The West Africa Squadron’s uniqueness becomes clear when you compare it to the actions, or inactions, of other slave-trading nations after Britain abolished the trade in 1807.
Portugal continued slave trading to Brazil for another sixty years, abolishing it legally only in 1869 and in practice somewhat later. During much of this period, Portuguese-flagged ships and Brazilian-flagged ships were among the most active in the trade. Portugal made no effort comparable to Britain’s to suppress the trade in which its own nationals were engaged.
France continued slave trading to its Caribbean colonies and abolished it formally in 1831, though the trade continued illegally for years afterward. France made no sustained naval effort to suppress the trade.
The United States presents a particularly striking contrast. American ships were among the most active in the slave trade through the 1840s and 1850s, partly because the United States refused for decades to sign treaties granting Britain the right to search American-flagged vessels. American law made slave trading a capital offence from 1820, but enforcement was minimal. No American naval equivalent of the West Africa Squadron existed.
Spain continued slave trading to Cuba until 1867, despite repeated British diplomatic pressure and treaty obligations. Brazil continued until 1850, when British naval vessels began entering Brazilian ports to seize slave ships, an act of considerable diplomatic boldness that finally forced Brazilian compliance.
The pattern is consistent. Every other major slave-trading nation continued the trade after Britain abolished it, none invested in enforcement on anything approaching Britain’s scale, and several required sustained British pressure before they eventually desisted. The argument that Britain bears unique or disproportionate responsibility for the slave trade, relative to other nations, does not survive examination of this record.
