things,” said he, on his death-bed, “I wish earnestly to see accomplished,—­peace with Europe—­and the abolition of the Slave Trade.”  But knowing well, that we could much better protect ourselves against our own external enemies, than this helpless people against their oppressors, he added, “but of the two I wish the latter.”  These sentiments he occasionally repeated, so that the subject was frequently in his thoughts in his last illness.  Nay, “the very hope of the abolition (to use the expression of Lord Howick in the House of Commons) quivered on his lips in the last hour of it.”  Nor is it improbable, if earthly scenes ever rise to view at that awful crisis, and are perceptible, that it might have occupied his mind in the last moment of his existence.  Then indeed would joy ineffable, from a conviction of having prepared the way for rescuing millions of human beings from misery, have attended the spirit on its departure from the body; and then also would this spirit, most of all purified when in the contemplation of peace, good-will, and charity upon earth, be in the fittest state, on gliding from its earthly cavern, to commix with the endless ocean of benevolence and love.

At length the session of 1807 commenced.  It was judged advisable by Lord Grenville, that the expected motion on this subject should, contrary to the practice hitherto adopted, be agitated first in the Lords.  Accordingly, on the 2nd of January he presented a bill, called an act for the abolition of the Slave Trade; but he then proposed only to print it, and to let it lie on the table, that it might be maturely considered, before it should be discussed.

On the 4th, no less than four counsel were heard against the bill.

On the 5th the debate commenced.  But of this I shall give no detailed account; nor, indeed, of any of those which followed it.  The truth is, that the subject has been exhausted.  They, who spoke in favour of the abolition, said very little that was new concerning it.  They, who spoke against it, brought forward, as usual, nothing but negative assertions and fanciful conjectures.  To give therefore what was said by both parties at these times, would be but useless repetition[A].  To give, on the other hand, that which was said on one side only would appear partial.  Hence I shall offer to the reader little more than a narrative of facts upon these occasions.

[Footnote A:  The different debates in both Houses on this occasion would occupy the half of another volume.  This is another circumstance, which reconciles me to the omission.  But that, which reconciles me the most is, that they will be soon published.  In these debates justice has been done to every individual concerned in them.]

Lord Grenville opened the debate by a very luminous speech.  He was supported by the Duke of Gloucester, the Bishop of Durham (Dr. Barrington), the Earls Moira, Selkirk, and Roslyn, and the Lords Holland, King, and Hood.  The opponents of the bill were the Duke of Clarence, the Earls of Westmoreland and St. Vincent, and the Lords Sidmouth, Eldon, and Hawkesbury.