He quotes Buxton's letter to the Norwich meeting, urging the establishment of friendly relations between the two Societies and arguing that the objects and methods of the two would not bring them into opposition with each other. He also quotes Clarkson's independent advocacy of the same theme. He objects to the suggestion that some of the leaders of the anti-slavery cause should be thrown out of the Anti-Slavery Society and asserts that Scoble must be as anxious as himself to stop one society from attacking the other. He claims that the lack of success of the earlier African institution [when advocating plans to 'civilize' Africa] should not be held against the present African Civilization Society because circumstances were then very different, there being no steamers to facilitate navigation of the river and no known entry into the Niger. He also explains the difference between the objects of the two institutions, the African Institution's aim to make treaties with slave trading powers, and the other Society's emphasis on making treaties with the African rulers. He alleges that the Liverpool Society had completely misrepresented the views of the African Civilization Society. He describes the principle of self-interest and profit to which they were appealing, their hope that the measures they planned to take would eventually cut off the supply of enslaved people from Africa, and that cotton grown by free labour would in time replace that grown in the slave states. He disagrees with the claim of the Liverpool Society that the African Civilization Society could not encompass the evangelisation of Africa. Finally, he defends the Society from the charge of being responsible for the introduction of armed force into Africa, claiming that this was the responsibility of the government. He asks that this letter should not be published without his permission. (Lithograph copy.)