Development of Slavery in the Northeastern Colonies

The development of slavery in the northeastern colonies of the United States had its origins in the general slave trade of the world. The European slave trade so essential to crops such as sugarcane in British and French colonies abroad was transported to American soil with the colonization of the original British holdings in America. It was not until cotton became such a cash crop in the southernmost colonies, however, that the slave trade became so fully entrenched in the entire economic well being of what were to become the United States of America. Slavery, as it evolved in the United States, became largely a southern "problem," because it came to bolster the interests of the cotton planters of the South to a far greater extent than it supported a northern, more urban economy based on manufacturing.

The northern colonies were actively trading in slaves in eighteenth century New England. Newport, Rhode Island, was a principal port of entry. From the period 1672 to 1760, slave trade in the northern colonies rose steadily, despite the objections of some colonial governors. In fact, colonial legislatures imposed duties on slave importations, but royal instructions (in 1731) forbade governors consenting to such acts. The action of S.C., 1760, in prohibiting the slave trade entirely was disallowed by the King Council. After 1690, slave importation mounted sharply.

The northeastern part of the United States saw numerous slave plots and insurrections during the period

Related Essays

Discontent in the American Colonies The United States of America .... tactical turning point in the fight against slavery. .... contributed to the economic development of the .... the Negro slave - the Northeastern colonies most certainly .... (2829 11 )

Racial Order at Cape Town .... distinct regional patterns of racial development, particularly in .... the "trekboer" region of the northeastern part of .... region of the southwest slavery remained a .... (6092 24 )

lantership begins with the admonishment, "In the first place, then, as it is in the interest of every planter to preserve his negroes in health and strength; so every act of cruelty is not less repugnant to the master's real profit, than it is contrary to the laws of humanity." The above passage (from the second edition of the Britannica, 1778-1783) is significant because it shows that the founding fathers and colonial governors were at least exposed to a more enlightened European influence with regard to slave ownership. The fact that they may have done away with slavery for political reasons or lack of a significant personal economic interest hardly diminishes the fact that slavery was unacceptable in the North far earlier than it was in the South. It could also be argued, as has been shown by the lengthy passage from Fogel's study, that the early colonists who settled in the North gave up a considerable economic interest by cutting all ties to the Crown, while at the same time denouncing slavery. The extinction of slavery in the North followed the pattern (in order of states making it illegal): Pennsylvania (1780); Connecticut and Rhode Island (1784); New York (1785); and New Jersey (1786). As Morris recounts, "By judici

Category: History - D