Such was the vast distance between the parties.

He would now address himself to each.
He would say first, that he agreed with his honourable friend Mr.
Wilberforce in very material points.

He believed the trade was not founded in policy; that the continuation of it was not essential to the preservation of our trade with the West Indian islands; and that the slaves were not only to be maintained, but increased there, by natural population.
He agreed, too, as to the propriety of the abolition.

But when his honourable friend talked of direct and abrupt abolition, he would submit it to him, whether he did not run counter to the prejudices of those who were most deeply interested in the question; and whether, if he could obtain his object without wounding these, it would not be better to do it?
Did he not also forget the sacred attention, which Parliament had ever shown to the private interests and patrimonial rights of individuals?
Whatever idea men might then have of the African trade, certain it was that they, who had connected themselves with it, had done it under the sanction of Parliament.

It might also be well worth while to consider (though the conduct of other nations ought not to deter us from doing our duty) whether British subjects in the West Indies might not be supplied with slaves under neutral flags.