Jefferson and Wilberforce: Leaders Who Shaped Their Times, Part II

By Ray Blunt

JEFFERSON AND WILBERFORCE, PART II

Back to Page I  |  Page 2  

Also in this series:

> JEFFERSON AND WILBERFORCE, PART I
> JEFFERSON AND WILBERFORCE, PART III

The Saints

Wilberforce, were he alive today, would have been the first to say that the end of slavery in all of Britain was not his accomplishment alone. While this would not be false modesty, he nevertheless was the engine for change whose persistence in what he believed to be right, his good humor and patience under vicious per­sonal and even physical attack, and his creative talent for making a moral cause a popular one, clearly marked the non-partisan coalition in Parliament that was given the nickname, "The Saints."

Many of "The Saints" chose to live in a community called Clapham Common. Later generations would refer to them as the Clapham circle or sect. They were in and out of each other's homes, worshipped in the same Anglican church, and were willing to submit their political careers and egos to the cause they all shared, operating, as one contemporary described, like "a meeting which never adjourned." Begun as a small group in 1792 by Wilberforce and his second cousin, Henry Thornton, it was to continue until Wilberforce's death in 1833. It was this group that not only allied with him, but also helped to encourage him and sustain his commitment in the darkest times. He was clear that the network of support he enjoyed was "indispensable in enabling him to serve effectively in politics." 5

Among the Clapham circle were leaders of British society and, given that Wilberforce's strategy to trans­form thinking was to influence its leaders, this group proved invaluable. They numbered not only political leaders like Sir William Smith, but also the jurist, James Stephen, Master of Chancery; the poet, educa­tor, and playwright Hannah More; clergyman and author Gisbourn Thomas; prominent businessman Charles Grant; colonial governor Zachary Macaulay; Henry Thornton, a wealthy banker; John Venn, the Rector of Clapham parish; Lord Teignmouth, Gover­nor General of India; and the abolitionist thinker Granville Sharp whose campaign to eliminate slavery in England was already well known in a series of tri­als in English courts.

All shared not only a common purpose but also a common Christian belief. What they needed was a leader, a voice that would be taken seriously in the public eye. The choice fell to Wilberforce whose faith and belief in eradicating slavery were by now well known. It was this group that would sustain Wilberforce and each other again and again through prayer and personal relationships as, each year, defeats in Parliament piled up the mound of discouragement.

It was not only the toll of defeats but also the viru­lence of the opposition in the early years that was daunting. The crown opposed them. The greatest hero of Britain, Admiral Lord Nelson, not only opposed their cause but also declared Wilberforce a traitor. And the opposition became so intense that Wilberforce was twice publicly attacked and began to have an armed guard travel with him where he went. But Wilberforce continued without returning the rancor.

After his conversion, Wilberforce would declare to his friend and Prime Minister, Pitt, that now his "party was humanity." Pitt was the political leader who ad­vocated that Wilberforce introduce his first bill on abo­lition in 1787, and was a staunch ally in the fight for the next several years. But when war broke out with France in 1793, the fear of the French revolution spreading to England and the possible rebellion of Brit­ish slaves gave Pitt cause to back away from his com­mitment in the name of the greater cause. Wilberforce, despite tremendous pressure, would not follow his party's lead. Political convenience, even in the name of party unity and national interest would not be put ahead of the greater cause of human freedom.

Another key to the ultimate success of Wilberforce lay not only with his close friends in Clapham and other fellow Christians but also with those who may have opposed him at the outset or who did not share his beliefs. He became known for being able to work with those whose ideology or religious beliefs differed from his own. One of his biographers describes this quality as that of "being a bridge-builder in public life-persuading those with whom he disagreed, and commending his views through civil discourse." 6 He had a view that embraced all of humanity and which held out hope that opponents might find areas in which to work in concert.

His personal respect for others, even those who vig­orously opposed his views on faith or the changes needed in society, was the character quality that al­lowed even his opponents to rise and applaud him when the bill ending the slave trade eventually passed in 1807. This was one central characteristic that saw many over his lifetime won to his side. Had he em­ployed vigorous denunciation and vilification, they would have only hardened their stance; had he plied the subtle use of power to undermine his opponents, he would have alienated potential allies as was seen in some of Jefferson's dealings. While he would not com­promise his beliefs, Wilberforce was very ready to adopt differing tactics when necessary. He would not, however, yield to pragmatism over virtue and give up the steady fight for ending slavery in order to advance his career. He almost certainly gave up a likely oppor­tunity to be Prime Minister and succeed Pitt because of his devotion to his two purposes.

Wilberforce and the Clapham circle also made cause with a wider circle of influential people who would help carry the message to the leaders and the grassroots. One of the best stories is the recruitment of Josiah Wedgwood, the maker of fine china. He de­signed a special Wedgwood pattern with the distinctive pale blue and white colors but with an imprint of a slave in chains on the center with the inscription, "Am I not a man and a brother?" These were considered conversation "launchers" by Wilberforce, objects providing an opening for dialogue after the finished meal uncovered the message of the evening.

There are some lessons here that would be well worth noting. First, Wilberforce did not act alone; al­though he took the lead thrust upon him by his call and by his Clapham colleagues-many whom had been laboring for those in need for years before-they worked together as a virtuous coalition. Other practices worth noting are:

  • They did their homework with excellence, not basing their positions on "right" or on rhetorical passion alone.
  • They built a wider support community around them.
  • They had a clear sense of a purpose to ac­complish.
  • They would not accept setbacks as final de­feats, even in the name of pragmatism.
  • They stayed the course for the long haul.
  • They refused to allow their opponents' viru­lent personal attacks to be answered in kind-they stuck with the issues and did not retaliate.
  • They sought to understand their opponents and to engage in meaningful dialogue.
  • They accepted small gains on the road to the larger prize.
  • They transcended a single-issue climate by addressing many issues within a need for a moral climate in all of society.
  • They had a sense of God's providential lead­ing and a faith that He would guide them if they acted faithfully.

As another of Wilberforce's biographers has concluded, Wilberforce gives an example of how to create the momentum that leads to positive change. His life is proof that a Christian statesman can change the times in which he lives; though he cannot do so alone. 7

The Contrast

It is a tantalizing question to consider: if Jefferson had been surrounded by a Clapham-like group, would he have taken up the cause of slavery while President or even afterward when the union was more secure? In my own estimation, I think not.

First, his nature, unlike Wilberforce's, was not one to try and take cause with those who did not adhere to his own beliefs. Thus, he could undermine his long­time friend and sponsor, Adams, privately vilify his "father" and advocate, Washington, and be comfort­able doing so as long as he was behind the façade of retirement at Monticello. It is also apparent from many biographers that he was a man with huge personal ambition, even though he denied it. He could not sub­ordinate his political ambitions to a greater purpose as much of the Clapham circle and Wilberforce were able to do. Political pragmatism was far more impor­tant in the long run to Jefferson than the lofty vision of the Declaration. And, finally, Jefferson did not have either the personality or possibly the strength of char­acter to persevere against opposition and certainly against widespread personal vilification. He once al­most quit public life entirely after being driven from the governor's house by the British and the cries of "cow­ard" wounded him for life.

Without Wilberforce's sense of a call from God and thus His present help to provide strength for the long battle, Jefferson saw himself as essentially on his own with a few trusted allies. He would not have been able to take the kind of slings and arrows that were the lot of the Clapham group and Wilberforce.

As for those who later became the Claphamites, until Wilberforce took up the lead at God's behest and theirs, their passion could not gain traction in a culture where as Wilberforce observed, "selfishness" was the reigning quality of its leaders. The unique coalescence of the times, the man, and the community along with the preparation of the culture's soil over the years made for an outcome in British society few would have dared to prophesy. Can it ever be replicated? It remains for some to make the attempt. Until then, it stands as a singular lesson.

In Part III we will conclude with a look at the con­tending worldviews evidenced in the lives of Wilberforce and Jefferson and at the legacy of their lives. What did they leave behind them to attest to the enduring quality of their leadership and why?


Footnotes

1 John Kotter, Leading Change and The Heart of Change (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1997 and 2003).

2 Adrienne Koch and William Peden, eds., The Life and Selected Writings of Thomas Jefferson (New York: Random House, 1944),

p. 642.

3 Ibid.

4 Roger Kennedy, Mr. Jefferson's Lost Cause: Land, Farmers, Slavery and the Louisiana Purchase ( New York: Oxford University Press, 2003), p. 30.

5 Kevin Belmonte, Hero for Humanity ( Colorado Springs: NavPress, 2002), p. 139.

6 Ibid.

7 John Pollock as cited in Belmonte, Hero for Humanity, p. 180.

 

Permission is granted to copy for personal and church use.

© 2005 C.S. LEWIS INSTITUTE
8001 Braddock Road, Suite 300
Springfield, VA 22151
703/914-5602
www.cslewisinstitute.org

JEFFERSON AND WILBERFORCE, PART II
Page I  |  Page 2