HISTORY OF EUROPE. 
the same side, insisted on the sup- 
port which was derived from that 
traffic to our shipping and manu- 
factures of every denomination. No 
fewer than 120 vessels of consider- 
able dimensions, and each of them 
manned upon an average with thir- 
ty-five seamen, sailed annually from 
Liverpool to the coast of Africa, 
laden with all manner of goods for 
the prosecution of that commerce. 
Shetiield, Birmingham, Manchester, 
and other manufacturing towns, de- 
pended in a great measure on that 
trade, for the vending of the vari- 
ous articles of their fabrication. 
This debate ended by the ad- 
journment of the question to the 
25th of April; when Mr. Dundas 
moved that the importation of ne- 
groesto the British colonies, should 
cease on the Ist day of the year 
1800. 
Lord Sheffield took this occasion 
to avow his satisfaction at the hope 
of getting rid of the discussion on 
the slave trade. He formerly ques- 
tioned the right of parliament to 
suppress this trade. He shewed 
the fallacy of comparing the ne- 
groes to cattle driven to market, 
which it were absurd to doubt the 
right of man to slaughter: he re- 
probated the petitions, as obtained 
through the mediums of associa- 
tions; to which he had always pro- 
fessed himself an enemy. 
Lord Mornington, in contradic- 
tion to Lord Sheffield, rejoiced in 
the blow given to the slave trade. 
This trade, however modified, was, 
in his opinion, entitled to no longer 
existence. Modifications of right 
-or of wrong, were, in the nature of 
things, inadmissible; and the true 
question was, Whether we could, in 
strict justice, permit the duration 
for any space of time, however 
[153 
short, of a commerce acknowledged 
to be repugnant to every principle 
of equity ? 
The slave trade, as actually exer- 
cised, was in direct violation of the 
jaw by which the merchants traded 
on the coast of Africa. That law 
strictly prohibited them, under the 
penalty of a hundred pounds for 
each offence, ‘from taking or pro- 
curing any African slave through 
force, violence, fraud, or any indi- 
rect means whatever.”’? Such were 
the words of the statute, pleaded in 
favour of the slave trade. But who 
that knew in what manner that 
trade was carried on would dare to 
assert that statute was not continu- 
ally violated? Could such a traffic, 
therefore, claim the sanction of le- 
gislature, in defiance of which it 
broke through the most essential re- 
strictions laid upon it? He con- 
cluded therefore by moving, that in- 
stead of 1800, the total cessation 
should take place on the Ist day of 
January of the ensuing year. 
This motion was warmly sup- 
ported by the friends to such a mea- 
sure. Mr. Ryder declared himself 
convinced by the arguments he had 
heard, that he was bound to oppose 
the trade; adding emphatically, 
that he ‘ could not hold a balance, 
with gold in one scale and blood in 
the other.” 
To those who pleaded the detri- 
ment that would ensue to the com- 
mercial and manufacturing interest 
of this country from an imme- 
diate abolition, it was answered, 
that the capitals vested in that trade 
by the merchants of London, Bris- 
tol, and Liverpool, might with faci- 
lity be converted to other commer- 
cial pursuits, as beneficial at least, 
and much more salubrious for the 
seamen employed in them; whom 
it 
