When the Master of Jesus College, University of Cambridge tried to obtain the removal of the statue of Tobias Rustat from the college chapel because of his links to the slave trade, the request was turned down by a Church court, which found that widespread opposition to the memorial was based on what they called “a false narrative” about the scale of the financial rewards Rustat gained from slavery, and ordered that the memorial should remain in the chapel. The judgement was made by the deputy chancellor of the diocese of Ely, David Hodge QC, who said the removal of the Rustat memorial would cause “considerable or notable harm to the significance of the chapel as a building of special architectural or historic interest”. He went on to say that Rustat only made a limited part of his wealth from slavery. His initial investment in the Royal African Company was £400, but a bonus in 1691, brought their shareholding up to £1,600, nearly 5 million today. Add this to the “modest” 7% per annum dividends and that he was a director of the Royal African Company for which he was well paid. One wonders how much it would have to be for the ecclesiastical court to see it as substantial. The true position, Hodge said, was that Rustat’s investments in the Royal Adventurers brought him no financial returns at all, and he realised his investments in the Royal African Company only in May 1691, 20 years after he had made his gifts to the college.¹

Is a crime less of a crime because the criminal did not make the expected gains? But, in any case, this is an ingenuous way of avoiding the main argument. The real problem with this memorial, as well all the other memorials and statues of those who profited, or attempted to profit, from the business of slavery, is that they glorify and honour men who were guilty of a crime against humanity.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, has condemned the decision to keep the memorial of slave trade investor Tobias Rustat in Jesus College’s chapel. He said that “Memorials to slave-traders do not belong in places of worship… Why is it so much agony to remove a memorial to slavery?”.

Sonita Alleyne, Master of Jesus College, has said of the verdict: “Last spring, the Church committed to taking action. This judgement demonstrates the inadequacies of the Church process for addressing issues of racial injustice and contested memorialisation. It is not fit for purpose“.

Tobias Rustat was a close confident and supporter of Charles II and James II, which position enabled him to gain considerable bribe money for gaining access to the King, particularly arranging the granting of Knighthoods, which could be obtained for £1095 [£4,379,000], plus a bribe to the person introducing the applicant. Rustat also lent money and used his access to royal authority to ensure prompt repayment. This was the origin of a considerable amount of the money he went on to invest in the slave trade. Let us not forget that his royal patrons, who he served so loyally, were the principal shareholders in the Royal African Company. After the so-called Glorious Revolution that deposed James II, he quickly swore allegiance to the new King William and Queen Mary in 1689 to secure his pension.³ Loyalty only goes so far when money is involved.

Rustat gave over £10,000 to Leicestershire churches, St Paul’s Cathedral, Chelsea Hospital, St John’s Hospital, Bath, St John’s College, Oxford, Cambridge University Library, and Jesus College, Cambridge. He commissioned three royal statues from Grinling Gibbons, all in Roman costume, commemorating Charles II, at the Royal Hospital Chelsea, Charles II on a horse, in Windsor Castle and James II, now in Trafalgar Square. Moreover, he paid for the memorial to himself during his life and stored it in his house for eight years until it could be erected in Jesus College on his death.⁴

Clearly a man much concerned about his reputation amongst future generations, so his donations to Church and University can be seen as just so much whitewash.