_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 connection 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 commitee, independently of it, for the promotion of the
object in question. This commitee, it may be 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
before 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
everything 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 burthens. 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 persons 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 commitee 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 connection 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 connections 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 connection. 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.