Slave Trade with no American Revolution

If the colonies stayed as part of the British Empire, how would the slave trade develop? Would the Empire become as anti slave as it was in OTL, or would it now have a vested interest in continuing it with the Southern colonies?
 
The Southerners would likely approve of the ban on the slave trade. Supply and demand after all; when the supply dries up, their slaves become even more valuable. They might react violently to attempts to end slavery. Maybe not. I don't think the sugar islands rose up in rebellion over abolition. Still, the plantation owners will demand compensation for lost property giving the property (usually in the form of land) = liberty attitude.
 
Doesn't matter. Insert whatever sounds plausible to you. Point of the thread is to discuss how the slave trade is affected.

The reason the sugar islands didn't rebel either in 1775 or on the abolition of slavery was that they were all relatively small, vulnerable due to their massive slave populations (>90%) and being islands completely dependent on the Royal Navy for any form of communication and trade. The Southern mainland colonies are stronger in every sense with bigger white populations, more space and not dependent on the RN. So they would definitely fight much harder both politically and if necessarily military to defend slavery than the Sugar Isles. As for whether they rebel it depends on how the Revolution was averted, to state the obvious pre-1775 Britain wasn't very good at listening to the needs and desires of the colonists so in the unlikely event that there had been no reform to the Empire's governance then Britain would probably abolish slavery on schedule and trigger a Rebellion. If on the other has there has been some kind of move to an Imperial Federation including representatives from BNA then who knows what would happen. Probably delayed abolition and then compensated emancipation but it al depends on the context.
 
It ends in 1806/1807 like OTL. That at least is reasonably predictable.

As for slavery itself, I think it:

A. Gets dragged out for decades after 1838 due to combined a Caribbean and Southern planter lobby before ending peacefully.

B. Results in southern North America trying to split off from the rest of the British Empire violently.

C. Results in slavery continuing in southern North America until almost the turn of the century, because no outside legislature has the power to abolish it in those provinces.

The problem with Britain making moves to abolish slavery in its colonies in 1833 is that by 1833 the North American colonies will almost certainly be in some sort of Dominion-like relationship with the UK, or they'd have revolted long ago. Remember that by 1830 the North American colonies would have a larger population than England; a subordinate relationship wouldn't last to the 1830s. And ATL there's no particular reason for the colonies to be tied together under a central North American government.
.
 
Last edited:
If the colonies stayed as part of the British Empire, how would the slave trade develop? Would the Empire become as anti slave as it was in OTL, or would it now have a vested interest in continuing it with the Southern colonies?

To be honest.....I'm afraid there's not a lot of good news in that regard; It might end around 1806-07 as it did in our history, but sadly, there's a rather strong chance it may last a good bit longer, with the Southern colonies holding them back: I'd put the most likely end at anywhere between 1825-40, with slavery itself ending entirely between 1845 to 1875. If there's one thing that can be said, the success of the Revolution no doubt humbled Britain and gave a *huge* boost to the abolitionist movement in the rest of the Empire that remained(which became apparent from about 1790 onwards).
 
To be honest.....I'm afraid there's not a lot of good news in that regard; It might end around 1806-07 as it did in our history, but sadly, there's a rather strong chance it may last a good bit longer, with the Southern colonies holding them back: I'd put the most likely end at anywhere between 1825-40, with slavery itself ending entirely between 1845 to 1875. If there's one thing that can be said, the success of the Revolution no doubt humbled Britain and gave a *huge* boost to the abolitionist movement in the rest of the Empire that remained(which became apparent from about 1790 onwards).

Why wouldn't the slave trade end in 1806-1807? The southern US was fine with it OTL, for the reasons The Kiat stated. I don't see any real reason they would fight against it in this TL either. Hell, the colonial legislature of South Carolina passed a bill ending the trade in 1770 (the governor vetoed it).

I don't agree with the second point either, abolitionism would have gotten just as strong in Britain and the northern states, but that doesn't mean they could have done anything about it.
 
Why wouldn't the slave trade end in 1806-1807? The southern US was fine with it OTL, for the reasons The Kiat stated. I don't see any real reason they would fight against it in this TL either. Hell, the colonial legislature of South Carolina passed a bill ending the trade in 1770 (the governor vetoed it).

Maybe, but that's largely because they were no longer part of the British Empire. Are we really so sure that would remain the same in a no ARW scenario?

I don't agree with the second point either, abolitionism would have gotten just as strong in Britain and the northern states, but that doesn't mean they could have done anything about it.

But the problem is, the Revolution failing, and Britain being humbled, was exactly one of the major reasons why abolitionism took off after 1781. Without that key factor, it would be a major challenge to even still entirely end the slave trade right around OTL's date, let alone slavery as a whole.
 
Maybe, but that's largely because they were no longer part of the British Empire. Are we really so sure that would remain the same in a no ARW scenario?

But as my example shows, there was desire for it in the South even back during the late colonial period, and Britain itself abolished the slave trade in 1806.

But the problem is, the Revolution failing, and Britain being humbled, was exactly one of the major reasons why abolitionism took off after 1781. Without that key factor, it would be a major challenge to even still entirely end the slave trade right around OTL's date, let alone slavery as a whole.

I disagree with that assessment and don't see any evidence for it, I think abolitionism was practically inevitable as a consequence of the Enlightenment. It caught on at roughly the same time pretty much everywhere in Europe and the US (aside from in the slavery-dependent economies), and the seeds of abolitionism were already very much present by the 1770s.
 
I've thought about this issue extensively, and am very confident about what the final answer is:

- The British Empire will ban slavery within a year or so after the middle classes get the vote. The gap in support for slavery between the middle class and the upper class is so huge that opinion changes are highly unlikely to matter.
- Whether or not the ban expands to the southern American colonies will entirely depend on whether whatever autonomy deal offered to them covers such matters.
- If push comes to shove, the southern colonies won't fight a war over slavery. It would be suicidal to take on both the northern colonies, the world's greatest navy and their chief export market.
 
Top