vent; but by the progress of civilization, which
removed the evil in a gradual and rational manner.

He then went over the same ground of argument, as when a member of the
Commons in 1792. He said that the inhumanity of the abolition was visible
in this, that not one slave less would be taken from Africa; and that such,
as were taken from it, would suffer more than they did now, in the hands of
foreigners. He maintained also, as before, that the example of St. Domingo
afforded one of the strongest arguments against the abolition of the trade.
And he concluded by objecting to the resolution, inasmuch as it could do no
good; for the substance of it would be to be discussed again in a future
session.

The Bishop of London (Dr. Porteus) began by noticing the concession of the
last speaker, namely, that, if the trade was contrary to humanity and
justice, it ought to be abolished. He expected, he said, that the noble
lord would have proved, that it was not contrary to these great principles,
before he had supported its continuance; but not a word had he said to
show, that the basis of the resolution in these respects was false. It
followed then, he thought, that as the noble lord had not disproved the
premises, he was bound to abide by the conclusion.

The ways, he said, in which the Africans were reduced to slavery in their
own country, were by wars, many of which were excited for the purpose; by
the breaking up of villages; by kidnapping; and by convictions for a
violation of their own laws. Of the latter class many were accused falsely,
and of crimes which did not exist. He then read a number of extracts from
the evidence examined before the privy council, and from the histories of
those, who, having lived in Africa, had thrown light upon this subject,
before the question was agitated. All these, he said, (and similar
instances could be multiplied,) proved the truth of the resolution, that
the African Slave-trade was contrary to the principles of humanity,
justice, and sound policy.

It was moreover, he said, contrary to the principles of the religion we
professed. It was not superfluous to say this, when it had been so
frequently asserted, that it was sanctioned both by the Jewish and the
Christian dispensations. With respect to the Jews he would observe, that
there was no such thing as perpetual slavery among them. Their slaves were
of two kinds, those of their own nation, and those from the country round
about them.