But supposing, to make the case more nearly parallel, that the disease was to have continued for many years; that the proposers of the first plan had declared from the very first, that the second plan could not be carried into execution; that time and other circumstances had proved the truth of their prediction as to the past, and that, to say the least, the prospect was not brighter for the future; would not a man thus circumstanced be disposed at least to suspend his opposition, and, if he could not give the plan, which he still feared would be ineffectual, his active support, yet would he not at least cease to obstruct the trial of it, when at the utmost he could only object that he feared that the impracticability would be found to attach to the first plan, which had been proved by experience to belong to the second?
Are we not in public life continually compelled to act on the principle of embracing the measure which we do not, in itself, judge to be near so eligible as another, which, from it’s not appearing to others in the same light as to us, is practically unattainable? And was there ever an instance, if such an one can possibly exist, in which this mode of proceeding was so imperiously enforced on us as in the present, when we consider to what an extent the work of death is every year going on in Africa: for here it may be truly said, Deliberat Roma, perit Saguntum.
Were I not convinced that the objection against which I have been here contending was urged by men of fair and honourable minds, I should not have entered so largely into this discussion. But with that persuasion, I cannot but indulge the hope, that even though their original objection may appear to them to retain all it’s force, they will at least not obstruct the trial of a measure which pleads the authority of such respectable names, and which affords the only practical hope, though they may think it but a faint hope, of putting an end to a system, which every year that it lasts is producing, as they affirm not less than we do, an almost incalculable amount of misery.
Let me also remind these gentlemen, that if we immediate Abolitionists conceive them, the gradual Abolitionists, to be, though unintentionally, the real practical friends and supporters of the Slave Trade, we at least are not the only persons who hold that opinion. The West Indians, who frankly declare they never can consent to the abolition, nay even the Slave Traders themselves, evidently shew that they conceive these gradual Abolitionists to be their real adherents. Against them ought to have been directed the serious opposition of our African and West Indian opponents, while we were mere objects of derision and contempt. We were a set of well-meaning visionaries, who were proposing what, even if carried into effect, would be found utterly impracticable. Whereas they were men of sound practical understanding, who had wisdom to devise effectual measures for executing all which their virtue might suggest. This is not urged with levity, it is seriously and earnestly pressed. Nor is it a statement without instruction. It has often been justly urged, that we may collect much as to the character of any man, or the tendency of any measure, by observing them not only in themselves, but, when that investigation is difficult and doubtful, by observing who are their enemies and who are their friends. Tried by this principle at least, we know what judgment would be passed on the gradual Abolitionists.
Slave Trade injurious to our Marine.
Another argument which, especially in the outset of the discussion, was strongly, and with great confidence, urged against us by our opponents, was, that the African Trade is a nursery for seamen; and that its abolition would therefore be highly injurious to our naval strength. This part of the subject was very early taken up by Mr. Clarkson, a gentleman whose services, throughout the whole conduct of this great cause, deserve the highest commendation. He asserted, as the result of a long and laborious inquiry, that of the sailors employed in the African Trade, between a fifth and a sixth actually died; and that the African ships seldom brought home more than half of their original crews. Nothing was more vehemently repelled, or more obstinately denied, than these positions, till, at length, having long borne with these clamorous contradictions, the muster rolls of the African ships were moved for and laid before Parliament; documents which had been kept in the possession of our opponents, and which cannot therefore be supposed to have been fabricated or coloured to serve our purpose.
From these papers Mr. Clarkson’s calculations were fully justified. It appeared, that of 12,263 persons, the number of the original crews, there had died 2,643, the average length of their voyages being twelve months; whilst, on the contrary, in the West Indian trade, in which the length of the voyage was seven months, of 7,640, the number of the original crews, there had died only 118. But the loss by deaths was not the whole loss to the country; for, besides the broken constitutions of the survivors, which rendered many of them, for the rest of their lives, incapable of the duties of their profession, so many left their ships in consequence of ill usage, that they seldom brought home more than half the persons they had taken out. This last circumstance was attempted to be accounted for, from the natural capriciousness of sailors; and it was said, that they ran away in as great number from the West India as from the Guinea ships. The direct contrary appeared from the muster rolls, and this too, though, from the different ways of paying them in the two trades, their forfeiting little or nothing by quitting the West Indiamen, but much by quitting the Guineamen, the reverse might have been naturally expected. Much more might be said on this subject. Especially, such scenes of cruelty towards those unhappy men might be opened to your view, as would excite at once the concern and indignation of every man, who feels for that class of his fellow-citizens to which this nation owes so much both of her security, her affluence, and her glory.
The evidence taken before the House of Commons contains but too many humiliating instances of this kind; and in consequence we find the most respectable naval commanders acknowledging that the Slave Trade is no nursery of seamen. This truth was even frankly confessed by a Noble Admiral on whose general testimony our opponents set the highest value. But I will quit the present topic, only remarking, that as at the outset of the discussion none of our assertions was more strongly controverted than that concerning the loss of seamen, which can now be no longer denied, we may hence claim some credit on those points which are still in dispute. The incident shows at least that it is not necessary that our opponents should be correct in order to be positive.
Another objection to abolition:—if we should abolish, foreign nations would still carry on the trade.
Again, great stress was laid on the consideration, that were Great Britain to desist from the Slave Trade, other nations would still continue it, and that the trade would not therefore cease to exist. The only difference would be, that the trade which formerly we had ourselves carried on, would henceforth be carried on by others; and how would Africa, how would the cause of humanity, be hereby a gainer? To this argument, many answers were returned. But before I proceed to state them, can I forbear remarking, that there would have been no place for such an argument as this, but for that fashionable though pernicious doctrine of the present day, that we are to regulate our practice by considerations of expediency, that vague, fluctuating, and often vicious instructress, instead of the sound, plain, and immutable dictates of justice. It is self-evident, that by stopping the importation into our own colonies, we destroy a large proportion at least of the evil.