It had been argued, that one or other of these two assertions was false; that either the population of the slaves must be decreasing, (which the abolitionists denied,) or, if it was increasing, the slaves must have been well treated.  That their population was rather increasing than otherwise, and also that their general treatment was by no means so good as it ought to have been, were both points which had been proved by different witnesses.  Neither were they incompatible with each other.  But he would see whether the explanation of this seeming contradiction would not refute the argument of expediency, as advanced by his honourable friend.  Did the slaves decrease in numbers?—­Yes.  Then ill usage must have been the cause of it; but if so, the abolition was immediately necessary to restrain it.  Did they, on the other hand, increase?—­Yes.  But if so, no further importations were wanted:  Was their population (to take a middle course) nearly stationary, and their treatment neither so good nor so bad as it might be?—­Yes.  But if so, this was the proper period for stopping further supplies; for both the population and the treatment would be improved by such a measure.

But he would show again the futility of the argument of his honourable friend.  He himself had admitted, that it was in the power of the colonists to correct the various abuses, by which the Negro population was restrained.  But they could not do this without improving the condition of their slaves; without making them approximate towards the rank of citizens; without giving them some little interest in their labour, which would occasion them to work with the energy of men.  But now the Assembly of Grenada had themselves stated, “that though the Negros were allowed the afternoons of only one day in every week, they would do as much work in that afternoon, when employed for their own benefit, as in the whole day, when employed in their masters’ service.”  Now after this confession, the House might burn all his calculations relative to the Negro population; for, if it had not yet quite reached the desirable state which he had pointed out, this confession had proved, that further supplies were not wanted.  A Negro, if he worked for himself, could do double work.  By an improvement then in the mode of labour, the work in the islands could be doubled.  But if so, what would become of the argument of his honourable friend? for then only half the number of the present labourers were necessary.

He would now try this argument of expediency by other considerations.  The best informed writers on the subject had told us, that the purchase of new Negros was injurious to the planters.  But if this statement was just, would not the abolition be beneficial to them?  That it would, was the opinion of Mr. Long, their own historian.  “If the Slave-trade,” says he, “was prohibited for four or five years, it would enable them, to retrieve their affairs by preventing them from running into debt, either by renting or purchasing Negros.”  To this acknowledgment he would add a fact from the evidence, which was, that a North American province, by such a prohibition alone for a few years, from being deeply plunged in debt, had become independent, rich, and flourishing.