Lord Grenville opened the debate by a very luminous speech.  He was supported by the Duke of Glocester, 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 Westmoreland and St. Vincent, and the Lords Sidmouth, Eldon, and Hawkesbury.

The question being called for at four o’clock in the morning, it appeared that the personal votes and proxies in favour of Lord Grenville’s motion amounted to one hundred, and those against it to thirty-six.  Thus passed the first bill in England, which decreed, that the African Slave-trade should cease.  And here I cannot omit paying to his Highness the Duke of Glocester the tribute of respect, which is due to him, for having opposed the example of his royal relations on this subject in behalf of an helpless and oppressed people.  The sentiments too, which he delivered on this occasion, ought not to be forgotten.  “This trade,” said he, “is contrary to the principles of the British constitution.  It is, besides, a cruel and criminal traffic in the blood of my fellow-creatures.  It is a foul stain on the national character.  It is an offence to the Almighty.  On every ground therefore on which a decision can be made; on the ground of policy, of liberty, of humanity, of justice, but, above all, on the ground of religion, I shall vote for its immediate extinction.”

On the tenth of February the bill was carried to the House of Commons.  On the twentieth, counsel were heard against it; after which, by agreement, the second reading of it took place.  On the twenty-third the question being put for the commitment of it, Lord Viscount Howick (now Earl Grey) began an eloquent speech.  After he had proceeded in it some way, he begged leave to enter his protest against certain principles of relative justice, which had been laid down.  “The merchants and planters,” said he, “have an undoubted right, in common with other subjects of the realm, to demand justice at our hands.  But that, which they denominate justice, does not correspond with the legitimate character of that virtue; for they call upon us to violate the rights of others, and to transgress our own moral duties.  That, which they distinguish as justice, involves in itself the greatest injury to others.  It is not in fact justice, which they demand, but—­favour—­and favour to themselves at the expense of the most grievous oppression of their fellow-creatures.”

He then argued the question upon the ground of policy.  He showed by a number of official documents, how little this trade had contributed to the wealth of the nation, being but a fifty-fourth part of its export trade; and he contended that as four-sevenths of it had been cut off by His Majesty’s proclamation, and the passing of the foreign Slave-bill in a former year, no detriment of any consequence would arise from the present measure.

He entered into an account of the loss of seamen, and of the causes of the mortality, in this trade.