cked
by wealth and influence from all quarters. Wilberforce wrote indignantly
to Lord Muncaster: "It was truly humiliating to see four of the Royal
Family come down to vote against the poor, helpless, friendless slaves."
A wild speech by Stanhope told against the cause which he meant to
further, and the motion was adjourned to avoid defeat.

Pitt's subsequent conduct in 1805 disappointed Wilberforce. Certainly it
was half-hearted and procrastinating. But, seeing that he had to rely
more on Addington and finally to bring him into the Cabinet, his
difficulties were great. The Irish members also showed signs of
defection; and it was certain that the Bill would fail in the Lords.
Accordingly, Pitt begged Wilberforce to wait for a more propitious time.
A sense of religious duty impelled him to persevere, with the inevitable
result, a crushing defeat (19th February 1805).[678] On a smaller
question, connected with the prohibition of the supply of slaves to
Guiana, then recently conquered from the Dutch, he finally brought Pitt
to acquiesce. But here again the conduct of the Minister was tardy.
Wilberforce urged Pitt to abolish the Guiana Slave Trade by an Order in
Council, and early in May wrote: "One very powerful and important reason
for your abolishing the Guiana Slave Trade by an act of Government, not
by, or in consequence of a vote of Parliament, is that it would tend to
confirm the disposition so strongly manifested by the Dutch to abolish
the Slave Trade, and give them the sort of compensation they demand."
The British Order in Council did not appear until 13th September
1805.[679]

Nevertheless, their friendship remained firm to the end. "Had much talk
with him [Pitt] on political topics, finding him very open and kind."
Such is Wilberforce's account of his last interviews with Pitt; and he
certainly could not have remained on friendly terms with one who was
deliberately untrue to the cause. He knew better than recent critics the
difficulties resulting from the compromise with Addington and from the
ceaseless friction with the followers of Fox and Grenville.

The case of the Slave Trade serves to illustrate the peculiar
difficulties of Pitt's position, which were to appear on even more
important questions. The King, Addington, Grenville, and Pitt had all
contributed to the tangle. Limiting our survey to the conduct of
Addington and Pitt, we must pronounce both of them culpable. Addington
should have seen that Pitt