the puny, yet wicked efforts of his oppofers he reminded him of his language on that night, that no confideration of private emolument or revenue, ought to fanction a fyftem, the progrefs of which was marked with every fpecies of criminality. Thefe words might be applied to the bufinefs now before the house; and he called on the right hon. gentleman to make his words good.

The chancellor of the exchequer faid, that the finance fystem of the current year, of which the prefent lottery made a part, had been determined on by the house, and the bills for the repealed taxes had been paffed it was, therefore, a matter almoft of impoffibility to think of infringing on it, by relinquishing the prefent lottery. With respect to the permanency of the meafure, he had heard nothing to induce him to relinquish it. The circumftances of the nation were notoriously such as required every nerve to ftrengthen its finances. A lottery had often been proved a refource equally certain and agreeable to the multitude. The evils complained of did certainly exift; but then he should obferve, that it was not from the lottery, but from illicit modes of raising money by unprincipled adventurers, equally injurious to the lottery itself and to the people.

He was of opinion fuch regulations might be adopted as would do all thofe away; the late exertions of government againit thofe offenders had been of much effect, particularly the punithment of the publishers of illegal propofals. Gentlemen would fee the neceffity of proceeding with the committee; the more fo, when they confidered, that the bargain for the lottery was already closed, and the depofits made; the glaring impropriety of retracting from which must be evident. However, he thought that a committee to inquire into the evils attending the drawing might be inftituted with good effect; but the reafons must be very strong indeed, to make him entertain the idea of relinquishing fuch a beneficial measure as a permanent refource.

Mr. Sheridan and Mr. Windham were fer a total abolition of a lottery, except in cafes of extreme neceffity. Mr. Fox was of the fame opinion, but imagined it was expedient that the prefent one fhould be proceeded with.

A converfation then enfued between the chancellor of the exchequer, and Mr. Fox; which was followed by one between Mefirs. Thornton, Pulteney, Lambton, Fox,.

Drake, and Taylor, the refult of which was, that the latter gentleman declared, that (as his propofed end was answered in the acknowlegement that the measure should not be permanent, if fufficient reafons were produced to the contrary, and by the likelihood of the committee's being instituted) he would withdraw his motion. In confequence of which the bill passed a committee.

The most important business that was agitated in the house of commons, after the Eafter Recefs, was that of the Slave Trade, on Wednesday, April 25, when Mr. Dundas, in confequence of the late decifion of the house, for the gradual abolition of that trade (See page 289) rofe, and fubmitted to the committee his first refolution, That it shall not be lawful to import any African negroes into any Britifh colonies, or plantations, in fhips owned, or navigated, by British subjects, as any time after the first day of January 1800.

Lord Sheffield fupported the motion, and the whole plan of the right hon. gentleman, which was calculated for the good of the country, by getting rid of a queftion, the difcuffion of which could tend only to bring us to the brink of the most dreadful calamities. It was his wish to abolish the trade, by adopting fuch regulations as would fpeedily do away the neceffity of the trade; and fuch regulations, he was of opinion, were to be found in the right hon. fecretary's plan: with him he agreed in the policy of inducing the colonial affemblies to co-operate, being convinced, that, without their affiftance, our exertions would have no effect.

Lord Mornington, confidering the trade as he did, to be a trade of iniquity, and admitting of no compromise between right and wrong, could not agree to the motion as it now ftood. It was a relief to the house, and to himself, that they were now fpared the difagreeable neceffity of entering into thofe painful tales of blood and mifery, which the trade had given rife to; because the houfe, having heard them on a former night, had paft sentence on the trade, by refolving that it ought to be abolished. They had refolved that it ought to be abolished, having been convinced, upon full enquiry and difcuffion, that it was inhuman and unjuft: the only question then, for decifion, was, how long ought that inhumanity and injustice to be prolonged? How long were they to continue that which they had condemned? It had been again and again argued

against

against the immediate abolition, that the trade would be carried on by other nations; but, even were that granted, he fhould contend that no political expediency could warrant that trade being carried on by this country, which the house and the nation had condemned as unjust and iniquitous.-The magnitude of our crime in carrying on the trade was greater in proportion, than the crime of any other country that carried it on, we having commenced it, and carried it on to the greatest extent: having acknowledged the trade criminal, we should be the first to give it up; fhould any other nation purfue it, he fhould lament that they had planted in their bofom that enormous evil which we had wifely rid ourselves of. Were we rancorous enough to desire to revenge ourselves upon an enemy, he knew not of an evil more fatal than the prefent that we could impart to them; but in our abandoning the trade, he trufted the example of a great nation, in the zenith of her power, eminent in commerce, and diftinguished for liberty, would convince the world that the true principle of commerce, the medium through which power, liberty, and eminence were to be obtained, was honour and honefty. Upon thefe grounds he concluded by moving an amendment, to fubftitute the words firft day of January 1793,' instead of the words ⚫ first day of January 1800.'

Mr. Beaufoy obferved, that the noble lord had argued, that no compromife was to be made with injuftice; but, he feared, we were compelled by a power too great to be contradicted, to compromife injuftice; for what right had we, fhould the flave trade be abolished, to hold in bondage 400,000 human beings, already flaves in our islands? The length of their oppreffion did not warrant the continuance of it. The house had refolved, that the trade ought to be abolished: the only queftion for confideration then was, what, on the whole cafe, was the best mode to be adopted to put an end to it? Our anceftors, at a period when they boasted of their being enlightened, when they contended for their liberty and religion, trampled on liberty, and on the juft dictates of religion, in carrying on a trade which they had left a dreadful legacy to the prefent generation, a legacy which it was our duty to get rid of with as little mifchief as poffible: to an immediate abolition he could not, however, aflent; for, by fuch abolition taking place, before the iflands had made preparation for an in

crease of their numbers by encouraging population, the hardships of thofe already in a state of flavery would be increased; a fhort time allowed for the abolition would induce the islands to prepare for events; in three years, he thought they might make every neceffary preparation an earlier period he confidered neither for the advantage of the negroes in our islands, nor for those who might be brought down to the coaft of Africa for fale; he objected therefore to the amendment, but would give his affent to any bill for the abolition taking place in three years.

Colonel Phipps obferved the ftrange inconfiftency of thofe, who, condemning the trade as unjust, had ftomach enough to digelt its continuance for one, two, cr three years. Hé wifhed to afk, whether, without further information, they were ready to overturn the refolutions already come to by the house, upon full enquiry, that the trade fhould be gradually abclifhed? He reprobated the petitions as unworthy notice. He concluded by objecting to fixing any definite time for the abolition, approving of the plan of the right hon. fecretary, in other refpects, for adopting fuch refolutions as might lead fafely to the abolition, by deftroying the neceffity.

Mr. Ryder faid, that he was in a fituation which he hoped many other gentlemen might be in, namely, that of feeling himself, from conviction, impelled to a recantation of those opinions which induced him on a former night to vote for the gradual, in preference to the total abolition of the flave trade. By putting an end to it immediately, the planters would be compelled by abfolute neceffity to treat their flaves with care and tenderness; but by fixing no definite period, no abolition would be come to at all. He reprobated the attack made on the petitions, contending that every perfon in the kingdom was interefted in the queftion, as Englishmen, as freemen, and as Chriftians.

Mr. S. Thornton faid, that no regulation would meet the evil, or effect the abolition, and any length of time given to the trade, would ferve but as a fpur to cruelty.

Mr. Efte infifted that the immediate abolition could not be come to without inhumanity; and in proof of this affertion, he referred to the evidence before them, by which it appeared, that flaves were brought for fale from the interior of Africa, and, if not fold, murdered. What then, he asked, if the abolition

fhould

fhould be immediately put an end to, was to become of those faves, fo brought for fale?

Mr. W. Smith obferved upon the manner in which the petitions had been treated by an hon. gentleman (col. Phipps) and argued for the refpect due to them, coming as they did from refpectable cities and towns, plainly demonftrating the fenfe and unanimity of the people to be against the continuance of the flave trade. The city of London, notwithstanding every exertion to prevent it, had petitioned; Norwich, and nearly every great manufacturing city and town in the kingdom, had petitioned, and in Scotland there was but one opinion. The trade in flavery, he faid, had been condemned by the houfe, and he should have confidered it hardly poffible that any man could stand the advocate for its continuance, upon the principles of humanity, had he not long been convinced that there was fome mischievous principle, fome infernal spirit, interwoven within it, which perverted the understandings of men of fenfe, and corrupted the morals of the ignorant. By the evidence it appeared that the flave trade had rendered Africa one vaft fcene of warfare and defolation; that it was rendered a wildernefs, in which the inhabitants were wolves to each other; that the affertion of the exported negroes being convicts was adding infult to cruelty and oppreffion; who then could defend fuch a trade upon the principles of humanity? Was it humane to keep a continent in warfare? Was it humane to keep it a wilderness, in which its inhabitants were rendered wolves to each other? Was it humane to continue a fyftem of fraud, robbery, and bloodfhed? It was abfurd to talk of regulations, and reftricting the importation to ages and defcriptions, when every flave captain that had been examined had uniformly declared it to be one of the principles of the trade, to afk no questions relative to the flaves offered them for fale; but if it was admitted that the age of flaves might be afcertained, and that convicts fhould no longer be taken, what would that regulation be, but a transfer of cruelty from the guilty and the aged, to the innocent and young. He fincerely hoped that the time was now arrived, when the bloody flag of oppreffion, which had long been flying, fhould give way to that of juftice and peace. In answer to what had been advanced of the right to indemnify those who might fuffer by the abolition, he faid he faw no right whatever that the house should

7

be called upon for indemnifying tho whom it ordered to cease from the commiffion of crimes. He knew that the country was with those who were eager for the abolition, in the exertions to obtain which they were determined to perfift until they obtained fuccefs. To the advocates for the continuance of the trade he wifhed to make one appeal; he had a right to defire every gentleman to ask himself, if his own wife, his child, relative, or acquaintance, were among the number of thofe unhappy thoufands whom their ruthlefs decifion of this night might doom to perpetual flavery and mifery, whether they would give their vote for other than an inftant abolition? He called upon them, as they valued the honour of their country, refpected juftice, and paid attention to every feeling of the heart that ennobled man, to vote for the abolition.

Mr. Windham faid, that the question had been rightly confidered as the cause of nations; they had confidered themselves called upon to put an end to a fyftem of oppreffion and guilt, in which they had taken too great part. He wished again to call their attention from every confideration of expediency, to the discharge of the duty they owed to juftice and honour; they had no option left them any more than they had to commit robbery and murder: it was a trade which could no longer be borne with. He wifhed them to recollect the section of a slave ship; to confider that, independent of the unfortunate wretches being torn from their country and connections, they were crammed together with galling chains; that they were thrown into a situation in which every horror, every disease, flavery, and death, were mixed up, and thickened, by the wickedness of those who were execrable enough to conduct the trade; that all the horrors of the damned were, heaped upon the heads of innocent men; and that it was not to one ship alone they were called on to give their fanction, but to fleets, for thus wafting over the Atlantic, cargoes, of human mifery. Every moment we fhortened the trade, we cut off a moment of cruelty and bloodshed ;-every argument that could be advanced was in fupport of instant abolition.

The chancellor of the exchequer, Mr. Fox, and Mr. Wilberforce folio ved for the amendment. Mr. Drake, and fir James Johnstone, were for a short period to be allowed to enable the iflands to prepare for the abolition. Mr. fcretary Dundas spoke against the amendment;

after

year

On Friday, the fame subject was refumed, when lord Mornington rofe and faid, though he had not had the good for tune, on a former night, to fucceeed in his proposed amendment, by introducing the year 1793, instead of that of 1800, he fhould not think he discharged his duty, did he not again attempt to bring that within as fhort a period as was poffible, which he had been defeated in his attempt immediately to abolish. It was his intention, before he fat down, to propofe to fubftitute 1795, inftead of the 1800; in doing this, however, he did not act up to his own principles; for he could not think of the continuance of the trade for a fingle hour without horror. He then went into argument to prove, that the time to which his amendment would extend the trade, would be fully fufficient to enable the islands to adopt fuch measures as were beft calculated to promote population, and to try fuch experiments as had a tendency to leffen the neceffity of employing negroes. He concluded by moving the amendment accordingly.

Mr. Addington, the speaker, having voted for the gradual abolition of the trade, felt it his duty to ftate to the house his opinion upon the propofitions for car rying the gradual abolition into effect. He admitted that the period between the refolution for abolishing the trade, and carrying that abolition into effect, was to be confidered a dreadful one. The juftice of the trade he had never contended for, but he had admitted it to be completely abandoned he felt, however, for the juftice due to the planters, and to every person whose property was embarked in the trade. He was convinced, that if we lott fight of the intereft of the planters, our attempts at an abolition would be ineffectual in withing to pay attention to their intereft, however, he wifhed not to oppofe policy to juftice, but to procure the greatest good he had it in his power to accomplish. The question was not between blood and gold, but whether allowing a certain time for the abolition of the trade, would not more effectually obtain the object of the majority of the houfe, than the refolving upon an immediate abolition.

By lengthening the period, the house would not encourage a fyftem of blood and rapine, but would render the cure more certain. He trufted that the amendment would be rejected, but faid he would vote for the abolition taking place in 1796, on condition that the other propofed reftrictions on the trade fhould be abandoned. He quoted Mr. Burke's opinion, that erecting places of worship would best tend to reform the negroes; and expressed a hope, that during the period of carrying on the trade, endeavours would be made, both in the islands and in Africa, to civi lize the negroes, by religion; and concluded by again declaring it to be his opinion, that immediate abolition could produce neither good to our islands, nor to Africa.

The chancellor of the exchequer rofe in oppofition to the arguments advanced by his right hon. friend (the fpeaker) against the amendment of the noble lord. The more the question was confidered, and the more time the house had for reflection, the more would it be feen that the fubject lay in a narrow compafs. The houfe had condemned the trade, its expedience was therefore totally out of the queftion, and the only thing which the houfe was now called to decide upon was, in which way could they moft fpeedily and effectually get rid of that which was fo disgraceful to the nation, and which every man should feel himself repugnant to fupport. His right hon. friend's argument, that a continuance of the trade till the year 1796 would be favourable to Africa, was untenable; for what rational hope was it poffible to entertain, of attempts to civilize the inhabitants of that country at the moment that we were carrying into her bofom every evil and every crime?Could the inhabitants of Africa be induced to believe that we were come ferioufly to befeech them to abandon barbarifm, and a trade of blood, when for three years we should continue to take the natives in barter? The idea of an intermediate civilization was contradictory the total and immediate abolition was the only preliminary to the civilization of Africa: the best way to get rid of their habit of felling each other, was removing our habit of buying. The propofition for extending the trade to a year or two longer, if it were a matter of common interelt, might be admitted; but the prefent was not a question of common interest, he would not therefore admit of the compromife of a year to convince the planters of 3 M

their

their intereft; for he did not understand complimenting away the lives of thoufands of our fellow-creatures for the intereft of any men. We had no right to tudy the interest of the planters by compromifing away the peace of that quarter of the globe which had been too long miferably afflicted by our barbarity, and kept back from that conftitution to which the would otherwife have reached. He wifhed gentlemen to recollect that by the regulations they had adopted for the Middle Paffage, they had foothed their confciences in the belief that they had taken away a chef fting from the trade; in that however they were deceived, for the papers on the table proved that the mortality in the Middle Paffage was ftill above ten per cent.-that of those that were landed, one-third died in feafoning. By every thousand taken from Africa, you rendered thousands in Africa miferable: they were taken away unjustly, and their mifory extended to their relatives. Evils of the greatest magnitude were spread by us throughout the country: every hundred we took added to the bloody catalogue of our crimes. Nearly five hundred out of every thousand of those unfortunate human beings, torn from their native country, were facrifices to an untimely grave; and the remainder, who unhappily furvived, were doomed to perpetual flavery, and to carry about with them the fad remembrance of their injuries, and the taints of infection which rendered them burdens to themselves and to the land in which

they exifted.The feeds of peftilence and of infurrection were imported in every negro landed in our islands; every argument of policy, therefore, as well as juftice, went to the instant abolition; but if that was impoffible, let us not unneceffa rily prolong that which we declare to be against our inclination and duty.

Colonel Tarleton refifted the amend ment, as propofing an abolition fudden, violent, and ruinous.

The mafter of the rolls and lord Car hampton spoke against the amendment.

Mr. Wilberforce declared, that the period had long fince arrived when the abolition ought to have taken place, and when it might, as it now would, with perfect fafety to our islands, and to the intereft of the planters. Not having been able to obtain an earlier period for the abolition, he gave his fupport to the

amendment.

Mr. Fox was for the amendment, contending that every year we continued the

trade, we fhould continue it to the facfi fice of fourteen or fifteen thousand lives. Sir Edward Knatchbull was against the amendment, which, if negatived, he would, he said, move an amendment to the original motion to introduce the year 1796, inftead of 1800.

The question was then put, and the committee divided, ayes 130, noes 161; majority 31 against the amendment.

Sir Edward Knatchbull then moved his amendment to fubftitute 1796, instead of

1800.

A fhort debate enfued, in which Mr. Pitt, Mr. Fox, Mr. Dundas, and Mr. Addington fpoke; after which the committee again divided, and carried the amendment, ayes 151, noes 132; majority 19, for abolishing the trade on the ft of January 1796.

The fame day, in the houfe of lords, when the order of the day was read for the fecond reading of the libel bill, lord Kenyon moved two questions to be put to the judges, the fubftance of which was, whether, in a criminal prosecution, where no evidence was adduced for the defendant, the criminality charged went to the jury? and whether the inuendoes, contained in the record, and their truth and falsehood, went to the jury? The idea to be inferred from the difcuffion of thefe points went to determine the grand queftion, whether the fact and the law combined together come within the province of a jury?

Lord Stanhope faid, this was not the stage in which he should deliver his fentiments at large on the subject; but thus much he should advance, that the propofition, as far as he could judge, were not thofe that the state of the cafe required. He fhould, however, the next day the fubject came under confideration, point out to the learned lords what the law and the conftitutión were.

Lord Loughborough held it as a clear matter of law, and as the true principles of the conftitution, that the law combined with the fact should go to the jury; and to fupport this he adduced fome incontrovertible arguments, as well as the decifive authority of lord chief justice Vaughan.

He drew a fine diftinction between the civil and the criminal law, ftating how far the matter of law and fact in the one, differed from the law and fact in the other. In civil cafes, if the judge erred, there was relief by arreft of judgment and new trial; but in criminal procefs for a libel, the matter was decifive, A jury, when fworn,

were