The Progressive: The GOP’s new ploy to destroy Social Security

[happyslug]

31. In 1776 the biggest concern of London was the Sugar Plantation in the West Indies

Last edited Wed Jan 14, 2015, 04:38 PM - Edit history (1)

Which was also the main concern of the French, thus when the French intervened in the American Revolution, they sent their ships and troops to the West Indies NOT the American Colonies.

Now, this was also the days BEFORE Satellite images, thus it was impossible to know where a Hurricane was forming, if a Hurricane was active, or where it was headed. Thus from June through October Europeans of the 1700s kept their fleets out of the Caribbean/West Indies to avoid losing them to a hurricane. The British kept their Fleet either in Charleston South Carolina or New York City between June and October, the French, when they had Canada, kept their fleet in Quebec. Come October both fleets would sail to the West Indies, via Europe and Africa (for that is how the currents AND wind ran).

During the Revolution the British taking of Charleston was to get a port close to the West Indies but out of most Hurricanes (and If one was headed for Charleston, you could tell by the movement of the clouds that indicated a hurricane was in the West Indies and then take the Gulf Stream up to New York City or even London to get away from the Hurricane). Those clouds would indicate a Hurricane was present, but not where. In the West Indies if you stayed in a harbor which was hit by a Hurricane you lost your ship. If you sailed out of the harbor you had a good chance of sailing right into a Hurricane and these losing your ship. If your ship was in the American Colonies you knew that Hurricanes always came from the West Indies, thus by sailing out and catching the Gulf Stream (an option NOT really available south of Carolina) you could out sail any Hurricane, if you left early enough. Florida was dangerous for a Hurricane could survive passing over Florida and hit a ship sailing outward. A Hurricane could also come from the Bahamas and wreck a ship on Florida or the Bahamas. The Gulf Stream does flow through the Bahamas, but for a quick safe getaway starts as the Gulf Stream "starts" as it leaves the Bahamas (and thus the Carolinas).

Thus in the 1700s you had soldiers and ships to fight in North America mostly between June and October, the Hurricane season. Once the Hurricane Season ended, the Fleets and any soldiers they could take with them went to the West Indies to fight (Thus Yorktown occurred in September 1781, just before both the British and French Fleet were set to return to the West Indies).

In the West Indies itself the biggest fear of the Plantation owners was that the local white and freed slave population would fight any invasion and in that fight destroy they investments in sugar refining. Thus if a Fleet and Troops would show up, the Ruling Elite wanted to quickly surrender so to preserve their investments. The invading force generally knew this and thus show no need to work to get the slaves on their side, for they wanted those plantations and their Slaves. Thus the biggest concern was the white population that was NOT tied in with the Plantation and the freed slave population, who would fight to preserve their connection with what little their had.

Given this situation no one in POWER in Paris, London or elsewhere were talking about abolishment of slavery anywhere. Till the Sugar Beat became a competitive source of Sugar (while the Sugar beat was known by 1747, the first factory to produce sugar from Sugar Beats was NOT created till 1801, in what was then Prussia, and that was result of the British Blockade of Europe which included sugar from the West Indies, this lead to Napoleon adopting and expanding Sugar Beat production and even banning importing care Sugar in 1813). This desire for sugar was so important that Abolishment groups advocated adopting beat sugar in the 1830s as one method to end slavery.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_beet#Creation

By the 1830s, Sugar was no longer the high profit item it had been in the 1700s do to the competition form Beat Sugar (France and Germany had both switched to beat Sugar by the 1830, thus cutting back severely on demand for cane sugar). This reduction in price and reduction in profit (for Britain and the US stayed with using exclusively Cane Sugar longer then any other country, for even Russia was switching to beat sugar by the 1850s) lead to a drop in price and a drop in the power of the sugar plantation (and thus the ability of Britain to abolish slavery in 1837, through it is unclear how many of those "Freed" Slaves ended up in the American South where the demand for slaves to pick cotton was increasing tremendously at that time period, it was done but no records for technically it was illegal, but the huge increase in Slaves in the American South had to come from some place).

Except for Haiti, no slave revolt has EVER been successful. Haiti was successful for France was fearful of losing it to the British and Spanish thus under the first slave revolt 1791-1794 the French freed the slaves so the slaves would fight for France against the invading British. Thus from 1794 to 1801 there was NO slavery in Haiti. The Former Slaves even defeated a British invasion in 1798. Then in 1801 Napoleon decided Haiti would be a slave colony. This was during a time of peace between Britain and France. It is believed Josephine, whose family was a white slave owning family from Haiti, convinced Napoleon to do so (and may be the reason Napoleon later divorced her). That army was defeated in 1804, but after the war with Britain had resumed, thus the French Army in Haiti was in effect abandoned by Napoleon do to the fact the French Fleet was that much weaker then the British Fleet. In simple terms the Haitian revolt was successful do to the fact the slave owners had to give the slaves freedom to stop a foreign invasion and then when that invasion had been defeated the ability to re-enslave the slaves could NOT be done do to the actions of that same foreign invaders (who themselves would have kept the slaves enslaved for their wanted the sugar from the sugar plantations and that included use of the slaves as slaves).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haitian_Revolution

Now, slaves did join the British Army during the American Revolution and they were some of the most effective forces on the British side. Slavery existed in all of the Colonies but north of Delaware and Maryland in very low numbers. On the other hand South of Pennsylvania the number of slaves increase tremendously. When the war was being fought in the North (1775 through 1777) you had SOME slaves joining the British but few, for the number of slaves norht of Maryland were few. On the other hand when the War shifted to the South, you had a hufe increase in the numbers of slaves fighting for the British, with some 18,000 left with the British when they evacuated Charleston in 1783.

Now, the Quakers had for a long time opposed slavery but do to their stealing lands from the Native Americans, then selling it to the Scot Irish, and then abandoning the Scot-Irish to the Native Americans in the Subsequent Wars (The French and Indian wars), they has little influence by 1780s (and the Quakers had overwhelmingly back the crown in 1775-1782 so another factor against their influence). Thus it was Puritan Massachusetts NOT Pennsylvania that was the First State to Abolish Slavery. One of the reasons for this is it was seen during the American Revolution that Slaves were an internal security problem in times of war and the best way to handle them was to free them. This movement was strongest in the South till the late 1790s and slavery was about to be abolished in the US by 1808 (A date set in the Constitution for Congress to be able to forbid the importation of Slaves).

Then the Cotton Gin was invented which permitted High Land Cotton to be used like low land cotton in the growing cotton mills in England. High Land Cotton was a crop that could be grown south of Virginia and the boom in Cotton lead to an increase demand for slaves and the Anti-Slavery movement moved back north.

This also lead to a change in attitude of Britain, first, except in the American, South Britain NEVER freed Slaves when the slaves had switched sides to fight for them (See the above on Haiti for an example of that). Britain wanted to take over areas when it could make a profit and that was Sugar prior to about 1830 and then Cotton after 1800. When push came to shove, Britain was even willing to supply troops to the American South except Britain did not know where it would look to replace the wheat it imported from the US North at that time period. .

Britain's main alternatives for wheat imports was Russia but that option was NOT available for Britain was opposing the Russians as the Tsar was putting down a Polish Revolt that the British was supporting. Yes, Britain was more then ready to fight FOR SLAVERY in 1862, but the fear of an internal revolt do to a massive increase in the price of Bread in London prevented them. Russia control grain exports from not only Russia in 1862, but also what is today the Ukraine and Poland. Britains leaders remembered that Wellington's Army in Spain during the Napoleonic War had been feed on New England Wheat and that dependence on the US for Wheat had increased NOT decreased since 1815.

Thus Britain NEVER suppressed Slavery when it was to Britain's economic benefit to preserve it. Yes, Britain abolished Slavery in its Colonies in 1837, but by then the market for Sugar had collapsed and the West Indies were going from one of the Richest areas of the World in the 1700s to one of the poorest in the 1900s. Thus it is wishful thinking that Slavery was on its way out by 1776 and Britain would lead the way to its abolishment. Yes, Slaves did back the British in the subsequent invasion of the US (and the British military moves of 1774-1776 were nothing but a full scale invasion) and Britain used such slaves but Britain had no intention of freeing any slave that did NOT fight for them (The same offer of freedom was made the the Confederate Congress, over President Davis objections, in March of 1865, but by then it was to late and that offer included payment to the owner for the lost of his slave).

Americans were NOT afraid of abolishment of Slavery by Britain in 1775 but the take over of the colonies away from the people then controlling those colonies (and that included slave holders, especially in the south). On the other had slaves would fight on the side that offered them freedom and as the war shifted to the South that became the British. The North, after the Revolution, took this fact and decided the best way to end such an internal security hazard was to abolish slavery and the North then adopted various laws to end slavery over a time period (States also did NOT want elderly slaves "Freed" so they would become wards of the States AND wanted to NOT be taking "Property" without compensation, thus it was a gradual abolishment, Pennsylvania said it had no slaves after 1848, New Jersey had about 8 slaves left in 1866 when Slavery was abolished by the 13th amendment.

The South and the rest of the colonies thought they could handle any Slave Revolt and did so up to and including the US Civil War. Slaves were feared but also seen as a money making machine. With the high return on an investment in slaves after 1795 slavery boomed in the South even during the period the South was subject to British Naval Raids (1813-1815). During the War of 1812, the British took 3000 American Slaves out of the US but paid for them after the war:

http://facts.randomhistory.com/war-of-1812-facts.html

Thus slavery was a factor in the HOW wars were fought, but except for the later years of the Revolution no concentrated effort was made by the British to recruit slaves. In many ways the slaves were intended to be used and then discarded but Britain needed loyal subjects in both Canada and the West Indies in 1783 and these Freed Slaves were perfect for they freedom was tied in with they loyalty to Britain.

Just a comment that Slavery was a factor in the Revolution but NOT in why it happened but how it was fought. No one thought of the Slaves till they showed up and offered to fight and then they were used and valued. And as far as Slave owners were concerned, they found out how "Loyal" their slaves were to them, and made sure the slaves knew what would happen to them if their escaped and were caught. Punishment increased after 1795 as the South demand for slaves increased AND the North headed to abolishment of slavery.

My favorite topic in Britain and Slavery was when Britain abolished slavery in Britain in 1807. There had been no slaves on Britain for centuries EXCEPT those brought back from the West Indies or America to live with their masters while the master was in Britain for some other reason. Thus the abolishment was more words than reality:

https://books.google.com/books?id=T_fT06fyMwsC&pg=PA78&lpg=PA78&dq=1813+Attack+on+Washington+slave&source=bl&ots=7XB5k2GWGk&sig=PbCvRGpHQ5FhPM8nQrPzhA_xd9I&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RL62VKCkJPb7sASr1ICgBQ&ved=0CEcQ6AEwBzgK#v=onepage&q=1813%20Attack%20on%20Washington%20slave&f=false