Observations on the three classes already introduced.--Coincidence of
extraordinary circumstances.--Individuals in each of these classes,
who seem to have had an education as it were to qualify them for
promoting the cause of the abolition; Sharp and Ramsay in the first;
Dillwyn in the second; Pemberton and Rush in the third.--These, with
their respective classes, acted on motives of their own, and
independently of each other; and yet, from circumstances neither
foreseen nor known by them, they were in the way of being easily
united in 1787.--William Dillwyn, the great medium of connexion
between them all.
If the reader will refer to his recollection, he will find that I have
given the history of three of the classes of the forerunners and
coadjutors in the great cause of the abolition of the Slave Trade up to
the time proposed. He will of course expect that I should proceed with
the history of the fourth. But, as I foresee that, by making certain
observations upon the classes already introduced in the present, rather
than in any future, place, I shall be able to give him clearer views on
the subject, I shall postpone the history of the remaining class to the
next chapter.
The account which I shall now give, will exhibit a concurrence of
extraordinary and important circumstances. It will show, first, that in
each of the three classes now introduced, there were individuals, in the
year 1787, who had been educated as it were for the purpose of becoming
peculiarly qualified to act together for the promotion of the abolition
of the Slave Trade. It will show, secondly, that these, with their
respective classes, acted upon their own principles, distinctly and
independently of each other. And lastly, that by means of circumstances,
which they themselves had neither foreseen nor contrived, a junction
between them was rendered easily practicable, and that it was beginning
to take place at the period assigned.
The first class of forerunners and coadjutors consisted principally, as
it has appeared, of persons in England of various descriptions. These, I
may observe, had no communication with each other as to any plan for the
abolition of the Slave Trade. There were two individuals, however, among
them who were more conspicuous than the rest, namely, Granville Sharp,
the first labourer, and Mr. Ramsay, the first controversial writer, in
the cause.
That Granville Sharp received an education as if to become qualified to
unite with others, in the year 1787, for this important object, must
have, appeared from the history of his labours, as detailed in several
of the preceding pages. The same may be said of Mr. Ramsay; for it has
already appeared that he lived in the island of St. Christopher, where
he made his observations, and studied the laws, relative to the
treatment of slaves, for nineteen years.
That Granville Sharp acted on grounds distinct from those in any of the
other classes is certain. For he knew nothing at this time either of the
Quakers in England or of those in America, any more than that they
existed by name. Had it not been for the case of Jonathan Strong, he
might never have attached himself to the cause. A similar account may be
given of Mr. Ramsay; for, if it had not been for what he had seen in the
island of St. Christopher, he had never embarked in it. It was from
scenes, which he had witnessed there, that he began to feel on the
subject. These feelings he communicated to others on his return to
England, and these urged him into action.
With respect to the second class, the reader will recollect that it
consisted of the Quakers in England: first, of George Fox; then of the
Quakers as a body; then of individuals belonging to that body, who
formed themselves into a committee, independently of it, for the
promotion of the object in question. This committee, it may he
remembered, consisted of six persons, of whom one was William Dillwyn.
That William Dillwyn became fitted for the station, which he was
afterwards to take, will be seen shortly. He was born in America, and
was a pupil of the venerable Benezet, who took pains very early to
interest his feelings on this great subject. Benezet employed him
occasionally, I mean in a friendly manner, as his amanuensis, to copy
his manuscripts for publication, as well as several of his letters
written in behalf of the cause. This gave his scholar an insight into
the subject; who, living besides in the land where both the Slave Trade
and slavery were established, obtained an additional knowledge of them,
so as to be able to refute many of those objections, to which others,
for want of local observation, could never have replied.
In the year 1772, Anthony Benezet introduced William Dillwyn by letter
to several of the principal people of Carolina, with whom he had himself
corresponded on the sufferings of the poor Africans, and desired him to
have interviews with them on the subject. He charged him also to be very
particular in making observations as to what he should see there. This
journey was of great use to the latter, in fixing him as the friend of
these oppressed people; for he saw so much of their cruel treatment in
the course of it, that he felt an anxiety ever afterwards, amounting to
a duty, to do every thing in his power for their relief.
In the year 1773, William Dillwyn, in conjunction with Richard Smith and
Daniel Wells, two of his own society, wrote a pamphlet in answer to
arguments then prevailing, that the manumission of slaves would be
injurious. This pamphlet--which was entitled, _Brief Considerations on
Slavery, and the Expediency of its Abolition; with some Hints on the
Means whereby it may be gradually effected_,--proved that in lieu of the
usual security required, certain sums paid at the several periods of
manumission would amply secure the public, as well as the owners of the
slaves, from any future burdens. In the same year also, when the
society, joined by several hundreds of others in New Jersey, presented a
petition to the legislature, (as mentioned in the former chapter,) to
obtain an act of assembly for the more equitable manumission of slaves
in that province, William Dillwyn was one of a deputation, which was
heard at the bar of the assembly for that purpose.
In 1774, he came to England, but his attention was still kept alive to
the subject; for he was the person by whom Anthony Benezet sent his
letter to the Countess of Huntingdon, as before related. He was also the
person to whom the same venerable defender of the African race sent his
letter, before spoken of, to be forwarded to the Queen.
That William Dillwyn, and those of his own class in England, acted upon
motives very distinct from those of the former class, may be said with
truth; for they acted upon the constitutional principles of their own
society, as incorporated into its discipline: which principles would
always have incited them to the subversion of slavery, as far as they
themselves were concerned, whether any other person had abolished it or
not. To which it may be added, as a further proof of the originality of
their motives, that the Quakers have had, ever since their institution
as a religious body, but little intercourse with the world.
The third class, to which I now come, consisted, as we have seen, first
of the Quakers in America; and secondly, of an union, of these with
others on the same continent. The principal individuals concerned in
this union were James Pemberton and Dr. Rush. The former of these,
having taken an active part in several of the yearly meetings of his own
society relative to the oppressed Africans, and having been in habits of
intimacy and friendship with John Woolman and Anthony Benezet, with the
result of whose labours he was acquainted, may be supposed to have
become qualified to take a leading station in the promotion of their
cause. Dr. Rush also had shown himself, as has appeared, an able
advocate, and had even sustained a controversy in their favour. That the
two last mentioned acted also on motives of their own, or independently
of those belonging to the other two classes, when they formed their
association in Pennsylvania, will be obvious from these circumstances;
first, that most of those of the first class, who contributed to throw
the greatest light and odium upon the Slave Trade, had not then made
their public appearance in the world. And, with respect to the second
class, the little committee belonging to it had neither been formed nor
thought of.
And as the individuals in each of the three classes, who have now been
mentioned, had an education as it were to qualify them for acting
together in this great cause, and had moved independently of each other;
so it will appear that, by means of circumstances, which they themselves
had neither foreseen nor contrived, a junction between them was rendered
easily practicable, and that it was beginning to take place at the
period assigned.
To show this, I must first remind the reader, that Anthony Benezet, as
soon as he heard of the result of the case of Somerset, opened a
correspondence with Granville Sharp, which was kept up to the
encouragement of both. In the year 1774, when he learned that William
Dillwyn was going to England, he gave him letters to that gentleman.
Thus one of the most conspicuous of the second class was introduced,
accidentally as it were, to one of the most conspicuous of the first. In
the year 1775, William Dillwyn went back to America, but, on his return
to England to settle, he renewed his visits to Granville Sharp. Thus the
connexion was continued. To these observations I may now add, that
Samuel Hoare, of the same class as William Dillwyn, had, in consequence
of the Bishop of Chester's sermon, begun a correspondence in 1784, as
before mentioned, with Mr. Ramsay, who was of the same class as Mr.
Sharp. Thus four individuals of the two first classes were in the way of
an union with one another.
But circumstances equally natural contributed to render an union between
the members of the second and the third classes easily practicable also.
For what was more natural than that William Dillwyn, who was born and
who had resided long in America, should have connexions there? He had
long cultivated a friendship (not then knowing to what it would lead)
with James Pemberton. His intimacy with him was like that of a family
connexion. They corresponded together; they corresponded also as kindred
hearts, relative to the Slave Trade. Thus two members of the second and
third classes had opened an intercourse on the subject and thus was
William Dillwyn the great medium, through whom the members of the two
classes now mentioned, as well as the members of all the three, might be
easily united also, if a fit occasion should offer.