The diaries contain an extraordinary cast of characters – over 5000 in total. While many represent the upper echelons of British society, others (like Prince Saunders) were outsiders. The entries below indicate what the diaries tell us about a few significant figures.
George Gough-Calthorpe, 3rd Baron Calthorpe (1787-1851)
Lord Calthorpe, Barbara Wilberforce’s cousin, is an example of a less well-known figure who was prominent in Wilberforce’s world. Through his relationship to Wilberforce’s wife, he is also demonstrative of how inter-connected Wilberforce’s social circle became over time – a cousin-in-law who became a friend who became a patron who eventually became godfather to Wilberforce’s first grandchild.
George Gough-Calthorpe, 3rd baron Calthorpe, was Barbara Wilberforce’s cousin, and inherited his title in June 1807, aged 20, on the death of his older brother, Charles. Not a widely known figure, he is described by John Pollock as ‘a Wilberforce disciple’ (Pollock, Wilberforce, p. 293), was an evangelical Anglican and, from 1807, was an active participant in the House of Lords, advocating a variety of issues that largely correlated with Wilberforce’s own priorities. He worked to develop the family’s estate at Edgbaston, near Birmingham, considerably increasing his income in the process (per the ODNB article on the Calthorpe family). Through this land ownership and consequent patronage, Lord Calthorpe controlled the election of the 2 MPs for Bramber and Hindon, two ‘rotten boroughs’ – in 1812, when Wilberforce retired as MP for Yorkshire, he accepted the offer of one of the Bramber seats, which he held until his eventual retirement in 1824.
Wilberforce first met Calthorpe’s father, Henry, 1st baron Calthorpe (Barbara Wilberforce’s uncle), in June 1797, through his wife. Both George and his older brother Charles were still children at this point (aged 10-12), and are not mentioned. When Henry died in 1798, Wilberforce recorded that Barbara was shocked to hear of her uncle’s death; other than a mention of ‘Lord Calthorpe’s tutor’ (Charles’ tutor) in 1801 (20 July 1801), the family does not feature in the diaries again until George inherited the title.
From 1808 onwards, Wilberforce mentioned seeing Calthorpe very frequently in the diaries (this frequency was probably established in 1807, when he inherited the title and likely started spending an increasing amount of time in London). Lord Calthorpe often stayed with the Wilberforces at Kensington Gore, Marden Park, Brompton Grove and Highwood Hill for several days at a time, both before and after Wilberforce became MP for Bramber. Similarly, the Wilberforces would visit Ampton Hall, Calthorpe’s house in Suffolk. In total, the surname ‘Calthorpe’ is mentioned 740 times after 1808, although some of these mentions are of Lord Calthorpe’s mother and siblings, or multiple mentions on the same day.
Also in 1808, as a general election loomed, Calthorpe promised Wilberforce a seat as MP for Bramber if he was not elected in Yorkshire again (Stott, Wilberforce: Family and Friends, p. 167). Bramber reappeared in the diaries in February 1811, when Wilberforce noted that Calthorpe was thinking about ‘bring[ing] in Charles Grant Jr for Bramber’ (20 February 1811). Six months later, when Wilberforce began considering retirement, Calthorpe was one of the friends he consulted, and, in August 1811, Calthorpe repeated his promise/offer from 1808. The diary suggests that Wilberforce was unsure about accepting the seat. In September 1811, he wrote ‘Lord Calthorpe & I came to an Explanation – He assured me that He had always declared that His Livings & Boroughs should never be considered by him as being to be filled for promoting his own family or Connections – Yet I shall not like to remain long in Parliament for his Borough, under Idea of being charged however falsely by Lady C & his family with usurping what his Brother [Frederick] ought to enjoy’ (11 September 1811).
It is through a letter to Calthorpe that we know about the ‘steel girdle cased in leather’ that Wilberforce relied upon, because he had left one of them at Ampton Hall, Calthorpe’s home (Pollock, p. 294; Stott, p. 206). Wilbeforce’s sons visited Ampton Hall without their father on several occasions when they reached adulthood, continuing the close relationship between the families. Both William Wilberforce jr. and Robert Wilberforce met people through Lord Calthorpe – Wilberforce expressed concern that Robert’s experience staying with the Calthorpes would lead him to ‘over value the Worldly dignity of Politicians & Lawyers &c in Comparison with the true dignity of the Ministerial Office’ (12 October 1821) (Robert was a year into his time at Oriel, Oxford when the visit took place; William met someone with whom to potentially study Law. Later, Calthorpe was godfather to William Wilberforce jr’s son, William. ANNA HARRINGTON
Thomas Clarkson
When The Life of William Wilberforce was published in 1838 by his sons Robert and Samuel, it sparked a public controversy with the veteran abolitionist, Thomas Clarkson. The Wilberforce sons were keen to counter the impression given by Clarkson’s History of the Abolition (1808) that he had orchestrated the movement in the mid-1780s and helped to recruit their father as its parliamentary spokesman. The Life, by contrast, insisted that Wilberforce had embraced abolitionism quite independently of Clarkson who was very much the subordinate figure. Clarkson responded in Strictures on a Life of William Wilberforce (1838), and eventually the sons removed offending passages from an abridgement of their biography, and offered a qualified apology.
If we compare the manuscript diaries to the extracts reprinted in the official Life, we find significant omissions. There are almost one hundred references to Clarkson in the diaries, mainly clustered in the period between 1789 and 1791 and in the 1810s and early 1820s, when the two men collaborated closely. Although Clarkson is often numbered among ‘the Clapham Sect’, the diaries suggest an effective working relationship rather than an intimate friendship. Clarkson was never as close to Wilberforce – socially, religiously, or politically – as Henry Thornton or Isaac Milner or Thomas Gisborne. Yet the sons omitted their father’s praise for Clarkson and included none of the c.50 references to Clarkson in the diaries after 1790. Their extracts concerning Clarkson came from 1789-90, but even here there are significant omissions: ‘How diligent Clarkson is: how they all shame me’; ‘how ought the diligence of Ramsay & Clarkson & Burgh to shame me’; ‘J[ohn] Clarkson came to dinner – he slept on the Sofa – He shames me by his diligence & simplicity’. In 1790, when Wilberforce tells us that he ‘Look’d over Clarkson’s Witnesses’, the sons omit Clarkson’s name, obscuring his critical role in gathering witnesses against the slave trade. The diaries give a more honest account of Wilberforce’s relationship with Clarkson, noting tensions over Sierra Leone in the 1810s, as well as collaboration over European diplomacy and the King of Haiti, Henri Christophe. JOHN COFFEY
Maria Edgeworth
Maria Edgeworth (1768-1849) was a writer, who published approx. twenty-five novels and works on education over a period of twenty-five years (1798-1823), with a further two novels published in 1834 and 1848. Wilberforce records reading Edgeworth’s books on several occasions. In July 1809 the family read her Fashionable Tales, and in September and October 1810 he read (or heard) Professional Education. In November 1812, when reading Vivian, he ‘Got so interested by that exce[p]t pri[vate] dev[otions] & fam[il]y prayers read it on till I finishd it’
The two met at Carrington’s house (poss. Robert Smith, first Baron Carrington) in late October 1821, at the host’s behest. He described her as ‘manifestly very clever & unaffected & well bred quite a Woman of the World’ as well as complimenting her sisters. Wilberforce lamented after the fact that he did not pursue more religious conversation with her, having travelled to meet her ‘unwillingly & felt all the time as if acting a part’. He had previously met her in March 1819, but did not pass comment on those occasions. ANNA HARRINGTON.
William Pitt (the Younger)
Wilberforce and William Pitt were close friends from the beginning of their parliamentary careers in 1780, having been acquainted with each other at Cambridge, albeit at different colleges. Pitt and his cousin, Edward James Eliot, accompanied Wilberforce on his first trip to France in 1783-84, shortly before Pitt took office as First Lord of the Treasury and thus de facto prime minister. The prominent position Pitt took in British politics, as prime minister 1784-1800 and 1804-1806, means that their relationship has long been of interest. Robert and Samuel Wilberforce included many extracts demonstrative of the friendship between the two men, including an incident in 1783 when Wilberforce almost shot Pitt, due to his poor eyesight, as well their political careers and the famed rift about war with France in the 1790s, in the five-volume Life (1838).
Anna Maria Wilberforce, the wife of Samuel Wilberforce son Reginald (William Wilberforce’s grandson), published a ‘Sketch of Pitt by W. Wilberforce’ in The Private Papers of William Wilberforce (1897), in which Wilberforce referenced their political differences before describing Pitt’s life. The ‘Sketch’ switches between personal anecdotes and recounting Pitt’s political career. Wilberforce’s writing is broadly hagiographic, but it also indicated where the two men’s ideologies were divided on matters of religion, and the resulting differences regarding war with France.
The Life contains details about Pitt’s (limited) support for the abolition of the slave trade, which Wilberforce’s ‘Sketch’ does not mention, but overall the two published accounts of Pitt and Wilberforce’s relationship are similar, highlighting their friendship and the political sphere. Pitt’s death in January 1806 is in one of the missing sections of the manuscript diaries, but his sons included the entry in which Wilberforce first mentioned it, writing that he was ‘deeply rather than pathetically affected by it. Pitt killed by the enemy as much as Nelson’, as well as a few letters Wilberforce wrote about his friend’s death.
Wilberforce continued to think about Pitt after his death in January 1806. In both correspondence and his diary, Wilberforce compared other politicians to Pitt (and to Charles James Fox, his parliamentary opposite), often unfavourably. There were annual dinners on Pitt’s birthday in the years after his death which Wilberforce attended for a while, although in 1823 he mentioned that he no longer went because the event had become ‘a mere party affair’. In January 1811, he defended Pitt in the House of Commons when Sir Samuel Romilly said, in a debate about the Regency, that Pitt had been motivated by a desire to retain power rather than to improve the lives of the British population, which Wilberforce commented on in his diary and was later included in the Life (vol. 3, pp. 490-491). He dictated a ‘Character of Mr Pitt’ to Mary Elliot in April 1820, which possibly became the ‘Sketch’ published in 1897. In September 1824, he considered writing ‘my own Life & Pitts too coming into the discussion’, and he later discussed Pitt with his son Samuel, who used notes from their conversations when writing the 1838 Life. ANNA HARRINGTON.
Prince Saunders (Black Abolitionist)
We catch fleeting glimpses of black activists in the Wilberforce diaries. There is no record of Wilberforce meeting Olaudah Equiano, though Equiano did witness one of Wilberforce’s abolitionist speeches from the gallery of the Commons in 1792. But the diaries do contain passing references to figures like Paul Cuffee, the black Quaker advocate of African colonisation, and the Jamaican Louis Celeste Lecesne, who visited the abolitionist in 1830. There was one black abolitionist with whom Wilberforce did have extensive engagement: the African American, Prince Saunders (1775-1839). Saunders was a free black from New England who had been raised in the home of a white lawyer and educated at a school attached to Dartmouth College, before becoming a schoolteacher and secretary of the African Masonic Lodge in Boston. In 1815, he visited England to raise support for the Prince Hall Masons and to forge links with British abolitionists.
It was here that he first met Wilberforce, apparently on the 5 June, when the diary records him as one of the ‘breakfasters’ along with Arthur Young, the agriculturalist. Wilberforce and Saunders met on four further occasions in late June and early July with Saunders being invited to breakfast and dine. In one entry, Wilberforce styles him a ‘Black Man’, in another ‘Revd. P Sanders’. They meet ‘about St Domingo’. By this point, Wilberforce and Clarkson were in contact with Henri Christophe, king of Haiti’s northern kingdom, who was seeking British assistance with developing the country’s education and agriculture. Saunders was recruited to sail to the island and establish a new educational system. On 9 November, Wilberforce records going to James Stephen’s on Chancery Lane to meet Saunders before he departed for St Domingo.
Saunders returned to England in March 1816, having won Christophe’s confidence and even vaccinated his family. He forwarded a letter from Christophe to Wilberforce in which the king gave ‘assurances that [he] wishes to give free Scope to Protestantism Establish Schools, relinquish French Language & render English general. He desires me to send Him Schoolmasters Instruments Books &c at his sole Expence’. Between March and August, Wilberforce met with Saunders on more than twenty occasions, introducing him to friends like Thomas Gisborne and Henry Ryder (bishop of Gloucester). Polished, knowledgeable and well-travelled, Saunders seems to have sparkled in London’s elite social circles: Charles Robert Leslie later recorded that ‘at one of Sir Joseph Bank’s conversazioni…The room was filled with the most eminent scientific and literary men, but Prince Saunders, the coal black Boston negro, was the great man of the evening’ (Autobiographical Recollections, 1860).
By late July 1816, however, the relationship between the New Englander and the Wilberforce circle was strained, with Stephen and Zachary Macaulay ‘talking over the extreme follies of P. Sanders’, and Stephen telling him ‘plainly of his faults’. ‘That Weak & loose Man is doing all He can to ruin the Cause’, wrote Wilberforce. Saunders was accused of ‘Drunkenness’ and of falsely claiming that Wilberforce ‘was privy to his publication’ of the Haytian Papers (1816), a work extolling Christophe’s regime and Britain’s support for it. Saunders ‘decried’ the charges, and Wilberforce wrote: ‘I am sadly distressd what Course to pursue abt Sanders Hayti &c’. Before long, however, differences were patched up within the Haitian delegation and between Saunders and Stephen. On 12 August, at Chancery Lane, Wilberforce had a ‘long Interview with several Hayti people & P Sanders & Stephen – Prevaild on them all to be reconcild’. Five days later, Wilberforce was ‘Busy on Hayti Letter & Notes to P Sanders &c all day’, and on 20 August he recorded that ‘Mr P. Sanders – Mr Mornay, Mr Weatherly Mr Evans & Mr Gulliver – all off in Coach’.
Thereafter, Saunders disappears from the diary, though he maintained a correspondence with Clarkson, lamenting the suicide of Christophe in 1820 and his own financial troubles in 1823 (See Henri Christophe and Thomas Clarkson: A Correspondence (1952)). Posterity has largely forgotten him. Aside from two or three academic articles, there is little or no work on him, and no book-length biography. Although Wilberforce referred to him in 30 separate diary entries, not one was reproduced in the 5-volume Life of William Wilberforce, compiled by the abolitionists’ sons. Nor has any subsequent biographer of Wilberforce so much as mentioned him. This reflects the erasure of black lives in traditional historiography, but it was also due to the failure of the abolitionists’ Haitian project. JOHN COFFEY
Women in the Wilberforce Diaries I: 1788-1791
Wilberforce met with female company in relative abundance. A keyword search of the 1788–91 Diaries reveal 115 mentionings of “Mrs”, 59 of “Miss”, 33 of “Lady”, 11 of “girl”, 8 of “woman”, and 7 “Ladies”, with the vast majority citing actual inter-personal experiences. The
contextual material needed to make sense of these all too brief references are often sparse and fragmentary. Even when names appear in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (ODNB) the quality of the information remains mixed, typically as result of not having been updated using appropriate foci and methods. The Diaries therefore serve as a worthy stimulus to further research, revision, and synthesis.
By the time Margaret Bingham [née Smith] (c.1740–1814) appears in the Diaries she was Lady Lucan: wife of the Irish landowner, politician, and peer Charles Bingham, Baron Lucan of Castlebar, Co. Mayo, (1735–1799); mother to Lavinia (1762–1831), who was married to John George Spencer, the second Earl Spencer (1758–1834); and, aunt to Frances (1760–1829), who was married to the politician John Jeffreys Pratt, later Lord Camden (1759–1840) — a mutual friend of Pitt and Wilberforce. Lady Spencer was a prodigy of the beau monde: intelligent, ambitious, fashionable, and, with Spencer House at her disposal, one of the most pre-eminent hostesses in London. As much as Lavinia’s achievements were her own, she was also self-evidently her mother’s daughter. Drawing upon her husband’s political and literary milieu in the metropolis, Lady Lucan showed a penchant of organising balls and assemblies. Yet, she also struck out on her own to convene Bluestocking soirées that were once described by Horace Walpole as so blue as to be “mazarine-blue”. So, when Wilberforce notes “Dined Lady Lucan’s” (8 Feb. 1788), the entry surely reflects Margaret’s singular status as a society hostess at her home in Charles Street, Berkeley Square. In observing later that evening that the “Ladies: affected to be in Spirits”, Wilberforce gives us just enough to imagine the candlelit dining room turned debating chamber that had given rise to such talk as to leave the women of the party strangely moved. Elsewhere, Wilberforce’s clipped remarks give an indication of Lady Lucan’s formidable character: “Mrs Montagus Dinner – Lady Lucan there – May it be for Good” (12 Mar. 1794). Was Margaret’s presence awkwardly poised between benign and malign agency, or had she been tasked with some social mission that only she could perform? “Ly Lucan came in – I unspiritual – vain &c.” (8 Apr. 1795), did such a juxtaposition of words indicate that Wilberforce was in quiet awe of Margaret?
Come 1797, the solemnity of Wilberforce’s Eastertide whilst on retreat at Bath was complicated by matrimonial politicking and romantic loving. On Maundy Thursday Wilberforce noted that Thomas Babington had “strongly recommended Miss Spooner for Wife for me” (13 Apr. 1797). By Easter Saturday, there was a frisson of excitement that cut through the social pleasantries: “Evg Tea […] Mrs & Miss {Maltbr} Miss Spooner […] – I irritated & vex’d that could not talk with Miss Spr” (15 Apr. 1797). The subsequent relationship between Wilberforce and Barbara Spooner is as they say “history”; but what of Mrs and Miss Maltby that bore witness to this initial tryst?
The Will of Miss Harriet Maltby of Bath (?1763–1853) sits in the National Archive waiting to be studied, but in the meantime a few things may be said. Harriet was born into a wealthy merchant family: her paternal grandfather was Thomas Maltby of Norwich (d. 1760); her father was Thomas Maltby (1722–c.1788) of Lakenham Grove, Norfolk, and Germans, Buckinghamshire; and her mother Elizabeth Maltby [née Rigby] (d. 1807) was able to live in some style as a widow at no. 22 Royal Crescent, Bath; becoming a neighbour to both Elizabeth Montagu (no. 16) and Barbara Spooner’s parents! Harriet’s sister and co-heir Elizabeth (d. 1826) had married Pitt’s former tutor and private secretary George Pretyman in 1784; and, by the time Mrs and Miss Maltby were mentioned Wilberforce’s Diaries, Pretyman was Bishop of Lincoln. G. M. Ditchfield’s ODNB entry makes plain that George Pretyman took his wife “fully into his confidence over ecclesiastical and political matters”. The experience of the Pretymans gives credence to the intimacy with which Wilberforce would have afforded Mrs and Miss Maltby, as well as and a sense of the intellectual tenor of the conversation that could on occasion have passed between them. That said, a female presence was not always valued. As Wilberforce once tersely put it: “At Bishop of Lincoln’s all day. Mrs. & Miss Maltby there a most unprofitable Sunday” (8 Jun. 1788). Harriet lived with her mother at no. 22 Royal Crescent until at least Elizabeth’s passing. Mother and daughter presumably were regular attendees at Blue Stocking assemblies hosted at no. 16 and both supported charitable organisations such as the Society for Bettering the Condition and Increasing the Comforts of the Poor (1796). For her part, Harriet continued formative relations with, amongst others, Frances D’Arblay, Hannah More, and Wilberforce.
The immense density and frequency of the inter-personal experiences presented in the Diaries provide readers with a rare opportunity to centre and de-centre Wilberforce in the historical narrative, almost simultaneously. This dual focus helps replace the teleology of biography with a more historicist appreciation of contingency. In so doing, scholars should be able to write new histories of the women involved as well as craft culturally sensitive studies of how gendered interactions defined the power wielded by men such as Wilberforce [Cf. Gareth Atkins Converting Britannia (2019)]. DAVID MANNING
Women in the Wilberforce Diaries II: Three Mariannes
There were three women named Marianne significant in Wilberforce’s life and diaries: Marianne Thornton, née Sykes (1765-1815); her daughter, Marianne Thornton (1797-1887); and Marianne Francis (1790-1832). All three were close to the Wilberforce family, and so offer insight into Wilberforce’s relationships with the women in his extended familial circle.
Marianne Thornton, née Sykes, married Wilberforce’s second cousin, Henry Thornton in March 1796. Wilberforce knew her before her marriage – a Hull native and daughter of an evangelical merchant, the two met when Wilberforce returned from London in 1770/71. Marianne Sykes was friends with Sally Wilberforce and the Sykes’ were among the families that Wilberforce dined with in the late 1780s, especially when he was in Yorkshire. She accompanied Wilberforce’s mother on a visit to Sally and Dr Clarke in September 1790.
Wilberforce noted when ‘Henry [Thornton] talked to me about Miss Sykes’ (04 July 1795), eight months before their wedding, and, when Henry thought she had rejected Henry’s proposal, Wilberforce wrote that it was ‘doubtful to me’ (25 January 1796). On their wedding day, Wilberforce wrote simply ‘Henry married – at Bloomsbury Church & to Battersea Rise’ (01 March 1796). Thereafter, she was referred to as ‘Mrs H Thornton’. Marianne was present at the birth of William Wilberforce in 1798 and was the one to tell Wilberforce the news. She remained a constant in Wilberforce’s diaries until her death in 1815, nine months after her husband. During those months, Wilberforce and his circle were active in supporting her, ensuring that got a pension and that she kept their house at Battersea Rise. In her final days in October 1815, Wilberforce ‘read to & prayed with her … never surely such a Tranquil scene as Mrs Henry Thornton’s death Bed’ (13 October 1815).
The Thornton’s eldest child was named after her mother. Wilberforce recorded her birth in his diary: ‘Mrs H Thornton delivered early of 1st Child – Little Girl’ (10 March 1797). He did not, however, mention the births of their other eight children, presumably because the births of his own children took precedence. Wilberforce was present when the two Marianne Thorntons received the sacrament for the first time since Henry’s death, after which Mrs Thornton ‘exclaimed … She [her daughter] had lost one father You must be another, or She must find another in you’ (12 February 1815). The Thornton children were placed under the care of Sir Robert Inglis and his wife after their parents’ death, but Wilberforce appears, from this comment, to have held a somewhat paternal place in their lives as well. She was a regular visitor to the Wilberforces, first with her mother and later with the Inglises and her siblings. When Marianne went on a tour of Europe in 1826 Wilberforce described her account of her travels as ‘highly interesting’ (5 October 1826).
(Miss) Marianne Thornton extensively recorded her life, and her recollections of Wilberforce reflect his piety and the affection in which Marianne held her relative (they paint Barbara Wilberforce in a less flattering light). She offers more descriptive insight into the Wilberforces’ domestic lives than Wilberforce’s diary entries, which often read as lists of visitors and activities, tended to do. Her relationship with Wilberforce continued into his retirement and she was frustrated by the portrayal of Wilberforce by his sons, although she did not offer them any recollections to include in the writing of the Life (Cf.: E. M. Forster, Marianne Thornton, 1956; Anne Stott, Wilberforce, 2012).
The third Marianne was not a relative, and her interaction with the Wilberforces was over a shorter period than that of the Thorntons. Marianne Francis was the great-niece of Wilberforce’s friend, Arthur Young, and niece of the novelist Frances Burney (Madame d’Arblay). She was employed in the Wilberforce household as a classics tutor and secretary. Arthur Young introduced Marianne Francis to the Wilberforces in 1812, and he described her in his diary as ‘many Languaged’ (29 March 1812). By the end of that year, Wilberforce included her in the list of ‘Inmates’ at Kensington Gore. Although she was employed by the Wilberforces, she was also a part of their social circle, and over time this expanded into both Marianne Francis and Wilberforce’s family. Over the following years Marianne, her brother Clement, and her other family members all became regular visitors to the Wilberforces, with Clement staying with the family during illness in 1814/15. Of course, Marianne was not the sole connection they had to the Wilberforces, as relatives of Wilberforce’s friend, but their interactions increased after she became a part of the household. When Marianne left Kensington Gore in 1814, it was with Eliza Spooner, Mrs Wilberforce’s sister, having presumably established relationships throughout the Wilberforce family circle. Wilberforce lamented that it was ‘a terrible Loss Marianne especially so good & so excellent a Companion for b’ (12 July 1814).
The three Mariannes are interesting as examples of some of the different relationships Wilberforce had with women in his inner circle. Mrs Thornton was a feature of his extended family-and-friends circle both before and after her marriage; Miss Thornton was a part of the same circle in the younger generation and shows the extended paternal role Wilberforce played; and Marianne Francis was a shorter-term fixture in Wilberforce’s life but is an example of the way that the social circle expanded as new connections were made. There were other women in Wilberforce’s close social circle – his correspondence and visits with Hannah More, his friendships with evangelical women like Lady Olivia Sparrow – the relationships he had with friends and colleagues wives and/or daughters – but the three Mariannes are representative of Wilberforce’s extended familial circle. ANNA HARRINGTON
The Wilberforce Diaries Project 