Archive for July, 2026

An Interview with Doctor Max Elstein

Posted on: July 31st, 2026 by Alan Wareham

The present

Q. It is a joy and blessing to see you at the most events of Manchester Lit &Phil. What do you most hope to get from an evening at the Society now?

A. The convivial atmosphere engenders mutual aspirations to learn about relevant subjects and partake in lively dialogue.

 

Early Life and Formative Influences: From Cape Town to the United Kingdom

Q. Looking back to Cape Town: what early experiences or influences nudged you toward medicine in the first place?

A. From my early years I wished to become a doctor. I strove to acquire the criteria to enter medical school at the University of Cape Town. I held our family GP in high esteem. During my medical school years, I helped organise clinics for African and mixed-heritage communities who were disadvantaged under apartheid.

My first publication as a student was on the importance of psycho-somatic medicine.

During my training I was inspired by one of my Obstetrics teachers, David Friedlander who was visionary in encouraging husbands to support their wives in labour. During my residencies, I was inspired by the dedication and surgical skills of the Professor of Surgery – Jannie Louw, and the Professor of Gynaecology – James Louw. Professor of medicine – John Brock, opened vistas of the importance of social medicine, and RNA, and DNA, molecular biology.

My next appointment was in Infectious Diseases where I acquired much experience and clinical skills and hands-on involvement in the Polio epidemic of over 500 cases.

Cecile Hoberman and I got married when I was working at the Infectious Diseases Hospital. Cecile was an early career artist specializing in Portraiture and Sculpture.

My direction was towards Obstetrics and Gynaecology, but General Practice was the next step for me to broaden my horizons and confirm my aspirations to specialize in Obstetrics and Gynaecology.

I joined a Group General Practice in Stellenbosch, which was a rural University town, famous for its wine growing, near Cape Town. A vast clinical experience followed coupled with the responsibility of setting up a separate Maternity service in the hospital for the underprivileged non-white people. As a GP, I carried out a survey of undiagnosed sickle cell trait (Sickle cell trait: a family study and a report of three further cases of Sickle cell disease L. Anstey and M. Elstein S.A. Medical Journal, April 1960, p 282 -284)

Q. In 1961 you moved to London. What prompted that decision, and what were your first impressions of professional life in the United Kingdom?

A. We were distressed by the inequities of the Apartheid System. In my working life, I accosted this degrading system; life had become challenging. We decided we needed to leave South Africa. After our decision and informing my GP partners and family, a few weeks later, the historic Sharpeville massacre took place.

We emigrated to the UK in May 1961, which was timely as it enabled us to acquire British Citizenship by right as South Africa was leaving the Commonwealth at that time. Moving to the UK, presented an opportunity for me to follow my aspirations for a holistic approach to the broader aspects of Obstetrics and Gynaecology such as reproductive health care, the provision of contraception, sexuality and the potential of endocrinology.

My impressions of professional life in the UK were more aspirational than experiential. My brief exposure to the NHS as a GP locum was a ‘learning experience’. The opportunities for embarking on specialist training in the discipline I had chosen was inspirational. I set my sights on getting training posts in premier institutions where there was emphasis on academic discourse and research.

 

Clinical and Academic Career: What Mattered Most

Q. You held posts at Queen Charlotte’s, Hammersmith, and Charing Cross, and you also lectured. How did this period of your career unfold?

A. I was fortunate to obtain a post in Obstetrics, at Queen Charlotte’s – the premier hospital in Obstetrics, under Professor Jack Pinkerton. My appointment was extended to do research with Carl Wood, a pioneering researcher into Uterine Activity. I also did research at the Chelsea Hospital for Women on the endocrine vaginal cytology of newborn girls – resulting in a notable publication. At that time, I became involved in teaching for the membership of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG).

My next post was at the postgraduate medical centre at the Hammersmith Hospital under Professor John Browne. I continued to teach on the course for the membership degree of the RCOG. I obtained Membership of the RCOG at that time.

In my Appointment as Registrar at Charing Cross Hospital, I became heavily involved in the teaching of students in Obstetrics and Gynaecology. I then became a lecturer in Obstetrics and Gynaecology for Professor Norman F Morris. My initial research was in management of labour. I then focused on contraception and obtained a fellowship of the RCOG to study the effects of progestogens on cervical mucus. This research resulted in my obtaining a Doctor of Medicine (MD) from the University of Cape Town (UCT).

Further research was on hormonal methods of contraception and intrauterine contraceptive devices.

During the sixties, I was able to extend the provision of contraceptive services irrespective of marital status. I pioneered the teaching of sexuality to medical students and doctors.

Q. What did you most enjoy about the balance between clinical practice and teaching?

A. My time at Charing Cross was busy clinically and in research, the most satisfying part was the creative rapport with the medical students.

Q. When you moved to the University of Southampton – first as Senior Lecturer, then as Reader – what were you seeking to build or explore academically?

A. Before we moved to Southampton, in 1970, I had a visiting Fellowship in Cape Town, this enabled me to defend my MD thesis. We had an extended tour of South Africa. I did a lecture tour presenting developments in oral conception. My family accompanied me on this eventful experience.

In 1970, the establishment of the new Medical School at the University of Southampton was an appealing challenge.

I was appointed as Senior Lecturer in Human Reproduction and Obstetrics to the Foundation Professor, David Millar. Within a few months, he developed cancer and died. I then took over the responsibility of planning and setting up the new curriculum. This entailed central allocation and subsequent peripheral location of the students throughout the Wessex region. The aspirations of the New Medical School were revolutionary and requested inspiring the NHS consultants to be involved.

Innovative teaching involved the establishment of early medical contact of the medical students during ante-natal care, in the delivery and subsequent development of the child.

The curriculum included the teaching of human sexuality, recognizing the broader aspects of human sexuality. This was extended to the GPs in the Wessex region. This resulted in seminal publications evaluating this teaching.

The postgraduate teaching of family planning was established; this formed the basis for the RCOG Faculty programme.

A major research project was established in women with intrauterine devices investigating the possible role of the IUD’s cervical appendage in the genesis of infection involving a clinical research fellow and a bacteriologist.

Research activities were extended by obtaining funding for the appointment of a lecturer in Reproductive Biochemistry.

I established a postgraduate teaching programme for RCOG Membership in the Wessex region.

Involvement in several clinical developments such as establishment of Day Case Surgery.

Q. In 1977 you came to the University of Manchester as Professor of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. What was the challenge you were most eager to undertake here?

A. On my professorial appointment to the University of Manchester, I changed my title by adding “Reproductive Health Care “to Obstetrics and Gynaecology.

I introduced the teaching of sexuality in the early years of the medical curriculum.

The introductory clinical skills programme at the end of the 3rd year, for students about to commence placement in the region, was made obligatory. This programme presented the opportunity to teach medical ethics in collaboration with Professor John Harris and Professor Margot Brazier.

The establishment of the discipline of Family planning and Reproductive Health Care followed. The appointment of the first clinical Consultant/Senior Lecturer in Reproductive Health Care in the UK was enabled by obtaining funding from the postgraduate dean and the District Health Authority. Higher Training in Reproductive Health Care, recognised by the RCOG followed. Subsequently over 100 Consultant posts in the discipline of Reproductive Health Care have been established. The clinical challenges were improvement in Obstetric / Neonatal care in the Withington Hospital, provision of Abortion services, pelvic microsurgery for female infertility.

Q. Which of your research areas felt most urgent or exciting as they were unfolding: contraceptive development, endometriosis, fertility mechanisms, pelvic blood flow, assisted reproduction, patient safety, or something else?

A. All held a genuine interest for me. The most exciting, however, was the development of hormonal contraceptives and the refinement of their formulations. Of comparable importance was the role of the cervical appendage of the intrauterine contraceptive device in the transmission of pelvic infection.

Q. Of all your published work and clinical contributions, of which are you personally most proud, and why?

A. The enhancement of oral contraceptive formulations resulting in the reduction of the amount of hormone was significant with an improved level of acceptance.

Q. You have been involved in infertility care and reconstructive pelvic microsurgery. How did you approach the human side of that work: hope, disappointment, resilience alongside technical expertise?

A. Pelvic reconstructive surgery most often resulted in relief of pain and some achievement of pregnancy. The women who had chronic pelvic pain would affirm alleviation of the pain within days of their surgery which made the painstaking surgery and the preoperative preparation worthwhile. The surgery was often prolonged. I took tremendous pleasure in the fact that I could pass these skills onto my colleagues, which they applied in their practice thus helping even more women. Where surgery was unsuccessful, I would support women in accepting that hysterectomy was required entailing appropriate empathic management.

 

Medicine, Law, and Bioethics: The Institute Years (IMLAB)

Q. After retiring from St Mary’s in 1995, you became Executive Director of the Institute of Medicine, Law and Bioethics, an institution spanning several universities. What drew you to that role?

A. I was privileged to facilitate the teaching of medical ethics to medical students with John and Margot. From my experience in medicolegal practice and having served as a Council member of the Medical Defence Union, it was fitting to accept the invitation from Professor Martin Harris, particularly as it involved linking up with the teaching of ethics and medicolegal law in Liverpool. This joint venture, funded by the Regional Health Authority, allowed me to raise funds for research projects and staff in these areas in Manchester. My initial three-year half-time contract was extended to five years.

Q. Which ethical questions in reproductive health care have you found the most persistent or the most difficult, whether then or now?

A. One of the most difficult aspects of this work was challenging the entrenched views of some experts.

 

The Manchester Literary & Philosophical Society: Joining, Belonging, Contributing

Q. How did your first contact with the Manchester Lit & Phil come about? How did you discover the Society, and what persuaded you and Cecile to join?

A. I was initially approached on my appointment to become a member, but my responsibilities precluded me from taking this on, which I regretted. On my first retirement, Cecile and I decided that we wished to join, even though we had some heavy commitment in looking after our son, Paul. I was approached by some council members to become a member of Council, which I found rewarding.

Q. What did the Manchester Lit & Phil offer that you did not find in academic medicine or in the professional societies?

A. Cecile served initially as a member of the Arts Committee, which she found very rewarding. We found that the lectures which we attended broadened our horizons, which for me, were invaluable. When I was invited to serve on its Council, I wished the Society to become more in tune with the changes in society and to become more financially secure.

Q. You served as Vice-President and, later, as a Director from 2009 to 2014. How did you see the Society’s role within Manchester and beyond?

A. I recognised that the Society needed to extend its membership, particularly to younger people and to be more efficient. I welcomed the opportunity to chair Task and Finish groups on how this might be achieved. Despite the difficulties that the Society has faced before and during Covid, I am pleased to see that many of our recommendations have been implemented. The present management of the Society can open vistas of creative development. One area I would like to see reinstated is a thriving young people’s forum, which Professor Derek Crowther had initiated.

Q. Are there particular moments, talks, debates, or people at the Manchester Lit & Phil that you remember as especially significant?

A. The Dalton Lecture series is particularly memorable; my grandson Adam, whom the Society generously permitted to attend, valued it greatly. More opportunities for young teenagers to take part should be explored.

Memorable events reflect my bias and are the Discussion between Sir Mark Elder and Michael Kennedy and of course, Cecile’s presentation.

There are many more!

In particular, there have been many recent outstanding events in the rejuvenated Society!

Q. If you could capture the “spirit” of the Manchester Lit & Phil in a single sentence, what would it be?

A. The current involvement of volunteers, and their dedicated commitment is truly inspiring.

 

Family, Care, and Resilience

Q. How did you experience the relationship between your two worlds – medicine and reproductive health, and Cecile’s artistic practice? Was it one of contrast or of harmony?

A. I should like to answer this by sharing with you something Cecile said to me after we had discussed the very question: “What connects art to science is an abiding similarity between the artistic and the scientific mind; it is as if both were motivated by the pangs of discovery and a desire for the consummation of ideas into beautiful totalities.”

Q. Cecile’s practice ranged from sculpture and printmaking to environmental art, with a profound attention to empathy and to accessible environments. What do you think she most wished people to feel or to notice?

A. Many of Cecile’s works reflect upon the relationships between people. She espoused the following four guiding principles: awareness, respect, loyalty, and the desire to negotiate.

Q. You and Cecile cared for your son Paul through many years of illness. If you are comfortable sharing it, what did that period teach you about love, patience, and the limits or the strengths of medicine?

A. It was a privilege for us to look after and provide for our wonderful son, who was empathic, resilient to his sufferings and always had a sense of humour and related well to his carers and visitors who all felt enhanced by his presence. We learnt to cope with the erosion of our privacy because of the carers that Cecile managed with considerable skill and empathy for their needs as well as that of Paul. We enjoyed positive relationships with the carers.

Q. How has family life: your children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren shaped your sense of meaning and continuity?

A. I feel truly blessed by the joy I have had, and continue to have, from my extended family.

Q. You and your daughter have been involved in preserving and sharing Cecile’s legacy. What forms does that work take: archiving, exhibitions, public artworks, talks, education?

A. Maureen, my daughter, responds:

“The Cecile Elstein Studio Team’s curatorial work offers fresh insights into Cecile Elstein’s creative practice, her spheres of influence and artists’ circles.

The Cecile Elstein Studio Team have been cataloguing and curating Cecile’s Studio. This includes her artwork, artefacts and the artwork’s provenance. Her artefacts include her studio notebooks and writings. Through this process we are discovering extraordinary insights into her creative practice.

This year, we have been talking to the Didsbury Arts Festival and hope to feature during the end of June 2026, Open House tours, Curators’ talks and Film screenings. Currently curatorial topics include: ‘Women at Work’, ‘Portraits of Medical Scientists’, ‘Print-making Innovation’, ‘Sculpture’, ‘Ceramics’, ‘Site-specific Installation Public Sculpture’, ‘Art as Environment’ ‘Empathy in Design Education’, ‘20 years of the Didsbury Drawing Group using the Philosophy of Non- Interference’, and ‘I and Thou – Relational Philosophy’.

In the future, we plan to hold a Retrospective Exhibition, alongside an Academic symposium, outreach workshops and book publication with gallery, museum and publisher partnerships.”

Q. What would you most like the public to understand about Cecile as an artist, something that a brief obituary or an exhibition label might overlook?

A. Cecile was an insightful, compassionate and understanding person, with an expansive love of humanity and the aesthetic. We enabled each other’s development. Throughout our life together, we wished to explore the broad spectrum of philosophy, literature and the arts and to facilitate its general availability in society.

 

The Future: Medical Science, the Life of the Society, and Counsel

Q. What do you believe the next generation of clinicians and researchers should protect, even as technology and systems continue to change?

A. The importance of personal interaction and communication is key. In the care of patients, human contact can never be wholly supplanted by machines.

Q. What role do you think a learned society such as the Manchester Lit & Phil should play in the coming decade, particularly in a world of rapid information and polarised debate?

A. The encouragement and availability of learned societies like the Manchester Lit &Phil to young aspiring professionals and knowledge and culture seekers need to be facilitated and encouraged by their mentors.

Q. What would you like younger members of Manchester Lit &Phil to know about how to get the most from the Society?

A. The involvement of volunteers from amongst the more senior members of the Society to take on a ‘buddy-role’ should be considered and evaluated.

Q. If you could leave readers with one thought about curiosity, service, partnership, or a well-lived life, what would it be?

A. Remain curious; never stop learning.

 

By Dr Eda Gliga-Baubec PhD, Trustee and member of Manchester Lit & Phil

Frederick Douglass

Posted on: July 31st, 2026 by Alan Wareham

Reflections and Musings

On a balmy evening on 18 June 2026, a near-capacity audience gathered in the cool and magnificently appointed Martin Harris Centre on Manchester’s Oxford Road corridor for a compelling and scholarly exposition of the extraordinary life and times of Frederick Douglass.

Delivered by one of Britain’s foremost and best-loved historians, Professor David Olusoga OBE, the occasion was Manchester Lit & Phil’s inaugural Frederick Douglass Lecture. Conceived as the keynote event in an annual lecture series bearing Douglass’s name, it was designed to explore the continuing global legacy and relevance of this remarkable abolitionist, author, orator, campaigner and statesman, who rose from enslavement to become a pioneering advocate of human rights and social justice.

Curated in partnership with Creative Manchester and CARISMA, the event marked the beginning of a new tradition for the Lit & Phil: one that honours global thinkers who have shaped our civic and moral imagination and who continue to inspire conversations about race, justice, identity and civic responsibility.

The lecture was introduced and moderated by our charismatic patron, Professor Erinma Bell MBE DL. Her post-lecture conversation with Professor Olusoga, followed by a searching and wide-ranging Q&A, deepened the discussion and drew important parallels between Douglass’s activism and the challenges of the present day.

The idea for the lecture series emerged from deliberations about how the Society might widen its reach and diversify its programme. These followed the publication in 2023 of research commissioned from the University of Central Lancashire into the connections between prominent Lit & Phil members, transatlantic slavery and the wider slave economy.

In the words of Professor Alan Rice, the report was:

“Evidence of the Lit & Phil’s willingness to engage more actively with contemporary demands for acknowledgement of the historic links to transatlantic slavery within a community that is still marked by racial prejudice and inequality.”

Creating an annual Frederick Douglass Lecture was one of the actions arising from that process.

Why Frederick Douglass?

Why Frederick Douglass? It is a good question, and one that some may well have asked.

There were many compelling answers, and these became self-evident as Professor Olusoga illuminated Douglass’s “global life”: his experiences in Britain, Ireland and elsewhere; his influence on transatlantic abolitionism; and the enduring relevance of his ideas.

Simply put, Frederick Douglass deserves to be better known—much better known.

Who Was Frederick Douglass?

Frederick Douglass was born Frederick Augustus Washington Bailey in Talbot County, Maryland, probably in February 1818. The exact date of his birth is unknown. Born into slavery, he was initially held by Captain Aaron Anthony, an overseer employed by Colonel Edward Lloyd on his extensive plantation complex.

Douglass was separated from his mother, Harriet Bailey, during infancy. He later wrote that it was:

“A common custom, in the part of Maryland from which I ran away, to part children from their mothers at a very early age.”

He had no certain knowledge of his father, who was white, although he recalled speculation that his enslaver might have been his father.

In 1826, at about the age of eight, Douglass was sent from the Lloyd plantation to Baltimore to live with Hugh Auld and his wife Sophia. Following Aaron Anthony’s death later that year, Douglass became the legal property of Anthony’s son-in-law, Thomas Auld, who allowed him to remain with Hugh and Sophia.

Sophia Auld began teaching Douglass the alphabet. Hugh Auld stopped the lessons, declaring that education would “unfit him to be a slave.” Douglass nevertheless continued learning in secret, teaching himself to read and write with the help of white children he encountered in Baltimore and by studying whatever written material he could obtain.

Literacy proved transformative. At around the age of twelve, he acquired a copy of Caleb Bingham’s The Columbian Orator, a collection of speeches, dialogues and essays. He studied and memorised passages from it, honing his reading and speaking skills while developing his political and moral understanding of freedom, equality and human rights.

If Douglass’s childhood had been difficult, his teenage years were to be brutal.

In March 1833, he was sent from Baltimore to Thomas Auld at St Michaels. In January 1834, he was hired out to Edward Covey, a farmer notorious for physically and psychologically abusing enslaved people in order to make them more compliant.

In August 1834, Douglass resisted Covey during a prolonged physical confrontation. Covey never whipped him again. Douglass later described this act of resistance as a decisive turning point that restored his confidence and sense of manhood.

In 1836, a planned escape by canoe with several enslaved companions was betrayed before it could be completed. Douglass was jailed and eventually returned to Baltimore, where he became a skilled ship caulker. He worked alongside both Black and white labourers, although he also experienced violent racism, including an assault by white shipyard workers.

Undeterred, Douglass escaped successfully on 3 September 1838 with the assistance of Anna Murray, a free Black woman with whom he had fallen in love. Disguised as a sailor and carrying identification papers borrowed from a free Black seaman, he travelled by train and ferry to New York.

Douglass and Murray married there on 15 September 1838. They subsequently settled in New Bedford, Massachusetts, where he adopted the surname Douglass.

Between 1839 and 1845, inspired by figures such as William Lloyd Garrison, Douglass immersed himself in abolitionist thought and activism. He subscribed to Garrison’s newspaper, The Liberator, in 1839, and his public abolitionist career began decisively in 1841 when he became a lecturer for the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society.

Douglass rapidly established himself as a powerful voice in the American antislavery movement. His growing prominence was reflected in the publication in May 1845 of his autobiography, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, Written by Himself.

The book became an international success. It also exposed Douglass to considerable danger by revealing details that could enable his former enslavers to identify and locate him. As a fugitive under American law, he remained vulnerable to seizure and re-enslavement.

That danger contributed to his decision to travel to Britain and Ireland.

Douglass’s Global Life

Professor Olusoga went on to explore Douglass’s experiences outside the United States, particularly his time in Britain and Ireland and, later in life, his travels through Europe, Egypt and Greece.

Douglass’s voyage across the Atlantic was motivated by the danger of recapture, but it also gave him an opportunity to develop international abolitionist networks, attract financial support and influence opinion in the British Isles.

Britain had experienced decades of sustained antislavery campaigning. The British transatlantic slave trade had been abolished in 1807. The Slavery Abolition Act was passed in 1833 and took effect in 1834, although many of those nominally emancipated were then forced into a coercive system of “apprenticeship.” That system ended in 1838, bringing full emancipation to most formerly enslaved people in the British Caribbean and other colonies affected by the legislation.

By the 1840s, however, the earlier intensity of British antislavery activism had diminished, while enslavement continued in the United States and elsewhere.

Manchester, widely regarded as the world’s first industrial city and a major centre of British textile production, had played an important part in earlier antislavery campaigns. It had hosted public meetings and activist organizations, and its citizens had supported large antislavery petitions.

Yet Manchester was also deeply implicated in the slave economy. Much of the cotton on which its prosperity depended was produced by enslaved labour, particularly in the American South.

American abolitionists increasingly sought to cultivate British support, donations and political pressure. They built on transatlantic networks established by British reformers and by earlier African American lecturers, including Charles Lenox Remond and Moses Roper. Their strategies included encouraging British manufacturers and consumers to confront their dependence on slave-grown cotton.

Douglass would become the most celebrated and influential Black abolitionist to participate in this transatlantic campaign, with an impact on British society greater than that of any other African American visitor of the period.

Already a charismatic and powerful orator and a prominent abolitionist speaker, Douglass had begun to acquire an international reputation through the success of his 1845 Narrative. His British and Irish tour would transform him into a major transatlantic public figure.

Ireland

Douglass arrived in Liverpool in August 1845 and travelled from there to Ireland. Between late August 1845 and early January 1846, he visited Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, Cork, Limerick and Belfast.

Ireland gave Douglass an extraordinary new experience of personal freedom. He described being able to sit beside white people, enter hotels, dine without insult and move through society without being treated as property. He wrote of being received with “kindness and deference” and of being regarded “not as a colour, but as a man.”

This did not mean that Ireland or Britain was free of racism. Rather, the experience offered a dramatic contrast with the legally enforced racial hierarchy of the United States.

Douglass had arrived in Ireland at the onset of the Great Famine, which would intensify catastrophically over the following years, and amid Daniel O’Connell’s campaign for repeal of the Union with Britain.

Douglass admired O’Connell, the Irish abolitionist and political leader known as “the Liberator.” He recognized parallels between Irish suffering under British rule and African American oppression under slavery, although he remained careful not to equate the two conditions completely.

His Irish experiences helped broaden his worldview. They encouraged him to understand abolition as part of an international struggle for justice rather than as an exclusively American cause.

Britain and Manchester

During his approximately nineteen-month tour of Britain and Ireland, from August 1845 to April 1847, Douglass used networks of churches, debating societies, temperance organizations and reform groups to reach large audiences. More than 300 lectures and public appearances have been documented, together with extensive newspaper coverage.

Douglass spoke not merely of a distant American problem but of a global economic system in which Britain was implicated. His speeches connected plantation slavery with British industrial prosperity. He demanded that British audiences confront the relationship between enslaved labour, cotton production and the wealth generated by the textile industry.

In this way, he helped make abolitionism a shared transatlantic cause.

Douglass travelled extensively, but Manchester became an important recurring base and speaking centre. Between July 1846 and March 1847, he appeared at venues including Manchester Town Hall, the Free Trade Hall, the Corn Exchange and the Mechanics’ Institution. He also addressed meetings in Rochdale, Ashton-under-Lyne, Oldham, Stockport, Bacup and Warrington.

On 12 October 1846, he delivered his celebrated “Evangelical Man-Stealers” address at Manchester’s Free Trade Hall before a large audience. He condemned slavery, exposed American religious hypocrisy and appealed to British abolitionists to recognize the relationship between Manchester’s cotton economy and the labour of enslaved people.

He did not merely speak to Manchester; he challenged its moral conscience.

His documented appearances in Manchester and the surrounding region during this period included:

  • 2 July 1846: Manchester Town Hall
  • 3 July 1846: Manchester
  • 12 October 1846: Free Trade Hall, Peter Street
  • 14 October 1846: Public Hall, Rochdale
  • 15 October 1846: Public Hall, Rochdale
  • 10 November 1846: Public Hall, Rochdale
  • 11 November 1846: Public Hall, Rochdale, morning meeting
  • 11 November 1846: Public Hall, Rochdale, evening meeting
  • 13 November 1846: Stockport
  • 17 November 1846: Warrington
  • 23 November 1846: Bacup
  • 25 November 1846: Oldham
  • 1 December 1846: Corn Exchange, Manchester
  • 4 December 1846: Corn Exchange, Manchester
  • 10 December 1846: Ashton-under-Lyne
  • 11 December 1846: Ashton-under-Lyne
  • 22 December 1846: Manchester
  • 18 January 1847: Corn Exchange, Manchester
  • 19 January 1847: Baptist Chapel, Grosvenor Street, Manchester
  • 9 March 1847: Mechanics’ Institution Lecture Hall, Manchester

Douglass frequently spoke alongside prominent white abolitionists such as William Lloyd Garrison and George Thompson. Yet his own presence was indispensable to the campaign. He was not simply discussing enslavement as an abstract political question: he was testifying from personal experience.

Political meetings were a major form of public spectacle and engagement in the nineteenth century. Douglass used rhetorical techniques including call and response, changes of pace, irony, dramatic impersonation and carefully controlled gestures to involve his audiences and demand action from them.

Freedom and British Support

While Douglass was in Britain, supporters raised money both to secure his legal freedom and to help him establish an abolitionist newspaper.

Among those assisting his fundraising was Jonathan Dodgson Carr, a Quaker social reformer and founder of Carr’s biscuit business.

In August 1846, Douglass visited Newcastle and met Anna and Ellen Richardson, Quaker abolitionists related by marriage. The Richardsons helped organize the raising of £150 sterling—then equivalent to approximately US$711.66—to purchase Douglass’s legal freedom from Thomas Auld.

Some abolitionists, particularly followers of William Lloyd Garrison, objected that purchasing Douglass’s freedom implicitly recognized an enslaver’s right to own another human being. Douglass nevertheless accepted the arrangement. As he explained, the payment was:

“Not to compensate the slave-holder, but to release me from his power; not to establish my natural right to freedom, but to release me from all legal liabilities to slavery.”

In Britain, Douglass could not lawfully be held or seized as property. Under Maryland law, however, he remained legally enslaved until the completion of his formal manumission in December 1846. That legal freedom enabled him to return to the United States without the same danger of being seized by Thomas Auld as a fugitive.

In December 1846 and again in March 1847, Douglass stayed at 22 St Ann’s Square in Manchester. The accommodation is believed to have been arranged by Alexander Morris, a local linen draper and supporter.

Quakers maintained a strong presence within the antislavery events Douglass attended, participating as organizers, speakers and supporters. John Bright, the Rochdale-born reformer and future Liberal statesman, was among the prominent figures—including Manchester Lit & Phil members—associated with Douglass’s British circle of allies. He has also been identified as a contributor to the fund connected with Douglass’s manumission.

Britain’s Effect on Douglass

Douglass’s time in England, Scotland and Ireland left an indelible mark upon him.

It was a pivotal episode in his development and self-fashioning—an emotional, intellectual and existential transformation that helped him define himself as a political thinker, writer and international public figure.

In Britain and Ireland, Douglass experienced a degree of freedom of movement that he had never known in the United States. He could enter public spaces without the threat of being seized as property. There were no American slave patrols, no federal fugitive-slave regime and no legally enforceable claim that he was another man’s possession.

This did not imply that Britain was free of racism or prejudice. It demonstrated instead that racial subordination was not inevitable: it was created and maintained through law, violence, political power and social custom, and it could therefore be dismantled.

In Professor Olusoga’s words:

“It was his time here in Britain, free from the fear of enslavement, able to live a quite expansive existence in an unsegregated society, that gave him the emotional space to evolve intellectually.”

It was here that Douglass developed greater political independence, refined his rhetorical and media strategies, built international networks and learned to challenge nations over their complicity in slavery and racial oppression.

These experiences informed his later speeches, letters, autobiographies, Reconstruction politics and diplomatic work. Above all, Britain and Ireland gave him the confidence and international perspective that helped transform him from a fugitive into one of the world’s great reformers.

In his “Farewell to the British People” address in London on 30 March 1847, Douglass compared the condition in which he had arrived with the status in which he was returning to the United States:

“I go back to the United States not as I landed here; I came a slave. I go back as a free man. I came here as a thing; I go back a human being. I came here despised and maligned; I go back with reputation and celebrity.”

Douglass had helped re-energise British support for the struggle against American slavery, strengthened existing transatlantic abolitionist networks and contributed to a tradition that later brought other African American campaigners to Manchester and other British cities.

Return to Britain, 1859–60

Douglass returned to Britain in 1859–60 and again toured the country, visiting towns and cities including Stockport, Leeds, Sheffield, Bradford, Wakefield, Newcastle, Glasgow, Edinburgh and Dundee.

This was not simply a repetition of the triumphant lecture tour of 1845–47. It was also a political refuge, with Douglass’s liberty once again in danger.

In October 1859, the radical white abolitionist John Brown led an unsuccessful raid on the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry—then in Virginia and now in West Virginia. After the authorities discovered correspondence linking Douglass with Brown, Douglass feared arrest as an alleged accomplice.

He escaped to Canada and sailed from there to Britain, arriving in Liverpool in November 1859.

Britain once again provided a safe haven. It was, however, different from the country Douglass had encountered in the 1840s. He now had to confront pro-slavery propaganda, racist minstrel entertainment, scientific racism and a growing British preference for non-intervention in American affairs.

Nevertheless, his time in Britain allowed him to continue influencing international opinion, challenge the retreat from abolitionist activism and maintain transatlantic networks that would become important during the American Civil War.

It also reinforced his position as a global moral voice rather than merely an American reformer.

Confederate defeat made nationwide abolition possible. In December 1865, the Thirteenth Amendment constitutionally prohibited slavery and involuntary servitude in the United States, except as punishment following conviction for a crime.

The abolitionist spirit Douglass had encountered in Britain had not disappeared. On 31 December 1862, a major meeting of Manchester working men at the Free Trade Hall expressed support for President Abraham Lincoln, the Union and emancipation, despite the severe hardship caused by the Lancashire Cotton Famine.

Opinion across Lancashire was not unanimous, but the meeting became a powerful symbol of working-class antislavery solidarity.

In his reply of 19 January 1863, Lincoln described the position taken by the Manchester workers as:

“An instance of sublime Christian heroism which has not been surpassed in any age or in any country.”

Douglass’s Final International Journey

Douglass’s final visit to Britain formed part of an extended honeymoon and international tour undertaken with his second wife, Helen Pitts Douglass, in 1886–87.

It was a late-life return—part honeymoon and part pilgrimage. Douglass revisited former allies, addressed new audiences and continued to speak about racial equality and human freedom.

Professor Olusoga summarized the relationship between Douglass and Britain in his lecture:

“The impact of Frederick Douglass on Britain and Britain’s impact on him was profound. He became a sensation. He revitalised the anti-slavery cause here in Britain in a way that no other speaker could.”

Professor Olusoga also emphasised Douglass’s extraordinarily sophisticated understanding of visual representation. More than 160 photographic portraits of him are known to survive, making him the most photographed American of the nineteenth century.

Few images better symbolize Manchester’s entanglement with slavery than that of the foremost African American abolitionist of his age living in a building in St Ann’s Square, close to the city’s Cotton Exchange and Heywood’s Bank.

Manchester’s exchange was a centre for the trading of cotton and textiles, much of it connected to slave-grown cotton. Heywood’s Bank, founded in Manchester in 1788 with family capital derived in significant part from slave-trading investments, became an important institution in the city’s economic development and was a predecessor institution of the Royal Bank of Scotland.

Abolition, Civil Rights, Women’s Rights and Public Office

Professor Olusoga framed Douglass’s principal political achievements under four headings: abolition, civil rights, women’s rights and public office.

Douglass became one of the most important leaders of the nineteenth-century movements for abolition and African American civil rights. He worked with abolitionists including William Lloyd Garrison and Gerrit Smith, although his political outlook evolved and he ultimately broke with Garrison over strategy, constitutional interpretation and political participation.

Douglass also understood the power of journalism long before the term “media strategy” came into use.

He founded The North Star in Rochester in 1847 to combat slavery and racism and to champion equal rights, including women’s rights. Its famous motto declared:

“Right is of no sex—Truth is of no color.”

Through Frederick Douglass’ Paper and Douglass’ Monthly, he continued campaigning against slavery and promoted the enlistment of Black soldiers during the Civil War. Through the New National Era and his other postwar writings, he advocated citizenship, suffrage and legal protection for formerly enslaved people during Reconstruction.

He used journalism to challenge racist pseudoscience, expose political cowardice, demand equal treatment for Black soldiers and argue for universal civil and political rights.

Douglass was also a committed supporter of women’s rights. He attended the Seneca Falls Convention in 1848 and defended the resolution calling for women’s suffrage when even some other participants considered it too radical.

His later years were marked by political appointments, public advocacy and international diplomacy. He pressed presidents and legislators on emancipation, military equality, voting rights and equal citizenship. In 1874, he briefly served as president of the already troubled Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company, attempting unsuccessfully to rescue it before its collapse.

Douglass subsequently held several groundbreaking federal appointments. In 1877, President Rutherford B. Hayes appointed him United States Marshal for the District of Columbia. He was the first African American to receive a presidential appointment requiring confirmation by the Senate.

The appointment represented a profound transformation: a man who had once been enslaved was now entrusted with carrying out federal law in the nation’s capital.

Douglass later served as Recorder of Deeds for the District of Columbia. From 1889 to 1891, he was United States Minister Resident and Consul-General to Haiti.

His diplomatic appointment connected him to the world’s first independent Black republic—a nation whose successful revolution against slavery had profoundly shaped Atlantic debates about race, emancipation and Black sovereignty.

When Douglass first visited Manchester in 1846, he was still legally a fugitive. Just over three decades later, he held prominent federal office in the United States.

That transformation speaks powerfully to traditions of social progress, civic responsibility and public advocacy. Douglass’s political career forms part of a wider transatlantic story in which Manchester played an important role.

An Elder Statesman Abroad

By 1886, Douglass had been internationally famous for approximately forty years. American slavery had been constitutionally abolished for more than two decades, and he had already published three versions of his autobiography, edited several newspapers and held major public appointments.

Together with his second wife, Helen Pitts Douglass, he undertook an extended journey through Britain, Ireland, continental Europe, Egypt and Greece in 1886–87.

He revisited former abolitionist allies, observed European political and religious life and reflected on classical civilization, empire, race and historical memory.

The journey enriched the international outlook of an already established abolitionist, statesman and civil-rights advocate. It added an important late-life chapter to his reflections on race, history, empire and human freedom.

For the Lit & Phil, Douglass’s rise into public office underscores the importance of institutions that nurture debate, challenge injustice and expand democratic possibilities. His journey from Manchester’s lecture halls to Washington’s corridors of power illustrates how ideas shared in civic spaces can ripple outward and reshape political life.

It is a reminder that Manchester has long been a city in which global conversations take place and voices demanding justice find an audience willing to listen.

Douglass’s Speeches

Frederick Douglass lived an extraordinary and consequential life. His groundbreaking speeches remain firmly embedded in the historical record and continue to challenge societies to confront injustice honestly and courageously.

It is difficult to single out one address, although “What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July?” must rank among his greatest.

Douglass delivered the speech to an audience of almost 600 people at Corinthian Hall in Rochester, New York, on 5 July 1852. He exposed the hypocrisy of celebrating American independence while millions remained enslaved.

Its most memorable passage includes the declaration:

“This Fourth of July is yours, not mine. You may rejoice, I must mourn.”

Although much of the address was a devastating indictment of the United States, Douglass concluded on a cautiously optimistic note. He expressed hope that slavery’s end was approaching and that the forces of communication, reform and international opinion would make oppression increasingly difficult to sustain.

In “Self-Made Men,” a lecture first delivered in 1859 and revised and repeated over subsequent decades, Douglass argued that achievement depended heavily upon effort, education, perseverance and character rather than birth or privilege. At the same time, he acknowledged that individual advancement could be enabled or obstructed by social conditions and unequal opportunities.

In “Our Composite Nationality,” delivered in Boston in 1869, Douglass set out one of his most forward-looking visions of America. He defended Chinese immigration and argued for an inclusive, multiracial nation based on equal citizenship and civil rights, regardless of race or national origin.

Douglass and the Continuing Battle over American Identity

For Ben Rhodes, former speechwriter and deputy national security adviser to President Barack Obama, Douglass is a central figure in his 2026 book All We Say: The Battle for American Identity—A History in 15 Speeches.

The book considers Douglass alongside figures including Benjamin Franklin, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Martin Luther King Jr. and John F. Kennedy.

Rhodes gives particular attention to “Our Composite Nationality,” interpreting it as a radical defence of multiracial democracy. Douglass’s argument was not confined to the rights of Black Americans: if democratic principles were truly universal, they also had to be extended to Chinese immigrants and others whose inclusion was deeply unpopular at the time.

Rhodes also considers Douglass’s brief meeting with Lincoln at the White House reception following the president’s second inaugural address on 4 March 1865. He sees the encounter as a moment when the possibility of a more inclusive American nation briefly came into view.

Just as Lincoln called upon the United States to accept the cost of living by its professed principles, Douglass demanded that the language of freedom and equality be applied consistently. Rhodes compares the radicalism of Douglass’s inclusive vision to contemporary calls for the legalization of undocumented immigrants in the United States.

The comparison resonates with continuing debates over immigration, citizenship and national identity.

A Global Legacy

Frederick Douglass’s global life—from enslavement to international leadership—is one of history’s most extraordinary stories of human freedom, intellectual courage and moral clarity.

His life demonstrates that dignity can survive brutality, that learning can challenge imposed ignorance and that moral courage can outlast oppression. It offers a powerful example of how individuals can change nations and how nations must continually renew their commitment to justice.

Douglass deserves to be better known because his life demonstrates how a human being armed with knowledge, truth, courage and a determination to be free can help change the course of history.

His legacy belongs not only to American history but to world history. It speaks directly to the moral challenges societies continue to face.

Professor Olusoga’s rendering of Douglass’s global life clearly demonstrated why Douglass remains relevant. The causes for which he campaigned—racial equality, voting rights, freedom of speech, women’s rights, equal justice before the law and human dignity—remain subjects of urgent debate.

Douglass’s influence also reached into British journalism, literature and activism, helping to shape the moral language of reform and leaving a model of public advocacy that remains relevant today.

We remain grateful to Professor Olusoga for embracing the idea of the Frederick Douglass Lecture Series and inaugurating it with such a brilliant and expansive narrative. We are equally grateful to Creative Manchester and CARISMA for their partnership and invaluable contributions, without which the event would not have achieved the same significance or success.

In a Guardian article published in July 2026 to mark the 180th anniversary of Douglass’s Manchester lectures, Chris Osuh noted that no commemorative blue plaque currently marks Douglass’s presence in the city. The building in St Ann’s Square in which he stayed is now occupied by a branch of Holland & Barrett. He added:

“But Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society (Lit & Phil), with whose members Douglass had connections in the 1840s, has begun annual lectures celebrating his legacy.”

Given Manchester’s profound historical connections with Douglass, abolitionism and the cotton economy, the case for such a plaque is surely compelling.

We now look forward to future Frederick Douglass Lectures at the Lit & Phil. We hope that they will provide a platform for leading historians, philosophers, writers and public thinkers to explore the national and global questions that continue to challenge us: race, inequality, justice, truth-telling, democracy and fundamental human rights.

In doing so, we hope that the Society will contribute to important conversations of lasting national significance.

Postscript: Why Frederick Douglass Matters

Frederick Douglass matters because:

  • His life demonstrates how truth, courage and intellect can reshape a nation and inspire movements around the world.
  • His autobiographies remain foundational texts of human freedom. They celebrate the transformative power of literacy and articulate a vision of equality rooted in dignity and self-respect.
  • He understood the power of journalism, photography and public representation long before “media strategy” became a familiar term.
  • His speeches, including the celebrated 1852 address “What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July?”, continue to challenge societies to confront injustice honestly and courageously.
  • He did not merely leave behind words; he left a rhetorical blueprint for resistance.
  • His ideas about democracy, equality, citizenship and national identity remain urgently relevant.
  • He understood that democracy requires uncomfortable truth-telling. Without it, nations can retreat into self-congratulation and myth.
  • He saw freedom as indivisible: no group can be truly secure in its freedom while another is oppressed.
  • He demonstrated that freedom is not a static achievement but a continual and collective responsibility.
  • His voice remains a guide for societies wrestling with inequality, injustice and historical memory.
  • His work teaches that patriotism without honesty is empty, progress without accountability is fragile and democracy without dissent is impossible.
  • His life is not merely an American story. It is a global story that speaks to enduring questions of freedom, justice, identity, democracy and equality.

In the end, Frederick Douglass was not only a symbol of abolition. He was a philosopher of democracy whose ideas continue to illuminate debates about race, justice, equality, citizenship and national identity.

Dhun Daji – Trustee and Member of Manchester Literary & Philosophical Society

Ford Madox Brown

Posted on: July 31st, 2026 by Alan Wareham

Ford Madox Brown and Manchester 

Was he a member of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society? A minor Victorian mystery. 

Ford Madox Brown is usually considered a Pre-Raphaelite artist although he was not a member of the original founding Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood. He knew a number of the Pre-Raphaelite artists and adopted their style. 

The Pre-Raphaelites were a group of 19th century artists who focused on vibrant colour and close attention to detail. A number of their paintings and works had religious themes or elements of social commentary. 

Madox Brown spent much of his working life in London but he has also come to be closely associated with Manchester. In the early part of his life, he had not been commercially successful but by the time he reached his mid 50s he secured what was probably his most lucrative and successful commission which saw him through most of the final part of his artistic career, the Manchester murals. 

The Manchester Murals 

In the 1870s Alfred Waterhouse was designing Manchester‘s new town hall. He and the city Council were keen to have murals illustrating Manchester’s history as a major part of the interior decor. A Manchester artist, Frederick Shields, was a key advocate for Madox Brown, and himself, to be the artists creating the murals. 

There was a considerable risk in using the medium of mural. The damp Manchester weather did not lend itself to traditional mural painting in fresco, i.e. applying the paint direct to wet plaster. Also, recent murals such as in the Palace of Westminster had been considered to be unsuccessful due to the technical challenges. These challenges, which Madox Brown would have to overcome, included painting to the right scale and perspective on large surfaces and colours which would change or fade as the pigments dried. 

Notwithstanding these risks the City Council and Waterhouse decided to go ahead with using mural and in 1878-79 Madox Brown and Shields were commissioned to create the mural scheme. The original plan was to create twelve, six each. 

Although Madox Brown had previously had contact with the Manchester art world, the Manchester murals commission marked the beginning of a fairly long and close association with the city. 

From the start there was controversy because Madox Brown believed that he was not being paid enough. The original price was £275 per mural with the City Council dictating the subject matter and wanting to see and approve drawings for each one. However, the drawings and preparatory cartoons did have some additional benefit to Madox Brown because he kept ownership of those and was able to sell them on. 

There was some dispute about the subject matter from the outset. The City Council had intended that the murals would reflect aspects of Manchester history to give the local population knowledge and pride in it. However, as one of the influential commentators of the day, William Axon, pointed out, at least two subjects of the murals, the Baptism of Edwin and the trial of Wycliff took place in York and London respectively. The decision to include those events in a cycle of pictures depicting the history of Manchester was based on the fact that they still represented the coming of Christianity and the beginnings of non-conformity which were key parts of Manchester’s history. 

Madox Brown wanted to finish the cycle with the Peterloo massacre which was probably indicative of his social liberalism and desire to paint a scene with action. But to his annoyance that was refused by the City Council as being too controversial. Therefore, the cycle ended with John Dalton, one of the city’s great scientists and a founding member of the Literary and Philosophical Society. 

When Madox Brown started the murals, because of the problems with traditional fresco methods he used what was known as the Gambier Parry method, which involved mixing gum and varnish with the paints then applying to a dry prepared surface. That was felt to be more resistant to damp and indeed during the recent restoration of the town hall it has been found that the murals have survived the Manchester climate reasonably well (link here to Manchester library video on town hall restoration) 

Initially Madox Brown continued to live in London and stay temporarily in Manchester. However, he soon found that he was working long hours, from 10 am until 10 pm, seven days a week, so in 1881 he decided to move himself and his family to Manchester where he resided until 1887. Initially the Madox Browns lived in Crumpsall before moving in 1883 to the then more fashionable area of Victoria Park. The house they rented in Victoria Park had previously been occupied by Sir Charles Halle of the Halle Orchestra fame. 

While working on the murals Madox Brown would sit inside a canvas tent in the town hall on a moveable wooden platform. To his annoyance life in the town hall continued around him and he protested to the City council about the distractions of flower shows, public meetings and organ recitals occurring in the room while he was working. However, this last did prove something of a benefit because he got to know the Town hall organist, James Pyne, very well and appreciated listening to Pyne practice while he painted. 

Madox Brown was not known for his speed and indeed one of his most famous paintings, Work, which is now in the Manchester City Art gallery, took him 13 years to finish. As the work on the murals progressed it became apparent that the project was going to take longer than anyone anticipated. Frederick Shields also dropped out, leaving Madox Brown to complete all 12 of the murals. That did create an opportunity for him to renegotiate the contract and the price for the final six murals increased to £375 each, with £100 retrospectively being paid for each of the previous six murals. Despite this Madox Brown was not happy and felt undervalued, making a number of complaints to the City Council about what he was being paid. 

It also became apparent that it was too difficult to paint the murals in situ given the distractions so Madox Brown switched from painting them direct onto the walls to painting them onto canvas, which would then be attached to the walls. That meant that by 1887 he could move back to London and finish the last three murals on canvas in his London studio thereby ending his residence in Manchester. 

Manchester Society in the late nineteenth century and Madox Brown’s part in it. 

During his time in Manchester Madox Brown integrated into the artistic and intellectual life of the city. Victorian Manchester has become known as the “shock city” of the industrial revolution, typifying many of its good and bad characteristics. 

It was a city where many people lived in appalling poverty as outlined by Engels in his Condition of the Working Class in England. 

But alongside that was a thriving intellectual life, with much activity in the sciences, arts and literature. The Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society was of course a key part of that, but then there were many other active clubs and societies as well, some of which Madox Brown played an active part in. For example, he lectured at the Manchester Literary Club and the Royal Manchester Institution, whose building is now part of the Manchester City Art gallery. He was an honorary member of the Brasenose club and regularly attended the Halle. 

Especially after he moved to Victoria Park, he hosted gatherings at his home which included such movers and shakers in the Manchester scene as CP Scott, the editor of the Manchester Guardian and Charles Rowley. 

Rowley was a keen promoter of the arts but also a social reformer who encouraged Madox Brown to assist in some of his welfare activities in Ancoats, by for example giving free lectures on art. Brown, Rowley and other friends set up a labour bureau in Manchester to assist the unemployed to find work. In 1886 Brown was one of the speakers at a meeting for the unemployed in Pomona Gardens with an attendance of around 6000. 

Browns interest in social issues is also highlighted by one of his most famous paintings, Work. To his pride this picture was acquired by Manchester City Art Gallery and still forms a prominent part of its Pre-Raphaelite collection. The picture is well worth seeing if visiting the art gallery Much has been written about this complex painting, including by Madox Brown himself, but essentially it is a hymn to the dignity of work, by hand and brain. Although it is set in the street in Hampstead, it is interesting to see that there are some connections with Madox Brown’s time in Manchester. When addressing the unemployed in Pomona Gardens, Brown condemned charitable middle-class ladies who blamed drink for the condition of the working classes, which is also illustrated in one of the scenes in Work, where a middle-class woman’s pamphlets against drink are discarded by the hard-working road navvies. 

Brown had an interesting and sometimes challenging personal life. One of the reasons why he moved his family to Manchester was that he had concerns about his second wife, Emma, who was unfortunately an alcoholic. He decided to move the family to Manchester so that he could care for her while he was engaged on the mural work. It was also an opportunity for her to commit to giving up drink which sadly did not work long-term. Emma was also one of the reasons why he eventually left Manchester, believing that the damp climate was affecting her health. Madox Brown also had a relationship with Mathilde Blind, a German writer with radical views who also moved to Manchester with the Madox Brown family, causing some tensions for the artist at home. 

Additionally, Brown’s own health was not great. He suffered from gout and during the course of the Manchester murals commission suffered a minor stroke which meant that one of the murals, Bradshaw, had to be painted with his left hand. The fact that the murals turned out as good as they did and have survived the test of time, notwithstanding the technical and health challenges that Madox Brown experienced, is a testament to his artistic skills. 

Madox Brown and the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society – was he a member? 

When researching this article, it had been thought that Madox Brown was a member of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, probably based on his activities during his fairly long period in Manchester and the circles within which he moved. However, confusion may have arisen between the Society and similarly named Manchester Literary Club. These were two different organisations, both existing at the same time in Manchester. Madox Brown certainly played a part in the Literary Club but there is no evidence from the Literary and philosophical Society membership list that he was a member of the Society. However, he would have mixed in circles and had contact with people who were. William Axon for example, who expressed strident views on the subject matter of the murals, was supported and employed by CP Scott as a journalist for the for the Manchester Guardian. Madox Brown was friendly with Scott, painting his daughter and showing his children round the town hall. Axon was an active member of the Literary and Philosophical Society, presenting several lectures to it. Brown and Axon would have known of each other, and it can be seen from these connections that there was a network of intellectuals in nineteenth century Manchester from which the modern-day Society has developed. 

One of the final pictures in the Manchester murals cycle is of John Dalton collecting Marsh gas. Dalton was of course a key early member of the Literary and Philosophical Society and many of his records were kept by the Society. When seeking increased pay for the murals commission, Madox Brown complained to the Council that it was taking a lot longer than anticipated in part because of the time taken to research the subject matter. That raises the possibility that Madox Brown could have consulted the records of the Literary and Philosophical Society to do some of his research for the mural. 

Although reference to literature is in the name, in the late nineteenth century, judging by the membership list, the Society tended to have a more scientific emphasis which could account for why Madox Brown would have been more active in the now defunct Literary Club. Nowadays the Literary and Philosophical Society has a wide membership and promotes a number of events which are dedicated to the arts as well as the sciences. 

For those interested in Madox Brown’s association with Manchester and indeed artistic life in the city in his time, it’s well worth visiting his murals in the Town Hall when restoration has finished and his major picture, Work, in the City art Gallery which also has an excellent collection of other Pre- Raphaelite art. To finish up your tour of Madox Brown in Manchester, you could even go to the Ford Madox Brown pub on Oxford Road near to his Manchester home in Victoria Park. 

Andrew Welch, member of Manchester Lit & Phil 

Sign up to our newsletter

Sign up to our e-newsletter to receive exclusive content and all the latest Lit & Phil news

* indicates required