rose to call the attention of the House to the present wretched state of the streets of the metropolis, which was evident to any man that walked along them. He wished to know what was the fund for keeping them in repair; and when he had learned that, he should propose a remedy. Some years ago there existed a regular board for paving and lighting the streets, but quarrels had arisen, some parishes were exempted from contributing, and he doubted if the fund were now applied to the repair of the streets; but rather thought it was applied to general parochial purposes. The emulation among the different water-companies, he believed to be a principal cause of the state of the streets. It was his intention next session to move for leave to bring in a bill on this subject; as the present session was too far elapsed to do it with effect. The hon. gentleman concluded by moving. 1. "That there be laid before this House, an account of the yearly amount of the assessments made for the last four years in the several parishes within the Dills of mortality, for the paving and lighting of the streets, lanes, and passages, within the said parishes. 2. A like account from the commissioners for paving and lighting certain parts of the city of Westminster, distinguishing in each account the amount of the sums disbursed for paving, together with the amount of the sums disbursed for lighting."—Ordered.

rose to make the motion of which he had given notice, relative to the increase of fees in the different courts of justice. He said, it was both the right and duty of the House to enquire into the state of the courts of justice, and into the conduct of the officers connected with them. Should that controul get into disuse the suitor would not have that protection which he was intended to have by the constitution. From the earliest times such a right had been exercised—from the restoration down to the revolution, and at various periods subsequently to that era, the last of which was in 1798; since which time there had been no supervision by that House, though called for by the union of the two countries. Bred himself to the profession of the law, he early felt a high respect for the profession; and was far from imputing any improper motive to the high officers who presided in the courts of justice. He should scarcely have thought it necessary to make this declaration, but for some expressions that had been used on a former occasion. It was one of the standing orders of the House, that such a committee should be appointed to exercise supervision, and it was his intention to place such a resolution upon the Journals. After the restoration, lord Hale had made an enquiry into the state of the courts of justice, and proposed many reforms, which had not been carried into effect; for example, that no office should be discharged by deputy, and that there should be no sale of offices connected with the administration of justice. He quoted lord Hale as a great authority, and he had said that fees were taxes laid on the subject, and should be applied to a common fund. The right hon. baronet then went into an enlarged detail of the steps that had been taken by parliament at different times on this subject, and stated that a commission had been appointed in 1799, though no proceedings had taken place in consequence of it. He should now move, "That it appears to this House fit and proper, that an enquiry should be made into the state of the Courts of Justice, and the offices connected therewith, as to the duties, salaries, fees, and emoluments, of the several officers, clerks and ministers of justice, similar to the enquiries instituted in the years 1664, 1693, 1732, 1757, and 1798, more especially as the union of parliaments of Great Britain and Ireland has taken place subsequent to the latest enquiry by this House, and that in Ireland, the latest examination by either House of Parliament was in the year 1733." The right hon. baronet also intimated his intention of following this motion by a motion to address his royal highness the Prince Regent, praying that he would be graciously pleased to cause to be laid before the House the reports that had been made by all the commissions which had passed under the Great Seal for examining into the Fees of the said Offices, &c.

said, he expected that the motion of the right honourable baronet would have been of a different nature. He had been led to this expectation from the observations made when the subject was first introduced. Particular cases of an improper increase of fees were then stated, which were not supported by the returns laid upon the table. The court of King's-bench had been particularly alluded to, and it was said that a considerable increase had taken place in the fees paid to the clerk of the rules. The truth was, nothing of the kind had occurred, nor was it in the power of the court to authorise it. In the year 1787 there had been a dispute upon this subject, and it was then said that the fees paid to the clerk of the rules were increased; but upon enquiry it was found not to be the case. The same might be said of the clerk of Nisi Prius, who had been alluded to. He would not deny that parliament was in the habit of making enquiries upon this subject, but not until some ground for enquiry was made to appear. The tendency of the motion was, in his opinion, to cast a reflection upon the courts of law, and he must, therefore, oppose it.

said, he had not been in the House when the grounds of the motion had been stated; but as far as he could collect of what had then taken place, the House could scarcely sanction so grave a proceeding, without some broader grounds being laid before them than had been stated by the right hon. mover. The House was entitled to expect that either some particular abuse should have been stated, or that some general ground should have been established. The proposed commission could only go to trace out the original grounds of the fees of courts, and how far the existing practice of the courts agreed with the original principles. The practice was a presumption of the fairness of the mode in which the business had been done. In the present instance, no practical ground had been pointed out in any particular court; but only some general plan of reform appeared to be in contemplation. He should object to the motion, as he was not aware of any particular abuse, and no public benefit seemed likely to arise from it; nor was he prepared to agree that something was wrong, where nothing had been proved.

did not think that the motion tended to throw any imputation upon the courts of justice. Upon any former occasion, when an enquiry of this kind was gone into by the House, it was not considered to imply any reflection of this kind. The character of the officers in the different courts was best supported by answering to enquiries of this kind; a refusal to answer such enquiries would tend much more to fix an imputation of the kind alluded to. The officers of the different courts might, without the knowledge of the judges, act improperly with respect to fees. He had heard reports of this kind, and he believed not without some foundation. On the propriety of paying officers by fee or salary, he would not now give an opinion. In some cases, one mode might be preferable to another.

protested against the practice of subjecting even unsuspected persons to enquiry, in order that their characters, as it was said, might come more pure from the trial.

did not think the judges had been well treated: he had expected, after what had fallen from the right hon. baronet on a former occasion, that he was prepared with abuses in some quarters, and with pregnant suspicions in others; and even the judges had been glanced at. [Sir John Newport here denied that he ever insinuated such a charge against the judges.] The right hon. baronet had obtained all the various returns of fees which had been ordered, yet not one of those returns had furnished him with a remark, much less with a charge, against any of the parties. He insisted, that a commission would imply suspicion, and thus diminish the high respect in which the judges ought to be held. It would also be a further unnecessary trespass on the time of the courts. Much needless trouble had been given already: for instance, the accomptant-general had been ordered to give in an account of the dead fund, with the names of all the persons to whom it belonged. If that officer could have so done, he would have at once dispensed with the labours of all masters in chancery, whose business it was to examine and decide upon the rights of the claimants. The account, also, under such circumstances, must have embraced nearly half the population of the kingdom.

said, that all the objection to the production of the return last alluded to by the learned gentleman, was, that the motion was not properly worded. This might have been easily remedied, and the object of the motion fulfilled by a slight change in the words. Such motions did not, in his opinion, throw any imputation upon the courts. When an enquiry was made into the enormous fees paid to the tellers of the Exchequer, was it supposed to throw any imputation upon them? They were in the receipt of 20,000l. a year. The fees were legal, but was that a reason why enquiry should not be made? The same might happen in other courts. The officers might receive from the increase of business, an amount of fees out of all proportion to the duties performed. Even with a view to ascertain the amount of fees, a revision of them, such as the motion required, might be of use. The right hon. baronet had taken the best method of preventing any imputation upon particular courts, by moving for a return from all of them. He had heard, and he believed it would be proved, that in many courts there were received by the officers, what were called expedition fees, to the great inconvenience of the suitors. This demanded enquiry, and he must therefore think, that the motion was very far from being such as it was represented.

said, that if the present motion had been the first which was made on this subject, no class of men, he was sure, would more anxiously wish to have their conduct scrutinized and investigated, than the gentlemen who at present held the situations which had been parti- cularly alluded to; but he begged the House to consider the nature of the motion which preceded the present. It was for a rate of increased fees, for the last 20 years; which looked like an insinuation that the officers of courts of justice had either received those fees without the knowledge of those who presided in the different courts, or that the proceeding was connived at by high judicial characters. From what fell from the right hon. baronet, it seemed, that he had heard, and he believed, that abuses did exist with respect to fees. But it was well known, that there were guards on the charges of professional men, which did not exist amongst any other class of society. It had been observed by some gentlemen, that an officer might improperly obtain an increase of fees, without the knowledge of the judge. Now, it was impossible that this could ever be the case. No officer could exact an improper fee, without the connivance of the judge, in open court. There was not an attorney's clerk, of six months standing, who did not know what the regular charges were; and if, in any instance, they were exceeded, when he went home to his office, his employer would at once tell him, "You have paid too much." When a suit was terminated, the costs were taxed. The two contending attorneys met to settle the important question of what one should pay the other. In that case, the master axamined the items frequently in the presence of the adversaries, one of whom was ready to object to every 6s. 8d. contained in the bill. Even after this, if the master allowed too much, it was competent to the party supposing himself injured, to have an application made to the court, to have the bill returned to the master, for the purpose of having it revised. An hon. gentleman said, it had been asserted, that expedition fees were taken by the officers of different courts. Now, it was not extraordinary that slander should propagate unfounded charges against a profession that was by no means popular. But, if any such irregular proceeding had really taken place, it would have become the subject of public investigation in a court of justice, and would, after full argument, have been decided upon by all the judges. He never knew, within the last 30 years, of any such thing having occurred in the court of King's-bench. Those who attended that court, for a single day, in term, would see whole reams of affidavits handed up to the clerk of the rules (than whom there was not a more correct or honourable officer) which were to be copied, and delivered to the different parties. When, from an extraordinary press of business, a party found it impossible to get a copy of one of these documents so soon as he could wish, it was common to ask leave to take the original to a law-stationer, to have it transcribed, or to request the master to send it for that purpose, the person wanting the copy offering to defray the expence; this, however, could not be looked upon as making an improper charge, or as receiving a fee to expedite business. He should, therefore, vote against the motion, coupled as it was with those preceding observations of the right hon. baronet, which would induce the people to suppose that some abuses had been really detected, and that therefore the enquiry was instituted.

having been one of the parliamentary commissioners, appointed to enquire into certain abuses in Ireland, discovered, in the course of the investigation, that an increase of fees had taken place in some of the courts of justice there, which had occasioned much discontent. On this account he should vote for the motion.

said, that, in voting for the motion of the right hon. baronet, he thought it right to state, that he did not think it cast the slightest imputation on any of the officers connected with the administration of justice. His learned friend, the Attorney General, seemed to think that it did throw out an imputation against those gentlemen, on account of the nature of the motion which preceded it; and on this principle, he founded his opposition. So that a regular parliamentary measure was to be refused, because, on a former occasion, the right hon. baronet had taken a false view of the subject, or had uttered an ill-judged expression. He should be very happy to say, as his learned friend had done, that no abuses existed in courts of justice; but, in his conscience, he could not say, that the practice of taking expedition fees did not exist. On the contrary, he believed, from the information he had received, that the custom of taking expedition fees did prevail.

(across the table) "As a bribe?"

—Yes, as a bribe.—I believe the business of some individuals is done in preference to that of others; and that the officer so favouring one set of persons, receives an emolument for it. This, I believe; though, perhaps, it would be difficult to prove it.—If his learned friend who spoke early in the debate (Mr. Stephen) had said, that he had made enquiry upon this point, and found that no such abuse existed in that part of the profession to which he belonged, he should have been happy to have heard the declaration.

said, he could not answer what, at the time he delivered his sentiments, had not been charged. No mention had then been made of expedition fees. He certainly had made no enquiry on this subject; because he had never before heard the allegation that such fees had been demanded. He was sure that nothing of the kind existed in any office with which he was acquainted.

expressed his conviction that such a practice as that he had alluded to could not exist with the knowledge or countenance of his learned friend; but he was not therefore prepared to say, that it did not exist at all. He thought it would give great satisfaction to the public if a committee were appointed to enquire into the fact; because every indulgence which was given to an opulent suitor, was granted at the expence of one whose situation in life was less favourable. With respect to what his learned friend, the Attorney General, said, that abuses of this nature could not exist, because the system of taxing fees prevailed; surely he did not mean to contend that abuses had never prevailed—and yet the taxation of costs had existed from all time. With respect to the supposition, that the motion insinuated an imputation against the judges, he should merely observe, that when a commission was appointed, in 1799, to enquire into the fees of courts of justice, the judges of that time did not think that any imputation was cast upon them by the measure. And, highly as he respected the great judicial characters of the present day, with some of whom he was on terms of intimacy and friendship, he could not conceive why they should object to a proceeding to which their predecessors had been subjected.

wished to know, whether, when his learned friend spoke of expedition fees being received as a bribe, in different offices, he meant to be understood to say, that the masters of the Court of Chancey had, to his knowledge, received any fee of that kind?

disclaimed any such intention.

stated, that he knew an instance, where a suitor in the Court of Chancery had paid expedition fees. The system of demanding expedition fees bore particularly hard on infants, whose guardians would not defray such extraordinary expences; the consequence of which was, that their business was very much procrastinated.

readily allowed, that the motion of the right hon. baronet did not throw an imputation on any particular person; and he as readily admitted, that it was competent for the House to examine the rates of fees of the different courts; but yet he believed it was not customary for parliament to agree to such a motion, without some distinct circumstances were stated, on which they might found the necessary proceeding. He believed, the right hon. baronet was of opinion, as some of those who supported the motion seemed to be, that, either from corruption, inadvertence, or the lapse of time, something wrong had taken place in the apportionment of fees. Now, had this arisen from corruption (which the right hon. baronet had disclaimed), he might have adduced circumstances in proof of that corruption; or if, from inadvertence or lapse of time, after the enquiries the right hon. baronet had made on the subject, he would have been able to support his statement of the errors that had crept in. But he had laid no ground whatever to induce the House to accede to his motion. He had not stated any act of injustice to have been committed by any class of officers; and, therefore, he should oppose the motion.

said, that if, upon every occasion where that House were called upon to interfere, it was necessary that positive proof, or, at least, circumstances amounting to a pregnant suspicion, should be brought under their consideration, before they could proceed, their privilege to take up questions of great importance to the public, would be very much curtailed. He would ask, whether stronger grounds than those already detailed in the course of the debate, were usually stated to the House, when the intervention of parliament was called for? They had heard it stated, by gentlemen whose situation gave them a perfect opportunity of forming a correct judgment, that abuses did exist. According to the belief of the one, and to the actual knowledge of the other, improper fees had been demanded. He should, therefore, vote for the motion, being conscientiously of opinion, from the information stated to the House, that expedition fees were often exacted, in a manner subversive of the due course of justice.

supported the motion, in the hope that it would draw the attention of the public and of government so strongly to the consideration of the subject of fees, as would end in the abolition of fees altogether; and also do away the system which at present prevailed, of the sale of places in courts of justice by the great law officers.

said, whatever the custom might have been heretofore, the present Chief Justice of the King's-bench had never sold any situation under him.

opposed the motion, the necessity for which was entirely done away, by the return of fees made to the House, in consequence of the former motion of the right hon. baronet.

rose to reply. He adduced instances of fees having been raised by the officers of courts by the authority of the judges only, and pressed on the House their obligation to exercise a vigilant superintendance over those courts. There was sufficient ground, he observed, for the enquiry, from the statements of several members, and from the general state of belief on the question. He had received a letter from a most respectable professional gentleman in Ireland, containing a list of the fees which had existed in the courts of justice in that country in 1733, with an account of the exorbitant augmentations which had been made. With this list of 1733, the present returns did not correspond. Against the fees, however exorbitant, the attorneys could make no remonstrance, because they thus drew on themselves the enmity of the court. According to the present practice in Ireland, documents referred to on the trial were taxed, and not only those mentioned in the pleadings, but those hinted at in a counsel's statement. The amount of fees in an action for 10l. was as great as those on an action for 1,000l. Of from 20l. to 27l. which was the general amount of costs in an action, 18l. went to the officer. These facts had been stated to him by letter, and he had not wished to have stated them to the House, but for the opposition to his motion, because they ought to be the subject of investigation. In 1731 the House of Commons had given a pre- cedent for the enquiry which he demanded, by an investigation which they had made into the subject, without any allegation having previously been made. The result was, that abuses were found to exist in all the courts; and it was resolved, nem. con. that the abuses had arisen from long disuse of enquiry; and an address was voted to the crown, to settle the fees in all the courts on a reasonable and legal footing. The right hon. baronet concluded by calling upon the House to exercise the power which they possessed, for the purpose of protecting the subject.

The House then divided, when the numbers were—For the motion, 49: Against it, 48. The motion was accordingly carried.—Sir John Newport then moved, 1. "That an humble Address be presented to his royal highness the Prince Regent, that he will be graciously pleased to give directions, that there be laid before this House, a report of all proceedings had by virtue of a commission under the great seal for examining the duties, salaries, and emoluments of the several officers, clerks, and ministers of justice, and for reporting what regulations may be fit to be established with respect to the same, for the institution of which commission, an humble Address was presented to his Majesty by this House on the 13th day of June, 1799.

2. "That he will be graciously pleased to issue a commission under the great seal, for examining the duties, salaries, and emoluments of the several officers, clerks, and ministers of justice within the united kingdom, and for reporting what regulations may be fit to be established respecting the same, and to direct that the proceedings of such commission may be laid before parliament as early as may be after the commencement of the ensuing session."—The motions were both agreed to.

moved, That the several entries in the votes of this House of the 3d day of May last, and the 3d day of this instant June, of the Address agreed to by this House, to be presented to his royal highness the Prince Regent, relative to the abolition of the Slave Trade, and of his Royal Highness's Answer thereto, that it would be the earnest endeavour of his Royal Highness to accomplish the object of it, might be read; and the same being read,

then said, that the motion which he had to submit to the House, though it related to the same subject as the motion which had been last night discussed, differed essentially from it, for instead of calling on the House to come to any conclusion, it merely contained a call for the information necessary to a correct judgment on the question which would be submitted to the House to-morrow. In the Address of the last night, he, for one, had concurred most cordially, nor was he disposed to under-rate the good effect which that Address would produce; for he did not doubt that, if there was further opportunity of exertion on the subject of the abolition of the Slave Trade, those who directed his Majesty's councils would go to the discussion with additional power from the reiterated expression of the wish of parliament.

But there was another business to be done; they had to express their opinions, not prospectively, but on the Treaty which had put an end to the misery of that protracted war with which Europe had been so long desolated. This Treaty was to be discussed in all its bearings, but if there was one point more interesting than another, it was the stipulation with relation to African Slavery, and to enquire how far ministers had acted up to the wishes of the parliament and the country. As to what had been done by the noble lord opposite to him he was wholly uninformed, and the object of his motion was to require this information in which lie was deficient—to know how far the noble lord, acting under the direction of the House, and the sense of his own duty, had wisely taken those measures which were calculated to give effect to the benevolent disposition of the whole nation on this subject.

He wished distinctly to be understood as to a point which had been mentioned in the discussion of last night; it had then been said by the noble lord, that it was the argument of those who disapproved of the stipulation, that the abolition of the Slave Trade should be sine quâ non of a treaty of peace. He did not know that such an alternative had been suggested as proper, nor should he have supported such an alternative. If he were informed the peace would have been impracticable, without such a stipulation as had been adopted, it would, without doubt, be wise to postpone what was the object of all our wishes: but it was necessary that he should have much more information on the subject before him than he already had, before he could believe that such an alterna- tive was at any time necessary. That such an argument might have been adduced by the negociators, any one who had ever had curiosity enough to look into diplomatical transactions, could well believe; but propositions were often laid down in the commencement of a negociation, which were departed from at the conclusion, without difficulty. There was another point in the discussion of last night, which he thought it necessary to allude to. It had been said by the noble lord opposite, that the question of the abolition could not have been mixed in the negotiation with the stipulation for the cession of the colonies in our possession. The reason of this he could not comprehend. The criterion of the policy of a proposition, was the effect of that measure on the power with whom we had to negociate. Now, so far as it appeared from the statement of the noble lord, he had voluntarily thrown away the only benefit which we could throw into the scale against the abolition of the Slave Trade on the part of France. Though the House could not decide, in the actual state of their knowledge, that the noble lord had acted unadvisedly, yet they could say that they did not possess information enough to enable them to judge fairly.

Why, in this state of ignorance, should the House depart from the old practice of demanding information? The only reason adduced to the contrary was, that the pretensions advanced during the negotiations, would, by being published, bind the different powers to support them. But at least the House should be permitted to know what the conduct of the noble lord himself had been. They knew the grounds on which the noble lord must have urged the immediate abolition, and the futile reasons by which they must have been opposed. These arguments might be wrapped in the mystery of diplomacy; but it was quite improbable that any thing could have been adduced which had not for the last twenty years been known to every man of education in this kingdom; there could be nothing of novelty in the reasoning. Why, therefore, should not these discussions be published? for if there was any sincerity in the wish of the French government to undeceive the public in France on this question, they could desire nothing more than that the reasoning against the abolition should he published for the purpose of being refuted. It would be curious to see what reasoning had been made use of by the Prince of Benevento on this subject—what new views he entertained on the subject of the rights of man—so contrary as they must have been to those which he had formerly entertained! It was certainly much to be desired that an opportunity should be given to apply the sense of this country to dispel the senseless prejudices which existed in France on this subject. Yet if there was nothing in this argument, the House could recur to its constant usage; this usage was, that when they were dissatisfied with a treaty they should require information on the subject. It was incumbent, however, to spew by the production of the documents, that there were such insurmountable obstacles to the immediate abolition, that the House might with justice to itself and the country, say "Aye!" to the demand which the noble lord was to make of an acquittal on this article.

The House on the 3rd of May had unanimously desired that care should be taken in the Treaty of Peace to bring about an universal abolition. The general wish—was it necessary to say the general expectation?—was, that a total abolition might take place. How different the result! The traffic of one of the greatest nations in Europe had been renewed (for during twenty years it had been interrupted)—renewed to an extent, of which the House perhaps had no conception. From the best authorities it appeared, that previously to the Revolution, the black population of the French colonies amounted to 800,000 persons, to maintain which, 40,000 negroes were annually imported. Could any man without horror and shame contemplate the misery thus immediately produced by a treaty, into the grounds of which, if they did not enquire, they virtually became parties. But this was not all. In many colonies the population had been wasted since the Revolution, though, extraordinary as it might appear, in St. Domingo during the dismal period of revolt and rebellion there, the population had increased—so superior was the worst species of liberty to slavery! Extraordinary importations would, therefore, be made to those colonies where the population had diminished. Even here the evil produced by the Treaty did not end. By the vigorous manner in which the abolition laws of this country had been carried into effect, the Slave Trade had been rooted out in a great part of the coast of Africa—there being only one small island north of the line Becao, possessed by the Portuguese. But now Senegal, Goree, and their dependencies having been restored to the French, all that coast would be thrown back into its former state of misery and desolation. Not only would this unhappy country be subjected to the evils of this terrible traffic on the part of the French, but on the part of the Portuguese; for, under a treaty which had been concluded with the prince regent of Portugal, under pretence of abolishing the Slave Trade by degrees, that nation was permitted to trade in slaves with any settlement where this traffic was continued by the power which possessed it.

Thus much evil had been done by the Treaty, and should they say, in the zeal of their parliamentary confidence, that the noble lord had acted zealously and widely? It was quite improper to place such an extravagant confidence in the noble lord without a knowledge of the reasons or facts on which he had acted. It was not, however, to the transactions at Paris that the object of his motion was limited. There had been repeated addresses from that House to the throne, which had always been most graciously answered, on the same subject as that of the Address of the 3rd of May, namely, to pray the crown to endeavour, in any arrangements entered into with foreign powers, to adopt measures for the universal abolition of the Slave Trade. It was, therefore, important to learn whether, before our armies had entered into France, arrangements had been made with the allied powers on this subject, and whether in the discussions at Frankfort and other places no time had been lost in coming to a distinct understanding on the subject, and making known that the colonies which we held we were ready to restore for the sake of peace, but not unless that peace were coupled with an abolition of the Slave Trade. The learned gentleman said, he held it perfectly proper that the abolition should not be made a sine quâ, non of peace, but that it was also most desirable that the restoration of the colonies by us and the abolition of the Slave Trade on the part of our late enemies should always have been put forward together. It was too great a stretch of confidence, he repeated, for the House to suppose, that in all these particulars the members of his Majesty's government had acted wisely, without having the least information on the subject.

The learned gentleman, adverting to the assertion of the noble lord, that the French were generally ignorant upon this subject, admitted the possibility of such ignorance, so far as regarded a certain portion of the people. That the appear circles, for instance, who had been for some time resident, had become so depraved in moral sentiment, so ignorant, or so indifferent with respect to whatever concerned the interests of liberty and humanity, he thought not improbable; but he felt it difficult to believe that the great body of a civilized and enlightened nation like France, could be uninformed or insensible upon a question of such importance as the abolition of the Slave Trade. There must, indeed, be something preternatural about France, if such insensibility existed in such a nation. Then, assuming the contrary, what peculiar sense of interest could prompt the French people to be so peculiarly tenacious for the continuation of the Slave Trade? For several years they had, in fact, known nothing about it, or the colonies in which it had been carried on, that could induce any popular solicitude to maintain or revive it. Two of the colonies restored to France, namely, Guadaloupe and Martinique, notoriously required no importation of slaves, and of St. Domingo, the present generation of the French knew nothing but that which was calculated to excite their horror, from a recollection of the fate of that gallant army which was sent there to perish, because it was attached to a rival general.

But, notwithstanding these circumstances, the noble lord had acceded to the Article under consideration, stating, however, that the French government assured him of its disposition and purpose to mitigate the evils and limit the extent of the Slave Trade. If, however, this assurance were sincere, and should be fulfilled, what must become of the plea of reverence for public prejudice and national sentiment, for that prejudice and sentiment were but too likely to derive strength from the embarkation of capital, and the acquisition of profit? That was, should any profit arise. For really the prospect of profit to France seemed very questionable, particularly, from the difficulties that must attend the re-acquisition of St. Domingo. Considering, then, that no such prospect could be much relied upon, and that France was not therefore likely to insist upon the maintenance of this odious traffic; considering also the situation of France, the concurrence of the allies in one sentiment upon this subject, he could not help thinking that our government was entitled, as it was bound, to press for the entire abolition of the Slave Trade, which was a proposition it would be idle to suppose that he French government in its defeated and tumble state could have successfully resisted. He could not, indeed, persuade himself to believe, that if the zeal and talents of the noble lord had been effectually employed with that view, the complete acquiescence of the French government in the abolition of the Slave Trade could not have been obtained. At least such a case as he had stated required explanation, as to the conduct of ministers in pursuance of the addresses of parliament, and the wishes of the country upon this important question. The hon. and learned gentleman therefore concluded with moving, "That an humble Address be presented to his royal highness the Prince Regent, That he will be graciously pleased to give directions, that there be laid before this House, copies of all representations made on the part of his Majesty's government during the late negociations for peace, and of all communications which passed between his Majesty's minister and the allied power, relative to the abolition of the African Slave Trade."

complained of the motion as uncandid, and he would even say unparliamentary, from the Manner in which it was brought forward. He could not, indeed, disguise from himself that it involved an attack upon his Majesty's ministers; and although the learned gentleman was pleased to compliment them on the other parts of their conduct, and to admit that they had faithfully followed up the principle and policy recommended by parliament, yet he called upon them to stand on their defence, and to produce evidence in their justification. But while the learned gentleman dwelt so much on the conduct of ministers, in the Article under consideration, it was not too much to expect from his charity some acknowledgement of what ministers had done in other respects to forward the wishes of parliament and the public, with a view to the abolition of the Slave Trade. This, however, the learned gentleman had omitted to state, and, after the Treaty had been a month on the table, he came forward with a motion, calculated to cast a doubt upon the character, and to depreciate the merits of that important transaction, the very night before it was fixed for discussion. Such conduct he could not help pronouncing uncandid, and quite inconsistent with parliamentary usage. It was unquestionably true, as the learned gentleman had stated, that the disposition of our allies must be taken into view and connected with that of France, in order to judge fairly upon this question as it affected the course pursued by his Majesty's ministers in the late negociation. For no one could raise a doubt as to the propriety of abstaining from any proposition in which our allies did not concur, or at least of declining to insist upon any measure likely to dissolve the confederacy. But the fact was, that the communication which had taken place with our allies upon the point under consideration, could not now be laid before the House in due time; and he put it to the candour of the House, whether it would be fair to suspend its judgment upon the merits of the Definitive Treaty, until documents referring to the correspondence of many years back could be produced, especially considering the time that had elapsed since a copy of the Treaty had been laid on the table, and within which time the learned gentleman might have brought forward his motion. Independently, however, of this consideration, he should resist the motion of the learned gentleman, because he felt fully convinced that the production of the documents alluded to would serve to prejudice the interests of the great question to which that motion referred. But recurring to France, it was to be recollected that we were to treat with her as an independent nation, and that she was entitled to say to us, "We will not become more moral because you give us an island or two." The noble lord repeated that France was master of her own conduct, and she had a right to demand that another nation should not dictate to her. He, indeed, was fully impressed with the opinion, that the best way of promoting the abolition of the Slave Trade was, to leave the French government to its own discretion, even if we had the power of dictation; for in framing a stipulation for an unwilling government, what guarantee should we have for its observance? But the learned gentleman, amidst all the variety of his points and questions, took no view favourable to those who framed the Article under consideration. No: all his inferences were against the conduct of ministers; at least on this branch of the negociation; and this, too, while he pro- fessed confidence in their disposition. As to the assertion, that the French government was willing to keep the French people in ignorance with respect to the conduct of this country upon the subject of the Slave Trade, it happened, unfortunately for those who used the assertion, that since the discussion of last night, a fact had transpired to refute that assertion; for the last Moniteur contained a report, in extenso, of the late proceedings at the Freemason's tavern; and this furnished a sample of the disposition of the French government, upon which it was fair to found a calculation with regard to this interesting question. But when it was stated that the French people were likely to be indifferent about the Slave Trade, because they had been so many years deprived of that Trade, it was to be remembered, that while the French were without the Slave Trade, they were also without colonies, and that it was natural on their part, comparatively unenlightened as they were upon the subject, to connect the recovery of the latter with the pursuit of the former. The popular impression in France, was, therefore, more excusable than some gentleman seemed to think, and unless that was contended for, which the learned gentleman disavowed, that we should engage in a crusade against all nations unwilling to abolish the Slave Trade, we were called upon to yield to that impression, Then, as to the extent to which the Slave Trade was likely to be carried, in consequence of the Article objected to by the learned gentleman, it was admitted that to two of the ceded islands, namely, Guadalope and Martinique, no importation was likely to take place, while, from the situation of St. Domingo, it was improbable, that even for five years any merchant would be found to speculate in the importation of slaves to cultivate that colony, and Cayenne, which was not under our controul, was not more likely to become a medium for the importation of slaves into the West Indies, in the hands of France, than under the dominion of the power from which it had been transferred by the late Treaty. Here, the noble lord said, that he could not help noticing the zeal evinced by certain parties upon the subject of the Slave Trade of late, compared to their conduct at former periods, and under other administrations. He also remarked, that while the Article respecting France was so emphatically dwelt upon, no acknowledgement was made of what ministers had done in favour of the abolition of this odious traffic, especially considering the recent decision of Holland, at the instance of the British government. Looking to this fact, he really thought that, in candour, the Article respecting France ought not to form the sole theme of the learned gentleman's declamation and that of his colleagues—that while what ministers had done was wholly cast into the shade, they should not be so prominently condemned for what they were really unable to do. For how could they press any proposition against the will of our allies? Could any reasonable man recommend to them to dissolve the great confederacy of Europe, and to contend alone against France? What in such a case could lord Wellington at the head of an army accomplish? Nothing but defeat and disgrace (so far as disgrace could attend military defeat) could possibly await him. He wished, therefore, that gentlemen would devote some portion of cool common-sense consideration to this question. He begged that they would moderate their virtuous feelings, and put their solicitude for Africa under the dominion of reason. The noble lord concluded with repeating his assertion, that the motion was inconsistent with candour, as it was calculated to prejudice the question which stood for discussion to-morrow, and to induce an impression that ministers had not faithfully performed the duty imposed upon them, by the voice of parliament and public opinion.

rose and spoke as follows:^*

Sir; To those members who were present when it was arranged in what order the business respecting the Treaty should be brought before the House, it cannot be necessary to point out the injustice of the noble lord's charge against my hon. and learned friend, of having brought forward his motion at an improper time. If he has moved for these papers only twenty-four hours before the Treaty is to be taken into consideration, it is because he has yielded to the wishes of others; and has, for their convenience, and most especially for the convenience of the noble lord himself, postponed his motion. It was desired by my hon. friend, who sits behind me (Mr. Wilberforce) that his intended Address, which was yesterday unanimously voted by the House, should precede my learned Friend's motion for papers: this was the wish too, of the noble lord, expressed by him in his place; and he cannot have forgotten the reason he assigned for it, namely, that he doubted not, that in the debate upon the Address, he should convince my learned friend, that his motion was unnecessary. The Address would have been moved for, a week ago, but for the noble lord's indisposition. It was on his account alone that it was postponed to yesterday. The noble lord was requested to defer the discussion of the Treaty for a few days; but upon this he was inexorable. Though no possible inconvenience could attend the delay, he insisted that the Treaty should be taken into consideration to-morrow. And after all this, and when it has been at his request, and for his personal convenience, and because he will not put own his own motion, even for four-and-twenty hours, that this debate comes so close upon the consideration of the Treaty, the noble lord is unjust enough to impute blame to my learned friend, for not bringing on his motion sooner. In the same spirit, and in a style of great exaggeration, he says, that the Treaty has been lying a whole month upon the table before these papers are called for, although at the moment when I am speaking, a month has not elapsed since the Treaty, which bears date only the 30th of May, was signed, and although it was not till the 3d of the present month that this House was informed from the throne, that it would attend to our wishes on this important part of the negociation.

^* From the original Edition, printed for T. Cadell and W. Davies, Strand.

I certainly shall not, Sir, by complimenting the noble lord and his colleagues for their sincerity, and their services in the cause of the abolition of the Slave Trade, provoke the same extraordinary return as my learned friend has experienced, and as little shall I be deterred by the high and presumptuous tone which the noble lord has this day assumed, from expressing my strong disapprobation of that article in the Treaty he has concluded, which relates to that odious Trade. If I knew, indeed, what claims the ministers had to praise upon this subject, I would not refuse to do them justice, even though my commendations were to be met with the same disdain as my learned friend's; but I am really at a loss to conjecture on what those claims can be founded; and recollecting, as I do, in what manner, and to what an extent the Slave Trade has of late years been carried on by Portugal, while the eminent services we had rendered that state gave us so good a right to require the total sacrifice of it on her part, I can see no reason to applaud his Royal Highness's ministers, either for the zeal or the success of their exertions.

It is impossible, I know, to speak of this Article of the Treaty in the severe, but just terms, which in my opinion it deserves, without incurring the imputation of acting with party views. Conscious that I am not its the smallest degree influenced upon this occasion by such motives, I regard all such imputations with contempt; but it may be well for those who are forward to cast them, to recollect that party is not the exclusive reproach of opposition, and to consider, whether they, who defend and applaud in public what, in the secret of their own bosoms, they utterly reprobate and condemn, are themselves exempt from that party-spirit with which they suppose others to be infected.

The noble lord objects to the production of the papers moved for, because this Article cannot, he says, be properly estimated, when taken disconnected from the rest of the Treaty and from the whole negociation; and yet the noble lord was content last night to enter into his justification upon this single Article, and to postpone the rest of the Treaty to a future discussion; and well, indeed, may this part of the Treaty, from its higher importance, and as being the only subject of negociation upon which this and the other House of Parliament thought it right to interfere with the executive power before the measure was concluded, challenge a distinct and independent examination.

We are not, the noble lord told us the other evening, aware of all the difficulties which, upon this Article, he had to contend with. We must not imagine, he says, that the French ascribe to us, all the merit which we claim for our abolition of the Slave Trade. They do not give us credit for all that humanity and that love of justice which we pretend to. They doubt our sincerity, and, not the common people only, but persons of a higher order; and even those, as he plainly gives us to understand, with whom he had to negociate, entertain that doubt. It would be highly interesting to gain a sight of the papers, if it were only to observe how the noble lord repelled that foul and unjust sus- picion. No person better than himself, who had, to the very last, in this House, resisted the abolition, could have assured them of the perfect sincerity of those who had so long persevered in that just and righteous cause, and who at the last, owed their glorious triumph to the strong sense and feelings of the nation loudly and repeatedly declared.

The proofs of our sincerity are so many and so powerful, that the noble lord cannot fail to have pressed them irresistibly upon his opponents. If to have relinquished this Trade, when we almost singly, of all the nations of the earth, might have carried it on; and when we might have prosecuted it to a greater extent, and with a much greater profit, than we or any other country had ever before derived from it. If to have persevered steadily for seven years in this self-denial, and never to have shewn the least symptom of an inclination to yield to the strong temptation, which this lucrative monopoly was holding out,—if facts like these left France unconvinced, then indeed, is she not open to conviction.

But what is the course which the noble lord has pursued? To prove how much we are in earnest on this important point, he has, on behalf of the British nation, affixed his signature to a treaty, which, after recognizing the injustice and barbarity of the Trade, contains a stipulation, that for five years, it shall be carried on. To remove all doubt of our perfect sincerity, he makes us parties to a convention, by which with fine professions of a holy regard for justice and humanity, we sanction, for a certain definite period, the practice of every species of oppression, robbery, and murder. What better plan could he have adopted, if his object had been to convert suspicion into proof, and to put into the hands of our detractors the formal and sealed evidence of our baseness and hypocrisy?

What a melancholy prospect, too, does this French notion of our insincerity, thus confirmed by the noble lord, afford, with respect to the stipulation, that at the end of five years, the trade by France shall altogether cease! Our only object being to gain some credit to ourselves, and to appear to all Europe the seeming champions of justice and humanity, the French are not unwilling to gratify our criminal vanity, and have, therefore, amused us with a declaration, that, after five years, they will cease to be traders in men—a declaration in which they have just as much sincerity as they impute to us; and having secured to themselves a trade, which they know mill continue after the stipulated period shall have elapsed, they pride themselves, no doubt, upon having met this nation of dissemblers with their own arts of dissimulation.

Amongst other difficulties in the negotiation, France, we are told, would not submit to the humiliation of having the performance of a moral duty imposed on her. The cession, or the retention of conquered provinces, might well be subjects of negotiation, without imputation upon a nation's honour, but to exact that the rules of natural justice should be observed; and to enforce a moral principle at the point of the bayonet, implies a species of degradation. I am unable (I confess it) to enter into these diplomatic refinements, but, if there be humiliation it stipulating not to carry on a trade repugnant to humanity and justice, that humiliation France has submitted to, since she has engaged, after five years, to renounce the Trade for ever; and how the honour of that nation would have been more deeply affected by an immediate renunciation than by one, which is to be preceded by five years of licensed devastation, piracy and murder, the noble lord has left wholly unexplained. To me, indeed, it appears that the negociation might have hem conducted on this point in a manner the most honourable to both nations. The Trade does not, at present, exist for either. With England it has ceased for the last seven years, by our own voluntary renunciation of it. With France it has ceased for upwards of twenty years, by the peculiar circumstances in which the war had placed her. France and England might have treated upon this subject on equal terms. Each might have contracted with the other, that this odious traffic should be revived by neither, and a treat might have been concluded more glorious for both, than any that has been recorded in the annals of mankind.

The prejudices of the French, the noble lord says, were to be attended to. That they have not at once adopted our opinions, cannot surprise us. We were long before we acted on them ourselves. Having been nearly twenty years abolishing this Trade, can we complain that France requires an interval of only five to prepare for its abolition? But when this question is asked, it should be recollected what the obstacles were which, in this country, so long retarded the accomplishing that great act of justice. They were obstacles which have no present existence in France, but which are preposterously under the operation of this Treaty, to be created in order, as we learn from the noble lord, that by the slow progress of reason they may be in time overcome. The extensive influence of Liverpool and Bristol, and other great trading towns, opposed difficulties with us which it required much time and patience to remove. Happily no such influence now exists in France, but it seems that by the revival of the Trade, such an influence is to be general, and to be fostered. Let the cause of humanity, the noble lord says, be promoted in France by exactly the same means as it was in England. In other words, let Nantes and Bourdeaux, and other maritime towns, become the Bristols and Liver pools of France; let large capitals be embarked in the Trade; let the support of many thousands of individuals be made to depend on its continuance; enlist the activity and zeal of commercial enterprize and adventure against you; multiply, without number, the enemies to the abolition, and then wisely trust to reason to refute their arguments, and silence their clamours. Embody against you the most uncontrollable passions and strongest interests, and most formidable combinations of men, and then calmly appeal to argument, to philosophy, and to religion, to disperse and to disarm them. Expect that some Clarkson will appear in France who will consume his valuable life in the service of the most oppressed and despised of his fellow-creatures. Wait till some Wilberforce shall arise, who with unexampled perseverance in spite of clamour and obloquy, and ridicule, will maintain his steady course, till he sees the great object of his life accomplished. Rely upon the slow but certain effects of free discussion in popular assemblies, and by an unrestrained press; and, till all these causes shall have fully operated, be content that the work of death and devastation shall go freely on upon the shores of Africa.

With us a most formidable obstacle to the speedy abolition of the Slave Trade existed in the strong and inveterate prejudice entertained by the proprietors of West Indian estates, that its sudden abolition must be soon followed by the destruction of their property. Their terrified imaginations painted to them insurrections breaking out in all the islands, and involving their plantations in one common ruin; or if, contrary to all expectation, they should escape this sudden destruction, yet they foretold the gradual but certain waste of their slaves, the inevitable and rapidly increasing depopulation of the colonies by disease and death, without the possibility, when all supply of fresh negroes was denied, of ever repairing the growing evil. This obstacle, once so gigantic, the noble lord had it in his power in an instant to dispel. He had only to direct the view of the French negociators to the large and valuable colonies which he was restoring to them by the Treaty, and which, under the abolition, had been for years in the enjoyment of perfect internal tranquillity, improved cultivation, and increasing population and prosperity.

An argument, which in this country we heard often, and too successfully used against the abolition, is, that the Trade, though renounced by us, would still be carried on by other and rival states; and that we should see them extending their commerce, increasing their wealth, and improving their maritime resources, at our expence, while the cause of humanity was in no degree promoted, and not one African the less would be torn from his native land. Many thousands have been the lives which have fallen a sacrifice to this pernicious argument. Against the noble lord, however, it was an argument which cannot have been urged with success; for it could not be doubted, that the powerful voice, and more powerful example of France, added to those of Great Britain, must have commanded the total abolition of this nefarious Trade, by the general consent of all the powers of Europe.

Let us not, then, be told, that in desiring time to prepare for the abolition, France is only following the example we have set her. France, it must be again observed, is not required to abolish the Trade, but not to embark in it anew; and, with all the difficulties which the abolitionists had to encounter here; with all the cause of just reproach, which certainly belongs to us, for having been so tardy in effecting what justice and religion, and our national honour, so long, so loudly, and so imperatively called for; yet it cannot be denied, that from the first moment when the attention of the public was awakened to the subject, there never was a time when this nation would have consented to incur the enormous guilt of creating such a traffic.

But although France is to revive the Trade, it is only for five years that it is to be revived. Not, indeed, that there is any positive stipulation that at the end of that period it shall absolutely cease; but, if I have rightly understood the noble lord, according to his construction of the Treaty, France merely engages, that after the five years, she will, by an act of her own, utterly renounce all commerce in slaves; and upon this assurance the noble lord relies. He really believes that the French nation, who, now that they are yet strangers to the Trade, except as they have heard and read of it, and are capable, like impartial and philosophical observers, to estimate it justly, are not only not deterred by the horrors which it presents from embarking in it, but are even eager to plunge into this sea of blood, will, when they are once deeply and eagerly engaged in it, and are largely enriching themselves with its guilty profits, have the generosity and magnanimity to relinquish it for ever.

In the mean time, and when the five years shall have expired, numerous difficulties, which do not now exist, will have arisen to obstruct the performance of their engagement. How differently circumstanced will France then be from what she is at present! Great capitals will be embarked in the Trade; numerous vessels will be employed in it; many thousands of individuals will have accustomed themselves to look to it for subsistence or support. France, too, will probably have engaged in, and long prosecuted her schemes for the reconquest of St. Domingo; and projects on this head have been talked of (but which, I trust, are not really entertained), the mere mention of which chills the heart with horror. When all these changes shall have taken place, by what arguments shall we persuade France to be faithful to her engagements? It cannot be by insisting on the great principles of justice of humanity. You have yourselves, she will reply, by the very Treaty which you require us to fulfil, admitted that justice and humanity must sometimes yield to expediency; and the present expediency is of a far higher nature than that which prevailed when you concluded the Treaty with us. We had then few sacrifices to make; we must now ruin the fortunes of thousands, who have themselves well-founded claims upon our hu- manity. We have reconquered St. Domingo, but it has been after a long and arduous struggle, which has cost us innumerable lives. We have expended immense treasures, and have consumed the flower of our armies; and now that at such a price we have recovered what may be to us the most important of our foreign possessions, you would fain persuade us to retain it just as war has left it, with its wasted plantations and desolated fields, a barren and depopulated island, because your humanity revolts at our supplying it with negroes. That humanity would better have proved itself to be sincere, by insisting at first upon an immediate and perpetual abolition, instead of suffering us to shed so much blood, and to waste such important resources, for the avowed purpose of re-establishing our valuable plantations, and then, when the season has at last arrived for repairing the mischief which it was well known must precede the benefits we had in view, endeavouring to prevent us from reaping the fruits of our dangers and exertions.

I confess that I deeply lament, that five years has been mentioned in the Treaty as the period at which the Trade is definitively to cease. Being fully convinced, for the reasons I have given, that the Trade will not end when that period arrives, I cannot but think, that the fixing it now as the moment of its termination, will only have the effect of giving a wider range and additional vigour and spirit to the Trade at its commencement, and of rendering those who engage in it more earnest in their pursuits, and less under the controul or any moral restraint. The traffic, no doubt, will be entered upon with all the eager spirit of adventure with which a new trade is always received; and at the same time, the adventurers in it, understanding that it is to be but of short duration, will be disposed to profit to the utmost of the golden opportunity while it lasts. Intent on making their fortunes, they will persuade themselves that not a moment is to he lost; and the scruples which they might have entertained at the fraud, and rapine, and bloodshed which they will meet with in their way, will be lulled by the reflection, that those evils are only transient and temporary.

It was with great surprise that I heard the noble lord declare, that he really believed that the Trade would last only for five years, and that it would be carried on till that period with the honest expec- tation that at its arrival it would cease; for in saying this, the noble lord surely could not mean to intimate, that it would be prosecuted on a larger scale, and assume a more atrocious character than it ever yet had done; and yet I cannot recollect the arguments used by the noble lord himself upon former occasions, and suppose him unconscious that this must be the case. In a debate, which I remember took place in the year 1806, when this House resolved, that it would, at a time to be afterwards fixed, abolish the Trade, the noble lord, as well as the right hon. gentleman who sits near him (Mr. Rose), strenuously opposed that resolution, upon this, amongst other grounds, that the fixing a future time for the abolition must always have the effect of giving new life and a wider extention to the Trade while it lasted; and experience, the noble lord observed, had shewn, that the fixing such periods always afforded a rich harvest to Liverpool. By the noble lord's own reasoning, therefore, he has consented to a renewal of this detestable traffic, under circumstances which must add to its horrors, and extend its devastation; and that very increased activity and extension must, when the stated period for its termination arrives, make its termination impossible.

That the British nation should be parties to a treaty, by which a traffic in human beings is sanctioned, is alone a sufficient cause of reproach, but to feel the whole extent of the disgrace which this Treaty brings upon us, it is necessary to consider what the real nature of this traffic is. The Slave Trade is, indeed, no where mentioned but with some epithet which expresses the horror that it inspires. It is described as inhuman, as sanguinary, as detestable, or by some other vague and general term of reprobation; but such terms can convey but a very inadequate notion of the real horrors of this Trade, to those nations which are happily strangers to it in practice. But, in this country, it is in no such imperfect and indefinite mode that this horrible traffic, this foul reproach to civilized society, is known. What the Trade really is, we have fully ascertained. We have, as it were, reckoned up and taken the exact dimensions of all the miseries and agonies it inflicts. What might seem to others to be the heightenings and amplifications of eloquence, we, alas, know to be plain fact, incontestably proved. We have made ourselves acquainted with the Trade in its manifold, complicated, and unexaggerated horrors. We have dared to scrutinize mutely into every part of it. We have, by long and patient examinations of numerous witnesses, traced, in the very heart of Africa, the superstitions and barbarism, in the darkness of which its nations are still enveloped, to this powerful cause. On those shores which have intercourse with Europeans, we have almost with oar own eyes beheld the wasted fields, and ruined villages, and flying inhabitants, which with certainty denote that slave-ships are hovering on the coast. We have even descended into the holds of the ships, and have had the courage to survey, and to expose to open day, the chained and crowded victims, writhing with agony, or wasting with disease, during the protracted sufferings of the middle passage. We have traced up to this, as their source, all those habitual severities and cruelties, and that constant contempt of human life and human misery, which distinguish West Indian from every other species of slavery: and it is this Trade, thus known to us in the full extent of all its abominations; this system of fraud and oppression, and rapine, and cruelty, and murder, examined into, understood, scrutinized, exposed, and execrated, to which the noble lord has, by the Treaty, given the sanction of the British name!

If the Treaty had been in other respects less favourable to us, we should at least have had the consolation of reflecting, that we had not profited by this dereliction of all honourable principle, and that we had not sold our consent to such enormous injustice; but with the stipulations in our favour which we know that it contains; with St. Lucie and Tobago, and the Isle of France, retained by us; with the engagement, that no fortifications shall be erected in the French settlements in India, and with the other benefits which we have bargained for, how can we defend ourselves from self-reproach, or silence our consciences, which tell us that these concessions have been purchased for us with the blood of Africa.

In consideration of our receiving these benefits, we consent that France shall carry on the Slave Trade; and to enable her the more successfully to carry it on, we restore to her her ancient factories on the coast of Africa. She is to be reinstated in Gorée and Senegal, almost in the centre of that large district from which this fatal trade had been wholly extirpated, and where we saw the dawn breaking of that happier condition which the natives were beginning to enjoy. This is the prosperous region which we consent to abandon to the ravages of the slave-merchants of France. Like faithful stewards, we have improved the country for them while it has been in our hands; we have increased its population; we have encouraged its inhabitants to settle in its peaceful villages; we have, by the instruction we have given them, and the confidence we have taught them to place in Christians, soothed them into a fatal, security; and we deliver up to its bitterest enemies this improving territory, well stocked with plentiful crops of negroes, and supplied for its savage hunters with abundance of human game. The very benefits we have conferred on these unhappy beings, the comforts to which we have accustomed them, and the knowledge we have imparted to them, will only embitter their misfortunes, and make them feel more acutely the full extent of the misery and degradation which now awaits them.

But turning our view from Africa, to consider how the West Indian islands we have ceded will be affected by this Article of the Treaty, I cannot, I confess, but entertain great doubt, whether we had any right to make such an alteration in the condition of its inhabitants as this stipulation must necessarily effect. The great population of all the islands consists, we must recollect, of negroes and of slaves. This population, notwithstanding their degraded and unhappy state, have claims upon us to protect them, and have rights which we are bound to maintain. Though the slaves of their masters, they are the subjects of the crown, and are entitled to the protection of the law, The abolition of the Slave Trade has done much to meliorate the condition of these unhappy men, and has mitigated the character of their slavery. To accomplish this, indeed, was, I think I have heard my hon. friend say, the principal object which he had in view, when he first entertained the design of putting an end to this detestable Trade. The calamities of Africa and the horrors of the middle passage had not at first presented themselves to his view. He foresaw that West Indian slaves would be less likely to be worn down by continual and exhausting labours, or to be sacrificed by sudden gusts of passion, or deliberate resentment in those on whom they were entirely dependent, when their loss could not be replaced by the never-failing supply which the Slave Trade afforded. To some degree, what he foresaw has come to pass. Wretched, indeed, is their condition still; but it is less wretched than it was, when fresh cargoes of slaves were every year exposed to sale in the markets. We have had, indeed, some remarkable proofs of the improvement of their condition. Not the least of them is, that since the abolition, we have seen what no eye before had ever beheld, and no ear had ever heard, a white proprietor brought to trial for the murder of his slave, convicted, and publicly executed. All improvement, however, with them, is now at an end. By the terms of the Treaty, we have not merely transferred the dominion over these colonies to a foreign state, but we have in effect agreed, that their inhabitants shall pass under a more cruel bondage than that which they groan under at present, since we have consented that there shall be withdrawn from them the most effectual of all restraints upon those wanton abuses of power, to which men, in a state of domestic slavery, must be constantly exposed.

When applied to the island of Guadeloupe, these considerations acquire tenfold force, and place the conduct of ministers in a most extraordinary point of view. In the last year we ceded that island to Sweden, but under an express stipulation that the Slave Trade should never be carried on there. Sweden could not, without a breach of national faith, either by herself, or by any other power to whom she might have transferred the colony, have polluted its shores with this inhuman traffic. But what we would not allow Sweden to do, we do ourselves: we consent that the island shall be given up to France, without affording it any protection against the Slave Trade. We make ourselves parties to a violation of our own treaty; and, without compunction, sanction a breach of those conditions, which, with such seeming anxiety, we had provided for the happiness of the colony.

But after all, we are told, that to submit to all this, was matter of necessity; for on this point France was determined not to yield. We had only to chuse, it seems, between permitting her to carry on the Slave Trade or still prosecuting the war; and the noble lord asks whether, for such an object as that of putting an end to the Trade, five years sooner or later, we should have been justified in prolonging such a contest, without the assistance, too, of our allies; and, he adds, with lord Wellington's army far advanced into France, and wholly unsupported. But ready, Sir, I cannot think that these difficulties presented themselves with quite so formidable an aspect as the noble lord would represent. I cannot forget that he has himself assured us, that the sovereigns, our allies, were sincerely and zealously desirous to abolish the Slave Trade; and when I recollect the circumstances in which France stood, and the extraordinary events which had preceded the negociation, I cannot persuade myself that England was obliged to treat so much in the spirit of a conquered country, that merely because France was pleased to threaten a continuance of the war, we were necessarily to relinquish the just demands that we had made. The noble lord must himself admit, that so high a tone, so unreasonably assumed by France, could have afforded no justification for his yielding every thing, no matter how unjust, which it might have been her pleasure to exact. If she had presumed to dictate to us, as the indispensable price of peace, that Gibraltar should be ceded to her, the noble lord assuredly would not have thought a prospect of the continuance of war a sufficient reason for making a sacrifice to France of that proud monument of our glory; and yet for no better reason, he has sacrificed to her what was a monument of much greater glory to the British name.

But who, indeed, can be credulous enough to believe, that we ever were reduced to the necessity of relinquishing either peace or the abolition of this traffic? If we were to admit that France, in the situation in which she stood, could with any appearance of reason have peremptorily insisted on carrying on the Trade, yet was it not most obvious, that we had a right to retain the colonies which conquest had made our own, unless France would consent, that from them at least the Trade should continue, as it then was, wholly excluded? Who, indeed, can look at the Treaty, and observe what we have retained, and what we have stipulated for, without being convinced that we never were reduced to this pretended necessity? but we preferred, it seems, Tobago and St. Lucie, and the other comparatively light advantages which we have secured for ourselves, to the honourable duty which was imposed upon us, of effacing for ever the foulest stain that had ever blotted the character of Europeans and of Christians.

Long and lasting must be the reproach which this has drawn upon us. The noble lord has complained, indeed, of the melancholy suggestions of my hon. friend, with which, he says, he has endeavoured at this hour of congratulation, to dash the cup of enjoyment from the lips of the nation. I confess, it appears to me, that this is the Moment, of all others, when it most becomes us to appreciate the real nature of this Article of the Treaty, and to consider in what light it places us as a nation. It is now, while our ears are vibrating with shouts of triumph, and while our imaginations are still dazzled with the splendour of our late rejoicings, that it behaves us to examine the part that we have acted in the great events which have taken place, and to consider whether we have fulfilled the high destiny to which God seemed to have called us; whether, on the contrary, we have not basely deserted the cause of our fellow-creatures which was committed to our hands; and whether, while we are drinking in this intoxicating cup, and feasting at the banquet which is set before us, some unperceived hand is not inscribing on the wall, the sentence of our condemnation.

To obtain the concurrence of other states, in the abolition of the Slave Trade, has long been an object of earnest solicitude to this House, even before we had passed an act to abolish it for ourselves; but when, under the administration of 1806, no doubt was entertained that such a law would speedily be enacted, this House presented an address to the crown, entreating his Majesty to take measures for establishing, by negociation with foreign powers, a consent and agreement for abolishing the African Slave Trade; and representing to his Majesty, that this House felt the justice and honour of the nation to be deeply and peculiarly involved in that great object; and we were assured, by his Majesty, that these our wishes should be attended to.

In 1810, this House again approached the throne, and, after expressing its deep regret that the efforts which the King had made to induct foreign powers to concur in relinquishing this disgraceful commerce, had been attended with so little success, earnestly besought his Majesty to persevere in those measures which might tend to bring about so desirable an end. The same gracious answer was returned to these renewed entreaties, the same royal pledge was again given, that it should not be through any omission on the part of the crown, that our hopes and wishes should be is appointed.

At last an opportunity presented itself for realizing those hopes, and gratifying those wishes, such as the most sanguine could hardly have pictured to themselves in their fondest dreams of prosperity;—a concurrence of circumstances the most fortunate, I should rather say the most providential, for rendering this great benefit to our fellow-creatures and to posterity; such an opportunity for concluding the most glorious treaty that ever was entered into between rival and contending nations, as might have warmed the coldest heart, and have inspired the most vulgar mind with a noble and virtuous ambition.

That such a crisis had arrived, we knew could not escape the observation of any man, that it would pass away unimproved we did not suppose possible, and yet, that there might be no omission on our part, that we might, as it were, make assurance doubly sure, that where such important interests were at stake, there might not be even the appearance of our being, in the smallest degree, wanting to ourselves and to mankind, this House unanimously resolved again to address the throne, and to represent to it all that the occasion demanded of us, the right which our situation gave us to insist upon this point with the enemy, the evils that would result, and the dreadful responsibility we should incur, if it were given up, and the solemn assurances and pledges which the crown had repeatedly given us, and upon which we had firmly relied. And after all this, possessed of such advantages, strengthened by such an address, and stimulated by such considerations, what is the treaty which the ministers have concluded? One that disappoints all our hopes, blasts all our prospects, seals our perpetual disgrace, and leaves us to deplore, that we have lost an opportunity of benefiting mankind, and ennobling ourselves, such as the world will, probably, never again afford!

That I take this view of the subject will, I know, by some persons, be ascribed to the spirit of party; but thinking, as in my conscience I do, that in concluding this Treaty, every moral and religion duty has been disregarded, ought I, from any such trivial consideration, and, because I cannot blame the measure without censuring the men who are the authors of it, to refrain from expressing my real opi- nion? Let me rather again remind those who, thinking as ill of the Treaty as I do, are yet so far influenced by their partiality to ministers, that they will either observe a criminal silence, or give their sanction to it by their votes, that they are, indeed, acting from the worst of party motives; and let me caution all such persons how, at any future time, they receive favours at the hands of ministers, lest their consciences should tell them, that such favours have been obtained at the expence of the happiness and blood of Africa.

My hon. friend (Mr. Wilberforce) indeed, who practises every Christian virtue, has expressed, in strong terms, his disappointment and regret at this Treaty; but yet he has the exemplary forbearance, while he deeply deplores, not to censure the conduct of the negociator. A most remarkable instance of Christian charity it unquestionably is, for there is no individual in his Majesty's dominions, who, if in consideration of such a superior importance, we could be allowed to mix any thing which merely affected ourselves, has more reason to complain than my hon. friend. There is no man living whom it can have robbed of a larger portion of happiness. After devoting the best part of his virtuous life to this great object; when by long-continued and unwearied exertions, after repeated disappointments, and by a perseverance without example, he had, at last, at a mature period of his life, accomplished the object to which he had devoted all the faculties of his mind; when he was beginning to reap the full rewards of his long labours,—rewards the most congenial to his heart, and the best adapted to services such as his,—the satisfaction of seeing the progress of the good of which he had been, in so great a degree, the author; while he was every year receiving from Africa and from the West Indies, the tidings of the improved condition of his fellow-creatures; while he saw in Africa the dawnings of civilization, the calm and the tranquillity which reigned in their contented villages, the instruction which was afforded to their youths, and the comforts which the light of true religion was every day diffusing among the natives; and, on the other hand, in the West Indies, the mitigation of the labours and sufferings of the negroes, and law extending its protection to these unhappy outcasts of society; while he was cheering his mind, long depressed by the miseries which he had been compelled, for so many years, to dwell upon, with the refreshing sight of this comparative happiness, and was eagerly looking forward to the further progress of this great good, and was expecting, from still greater improvements in the moral existence of those to whom he had already been so great a benefactor, the best consolations of his declining age; what a prospect of the future has the noble lord opened to him!—The sudden revival of this horrid traffic, upon the largest scale, and in its most ferocious spirit; all his exertions, and his anxieties, and his sacrifices of time, and health, and fortune, endured in vain; a renewal of the plunder, and carnage, and devastation, which used to lay waste the shores of Africa; new fleets sailing across the Atlantic, freighted with human misery in every form and every degree; new markets opened, in which rational beings, like beasts of the field, are to be again exposed to public sale; the revival of a more severe and a more cruel species of bondage, more exhausting toils, a lower species of degradation, augmented tortures; an aggravation of all the anguish of body and mind, which wastes and consumes so large a portion of our fellow-men; and the sickening certainty, that all these complicated evils tend to confirm, and perpetuate, and aggravate each other, and that they forebode scenes more dreadful even than those which they exhibit!

Such are the melancholy prospects which this Treaty affords to those who had been earnest in procuring the abolition, and who were pleasing themselves with the reflection of the great benefits which they had obtained for mankind, or, in other words, to the great majority of the British nation. With these prospects before us, I cannot applaud the Treaty. I am desirous with my hon. friend, to have all the information that can throw light upon the negotiation; but if that information is with-held, and I ant compelled to decide with no other lights than I at present possess, I must say, that the Treaty appears to me, as far as it respects the Slave Trade, to be repugnant to justice and humanity, disgraceful to the British name, and offensive in the sight of God.

rose in a state of great agitation, and after remarking that it was impossible for him not to feel that the eye of the hon. and learned gentleman glanced at him when he talked of members who chose to be criminally silent; asked, what right the hon. and learned gentleman had to impute to him so uncharitable a charge? He had last night on two several occasions offered himself to the attention of the Speaker, but was not fortunate enough to catch his eye, till a period of the evening when he was too much exhausted to do justice to his feelings. So far from not intending to speak upon the present occasion, he had been listening with satisfaction to the eloquent speech of the hon. and learned gentleman, till the cruel and unjust attack was made upon himself, with the view of being able to distinguish the little of that speech of which he did not approve, from the great proportion of it in which he so highly concurred, and in conjunction with the House admired. If the hon. and learned gentleman was sincere in the sentiments of benevolence he had uttered that night, he would take himself to task on his pillow, for the injustice of which he had been guilty, in imputing to others so serious a charge. It was too much to impute to a man who had some small claims to good will on this very account, the charge of bartering the blood of Africa for the sake of detestable lucre.—He then proceeded to shew how zealous he had uniformly been, both in the West Indies and in this country in support of the abolition. He expressed his disapprobation of the Article in the Treaty; but at the same time, as the noble lord pledged himself that the production of the papers called for, instead of serving the cause of the abolition, would injure it at the Congress, he was willing to take the pledge of the noble lord in this respect, thinking that he thereby best consulted the attainment of the grand object, and satisfied that ministers were equally responsible for any omission or violation of their duty, after the Congress had taken place, as they were now. He had read every publication on the recent horrible proceedings in St. Domingo, and he had obtained information on the subject in every possible way, and he was petrified with horror at the facts which he had learnt. At Cape Françoise they were in the habit of desecrating Sunday by hunting human beings in a ring with blood hounds, until they were torn to pieces; and of carrying others out to sea, and drowning them by wholesale. The fact that the ex-nobles of France had great possessions in St. Domingo, and that M. Mahonet had been appointed the French colonial minister, accounted to him in a great measure for the difficulties under which the noble lord had laboured to obtain his object. The noble lord had however pledged himself, he believed most sincerely, to exert every effort in this cause at the approaching Congress. If the noble lord failed to redeem this pledge, might God not spare him if he spared the noble lord or his colleagues. Thinking, however, that the motion would be injurious instead of beneficial to the object in view, he must vote against it.

, in explanation, expressed his regret that the hon. and learned gentlemen had taken the observations which he had made as personally directed against him, and assured the hon. and learned gentleman that he meant no attack upon him, but merely directed his argument to him in common with ethers who were in the same situation.

declared himself satisfied with this explanation.

and Mr. Barham supported the motion.

denied that any practical benefit would result from the motion if it were acceded to. Although he was at an utter loss to conceive how a British minister could have placed himself in the situation in which the noble lord said he had found himself placed, yet, after the warning of the noble lord, given on his responsibility as minister, that much detriment to the cause would arise from the production of the papers moved for, he could not consent to the motion.

expressed his surprise that the hon. gentlemen who last spoke should be disposed to yield implicit credit to the noble lord's statement, that to agree to his learned friend's motion would be to injure and not to serve the cause of the abolition, after having said that his imagination was at a loss to conceive how a British minister could place himself in such a situation as that in which the noble lord confessed he had been placed. He allowed that the noble lord had misjudged in the one case, and yet he was willing to take the noble lord's opinion as imperative in the other. On the noble lord's own principles, what chance was there of success in any further negociation with France? The noble lord asserted, that we had no right to insist on the French being more moral than they were; and, on the other hand, that we had no right to threaten the French with a continuation of the war unless they consented to the abolition. Then, he should be glad to know, in what quarter we were to look for favourable circumstances in the approaching Congress? Was it from the good disposition of the allied powers? If the noble lord had not availed himself of that good disposition in the efforts which he had already made, he was deeply culpable; if he had availed himself of them, it was evident that they had not much weight. In what he was about to say, he by no means intended to disclaim being a party man. On the contrary, he thought it an honour to be so considered. He should never think well of the condition of any country in which there were not avowed associations of public men, friendly to public liberty. But that the present motion was made in what was usually termed the spirit of party, he would utterly deny. The noble lord and his colleagues had less reason to complain of party than any administration in the history of this country. During the whole of the late negociations, they had not experienced a single act of opposition; and their political enemies appeared as arduous to strengthen the hands of government, as were their most arduous supporters.

said, that though his opinion with regard to the Treaty, so far as the article respecting the Slave Trade was concerned, remained exactly the same as he had expressed it on a former evening, yet he felt it to be imperiously his duty, to vote against the motion of his learned friend.

briefly replied. His object in making the motion, was to obtain papers, which might enable him to form his judgment respecting the conduct of the noble lord, as to whether that conduct was deserving of censure or approbation. He disclaimed the idea of bringing it forward in the first instance, as a direct censure upon the noble lord. If, however, the noble lord chose to refuse that evidence which might qualify him (Mr. Horner), to determine upon his conduct in framing that Treaty, and if he must deliver his opinion upon it from the impression now on his mind, he, in the absence of all other means of determining, should have no hesitation in saying Guilty. He did not mean to press the matter to a division, as he had sufficiently collected the sense of the House from the turn of the debate. He had done what he conceived to be his duty in bringing the question forward, and should rest satisfied with that consciousness.

, in explanation, said, that it was far from his intention to say any thing which could be construed into an attack upon the motives or feelings of the learned gentleman; he had used the word party in no offensive sense; he referred merely to the time that had been suffered to elapse before the present motion was brought forward.

contended, that he had availed himself of the first practicable night.

replied, that he might have given notice of his motion, if intended to impute blame, without the necessity of bringing it forward earlier.

observed that his learned friend had certainly postponed his motion at his request, in order to afford him the opportunity of previously bringing forward his own motion respecting the Slave Trade.

The question was then put, and negatived without a division.