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 conviction 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.  The former were to be set free on the seventh year; and the rest, of whatever nation, on the fiftieth, or on the year of Jubilee.  With respect to the Christian dispensation, it was a libel to say that it countenanced such a traffic.  It opposed it both in its spirit and in its principle; nay, it opposed it positively, for it classed men-stealers, or slave traders, among the murderers of fathers and mothers, and the most profane criminals upon earth.

The antiquity of slavery in Africa, which the noble lord had glanced at, afforded, he said, no argument for its continuance.  Such a mode of defence would prevent for ever the removal of any evil; it would justify the practice of the Chinese, who exposed their infants in the streets to perish; it would also justify piracy, for that practice existed long before we knew anything of the African Slave Trade.

He then combatted the argument, that we did a kindness to the Africans by taking them from their homes; and concluded, by stating to their lordships, that, if they refused to sanction the resolution, they would establish these principles, “that though individuals might not rob and murder, yet that nations might—­that though individuals incurred the penalties of death by such practices, yet that bodies of men might commit them with impunity for the purposes of lucre;—­and that for such purposes they were not only to be permitted, but encouraged.”

The Lord Chancellor (Erskine) confessed that he was not satisfied with his own conduct on this subject.  He acknowledged, with deep contrition, that, during the time he was a member of the other House, he had not once attended when this great question was discussed.