I have pleasure in reporting to History Reclaimed two minor but satisfying victories. In both cases there has been no explanation as to why the historical distortions I have corrected were presented as truth in the first place. The incidents demonstrate the power of historical research, which can usually (though not always) undermine falsehood and error.
St. Paul’s, Deptford
In the beautiful Anglo-Catholic baroque church of St Paul’s, Deptford, a fine memorial wall plaque, sculpted by Joseph Nollekens, commemorates the life of Admiral James Sayer (1720-1776). James was a distant cousin of mine. I visited the church as I have been writing up notes on my more than 50 ancestral admirals, maternal and paternal, by blood and marriage.
Admiral James Sayer, Nollekens Memorial, St. Paul’s, Deptford
The wording on the plaque (see above) led the church to place a sign (see below) beside it and also make some unsubstantiated claims on the church website that cousin James was an “imperialist” and “involved in the scandal of the slave trade” amongst other presumed crimes. I carried out a lot of research, including in Brighton where Sayer family papers are held, and sent my detailed findings to the vicar and his Parochial Church Council (PCC).
I won’t go into all the details, except to say that James was only a young midshipman and junior lieutenant when serving in the Caribbean, a servant of the state. The text of the memorial was written many years after his death, and contains inaccuracies. He never owned land in the West Indies, only in Berkshire. I emphasised that the Admiral should have been lauded for his later role in the Seven Years War, when he took part in actions on the West African coast (the capture of Senegal and Gorée), at Belle Isle, and in the failed Louisbourg Expedition of 1757. Simply put, James served his country with some distinction, defending the nation against a probable invasion by the French, though he missed out on Hawke’s brilliant naval triumph at Quiberon Bay in 1759. Following the end of the war, James never went to sea again, neither as a senior captain, nor as an admiral.
After a few months, the church backed down and removed the sign and the internet nonsense, with reasonable grace. The vicar himself seemed embarrassed by the incident and it appeared to me he had simply not wanted to upset his PCC members.
“We have removed the sign by the memorial in the church, and have deleted the text you bring to our attention on the website.”
Wimbledon Museum
In January 2025 I visited my local Wimbledon Museum in order to check a mistake I had reported which they had made regarding an ancestor. It had been removed. However, I was astonished to find new wording about the Spencer family. Until the 1840’s they owned property in Wimbledon, including Wimbledon Park which they had hired “Capability” Brown to landscape. Being a member of the family and having studied our history, I was surprised to read the claim that there had been family involvement in the slave trade. I wrote to the Director and the curator of the museum stating that: “I would be most interested to know which members of the family were involved in the slave trade, what specifically they did (and when) in the slave trade, and what research was done to back up this bald statement”.
Wimbledon Museum: A note, since taken down, on the local
Spencer property with a tangential and incorrect mention of slavery
They replied: “We did balance it by saying that the family [by which they meant the 3rd Earl Spencer] had also fought against slavery”. They also stated that “the caption was based on research done by a team of volunteers, which was then turned into ‘museum text’ by a professional.” The museum could not answer my simple questions, however. They claimed as proof that the Spencers had owned land in the Caribbean (which is completely untrue) and therefore must have been slavers. I checked with my cousin, the noted historian Charles Spencer, who has written fine books on both the Spencer family and the ancestral home, Althorp. He said he had never come across any links to slavery.
The museum took down the offending sign quite quickly, with an apology, replacing it with some slave-free wording. I sensed it was very much as if someone had felt: “We have not mentioned slavery anywhere in the museum, so let’s put something in. Everyone else does.” Even now, they suggest that some of the larger houses in Wimbledon were built with the profits of slavery without offering any proof.
Charles also told me that the BBC had stated on its website that Caesar Shaw was a slave. Included alongside the first Earl Spencer and his father in a group portrait by George Knapton that hangs at Althorp, Caesar Shaw was a black servant of the family who was on the payroll like all the other family staff. A racist assumption by the BBC or what? When Charles complained, the BBC took the slur off their website.
In my local research, I discovered that the first Earl and his wife Georgiana had employed another black member of staff in Wimbledon known as “John, an adult Negro servant”. Again, a paid servant not a slave.
“In the light of this further information, I think it will be best if the caption in question is permanently removed. We hope we will be able to afford to renew the captions and labels in the museum. We will consult with you about the wording of the new one.”
