Star.
London, England, 1823-05-16 00:00:00

the House to gn along with him. It was not possible
any man could hesitate to say that he ssi,hed to im-
part to the slave evei y privilege ; but it was
impossible to look on such a system- as had prevailed
so long in' our West Indian Islands, and not to see ihat
in the effort they were touching upon very delicate
grout!. "The knot must be cautiously disentangled
and not ciit with violence, an,! the difference between
me and'the llonom able Gentleman is this—he would
rush, regardless of all impediments, to the accom-,
plishirent of a laudable object, while I would pi o-
ceed hy adapting measuies to the necessity of the case,
and succeed,.i! possible, it last without compromising
the interests ol my own fellow-citizens."—(Heart.—
The Hon. Gentleman commenced his motion by de-
claring that "the state of slavery was contrary to the'
principles of the lit iti ,h Constitution and the Chris-
tian religion." Gorr tot bid that he sheuld assert that
in the abst: act slavery ►s as congenial to the liberal
spirit of the British Constitution; still less should he
• say that it accorded with Christianity ! But he must
.52y that the proposition, in the sense in which it was
• intended to be conveyed, was not pr►ctically true. If
he meant to say that the 13i itish Cons.itution had nor,
in distant po: dons of the empire, tolerated that sys-
tem against which the Hon. Member complained, he
mast say that he asserted that which was not his..tori-
'cAlly true. So, too, of Christianity, the introduction
of which topic he always deprecated in that House—
(Hear). Let religion inspiie the acts of the Govern-
ment, as well as those of individuals; but I own I
never heard religion mentioned as it has been in this
blouse to•ni la, without a strong feeling that a topic
the most sac! rd of all at this side of the grave has been
put forward to serve a particular purpose—(llear).
I think the example has been taken from ill-times, and
Ido no: visit for a recurrence of those times. If it
was meant by the lion. Member, that Christianity and
slavery could n•it co-exist together, all history proved
the falsehood of the statement ; and the very charac-
teristic of Chi istianity itself amply refuted the asser-
tion of the Hon. Member. It was the characteristic
of the Christian religion to accommodate itself to
the countries—to the institutions of the nations through
\did) it made its progress. It gilded the sceptic of
the Monarch, and gave consolation to the sufferings
of the slave; and in adopting its pure spit it to the
gradations of society, gave an attestation that its ob-
ject was more high and holy than the fleeting and
transitory things of life. This was not his language—
l" Non melts hic sermo est !"—He remembered a pas-
sage of considerable eloquence in the writings of Dr.
Paley, which set this question between him arid the
Hon. Gentleman in so clear a light, that he must
trouble the House with the quotation :

" Slavery was a part of the Civil Constitution of most coon- I
tries, when Christianity appeared , yet no passage is to be found in
the Christian Scriptures, by which it is condemned or prohibited.
" This is true ; for Christianity, soliciting admission into all
nations of the world, abstaimed, as behoved it, from intermed-
ding with the civil institutions of any. But does it follow, from
the silence of Scripture concerning them, that all the civil insti-
tutiNis which then prevailed wete right? or that the bad should
ant Ie exchanged for better?
" Be-.ides this, the di-charging of Slaves from all obligation to
*lll their masters, which is the consequence of pronouncing
slavery to be unlawful, would have had no better. effect than to
let loose one half of mankind upon the other.
Slaves would have been tempted to embrace a religion
which asse:ted their right to fret,...).n. 'Masters would hardly
have been] persaaded to consent to claims founded upon such au-
thorit v. The Must calamitous cf all contests, a " Belhon servile"
alight probably have ensued, to the reproach, if not the extinc-
tion of the Christian name. The truth is, the emancipation of
SENT% Si. Ould he gradual, and be carried on by provistnns of law,
and under the protection of Civil Goverument—Christianity
can oily operate as an alterative. By the mild diffusion of its
light and influence, the minds of men arc insensibly prepared to
perceive and correct the enormities which folly, or wickedness,
or accident, have introduced into their public establishments.
" In this way the Greek and Etonian slavery, aud, since these,
the feudal tyranny has declined before it : and we trust, that, as
the knowledge and authority of the same religion advance in the
world, they will banish what remains of this odious institution."
Such was the gradual operation of Christianity. It
went forth with its crook and scrip at a time too when
slavery prevailed in Home-a slavery more galling
and oppressive than any that ever existed under a
civilized people; the power of lie and death over
the slave was not only a matter of constant practice,
but it was familiarized to all by repeated allusions,
even in the poets of that period. Read Jo venal—
Serves host° is the phrase in which in the 6th satire
the fine lady speaks of the slave, whose crucifixion
was necessary to appease her vengeance! But if the
existence of slavery was so repugnant to the British
Constitution, as the resolution would make it, why
had the Honourable Gentleman allowed anything
to interfere with the complete Emancipation of
the Slaves? Why should he consent to leave to
hopeless servitude a large portion of the slaves?—
For his own proposition was to leave to the one-half
the certainty of continual slavery, and only to provide
for the gradual liberation of the other. The fact was,
that it was not entirely repugnant to the Constitution
to have slavery exist in some parts of our dominions,
although its spirit might be in the abstract opposed to
it. It was because the spirit of the British Constitu-
tion and the spirit of Chi istianity were inimical to its
existence, that he should be inclined to leave them to
work out eventual emancipation. He agreed with
much that had fallen from the Honourable Gentle-
man, and he agreed in the necessity and justice of
much which he recommended to be done; but he
could not agree to preface their diet Lions by resolu-
tions so liable to misconstruction. If he were asked
why he objected to the plan proposed? he would say,
that they must, in some degree, consider property as
the creature of law, and as therefore being enti-
tled to the law's protection. But if the Honourable
Gentleman asked him whether he would have the
progeny of the existing race be slaves? audoubtedly
he should say, no. 11; then,. he asked him how he
could reconcile this with preserving the sacredness of
property? his answer was, that in removing a greet
national stigma, in doiug a great national justice, he
would not consent for that national stigma to be re-
moved, for that national justice to be done, at the ex-
pense or loss of any single class or interest, but that
the burthen should be. borne alike by all—(Hear).•--
Ills opinion, made up with that of his colleagues, after
the most earliest and mature deliberation, was, that
in. order to work with more certain and secure effect,
these optrations had better be left in the hands of
the Executive Government. With that view he should
move certain resolutions Lor the adoption of the
House, instead of those proposed by the Hun. Gen-1
tleman ; and they would differ only in this—that he
would lay down the same principles more cautiously,
leaving them to act more gradually, and, as he bet-
bet.cd. more securely. Although he deemed it expe-
dient thus to treat the goestiou upon general basest,