136] ANNUAL REGISTER, 1814. 



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 com- 

 plete success, and their earnest 

 hope that his Royal Highness 

 might be able to form new ar- 

 rangements 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 completelj' concurred in 

 the motion, but he thought that 

 while regret was expressed that 

 more had not been done, satisfac- 

 tion should also be expressed at 

 what had been effected ; and he 

 proposed introducing into the mo- 

 tion, words declarative of their sa- 

 tisfaction 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 pres-ented to parliament, dur- 

 ing 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 assem- 

 bled," 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 al- 

 tered " To the Lords in Parlia- 

 mentassembled." TheLord Chan- 

 cellor remarked upon this cir- 

 cumstance, that the usual desig- 

 nation of the House being " The 

 Lords spiritual and temporal in 

 Parliament assembled," if in the 

 general term " Lords" the peti- 

 tioners meant to include this de- 

 scription, their Lordships would 

 probably think the petition ad- 

 missible. 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. 



i 



