The Royal African Company and Edward Colston (1680-92) By Roger Ball 10th June 2020 Figure 1: Seal of the Royal African Company showing the motto of the business: Regio floret patricionio cium, commercioque regum [By Royal patronage trade flourishes, by trade the realm] Introduction This research article is an examination of the Royal African Company (RAC) and the role of Edward Colston (b. 1636 d. 1721) within the organisation as both an investor and executive. It is unsurprising that this history has not been previously collated in this form as Colston still retains a popular status amongst sections of Bristol’s population as a philanthropist and ‘city father’, his memory protected by powerful civic organisations. Although the depiction of Colston as a ‘merchant prince’ and ‘moral saint’ particularly through memorialisation in the Victorian period[1] may have lessened, ritual celebrations and commemorations still continue in the city. There have been notable exceptions to this local hegemony, particularly the efforts of Reverend H. J. Wilkins of Westbury-on-Trym in the 1920s whose work in the archives began to expose Colston’s involvement in the trans-Atlantic slave trade. This article extensively uses Wilkins’s chronology of Edward Colston’s life and it is encouraging to see that there has been a revival of interest in this progressive Churchman who had the courage to speak against the prevailing orthodoxy.[2] The reluctance to face up to the dark history of Edward Colston has led some commentators in Bristol to denigrate or even ignore his involvement in the trans-Atlantic slave trade. It is notable that where there has been a focus on this history, Colston is often portrayed as merely an investor, a beneficent share- holder, distant from both the organisations that ran the trade and its horrors. Other major public figures in Bristol have mistakenly implied that the history of his involvement is mere speculation.[3] These rosy perceptions have to be challenged and this piece aims to correct this view on an evidential basis. This article is the second of a series unpicking the myths around Colston. The first documented the huge numbers of enslaved African men, women and children, purchased, branded, transported and killed under the management of the RAC during Colston’s involvement in the company (1680-1692). RAC: Powers, structure and composition In 1680 Edward Colston became a member of the Royal African Company. The RAC was the premier slave trading organisation in the emerging British Empire, having a complete ‘legal’ monopoly over the transportation of human cargo from West Africa in the late seventeenth century. The company had been re-established in 1672 after a previous entity, the Company of Royal Adventurers had ground to a halt due to the effects of war with the Dutch, crippling debts and defaults on payments to subscribers.[4] The RAC was established under a new Royal charter with a considerable range of powers and privileges, as Scott explains: Under the charter of 1672 the usual privileges of incorporation are granted as well as “the whole entire and only trade” from Sallee to the Cape of Good Hope and the adjacent islands.[5] The company had the right of acquiring lands within these limits (provided such lands were not owned by any Christian prince) “to have and to hold for 1,000 years, subject to the payment of two elephants’ teeth,” when any member of the royal family landed in Africa. Powers were also given to the company to make peace and war with any non-Christian nation. Amongst other miscellaneous privileges the right of Mine Royal[6] was conveyed to the company on condition that the Crown might claim two-thirds of the gold won, on paying two-thirds of the expenses, the company retaining the remaining third.[7] The charter also defined the right to buy and sell enslaved Africans, gave locations on the West African coast for their purchase and included projections for where the trade might be expanded. It concludes by claiming an economic justification for this trade in humans: The Slaves they purchas[e]d are sent, for a Supply of Servants, to all His Ma[jes]tie’s American Plantations which cannot subsist without them.[8] Alongside these sweeping powers the RAC was organised into the management structure shown in Figure 2. Figure 2: Organisational structure of RAC after the Royal Charter of 1672 From its founding in 1672, to 1688, the Governor of the RAC was James, Duke of York, latterly James II when he became king of England in 1685. Of all the royal connections with trading monopolies in the period, that between James and the RAC was the closest. James was the largest shareholder in the RAC and also Lord High Admiral, a position through which he could exercise direct punitive power over those who dared to challenge the monopoly of the RAC. In this period, although James did not attend any meetings of the RAC he effectively operated as the Company’s ‘fixer’ and ‘enforcer’ at a national level. He was backed up in the RAC by a cabal of royalist Tory politicians and London aldermen who were shareholders and managers in the company.[9] Edward Colston fitted this particular profile perfectly, coming from prosperous ‘mere merchant’[10] family in Bristol whose head had held high office in the city and who were staunch Tory royalists with connections to the monarchy.[11] After James fled abroad in 1688 as a result of the so-called ‘Glorious Revolution’, the position of Governor of the RAC became effectively an honorary position. This was despite the incumbent William of Orange being elected to the role and becoming a share-holder in the company. Executive power in the RAC actually lay in the positions of the sub-governor, deputy-governor and the twenty-four assistants who were elected annually by the stock-holders. In the original RAC charter of 1672 it was stipulated that: …individuals had one vote for each £100 share, but to be elected Assistant, a shareholder had to hold £400 of shares.[12] This regulation required those who wished to direct the company to show some financial commitment to the company.[13] By 1714 the qualification for an assistant had risen to £2,000 and a minimum of £500 of stock commanded one vote up to a maximum of five votes.[14] Technically, the ruling body of the RAC was the General Court which was made up of all the share- holders and met once a year to elect the assistants. However, in practice, it was the weekly meeting of the full Court of Assistants that actually held power in the company.[15] The quorum at this meeting was seven, of whom either the sub-governor or deputy-governor must be one. The Assistants also sat on various committees that managed specific aspects of the company’s affairs. There were four core bodies dealing with accounts, correspondence, purchase of goods and provision of shipping and preventing private trade.[16] Membership of these committees was capped at three years after which a shareholder had to withdraw for a minimum of a year. An Assistant who was elected to be Deputy Governor or Sub- Governor could serve another two years at each level of the hierarchy.[17] However, these rules could be flouted and some important figures in the RAC moved seamlessly between the Assistant and Governor positions for many years.[18] The word Assistant is somewhat of a misnomer suggesting the role of operative or subordinate; in practice these men were company executives. The entire burden of decision-making in the huge organisation that was the RAC was carried out by the Assistants and their committees that met multiple times a week. This day-to-day commitment to running the company’s business tied its managers to living in London or its environs.[19] The Assistants, twenty-four of the wealthiest investors, effectively ran the company, decided its policies and direction and, of course, resourced, organised and managed its substantial slave trading arm. In March 1680 Edward Colston purchased a £500 share and became member of the RAC.[20] The RAC although a relatively recently formed company was nothing new to Colston or his family. Colston’s father William, a merchant and ship-owner, had major trading contracts with the company selling more than £3,000 of textiles to the RAC in 1674 alone. He was also a significant investor in the 1670s, holding £400 in shares in the RAC. [21] In the same period his brother Thomas supplied goods to the RAC specifically for the purchase of enslaved Africans.[22] William Colston died in 1681 and it may have been his increasing age that spurred Edward to replace his father in the RAC. As we shall see, being a shareholder in the company and particularly holding an elected position was of great financial advantage for ship-owners and particularly mere merchants trading in the Mediterranean and Levant regions. Edward Colston’s familial connections with the RAC, his political affiliations and pedigree in the London trading fraternity set him in good stead for a rapid rise through the company’s hierarchy. It thus comes as no surprise that less than a year after joining the RAC as a share-holder Edward Colston was elected as an Assistant, serving on the Court and on the committees for purchasing goods and providing shipping. He was a regular attendee at the executive decision making bodies of the company over the years 1681-3, before apparently taking his statutory break from direct management during the year 1684.