HOUSE OF COMMONS. Monday, April 18, 1791.

IN a Committee of the whole Houſe,

Mr. WILBERFORCE moved, ‘"That the Chair⯑man be inſtructed to move for leave to bring in a bill to prevent the farther Importation of Slaves into theBritiſh Colonies in the Weſt Indies."’

In the courſe of this debate,

Mr. FRANCIS ſaid, he ſhould have contented him⯑ſelf with giving his vote for the motion, but for ſome conſiderations, which were perſonal to him, and by which he thought himſelf particularly called upon to deliver his opinion on the preſent occaſion, not impli⯑citly by a vote, but expreſſly by declaration. He be⯑lieved he was not very likely to be ſuſpected of receiv⯑ing, with ſpecial favour and partiality, any meaſure in⯑troduced [2] and recommended from the other ſide of the Houſe; that, in his own ſituation in private life, every motive, by which the conduct of men is uſually deter⯑mined, was united on one ſide, and powerfully preſſed upon him, to engage him to take part this night againſt his opinion. Connections of every ſort; friends, who were dear to him, and who thought their fortunes were at ſtake; ſolicitations, the moſt urgent, from perſons to whom he was bound by many ties; and poſſibly the proſpect of advantage to himſelf or to his family, at a future day, to be forfeited or preſerved. All theſe were in one ſcale, and nothing in the other, but the juſtice of the cauſe, and the protection of creatures, who would never know that he had endeavoured to ſerve them, or whoſe gratitude could never reach him. That he did not ſtate theſe circumſtances for oſtentation, or as a claim to merit, but to fortify his cauſe, by ſhew⯑ing that his opinion was ſincere. Sir, I do not intend to go far into the general ſubject. If the undiſputed ſtate of facts, if the clear and able argument delivered by the honourable gentleman, who takes the lead in this buſineſs, has not carried conviction along with it, I muſt conclude, that truth and reaſon on this ſubject have no acceſs to the human mind. Many gentlemen, in⯑deed, have aſſerted what they have by no means eſta⯑bliſhed, and what, upon the whole, I utterly diſbelieve, that this trade is profitable; but no man has yet had the courage to affirm, or even to inſinuate that it is not criminal. The queſtion then is not, whether the trade be criminal, but in what degree? Is it a crime of the higheſt guilt in morals, or is it in practice capable of palliation? Will it admit of an excuſe? No, Sir; I de⯑clare upon my honour and my conſcience, none. I [3] paſs by the traffic as it is conducted on the coaſt of Africa, the temptation you give to one human creature to make a property of another, and to ſell him to per⯑petual ſlavery. I take no notice of the miſeries it pro⯑duces in that country. Remember only that, whatever they are, you are anſwerable for them all. You create the market, and it is the market that conſtitutes the de⯑mand, and produces the ſupply. I ſhall not inſiſt on the horrors of the Middle Paſſage. You do well to paſs over them with diſregard. The moſt determined mind, the moſt obdurate heart, if it be human, could not liſten to the evidence, on that ſubject, without torture. I take theſe creatures in that, which is ſtated to be their beſt ſituation; at their landing in the iſlands; at their arrival in the land of promiſe, where they are inſtantly to find relief from their ſufferings; where, in return for a moderate degree of labour, a tolerable mode of exiſ⯑tence is provided for them. You ſay you have paid for them; that they ſubſiſt at your expence, and that you have a right to their labour. Be it ſo. On that princi⯑ple, let us ſee how they are treated. In conſidering the ſtate of ſlavery in the Weſt Indies, the object, that inſtantly ſtrikes my mind with a force and conviction, to which the evidence of ſpecial facts hardly makes an addition, is the power of corporal puniſhment, allotted as I find it. I do not aſk you to inquire in what man⯑ner this power is exerciſed, but how it is diſpoſed of, and to whom it is truſted, and then to determine what muſt be the effect of it. They know nothing of the human conſtitution, who have not obſerved, that power of every ſort, of one man over another, has a natural tendency to deprave and corrupt the mind. The moment I hear of ſuch power, uncontrouled, in any hand, I con⯑clude [4] that the depravity is unlimited. The actual exer⯑ciſe of it, in the infliction of puniſhment, aſſuredly intro⯑duces that worſt and moſt odious of all diſorders in the moral ſyſtem, perſonal cruelty. The truth of theſe principles is acknowledged by the ſpirit and caution of our penal laws in every other inſtance, by the care they take, in all criminal proceedings, to ſeparate the intereſt from the judgment, and the judgment from the execu⯑tion. They will not ſuffer ſuch characters and powers to be united in one perſon; nor are they united in any civilized ſociety upon earth, except in our Weſt India iſlands. What are the uſual offences imputed to ne⯑groes? In ninety-nine inſtances out of a hundred, they are either idleneſs or theft. They do not work hard enough to ſatisfy the taſk-maſter, (and why they ſhould work at all, I know not) or they ſteal proviſions. The thing they can eat is the only thing worth their ſtealing. Food is the only object of theft, which it is in their power to conceal, or that could poſſibly do them any ſervice. Conſider the riſk they run, the horrible pu⯑niſhments they ſuffer when detected, and then you may conceive in what manner they are fed. But, in the conſideration of theſe offences, who is the offended party?—The negro driver.—Who is the judge of the fact? The driver.—Who awards the puniſhment? The driver.—Who inflicts it? The driver with his own hand. But how? Captain Giles, of the army, ſays, that ‘"the puniſhment by whipping, though with fewer laſhes given, is more ſevere and cruel than that of the army, becauſe of the ſize of the whip."’ Captain Hall, of the navy, ſays, ‘"that in Barbadoes and the Leeward Iſlands, the treatment of the negroes on the plantations was inhuman; that the puniſhments in⯑flicted [5] were very ſhocking to perſons not uſed to ſee them; much more ſo, than on board a man of war. The field ſlaves he has ſeen, (a great many) were ge⯑nerally marked with the whip."’ This is the mode of puniſhment. What is likely to be the degree of it? An angry man determines the penalty; an offended judge inflicts it; and he, perhaps, by office, by habit, and oc⯑cupation, one of the loweſt if not worſt of our ſpecies. If you cannot have an indifferent judge of the offences of theſe wretches, at leaſt let there be a cold, indiffe⯑rent executioner. It is a horrible truth that, when once the laſh is lifted by an angry man, with deſpotic power over the object, his rage is inflamed by every ſtroke he gives. The cries and writhings of the creature are called reſiſtance; even his patience is called ſulkineſs; even his ſufferings are an offence. The decrees of paſ⯑ſion are executed by paſſion. Admitting the power to be neceſſary, is there any protection againſt the abuſe of it? Have the negroes any ſhelter? Have they any appeal? Is there a law to deter, is there a magiſtrate to reſort to?—No, Sir; none at all. Mr. Terry, who was many years an overſeer in Grenada, ſays, ‘"that he has known ſlaves puniſhed by managers ſeverely for trifling faults; that they durſt not complain to the owner, for fear of worſe treatment; that he has known them puniſhed by the owner for ſo doing, and ſent back, though their complaint was juſt; that field ſlaves uſually bear the marks of the whip; and that he never heard that a ſlave complained to a magiſtrate of his owner, manager, overſeer, or attorney; that he has known the ſame perſon both attorney, mana⯑ger, and doctor on one eſtate; that he never knew a planter or manager interfere with another's treat⯑ment [6] of his ſlaves; that food is the general object of theft among ſlaves, and at the hazard of their lives. That an overſeer on the eſtate where he was, (Mr. Coghlan) threw a ſlave into the boiling cane juice, who died in four days; he was not puniſhed other⯑wiſe than by replacing the ſlave, and being diſmiſſed the ſervice; was told of this by the owner's ſon, the carpenter, and many ſlaves on the eſtate; has heard it often."’

Againſt all the allegations and all the arguments on this ſubject, one general anſwer is uſually ſtated, and ſuppoſed to be concluſive: The negroes are our property; we have paid high prices for them, our profits depend upon the care we take of them. If we are bad men, at leaſt we underſtand our intereſt too well, to deſtroy or diſable the in⯑ſtruments, by which alone our eſtates are made of any value to us. In the firſt place, Sir, the proprietor is not in general the perſon, who exerciſes the power in queſ⯑tion. If he were, it might be fair to preſume, that the conſideration of his true intereſt would be ſome reſtraint upon his paſſions. I fear, that, in general, it would not be effective. Many of the Weſt-India proprietors, I know, are men of as much honour and humanity as are to be found in any other rank of life; but they re⯑ſide in England. Concerning the management of their eſtates, they have no other evidence but the information of their overſeers; concerning the treatment of their ſlaves, they have nothing to judge by, but the amount produce of their labour. If the returns are abundant, it is not likely that the owners ſhould be much diſpoſed to inquire into abuſes, by which their profits do not appear to be diminiſhed. They hear no complaints; [7] they live happily themſelves, and conclude that all is well.^* But I deny that the principle, ſo aſſumed and relied on, namely, that ſlaves will be well treated, be⯑cauſe it is the intereſt of an owner to take care of his property, is concluſive in this caſe, as it would be in the caſe of inanimate property. All the protection, which you can expect from the principle, and it goes no farther, is, that corporal puniſhment ſhall not be inflicted to the hazard of life and limb; that the ſlave ſhall not be diſabled from performing the taſk allotted to him. Within that limitation, the laſh may be in⯑flicted with the moſt ſhocking, capricious ſeverity, provided it does not eſſentially injure the property of the owner. But to ſecure even that degree of pro⯑tection, he ought never to truſt the laſh out of his own hand. He delegates his power to another, but not the intereſt, which, you ſay, is to govern the ex⯑erciſe of it. Still the negroes are your property. So are your horſes, and of more value too, if price and value are the ſame. See how thoſe noble, uſeful ani⯑mals are treated by coachmen and others, every day in the ſtreets; every night at the doors of the crowded aſſemblies of this town, before the eyes of their maſters and miſtreſſes, and even at the hazard of their lives. I have been often witneſs to theſe abominable ſcenes of riotous or paſſionate cruelty. Did you ever hear of a coachman puniſhed, or even diſmiſſed, for cruel treat⯑ment of his horſes?

[8]One would think, at the firſt view of the ſubject, that a plantation, once properly ſtocked with male and female negroes, would ſupply itſelf without farther im⯑portation. I wiſh it were ſo; for then I ſhould con⯑clude that the condition of the negroes was tolerable at leaſt. There is nothing in the climate or ſoil to coun⯑teract the propagation of negroes in the iſlands, any more than in Africa, where they multiply to exceſs. In all other countries, the labouring part of the people are in general the moſt prolific. Why not in the Weſt Indies? Exceſſive labour, and ſcanty unwholſome food, would be ſufficient to check population any where. But the fact is, that the planters do not think it their intereſt to encourage it. Captain Hall tells you, that ‘"in the Britiſh iſlands, breeding is not thought deſira⯑ble; they rather thought it a misfortune to have pregnant women, or even young ſlaves. They eſteemed the charge of rearing a child to maturity, more troubleſome and greater than buying a ſlave fit for work; and it was not uncommon for them to give away a child of two years old, as you would a a puppy from a litter. Has heard an overſeer of ſome conſequence expreſs this opinion. It was, in fact, his ſyſtem to prevent population, as far as in his power; and he underſtood this to be a general ſyſtem. So little care was taken of infants, that mothers deemed it a misfortune to have children: after the month, they were ſent to field labour, with their child upon their backs, and ſo little time afforded them to attend to its wants, that he has ſeen a woman, ſeated to give ſuck to her child, rouſed from that ſituation by a ſevere blow from the cart whip."’

[9]Mr. Terry ſays that, while a manager, he never ‘"received any direction about attention to preg⯑nant women, or children; has heard managers ſay, it was cheaper to buy African ſlaves than to breed; that they wiſhed the children to die, for they loſt much of the mother's work during their infancy."’

Captain Roſs ſays, ‘"he has ſeen a negro woman flogged with ebony buſhes, ſo that the ſkin of her back was taken off down to her heels; ſhe was then turned round, and flogged from her breaſt down to her waiſt; and in conſequence, he ſaw her afterwards walking upon all four, and unable to get up."’

Such is the treatment of women ſlaves, and in that ſtate too, which of all others would excite pity in the moſt callous heart, that ſtill had one human ſenſation left in it. But we are told that, altho' poſſibly facts of this atrocious nature may have happened in the early periods of the Weſt-India ſettlements, no ſuch inſtances occur at preſent: that the government of the iſlands in this reſpect is greatly improved; that good laws have been made; that they are carefully executed; and that, upon the whole, the ſituation of the negroes is conſide⯑rably mended, and grows every day more and more tolerable. Perhaps it may be ſo on ſome particular plantations; but, in general, I do not believe the aſ⯑ſertion to be true. The operation of habits and prin⯑ciples is permanent and uniform; the check created by good laws can only be temporary and occaſional, until they have acted long enough to effect a change in the manners of the people. It would have been natural to conclude that, while theſe inquiries were going on [10] in England, and while the attention of the nation was ſo particularly directed to the ſubject as it has been lately, ſome reſtraint would have been laid on practices, which it was well known had excited univerſal indig⯑nation here. One fact, which I ſhall ſtate, will be ſufficient to ſhew you, what you have to expect from the probable effect of theſe pretended laws and regula⯑tions made in the iſlands for the protection of the ſlaves. It is not more than eighteen months ago that I read, in the Jamaica Gazette, an account of a female ſlave, of the age of fifteen, flogged by one of theſe drivers, till ſhe fell ſenſeleſs to the ground. In this ſtate ſhe was dragged by the legs to a place which they call an hoſpi⯑tal, till her mangled fleſh was torn completely from her bones. In the hoſpital ſhe died. The villain was tried for his life, and honourably acquitted by twelve of his peers, every one of whom, I have a right to conclude, and, for my own part, have no ſort of doubt, would have done exactly the ſame. On what pretence was he acquitted?—Why, Sir, it was ſaid, or pretended, that the girl was his property; that it could not be his intention, becauſe it was not his intereſt, to take away her life.

Sir, I have given you but a very ſlight ſpecimen, in⯑deed, of the horrors, with which theſe books are filled. I will not argue the queſtion, whether we ought to en⯑deavour to put an end to them, or not. The very queſ⯑tion is a diſgrace to us. In ſuch a caſe, I will not at⯑tempt to do that, which many perſonal conſiderations would have led me to do, to endeavour to compound with my duties, and to compromiſe between extreme right and extreme wrong. I give my vote for abolition. I [11] declare my opinion. I would do more if I could. Were I to have done otherwiſe, I do not believe that I could have enjoyed happineſs in this world. I am ſure I ſhould not have deſerved it hereafter.

HOUSE OF COMMONS. Tueſday, March 15, 1796.

‘"Motion for taking into conſideration the report of the Bill, for the Abolition of the Slave Trade, at a time to be limited."’

Sir WILLIAM YOUNG.

General SMITH.

Mr. FRANCIS. Mr. Speaker, I really had no thoughts of taking part in this debate. My opinion of the ſlave trade is ſufficiently known. But I confeſs I have not patience to hear what I have heard this day, without feeling indignation, and endeavouring to ex⯑preſs it. The honourable General introduced his ſpeech with premiſing, that he had no property in the Weſt In⯑dies, nor any connection with thoſe who had. Allow me in my turn to declare that, altho' I have no pro⯑perty in the iſlands, I once was intimately connected with ſome, who poſſeſſed a great deal. The perſon, I allude to, had no relations but in my family. Her per⯑ſonal fortune was very conſiderable. The ſucceſſion to the greateſt part of it would undoubtedly have gone, as in juſtice it ought to have done, to her own relations, to whom ſhe always expreſſed, as in common gratitude to me ſhe ought to have felt, the warmeſt affection. Why was that juſt and reaſonable expectation on our [12] part diſappointed? Becauſe I did not yield to her ear⯑neſt and repeated ſolicitations to vote againſt the aboli⯑tion of the ſlave trade, or at leaſt to be neuter. I voted and ſpoke for it, and ſhe diſpoſed of her fortune accord⯑ingly. The honourable General ſays, that we are very much at our eaſe, while we are voting away the pro⯑perty of others; that we go home to the enjoyment of our dinners and our beds, without thinking on the mi⯑ſery and ruin we are to bring on a great body of our fel⯑low ſubjects. Well, Sir, of me at leaſt, it cannot be ſaid that, while I neglected or ſacrificed their intereſts, I was careful of my own. I acted with my eyes open, for I was diſtinctly threatened with the conſequence. And yet I went home that day with appetite to my din⯑ner, as I ſhall to-day, and ſlept ſoundly that night. Had I done otherwiſe, I ſhould have loſt the quiet mind, without which, neither can the luxuries of the table gratify the palate, nor the bed of down give re⯑poſe. Forgive me, Sir, for ſpeaking of myſelf in this manner. The facts I allude to are well known to every one, who knows me. My object in referring to them is to obtain credit for my ſincerity, in the part I now take, even with thoſe, who may undervalue my judg⯑ment. The honourable Baronet, in vehement language, and paſſionate terms, complains of the enormous loſs and injury, which the Weſt India proprietors and plan⯑ters are to ſuffer by this bill, without any compenſa⯑tion. I deny it as a fact. But, if it were true, let them begin by entitling themſelves to redreſs, before they ex⯑pect that the Houſe will liſten to their complaint. I anſwer them with the authority and in the language of Engliſh equity, ever ſince equity was known in Eng⯑land; Do juſtice before you demand it. NON FERET AEQUUM, QUI PETIT INIQUUM. As long as you are [13] guilty of an enormous injuſtice, on the very ground and ſubject matter of your pretended wrongs, the court will not liſten to you, even though it were true that you had ſome equitable claim to compenſation or re⯑lief. The honourable Baronet ſays, that the preamble to the bill, in aſſerting that the ſlave trade is contrary to the principles of juſtice and humanity, is a cruel mockery of the ſufferings of perſons in his ſituation, and that it adds inſult to wrong. The honourable General, on the other hand, ſays, that it is nothing but the truth, that it was true a hundred years ago, and has continued ſo to this hour; and therefore, I ſuppoſe, he concludes it is too trite and notorious to be worth aſſerting. The ho⯑nourable gentlemen agree better in their views, than in their principles. The honourable Baronet ſays, that the ſtate of the greater part of the Weſt India proprietors is already ſufficiently diſtreſſing, and in many inſtances deplorable; that their eſtates are mortgaged, for nearly the whole of their actual value, to merchants and other monied men in this country; and that this bill will an⯑nihilate the ſecurity of the mortgagees. Be it ſo. The intereſt then is in them, and from them we have had no petition. The honourable Baronet's anxiety about the mortgagees is extremely generous I confeſs; but, if his account of the actual ſituation of Weſt India property be correct, the owners would ſuffer little or nothing, even by a general forecloſure. Theſe gentlemen recom⯑mend it to us not to forget policy, while we are talking of juſtice; from which I can only collect that, in their minds at leaſt, there is an evident diſtinction between policy and juſtice. In mine, Sir, they are the ſame. If there be any circumſtances of the preſent moment, or in the actual ſituation of affairs in the Weſt Indies, [14] which may render it prudent or adviſeable not to carry the meaſure of abolition into inſtant execution, his Majeſty's Miniſters, who have the beſt information on ſuch points, and who are truſted with the care of the general intereſts of the empire, ought to tell us ſo. I muſt confide in their prudence. If, by withholding any neceſſary information of fact, they ſuffer the Houſe to be miſled, they are to anſwer for it. But, as to ge⯑neral and fundamental principles of policy, I want no inſtruction from any man. I know that it is by juſtice only that great empires can preſerve their greatneſs, ſic fortis Etruria crevit, and that, by abandoning that prin⯑ciple, they inſure their ruin. But, when argument fails, we are to be threatened if we perſiſt. The exam⯑ple of the loſs of America is held up to us by way of warning not to provoke the Weſt India iſlands, leſt they alſo ſhould be loſt to Great Britain. If this be a ſpeculation only, I anſwer it with a better;—that the events and iſſues of human counſels are at the diſpoſal of a higher wiſdom than our's; and that thoſe conclu⯑ſions, which we moſt ſtrongly dread and deprecate in proſpect, are very often beneficial in the event. If it be a menace, I anſwer it with a fact. At the outſet of that unhappy conteſt, the terror held out by thoſe who promoted and thoſe who oppoſed it, was the loſs of America; by the former if we yielded, by the latter, if we perſiſted. But all parties agreed, that the loſs of America muſt be the ruin of Great Britain. America was loſt; yet, in ſpite of that loſs, and of all that this country waſted and ſuffered in attempting to recover it, Great Britain has ſurvived, and ſtood as firm and ſecure as ever; nor do I know with certainty that, ſetting aſide the expences and calamities attached to the conteſt, [15] Great Britain is eſſentially weakened or impoveriſhed by the ſeparation of America. The honourable General ſtates it as an abſurdity in the councils of adminiſtration to waſte ſo many lives, and to ſquander ſuch immenſe ſums of money in expeditions to make conqueſts in the Weſt Indies, while in effect they forbid the cultivation not only of any you may acquire, but even of thoſe which you poſſeſs. Of what uſe are the acquiſitions, if the importation of negroes be forbidden? Sir, it would be improper to enter now into the policy of theſe expe⯑ditions. That queſtion is not before us, nor is this the time for it. But to the objection, as it is ſtated, the anſwer is obvious. On our principles, there is no con⯑tradiction between the policy of the expeditions, and the object of the bill. The two meaſures may be con⯑ſiſtent, at leaſt in the judgment of perſons, who think and maintain, as I do, that the cultivation of all the lands in the Weſt Indies may be effectually provided for without a farther importation of negroes from Africa. The honourable Baronet complains of the extreme ri⯑gour and ſeverity of the penalties impoſed by this bill. My anſwer is, that if the purpoſes of the law be good, if the object be juſt and neceſſary, the penalties muſt be ſufficient to enforce the execution, and inſure the effect. Beyond that point, I allow, they ought not to be ex⯑tended. On this part of the ſubject I call on the gen⯑tlemen of the long robe to give us their advice and aſ⯑ſiſtance. It is properly their buſineſs and duty to watch the formaion of all penal acts, and to take care that they neither violate the principles, nor extend the ri⯑gour of our Engliſh juriſprudence without abſolute ne⯑ceſſity. I muſt own I have my doubts, whether there may not be ſome foundation for the apprehenſion ex⯑preſſed [16] by the honourable Baronet, that the extreme la⯑titude of the terms uſed in the firſt clauſe, by which the procuring, aiding, or abetting the importation of any ne⯑groes, is put on the ſame footing with the actual im⯑portation, and made ſubject to the ſame penalty of tranſ⯑portation for fourteen years, may involve innocent per⯑ſons in the conſequences of acts done without their par⯑ticipation, and even without their knowledge. Here again I call on the gentlemen of the long robe, to examine this matter, and give us their advice. The honourable Baronet affirms and laments that, by this clauſe, men of birth, fortune, and education, poliſhed and improved by man⯑ners and by learning, are liable to a puniſhment degrad⯑ing as well as rigorous, and to be confounded with fe⯑lons and criminals of the vileſt denomination. I feel the force of the objection, and wiſh to have it conſidered. At the ſame time, I do not think it comes with a very good grace from the honourable Baronet. When the ſedition bill paſſed, he took no part to oppoſe it. He ſaw no objection then to the newly-created penalty of tranſportation for a ſeditious libel, on a ſecond offence. By what ſort of perſons could that ſort of offence be committed? By men of learning, genius, and educa⯑tion. He ſaw no objection then to the penalty of tranſ⯑portation in company with felons of every deſcription, though poſſibly it might fall on ſuch a man as Mr. Burke or Dr. Parr, or on perſons the moſt eminent in the kingdom for literature and ſcience. Such men, if they were obnoxious to government, would be proſecuted, in the firſt inſtance, on any trifling pretence, for the ſake of inſuring the penalty attached to the ſecond con⯑viction. The honourable Baronet has different rules and meaſures for offenders, whoſe quality and character [17] are the ſame. But juſtice ought to be diſtributed with an equal hand to all men. The claſs of the offender undoubtedly ſhould be conſidered, as well as that of the offence. If, in this reſpect, the bill ſhould be found liable to objection, it ought to be corrected.

BILL thrown out by 74 to 70!

HOUSE OF COMMONS. Monday, March 21, 1796.

Mr. FRANCIS roſe to give notice of his intention to take the firſt convenient opportunity, after the re⯑ceſs, to bring forward a motion concerning the ſtate of negroes in the Weſt India iſlands. That, in order not to load himſelf with unneceſſary difficulties in an at⯑tempt ſufficiently arduous in itſelf, and perhaps above his capacity, by exciting groundleſs ſuſpicions, or pro⯑voking a ſuperfluous diſpoſition to oppoſe his intended propoſition before it was underſtood, he would now ſtate ſhortly to the Houſe, not what his object was, but what it was not. It did not relate at all to the abolition of the ſlave trade, nor to the manumiſſion of the ſlaves now in the iſlands. His purpoſe was to provide for another intereſt, which, in his opinion, tho' certainly not neglected, had never been wiſely conſidered, or ration⯑ally promoted on ſound principles of advantage either to the maſter or the ſlave; he meant, the real intereſt of the proprietor himſelf. If, thro' that medium, the con⯑dition of the ſlave could be improved, he hoped it would not be an objection to his propoſition. It was true, he [18] had not till lately thought of taking an active part upon a ſubject, which, in other views, had been ſo long de⯑bated, and to ſo little purpoſe. The laſt unfortunate vote on the ſlave trade had determined him to come for⯑ward. On one point only, he thought it neceſſary to make an explicit declaration, in order to ſhelter himſelf from perſonal reproach or blame. It was true that he had taken his reſolution, and that, at preſent, he ſaw no reaſon to think it at all likely that he ſhould not adhere to it. Nevertheleſs, it was poſſible that, in the interval, conſiderations might occur, or be ſuggeſted to him by men wiſer than himſelf, whom he meant to con⯑ſult, or that inſurmountable difficulties, or ſtrong pruden⯑tial objections might deter or divert him from purſuing his preſent purpoſe. If ſo, the Houſe would hear no more of it. But, if he perſevered in his deſign, of which at preſent he had no doubt, the Houſe might be aſſured that he would apply his mind to it, with all the induſtry of which he was capable, and with every exer⯑tion of whatever faculties he poſſeſſed.

HOUSE OF COMMONS. Monday, April 11, 1796.

Mr. FRANCIS. Mr. Speaker, It is hardly neceſ⯑ſary for me to ſay that the ſight of ſo numerous an attendance, on the preſent occaſion, gives me the greateſt ſatisfaction. I conſider it not only as a practical acknowledgement of the importance of the buſineſs of the day, and of the intereſt it excites, but as an omen of ſucceſs. Convinced, as I am, of the [19] intrinſic merits of the cauſe I am engaged in, I cannot but rejoice to find that ſo many gentlemen are ſtill diſpoſed to attend to it. The greater the number, and the more they examine it, the more I am aſſured that, ſooner or later, it will make a deep and univerſal im⯑preſſion, and finally prevail over every oppoſition. I believe, Sir, I may venture to aſſert, without a riſque of contradiction, that, including the greateſt learning, by which this Houſe is at all times adorned and ſome⯑times inſtructed, there is no man here better qualified than I am to introduce a ſerious ſubject of any kind with a dull, tedious, elaborate exordium. The power and the faculty being undiſputed, I ſhall not abuſe it. Inſtead of tormenting you with a long preface, I ſhall ſubmit to the Houſe ſome ſhort but earneſt requeſts, and then inſtantly to my ſubject. The firſt is, that the Houſe will grant me a patient audience. I aſk it with humi⯑lity for myſelf; but I demand it, as a debt of juſtice, for my cauſe. On this day, it is your lot to exerciſe a high juriſdiction over a queſtion important to a great portion of mankind, and intereſting, I truſt, even to thoſe, who think they have no concern in it. If this be your office, your patience is your duty. My ſecond requeſt is, that gentlemen will have the goodneſs and the candour to hear me out; that they will not ſuffer their minds to travel faſter than I do; that they will not anticipate my concluſions, and much more, that they will not conclude for me. The ſubject naturally divides into two parts; the principles and object on one ſide, the means on the other. Each of theſe diviſions conſtitutes of itſelf an entire whole, the merit of which, if it has any, will depend on the mutual re⯑lation, correſpondence, and conſiſtency of its conſti⯑tuent [20] parts, united in one view, and acting together for one general purpoſe. It cannot be fairly deter⯑mined, or even thoroughly underſtood, by any conſi⯑deration of particulars, that detaches the materials from the compoſition, or that values the component part with⯑out regard to its poſition. The moſt irregular fragment, in meeting another fragment, finds the place that belongs to it. But, above all things, I muſt appeal to your juſtice againſt any attempt or inclination to confound the con⯑ſideration of the two general diviſions of the ſubject, by drawing objections from the means, and applying them to the object. The ſecond may be eligible and practicable in its nature, though poſſibly not by that courſe, or through that medium, which to me might appear preferable to all others, if not the only one likely to be ſucceſsful. You may approve the purpoſe without admitting the means. But you cannot ho⯑neſtly or reaſonably contend, that deciſive objections to the means are neceſſarily fatal to the end. Sir, I am thoroughly conſcious of my own infirmities. I cannot hope to make myſelf underſtood, unleſs I am heard without impatience or interruption. Even ſigns and geſtures are ſufficient to diſconcert me. From that ſort of diſtreſs, however, I hope to guard myſelf in ſome degree, by obſerving a rule, which is not ſo much regarded as it ought to be, by fixing my eye as ſteadily as I can upon you, Sir, from whom I expect nothing but what I have always experienced—kindneſs, encou⯑ragement, and protection. There is no affectation in confeſſing that I have but little confidence in my own ſtrength. Allow me to claim the benefit not the merit of this confeſſion, if you believe it to be ſincere. Con⯑clude [21] for me, as you ought to do, that I am convinced of the ſtrength of my cauſe, and that I rely on it for ſupport. That I am earneſt in my opinion you cannot doubt. The value of it muſt be eſtimated by others. On this day, Sir, it is eminently my duty, as it is at all times my intereſt and inclination, to look round me for aſſiſtance, and to conciliate, if I can, every claſs of per⯑ſons and opinions, into which the Houſe has been divided on the ſubject of the Slave Trade. To the enemies of this traffic, a reſolute and I hope an unconquerable phalanx, to thoſe, who have hitherto adviſed and in⯑ſiſted on abolition, I think I have ſome right to apply for ſupport. I have gone the full length of their opi⯑nions, and given them, from firſt to laſt, the utmoſt aſſiſtance in my power; and, if ever they ſhould think it prudent or adviſable, if ever they ſhould ſee, what at preſent I deſpair of, a rational proſpect of ſucceſs in that direct purſuit, they ſhall find me at my poſt, and as ready as ever to ſecond their efforts. Is it poſſible they ſhould tell me in return, as, I think, implicitly they would do by refuſing to concur with me this night, that they will not ſuffer any part or portion of that entire ſyſtem, which has totally failed in their hands, to ſucceed in mine? They may ſay, perhaps, that their principles will not permit them to negotiate with guilt, or to compound with crimes, as they muſt do, if they conſented to palliate or to qualify an evil, which they cannot remove, and much more if they ap⯑peared to authorize or even to acquieſce in its exiſtence, by contributing to reduce it to a leſs intolerable form. Neither would I, if I could help it. But is it true that, by yielding to neceſſity, any principles are abandoned? Do I renounce even their object of ultimate abolition, [22] or do I purſue it by a courſe, perhaps more effectual, though leſs rapid and direct than that, which they have hitherto repeatedly tried without ſucceſs? Are there no ſtages and gradations between complete ſucceſs and ab⯑ſolute deſpair? Are there no expedients in practice, of which prudence ſhould avail itſelf to compaſs whatever is attainable of the objects of wiſdom and benevolence? Have they a moral right to this extreme preciſion in a queſtion of action, in which the ſufferings of others are inſtantly involved? Have they nothing to conſider now but their own conſiſtency? Is it pride or is it charity to ſay to a fellow-creature, the ſuffering ſubject of the argument and victim of the debate, that you will not ſubmit to relieve, becauſe you have been diſappointed in attempting to cure? From thoſe gentlemen I have a right to expect better morals, if not better logic. My appeal to the planters and proprietors is of a different nature, but equally intended to conciliate their good will, and to obtain their concurrence. Of them I de⯑mand nothing but an exact conſiſtency between their conduct this day and all their former profeſſions. They cannot conſent to aboliſh; but they are ready and deſirous to regulate and to improve. Such has been their conſtant language, whenever abolition has been propoſed. They are at all times ready to meliorate the perſonal con⯑dition of the Negro, tho' not to put an end to the trade.—Now I take theſe gentlemen at their word. Let us heartily and honeſtly unite our endeavours to accompliſh that, which they are willing to concur in, which they confeſs ought to be done, to place the Negroes in the Iſlands on ſuch a footing of regu⯑lated ſervice, no longer at perſonal diſcretion, but under a legal ſecurity, that the exiſtence of the trade [23] itſelf for a farther period may poſſibly be endured. Some of the parties, I am told, are highly diſſatisfied at my attempting to revive the ſubject in any ſhape. For what purpoſe do you ſtir a queſtion, now finally ſettled by a reſolution of the Houſe? Are we never to be at reſt? To a complaint of this kind I might truly anſwer, that if I were ſilent, or if I were not in being, there are others, who would reſume the ſubject with as much zeal, and with greater ability; who would never ſuffer it to periſh or be forgotten. On this point the gentle⯑men I allude to may as well reſolve at once to make up their minds to their ſituation. They may be aſſured, that as long as the grievance exiſts, at leaſt in its preſent form, they will have no repoſe; they can never be at reſt. But this is not my language. It would have the air of an apology, which I will never make to any party or to any power, for endeavouring to do one of the greateſt duties incident to my ſtation. In doing it I want no ſhelter, nor would I ſtoop to ſolicit it from any human reſentment. I tell them frankly that, while I exiſt, the queſtion ſhall never die; and tho' it were dead, yet ſhall it live. Some years ago it was ſaid by a Member of this Houſe, reſpectable for his age,—where he is now I know not,—‘"Why cannot you be content? Are not we all very happy? Do not we enjoy good dinners and pleaſant ſociety, and all manner of comforts? I dare ſay the Negroes are very well off, and why cannot you let them be quiet?"’ My anſwer was and is, that ſuch principles and practice never ought to find peace on earth. It is in vain to look for it. By power and by force they may obtain a partial triumph from day to day; but it muſt be in a perpetual ſtruggle between active wrong [24] and perſevering right, until the moral ſenſe of juſtice, charity, and ſhame, ſhall either finally prevail or be ut⯑terly extinguiſhed in this land. To any other iſſue the war is immortal. Addreſſing myſelf now to the Houſe collectively, I certainly mean to do it with the de⯑ference and ſubmiſſion that becomes me. If I could perſonify the Houſe of Commons, it would be my in⯑tereſt as well as my duty to approach ſo great a perſon with the utmoſt reſpect. But reſpect does not exclude firmneſs, and ſhould not reſtrain me from ſaying, that it is the function of your greatneſs, as well as of your office, to liſten to truth, eſpecially when it arraigns a proceeding of your own. I am not here to admire your conſiſtency, or to applaud the conduct which I am en⯑deavouring to correct. Theſe topics do not furniſh any ſubject for applauſe. You have nothing like praiſe to expect from me; unleſs you feel, as I do, that a compliment of the higheſt order is included in the con⯑fidence, which appeals to your juſtice againſt your in⯑clination. Compare the reſolutions of the ſame Houſe of Commons in 1792 and 1796. Againſt the ſecond I plead the firſt, the reſult of a longer debate, the deci⯑ſion of a greater majority. If the authorities are equal, to which ſhall we ſubmit? Contradictions cannot act together. Is it poſſible to remember the pledge that was given, the faith that was engaged, and really to reſpect a power, by which both have been broken? It is not for me to qualify the proceedings of this Houſe. But they can not eſcape the records of hiſtory. To ſave you from everlaſting diſhonour, that leaf muſt be torn out. There is one perſon left, Sir, whoſe ſup⯑port, if I really had it, would undoubtedly be of more uſe than all the reſt; but whoſe ſupport I diſdain to [25] ſolicit. I will not, for any purpoſe of this world, much leſs for any intereſt of my own, deſcend from the independence of my character, or from the ſtation attached to the duty of this day, to ſubmit myſelf to a capricious, mean, injurious enmity, not the leſs bitter becauſe utterly groundleſs, not the leſs perſevering be⯑cauſe utterly unprovoked. Neither is it neceſſary. I have a ſurer courſe to take with the Right Honour⯑able perſon I allude to. If I am not groſſly miſta⯑ken in my opinion of his character, I have a power⯑ful reſource in the judicial quality of his calculating mind. I am not alluding now to the general purity of his morals, or to his ſincerity in particular. Without diſputing his virtues, I hold it to be fortunate that I am not driven to rely on them. I depend on his ſupport, becauſe I think I can put an honourable force upon his mind. I know the ſcruples and the prudence, with which he weighs and balances the ſpecific value of pro⯑fit againſt praiſe. Whatever you may think of him, he is not a man to be driven, even by a favourite paſſion, to ſacrifice a great portion of reputation for an inconſi⯑derable advantage, and ſtill leſs for a gratuitous indul⯑gence of temper. I am ſafe, then, when I ſay, that my preſent intention is neither to ſolicit or to offend, but to provoke him, (Hear! hear!)—Yes, Sir, not to offend, but to provoke. Provocation is not of ne⯑ceſſity offence. To inflame is not to irritate. They know nothing of the language, who think that theſe words repreſent the ſame idea. I tell him frankly that the laſt deciſion of the Houſe has left a ſhade, I will not call it a ſtain upon his reputation. Is he not yet ſatiated with the poſſeſſion of power and emolument? Is he not weary of the drudgery of his office, compared to which [26] the mere labour of a Negro is in my mind a ſervice to be endured? And does he think it poſſible that the country, that any rational being ſhould give credit to a propoſition ſo extravagant and ſo monſtrous, that the all-power⯑ful Miniſter of the Crown, with all his eloquence, and with all his influence, and with the acceſſion of thirty voices from this ſide of the Houſe, ſhould not have been able to engage more than ſeventy votes on a favourite queſtion of his own, If, in earneſt and bonâ fide, he had deſired to carry it? Is there nothing in his mind to elevate him for a moment above the level of his ſtation? Does he never look forward to a time, when the merits of his character will be canvaſſed by poſterity? And is it poſſible for him to endure the thought of paſſing for an * * * *

Mr. Secretary DUNDAS roſe to call the Honorable Gentleman to order. He ſpoke of his Right Honorable friend as a Member of Parliament only; and it was the eſtabliſhed rule of the Houſe to preſume that no mem⯑ber ever delivered opinions or expreſſed ſentiments in which he was not in earneſt. That to aſſert or inſi⯑nuate the contrary was unparliamentary, and a high breach of order.

Mr. FRANCIS. I ſubmit to correction, though I really do not think that I ſaid any thing to deſerve it. Certainly what I meant was, not to expreſs a ſuſpicion of my own concerning the Right Honorable Gentle⯑man's ſincerity, but to indicate to him the impreſſion which the fact, as it ſtood, ſeemed likely to make on the general judgment of mankind at preſent and here⯑after. I have no time now to debate a point of or⯑der; [27] nor is it neceſſary. The full idea, which I meant to give, may be conveyed in another form. Inſtead of a comment, allow me to tell you a ſhort ſtory, from good authority; but whether it be true or not is immaterial. It will ſerve to illuſtrate an obſcure ſubject, without the riſque of giving offence. A Member of this honorable Houſe was aſked, how he voted on the laſt queſtion of abolition. ‘"Sir, I voted with my friend the Miniſter."’ How ſo? I thought you had divided againſt the Bill.—‘"Very true; I certainly divided againſt the Bill; but I voted with my friend the Miniſter."’ At the moment, when the Secretary of State called me to order, I was going to make an acknowledgement in favour of the Right Ho⯑nourable Gentleman, and to pay him, what I never re⯑fuſe even to hoſtile merit, an honeſt tribute of ap⯑plauſe. What judgement I poſſeſs is a good deal go⯑verned by impreſſion. I cannot calculate the value, while I feel the effect. I have not forgotten that illuſtrious night^*, when all the powers of his elo⯑quence were ſummoned to the ſervice, and exerted in the defence of juſtice and humanity;—when he took the Houſe, at a late hour, exhauſted with watching and wearied with debate;—when worn out attention revived at his voice; — when he carried conviction to our hearts;—when reaſon in his hand ſeemed to have no office but to excite the beſt of paſſions in our breaſts;—then, Sir, was the time, if he had nothing to conſider but his own glory, then was the moment for him to have choſen to retire from Parliament, perhaps from the world. He had arrived at the pinnacle of [28] parliamentary honor, and at the ſummit of his fame; and there he ſhould have quitted the ſcene. From that moment and from that ſtation, in my judgment, he has done nothing but deſcend. If the effort I allude to was no more than the imitation of an action, we may find ſuch imitations ſtill better repreſented in books, or as well acted on the ſtage, where reality is not in queſtion. I do not ſuſpect his ſincerity on that occa⯑ſion. But, whether that was an imitation or not, mine is a real action; or, if it be an error, it is I who am the dupe of it. I well know the dilemma, in which I am to ſtand this day. If the motion I have in view ſucceeds, I ſhall then be driven to ſubmit to a conti⯑nuance of the trade. If it fails, the whole exiſting miſ⯑chief receives another confirmation. But on the other hand, if I ſucceed, a great immediate good is done, progreſſive in its nature, and inevitably leading to final abolition. If I fail, one material advantage will be gained by it, that the pretences ſet up by thoſe, who ſay they cannot yield to abolition, will be unmaſked; and that, with reſpect to them at leaſt, we ſhall know what we have to truſt to. Such is the perpetual mix⯑ture of good and evil, that embarraſſes the choice and balances the event of human councils. We cannot command the iſſue; let us make ſure of the intent. The firſt queſtion that will naturally occur to all par⯑ties is to aſk me, what is your general intention? You ſay, you do not now propoſe to aboliſh the trade. Do you mean to emancipate the Negroes in the Iſlands? In effect, Sir, I have anſwered that queſtion already. It cannot be my intention, becauſe it is not in my power, nor would I venture it, if it were. Before I diſcharged them from their preſent evil condition, I [29] ſhould be bound to provide for their ſubſiſtence and ſe⯑curity in a better. Otherwiſe their freedom, unpre⯑pared and unprovided for, might be their inſtant de⯑ſtruction. They muſt be furniſhed with the means of ſubſiſting on the ſpot, and inſtructed to make uſe of them. Liberty, like all other human advantages and enjoyments, has difficulties of its own, which he, who has been bred in ſlavery, will not ſuddenly know how to contend with. In ſome caſes the planters are ready enough to make their ſlaves free, that is, to turn them adrift when from age or infirmity they are paſt their labour, and leave them at liberty to ſhift for them⯑ſelves. For this proof of the liberality of planters, the Houſe, I imagine, will give them but little credit. The ſame principle operates thro' all their conduct. Their ſole conſideration is the profit or the loſs. The Negro, in every ſtage of his exiſtence, is, ſome way or other, the ſubject of cruelty or injuſtice, of which the final effort, when it can exact no more, is to refine upon all the reſt, and at laſt to ſet him free. I do not ſay that ſuch conduct has been univerſal. Undoubted⯑ly ſome planters are wiſer and more humane than others. But that the practice I allude to has prevailed, I affirm from the beſt evidence, from the laws of the Iſlands, which declare the fact, and pretend to put a ſtop to it. But for what reaſon? Is it becauſe juſtice or humanity forbid that theſe helpleſs wretches ſhould be let looſe to ſtarve and to periſh at the period of their ſervice? No, Sir; no ſuch thing. The laws inter⯑poſe, avowedly, for no purpoſe but to deſtroy a nui⯑ſance, to remove an eye-ſore, or to diſcourage theft. Theſe immoral beings, it ſeems, are determined to eat. If you will not give them food, they take it by ſtealth. [30] The appropriated rights of nouriſhment are invaded by theſe free Negroes. No edible property is ſecure from them. And is that an evil to be endured for a moment by an enlightened legiſlature?—No, Sir, it is not my deſign to give ſuch freedom on ſuch terms; nor will I leave it to the maſter to diſſolve the relation between his ſlave and himſelf, juſt whenever he pleaſes. The next queſtion, I expect, is;—Do you mean to give the Negroes equal rights with the white inhabitants? That would be a direct emancipation. What I would do immediately, if I could, would be to place them in a ſtate equivalent to that of voluntary ſervice. That ſtep will follow in due time; but it muſt be preceded by other gradations. To aboliſh ſervice in ſociety, is in fact to aboliſh man. You have heard of fanciful definitions, that man is an animal bipes et implume, that man alone makes inſtruments to act with; but there is no diſtinction perhaps more ſtriking, more prominent and characteriſtic, than that he alone of all created beings makes uſe of the ſervice of creatures of his own ſpecies. But ſervice is not ſlavery. It is the free man's calling. In effect, ſlavery is the reverſe of ſervice. Inſtead of bad ſlaves I would make the Negroes good ſervants. I am ſure that the maſter's profit, on the whole, would grow with the freedom, and that even his morals would be minded by it. A good maſter makes a good ſervant, and, vice verſá, a good ſervant makes a good maſter. The principles act and react on each other. But we are yet at too great a diſ⯑tance from this humble ſtate of improvement. I do not aim at it immediately. Then what is it you pro⯑poſe? I mean, Sir, generally, in the firſt inſtance, to allow the Negroes every benefit and advantage com⯑patible [31] with a rational and profitable demand on their ſervice; to mend their actual condition, to prepare them gradually for a better ſituation, and to make them capable of higher improvements. The courſe and the power ſhall be ſtated in their place. But, firſt of all, let us inquire and conſider, what is the actual ſtate of the Negroes in the Iſlands. I mean to repreſent it fairly on both ſides. In a printed tract, called A true State of the Queſtion, drawn up with great artifice, under an air of ſimplicity, I find the following paſſage, which the author evidently means ſhould be taken for a general and candid account of the Negroes in the plantations. ‘"They have a houſe and garden for nothing, clothes found them, food found them, both good and ſufficient, the beſt doctors in the country to attend them when ſick, their wives and children provided for, and all without any expence. The par⯑ſon, who lived there three years, ſays this is the general ſtate of the Negroes on all the plantations he ſaw; and that in a great many parts they catch, by means of ſpringes or ſnares, abundance of wild pigeons and Guinea hens."’ Undoubtedly, Sir, if the Negroes are really furniſhed with all theſe conveniences and amuſements, there is no occaſion to tell us that it muſt be without any expence to them. They land naked, and they cannot acquire. To ſay that they have them for nothing, is only to aſſert that their labour is of no value. But does any man in his ſenſes believe the ſtatement to be true? If it be, the fortunate iſlands were never diſ⯑covered before. Grenada and St. Kitt's are the real Heſ⯑perides. A ſugar plantation muſt be a perfect paradiſe. Be it ſo. I take theſe gentlemen at their word. In aſſerting the fact, they allow the right. To affirm [32] that ſuch is the practice already, is to confeſs that ſuch it ought to be. Their allegation is an admiſſion. Al⯑moſt all that I contend for is acknowledged to be right, and in effect, if they ſpeak truth, already granted and enjoyed. Inforce your practice. Compel thoſe plan⯑ters, if there be any, who neglect or refuſe to follow your benevolent example. Confirm your own cuſtom by ſome legal ſanction, and make it binding on all par⯑ties. The rights, which are held at diſcretion, may be capriciouſly reſumed; and, even while they are poſ⯑ſeſſed, can hardly be enjoyed. You cannot anſwer for the juſtice and humanity of your ſucceſſors. It is not abſolutely certain that your virtues will deſcend with your eſtates. Since in effect you give the ſubſtance, for what reaſon ſhould you refuſe the ſecurity? Your Negroes will not work with leſs diligence, when they know that their induſtry and obedience are the certain tenure of their happineſs. As long as they have no⯑thing to loſe, they are not properly within the reach of good government. At leaſt it is worth trying, whe⯑ther the fear of forfeiture may not be full as effectual as the dread of puniſhment. I muſt call upon you now, Sir, to attend to the oppoſite ſide of this flattering re⯑preſentation;—after looking at the picture, to turn the frame and examine the canvas. Very different indeed is the view, which I ſhall endeavour to give you of the condition of theſe ſlaves; but it is that, which I moſt conſcientiouſly believe to be true. The reality of the caſe, as I ſhall ſtate it, is founded in the ſtrongeſt pro⯑bability and rational preſumption on general princi⯑ples; is ſupported by direct evidence, and above all things is demonſtrated by unavoidable inference from the laws of the Iſlands. My chief reliance is on the [33] laſt, becauſe, tho' not in its nature ſo direct as oral teſtimony, it is the only ſort of evidence, which it is impoſſible for any adverſe party to contradict or diſpute. At the ſame time, Sir, I deſire it to be underſtood that what I ſtate on this ſubject is ſtated generally. I do not mean to deny that ſome plantations are better ma⯑naged than others; that, in ſome places, very prudent and humane regulations have been eſtabliſhed, and par⯑ticularly that, when proprietors, who commonly re⯑ſide in England, have viſited their eſtates, their occa⯑ſional preſence has been a bleſſing to their ſlaves. Knowing and eſteeming many of them, as I do, and living in friendſhip with others, I ſhould betray my cauſe as well as my honour, if I did not much more than admit, if I did not contend that a great part of the miſeries ſuffered by the ſlaves is in fact owing to the conſtant abſence of the proprietors, and would probably be removed or alleviated by their preſence. Had it been my lot to have poſſeſſed an eſtate in the Weſt Indies by gift or inheritance,—ſuch property aſſuredly I never would have acquired by an act of my own,—I ſhould have thought it my duty, in the firſt inſtance, againſt every motive of perſonal reluctance and diſlike, to have viſited my eſtate, to have examined the condi⯑tion and treatment of my Negroes with my own eyes, and, before I allowed myſelf to think of any thing elſe, to give and inſure to them at leaſt as much com⯑fort and happineſs as might be compatible with the de⯑mand of a reaſonable and a fixed proportion of the amount produce of their labour. What more I would have done, in the ſame purſuit, may be collected more uſe⯑fully from the ſcheme, which I am gradually unfolding to the Houſe, than from an abrupt declaration of it [34] at preſent. Speaking generally then, and not without exception, of the actual ſituation of Negroes in the Weſt Indies, I ſay it appears to me, from all the evi⯑dence to which I have alluded, that they are a collec⯑tion of human beings, exiſting together, but not in a ſtate of Society;—that they are under no law, but that of arbitrary will;—that they know of no govern⯑ment, but the whip;—that they have no effective pro⯑tection, in laws or in magiſtrates, againſt perſonal cruelty on the part of thoſe white men, who exerciſe the offices, too often united in one perſon, of mana⯑gers, overſeers, and drivers, nor any ſhelter whatſoever from the ſevereſt puniſhments, but in the prudence or humanity of thoſe officers;—that there is no bond of marriage among them;—and finally that, in this ſtate, they neither have, nor can have, nor in fact is it in⯑tended that they ſhould have, any idea of morals or re⯑ligion. If this be generally their condition, it follows of courſe that, even if the propagation of Negroes in the Iſlands were not directly diſcouraged, as it is, by the planters, they could not increaſe and multiply, as be⯑yond all doubt they would do, if they were to partake of the common benefits of ſociety, or even if they were ſure of protection from outrageous wrongs. The cauſe is proved by the effect. They, who affirm that the con⯑trary is true, that propagation is really encouraged and protected, are bound to ſhew, why they have not ſuc⯑ceeded in the courſe of a century, and why a continued importation of adult Negroes from Africa is ſtill neceſ⯑ſary. If you truſt to their experience of the effect of their own meaſures, the neceſſity can never ceaſe. You muſt perpetuate the importation. I wait with curioſity to hear, with what arguments and proofs they ſupport [35] ſo extraordinary a propoſition. They will find it a difficult taſk; and they may be ſure of my attention to every thing they ſay. Not a word of it ſhall be loſt. But, until I receive new lights on this part of the ſub⯑ject, I muſt continue in my preſent conviction, that there is no marriage among the Negroes (by which I do not mean a caſual cohabitation, but a real bond of union), becauſe there is no protection to marriage, and that, without marriage, there can be no certain propa⯑gation, or care of the infant. For what reaſon ſhould a Negro marry? That his wife, if ſhe has any per⯑ſonal attractions, may be at the mercy and diſpoſal of the driver, who whips them both? That his children, if they are ſuffered to live, may be ſlaves like himſelf? And do theſe people expect us to believe, that the pro⯑ductive power of mere animal inſtinct, if in fact it were protected and encouraged, is ſufficient to overcome the moral order of nature, and the diſpenſations of Providence? Promiſcuous cohabitation is generally ad⯑verſe to increaſe; but, in the caſe of the Negroes, tho' birth were not prevented, death muſt follow. What care do you think is likely to be taken of the mother or the child, when children are conſidered as a loſs and a burthen to the eſtate?—Do you mean then to impart directly to the Negroes, now in the Weſt Indies, the immediate benefit and enjoyment, as far as a ſtate of ſervitude is capable of it, of law and government, of morals and religion? No, Sir, that is not my inten⯑tion. I know too well that they are not in a ſtate to receive theſe benefits, or to profit by them. You might as well attempt to ſow wheat upon a mar⯑ble table, or on a gravel walk, and expect a plentiful crop in return. Before you plant, you muſt prepare [36] the ſoil; otherwiſe the expence is waſted, and the la⯑bour thrown away. Something muſt be done, in the firſt inſtance, to raiſe their degraded minds, and to ex⯑cite their faculties, before you attempt to make them productive. What idea can they form of a govern⯑ment, or how can they regard it, from which they ex⯑perience nothing but puniſhment? How can they con⯑fide in laws, which place no confidence in them, and from which they derive no protection? What concep⯑tion can they have, or would it be poſſible to give them, of moral obligations, as long as they exiſt with⯑out a ſocial relation of any kind, not only to the whites, who to them are a diſtinct order of beings, but even to one another. Many well-meaning perſons, I know, have wiſhed and endeavoured to impart to the Negroes ſome notion of a Deity and ſome ſenſe of religion. Without blaming the intention, I lament the miſappli⯑cation of a pious principle, and the inutility of a vir⯑tuous attempt. Again I entreat the Houſe, moſt ear⯑neſtly on this point, not to anticipate my argument, not to conclude haſtily either for me or againſt me. My language, on this ſubject, may be offenſive to vul⯑gar ears, or to ſuperficial obſervers; but examine it well, and you will find, that it proceeds from the deepeſt ſenſe of the truth and reaſon of religion. Theſe ſerious conſiderations are not foreign from my purpoſe. The legiſlator, who leaves religion out of his ſcheme of government, whatever it may be, knows nothing of human nature, and but little of his office. But, in all the operations of human contrivance, gradation and order are eſſential to ſucceſs. It is only for the hand of the Creator to act, by inſtant inſtitution, univerſally and at once. The Negroes, in their preſent ſtate, are [37] incapable of the benefits of religion, becauſe they are not prepared to receive them. To give them, as they are, a confuſed idea of a Power and Providence above them (which is the utmoſt you can do) would be much worſe than uſeleſs and ineffectual. I ſay it would be dangerous. In failing, you only waſte your time. I dread nothing but your ſucceſs. Expoſe, if you will, the aweful rites and ceremonies of your religion to mockery and profanation. Baptiſe your dogs. Baptiſe your horſes. Theſe animals you careſs. They feed from your hands; and, above all things, they do not know that they are your ſlaves. But beware of the laſt act of human impiety. Beware of perſuading the Negro of the exiſtence of a Being, of whoſe power and attributes he can know nothing, but in the miſeries it inflicts, or permits to be inflicted upon him. In his preſent ſtate, do you expect him to liſten to religious inſtruction, or to underſtand it, if he does? Be it ſo. You have taught him to believe, or to pretend to be⯑lieve, what he does not underſtand, the exiſtence of a providential Power above us. In what manner is he likely to be affected by that belief, or what concluſion will he draw from it? His ſimple reaſon will tell him, in effect, that to him it is an abſtract propoſi⯑tion; that, whether true or falſe, he has no manner of concern in it; or that, if there be a God, he is not the equal protector of his creatures; that all the bene⯑fits of exiſtence are reſerved for the whites, and nothing for his colour, but degradation, ſlavery, and ſtripes. Is this the impreſſion you wiſh to make by your in⯑ſtructions? Whatever you may intend, the untu⯑tored mind of the Negro is incapable of any other. What then? Is it my purpoſe to keep the Negroes as [38] they are, without a ſenſe of the truth, or a ſhare in the bleſſings of religion? God forbid. My intention is directly the reverſe. I have conſulted the Book of Wiſdom, and ſhall follow the precept as it is written. He, who reads that book without emotion, in my mind, has no feeling; he, who reads it without reliſh, has no taſte. Begin with yourſelves. Do not intercept all the goodneſs of Providence in its paſſage. Let ſome portion of its benefits eſcape from your graſp, and de⯑ſcend to your fellow-creatures. By degrees the Negro will conceive, without envy, that it is your lot to oc⯑cupy an order of exiſtence above him, conſiſtent with his happineſs, and poſſibly the medium, thro' which he is to receive it. Give him benefits, and he will re⯑turn thanks; give him hope, and he will pray. Why ſhould he be grateful now, or for what purpoſe ſhould he pray? Deſpair never prays; extreme guilt, rarely. The publican hid his face. You have heard of the parable of the ſower and the ſeed. From a man, whoſe life has been waſted in the purſuit of buſineſs or of pleaſure, and perpetually traverſed by diſappointment in detail, tho' ſucceſsful in the reſult, theſe things may have more weight, perhaps, than if they came di⯑rectly from the temple and the teacher. The only ſeed, which brought forth fruit, was that, which fell into good ground. The good ground is that, which is duely prepared. Without cultivation, the richeſt ſoil pro⯑duces weeds, and nothing elſe. If then you ſeriouſly and rationally mean to give religion to the Negro, pre⯑pare his mind to receive it. By what means? By direct information? By poſitive inſtruction? No. Give him a footing on the ground, tho' it were but a point. Give him a ſtation in ſociety, even the loweſt that can [39] be found. At preſent he has none. He belongs to no order. Give him ſome tenure in the earth, if you mean to exalt his thoughts to any thing above it. His mind is elaſtic as well as your's; but it muſt have ſomething ſolid to act upon. Theſe are the premiſes. Then what is the concluſion? In one word, give pro⯑perty to the Negroes. What! property to a ſlave! to a being, who is not the maſter of his own actions, who is not the owner of himſelf! Yes, I ſay, property to a ſlave. I mean a property in the ſoil, the beſt for their uſe, the moſt convenient for yourſelves, qualified and limited on one ſide, and accompanied on the other with time and means to cultivate, and ſecurity to enjoy. Without thoſe conditions, the mere grant of property would be nominal and nugatory. I am not alluding to goods and chattels, but to a real tho' inferior tenure in the land. To that ſort of property, in all its degrees, cultivation is the origin of right, antecedent to laws and even to ſociety. But, if that propoſition be true, how peculiarly powerful is the inference in favour of the Negro? The moment you forced him to work, you gave him the claim, and much more than I con⯑tend for. To ſome participation at leaſt, the labour and the right are inſeparable. I ſay that the protection of property is the cauſe and foundation of ſociety. In that ſingle and ſimple principle is involved, and out of it will gradually unfold, the benefits, the orders, and the improvements of ſocial life. In that acorn the whole oak is included. Give it time to take root; give protection to the plant; let it thrive and flouriſh. The ornament and the uſe will pay you here⯑after. The branches, as they expand, will ſhelter you from the ſtorm. The majeſtic ſtem itſelf, even when [40] it falls, will be devoted to your ſervice. From this ſingle act of giving property to the Negroes, the im⯑provement of their faculties and character as well as of their condition will gradually and neceſſa⯑rily proceed, or on this ſtock it may he grafted. The cultivation of the earth is not merely the ſource of nouriſhment, or comforts, or perſonal enjoyments, but of order, laws, art, and ſcience, of every thing that is moſt refined, and moſt purely intellectual in the human ſyſtem. Even eloquence, muſic and poetry, tho' laſt in ſucceſſion, are the progeny of the earth. Morality and religion undoubtedly derive from a higher ſource. But this is the medium, thro' which they are conveyed to us. PRIMA DEDIT LEGES, CERERIS SUNT OMNIA MUNUS. You may not believe in the inſpiration of poetry; but I am ſure you will liſten and ſubmit to the wiſdom of a king. You have it from royal autho⯑rity, that truth ſhall ſpring and flouriſh OUT OF THE EARTH. What can that ſentence mean, but that hu⯑man knowledge, with all its illuſtrations in ſociety, was intended to originate from the clod, broken by the ſpade, or turned by the plough; and that the labour beſtowed upon the earth is the firſt ſtep to the cultiva⯑tion of the mind. Before I proceed to ſpecify the ſort of property, in which I wiſh the Negroes to partici⯑pate, I am bound to ſhew generally that rights of pro⯑perty are not incompatible with a ſtate even of abſo⯑lute ſlavery, and that in fact they have exiſted toge⯑ther, under governments, which, in other reſpects, exhibited no ſign of lenity, or even mercy, to their ſlaves. It was the practical wiſdom or policy of thoſe ſtates which, only in this reſpect, and for a public purpoſe, preſcribed a limit to the power of the [41] maſter, tho', in all other inſtances, utterly arbitrary and uncontrouled. By the cuſtom of Rome, if not by poſitive inſtitution, the ſlave might acquire, by extra-work, or by ſavings on his allowance of grain, a pecu⯑lium or private property, which the maſter could not take from him, tho' he might diſpoſe of his perſon. I do not know that the peculium was provided for by the laws of the Twelve Tables; but it was conſidered as a cuſtomary right, and protected by the Praetor. This money, with their maſter's permiſſion, they laid out at intereſt, or purchaſed with it a ſlave for them⯑ſelves, from whoſe labour they might make profit. They might buy out their liberty, and have their names inſerted in the cenſor's roll; by which they ob⯑tained ſome of the advantages attached to the condition of a Roman citizen, tho' the relation between the freedman and his maſter was not entirely diſſolved. Even while the bond continues, the allowance of, or the connivance at petty profits by the ſlaves tends of itſelf to ſoften and efface the impreſſion of ſlavery, and to convert it gradually into the condition of voluntary ſervice. The eſſential difference between ſlavery and ſervice is, that one is forced, the other is voluntary. Monteſquieu ſays that, in Germany, the labour of the mines, in itſelf ſevere and odious beyond all others, was maintained by the encouragement of little privi⯑leges, perquiſites, and profits to the miners; that they were even brought to love their condition, and to live happily in it. From this fact he concludes, that there is no labour that man can execute, which may not be performed by freemen. My concluſion from it is, that the more of freedom you can impart to a ſlave, the more he will labour, provided it be ac⯑companied [42] with a gradual acceſſion of profit. Cu⯑pidilate peculii nullam conditionem recuſant duriſſimae ſervi⯑tutis. In ſociety, or in contact with ſociety, I hold that the poſſeſſion of property, of ſome kind and to ſome degree, is more neceſſary to a ſlave than to a free⯑man. It tends to give him not only comfort but pro⯑tection, and neceſſarily prepares him not only for ſo⯑cial benefits, but for perſonal improvement. The ſavage is ſatisfied with his liberty. Inſtead of ſta⯑tionary labour, he ranges for ſubſiſtence; and, having little or no idea of property, has ſtill leſs of laws or ſettlement. In ſociety, a free man may do without property; becauſe he is free. His liberty is his free⯑hold. Without acquiſition, he may have enjoyment. But, in ſome way or other, he muſt ſerve, or he muſt labour. So maſt we all, tho' in different ſenſes, or in oppoſite directions. The many cannot govern the few, nor do they deſire it. But is there a rank in ſociety, including the higheſt, in which the maſter in effect is not very often more a ſervant to his ſervants, than they are to him? From my own experience, tho' on a little ſcale, I can affirm it to be true. But the relations between the different claſſes of man⯑kind, to be uſefully maintained for any, muſt be reciprocally obſerved by all. In the loweſt ſitua⯑tions of life, the people know, as well as we do, that wherever perſonal induſtry is encouraged and property protected, there muſt be inequalities of poſſeſſion, and conſequently diſtinction of ranks. Then come the form and the order, by which the ſubſtance is at once de⯑fined and preſerved. Diſtribution and limitation pre⯑vent confuſion, and government by orders is the natural reſult of property protected by freedom. Take care [43] that you adhere to it. Where the few poſſeſs all, and the multitude have nothing, there is no government by orders. Every thing is in extremity, and nothing in gradation. It is ignorance or calumny to ſay, that if the poor man was allowed his humble ſhare in the al⯑lotment, he would feel any diſpoſition to invade the portions of the ranks above him. Equality of condi⯑tion is impoſſible. They, who talk of it to the people, mean nothing but to deceive them. The very act of juſtice and good government, which ſecures to every man his reſpective right, excludes the idea of poſitive equality. The Roman ſlave had ſome rights of per⯑ſonal property, tho' he had no other. That example, however, is but little to my purpoſe compared to the condition of the Helots, under the tyranny of Sparta. My general wiſh and object is to make the ſervice of the Negroes, as much as poſſible, a real ſervice, by at⯑taching it to the ſoil, and as little as poſſible a perſonal ſervice. The Negroes, in our iſlands, are equally ſubject to both, or may be capriciouſly transferred from one to the other. The horrible barbarity, with which the Helots were treated, was the deliberate policy of the ſtate, not the indulgence or reſult of perſonal cruelty. The Spartans were far outnumbered by the Helots. The ſecurity of the few was thought to be incompatible with common juſtice, or even with com⯑mon mercy, to the many. One crime produced an⯑other. The firſt violation of right, in reducing a free people to ſlavery, could only be ſupported by a perpe⯑tual outrage to humanity. Such at leaſt was the prin⯑ciple and practice of that extraordinary government, in which every thing was original and unexampled. In another inſtance, directly applicable to my preſent [44] purpoſe, they departed boldly from all the vulgar rules of human prudence; and yet they acted wiſely. They renounced the uſes of property for themſelves, and in effect gave the lands of Laconia to the Helots, to be cultivated by them, on the ſole condition of re⯑turning to their maſters a fixed and certain tribute in kind, equivalent to a quit-rent, which could never be increaſed. To every other intent of uſe and profit, the Helots were in fact proprietors of the lands. The amount of the demand on the produce of their la⯑bour being once made unalterable, a vigorous and general cultivation followed. Many years ago, I endeavoured to inculcate a ſimilar principle on the Engliſh Government of Bengal. I ſaid then, and I ſay now, leave the lands with the natural owners, the Zemindars, and fix your demand of a certain por⯑tion of the produce at once and for ever. Subject, as it is, to a foreign dominion, much heavier in detail than that of a ſingle deſpot, Bengal cannot exiſt, with ſecu⯑rity of any kind to the natives, or with permanent ad⯑vantage to the governing power, on any other princi⯑ple. The effective right of property was inviolable in the Helot, tho' ſubject, in his perſon, to a cruelty at once deliberate and capricious, and tho' his life was never ſafe. He ſtill held a middle rank between the freeman and the domeſtic ſlave. The Helots were commonly inrolled in the Spartan armies; and, tho' ſeldom rewarded for their courage or fidelity, their condition was mended, at leaſt as long as the war laſted. The life of a ſoldier, with all its fatigues and dangers, is undoubtedly preferable to that of a ſlave. We are told that the Negroes on our plantations are always ready to take up arms for their owners, and to [45] fight in their defence; and this is advanced for a triumphant proof of their attachment, and conſequently of the mildneſs with which they are treated. In ſome caſes, it may be ſo. I have no wiſh or occaſion to overſtate any thing to the diſadvantage of the plan⯑ters. But, generally ſpeaking, the fact does not prove the propoſition. All it proves, with any certainty, is, that in the army the Negroes are ſure of food and cloathing, and exempted from field labour and arbitrary puniſhment. How were the armies of Lewis the Fourteenth recruited in the lateſt of his wars? The diſtreſs and miſery of every other condition of life drove all men into the army, where alone it was poſſible to ſubſiſt. How often have we been told that the wonderful facility, with which the French have been able to keep their forces complete in the preſent war, proves nothing but the general deſolation of the coun⯑try, and that all the bread, that exiſted, was reſerved for the army. This example of the Helots, Sir, is direct and powerful to my immediate purpoſe. They were ſlaves, and they had landed property, or an equi⯑valent to it in the uſe and enjoyment. In our own ancient hiſtory, the firſt eſtate or tenure, ſuperior to downright ſlavery, but inferior to every other condi⯑tion, was that of a Villan regardant, whoſe ſervice was annexed to the manor or to the land, and who could not be ſeparated from it. To a ſtate reſembling this, I would, in the firſt inſtance, raiſe the Negro. The planters ſhould be obliged to furniſh every adult Ne⯑gro, as they ſay they do at preſent, with a cottage and a ſmall portion of land for his own uſe, with implements of tillage, and a fixed allowance of time for cultivation; the entire produce to be his own. In ſome of the [46] Iſlands, this allotment may be made with greater eaſe and convenience than in others. But no plantation ſhould be ſo overſtocked with Negroes, no more than a farm with cattle, as not to leave room enough for the production of ſubſiſtence. Ground food is the only nouriſhment, in which the Negroes have any pleaſure. The Houſe will obſerve that I mean to confine my⯑ſelf to the general principles and outlines of a plan, the detail of which will appear before you more diſ⯑tinctly in another form, if I ſhould be permitted to proceed in the manner I propoſe. Marriage muſt be encouraged; I mean a real bond of union between the ſexes. A certain participation in the uſufruct of the land, however limited and qualified, is the firſt en⯑couragement to marry. The marriage muſt be con⯑tracted with ſome ceremony, and recorded in ſome form; and then it muſt be ſeriouſly protected. By the laws of ſome of the Grecian ſtates, if a maſter violated the wife of his ſlave, the huſband and the wife were inſtantly free. Leges pudicitiae ſunt juris naturalis. Di⯑rect force or violent compulſion of any kind, employed againſt a Negreſs, ſhould be puniſhed with death. Corruption of the wife ſhould make the huſband free. It is ſhocking to human nature to think that perſonal protection, even to this amount, would conſtitute in itſelf a ſtate of improvement. But, once granted and ſecured, it would of neceſſity lead to greater. I know that, according to the actual laws of the Iſlands, in which you will find that principles are for ever de⯑duced from practice, the difficulty of convicting a a white man of any crime againſt a Negro, is little leſs than inſurmountable. The Negroes are not ſup⯑poſed to be moral agents. Againſt a white man, no [47] evidence of theirs is admitted. The laws, if they were good, cannot act for want of proof. The hand of the magiſtrate, tho' diſpoſed to puniſh, is diſarmed or ſuſ⯑pended. The moſt ſhocking acts of cruelty are encourag⯑ed by impunity; and, in the midſt of horrible ſufferings, there is no complaint. By mending the poſitive exiſt⯑ence of the Negro, you will gradually raiſe him to a moral character, ſufficient at leaſt to make his evidence admiſſible. Without it, he can have no protection from the laws. His credit and eſtimation will grow with the intereſt you give him, and keep pace with the advantages, in which you ſuffer him to participate. In no caſe ſhould the Negro be removed, againſt his will, from the ſpot which he has cultivated, much leſs from the eſtate. They ſhould always deſcend or be trans⯑ferred together. In no caſe ſhould wives be ſeparated from their huſbands, or children from their parents. In theſe inſtitutions I lay my foundation. Particular re⯑gulations will follow in their place. There ſhould be a general limitation by law of the hours of labour ac⯑cording to age and ſex. Indulgence to weakneſs or infirmity muſt ſtill be left to the diſcretion and bene⯑volence of the maſter. Every Negro ſhould have the privilege of applying the petty profits of his induſtry to the recovery of his freedom, by buying out the re⯑mainder of his ſlavery, or ſome part of it, at a price to be fixed by law. Fathers and mothers, who have brought up a certain number of children, ſhould be rewarded with premiums, and the mothers exempted from labour. No man ſhould be deemed capable of the office of overſeer or manager of an eſtate, who was not of a certain age, and married. The ſuperintendance of the female ſlaves would naturally devolve, as it [48] ought, to the care of his wife. I need not paint the caſes, in which the ſympathy of a woman and a mother would be a ſource of comfort and relief to theſe creatures. The ſufferings, appropriated to the ſex, demand the office, and allot the department. I am not, Sir, ſo weak or inexperienced as to expect that, if laws were ever ſo judiciouſly framed to accompliſh all theſe ſalutary purpoſes, they would execute themſelves, and eſpecially in the Weſt India Iſlands, without the con⯑currence of other eſtabliſhments. Undoubtedly there muſt be ſpecial courts, and magiſtrates, and officers, to receive complaints, to proſecute, and to puniſh. There muſt be a judge conſervator of the Negroes in every iſland, with an advocate and attorney to plead and act for them, appointed by the King, and dependent ſolely on the Crown, with ſufficient ſalaries, and no way in⯑tereſted in the property or produce of the plantations. Under the principal judge, and by his deputation, there ſhould be itinerant inſpectors, with ſome of the powers of a juſtice of peace, who ſhould travel occa⯑ſionally, and not at ſtated periods, in circuits thro' the Iſlands, give notice of their arrival at convenient ſta⯑tions, and wait there a ſufficient time to receive com⯑plaints; in petty inſtances, to give redreſs; in graver caſes, to inſtitute a more ſerious proceeding before the ſuperior court. I have another meaſure in contempla⯑tion, materially connected with the general object of relief, for which I am contending, tho' it be not to operate immediately in the Iſlands. I know that, in the circumſtances to which I am compelled to ſubmit, it could not fail of producing many ſalutary effects; and yet I cannot mention it without a deep ſenſation of regret. With or without it, the general plan might [49] proceed. But, if the plan fails, the meaſure I allude to is indiſpenſable. I ſhall ſubmit it to the conſidera⯑tion of the Houſe, as I received it from a gentleman, who poſſeſſes a conſiderable property in Antigua, and with whom I have the happineſs to be united by per⯑ſonal friendſhip as well as by alliance. As it is ſtill permitted to be the will of Parliament, that this in⯑fernal trade ſhould continue, let us endeavour to mi⯑tigate, if we can, the horrors that belong to it. There ought to be commiſſioners ſtationed at the principal places of traffic on the coaſt of Africa, with ſalaries ſufficient to engage men of character to accept the office, and with legal powers to examine the accommo⯑dation in the ſhips, to ſuperintend and regulate the purchaſe of Negroes, to act as magiſtrates of the mar⯑ket, to prevent or put a ſtop to treacherous or fraudu⯑lent tranſactions, to ſee that iniquity and injuſtice are at leaſt conducted fairly, on their own pretended prin⯑ciples, and without unneceſſary aggravations. Surely the ſubſtance of this traffic is enough of itſelf to ſatisfy the moſt ſavage or brutal mind. Above all things, it ſhould be the care and duty of ſuch commiſſioners to prevent the ſeparation of families—not to ſuffer the wife to be divided from her huſband, the ſiſter from the brother, the infant from its mother. The ſales in the Iſlands ſhould be governed by the ſame rules. A multi⯑tude of other duties and offices, with which the com⯑miſſioners ſhould be charged, will occur upon reflection. That a caſe ſhould exiſt, with the conſent of an enlight⯑ened Government, in which ſuch an inſtitution ſhould be wanted, is ſhameful, is intolerable. I am ſure it is an opprobrium to the name of England. In the treat⯑ment of the Negroes in our iſlands, of all its evils the [50] moſt grievous and afflicting remains to be conſidered. As long as it exiſts, I know that general inſtitutions, laws, and magiſtrates, will avail but little in their defence. The arbitrary power of the whip, committed to men without feeling, to be exerciſed in anger, and unchecked even by the intereſt of an owner in the well⯑being of the object, is not in its nature capable of re⯑gulation, or ſubject to controul. To limit the num⯑ber of ſtripes, to interpoſe between the naked helpleſs wretch,—a pregnant woman perhaps,—and the up⯑lifted hand of the driver, would be an unjuſt invaſion of neceſſary authority, and poſſibly in its conſequences might hazard the crop. For a miſchief of this kind there is no partial remedy. In the place of a deſpotic power of puniſhment entruſted to a ſingle perſon, I would ſubſtitute a form of trial, not leſs effectual to in⯑ſure the reaſonable demand on labour, and equally ſafe to the only intereſts, which the planters ſeem to think of. I would give juriſdiction to the Negroes, in every plan⯑tation, over one another. The whole gang of males adult ſhould conſtitute the pannel, out of which a kind of jury ſhould be formed by lot or by ſelection, with a right of challenge, on one ſide to the offender, and on the other to the maſter, or to his repreſentative, who ſhould ſuperintend and regulate the proceedings, and mitigate or remit the ſentence, if he thought pro⯑per. Gentlemen, who are fond of juſtice, may appre⯑hend, perhaps, that a black tribunal would rarely if ever inflict ſufficient puniſhment on a Negro. I, for my part, am confident that, as ſoon as they underſtood their office; and were ſenſible of the truſt repoſed in them, they would rather lean to ſeverity, and that the overſeer would often find himſelf obliged to reſtrain [51] it. On this principle, the diſcipline of our armies in India is effectually maintained. An Honorable Gen⯑tleman ^* near me can give you better information on this ſubject. But I know enough of it to be able to aſſure you that no Sepoy can be puniſhed but by the ſentence of a court martial compoſed of native officers, who have all been taken from the ranks, and with an European officer to act as judge advocate; and that I never heard the juſtice of their proceedings diſputed. As long as they are tolerably well treated, they are attached to their officers, and will follow them as far as the beſt Britiſh troops. A remarkable inſtance of this attachment, and of their diſpoſition to do even more than juſtice on offenders of their own caſt, oc⯑curred a few years ago. Captain Ewans, an officer generally beloved, at the head of his battalion, was murdered by a Sepoy, who ſuddenly went out of the ranks and ſhot him, without notice or complaint, or any provocation that could ever be diſcovered. The whole battalion ſaw the fact. The grenadiers on the flanks immediately wheeled without orders, and ſur⯑rounded the aſſaſſin. The difficulty then was to pre⯑vent their tying him to a horſe's tail, and dragging him to death without a trial. The Britiſh officers inſiſted on his being regularly tried, and executed in the uſual military form. I need not, however, have gone ſo far from the Iſlands for a ſucceſsful inſtance of practice founded on the ſame principle. I have not the honour of knowing the gentleman, whoſe example I am going to appeal to; I mean Sir Philip Gibbs; but I know his character, and what [52] his conduct has been in the management of his eſtate in Barbadoes. The former is eminently humane; the latter equally judicious. His virtues are to me a proof of his wiſdom. He gives his Negroes land and ſtock, with time to cultivate. He feeds and cloaths them well. He encourages marriage among them, and allows of no puniſhment but by the ſentence of a jury of Negroes. The conſequence is that his ſlaves do double the work of others, becauſe they are better able and more wil⯑ling. The inſtructions he has given to the managers of his eſtate are a model for imitation. The ſucceſs and the profit have correſponded with the benevolent de⯑ſign. Before I quit this firſt diviſion of my ſubject, I owe it in juſtice to an honorable perſon, lately a diſ⯑tinguiſhed member of this Houſe, as well as to my cauſe, not to conceal the lights I have received from him, and to avail myſelf, as far as I can, of the con⯑currence of his authority. On a ſubject of this nature there cannot, in my opinion, be a greater. I mean Mr. Burke. Divided, as we are, by an irreconcileable difference of opinion on another important ſubject, and ſeparated in private life as long as that unfortunate queſtion continues, I ſtill hope and believe that the bond of perſonal friendſhip and good-will between us will never be diſſolved. As ſoon as I had determined to take an active part in this buſineſs, I went to Mr. Burke, as wiſer men have done before me, for advice and information. I know how little I am qualified to occupy his ſtation on any ſubject, and that I have undertaken a taſk, which eminently and pe⯑culiarly belonged to him. To form and to digeſt a complete and perfect code of laws, on a ſubject ſo ex⯑tenſive and ſo full of difficulties, would be a work ap⯑propriated [53] to the powers and compaſs of his mind. His induſtry and perſeverance alone could carry it into exe⯑cution. On a tranſcendent queſtion, ſuch as this, of morals implicated with policy, the eminence of his mind extends his view, and gives him an horizon, which vulgar viſion can reach to. I have not ſtrength to ſuſtain or vigour to wield the armour of Achilles. If Mr. Burke were here,—for his own happineſs I can⯑not wiſh it,—this would be his office. How gladly would I reſign it to him!

‘Non foret incertus tanti certaminis haeres.’

I have not ſeen the plan which he drew up ſome years ago, and which he then communicated to a Right Honorable Gentleman, high in office in Ireland;^* and ſince to a Right Honorable Friend on the other ſide ^†. Nor would I avail myſelf now of his permiſ⯑ſion to ſee it, becauſe I ſoon perceived that it went to an extent and embraced a multitude of objects, which I knew it was impoſſible for me to manage. To force them on my mind, without capacity to receive them, would be only to embarraſs or utterly to diſcourage me. Perhaps, too, I might differ from him on the moſt prudential courſe of proceeding. Yon will not ſuſpect me of ſetting my judgment in competition with his. If it were poſſible for him to lead the cauſe him⯑ſelf, I ſhould hold myſelf ready for any ſubordinate part in it, and to be guided by his judgment. But, if I am to act, I muſt act upon my own. I am not tho⯑roughly [54] convinced of the advantage of forcing a great variety of inſtitutions to march together and in front. Or poſſibly it would be more honeſt to ſay, that I conſult my own infirmity in leaving as much as I can to the gradual operation of thoſe ſimple principles and limited inſtitutions, which I am more able to com⯑prehend, to arrange with effect, and apply to practice.

The Houſe, Sir, is now in poſſeſſion of the general object and principles of the plan, which I meant to lay before you. There are ſome perſons undoubtedly, whoſe hearty concurrence I am not ſanguine enough to expect; but I do not believe it poſſible that any man will directly and openly aſſert, that ſuch an object, if it were attainable, is not to be deſired;—that ſuch a plan, if it were practicable, is not fit to be encouraged. No human reſolution will go that length. I know, as well as they do, on what ground they are prepared to meet me, and for what queſtion the ſtrength of their oppoſition is reſerved. Admitting the meaſure to be eligible in itſelf, they aſk me now by what means do you propoſe to carry it into execution? What courſe would you purſue? What power would you employ? I ſhall not keep theſe Gentlemen in ſuſpenſe. My anſwer, I ſee, is waited for with an impatience, which indicates the certainty and anticipates the triumph of immediate victory. They exult in the practical diffi⯑culties inſeparable from every attempt to do good in this world, and which, they truſt, are inſurmountable in the preſent inſtance. Well, Sir, I am ready to gratify their deſire, and prepared, as I think, for all the objections that can be rationally urged againſt me. This part of the queſtion is not new to me. What I [55] know of it is derived not only from ſtudy and re⯑flection, as deep as I am capable of giving to any ſubject, but from the wiſdom of great men whom I have known, and from the experience of events which have happened in my own time. Tho' too young to take part, I was old enough to obſerve, and I had acceſs to ſome of the greateſt ſources of inſtruc⯑tion. How far I may have been able to avail myſelf of theſe advantages muſt be determined by others. The power, which I mean to reſort to, for carrying this plan into effect, is that of the Britiſh Parliament over the colonies of Great Britain. No man is fairly at iſſue with me, who does not diſtinctly deny that power. Is there a ſtateſman in this Houſe, is there an indi⯑vidual of any rank or conſideration here, who will take it upon himſelf, directly and plainly, to maintain that denial, or, in other words, to affirm, that in no caſe whatever has the Britiſh Parliament a right to make laws to bind the Britiſh colonies? I cannot believe it. But, if there be, let him come forward and declare himſelf. On that queſtion, inconſiderable as I am, and bold as it may appear, I am ready to meet him in front, to ſhew that he knows nothing of the principles of legiſlation, of the policy of ſtates, or of the duties of government, and to make him, for his ignorance at leaſt, the ſcorn and contempt of mankind. If he admits that caſes may poſſibly exiſt, in which the power may be neceſſary, and the right undiſputed, I then ſhall have nothing to prove, but that this is eminently a caſe in point, in which the application of the unqueſtion⯑able power of Parliament muſt be reſorted to, becauſe no other power on earth is equal to the purpoſe. I am as ready as any man to allow, or to contend, if it were [56] neceſſary, that the tranſcendent power of Parliament to make laws for every part of the Britiſh empire, where it has not been formally relinquiſhed, is not, in prudence, to be uſed on ordinary occaſions, when the ſubordinate powers of legiſlation can act with equal effect in their ſeveral departments. It is a right re⯑ſerved for great emergencies. To ſay that it ought to be ſo reſerved, is to acknowledge that it exiſts. Without evident neceſſity, I would neither urge the caſe nor agitate the right. Occaſions vary, and pru⯑dence muſt be conſulted. But rights are not given to lie dormant for ever. They have relative duties at⯑tached to them. According to the occaſion, the right is to be exerciſed, and the duty to be performed. Ne⯑ceſſity alone, if the thing muſt be done, and if there be no alternative, conveys a right, or ſtands in the place of it, to act for the general welfare or for the public ſafety. I ſhall ſhew you hereafter how little is to be expected, on this ſubject, from the power, even if it concurred with the diſpoſition of the colonial aſſemblies, and that, by their means, a real and effective alteration in the condition of the Negroes can never be accom⯑pliſhed. But I have firſt another argument to main⯑tain, and better ground to ſtand on. In a former de⯑bate, the example of America was held out to deter us from acts, which might alienate the Weſt India Iſlands, and drive them to look elſewhere for protection, if not to reſiſtance. At that time, nothing was in queſ⯑tion but the abolition of the Slave Trade. This night you may be ſure of hearing the ſame argument repeated, or rather of ſeeing the ſame weapon up⯑lifted to awe your deliberations. Let the queſtion be what it may, they are equally ready with it. If the [57] Weſt India Iſlands would not ſubmit to abolition, how will they endure the interpoſition of the legiſla⯑ture in any thing that touches their internal govern⯑ment? Such is the language of Engliſhmen, ſitting among us, to the legiſlative authority of their country. Let us ſee with what reaſon they reſort to the example of America. I am as ready to appeal to it as they are. I know where that fatal queſtion originated. No part of the argument, which divided this country on the merits of the Stamp Act, or of the events, which fol⯑lowed it, have eſcaped me. With all thoſe tranſac⯑tions in my view, I declare now, on the principles and in the language of Lord Chatham, that I REJOICE THAT AMERICA RESISTED. If this be a conceſſion, theſe Gentlemen are welcome to it. I do not believe it will avail them. I rejoice that America reſiſted with ſucceſs, becauſe it was a triumph of unqueſtion⯑able right over outrageous wrong, of courage and vir⯑tue over tyranny and force;—becauſe the iſſue of that conteſt has provided a refuge and left us an aſylum, when exiſtence in Europe, perhaps even in England, can no longer be endured. The nations, cruſhed by taxes for the ſupport of powers that oppreſs, or of wars that deſtroy them, have ſtill the conſolation of knowing that peace, and freedom, and plenty, are to be found in America, and that there is ſtill a coun⯑try in the world, where every man enjoys in ſecu⯑rity the fruits of his induſtry, and the produce of his labour. Who is there, who can pronounce with certainty that a period is not approaching, when no other refuge may be left us?—On what ground did the Americans firſt diſpute the general legiſlative au⯑thority of the mother country? Did they aſſert that a [58] Britiſh Parliament had no right to bind or to regulate a Britiſh colony by its laws, in any caſe whatſoever? Did they ever maintain a propoſition ſo abſurd and ſo monſtrous as that protection gave no claim to obe⯑dience, that thoſe duties were not reciprocal; that a nation ſub tutelâ owed no ſubmiſſion to the tutelary power by which it was protected, that the ward owed nothing to the guardian, the pupil to the tutor, the child to the parent;—that ſuch offices were merely nominal, and gave no right to act even for the benefit of the pretended objects of their care? No, Sir; Ame⯑rica had too much wiſdom for herſelf, as well as too hearty an attachment to England, to hold ſuch fooliſh language, or to maintain ſuch dangerous doctrines. See how ſhe has lately acted to ſome refractory de⯑pendencies of her own. The moment ſuch principles prevail, there is an end of all unity of government in the world. In an extended empire, every diſtant pro⯑vince may ſet up for itſelf. Every one of your iſlands may be an independent ſtate. If I aimed at their deſtruction, they ſhould have my conſent to be ſo. You would ſoon ſee them at your feet with ſupplica⯑tion to you to reſume your ſtation, and never to re⯑linquiſh your authority over them. That authority was not diſputed by America, until it was extended to purpoſes unconnected with general regulation, and exerciſed on principles, which, if once they were ad⯑mitted, left no ſecurity to the Americans for any thing they poſſeſſed. The claim, which they reſiſted, was that of direct taxation by a Houſe of Commons, in which they were not repreſented. They aſſerted truly, that taxation and repreſentation were inſeparable;— that the right grew from the fact, and could not exiſt [59] without it. In private life, the guardian regulates the conduct, and even diſpoſes of the property of the pupil, for his maintenance, for his ſervice, or for his educa⯑tion. But it does not follow, that he may take any part of it for his own uſe or benefit. The firſt may be a duty; the ſecond would be a robbery. The protect⯑ing power has a claim to obedience, not to money. To prevent any further queſtion on this ſubject, all claim to lay taxes on the colonies was formally re⯑nounced in the year 1778. The act of the 18th of his preſent Majeſty, commonly called Governor Johnſtone's act, ‘"declares and enacts, that the King and Parlia⯑ment of Great Britain will not impoſe any duty, tax, or aſſeſſment whatſoever, payable in the colo⯑nies, except ſuch duties as it may be expedient to impoſe for the regulations of commerce, the nett produce of ſuch duties to be always paid and applied to the uſe of ſuch colonies."’—This ſurrender, on the part of Great Britain, is ſpecific. All the other general rights of the mother country remain unaltered. The conceſſion, by which one particular point is given up, amounts in fact to a re-affirmance of the reſt. The queſtion then is, whether the meaſure I propoſe, and particularly that part of it, by which the planters would be obliged to allot ſome portion of their land with a cottage to their Negroes, be or be not an act of taxa⯑tion. I deſire to confine myſelf to this point at pre⯑ſent, becauſe I do not mean to inſiſt that a proviſion for the ſalaries and eſtabliſhments of magiſtrates, ad⯑vocates, and commiſſioners may not properly be the ſubject of a different conſideration. What I am now ſpeaking of is the allotment of a ſhare in the uſufruct of the eſtate to the ſervice and benefit of the eſtate [60] itſelf, and to no other purpoſe whatſoever. Nothing is taken away from the owner, nothing is applied to the uſes of Government. The tenure of the villan re⯑gardant was in its nature uſufructuary, and was never underſtood to limit or impair the right of the proprietor to the property of the ſoil. Now I affirm that it is eſ⯑ſential to the character and definition of a tax, that the amount ſhall be taken from the contributor and applied to the ſervice of the Crown or of the public. To appropriate and allot an exiſting fund, whether in land or money, is not of itſelf an act of taxation. But if it were ſo, what pretence have theſe gentlemen to appeal to the caſe or to quote the rights, which juſtified the reſiſtance of America? Is there any re⯑ſemblance between the two ſituations? The Ame⯑ricans reſiſted taxation, becauſe they were not re⯑preſented in Parliament. The folly and injuſtice of this country, by perſiſting in a claim of right, which never could have been eſſentially exerciſed, and which at laſt was relinquiſhed, drove the Americans to the neceſſity of aſſerting much more than their original pretenſions amounted to. They began with petition and remonſtrance;—they appealed to the ſword, and eſtabliſhed their deſtined independence long be⯑fore its natural and inevitable period, before they themſelves had foreſeen or deſired it. In the full⯑neſs of time, and in the maturity of their ſtate, ſepa⯑ration and independence muſt have been the lot of America. The Herculean infant would neceſſarily have burſt its cradle, and broken looſe from its leading ſtrings. But then the union of the two countries would have continued unimpaired. The mutual rela⯑tions of kindneſs and friendſhip would not have been [61] diſſolved. Affection and attachment would have oc⯑cupied the places of authority and dependence. Be⯑tween the caſe of America and that of the Weſt India Iſlands there is no ſimilarity, nor are the ſame conſe⯑quences poſſible. Is it true, in fact, that the property of the Weſt India Iſlands is not repreſented in the Houſe of Commons? Of what ſort of perſons does that party conſiſt, which, on the ſubject of the Slave Trade, carries every thing before it in this Houſe? Why, Sir, it is one of their allegations, when it ſuits their pur⯑poſe, that the property of the Iſlands is veſted in Great Britain, that is, in the hands of reſident owners, mort⯑gagees, merchants, and creditors. They are all on the ſpot, to repreſent the intereſts, and to defend the right of the Iſlands. They, at leaſt, are the ſubjects of Great Britain. They, at leaſt, may be compelled by the power of Parliament. If they are not your ſubjects, what are they? The Americans, on the contrary, re⯑ſided on their own continent, at a diſtance, which made communication impracticable, and not only without repreſentation, but not even in contact, and much leſs in ſympathy with the power, that pretended to tax them. The progreſs of their population had no limits. An unbounded territory expanded to receive it. The Iſlands have their boundary fixed for them by nature. The number of their white inhabitants cannot increaſe beyond a certain point, and muſt always be inconſiderable in compariſon with the Negroes and people of colour. Of ſome ſuperior power, of ſome protecting dominion, the Iſlands muſt for ever be the colonies or the dependencies. In the nature of things they never can he independent ſtates. Their Repre⯑ſentatives in this Houſe talk boldly of ſeparation, and [62] even intimate reſiſtance. I would not drive them to that iſſue. If they can make out their right, I would never put them to a trial of their ſtrength. Their ar⯑guments and their power are pretty much upon a footing. They know that, if they were unconnected with us to-morrow, and if it were poſſible for them to maintain their independence againſt France and America, the great market for their produce is in the conſumption of theſe kingdoms, and that to this market they muſt bring it on any terms, which Parliament ſhould think fit to preſcribe to them.

I have already intimated, that it is not my in⯑tention to propoſe any thing, that ſhould really trench on the queſtion of taxation, or furniſh a pre⯑tence to cavil or to quarrel with the general views and purpoſes of the meaſure. I need not argue about privileges, which I have no thoughts of invading. If the ſums required to pay the ſalaries and to ſup⯑port the eſtabliſhments, made neceſſary by this or any other plan, were to be raiſed in the Iſlands by the direct authority of Parliament, the objection would then be in its place, and proper to be conſidered. That point is not in queſtion, and need not be debated. If the colonial aſſemblies cannot be prevailed upon, by a recommendation from the Crown, or any other means, to provide for ſuch expences, the charge muſt be borne by Great Britain, and may eaſily be aſſeſſed upon objects, unqueſtionably within the diſpoſition of Par⯑liament. I am ready, for my part, to contribute to it, by a perpetual rent-charge on my eſtate, to a greater amount than can be reaſonably ſtated as the juſt pro⯑portion of any individual.

[63]Waving now, Sir, all farther conſideration of the ſtrict right of Parliament to act legiſlatively for the general benefit of the Weſt India Iſlands, I know there is another important queſtion to be reſolved. Since the different Iſlands have colonial aſſemblies or inferior Parliaments of their own, why do I not prefer ſome courſe of application to thoſe aſſemblies, and try whe⯑ther all the uſeful purpoſes of the Bill, which I am endeavouring to recommend to the Houſe of Commons, may not equally be effected thro' that medium? The queſtion is fair, and I ſhall anſwer it frankly. In the face of experience, and againſt all our knowledge and obſervation of the principles, character, and pro⯑ceedings of theſe aſſemblies, let us ſuppoſe for a mo⯑ment that a general diſpoſition did really prevail among them to impart to their Negroes ſome ſhare in the natural rights of human creatures, labouring in their ſervice, and a legal ſecurity for the poſſeſſion of them. Within theſe few years, ſince queſtions on this ſubject have been warmly revived and repeatedly agitated in England, they have had opportunities and incitements enough to indulge their benevolence, and to take the buſineſs into their own hands. But neither have they diſcovered ſuch an inclination, nor do I think it was in their power to have concerted a general plan, or to have purſued it with effect. Partial alterations might poſſibly have been attempted in the ſeveral Iſlands, without ſyſtem or connection, according to the acci⯑dental temper or prevailing diſcretion of the different aſſemblies. Some would have granted leſs than others. Very little, I believe, would have been yielded by any of them. But, were it otherwiſe in point of diſ⯑poſition, their number and their diſtance from each other would have made it impoſſible for them to deli⯑berate [64] in concert, or finally to concur in a uniform concluſion. The colonies of North American were in contact with each other, and were capable of act⯑ing under one direction, for a general object. The Iſlands have no union of views, no common bond of intereſt, to engage them to agree in a general reſolu⯑tion; much leſs have they a union of power to inforce it. So much the more neceſſary is it, that there ſhould be ſomewhere a ſuperior indifferent tribunal, and a binding power paramount to them all. No authority, adequate to the purpoſe, can exiſt but in Parliament. If one of the provincial legiſlatures preſided with ſo⯑vereignty over the reſt, it might poſſibly be ſufficient to form the plan. The difficulties of the execution would ſtill be inſurmountable. But let their capacity be what it may, the principal diſqualification lies in their rooted averſion to the meaſure, and in their con⯑tempt of the objects of it. Such is the invariable in⯑fluence of arbitrary capricious power, to vitiate the human mind;—to make us hate, when we have in⯑jured; and deſpiſe, when we have degraded. A great deal, it is ſaid, may be expected from the virtue and prudence of the colonial aſſemblies. Let us try the value of that expectation by the teſt of experience. To judge of what they will do, let us ſee what they have done. I place no confidence in profeſ⯑ſions, unſupported by conduct. I have examined their laws with care and attention. I have read them with patience, with wearineſs, and diſguſt. I do aſſure you, Sir, it is not eaſy for an Engliſh mind to conceive that ſuch a code as this could be the reſult of debate and deliberation in a ſenate of any ſort. Their utter ignorance of every rational principle of [65] legiſlation is only to be paralleled by the unfeeling cruelty that dictates and prevails thro' all their reſolu⯑tions. I ſhall not weary the Houſe with details or recitals from this book. My honorable Friend ^* near me has kindly undertaken that taſk, if the Houſe ſhould be diſpoſed to call for it. I believe it will be ſufficient, if I give you a ſample of the principles, on which theſe aſſemblies have proceeded. You may take it ſafely for a ſpecimen of the whole. Firſt of all, let the perſonal injury done to a Negro, be ever ſo atro⯑cious, the aſſemblies have taken ſpecial care to make con⯑viction impoſſible. Suppoſe that all the Negroes on any plantation ſhould jointly and ſeverally atteſt that the overſeer had maimed, defaced, mutilated, or cruelly tor⯑tured a Negro, (the common language of theſe laws) their evidence would avail nothing. The party would be at liberty to purge himſelf on his oath; that is, they have eſtabliſhed impunity by law for crimes, in many caſes worſe than murder. They talk of con⯑viction perpetually, and of penalties to be attached to it. To deface, to maim, or to mutilate, if by any means the fact can be proved, is to be puniſhed with impriſonment, not exceeding three months, and a fine of a hundred pounds currency, to be paid into the trea⯑ſury of the iſland for the public uſes thereof. But in what form, or by what teſtimony conviction is to be ob⯑tained in this or any other inſtance againſt a white man, where there is no white evidence, which muſt generally be the caſe, is no where ſpecified. White overſeers and drivers will not often bear witneſs againſt [66] one another. They have a fellow feeling on this ſubject, or they can eaſily take care not to act in com⯑pany. An act, paſſed in Dominica in the year 1788, for the encouragement, protection, and better government of ſlaves, I am told, is greatly relied on as a proof of the juſtice and humanity which prevail in the Iſlands. This act does certainly admit, that ‘"it is juſt and proper that the ſlaves ſhould be protected in their per⯑ſons from the violence and inhumanity of ſuch white perſons and free perſons of colour, who may have no lawful authority over them."’ The admiſſion is impor⯑tant. Obſerve the date, and then conſider what ſort and what length of antecedent practice is proved by it. But this act is remedial. I wiſh it were poſſible to bring the whole tenor of it into your view. One example will be enough to ſhew you the ſpirit that runs thro' it. The 18th clauſe declares that the inferior crimes of ſlaves cannot always be conveniently brought before the cognizance of the magiſtrates, and therefore enacts, ‘"that every ſlave, who ſhall diſobey orders, or who ſhall be guilty of neglect of duty, or abſence from labour, &c. &c. ſhall be puniſhed at the diſcretion of the owner, renter, manager, or overſeer, by confine⯑ment or flogging on the bare back, provided the number of laſhes does not exceed thirty-nine."’ Trial and conviction are avowedly out of the queſtion. But if the puniſher ſhall inflict any puniſhment not pre⯑ſcribed by this act,—What then? He ſhall be ſubject to a penalty not exceeding twenty pounds current money of the iſland, to be recovered by bill, plaint, or information, in any of his Maieſty's courts of record! Who is to com⯑plain? Who is to inform?—Suppoſe he repeats the thirty-nine laſhes, after a ſhort interval. That caſe [67] is not provided for. Moſt of theſe lawgivers ſeem to think it reaſonable that, if any violent injury be done to the perſon of a Negro, compenſation ſhould be made for it. By an act of St. Vincent's, paſt in 1767, it is provided that, if any white perſon ſhall caſtrate or diſmember any ſlave (familiar caſes) he ſhall, upon con⯑viction, and if the proſecution be commenced in one year after the offence, pay double damages and coſts to the party grieved. By the 47th clauſe, if a ſlave, in purſuit of a runaway, ſhall be only maimed or much hurt, proportionable allow⯑ance ſhall be made by the public. Now who do you underſtand to be the party aggrieved, to whom ſome compenſation and allowance ought to be made?—The maimed or mutilated Negro? No, Sir. In the eye of the law, the owner is the only ſufferer. He ſuffers in his property. He loſes the labour of his ſlave. If He be reimburſed, the juſtice of the iſland is ſatisfied. By a law of the Bahama Iſlands, paſſed in 1784, it is enacted that any perſon, who ſhall apprehend a run⯑away Negro, dead or alive, ſhall be paid twenty pounds. Then comes the trial of the runaway, before two magi⯑ſtrates and three freeholders, who, on conviction ſhall order execution, unleſs it ſhall appear to them that ſuch ſlave has received ſuch cruel uſage from his or her owner, as to have been the cauſe of his or her running away. Ob⯑serve that the reward is given for taking dead as well as alive; that is, for ſhooting a ſlave, who might have been driven to run away by that cruel uſage, which, they ſay, would ſave him from puniſhment if he had been taken alive. Redreſs, compenſation, or protec⯑tion to the Negro is never thought of.

[68]In other iſlands, the proof of innocence, or freedom is always put upon the accuſed Negro. If he cannot prove affirmatively, that he did not commit the fact, or that he is not a ſlave, conviction follows of courſe. The laws of Montſerrat take ſpecial care of provi⯑ſions. A Negro, who ſteals any, to the amount value of twelve pence, ſhall, upon due proof thereof, before the governor and council, ſuffer ſuch death as they ſhall think fit to award! Again; ‘"If fleſh of any ſort ſhall be found in the houſe of a Negro, unleſs he or ſhe can make it plainly appear they come by it honeſtly, ſuch Ne⯑gro ſhall undergo a whipping, and have one of their ears cut off."’

I aſk pardon of the Houſe for dwelling ſo long, on ſuch odious examples of deliberate legiſlative barbarity. It was neceſſary, in order to ſhew you what ſort of legiſlators you are referred to; into what hands you are to delegate your juſtice and your mercy, and how fit they are to be truſted. To eſtabliſh the neceſſity of a direct recourſe to the power of Parliament and the injuſtice of reſorting to any other, one general conſideration of the ſubject remains to be ſtated, and with that I ſhall conclude. The population of the iſlands conſiſts of the many, who are black, and of a few who are white. The few legiſlate for the many, without their conſent or knowledge. The Negroes, I take it, are not repre⯑ſented in the aſſemblies, whoſe authority, however, would not have been diſputed, if it had been exerciſed with any tolerable regard to juſtice, reaſon, or hu⯑manity. The nature of the caſe requires that there ſhould be ſomewhere a compulſory power over both parties. The higheſt attribute of Parliament is to com⯑pel [69] the guilty and to protect the innocent. The ſta⯑tion and the truſt are inſeparable. Renounce your of⯑fice, or perform your duty.

With the aſſiſtance of a near relation, whoſe ſtudies I hope will be ſucceſsful as long as they are directed by generous principles to honourable ends, a bill for the purpoſes, which I have ſubmitted to the Houſe, is in ſome degree of forwardneſs. I am glad I did not fore⯑ſee the uncommon difficulties that belong to it, and the extent of the labour I was about to undertake. I fear it would have deterred me from attempting to do any thing. Suppoſing I were at liberty to proceed as I thought fit, my deſire would be to have leave to bring in the Bill, to read it once, to have it printed, and to let it lie over till the enſuing ſeſſion. Even they, who might wiſh to promote the objects of the bill by other means, would find ſome advantage, I hope, from having the bill before them. They might take the materials, and make a better uſe of them. Though I ſhould not have a ſeat in Parliament, I ſhall be ready to devote my time and my labour to aſſiſt any man, who will un⯑dertake to proſecute the meaſure.

With this act I am content to cloſe my parlia⯑mentary life. I ſet out with a fixed principle, and have adhered to it faithfully, without looking to the right or left for advantages. I am not conſcious of having purſued any intereſt at the expence of any duty. I ſaw my way, and I knew where it would lead me. For profit or preferment I ſhould have taken another courſe. For honour and happineſs I ſhall not think that I have lived in vain, if, at the period of my [70] exiſtence, I ſhould be able to look back, as I do in this place, to a life of unrewarded ſervice, and to end it with an act of benevolence to mankind.

I move you, Sir, that leave be given to bring in a Bill for the better regulation and improvement of the ſitua⯑tion of the Negroes and other ſlaves in the colonies, iſlands, and plantations in America and the Weſt Indies, belonging to his Majeſty, his heirs, and ſucceſſors.