As he had had occasion to advert to the Eastern part of the world, he would
make an observation upon an argument, which had been collected from that
quarter. The condition of the Negros in the West Indies had been lately
compared with that of the Hindoos. But he would observe that the Hindoo,
miserable as his hovel was, had sources of pride and happiness, to which
not only the West Indian slave, but even his master, was a stranger. He was
to be sure a peasant; and his industry was subservient to the
gratifications of an European lord. But he was, in his own belief, vastly
superior to him. He viewed him as one of the lowest cast. He would not on
any consideration eat from the same plate. He would not suffer his son to
marry the daughter of his master, even if she could bring him all the West
Indies as her portion. He would observe too, that the Hindoo-peasant drank
his water from his native well; that, if his meal were scanty, he received
it from the hand of her, who was most dear to him; that, when he laboured,
he laboured for her and his offspring. His daily task being finished, he
reposed with his family. No retrospect of the happiness of former days,
compared with existing misery, disturbed his slumber; nor horrid dreams
occasioned him to wake in agony at the dawn of day. No barbarous sounds of
cracking whips reminded him, that with the form and image of a man his
destiny was that of the beast of the field. Let the advocates for the
bloody traffic state what they had to set off on their side of the question
against the comforts and independence of the man, with whom they compared
the slave.
The amendment was supported by Sir William Yonge, Sir William Pulteney,
Colonel Tarleton, Mr. Gascoyne, C. Brook, and Hiley Addington. On dividing
the House upon it, there appeared for it seventy-seven, but against it only
seventy.
This loss of the question, after it had been carried in the last year by so
great a majority, being quite unexpected, was a matter of severe
disappointment; and might have discouraged the friends of the cause in this
infancy of their renewed efforts, if they had not discovered the reason of
its failure. After due consideration it appeared, that no fewer than nine
members, who had never been absent once in sixteen years when it was
agitated, gave way to engagements on the day of the motion, from a belief
that it was safe. It appeared also, that out of the great number of Irish
members, who supported it
|