Williams Mercantilist Preferential Trade Analysis

Analysis Historians Williams, Carrington and Ragatz the three main proposers of economic decline believed that the economic system of slavery was a doomed system battered and bruised by time and the changes in both the Old and New World. The strength of the arguments put forward by the likes of Williams, Ragatz and Carrington hinged on the presence of undeniable evidence which would show a decline. Seymour Drescher and his supporters believed that the slavery system was removed due to the efforts of humanitarian pressure groups which enforced their positions through parliamentary Acts.

The slavery system was critiqued heavily by economist Adam Smith. Smith posited that the economic system of slavery accompanied by the mercantilist preferential

This strong position held by Drescher was based on his interpretation of the figures which Williams himself used in his Capitalism and Slavery. Drescher made the connection between the figures provided by Williams for the period in question to the year 1722. Drescher had placed emphasis on the presence of fluctuations in the value of sugar but the rate of importation and production remain the same. Drescher was challenged by Brion Davis as placed attention to the nature of the West Indian Colonies within the market. The nature of the economic system of mercantilist preferential trade was put in place to ensure that the wealth of the colonies remained within the British Empire. The crux of this system was the self-sufficiency of the trade from America to Britain. This enclosed system would ensure that outside factors would have limited effects on the production or imports of Sugar to Britain. This comfort eroded in 1763 with America deciding to remove itself from the subject of British Control Leading to their independence in 1776. Williams stated that ‘American independence destroyed the mercantile system and discredited the old regime’. The Independent America could no longer trade with British colonies and

Ward contends Dresechers position with the figures he provided. Carrington provides an important analysis of these figures. He posited simply that the fluctuations in value of the British slave trade after 1783 was the returning of the economy back to stability after the effects of the war. The reality was that the growth of capitalism was gaining favour as Britain’s focus on industry grew. The sugar industry and mercantilism had built up Britain’s industry. Britain had long since moved past the days of making sweet cakes and tea sweeteners. With the large volume of raw materials from the new world their development of factories saw clothes and canned goods being mass produced. While profit was afforded to the manufacturers their economic gains were being stifled by the King Sugar as the mercantilist system used to nurse and wean an infantile sugar economy. The BWI sugar industry initially saw little competition but France through their economic cheat code of St. Domingue soon over took control of the sugar market of the Americas. This had a considerable impact on the decision to implement the abolition of the slave trade ad the British looked to an early end to the trade and the forced implementation of waged labour would have destroyed the French and Spanish sugar industries. This resulted in great loss not only from the initial loss of the replenishable supply of labour but