we should not suffer. He believed that our duty
and our interest were inseparable: and he had no difficulty in saying, in
the face of the world, that his own opinion was, that the interests of a
nation would be best preserved by its adherence to the principles of
humanity, justice, and religion.

The Earl of Westmoreland said, that the African Slave-trade might be
contrary to humanity and justice, and yet it might be politic; at least, it
might be inconsistent with humanity, and yet be not inconsistent with
justice: this was the case, when we executed a criminal, or engaged in war.

It was, however, not contrary to justice; for justice in this case must be
measured by the law of nations. But the purchase of slaves was not contrary
to this law. The Slave-trade was a trade with the consent of the
inhabitants of two nations, and procured by no terror, nor by any act of
violence whatever. Slavery had existed from the first ages of the world,
not only in Africa, but throughout the habitable globe; among the Persians,
Greeks, and Romans; and he could compare, with great advantage to his
argument, the wretched condition of the slaves in these ancient states with
that of those in our colonies. Slavery too had been allowed in a nation,
which was under the especial direction of Providence. The Jews were allowed
to hold the heathen in bondage. He admitted, that what the learned prelate
had said relative to the emancipation of the latter in the year of jubilee
was correct; but he denied that his quotation relative to the stealers of
men referred to the Christian religion. It was a mere allusion to that,
which was done contrary to the law of nations, which was the only measure
of justice between states.

With respect to the inhumanity of the trade, he would observe, that if
their lordships, sitting there as legislators, were to set their faces
against every thing which appeared to be inhuman, much of the security on
which their lives and property depended, might be shaken, if not totally
destroyed. The question was, not whether there was not some evil attending
the Slave-trade, but whether by the measure now before them they should
increase or diminish the quantum of human misery in the world. He believed,
for one, considering the internal state of Africa, and the impossibility of
procuring the concurrence of foreign nations in the measure, that they
would not be able to do any good by the adoption of it.

As to the impolicy of th