Roll out the ... Statue!

I have great affection for the city of Bristol.  Apart from spending a week there on a study-holiday in 2002, I was sent there on many occasions during my working life, including a memorable Saturday when I returned from an early delivery there, only to be assigned a second job to the city later in the day!

Undoubtedly there will be some to accuse me of 'band-wagon jumping' and, while they could be right, it's time that these locked-down posts diverted from endless stories of my genealogical researches.  Since the whole of one morning this week - and more time besides - have been taken up in reading about this matter, I feel I can claim that to write about it reflects, in part, the activities of my week.

Edward Colston (1636-1721) was MP for Bristol 1710-13 but before this (and probably during that time as well) he had a very profitable career as a merchant.  Consequently, he was able to support many local charities ... provided their aims coincided with his own beliefs and interests as a high churchman and a Tory.  As a result, the city benefited by the creation of a number of hospitals, schools and other facilities.

Unfortunately, much of his wealth arose from his involvement with the Royal African Company, of which he was a member 1680-92 and a director for part of that time.  This company held, until 1698, a monopoly for the provision of African slaves to the tobacco and sugar plantations of America.  It is said that, in order to sell approximately 84,000 slaves, a further 19,000 died on the way across the ocean, their bodies being dumped in the Atlantic.  When he died, Colston left much of his fortune in trusts to be administered by the Society of Merchant Venturers, which was formed as a trade guild in the 13th century for a variety of worthy purposes.

In Victorian times, one of the amusements of the social elite was the formation and running of societies.  Many of these had laudable aims, but it must be admitted that the creation of, and adherence to, rules and rituals was a large part of their attraction.  Four principle philanthropic societies were active in Bristol in the late 19th century and many of their members were also involved with the Society of Merchant Venturers.

The president of one of these societies, James Arrowsmith, proposed the erection of a statue of Colston as a tribute to his impact on the development of the city and an appeal went out to raise the £1,000 required.  Interest in the project was significantly less than expectation; the appeal raised less than a quarter of the target and a subsequent repeated request advanced the fund only a little.  Nevertheless, the statue was commissioned and it was unveiled with great pomp in 1895.  Arrowsmith and other members of the Merchant Venturers eventually provided the balance of funds to pay for it.

21st century attitudes to slavery have called into question memorials such as this statue and other structures and streets across our land that bear the names of those engaged in the slave trade.  Consideration has been given to possible changes to their name or purpose.  As regards the Colston statue, some years ago a newspaper poll returned 42% in favour of its removal; proposals instead were brought forward for the addition of a plaque explaining the balance of Colston's beneficence and the source of his wealth.  Apparently this had been agreed in principle but, owing to objections from the Society of Merchant Venturers, who own the monument, agreement of the exact wording had never been achieved.  One city councillor is reported as saying that the matter had never been brought before the full council for a vote, but I'm not sure whether this referred to the plaque or the removal of the statue entirely.

After the events of last weekend, few can be unaware of the present location of the statue at the bottom of the harbour.  I have to admire the decision of the police in regarding the keeping of the peace more important than the prevention of an act of criminal damage.  As a result of their maintaining a low profile, there were, I believe, no injuries and no arrests.  However, it is important that a precedent is not set, whereby any group with an apparently worthy aim can take the law into their own hands with immunity.  My preference would be that those responsible are arrested, properly charged according to law, and given only modest punishments, taking into account the safe manner in which the offences were carried out and the provocation caused by the inability of the city authorities to act on a decision once taken.

One commentator made a further point, with which I heartily agree.  It is clear that the adversarial nature of our political system - both at local and national level - makes agreement on anything of a controversial nature very difficult.  Had a proportional electoral system been in force here, as it is for local elections in Scotland, a more balanced council, reflective of the mood of the city might have resulted, and the whole matter could have been resolved long before events in the USA led to the present tensions here.

Acknowledgement: Many of the historic details in this post are taken from Wikipedia.