negroes they would procure, in defpite of all our prohibitions; their neighbours would not be tardv in ferving them; and all our vigilance would not fuffice to prevest a clandeftine trade between our islands and the others in their neighbourhood.

Another argument against the abolition, was the fituation in which the planters might be placed in regard to their creditors, through any fudden and unexpected deprivation of their ufual methods of fettling their mutual accounts: a difficulty that would be obviated by the gradual progrefs of the habits and ufages that would be introduced by the meafures and regulations propofed.

The iffue of this debate was a majority of forty-nine votes in favour of Mr. Dundas's motion. But this tedious affair was not finally fettled in the Houfe of Commons till the twenty-leventh of April; when, on the motion of Sir Edward Knatchbull, a compromife was propofed, and accepted by both parties; in confequence of which the term of the abolition was fixed for the 1ft of January, 1796.

The refolutions propofed by Mr. Dundas were, on the 1ft of May, laid before the Houfe, with fome flight alterations by Mr. Pitt; and being approved of, were carried up to the Houfe of Lords.

But here the friends of the immediate abolition of the slave trade were fewer, in proportion, than among the commons. The oppo. fition to the schemes of those who determined to promote its continuance, was weak, and foon overpowered by the weight of a nume. rous majority. It was obferved, that a prince of the blood fpoke on

this occafion with marked difapprobation of the attempt to set aside the flave trade.

The advocates in its favour, unwilling totally to oppofe its adverfaries, confented to the appointment of a committee for the hearing of evidence at the bar of the Houfe. This was vigorously oppofed by Lord Grenville, the Bifhop of London, Lord Portchefter, Earls Stanhope, and Lord Rawdon, who befriended the abolition, and exerted themfelves ftrenuously for an upstairs committee, knowing it would anfwer much more effectually than the examination of witneffes at the bar. But those who propofed this measure were fo powerfully feconded, that it was adopted against the repeated arguments and remonftrances of their opponents. Those who took the principal part in frustrating the intentions and endeavours of the afore-mentioned noblemen, were the Duke of Clarence, the Lord Chancellor, the Bishop of St. David's, Lord Stormont, and Lord Hawkesbury.

In this manner the most powerful effort ever made, not only in this country, but in all Europe, to abolifh a branch of commerce which, however justified by those who confult barely what they deem of utility to the ftate, has conftantly met with the general difappro ation of mankind, was defeated. Whether the reiterated endeavours of Mr. Wilberforce, and his affociates in this bufinefs, meet ultimately with fuccefs or disapprobation, no doubts can be entertained of the purity of his motives; and the indefatigable pains he has taken in this tedious affair, will always en. title him to praise and respect.

CHAP.

TH

HE diforders and mifdemeanors committed by thofe numerous individuals in the lower claffes, whom want of fufficient employment, or an idle difpofition, lead into habits of diffipation, had long been complained of as incorrigible by the ordinary means in afe for the repreffion of fuch evils. A variety of fchemes had been propofed, and fome adopted, for the more effectual removal of thofe complaints; but none had been found adequately efficient for the purpofes of prevention; and punishment alone, though it might deter the ill inclined, could not redrefs the mifchief already perpetrated. In order, therefore, to ob. viate the caufe of evil, many confultations were held by magiftrates, and other perfons of experience, in the execution of thofe laws that regulate the common tranfactions of fociety, and are framed with the view of maintaining peace and good order among the inferior parts of the community.

The ftricteft regulations were become requifite in a metropolis of fuch immenfe magnitude as London, confifting in fact of three cities, once at a diftance, but now conjoined by an increafe of buildings into one city, and ftill daily increafing. Its prodigious population,

exceeding that of any European capital, if not that of any feat of empire, ancient or modern, requires, no doubt, a degree of infpection and vigilance over the morals and conduct of its inhabitants, far more extenfive and rigid than over any other city now extant. According to authentic accounts, more diforderly people are to be found within its precincts than would furnish a population equal to that of any other city in the kingdom.

Facts of this kind, the reality of which was unquestionable, naturally excited great alarm in those perfons whom either duty or intereft rendered anxious for the welfare and fafety of the inhabitants. They well knew that a multiplicity of rules and ordinances had been enacted at divers periods and different occafions, but had experimentally proved unequal to the ends propofed, for want of fufficient powers being lodged in the magiftracy and its agents, to difcover and fupprefs in a fummary and expeditious manner, whatever had a visible tendency to disturb the public tranquillity.

The ancient and refpectable office of juftice of the peace, in former times, answered most of the purpofes for which it had been in

ftituted:

fituted: the fimplicity of life and manners prevailing among our ancestors, did not afford that complication of misbehaviour and of tranfgreffions, for which fuch a multiplicity of laws have been provided; add to this, that the execution of the moderate number of laws in our more early periods, was committed to perfons of rank, who discharged, with more eafe to themfelves, the functions of their office, than could be done at prefent, amidst the great variety of cafes perpetually arifing from the numberlefs manners of infringing the law. Hence the once venerable office of juftice of the peace became at laft too tedious and burdenfome for people of opulence and diftinction. Their unwillingnefs to accept of fo heavy a charge, obliged the ruling powers to apply to individuals of inferior character; who, in accepting it, had an eye to the profits and emoluments arifing from the exercife of the judicial powers entrusted to them.

From the period when that honourable and weighty office was thus degraded, it loft by degrees the reverence in which it had been held: venal and mercenary individuals were appointed, whofe bafe practices became fo notorious, that they drew general odium and contempt both upon themfelves and their functions. Hence the vilifying appeilation of a trading justice was at laft applied with too much reafon to many of those who exercifed that office.

Such was the general opinion attached to a confiderable proportion of those who were in the commiffion of the peace in the city of London and its vicinity. It was to rectify the abufes imputed to

them, and to place the office itself on a footing of refpectability, that, in the beginning of March, a bill was introduced, with the countenance and approbation of government, into the lower Houfe. The plan of this bill was, to open five different offices in the metropolis, at a convenient distance from each other, for the prompt adminiftration of thofe parts of juftice within the cognizance of juftices of the peace. Three justices were to fit in each of thefe offices, with a falary of 300l. a year to each of them. They were to be prohibited from the taking of fees individually; and the money from the fees, paid into all the offices, was to be collected and applied to the payment of their falaries and official expences. In order, at the fame time, wholly to fupprefs the name and bufinefs of a trading juftice, no fees were henceforward to be taken by any one in the commiffion of the peace within the Lon

don diftrict.

ex

Notwithstanding the apparent fairness of fuch an establishment, the jealousy of freedom was alarmed at fome claufes in the act of its inftitution. Many were the difapprovers of the influence arifing to government from its appointing officers, of which the authority extended over the whole metropolis. No lefs difapprobation was preffed at the power vefted in contables, to apprehend people who did not give a fatisfactory account of themfelves, and empowering the juftices to commit them as vagabonds. This appeared a dangerous novelty in adminiftering the law, which had always of old refrained from fuch an infringement on perfonal liberty: it conferred a fway,

which, in the hands of injudicious and violent men, might be converted to the most arbitrary purpofes: it was pointed chiefly to the poorer forts, who had not, however oppreft, the means of procuring redrefs. Its aim was to hunt after people, merely fufpected to live by knavery and depredation; it was founded on the unjuftifiable principle of punishing men, not for their actual offences, but for those which they might propofe to commit: it was, in fact, a law made by the rich against the poor: it added a double feverity to à ftatute, already too fevere; that against vagrants, which was well known to be occafionally an inftrument of extreme oppreffion. As to the appeal which perfons aggrieved might make to the quarter feffions, it was an infult offered by the powerful to the wretched. Could the ill treatment, could the fufferings thefe had endured, be annulled by a quarter feffions? It was alleged, that the apprehender of a fufpected knave was compelled to make oath, that the party apprehended was juftly fufpected. But was this a juftification for harfh ufage Another aggravation, equally barbarous and unconftitutional, was, that a magiftrate, without the intervention of a jury, might condemn to punishment a man whom a jury would have acquitted.

Refting on thefe premifes, was it equitable to inveft individuals, appointed and paid by the miniftry, and under its immediate influence, with fuch an extenfive authority? Was it not taking fuch a step to arbitrary power over the community, as was evidently incompatible

with the fyftem of government established in this country?

Thofe, on the other hand, who argued for the neceffity of this bill, grounded it on the vifible and longcomplained-of defects of the police in to large and populous a capital; which, from that circumftance, required the most rigid watchfulness over that immenfe number of its inhabitants whofe means of living were fluctuating and uncertain, and who, from their wants, and no lefs from their ill conduct, rofe in the morning from their places of reft without any fixed prospect of provifion for the day. The fevereft police was required to counteract the manifold evils that were hourly threatened to the community, by conniving at the danger in which it food, from the enormous numbers and iniquitous difpofitions of mankind under fuch trying circumftances.

The appointment of justices was the conftitutional right of the crown.

The principal intent of the bill was to place fuch perfons in the commiffion of the peace as might enable government to answer for their conduct, by making them refponfible to its im-, mediate authority: this was the readieft method of fupplying the public with upright magiftrates:they could have no pretext for exacting money, while they were paid regularly for their trouble; and no inducement to act oppreffively, while they ftood in fear of inftant deprivation for any proved mif conduct. The labour attending the office of justice in the metropolis, was in the mean time fo heavy, that perfons of opulence could not be prevailed upon to undertake it.

Was

Was it unreasonable, therefore, to beftow a competent reward on thofe who were employed in fo laborious a bufinefs?

Neither was the power lodged in a conftable, to apprehend people notoriously of ill characters, any way improper. This was a practice of long standing, and fully authorised by the law: it was undoubtedly for the benefit of fociety not only to keep a strict eye on all its members, but to compel them, when justly fufpected, to clear their characters, or to give fecurity for their honeft demeanor. Nor was a conftable authorised to act folely at his own private difcretion: unless proper witneffes depofed against an individual character, no conftable could lay hands upon him; and if, upon due examination, the charges against him appeared to be unfounded, he was inftantly to be fet at liberty; and if either the conftable or the juftice had treated him improperly, he was entitled to recover damages from them. But the particular circumftance which proved the laudable intent of the bill, was the limited space of its duration; it was meant as an experiment, neceffary in the prefent circumftances of the metropolis: if it was found beneficial, it ought.doubtlefs, to remain; if otherwife, parHament would either amend its deficiencies, or annul it. The majority infifting on the propriety of thefe reafonings, the bill was paffed accordingly.

The principal fpeakers on this occafion, in its favour, were Mr. Dundas, Mr Wilberforce, and Mr. Burton, in the lower Houfe: and in the upper, the Lord Chancellor, and Lords Grenville, Kenyon, and Sydney. Its chief oppofers were

Mr. Fox, Mr. Wyndham, and Mr. Sheridan, and the Lords Loughborough and Rawdon.

But the diffatisfaction it gave to the nation at large was remarkable: the influence of miniftry was, in the general opinion, the main object fought for in the framing of this bill. Abufes had been undoubtedly committed by the many juftices who had made their duty a mere trade; and it was the business of parliament to put a stop to their fcandalous practices: but this, it was faid, fhould have been done without ftrengthening the influence of miniftry, by enabling them to add falaries to appointments, placed already too much in their dependence. Whoever filled them would have a double motive for being devoted to his patrons, the office beftowed upon him, and the certain income attending it.

The

The next object that took up the confideration of parliament was, a bill for inclofing feveral parts of that extenfive track of land in Hampshire, known by the name of the New Foreft, in order to promote the growth of timber. reafons alleged for this measure were, that the commiffioners of the revenue arising from crown lands, had recommended a ferious atten tion to the neceflity of promoting a fufficient quantity of timber for the ufe of the navy.

But this idea was not reputed the real motive for the bill by thofe who oppofed it. They condemned it with the moft pointed teves rity, as merely calculated for the private benefit of Mr. Rofe, Secretary to the Treafury. The profits he had derived from the many finecures he had already obtained, and the lucrative places, of which

the