evidence, the utter falsehood of the charge, that he had underrated the
merits of others and exalted his own. These proofs were the references
to his volumes themselves, which it really seemed as if the two reverend
authors had never even looked into. He then proved to demonstration that
he had taken the field earlier than William Wilberforce. This was shown,
first, by known dates, matter of history; next, by letters from the
friends of both parties, as Archdeacon Corbet and William Smith; but,
lastly, by the words of William Wilberforce himself, as well privately
as at public meetings, asserting that he (William Wilberforce) came into
the field after his valued friend. But a striking fact may be cited, as
a sample at once of the course pursued by the assailants, and the
completeness of the defence. The reverend authors in proof of their
unqualified assertion, that Thomas Clarkson and the Committee acted from
the first under William Wilberforce's directions, refer to "MS. Minutes
of the Committee" for their authority. But the friend who so ably
superintended the publication of Thomas Clarkson's defence, and who
added to that tract an appendix of singular merit and great interest
(H.C. Robinson), showed that the parts referred to by the reverend
authors, in proof of their assertion, completely disproved it; and that
six months after the Committee had been working, William Wilberforce
applied to them for any information of which they might be possessed on
the subject of the Slave Trade.

But the publication of the letters and the colour given to the
transaction were far worse. The preservation of that correspondence, at
all, by the sons, could only be justified by the belief of its being
accidentally kept by the father, but, of course, never intended to be
made public; least of all without the usual precaution of asking the
writer's leave, and giving him the opportunity of explaining it. The
biographers printed it without any kind of communication with him, and