is material to know what he really intends | God that the situation of the country to convey, to understand how much, and the precise value of what he has advanced. I understand him to have said, and I beg to be corrected if I am mistaken, that measures have been already taken by ministers, with a view to avail themselves of whatever circumstances may occur favourable, either to making or receiving overtures of peace with France. I certainly do not mean to quibble upon words, and therefore it cannot be supposed that he can mean a continuance of the war to be one of those measures which he hopes are introductory to negotiation. If it be understood, that since the message of the 8th of December, he has endea voured, by means of communication with our allies, to learn the grounds on which they wish to negociate, this certainly is something; but it is an instance of tardiness for which it is difficult to account. And even admitting these steps to have been taken, it still remains a question of serious urgency, whether the motion of my hon. friend ought to be agreed to by the House? That the manifestation of a sincere desire to negociate would in this country produce an effect highly popular, is a fact not to be disputed. To the rest of Europe such an inclination would be no less grateful; and I will put it to the judgment of the House, if they really think the country will make worse terms of peace with France, because the French government know our desire for peace to be sincere? Is it not to be feared, on the other hand, that the mutual alienation of affection, and the mutual distrust which have subsisted between the countries, will create a more serious difficulty with respect to the success of any negotiation, than even the terms that may be proposed? In former wars, we have found that the obstructions to pacification arose more from the temper of the adverse countries, than the specific terms which were brought upon the tapis. In the war of the succession, which, without exception was the most glorious of any that this country was ever engaged in, is there a Whig at this day so bigoted as not to believe that the conferences of Gertruydenburg might have led to peace, had they been properly conducted, and that the prolongation of the war arose from unextinguishable jealousy, and unyielding rivalship? I am not so sanguine as to expect that no difficulty will arise in negotiation about terms? I wish to were such as to afford any reasonable ground for such an expectation. But what I contend for is this, that such has been the asperity displayed on both sides, in the course of the contest, that the temper of the governments will occasion a difficulty no less formidable than any that may occur in the discussion of terms-a difficulty which I am sorry to say the concluding part of the right hon. gentleman's speech was by no means calculated to remove. It may be said, that the language held by the Directory was insolent in the extreme. But because insolent language is held by the Directory of France, is that a reason why the government of England should assume the same tone of insolence? Were we to adopt conciliatory language, the effect would be immediate upon the temper of the French government in softening asperity, and silencing abuse. And if such would be the effect in France, what might not be expected here?-It was stated by the right hon. gentleman that the motion of my hon. friend, if agreed to by the House, would so cramp, fetter, and humiliate government, that it would be impossible to negociate with honour. This is an objection which has been stated so often in the course of the war, that it has entirely lost its force. When on a former occasion it was proposed to declare the government of France in a negociable situation, the proposition was rejected with scorn, and now this very declaration has been made by ministers, and we have experienced no inconvenience from it. As to the prerogative of the crown of making peace, when and how his majesty pleases, no man doubts of it; but no man, on the other hand, will doubt of the prerogative of the Commons of England to advise his majesty, both as to the time and the terms of pacification. The present is not a matter of right, but a matter of discretion. I have put a case before to the House, which is so appropriate to the present circumstances of the country, that I may be allowed to quote it again-the case of the American war. In the course of that war, we heard from a noble lord, that it was the height of indiscretion in parliament, to interfere with the prerogative of the king in making peace. Parlia ment wisely rejected the noble lord's argument, and not only declared that America was in a negociable situation, and that the States should be acknowleged as independent, but they even declared that no offensive war should be carried on against America; and this very declaration enabled the right hon. gentleman and his associates at that time to conclude a peace, the terms of which were certainly not such as the country, in my opinion, had reason to expect from its circumstances at the time, but which redounded much to his credit, when compared with the misfortunes to which it had formerly been subjected.-There are certain bugbears which have always been held out by ministers to parliament, and which have been disposed of according to its good sense at the time. The pretences of state secrets, and parliamentary confidence, have always been held forth as a shield for the measures of the servants of the crown; fortunately for the people, however, their constituents have not been always inclined to pay that attention to them, which to superficial observers they may seem to claim. As to the state paper to which the right hon. gentleman referred, I have not seen it, and therefore am not qualified to reason upon it. But allowing the sentiments of the directory on the subject of peace, to be as wild, fanciful, and extravagant as it is possible for them to be, that is no reason why these sentiments ought to deter us from offering terms of peace. The time in which we live, is a time in which government must pay some attention to the opinion of the people whom they are appointed to govern. Were a disposition for peace, on the part of the government, discovered to the people of England, it would diffuse general happiness over the kingdom; and if it was made known to France, I am convinced that her concessions would be as ample as we could wish. As to the popular opinion in this country, it has for some time been evidently against the war; and I say it to the credit of ministers, that they have sacrificed something to the constitution of the country, in permitting the opinion of the people respecting the war, to have some weight in regulating their conduct. If the demands of France are exorbitant, let us meet them with reasonable overtures on our part, and moderation will have a greater effect than the most strenuous resistance, in relaxing their exertions. I know reason has too little to do in the government of the world, and that justice and moderation must often yield to power and lawless might. This has T been unhappily exemplified in the fate of Poland. Still, however, it is no light matter in national as well as private concerns to have reason on our side. I know I have been sometimes thought absurd, when I argued, that honour was the only just cause of war; but I still believe, and there has been nothing in late events to contradict the opinion, that reason and justice in any cause are the most powerful allies. If this be the case, let us manifest to France, to Europe, and to the world, a spirit of moderation; and let us this night address his majesty to commence a negotiation with the republic of France. I say the republic of France; for there is more in names than one would sometimes be apt to imagine. Ministers have talked of the French rulers," of persons exercising the government of France," &c. If they are serious in their intentions of making peace, they must hold a language more explicit. They have sent an ambassador (lord Macartney) to the court of Louis 18th. Do they imagine, after such an insult to the present government of France, that a negotiation can be entered upon without a previous and direct acknowledgment? That government has been recognised in various acts, both by us and our allies; in the exchange of prisoners, the release of the princess royal, &c. There is no injury, therefore; but, on the contrary, much advantage to be derived from a more full and explicit recognition. At the peace of Utrecht, the negociation and conferences at Gertruydenberg were injured by Louis 14th employing an ambassador in the interest of the pretender; why, then, the count d'Artois should now be so much countenanced by government as ambassador from an unfortunate prince, I am at a loss to conceive. Is it not highly necessary, then, to make an explicit declaration, that we are really desirous of a suitable and honourable peace. Let us, however, come to the point. Ministers say, all this is very good, if you let us do it; but if the House of Commons suggest it, it is very wrong. Do they think, however, that there is a cabinet in Europe, or even that there is a man who reads a newspaper, who believes, if the motion of my hon. friend were to be carried this evening, that it was forced upon administration? Nay, would he not rather think (if indecency I may be allowed to say so), that ministers had made the House of Commons adopt the motion? Allowing Now, though I am not one of those who think that land pays all the taxes, I think the weight of them lies upon the land, which cannot exist very easily under a burthen of twenty shillings in the pound. I am told that things are worse in France; but, will any man be bold enough not to wish for peace, because the finances of France may be in a state still more deranged than ours? Rather than continue the war for another campaign, independent of the moral reasons against its prolongation, I would not unquestionably give up our honour, our dignity, or our liberty, which, till I die, I trust I shall never fail to assert; but I would give up all questions of etiquette and accommodation, and in fact every thing short of what most nearly concerns our character. Let it not be understood that I wish for a dishonourable peace, or peace on any other terms than those which are suitable to the interests, and consistent with the dignity of the country; but I am sanguine enough to think, that even now this country may have fair and honourable terms of peace. The governors of France dare not refuse any reasonable terms which we may offer; if they do, others will then be appointed in their place, who will dare to accept of them. When peace shall be proposed, however, I hope and trust that it will not be proposed on the dividing system, and that this country will never give its sanction to any such transaction as the infamous partition of Poland. Dearly as I love peace, and anxiously as I wish for it, that such a peace may never prevail, I most heartily pray. I hope when peace shall arrive, that the interests of humanity as well as of kings, and that of every particular state, will be consulted, and that tranquillity will be re-established on the broad basis of justice, in answer to the prayers of mankind, who are now fatigued with war, slaughter, and devastation. the right hon. gentleman all the confi- | sum equal to the whole landed rental. dence which he can desire, nothing could tend more to evince the confidence of the House in administration, than the motion that has been made this evening. Even if it be the etiquette of the minister, that all declarations of this nature shall originate in the crown (an etiquette which I do not understand) I would not put a declaration of the crown in comparison, in point of authenticity, with that which the present motion, if carried, would convey. Let him recol lect that every moment of delay is a moment of danger, and therefore let him not procrastinate in making the declaration. He may, perhaps, have intended the speech of this evening to serve the purpose of a declaration: but he cannot but know the wide and immeasurable difference between a speech which may or may not go abroad in an accurate manner, and a resolution inserted in the votes of the House of Commons.-I shall not say one word on the relative situation of Great Britain. I am not one of those who are inclined to think despondingly of the situation of the country. But if any thing could make me despair, it would be that species of reasoning, which, after telling me of the increased national debt, the load of taxes, and the consequent misery entailed upon the people, desires me to look to the ruined finances of France for comfort, which are quickly hurrying that power to the precipice of destruction. So that, in proportion as the enemy retreats from the common abyss which would swallow up both, we are encouraged to be under no apprehension for our own safety. I will allow, that the French may be in greater distress than the people of this country are at this time; but to me it appears to be very poor comfort to the afflicted to hear, that their enemies will fall a little before them. Even supposing France to come and bow at our feet, supposing that Louis 18th were to be proclaimed rightful heir of the crown, and supposing that she were tamely to surrender all the conquests she has made it would be no recompence for the loss that we have already sustained. According to the statement of the right hon. gen. tleman, the territorial rental of the kingdom does not exceed twenty-five millions annually. The taxes, if they turn out as productive as they have been estimated, will amount to twenty-one millions, which, with the poor-rates, will make a The House divided on Mr. Grey's mo tion : YEAS NOES Tellers. Mr. Grey 3 50 Mr. Steele Mr. Adams 189 List of the Minority. Antonie, W. Lee Barclay, George, esq. Debate on Mr. Wilberforce's Motion for the Abolition of the Slave Trade.] Feb. 18. Mr. Wilberforce rose to make his promised motion respecting the Abolition of the Slave-trade. He said, that when he considered how often he had brought the subject in various shapes before the House, and how many grievous disappointments he had met with in his prosecution of it, he could not but foresee that many would be inclined to wonder at his perseverance. If there were persons who, from that conception, were led to indulge the hope that he was either discouraged by want of success, or baffled by opposition, he would tell them they utterly mistook his temper, as well as the principles upon which he had taken the matter up. This question differed fundamentally from all others, which had ever come under the cognizance of parliament. There were many questions of policy on which different opinions might be formed upon the most disinterested principles; on which the decisions, though of importance, might yet not cut very deep in the end; and the delay and suspension of which might be attended with no great degree of misery or injury. In the present case, however, error in decision, and delay or suspension in proceeding, was, attended with ruin, beyond all calculation, to unhappy Africa: while the House slept, the mischiefs complained of were going on, and every year, nay every day, was adding to the guilt of this country, and to the calamities of that. Impressed, as he was [VOL. XXXII.] with these horrible truths, he felt it to be his duty to strain every effort, to prevent a practice so destructive to the human, race; so disgraceful to the character of the British nation. It was hardly necessary for him to state to the House, that there was something very peculiar in the present time, as connected with this unfortunate subject. Gentlemen could not but recollect, that the 1st of January 1796, was the time when the House had declared that the slave trade should end. The first of January, 1796, was past, but alas! the detestable traffic proceeded with undi. minished spirit. Taking the resolution of that House, "that the slave trade should be abolished in January 1796,"* for his ground, he stood upon a foundation that could not be shaken. This was the sentence of the House, formally and deliberately pronounced, after a more elaborate discussion than any question had ever undergone. It became his duty, therefore, to call upon the House for the execution of its sentence. In doing so, it would be superfluous to argue, since any effort to shake the well-grounded resolution of the House would be as ineffec tual, as any attempt to convince those, who were not already convinced, would be vain. The House, in order to do justice to the question, should remember the state of opinion on that occasion. Some were disposed for an immediate abolition; a large majority was in favour of a gradual abolition; but, however different in opinion on that point, all agreed in branding the traffic with every epithet of infamy and reproach that ingenuity could devise. That should be ever remembered: for his part, he never would forget it; from that ground he would never move. He would not trouble the House, or afflict the sensations of those who had feeling, with a repetition of things at the bare thought of which his own heart sickened. Those mischiefs, then felt and branded with the execrations of the House, were still going forward, and would continue to go for ward with increased industry, if the House did not interpose, and take a quick, decisive, and an active part. One topic there was which threw new light on the business, and pointed out more distinctly, if possible, the necessity there was for the House to interfere without delay; he al [3 B] *See Vol. 29, p. 1293. luded to the present state of the West India islands. Last year, the state of that quarter had pointed out the policy of adopting some means for stopping the influx of Africans into those islands. If that motive was urgent then, how much more so was it at present? Did gentlemen consider what the enemy was even at this time doing there? Did they not know that the French government was acting there on the decree of 1794; and by emancipating, and turning the arms of the negroes against us, had got several of the islands into their possession, and were promoting and encouraging insurrection in others? Had the act passed, our enemies would never have possessed the strong ground they held in Guadaloupe, Grenada, and St. Vincent's. Was it not evident that the negroes lately imported would be easily influenced by the wide spreading system introduced by the enemy? What tie had they of attachment to the planters, when liberty was offered them by our neighbours? Let any man ask himself how much more likely were the new imported slaves to be influenced by French principles than others, and common sense would supply the answer. Upon the arguments used by the adversaries of the abolition, it was manifest that every fresh importation of African negroes was a fresh accumulation of inflammable matter into the islands: when they saw what was going forward with others under the machinations of the enemy, was it to be hoped that they would not lend their aid; and thousands upon thousands joining in the cause, become quite irresistible? How much less would the danger have been, if the 150,000 wretched Africans, who have been imported within the last four years, had not been added to the most dangerous of all the negroes. Was it not then, infatuation of the most extravagant kind to continue the trade under such circumstances? If gentlemen felt no impulse from the principles of justice and common humanity they should at least hearken to the dictates of policy and common sense, and give to self interest what they might be disposed to refuse to the calls of compassion, justice, and virtue. Those who had argued, that there were not negroes in the islands to make up a sufficient stock, would surely be from this moment deprived of that argument, since many more had been introduced subsequent to that argument being urged, than the number those gentlemen had specified. Formerly, it was an argument of objection that the number of slaves in the West Indies was not great euough to execute any powerful act of rebellion; but when we recollect that since those arguments were used, there has been a progressive augmentation that argument of safety is weakened and diminished. Another argument was, that by enfranchising the slaves, we should let them loose upon society, and by that means excite anarchy and confusion. He most earnestly enjoined the House not to suffer such an argument to prevail for a moment; nor to let our enemies assert that we suppressed liberty, in every shape, while we pretended to cherish it; but to show an admiring and applauding world, that we did really succour liberty, while we repressed licentiousness. If there were any who, rendered insensible by habit to the demands of humanity, could look with indifference on such a traffic, let them ask themselves, if they never before had heard of it, and were told that a system so repugnant to every human feeling, and so contradictory to every divine law, had been encouraged by the House of Commons, what opinion they would form of that House? Shall it be said, that those who spread confusion through Europe, shall be merciful alone, in that point where we are deficient? Shall it be said that they pour balm into the wounds of the Africans, whom we scourge and torment ? He was vinced, that neither policy nor interest justified any such measure; and sure he was, there was no man bold enough to advance, that any interest was a sufficient apology for the continuance of such a system of barbarity and wickedness. He exhorted the House, in the most pathetic language, to consider what an important question they had to decide upon; and to reflect, that upon their assent or dissent, the fate of millions of their fellowcreatures depended. He implored them not to resist obvious and just claims by vague declarations; but if they saw any harm in the measure, to state it specifically, and say what it was. And, finally, as they had themselves, upon the most full examination and discussion, pronounced a just and equitable sentence, he called upon them to carry it into immediate execution. To which end he moved, "That leave be given to bring in a bill for the Abolition of the Slave Trade, at a time to be limited." con General Tarleton said, though he al |