Page:A memoir of Granville Sharp.djvu/54

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.
50
MEMOIR OF

Joshua Reynolds, and two others, who afterwards proved enemies. At this meeting, Mr. Wilberforce was solicited, and engaged to take the lead in Parliament, but soon after falling sick, Mr. Pitt took his place till his recovery. On 22d of May, a committee of twelve was chosen and Granville Sharp was named as one of the committee.[1]

This committee immediately dispersed circulars, giving an account of their organization and object. The Friends as a body responded to the notice, with alacrity—the General Baptists declared their concurrence; and a correspondence was opened with the societies established in New-York and Philadelphia, for the manumission of slaves, and the abolition of slavery. Mr. Clarkson's "Summary View of the Slave Trade, and of the probable consequences of its Abolition," were extensively scattered, and truth, thus placed before them, took more and more hold on the best minds in the nation. The Rev. John Wesley and Dr. Price gave their important aid. Robert Baucher Nicholls, Dean of Middleham, prepared a letter, which was printed by the committee and widely circulated. Dr. Watson, Bishop of Landaff, added his support. Public attention was aroused—meetings began to be numerously called—knowledge was multiplied—petitions poured in, and the Government found itself under a necessity of paying attention to the noble public sentiment which was rapidly forming against the long cherished iniquity of the nation.

In 1788, Lafayette was enrolled, at his own request, amongst the honorary and corresponding members of the society. John Jay and Benjamin Franklin added their honored names.

An ex-jesuit, called Harris, a clerk in a slave-trading house in Liverpool, endeavored to support the iniquitious


  1. It is pleasing here to record, that eleven years previously, (in 1776) Mr. David Hartley member of the Commons for Hull, had brought forward a motion, "That the slave trade is contrary to the laws of God and to the rights of men," and that Sir George Saville, had seconded it. But it is equally painful to record, that the British Parliament at that time, had a heart in this respect, altogether alien to God and its brother.