proper tribunal at which Mr. Smith ought to have been tried. That Court was only empowered to try offences committed after and not before the time of its institution *; and the proceedings of that court, being sanctioned by the Governor, could not be the subject of an action. He did not approve of a sentence passed, he presumed, in the spirit of the old Dutch law of the colony, which certainly was not in concordance with the spirit of English law. He thought the previous conduct of the party ought not to have been received in evidence, and he wished it distinctly to be understood, that though he voted against the proposition in its present shape, he did not approve of all that had been done.

The Attorney General did not feel bound to admit that he must take part with the Honourable Gentleman opposite, unless he could affirm, that had he sat on the trial of Mr. Smith be should have arrived at the same conclusion as the members of the court martial had adopted. He could not say, that because he might have differed from them in the conclusion to which they arrived, that they had, therefore, acted wrongly, &c. Looking at this evidence, through the medium of the notes that had been published, he might not, perhaps, pronounce the same opinion on Mr. Smith's case that the court at Demerara had done, &c.

Mr. Canning said, "Whatever difference of opinion the House may entertain as to this question, there is one point in which all must agree, that it is one of the most painful that could possibly engage their attention." And he explains his own feelings when he says-" Indeed I scarcely recollect any question, of which I could say, as I can of this, that there is no single part of it on which I can reflect with satisfaction. I differ from my Honourable Friend upon one point, though I admit that he has gencrally placed the question upon a fair issue. I deny that the House is obliged, on one hand, to defend every act of the Court Martial, or, on the other hand, to conclude that the unfortunate Gentleman who forms the subject of this discussion is entitled to the consideration and character of a martyr. I hope to show that my dissent is perfectly consistent with justice; though I shall not identify my opinions with those for which Mr. Smith was tried, nor with the sentence by which he was condemned. It has been said, that no one can oppose the Resolution who is not prepared to maintain the guilt of Mr. Smith. From that opinion I also dissent, though I fully admit the talent which the Honourable and Learned Gentleman has shown, and concur in thinking that the country is indebted to him for having brought the subject under the consideration of Parliament. Whether the remains of the original Dutch constitution, or whether the nature of courts martial, warranted the punishment which was assigned to the offence, I have not the knowledge to decide; but when I am asked to inculpate the Court Martial in a crime of murder, I must inquire whether they had any precedents to warrant them in the course they took, and I must hear the defence they are capable of making. It is a very different thing to agree to the condemnation of a Court Martial, in the terms of the motion, and to defend the sentence which they thought proper to pronounce. If I were to defend that sentence, I must, as part of the executive government, make myself responsible for its legality; but it is already known to the House, that, on the review of these proceedings, the Government did not hesitate for a moment to annul the sentence. But I cannot, as a Member of Parliament, condemn that tribunal unheard. I shall propose to the House to meet this motion by the previous question, which will neither countenance the colony in their views, nor make this house a party to the censure of honourable men, who, in the discharge of their duty, had rescued the prisoner from a tribunal where he must have been heard with prejudice and judged with severity, and from which it was desirable to save him. Sir, I will not enter into the minutiae of the evidence against Mr. Smith. I lament the mode of the trial; I deeply deplore his fate; but, Sir, in these proceedings I see neither that which should entitle the victim to the honour of a martyr, nor that malus animus in his judges which should call down on them unqualified disapprobation; and in voting for the previous question, I think we shall not be liable to the imputation that we are lukewarm in the cause of the improvement of our fellow-creatures, or that we cease to regard religion as the fittest instrument by which that improvement can be effected."

It were easy to enlarge our extracts from the speeches of those members who wished to get rid of Mr. Brougham's motion, and at the same time to show how completely every argument was confuted; but our limits compel us to draw to a close; and we shall therefore venture, without stopping to assign our reasons, to record the conclusions at which, after an impartial investigation, we have arrived:

1. That the trial of Mr. Smith by a court martial, rather than by a regular civil court, was illegal, and entirely unnecessary.

2. That so far from having promoted discontent and dissatisfaction among the negroes,

* We suppose this means after the proclamation of martial law.

he has, during the whole period of his Ministry, as far as appears from the evidence selected by his very enemies, done every thing in his power to promote entire submission, obedience, and patience, under severe and unjust restrictions.

3. That had the constituted authorities of Demerara acted as either their duty to his Majesty's Government or as common sense and civil policy required, no disturbance. whatever would have taken place in Demerara in August last.

4. That no sufficient proof has been given that Mr. Smith knew of the intended insurrection. That had he reported his conversation with Quamina, on August 17, to the constituted authorities, he would have most unjustifiably endangered the life of a man whom he had every reason to believe innocent, and of whose guilt there does not appear, even at this moment, to be any clear evidence.

5. That even had Mr. Smith been highly imprudent and enthusiastic, which are the strongest terms we have yet heard applied to his conduct, the sentencing him to be hanged was not only exceedingly severe, but grossly unjust and illegal.

The circumstances of this case most unequivocally evince the utter unlawfulness and the gross impolicy of negro slavery, as at present existing in our colonies. All the reports of cruelties, said to be committed in the West Indies, have failed to produce that deep impression on our minds of the miserable effects of the whole system, which has beer produced by this investigation. To Mr. Smith the result is a small matter; he has died few weeks, or perhaps years, sooner than in the course of nature might have been expected; but he has entered into his rest, and doubtless death was to him exceeding gain. But we feel for the living-for the poor oppressed negroes-for the cruel lacerations inflicted upon their bodies-for the deprivation of religious instruction and consolation, which alone can cheer them under their trials-for the overseers and Europeans in the colony, trembling at every leaf, and sleeping, as has been said, on the brink of a volcano. We feel for our countrymen, for British officers and British statesmen. Here we have Governor Murray, and Lieut. Col. Goodall, and Mr. Wray, handed down to posterity under disgraceful charges, which a British House of Commons evade rather than contradict. Here we have his Majesty's Ministers placed in the most embarrassing situation, and one of them induced to proclaim, to his own shame, that Mr. Smith was an enthusiast, and had shown his ill-regulated enthusiasm, by teaching that it was wrong to make the slaves work on a Sunday; forgetting that the keeping holy the Sabbath day is expressly enjoined in the Word of God, and by the laws of the land.

But we forbear: we call upon all, as Christians, earnestly to pray that God would have pity on the enslaved and oppressed; and we call upon them, as Britons who love their country, to strive, by petitions and all other legal means, to promote the emancipation of the slaves, and to express their willingness cheerfully to contribute to any remuneration which the legislature may deem in consequence necessary; to abstain, on this very ground, from joining in that clamour which is raised against the assessed and other innocent taxes, that we may, if possible, be relieved from those, which, by encouraging the West India produce to the exclusion of sugar, &c. raised in the East Indies and elsewhere, by the culture of free men, are supporting a system of cruelty and bloodshed, pregnant with national guilt; which, if not speedily corrected, will produce, before very long, a tremendous explosion in the West Indies, accompanied with a fearful loss of human life, if not the utter destruction of every European resident.

Notices and Acknowledgments.

L. N.-Mary-Q. &c. are received, and intended for insertion.

We

We regret the impossibility of noticing, as we could wish, a Churchman's Letter to Lord Kenyon, on the applications now making in behalf of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States. It contains a most decisive and complete refutation of the calumnies heaped on Bishop Chase, &c. in the last Number of the British Critic. are not often surprised at any thing which appears in that publication; but we must confess our surprise at present, at the wanton attack made on a prelate and a cause sanctioned, after the most deliberate examination, by the Right Rev. the Bishops of London, Durham, St. David's, Chester, Lichfield and Coventry; by the Very Rev. the Deans of Canterbury, Salisbury, and Westminster; by the Lords Kenyon, Gambier, Brownlow, Barham, and Bexley; by the Rev. Dr. Gaskin, H. Hoare, Esq. and others, who have contributed upwards of 3500l. towards the projected seminary.

Theophilus-Annette-Mandana-Pierre M. and Jasper, will most probably not be

inserted.

N.-IIais-R. G.-C. E.-Phavorinus-Anna-O. and Discipulus are under consideration.

THE

CHRISTIAN GUARDIAN,

AND

Church of England Magazine.

AUGUST 1824.

MEMOIRS OF THE REFORMERS.