had now
returned to the committee after an absence of nine years, to take
another journey for this purpose.

This journey I performed with extraordinary success. In the course of it
I had also much satisfaction on another account. I found the old friends
of the cause still faithful to it. It was remarkable, however, that the
youth of the rising generation knew but little about the question. For
the last eight or nine years the committee had not circulated any books;
and the debates in the Commons during that time had not furnished them
with the means of an adequate knowledge concerning it. When, however, I
conversed with these, as I travelled along, I discovered a profound
attention to what I said; an earnest desire to know more of the subject;
and a generous warmth in favour of the injured Africans, which I foresaw
could soon be turned into enthusiasm. Hence I perceived that the cause
furnished us with endless sources of rallying: and that the ardour which
we had seen with so much admiration in former years, could be easily
renewed.

I had scarcely finished my journey, when Mr. Pitt died. This event took
place in January 1806, I shall stop therefore to make a few observations
upon his character, as it related to this cause. This I feel myself
bound in justice to do, because his sincerity towards it has been
generally questioned.

The way, in which Mr. Pitt became acquainted with this question, has
already been explained. A few doubts having been removed, when it was
first started, he professed himself a friend to the abolition. The first
proof, which he gave of his friendship to it is known but to few; but it
is, nevertheless, true, that so early as in 1788, he occasioned a
communication to be made to the French government, in which he
recommended an union of the two countries for the promotion of the great
measure. This proposition seemed to be then new and strange to the Court
of France; and the answer was not favourable.

From this time his efforts were reduced within the boundaries of his own
power. As far, however, as he had scope, he exerted them. If we look at
him in his parliamentary capacity, it must be acknowledged by all, that
he took an active, strenuous, and consistent part, and this year after
year, by which he realized his professions. In my own private
communications with him, which were frequent, he never failed to give
proofs of a similar disposition. I had always free access to him. I had
no pr