Continuation from July 1792 to July 1793.--Author travels round the
kingdom again.--Motion to renew the resolution of the last year in the
Commons; motion lost.--New motion in the Commons to abolish the
foreign Slave Trade; motion lost.--Proceedings of the Lords.
The resolution adopted by the Commons, that the trade should cease in
1796, was a matter of great joy to many; and several, in consequence of
it, returned to the use of sugar. The committee, however, for the
abolition did not view it in the same favourable light. They considered
it as a political manoeuvre to frustrate the accomplishment of the
object. But the circumstance, which gave them the most concern, was the
resolution of the Lords to hear evidence. It was impossible now to say,
when the trade would cease, the witnesses in behalf of the merchants and
planters, had obtained possession of the ground; and they might, keep
it, if they chose, even till the year 1800, to throw light upon a
measure which was to be adopted in 1796. The committee found too, that
they had again the laborious task before them of finding out new persons
to give testimony in behalf of their cause; for some of their former
witnesses were dead, and others were out of the kingdom; and unless they
replaced these, there would be no probability of making out that strong
case in the Lords, which they had established in the Commons. It
devolved therefore upon me once more to travel for this purpose: but as
I was then in too weak a state to bear as much fatigue as formerly, Dr.
Dickson relieved me, by taking one part of the tour, namely, that to
Scotland, upon himself.
These journeys we performed with considerable success; during which, the
committee elected Mr. Joseph Townsend of Baltimore, in Maryland, an
honorary and corresponding member.
Parliament having met, Mr. Wilberforce, in February 1793, moved, that
the House resolve itself into a committee of the whole House on Thursday
next, to consider of the circumstances of the Slave Trade. This motion
was opposed by Sir William Yonge, who moved, that this day six months
should be substituted for Thursday next. A debate ensued: of this,
however, as well as of several which followed. I shall give no account;
as it would be tedious to the reader to hear a repetition of the same
arguments. Suffice it to say, that the motion was lost by a majority of
sixty-one to fifty-three.
This sudden refusal of the House of Commons to renew their own vote of
the former year, gave great uneasiness to the friends of the cause. Mr.
Wilberforce, however, resolved that the session should not pass without
an attempt to promote it in another form; and accordingly, on the 14th
of May, he moved for leave to bring in a bill to abolish that part of
the Slave Trade, by which the British merchants supplied foreigners with
slaves. This motion was opposed like the former; but was carried by a
majority of seven. The bill was then brought in; and it passed its first
and second reading with little opposition; but on the 5th of June,
notwithstanding the eloquence of Mr. Pitt and of Mr. Fox, and the very
able speeches of Mr. Francis, Mr. Courtenay, and others, it was lost by
a majority of thirty-one to twenty-nine.
In the interval between these motions, the question experienced in the
Lords considerable opposition. The Duke of Clarence moved that the House
should not proceed in the consideration of the Slave Trade till after
the Easter recess. The Earl of Abingdon was still more hostile
afterwards. He deprecated the new philosophy. It was as full of mischief
as the Box of Pandora. The doctrine of the abolition of the Slave Trade
was a species of it; and he concluded by moving, that all further
consideration of the subject be postponed. To the epithets, then
bestowed upon the abolitionists by this nobleman, the Duke of Clarence
added those of fanatics and hypocrites, among whom he included Mr.
Wilberforce by name. All the other Lords, however, who were present,
manifested such a dislike to the sentiments of the Earl of Abingdon,
that he withdrew his motion.
After this, the hearing of evidence on the resolution of the House of
Commons was resumed; and seven persons were examined before the close of
the session.