“In the 8th and 9th month of this year (1818), in company with his wife, his sister Elizabeth Fry, and one of her daughters, he took a journey into Scotland, visiting many of the prisons both there and in the north of England, besides attending many of the meetings of Friends. On this occasion, in conformity with the christian order established in the Society of Friends, he was furnished with a minute or testimonial expressing the concurrence of his Friends of his own ‘Monthly Meeting’ in his prospects of religious service.”
We have now to view the philanthropist not only in the varied relations of private life, but also in the very important character of a christian minister. He gradually became the most distinguished member of the Society of Friends in all England, and he often delivered exceedingly impressive discourses in Norwich and other large towns, preaching the gospel with a peculiar grace of manner which fascinated every audience. We have often heard him preach before large congregations of educated people in the Meeting House at Liverpool, and always with great effect. His journal is full of details of his labours in all parts of England, Scotland, and Ireland. He became a Home Missionary, working hard at his own expense; but we must confine this brief sketch to his doings here in Norwich. The death of his beloved wife at Earlham on October 6th, 1822, put his religious principle to the severest test, and in his letters he expresses deep sorrow, but he was of too active a disposition to be long subdued by grief. During the few months succeeding his loss, he continued mostly at home in the enjoyment of the society of his sisters, Catherine and Rachel; his children becoming increasingly the objects of his tender solicitude. In the mean time, besides attending to the necessary claims of business, and to the various public objects that had long shared his interest, he devoted his leisure to study, finding relief, as he intimates, “Not in the indulgence of sorrow, but in a diligent attention to the calls of duty.”
After giving many extracts from his journal, Mr. Braithwaite continues in reference to the anti-slavery agitation:—
“Retiring for a few days to Cromer Hall, he found a large and interesting circle. Amongst others, the late William Wilberforce and Zachary Macaulay were there, deliberating with his brother-in-law Thomas Fowell Buxton on the position and prospects of the Anti-Slavery question. It was the occasion on which the latter appears to have arrived at his final decision, to accept the responsible post of advocate of the cause as successor to Wilberforce. In this important undertaking, and throughout the succeeding struggle, Joseph John Gurney gave him his warm and efficient encouragement and support.”
Mr. J. J. Gurney, Mr. Clarkson, Mr. T. F. Buxton, Mr. Wilberforce, and others, were earnest advocates for the total abolition of the slave trade and of slavery; and they attended many public meetings at which they denounced and exposed the horrid traffic. Ultimately, as we all know, their efforts were rewarded, by rousing public indignation to such a pitch as to result in the passing of an act of parliament emancipating the slaves in the West Indies, at a cost of twenty millions.
The panic in the monetary and commercial world, and the sudden run upon the banks in London and the country, have rendered the winter of 1825–1826 memorable. As a banker, J. J. Gurney did not escape his share of anxiety, as appears from his journal, but his firm weathered the storm. Another circumstance was at this time deeply interesting to his feelings, namely, his attachment to Mary Fowler, daughter of Rachel Fowler, a cousin of his late wife. After some correspondence he made Mary Fowler an offer of marriage, which she accepted. On July 18th, 1827, they were married at Elm Grove. On this interesting occasion, he remarks in his journal,—
“Bright, hopeful, and happy was our wedding day. We dined on the lawn, a large united company, and rejoiced together, I trust in the Lord. Mary and I left the party at Elm Grove, in the afternoon, for North Devon.”
They arrived at Linton, and thence proceeded to Ilfracombe. There they spent the honeymoon, and then the happy husband brought his second wife home to Earlham, where they were received with joy. After this he was visited by many eminent characters at Earlham, including Dr. Chalmers, who stayed with him several days.
“None can have attentively perused the foregoing pages” (says the editor of the memoirs) “without perceiving that one leading feature of Joseph John Gurneys character was an unweared active benevolence. Like his sister, Elizabeth Fry, he seemed continually to live under a deep sense of his responsibility towards others. A cheerful and bountiful giver, it was not merely by large pecuniary assistance that he proved his interest in objects connected with the welfare of his fellow-men: to these objects he was exemplary in devoting no common share of his time and personal attention. The steady devotion to the Anti-slavery and Bible Societies is already before the reader. In addition to these great and often absorbing interests, his exertions for the distressed labouring population of Norwich were unremitting. Year after year, during the winter, or on any occasion when their distress was aggravated by want of employment, he was at his post, stirring up his fellow-citizens to the necessary measures for the alleviation of their wants. The District Visiting Society, which was mainly instrumental in originating the Soup Society and the Coal Society, found in him a steady and effective supporter. Often would he say that the painful consciousness of the poverty and suffering of many thousands around him, almost prevented his enjoyment of the abundant blessings with which he was himself so richly favoured. On one occasion he expended a considerable sum in providing the capital for an attempt to supply the poor weavers and mechanics with employment during a scarcity of work. But, though like many similar attempts, it failed to answer the expectation of the promoter, and was abandoned, it served at least to furnish another proof of the sincerity and earnestness with which he laboured for their welfare.
“The depressions in trade occasioned by the panic of 1825 will be long remembered. Norwich did not escape its influence. As a banker, Joseph John Gurney was more than usually absorbed in his own immediate cares, but his heart at once turned towards his suffering fellow-citizens. ‘The dreadful distress,’ he writes to a friend, ‘which prevails in the great mass of our once labouring, now, alas! idle population, has been such as to call forth my strenuous efforts on their behalf. In this, success has been mercifully vouchsafed. We have raised £3300 in five days.’
“One more illustration deserves notice. In the winter of 1829–30, the manufactures of Norwich were again greatly depressed. The weavers became unsettled, holding riotous meetings, and using threatening language against their employers. The state of things was alarming. J. J. Gurney felt it to be his duty to use his influence in checking the spirit of discontent that was rapidly spreading. He attended one of the very large and tumultuous meetings of the operatives, and endeavoured to persuade them to desist from their disorderly proceedings, and quietly to resume their work. With a view of still further winning them by kindness, he invited a deputation from those assembled to breakfast at Earlham on the following morning. Between forty and fifty of them came, with Dover, a notorious Chartist leader, at their head. After the usual family reading of the Scriptures, they sat down to a plentiful repast which had been provided for them in the large dining room, of which they partook heartily; and their host afterwards addressed them in a kind, conciliatory manner upon the subject of wages, and their duty to their employers. The men conducted themselves in an orderly manner and appeared grateful for the attention shown them. The scene was not soon to be forgotten.”
The editor gives some illustrations of the philanthropist’s benevolent character, by narrating instances of his visits to prisoners in the Jail, and to afflicted inmates of the Bethel and the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital. A volume might be filled by an account of his acts of private benevolence, but we must pass on to more public matters. He seldom took an active part in contested elections, but at the election in 1833, after the passing of the Reform Act, the Whig candidates, one of whom was his near relative, were defeated, chiefly, as was generally believed, through the influence of bribery. On this subject J. J. Gurney wrote,—