Slavery and British Society 1776-1846 , and: The Scots Abolitionists, 1833-1861 (review)

Abstract

BOOK REVIEWS183 always fated and compulsory," according to Chalfant. And if this were not amazing enough, Chalfant implies that Adams's reports to the New York Times from London during the Trent affair made a considerable contribution to the peaceful resolution of the crisis. While Chalfant admits that the "precise degree" of Adams's influence in the Trent affair is uncertain, the book jacket foregoes such modesty, proclaiming that Adams "predecided" the outcome: thus, "as much as anyone," he was responsible for the North's ultimate triumph in 1865. Most historians will find these assertions overstated, even absurd. Neither Norman B. Ferris nor Gordon H. Warren mention Adams as a key figure in their studies of the Trent affair. At best, Adams was only one of many advocates of a peaceful solution. Most disturbing, however , is Chalfant's inability to deal with Henry Adams as a human being. William Dusinberre and David Contosta have convincingly argued that Adams was confused and unsure of himself as a young man, afraid of failing to live up to the high expectations inherent in being an Adams. Often Adams's puffery and conceit exposed his self-doubt even as he sought to conceal it. Instead of exploring Adams's struggle to create an identity which reconciled his personal ambitions with the family heritage , Chalfant claims thatAdams knew who hewas from the start. In the spirit of Parson Weems, Chalfant erects a mythical image of his subject, offering the result as a model which "deserves imitation" by today's youth. Henry Adams oncelikened biography to murder. Nowweknowwhat he meant. Brooks D. Simpson University of Wisconsin-Madison Shvery and British Society 1776-1846. Edited by James Walvin. (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1982. Pp. 272. $24.95.) The Scots Abolitionists, 1833-1861. By Duncan Rice. (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1981. Pp. xii, 221. $27.50.) The historiography of British abolitionism has been undergoing serious reappraisal since the early 1970s. James Walvin's collection of essays is the most recent and possibly the most significant reappraisal to date. Interest in abolitionism has in the past been dominated by two strains of thought: (1) the humanitarian, which argued that abolitionism was mainly the work of a small coterie of evangelicals dominated by the "Clapham Sect," and (2) the counter argument raised by Eric Williams in his seminal work Capitalism and Shvery, which insisted that abolitionism was largely the result of contending economic forces—on the one hand a backward looking mercantilism, and on the other a more innovative capitalism. Williams's work has since come in forits fair share of criticism, much of which has been wide of the mark, but some of 184civil war history which while not fully subscribing to his conclusions have managed to incorporatemany ofthe issues heraised. Thethrust ofthese essays aims at a synthesis of these contending views. As Walvin puts it, they aim "to locate and explain abolition in terms of shifts in a much more allembracing ideology or world-view which would encompass both of these once competing factors" (p. 14). There is, however, a more important thread running through most of the essays, namely, working-class contributions to British aboUtionism. In the past abolitionism has been viewed as the province of organized societies led by conscientious middle-class radicals. That position is now coming under careful scrutiny, and this book adds considerably to our appreciation of the extent of working-class support for West Indian emancipation. Drescher's study of antislavery petitions demonstrates the extent and importance of popular support for final emancipation. What is startling is that the popular success of the abohtionist campaign effectively silenced potential opposition to the point where it was unable to mount a counteroffensive. On most other issues involving civil, political, reUgious, or economic reform between 1780 and 1838, Drescher observes, "it was possible for the opponents of change to mobilize respectable, and sometimes superior, numbers of counterpetitions or signatures" (p. 29). In fact antislavery reached its peak in the 1830s with over 4,000 petitions to Parliament. No one anxious to be elected to Parliament in 1832 could have afforded to take a position on the wrong side of abolition. The...