Lord Grenville opposed the motion on account of
the delay, which would arise from an examination of the witnesses by the
House at large: but he moved that such witnesses should be examined by a
committee of the House. Upon this a debate ensued, and afterwards a
division; when the original motion was carried by sixty-three against
thirty-six.
On the 15th of May, the Lords met again. Evidence was then ordered to be
summoned in behalf of those interested in the continuance of the trade.
At length it was introduced; but on the 5th of June, when only seven
persons had been examined, a motion was made and carried, that the
further examinations should be postponed to the next session.
CHAPTER XXVIII.
[Sidenote: Continuation from July 1792 to July 1793.--Author travels
round the kingdom again.--Motion to renew the resolution of the last
year in the Commons; motion lost.--New motion in the Commons to abolish
the foreign Slave Trade; motion lost.--Proceedings of the Lords.]
The resolution adopted by the Commons, that the trade should cease in
1796, was a matter of great joy to many; and several, in consequence of
it, returned to the use of sugar. The committee, however, for the
abolition did not view it in the same favourable light.
Pages:
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913