Slave Trade In The 1800s

Britain had become the largest exporter of African slaves to the Americas by the 18th century. By the start of the 19th century more than half of the slaves taken from the West Coast of Africa had been transported across the Atlantic Ocean by British ships. Although Britain was one of the key investors in the slave institution it became the first major European country to leave the trans- Atlantic slave trade and make it illegal in 1807. The discovery of the Americas at the end of the 15th century opened up new economic incentives that led to the greatest transportation of human capital in the form of slaves. From about 1500 to the end of the 1800’s millions of slaves from Africa were taken to the Americas. Britain started the process of
ending slavery and by 1833 had ended slavery in the colonies under their control, the American Civil War brought the end of slavery to America by 1865, and then Cuba ended slavery in 1886 followed by the end of slavery in Brazil in 1888. By the mid 18th century the Industrial Revolution emerged and with it came the ideology of capitalism leading to the new type of free labor and the end of slavery being seen by investors as a more profitable institution. This new economic change in ideology trickled down into the social system of Britain. New ideas and thought on how other humans should be treated emerged and abolition movements both peaceful and violent occurred. Without the Parliamentary acts influenced by the abolitionists the elimination of slavery would not have occurred. The abolishment of slavery would not have transpired without the transformation in economic and social views throughout the 19th century, primarily in Britain followed by the rest of Europe. Firstly, the slave trade came to gradual demise through the 19th century somewhat due to the change in the various British economic markets.
Slavery had been a profitable and productive institution with the benefit of very cheap labor up until this point. Planation owners only had to supply the basic means of living to the slave after purchasing them. Plantation drivers could then work the slaves at very inhumane levels, which created high production and efficiency out in the fields. This type of labor changed when the Industrial Revolution caused a transition to new manufacturing processes and the opening of different economic markets in the period from 1760 to 1870. During this period Europe saw the emergence of new technology, living standards, and work environments. In addition the Industrial Revolution started an era of per capita economic growth in capitalist economies with free labor. The industrial revolution in Britain brought a new demand for efficiency, free labor, and free trade all of which went against the process of slavery. The Industrial Revolution affected the various economic markets, such as that for trade and labor, and in addition showed wealthy investors and business owners that there was more to just slave labor that had become increasingly more costly and less
prosperous.
Industrialization and abolition developed together in the late 18th and 19th century.
With America’s independence in 1776 it meant that Britain had lost its main source of provisions and a valuable revenue market. America’s independence also meant that the United States could legally trade with other nations such as France. In order to regain the dominance that Britain had lost it needed to find a new labor force to manufacture the goods they had once sold in the European market. The British government found this new source of labor in its growing population. As seen in figure 1 the population in England grew by 11,173,688 between the years 1801 to 1851. Within those 50 years the population had more than doubled and many of these individuals were looking for available work opportunities. The population increase allowed Britain to move away from the slave labor it had previously used for the last 300
years.

With this new increase in the labor force employment was hard to find causing many individuals to agree to work for low wages so as to earn an income, however small it may have been. Another factor to the change in labor market amount came from the consumer revolution. This revolution encouraged Europeans to want to buy the new sought-after slave made goods but in order to afford such items households had to find more work. This new cheap labor offered a substitute to enslaved labor, which had been looking less appealing to wealthy investors in Britain. Instead of financing plantations overseas in the Americas investors could now invest in in the growing manufacturing factories within Britain. With the emerging labor force it meant that the slave system presented to be harmful in the development of the wage labor representing a substitute if ever employers decided that wages were not worth giving out when there was the possibility of free work with slaves. In the Wealth of Nations written by Adam Smith he stated that the process of slavery was grossly inefficient as the slaves had no interest but, “to eat as much as possible and to labour as little as possible.” Adam Smiths work pointed out that free wage labor had more of an incentive to produce as much as possible whereas slaves did not so they only worked at to produce the amount that they were required. Another possible substitute to the use of slaves was the usage of English convict labor. Unskilled English male convicts sold for £16 each during the years 1767 – 1775 while within the same time bracket a newly arrived African male slave sold for around three times that amount. One downfall to this system would be that convicts were only required to work for ten years or less and the Africans for life. Nevertheless there was a steady flow of convicts available for work just as there were slaves. This possibility of convict labor plus the existing low wage labor from Britain facilitated the change in the use of enslaved labor. This change in the labor market was not the only market adjustment to happen in Britain, the British trading empire had started to flourish in other parts of the world. Now there were no longer just wealthy plantation owners but the added influence of industrialists and merchants that had emerged from the developing market in India. Merchants were able to import items from India to sell in the European market, thereby replacing the once abundant slave products for cheaper items from India such as cloth, cotton, and tea. Amongst the new supply of European labor Britain was able to transition from the process of slavery to that of free labor. The substitute in labor force from enslaved labor allowed business owners to employ work that benefited them more than the Africans could have in the long run. Shifting perceptions of labor likewise helped to explain the empathy of British industrial workers to the difficulties of the enslaved laborers as well as their willingness to partake in the mass petitioning that was seen as part of the British anti-slavery movement before and after 1807. The new ideology in Europe of a laissez- faire approach meant that the process of slavery was no longer as perspective in the eyes of investors and society as a whole.
Furthermore, not only did the change in labor market and trade opportunities within Britain benefit the appeal of ending slavery but the decreasing profitability compared to the increasing cost levels of maintaining slaves seemed less attractive to those involved. The British government earned now more from duties and taxes on imported cotton and the export of manufactured goods than it achieved from the slave trade. The rise of men with new philosophies, such as Adam Smith, challenged the economic arguments that had once been the foundation of the slave trade. More individuals were being convinced that hired labor was cheaper and more productive than slave labor. Landowners came to realize that their profits could increase by giving their workers an incentive, such as a wage, in return for their share of production. Before this view though slaves from Africa were used to grow sugar and harvest other plantation crops because it had been reasoned that they were the least cost choice at the time. Enslaved labor compared to indentured labor was a cheaper option as ships carrying convicts, indentured servants, and fare paying passengers always carried fewer people per ton than did slave ships. If ships carrying Europeans had been as closely packed as those carrying Africans then costs per person would have been much lower for Europeans than for Africans and there would have been a switch in labor force, but this was not to happen. Between the year 1720 and the American Revolution productivity in the rice growing state of South Carolina had been at a steady increase of 1.4% but that was not enough to cover the higher costs in the years after. When the trans- Atlantic slave trade stopped in 1807 the constant supply of slaves from Africa was cut off. It meant that slaves were more of a commodity than ever before that could only be supplied by other plantations selling their slaves. The price of slaves all around the Americas increased steadily with the continuation of the need for slave labor.

Figure 2 shows large spikes in the average price of a slave after the War of 1812 and once again after 1834 a period that had seen diminished sales. Slaves were needed not only in the fields but also in households and other occupations that required skills. As the prices of slaves increased in the Americas the sugar sales to Britain from the West Indies had been cut off due to the protected British market. Another portion of potential profit was unavailable now because of this adjustment in the British market, which had been one of the largest buyers of sugar from the Americas. While it is true that the total output, therefore the measured level of productivity, of a slave would be superior than that of an equally productive free worker it still stands to reason that the profits made from the output of the slave did not equal its maintenance cost. Maintenance costs for a slave included providing shelter, food, clothing, doctor appointments when needed, and the potential threat of having a runaway slave. In the work The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith concluded that the high cost of maintaining slave labor towards the close of the 18th century appeared to have been echoed in a new economic standard by British economics being that of a shift towards capitalism from mercantilism Slavery was a productive and efficient means to create profits on plantations but with the increasing costs for buying and maintaining a slave it meant that revenue was no longer greater than the costs. The rate of return from a slave had therefore decreased; the present value of the maintenance costs outweighed the future amount of services the slave would have provided. From this it can be said that slave labor and free labor were alternatives to each other whose costs depended on the market. Prior to the start of the industrial revolution free labor had cost more than slave labor but that switched after the late 18th century and continued to do so until slavery was abolished. Profits were not as high as they had been and the incentive for enslaved labor was looking less appealing now that other means of labor could be achieved with less the cost and less the risk factor.