was displayed. But the unanimous answer, with the reasons for it, may be
conveyed in substance as follows. "It would be most wise, it was said, in
the present Assembly to introduce the question to the notice of the nation,
and this as essentially connected with the bill of rights, but to transfer
the determination of it, in a way the best calculated to ensure success, to
the succeeding legislature. The revolution was of more importance to
Frenchmen, than the abolition of the Slave-trade. To secure this was their
first object, and more particularly, because the other would naturally flow
from it. But the revolution might be injured by the immediate determination
of the question. Many persons in the large towns of Bourdeaux, Marseilles,
Rouen, Nantes, and Havre, who were now friends to it, might be converted
into enemies. It would also be held up by those, who wished to produce a
counter-revolution, (and the ignorant and prejudiced might believe it,)
that the Assembly had made a great sacrifice to England, by thus giving her
an opportunity of enlarging her trade. The English House of Commons had
taken up the subject, but had done nothing. And though they, who were then
present, were convinced of the sincerity of the English minister, who had
introduced it; and that the trade must ultimately fall in England, yet it
would not be easy to persuade many bigoted persons in France of these
truths. It would therefore be most wise in the Assembly only to introduce
the subject as mentioned; but if extraordinary circumstances should arise,
such as a decree, that the deputies of Colour should take their seats in
the Assembly, or that England should have begun this great work, advantage
might be taken of them, and the abolition of the Slave-trade might be
resolved upon in the present session."

The last question I proposed was this. "If the determination of this great
question should be proposed to the next legislature, would it be more
difficult to carry it then than now."