Sons of Providence: The Brown Brothers, the Slave Trade, and the American Revolution (review)

Charles Rappleye's Sons of Providence: The Brown Brothers, the Slave Trade, and the American Revolution details the ideological views, political actions, and business enterprises of the Brown family of Providence, Rhode Island. Aimed at a popular audience, this work not only describes the often admirable involvement of the family in the creation of the United States but also reveals the diametrically opposed roles that Moses and John Brown, the brothers at the center of the story, took in the contentious debate over the place of slavery in the new nation. This is a rich and engaging narrative that humanizes the complexity of the early nation's struggles to define itself.

The tension between the impulses of commerce and conscience serves as the underpinning of Rappleye's story. The brothers' merchant father, James Brown, was the descendant of a prominent line of colonial Baptist pastors, but he opted for a life of trade rather than religion. After the death of their father, the young Browns entered business under the supervision of an uncle, trading rum, candles, and, at times, slaves. The author recounts how commercial pursuits brought the family prosperity and with it, increased social and political influence. However, while the brothers generally shared interests early on, their paths divided when Moses converted to Quakerism in 1774. During the Revolution, John supported the patriots as a war supplier and privateer. Moses, along with other Quakers, provided aid to victims of the war but chose not to become actively involved in the conflict.

It was after the war, however, that the ideological, religious, and temperamental differences of the brothers culminated in a very public disagreement. Wracked with guilt over his involvement in slavery, Moses freed his slaves in 1773. Later, with Quaker allies, he tried to convince Rhode Island's General Assembly to pass a bill barring state residents from participation in the slave trade. John, outraged that the state government would think to limit the freedom of merchants, led the opposition that blocked the bill. The brothers continued their argument in personal letters that demonstrate both their deeply divided personal convictions and continued mutual affection. The two also publically debated the issue in the press, using pseudonyms that only thinly veiled their identities.

Eventually the dispute became more than philosophical. To Moses' dismay, John resumed slave trading in 1786. He continued even after a federal law was passed in 1794 prohibiting Americans from participation in the foreign slave trade. As a result, John was convicted of illegal slave trading in a federal district court. This conviction, however, did little to damage John's reputation. He was elected to Congress two years later and there became an outspoken defender of the rights of both slave owners and those merchants who wanted to deal in slaves. The brothers never resolved their disagreement over slavery, and Rappleye does not force a tidy conclusion in his narrative. In many ways this suits Rappleye's purposes, for he clearly sees the battle between capitalism and ethics as both quintessentially American and ongoing.

In crafting this work, Rappleye utilized enviable research skills. He gathered documents from such myriad sources as edited collections, Providence archives, the invaluable microfilm series "Papers of the American Slave Trade," and the personal holdings of Brown descendents. He also mined previously published histories for the many quotes and facts that flesh out his story. As a result, the dual biography at the center of the work is notably graceful; it draws full portraits of both men and is central to the book's success. Moses is presented as a complicated, if deeply principled, figure. And while one might expect that the portrayal of the abolitionist would be the most valuable part of this work, it is actually Rappleye's examination of John, the northerner who so actively defended slavery, which will add depth to readers' understanding of the brothers' debates. What clearly...