The Slaving Capital in the Era of Abolition: Liverpool's Silent Rejection of the Slave Trade, 1787-1807

<p>In 1787, when the British abolition movement began, the Liverpool slave trade was the largest in the world. Contemporaries throughout Britain, but especially in the port, viewed the slave trade as the primary source of Liverpool’s growth and prosperity in the eighteenth century. Liverpudlians, therefore, reacted negatively to the abolition movement, which they viewed as a threat to both the local and national economy. By 1788, the immense popular support generated by the abolition campaign left Liverpool isolated in its defence of the slave trade. Liverpudlians, however, were not unanimous in their support of the slave trade’s continuance. In 1787 and 1788, a small group of rational dissenters, known as the Roscoe Circle, anonymously contributed to the abolition campaign from Liverpool. The group’s namesake, William Roscoe, went on to be elected Member of Parliament for Liverpool in 1806, and in March 1807 he voted in favour of abolishing the slave trade along with 282 other MPs, against just sixteen, including Liverpool’s other MP. This thesis examines reactions in Liverpool to the British abolition movement between the start of the campaign in 1787 and the passage of the Slave Trade Abolition Act in 1807. It highlights the periods 1787-1788 and 1796-1807 to challenge the view of Liverpool as a town almost uniformly averse to abolition throughout the twenty year campaign. Chapters One and Two examine the immediate pro- and anti-abolition responses in Liverpool in 1787 and 1788, respectively focusing on the contributions of Liverpool slaving merchants to the anti-abolition campaign and on the abolitionist activities of the Roscoe Circle. Drawing on Liverpool guidebooks and a series of letters in the Liverpool Chronicle, Chapter Three then traces the gradual change in popular feeling towards abolition that occurred in Liverpool in the last decade of the British slave trade’s existence. Ultimately, this thesis argues that rapidly dwindling Liverpudlian support for the slave trade from the mid-1790s onward has been under-valued. By 1807 Liverpudlians, wanting to re-affirm cultural ties with the rest of Britain, turned their backs on the slave trade, which had by then become a source of unease and embarrassment.</p>

The Slaving Capital in the Era of Abolition: Liverpool's Silent Rejection of the Slave Trade, 1787-1807

<p>In 1787, when the British abolition movement began, the Liverpool slave trade was the largest in the world. Contemporaries throughout Britain, but especially in the port, viewed the slave trade as the primary source of Liverpool’s growth and prosperity in the eighteenth century. Liverpudlians, therefore, reacted negatively to the abolition movement, which they viewed as a threat to both the local and national economy. By 1788, the immense popular support generated by the abolition campaign left Liverpool isolated in its defence of the slave trade. Liverpudlians, however, were not unanimous in their support of the slave trade’s continuance. In 1787 and 1788, a small group of rational dissenters, known as the Roscoe Circle, anonymously contributed to the abolition campaign from Liverpool. The group’s namesake, William Roscoe, went on to be elected Member of Parliament for Liverpool in 1806, and in March 1807 he voted in favour of abolishing the slave trade along with 282 other MPs, against just sixteen, including Liverpool’s other MP. This thesis examines reactions in Liverpool to the British abolition movement between the start of the campaign in 1787 and the passage of the Slave Trade Abolition Act in 1807. It highlights the periods 1787-1788 and 1796-1807 to challenge the view of Liverpool as a town almost uniformly averse to abolition throughout the twenty year campaign. Chapters One and Two examine the immediate pro- and anti-abolition responses in Liverpool in 1787 and 1788, respectively focusing on the contributions of Liverpool slaving merchants to the anti-abolition campaign and on the abolitionist activities of the Roscoe Circle. Drawing on Liverpool guidebooks and a series of letters in the Liverpool Chronicle, Chapter Three then traces the gradual change in popular feeling towards abolition that occurred in Liverpool in the last decade of the British slave trade’s existence. Ultimately, this thesis argues that rapidly dwindling Liverpudlian support for the slave trade from the mid-1790s onward has been under-valued. By 1807 Liverpudlians, wanting to re-affirm cultural ties with the rest of Britain, turned their backs on the slave trade, which had by then become a source of unease and embarrassment.</p>

Prison Abolition

Prison abolition as an American movement, strategy, and theory has existed since the establishment of prison as the primary mode of punishment. In many of its forms, it is an extension of abolition movements dating back to the inception of slavery. The long-term goal of prison abolition is for all people to live in a safe, liberated, and free world. In practice, prison abolition values healing and accountability, suggesting an entirely different way of living and maintaining relationships outside of oppressive regimes, including that of the prison. Prison abolition is concerned with the dismantling of the prison–industrial complex and other oppressive institutions and structures, which restrict true liberation of people who have been marginalized by those in power. These structures include white supremacy, patriarchy, capitalism, and ablest and heteronormative ideologies. The origins of the prison regime are both global and rooted in history with two fundamental strategies of dominance, the captivity of African-descended peoples, and the conquest of Indigenous and Aboriginal peoples, land and resource. Similarly, the origins of prison abolition begin with the resistance of these systems of dominance. The contemporary prison abolition movement, today, is traced to the Attica Prison Uprising in 1971 when incarcerated people in the New York prison rebelled and demanded change in the living conditions inside prison. The nature of the uprising was different from prior efforts, insofar as the organizers’ demands were about fundamental rights, not merely reforms. Throughout the history of abolition work, there is continuous division between reform and abolition organizers. When the lives, voices, and leadership of the people most impacted by the violence of these oppressive regimes is centered, there is minimal space for discussion of reform. Throughout the abolition movement in America, and other western cultures, the leadership of Black, Indigenous, women, and gender-nonconforming people of color play a pivotal role. By centering the experiences of those most vulnerable, abolitionists understand prison does not need to be reformed and is critical of fashionable reforms and alternatives to prisons which are still rooted in carceral logic.

Foucault, prison, and human rights: A dialectic of theory and criminal justice reform

Michel Foucault’s advocacy toward penal reform in France differed from his theories. Although Foucault is associated with the prison abolition movement, he also proposed more humane prisons. The article reframes Foucauldian theory through a dialectic with the theories of Marc Ancel, a prominent figure in the emergence of liberal sentencing norms in France. Ancel and Foucault were contemporaries whose legacies are intertwined. Ancel defended more benevolent prisons where experts would rehabilitate offenders. This evokes exactly what Discipline and Punish cast as an insidious strategy of social control. In reality, Foucault and Ancel converged in intriguing ways. The dialectic offers another perspective on Foucault, whose theories have fostered skepticism about the possibility of progress. While mass incarceration’s rise in the United States may evoke a Foucauldian dystopia, the relative development of human rights and dignity in European punishment reflects aspirations that Foucault embraced as an activist concerned about fatalistic interpretations of his theories.