It had been urged that we should suffer by the abolition of the Slave Trade; he believed that 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 not be 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 would 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 everything 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 quantity 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 the trade, the policy of it, on the other hand, was so great, that he trembled at the consequences of its abolition.  The property connected with this question amounted to a hundred millions.  The annual produce of the islands was eighteen millions, and it yielded a revenue of four millions annually.  How was this immense property and income to be preserved?  Some had said it would be preserved, because the black population in the islands could be kept up without further supplies; but the planters denied this assertion, and they were the best judges of the subject.