one from certain merchants in London; Alderman Watson another from certain
merchants, mortgagees, and creditors of the sugar-islands; Lord Maitland
another from the planters of Antigua; Mr. Blackburne another from certain
manufacturers of Manchester; Mr. Gascoyne another from the corporation of
Liverpool; and Lord Penrhyn others from different interested bodies in the
same town.

Mr. Wilberforce then moved the order of the day, for the house to go into a
committee of the whole house on the report of the privy council, and the
several matters of evidence already upon the table relative to the
Slave-trade.

Mr. Alderman Sawbridge immediately arose, and asked Mr. Wilberforce, if he
meant to adduce any other evidence, besides that in the privy council
report, in behalf of his propositions, or to admit other witnesses, if such
could be found, to invalidate them. Mr. Wilberforce replied, that he was
quite satisfied with the report on the table. It would establish all his
propositions. He should call no witnesses himself: as to permission to
others to call them, that must be determined by the house.

This question and this answer gave birth immediately to great disputes upon
the subject. Aldermen Sawbridge, Newnham, and Watson; Lords Penrhyn and
Maitland; Mr. Gascoyne, Marsham, and others spoke against the admission of
the evidence, which had been laid upon the table. They contended, that it
was insufficient, defective, and contradictory; that it was _ex parte_
evidence; that it had been manufactured by ministers; that it was founded
chiefly on hearsay, and that the greatest part of it was false; that it had
undergone no cross-examination; that it was unconstitutional; and that, if
they admitted it, they would establish a dangerous precedent, and abandon
their rights. It was urged on the other hand by Mr. Courtenay, that it