On February 20, 2012, the British newspaper the Daily Mail reported that' "family fortune came from the slave trade". On February 19, 2012, The Daily Telegraph reported that Dawkins is being called to make reparations for his family's past.
The Daily Mail reported:
|“||Ancestors of secularist campaigner Richard Dawkins made their fortune from the slave trade, it has been revealed.
The outspoken atheist, who once branded the Catholic Church 'evil', is the direct descendent of Henry Dawkins who owned 1,013 slaves inuntil he died in 1744.
His 400-acre family estate, Over Norton Park near Chipping Norton, Oxfordshire, is believed to have been bought with money made through slave ownership hundreds of years ago...
Richard's son, Henry, married into another of Jamaica's powerful slave trading families and left 1,013 slaves worth £40,736 when he died 1744.
The links with slavery continue down the family tree and in 1796 another ancestor, James Dawkins, voted against's plans to abolish the slave trade
As far as the demand for Richard Dawkins to pay reparations, The Daily Telegraph reported:
|“||He is now facing calls to apologise and make reparations for his family's past.
Esther Stanford-Xosei, of Lewisham, south London, the co-vice chairman of the Pan-African Reparations Coalition in Europe, said: "There is no statute of limitations on crimes against humanity.
"The words of the apology need to be backed by action. The most appropriate course would be for the family to fund an educational initiative telling the history of slavery and how it impacts on communities today, in terms of racism and fractured relationships."
(was a devout , philanthropist, , and the leader of the campaign against the )
|“||Whilewas common to all civilizations, as well as to peoples considered uncivilized, only one civilization developed a moral revulsion against it, very late in hits history…not even the leading moralists in other civilizations rejected slavery at all…. Moreover, within , the principle impetus for the abolition of slavery came first from very religious activists – people who would today be called ‘the religious right.’…this story is not ‘ ’ in today’s terms. Hence it is ignored, as if it never happened.”||”|