order of the day, which was carried by 209 againft 86.

The earl of Lauderdale made a fimilar motion to that of Mr. Wilberforce, in the houfe of lords, on the 5th of June, and fupported it with much the fame reafonings. Spain, he obferved, was the only ally that was not in the pay of Great Britain. The lofs of Holland rendered an augmentation of the military ftrength of the coalition impracticable. Every power in Europe, even thofe hoftile to France, had virtually, if not formally, acknowledged the French republic. It was indecent in government to arrogate the exclufive privileges of deciding on the propriety of negotiation: in fo weighty a cafe, as the prefent parliament had a right to interfere: he would therefore move, that an addrefs fhould be prefented to the king, requesting him to enter into a negotiation with France for a speedy and honourable peace.

Lord Grenville oppofed this motion, chiefly on the ground that the French would conflrue a negotiation, thus recommended by the voice of parliament, as proceeding from defpair of fuccefs. The hands of minifters would be tied down, and freedom of action would be taken from them in the most effential execution of their office. Such, in the mean time, were the preparations for the enfuing campaign, on the part of the emperor, aided by the powerful fabfidies of Great Britain, that a force would be brought into the field fully competent to meet that of the enemy. A vigorous refiftance to the ambition of France was neceffary for the fecurity of Europe. To fpeak of the empire as difpofed to a pacification, without recoverg the provinces feized by the

French, betrayed a total want of infight into its indifpenfible interefts. The prefumed willingnefs of the French to negotiate was a inanifeft error, as they had even refused to treat for fo ufual a thing in war, as an exchange of prifoners. After a few other obfervations from both fides, lord Lauderdale's motion was negatived by 53 against 8.

The imperial loan was the next fubject that engaged the attention of the houfe: it was brought forward, on the 28th of May, by Mr. Pitt, who obferved, that every fe curity had been provided for payment of both the intereft and principal to the lenders, and moved that the whole fhould be guaranteed. Mr. Fox objected to the agreement made by government with the emperor, as placing our. felves in his power without any certainty that he woul! perform the ftipulations agreed upon. From four to fix millions were to be advanced him, proportionably to the augmentation of the force to be em-ployed againft France, beyond the original ftipulation of two hundred thoufand men. But nothing precile had been decided, and we were totally uninformed of the exact proportion intended. The conduct of the emperor in the military tran factions that had taken place, did, by no means, entitle him to fuch implicit faith from this country. It had been afferted, and not contradicted by minifters, that, in a fituation of the most imminent danger, he had refused the affiftance demanded of him, and evidently needed by the British troops. Notwithftanding this ungenerous and inequitable treatment, we fill con tinued to pay him one hundred thoufand pounds a month, and this

too at a time when he had quite deferted us. Other breaches of good faith, in the court of Vienna, were particularized by Mr. Fox, which ought, he faid, to render us extremely circumspect in our pecuniary negotiations with that minif try. Should it conclude a peace with France, as not a little to be apprehended, what an immenfe fun would have been lavifhed to no effect: he dwelt with great indignation on the uncertainty to which we fubmitted in the emperor's conduct, and demanded, with great firmness, that the committee of the house, now fitting upon that important fubject, would exprefs their fenfe of it in explicit terms. After feveral reafonings, by other members, the minifterial refolutions, in favour of the loan, were carried by 77

to 43.

The fecond and third readings of the bill relating to this loan, were attended with very animated contefts. The two-fold character of the emperor, as head of the empire, and as the fovereign of other dominions, occafioned a variety of difcuffions; fome infifting that he could not well feparate these characters in practice, and others alleging, that neither of them interfered with the other, and, that were he to conclude a peace with France in his imperial capacity, he might ftill continue the war as king of Hungary and Bohemia, and fovereign of other ftates, from which he derived far greater importance and power than from the imperial dignity. A repetition took place, as ufual, of the many other arguments already employed by both fides on this fubject, which terminated, at length, by the paffing of the bill.

In the house of lords, the bill was ftrongly oppofed by the dukes of Norfolk and Grafton, as introduced too abruptly, and without a fufficient explanation on the part of minifters: it was a measure involving the deareft interefts of the nation, and tending to deprive it not only of its property, but of the very right of difpofing of it; which, by the prefent arrangement, was in reality lodged in the hands of minifters.

Their conduct was zealously vindicated by lord Grenville, who feverely cenfured the reafonings drawn from the defection of Pruffia, against confiding in the emperor; as if every fovereign could be fuppofed void of honour and honefty. He denied the difapprobation of the war by the people at large, and afferted, that the public had never been more thoroughly convinced of its propriety.

The bill was ftrenuously opposed by the earl of Lauderdale. He adduced a variety of reasons why it ought never to have been produced to the house in its actual form, which divested us of all fecurity from the emperor, and left it at his option to act independently of every motive that could bind him to do us juftice. His zeal for the com mon caufe was very precarious, and, fince the difafters of the last campaign, he had proved a useless ally. Minifters boasted of what had been done in the Weft Indies, and of what was projected against France: but fifteen hundred thousand pounds, iffued for the relief of the people in our islands, proved how little thefe allertions ought to be credited, and our difappointments on the coaft of France, fhewed how ill-founded

Our

fpoke alfo for and againft it with equal earneftnefs on each fide. The debate finally concluded with the pafling of the bill, by 60 votes in ita favour to 12 against it,

CHAP

1

ed. He ftrongly objected to the idea, that civilization firft flourished on fea coafts: fome perfons, he obferved, had travelled three hundred miles from Sierra Leone, into the interior parts of Africa, and had difcovered civilized people, inhabiting confiderable towns, poffefled of the knowledge of reading and writing, and of many more of the conveniences of life, than were known to the inhabitants on the fea fhore. He took notice of the manifeft difpofition of the newly-imported negroes to rife against the white people, and of the confequent neceffity of maintaining a numerous military force to keep them in awe and fubjection. He urged feveral other arguments against their farther importation into the Weft-India iflands, and concluded by moving a final abolition of the flave-trade.

He was feconded by Mr. W. Smith, and oppofed by Mr. Dent, Mr. Barham, and Mr. Eaft. Were fuch a bill to pafs, thefe gentlemen thought the property of planters would be greatly endangered: they deprecated all difcuffion as extremely dangerous in the prefent crifis : were the negroes once induced to hope for emancipation, difappointment would render them ungovernable, through the irritation it would occafion, and the com patitons they would make between their fituation and that of their Countrymen in the French iflands: Were even the bill to pafs in the commons, it was not probable the lords would acquiefce in it."

They were anfwered by Mr. Whitbread, and Mr. Fox, who pointedly noticed the length of time employed by the houfe of lords in the examination of witneffes on this bject. But even thole who were

averfe to the abolition of the trade, had not ventured to justify it. The calculations of Mr. Wilberforce, refpecting the fufficiency of the actual number of blacks in the islands, for their cultivation and improvement, were undifproved. The more moderate their numbers, the. lets would be the danger from them, and the better their treatment. The French fyftem of difciplining their negroes ought to be an example to us in proportion as we fhewed them confidence, they would become attached and faithful. At all events, it became a British parliament to discontinue the countenance it had fhewn to fo iniquitous and inhuman a trade.

Mr. Dundas alleged, in reply, that the motive of deferring the abolition until the beginning of 1796, was, to afford time to the planters to make suitable arrangements for it: but the war had prevented the recruiting of the prefent numbers, which were not fufficient for their exigencies. He approved of the abolition, but was of opinion it ought to be gradual.

Mr. Pitt declared for an immediate abolition. The numbers of flaves imported into the colonies, had, he faid, been large enough during the three laft years, to anfwer every purpose of the colonists. The negroes themfelves were not defirous of thefe importations, as they found, by experience, that their own labours were not leffened thereby, nor their condition bettered. After a variety of other arguments for and against the abolition, the motion was poftponed for fix months, by a majority of 17.

This decifion was conformable fo the expectations of the public which had, for fome time paft,

began