Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

ment would employ every proper means to obtain a convention of the powers of Europe, for the immediate abolition of the Slave Trade; representing to him that the late happy events afford the most auspicious opportunity for the interposition of Great Britain for that purpose; that unless this nation interposes with effect at the present juncture, the restoration of peace will be the revival of this criminal traffic in all its horrors; and that they trust that such a great act of atonement towards Africa would tend to prolong the tranquillity of Europe, by inculcating a higher respect for justice and humanity among its

nations.

The motion being read, the Chancellor of the Exchequer rose to express his cordial concurrence. He was followed by several other speakers from both sides of the House, who were unanimous in their approbation of the sentiments in the address. Mr. Canning hinted, that as Spain and Portugal had now recovered their independence, we might assume a loftier tone with them than would have been wise or delicate when they were struggling with difficulties, and looked to this country for aid. Mr. Marryatt took upon him to state that those connected with the West India colonies were as anxious for the abolition of the Slave Trade as any other class of persons could be. As a proof that little was done towards lessening the evil while the trade was carried on by other nations, he said, that from the report of the African society up to the year 1810, the average number of slaves annually obtained from Africa

amounted to 80,000, of which half were carried away in Spanish, and half in Portuguese vessels. He asserted that our abolition of the trade had already produced the effect of a better treatment of the Negroes in the colonies, the old system of night and day gangs being abandoned. Mr. Whitbread observed, that those were deceived who imagined that every man in England wished for the abolition of the Slave Trade. It had come to his knowledge that there were persons in this country base enough to wish for the return of peace on account of the facilities it would afford for carrying on this traffic under another flag. Those powers which still supported it ought to be made to understand that their interest required its total abolition.

The motion was agreed to unanimously.

In the House of Lords, on May 5th, Lord Grenville rose, and made a speech so much in the general tenor of that of Mr. Wilberforce, that it would be superfluous to particularize its topics. It may however be observed, that he dwelt with more energy on the conduct of the court of Portugal in its late edict permitting the Slave Trade, and plainly inculcated the necessity of "meeting it with higher and more influenfial arguments than we had used before," if we desired to effect the abolition. His Lordship concluded with moving an address to the Prince Regent precisely of the same import with that proposed in the other House, which was agreed to nem, diss.

These proceedings were prior to the treaty of peace between the

allied powers and France; and when, among the terms of that treaty, an article was found, sanctioning to France the practice of the Slave Trade during five years, the zealous advocates for its total abolition were struck with deep concern, and foresaw a renewal, to a wide extent, of all the horrors which they had so long been employed in combating. The leaders in each House of Parliament in the measures above recorded, prepared to exert themselves again for the same benevolent cause, though the part they had now to take was of a more difficult and complicated nature, since they were to contend against an engagement already entered into, and in which the reputation of the ministers was in some degree involved.

On June 27th, Mr. Wilberforce rose in the House of Commons, and began with expressing his severe disappointment that the address which on his motion had been presented to the crown, imploring its influence to induce foreign powers to join in the abolition of the Slave Trade, had proved ineffectual. He gave a pathetic view of the miseries which the supply with slaves of the French colonies unconditionally restored would inflict on a vast number of human beings. He said it had not been his intention to express any opinion of the conduct of the negociators in this treaty; but for himself, no considerations, however weighty, could have induced him to resign settlements which were to be culti -vated in a way so abhorrent to humanity. As the matter, now stood, he was afraid that the ut

most we could hope was, that at the end of five years France would join with the rest of Europe in the condemnation of this trade; England however even now ought to lift up her voice, and at least endeavour to prevent the introduction of the miseries formerly existing, into those parts of Africa in which these horrors had been repressed, and legitimate commerce had been established. After various other observations on the subject, urged with great earnestness, Mr. W. concluded with moving a long address to the Prince Regent, in which, after expressing the regret of the House, that the consequences of their former address had not been such as they had confidently anticipated, and stating the multiplied evils that would result from the renewal of the Slave Trade by the French, they earnestly implore his Royal Highness to endeavour to obtain, if possible, from the government of France, some diminution of the term permitted to the Slave Trade; but, in any case, its restriction within certain limits, and its total exclusion from those parts of Africa, where the exertions of Great Britain have already succeeded in suppressing it also, that no exertion should be omitted in the approaching congress to procure a final and universal extinction of the Slave Trade.

Lord Castlereagh said, that he warmly concurred in all the sentiments expressed by his hon. friend with respect to the Slave Trade, and the propriety of the address proposed, though he could have wished the discussion postponed till the time of taking the

treaty

treaty into consideration, when he trusted he should have been able to shew that government had performed its duty, even to the interests of this question. His Lordship then entered into some considerations to prove that there was no reason to suppose that France would have consented to an abolition of the Slave Trade on the restitution of her colonies, and that it would have been highly improper to make such a condition a sine qua non of the treaty. He spoke long upon these points, but in conclusion said he had no hesitation in agreeing to the address.

Several succeeding speakers expressed their dissatisfaction with the article of the treaty in question; and Mr. Barham moved as an amendment to that part of the motion, which implored the Regent to obtain from the French government some diminution of the term allowed for the traffic, "That an immediate renunciation of the Slave Trade may be effected in return for any cession, consistent with the honour of this country, which may be agreed on by his Majesty's government in concurrence with his Majesty's allies." This amendment, however, was withdrawn, and the motion for the address was agreed to,

nem, con.

In the House of Lords, on June 27th. Lord Grenville rose, and introduced a motion on the subject in an eloquent speech, which has been published in the form of a separate pamphlet, and therefore can admit of no abridgment compatible with the limits allowable in this work. Its main scope, however, was the inculpa

tion of the ministry for having consented to a treaty permitting the carrying on of the Slave Trade for five years, when its immediate and total abolition might have been obtained if pursued with zeal. After having placed the horrors of the trade, and the blame of having neglected an opportunity for its abolition, in the strongest lights, and urged them upon the House with all the force of language, bis Lordship moved, "That an humble address be presented to his Royal Highness, the Prince Regent, praying that he will be graciously pleased to direct, that there be laid before this House copies of such representations as have been made by his Majesty's ministers in the late negociations for peace, in consequence of the unanimous address of this House for the immediate and total aboli. tion of the Slave Trade, together with the answers returned thereto; and also extracts from such parts of the dispatches of his Majesty's ministers as relate to the same subject."

The Earl of Liverpool, in reply, said that one great mistake ran through the whole of the noble Baron's argument, founded upon a misconception of the right which a country has to dictate to another and independent nation on a subject like the present. Such right must be founded either on general principles, or on particular circumstances. With respect to the first, it would scarcely be contended, that any government would be justified either in going to war, or in continuing it, for the purpose of imposing upon another country a moral obligation, however solemn or sacred. In these

Points every independent nation is entitled to judge and act for itself. As to the circumstances of the present case, it was first to be considered, that these could only attach to the colonies of which we had possession, not to those which were not in our hands. With respect to the former, the noble baron argued as if the restitution of her colonies to France was an act purely gratuitous on our part. He confessed that he never considered it as such. The object of the negociations being a general peace, the continental powers, jealous of the colonial possessions of Great Britain, would never have allowed her to keep all those of France. When it is argued, that the abolition of the Slave Trade ought to have been the condition of restitution, it is contending that the abolition ought to have been made the price of peace, and that upon its refusal, the continuation of the war must have been the consequence; but were their Lordships' or the nation prepared for such an alternative? His Lordship proceeded to shew, that the ministry had by no means been neglectful of every real opportunity of abolishing the Slave Trade which had occurred in other countries; and he would not admit that the concession made by France was unimportant, though not such as they could have wished, and struggled hard to obtain. He came at length to the immediate consideration of the motion, and contended, that nothing could more tend to frustrate the object in view than acceding to it.

Of the other speeches for and against the motion it seems unnecessary to give any particulars,

since every thing of argument had been anticipated. The question being put, a division took place, when the numbers were, for the motion 27, against it 62: Majority 35. A protest against the rejection was eutered upon the journals, signed by the dukes of Sussex and Gloucester, and the lords Grey, Lauderdale, Grenville, and Holland.

A similar motion was made on June 28, in the House of Com mons, by Mr. Horner, which was negatived without a division.

The subject was not as yet entirely dismissed from the consi deration of parliament. On June goth, the Marquis of Lansdowne rose in the House of Lords to move an address to the Prince Regent relative to the Slave Trade. He prefaced it with saying, that he was one of those who thought that some information ought to have been produced, and some opinion given, on the omission to secure this great object. But setting this aside, every one must feel how necessary it was that their Lordships should follow up their previous address, and that they could not quit the subject without expressing their regret at the failure which had already taken place, and their anxious desire as to what might be done in future. If the immediate abolition of this detested traffic could not be procured, there might still be means found of saving Africa from the full extent of evil resulting from it, and with which it was threatened by the command the French would acquire of the river Senegal, and partly of the Gambia. After some observations on this topic, his Lordship concluded with mov

ing an address expressive of the deep regret felt by that House that the exertions of his Royal Highness, the Prince Regent, had not been attended with more complete success, and their earnest hope that his Royal Highness might be able to form new arrangements with France for the purpose of bringing about this desirable result. At the same time entreating that his Royal Highness would use his utmost endeavours at the approaching congress to procure a declaration, that this traffic was contrary to the law of nations, and one which ought to be abolished over the whole of the civilized world.

The Earl of Liverpool said, that he completely concurred in the motion, but he thought that while regret was expressed that more had not been done, satisfaction should also be expressed at what had been effected; and he proposed introducing into the motion, words declarative of their satisfaction at the abolition of the trade by Sweden and Holland, particularly by the latter.

The Marquis of Lansdowne had no objection to this amendment. Lord Grenville spoke in favour of it, and of the whole motion and the address was agreed to nem. diss.

It is only further to be noticed, relative to this subject, that a great number of petitions for the aboli.

tion of the Slave Trade continued to be presented to parliament, during the session, from towns and communities in different parts of the empire. The petition to the House of Lords from the Society of Friends, called Quakers, in and near the metropolis, occasioned a singular discussion respecting form. It had first been addressed "To the Peers in Parliament assembled," but the petitioners being informed that this was not the proper designation of that House, as the bench of bishops were not Peers, but Lords, it had been altered "To the Lords in Parliament assembled." The Lord Chancellor remarked upon this circumstance, that the usual designation of the House being "the Lords spiritual and temporal in parliament assembled, if in the general term "Lords" the petitioners meant to include this description, their Lordships would probably think the petition admissible. Lord Arden thereupon protested against any innovation upon established forms, and said. he felt it to be his duty to oppose the reception of the petition. Several lords, however, among whom was the archbishop of Canterbury, giving their opinion that such a strict adherence to form should be waved in favour of so respectable a body of petitioners, the petition was received.

CHAP.

« ZurückWeiter »