For 300 years, from the beginning of the sixteenth to the beginning of the nineteenth century, the transatlantic slave trade—the forced migration of Africans to work as slaves on the plantations and in the mines of British, French, Spanish, Portuguese and Dutch colonies in North and South America and the Caribbean—was carried on legally, and on an everincreasing scale, by the merchants of most Western European countries and their colonial counterparts, aided and abetted by African middlemen. On. 25 March 1807, however, after a lengthy struggle, inside and outside Parliament, it was declared illegal for British subjects (and at this point during the Napoleonic Wars at least half the trade was in British hands) to trade in slaves after 1 May 1808. During the previous twenty years there had been a marked growth of intellectual and moral revulsion against the trade (and, in particular, the horrors of the ‘middle passage’) and changing economic conditions, which to some extent reduced the importance to the British economy of the West Indian colonies for whom the trade was a major lifeline and created new interest groups unconnected with and even hostile to them, facilitated its abolition.

¹ For the slave trade in Portuguese Africa, see, for example,Duffy,James,Portuguese Africa (Harvard Univ. Press,1959), pp.137, 142, 146Google Scholar;Duffy,James,A Question of Slavery. Labour Policies in Portuguese Africa and the British Protest, 1810–1920 (Oxford,1967), pp.1–2Google Scholar;Hammond,R. J.,Portugal and Africa, 1815–1910 (Stanford Univ. Press,1966), pp. 37–8, 42, 55–6, 68–9.Google Scholar

² The most thorough examination of the available evidence on the size, distribution and racial composition of the Brazilian population at the end of the colonial period isAlden,Dauril, ‘The Population of Brazil in the late eighteenth century; a preliminary study’,Hispanic American Historical Review,43 (1963),173–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³ For the structure of the Brazilian economy and Brazilian society at the end of the colonial period, see, for example,Júnior,Caio Prado,Formaçāo do Brasil Contemporâneo (5th ed.,São Paulo,1957): Eng. trans.Google Scholar,The Colonial Background of Modern Brasil (Univ. of California Press,1967),passimGoogle Scholar;de Holanda,Sérgio Buarque (ed.),História Geral da Civilização Brasileira.Tomo 1, vol.11Google Scholar,A Época Colonial. Administraçāo, Economia, Sociedade (São Paulo,1960)Google Scholar,passim;Furtado,Celso,Formaçāo Economica do Brasil (Rio de Janeiro,1959): Eng. trans.Google Scholar,The Economic Growth of Brazil (Univ. of California Press,1963), pp.79–106.Google Scholar Neither the extent nor the harshness of negro slavery in Brazil can, in my view, be disputed. I have deliberately avoided here the controversial question of whether Brazilian slavery was nevertheless milder than slavery elsewhere in the Americas.

⁴ SeeGoulart,Mauricio,Escravidão Africana no Brasil: das origins à extinção do tráfico (Sāo Paulo,1950), pp.265–70.Google Scholar During the colonial period as a whole it is probable that as many as three million slaves were imported into Brazil (Goulart, in Buarque de Holanda,op. cit., p.191).Google Scholar

⁵ SecBoxer,C. R.,Race Relations in the Portuguese Colonial Empire, 1415–1825 (Oxford,1963), pp.101–21Google Scholar;‘Negro Slavery in Brazil: a Portuguese pamphlet of 1764’,Race,5 (1964),38–47.Google Scholar

⁶de Azeredo Coutinho,J. J. da Cunha,Análise sôbre a Justiça do comércio do resgate dos escravos da Costa da Africa (2nd ed.,Lisbon,1808)Google Scholar;Concordância das Lets de Portugal e das Bulas Pontificias, das quais umas permitem a cscravidão dos Prêtos da Africa e outras proîbem a escravidão dos Indios do Brasil (Lisbon,1808).Google Scholar See also,Siqueira,Sonia Aparecida, ‘A escravidão negra no pensamento do bispo Azeredo Coutinho. Contribuição ao estudo da mentalidade do último Inquisidor’,Revista da História (São Paulo),56 (1963),349–65; 57 (1964), 141–76.Google Scholar

⁷ For the transfer of the Portuguese court from Lisbon to Rio de Janeiro and its consequences for Anglo-Portuguese relations, seeManchester's,Alan K. now classicBritish Preeminence in Brazil: its rise and decline (Univ. of North Carolina Press,1933), pp.54–68Google Scholar, and a more recent work,de Freitas,Caio,George Canning e o Brasil (2 vols.,Rio de Janeiro,1958), 1,32–96.Google Scholar

⁸ Treaty of 19 Feb. 1810, article X, British and Foreign State Papers (hereafter cited asB.F.S.P.), 1, 555–7.

⁹ Treaty of 22 Jan. 1815,B.F.S.P., 11, 348–55. Also printed inPinto,Antônio Pereira,Apontamentos. para o Direito Internacional, ou Collecção completa dos Tratados celebrados pelo Brasil com differentes Nações Estrangeiros (4 vols.,Rio de Janeiro,1864–1869),1,124–37.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Treaty of 28 July 1817,B.F.S.P., iv, 85–116;Pinto,Pereira,op. cit., 1,155–88.Google Scholar On the right of search question and the establishment of courts of mixed commission for the adjudication of captured slave ships, see my article‘The Mixed Commissions for the Suppression of the Transatlantic Slave Trade in the Nineteenth Century’,Journal of African History,7 (1966),80–1.Google Scholar

¹¹ The French consul Maler reported that Dom João always discussed the slave trade questioncom calor. Seede Oliveira Lima,Manuel,Dom João VI no Brasil, 1808–21 (2nd ed.,3 vols.,Rio de Janeiro,1945),ii,438.Google Scholar

¹² For the independence of Brazil, seeArmitage,John,The History of Brazil from the Period of the Arrival of the Braganza Family in 1808 to the Abdication of Dom Pedro the First in 1831 (2 vols.,London,1836)Google Scholar;Adolfo de Varnhagen,Francisco, ‘História da independência do Brasil’,Revista do Instituto Histórico e Geográfico Brasileiro,79 (1916),25–594Google Scholar;de Oliveira Lima,Manuel,O Movimento da Independência, 1821–2 (São Paulo,1922)Google Scholar;Monteiro,Tobias do Rego,História do Império: a elaboração da independência (Rio de Janeiro,1927)Google Scholar;de Holanda,Sérgio Buarque (ed.),História Geral da Civilização Brasileira. Tomo II, vol.1Google Scholar,O Brasil Monárquico. O Processo de Emancipação (São Paulo,1962).Google Scholar

¹³Canning, toWard, (chargé; in Lisbon), no. 8, 18101822Google Scholar, printed inWebster,C. K. (ed.),Britain and the Independence of Latin America, 1812–1830. Select Documents from the Foreign Office Archives (2 vols.,London,1938),11,234–5Google Scholar;Canning, toWellington, (at the Congress of Verona), 15101822Google Scholar, printed inDespatches, Correspondence and Memoranda of the Duke of Wellington edited by his son (8 vols., London,1867–1880), 1,358Google Scholar;Canning, toWilberforce,, 1910, 24101822Google Scholar, Canning Papers (Leeds City Library), box 80a; Canning to Bathurst, Secretary for War and Colonies, 6 Dec. 1822, Canning Papers, 106.

¹⁴ Thornton (minister in Lisbon) to Canning, 8 March 1824, Foreign Office Archives (Public Record Office, London), hereafter cited as F.O., 63 (Portugal)/285. See alsoBandinel,James,Some account of the trade in slaves from Africa—especially with reference to the efforts of the British government for its extinction. A memoir to Lord Aberdeen (London,1842), pp.157–8.Google Scholar This work by the Superintendent of the Slave Trade Department of the Foreign Office from 1819 to 1845 is essentially an abstract of Foreign Office slave trade papers.

¹⁵Canning, toWellington,, 15101822Google Scholar, two separate despatches printed in Wellington'sDespatches, op. cit.,1,355,358.Google Scholar

¹⁶ For the policies of Castlereagh and Canning towards Latin American independence in general, seeWebster,,op. cit., intro.Google Scholar

¹⁷Canning, toWellington,, no. 4, 27091822Google Scholar, printed inWebster,,op. cit.,11,74Google Scholar, and quoted inKing,J. F., ‘The Latin American Republics and the Suppression of the Slave Trade’,H.A.H.R.,24 (1944),391.Google Scholar

¹⁸Canning, toWellington,, 30091822Google Scholar, printed in Wellington'sDespatches, op. cit.,1,329.Google Scholar

¹⁹Canning, toWilberforce,, 24101822Google Scholar, printed inCorrespondence of William Wilberforce, ed.,R. I. andWilberforce,S. (2 vols.,London,1840),11,466Google Scholar;Wilberforce, toCanning,, 25101822Google Scholar, Canning Papers, 80a;Canning, toWilberforce,, 31101822Google Scholar, printed in Wellington'sDespatches, op. cit., 1,474.Google Scholar

²⁰ Instructions, 12 Aug. 1822, printed inArchivo Diplomático da Independência (6 vols., Rio de Janeiro,1922–1925)Google Scholar, hereafter cited asA.D.I., 1, 9. Seede Freitas,Caio,op. cit.,1,338–40,344–6.Google Scholar

²¹Brant, toBonifácio,José, 6051822Google Scholar, printed inPublicações do Archivo Publico Nacional,7 (1907),245–6.Google Scholar

²²Brant, toBonifácio,José, 12111822Google Scholar,A.D.I., 1, 198–9; also Hipólito José da Costa to José Bonifácio, no. 3, 12 Nov. 1822,A.D.I.,1,203–5.Google Scholar

²³Brant, toCanning,, 911Google Scholar, enclosed inBrant, toBonifácio,José, 12111822Google Scholar,A.D.I.,1,200–3.Google Scholar

²⁴Brant, toBonifácio,José, 16111822Google Scholar,A.D.I.,1,208–9.Google Scholar

²⁵Brant, toCanning,, 14111822Google Scholar, enclosed in Brant to José Bonifácio, 16 Nov., printed (in English) in Wellington'sDespatches, op. cit.,1,573–5Google Scholar (in full), and inWebster,,op. cit.,11,393 (extracts).Google Scholar

²⁶Brant, toBonifácio,José, 17111822Google Scholar,A.D.I.,1,209.Google Scholar

²⁷Canning, toLiverpool,, 16111822Google Scholar, Canning Papers, 70. AlsoCanning, toLiverpool,, 18111822Google Scholar,ibid.

²⁸ 15 Nov. 1822, Cabinet memorandum, Canning Papers, 131. Extracts printed inWebster,,op, cit..11,393–8.Google Scholar See alsode Freitas,Caio,op. cit.,1,349–52.Google Scholar

²⁹Canning, toLiverpool,, 18111822Google Scholar, Canning Papers, 70;Hipólito, toBonifácio,José, no. 5, 18111822Google Scholar,A.D.I.,1,212–13.Google Scholar

³⁰Brant, toBonifacio,José, 20–30111822Google Scholar,A.D.I.,1,216–21Google Scholar;Hipólito, toBonifácio,José, no. 6, 30111822Google Scholar,A.D.I.,1,213–16.Google Scholar There was some confusion over what the British ministers were demanding. Whereas Brant recalled that they had asked for abolitiondentro em mui curto prazo, Hipólito referred to a request for abolitiondentro em dous anos and, at another point,dentro eu ano.

³¹Brant, toBonifácio,José, 20–30111822Google Scholar; Hipólito no. 6;Hipólito, toBrant,, 21111822Google Scholar, enclosed in Hipólito no. 6.

³²Canning, toWard,, no. 14, 21111822Google Scholar, printed inWebster,,op. cit.,11,235–6.Google Scholar

³³Hipólito, no. 7, 15121822Google Scholar,A.D.I.,1,223–4Google Scholar;Brant, no. 8, 15011823Google Scholar,A.D.I.,1,234–7Google Scholar;Canning, toChamberlain, (Rio), no. 5, 15021823Google Scholar, Secret, printed inWebster,,op. cit.,1,220–1.Google Scholar See also Brant no. 30, 6 May, no. 36, 1 June, no. 42, 1 July 1823,A.D.I.,1,252,264,271.Google Scholar

³⁴ Canning no. 5, Secret.

³⁵Canning, toLiverpool,, 17021823Google Scholar, Secret, Canning Papers, 70.

³⁶Canning, toAmherst,, 18021823Google Scholar, Canning Papers, 80.

³⁷Canning, toAmherst,, 28021823Google Scholar, Secret and Conf.,Canning, toAmherst,, 28021823Google Scholar, Separate, F.O. 84 (Slave Trade)/24.

³⁸Brant, toBonifácio,José, 5071823Google Scholar,A.D.I.,1,278Google Scholar, quoted inManchester,,op. cit., p.193.Google Scholar

³⁹ SeeStein,Stanley J.,Vassouras. A Brazilian Coffee County, 1850–1900 (Harvard Univ. Press,1957), p.295: Free and slave population of Brazil by province, 1823 and 1872.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ There had been a steady expansion of the slave trade during the first quarter of the nine teenth century. For the period after 1808, seeLopes,Edmundo Correla,A Escravatura: subsidios para a Sua história (Lisbon,1944), pp.139–47Google Scholar;Rodrigues,José Honório,Brasil e Africa: outra horizonte (2nd ed.,Rio de Janeiro,1964)Google Scholar: Eng. trans.,Brazil and Africa(Univ. of California Press,1965), pp.117–8.Google Scholar In his bookNotices of Brazil in 1828 and 1829 (2 vols., London;1830),11,322Google Scholar, the Rev. R. Walsh gives the following frequently quoted figures for landings of slaves in the area of Rio de Janeiro: 1822, 27,363; 1823, 20,349; 1824, 29,503; 1825, 26,254. The following estimates of slaves landed during the years 1822–5 are taken from the quarterly returns sent to the Foreign Office by British consuls in Brazil. Rio de Janeiro: 1822, 28,246; 1823, 18,922; 1824, 26,712; 1825, 25,769; Bahia: 1822, 7,656; 1823, 2,672; 1824, 3,137; 1825, 3,840. Smaller numbers of slaves were also landed in Fernambuco and Maranhao, but the figures are incomplete. See alsoTaunay,Affonso de E.,Subsídios para a história do tráfico Africano no Brasil (São Paulo,1941), pp.275–305.Google Scholar

⁴¹Chamberlain, toCanning,, no. 55, 26041823Google Scholar, Secret, F.O. 63/259.

⁴²Bonifácio,José toBrant,, 74021823Google Scholar,A.D.I.,1,24Google Scholar;Pinto,Pereira,op. cit.,1,312.Google Scholar

⁴³Representação à Assembléia geral constituiate e legislativa do Imperio do Brazil sôbre a escravatura (Paris,1825: English trans., London, 1826).Google Scholar

⁴⁴Chamberlain, toCanning,, 2041823Google Scholar, Secret, P.O. 63/259.

⁴⁵ Chamberlain no. 55, Secret; extracts printed inWebster,,op. cit.,1,223–5.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Chamberlain no. 55, Secret. An article inO Espelho, 30 May, by ‘0 Philanthrope’ (the Emperor Dom Pedro himself) recommended abolition after two years (enclosed in Chamberlain to Canning, 6 June 1823, F.O. 63/259).

⁴⁷Amherst, toBonifácio,José, 17051823Google Scholar,A.D.I.,11,444Google Scholar;Amherst, toCanning,, 1705Google Scholar, Secret, F.O. 84/24; Amherst to Canning, 21 May, Priv., Canning Papers, 80.

⁴⁸Bonifácio,José toChamberlain,, 2305Google Scholar, enclosed inChamberlain, toCanning,, no. 62, 24051823, F.O. 63/259.Google Scholar

⁴⁹Chamberlain, toCanning,, 21101823Google Scholar, Sep. and Secret, F.O. 84/24.

⁵⁰ SeeAlves,João Luís, ‘A Questão do Elemento Servil. A Extincção do Tráfico e a Lei de Reprcssão de 1850. Liberdade dos Nascituros’,Revista do instituto Histórico e Geogràfico Brasileiro, Tomo Especial,1914, iv,190–1.Google Scholar

⁵¹Chamberlain, toCanning,, 21101823, Secret, F.O. 84/24.Google Scholar

⁵²Canning, toChamberlain,, no. 10, 5081823, F.O. 84/24.Google Scholar Yet before leaving London Brant had suggested that the best way for Britain to secure an anti-slave trade agreement with Brazil would be by allowing an interim period often years before abolition (Brant to Canning, 3 Aug., enclosed in Brant to Carneiro de Campos, 13 Oct. 1823,A.D.I.,1,289–90).Google Scholar

⁵³ For some of the arguments influencing Canning, seeManchester,,op. cit., pp.193–4.Google Scholar

⁵⁴Chamberlain, toCanning,, no. 164, 31121823Google Scholar, Secret, printed inWebster,,op. cit.,1,232–3Google Scholar;Chamberlain, toCanning,, no. 3, 7011824Google Scholar, Secret,Webster,,op. cit.,1,235.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Instructions, 3 Jan. 1824,A.D.I., I,39–53Google Scholar; Carvalho c Mello to Brant and Gamciro Pessôa, 16 Feb. 1824, Arquivo Histórico do Itamaraty (Rio de Janeiro), hereafter cited as A.H.I., 268/1/14; Carvalho e Mello to Brant and Pessôa, 28 Aug. 1824,A.D.I.,1,89–90.Google Scholar See alsode Freitas,Caio,op. cit.,11,64–8Google Scholar;Manchester,Alan K., ‘The Recognition of Brazilian Independence’,H.A.H.R.,31 (1951),86–7Google Scholar;Calógeras,João Pandiá,A Politica Exterior do Império (2 vols.,Rio de Janeiro,1927–1928),11,78–84.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Brant and Gameiro Pessôa to Carvalho e Mello, 6 June 1824,A.D.I.,11,57.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ For British mediation between Portugal and Brazil and the London Conferences, seeManchester,,British Preeminence, op. cit., pp.192–8Google Scholar;de Freitas,Caio,op. cit.,11,72–136Google Scholar;Calógeras,,op. cit.,11,111 ff.Google Scholar;Lima,Oliveira,O Reconhecimento do Império (1822–7) (Rio de Janeiro,1902), pp.73–166.Google Scholar

⁵⁸Canning, toStuart,, no. 1, 14031825Google Scholar, F.O. 13 (Brazil)/1; extracts inWebster,,op. cit.,1,262–72Google Scholar; also seede Freitas,Caio,op. cit.,11,193–217.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ For Stuart's mission to Lisbon, secde Freitas,Caio,op. cit.,11,221–58Google Scholar;Manchester,,H.A.H.R. (1951),op. cit., pp.94–5.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ For Stuart's negotiations in Rio on behalf of Portugal, seede Freitas,Caio,op. cit.,11,271–302Google Scholar;Manchester,,H.A.H.R. (1951),op. cit., pp.95–6Google Scholar;Manchester,,British Preeminence, op. cit., pp.201–3.Google Scholar The text of the Aug. 1825 Treaty is printed inBurns,E. Bradford,A Documentary History of Brazil (New York,1966), pp.219–22.Google Scholar Dom Pedro was required to promise never to permit any Portuguese African territory to unite with Brazil (there had been disturbances in Luanda and Benguela which through the slave trade enjoyed such close ties with Brazil). In addition to other, broader, considerations Britain had sound abolitionist reasons for supporting Portugal in this demand. For the unconvincing argument that ‘the great idea’ of British diplomacy in this period was not so much the abolition of the slave trade as the separation of Brazil and Africa so as to clear the way for British imperial expansion and the development of Africa as an economic rival of Brazil, seeRodrigues,,op. cit., pp.126,138,141–2,148–9,154–5,165,170,173.Google Scholar

⁶¹Canning, toStuart,, 7051825Google Scholar, F.O. 13/1;Canning, toStuart,, no. 19, 12051825, P.O. 13/1.Google Scholar In November Canning hinted that Britain might give up its commercial privileges in Brazil if their loss were compensated by the simultaneous attainment of such a ‘great moral and political good’ (Canning, toStuart,, 28011825, F.O. 13/2).Google Scholar

⁶²Stuart, toCanning,, 25071825, F.O. 13/4Google Scholar

⁶³ On the negotiation of the abolition treaty of Oct. 1825,Stuart, toCanning,, 2507, 2408, 30081825Google Scholar, F.O. 13/4, 18 Oct. 1825, F.O. 128 (Brazil: Rio legation archives)/4, 21 Oct. 1825, F.O. 13/6, 11 Feb. 1826, Priv., printed inWebster,,op. cit.,1,297–8Google Scholar;Stuart, toPlanta, (P.O.), 5091825Google Scholar,Planta, toCanning,, 5101826Google Scholar, Priv., Canning Papers, 109;Stuart, toParanaguá,, 1510Google Scholar,Amaro,Santo andParanaguá, toStuart,, 1810Google Scholar,Stuart, toAmaro,Santo andParanaguá,, 20101825Google Scholar,A.D.I., vi,159–60,161–2,163–5Google Scholar; Carvalho e Mello to Gameiro Pessôa, 28 Sept. 1825, V. de Inhambupe (Foreign Minister) to V. de Itabayana (Gameiro Pessôa), no. 118, 3 Feb. 1826, A.H.I. 268/1/14;Stuart, toInhambupe,, 15041826Google Scholar, A.H.I. 273/1/8. On the negotiations for the commercial treaty of Oct. 1825, seePryor,A. J., Anglo-Brazilian Commercial Relations and the Evolution of Brazilian Tariff Policy, 1822–1850 (unpublished Ph.D. thesis,Cambridge,1965), pp.32–44Google Scholar;de Freitas,Caio,op. cit.,11,348–68.Google Scholar The treaties were published in theDiario Fluminense (Rio de Janeiro), 14 Nov. 1825, and subsequently in the London press—much to Canning's annoyance.

⁶⁴ Quoted inTemperley,The Foreign Policy of Canning, 1822–1827 (London,1925), pp.508–9.Google Scholar

⁶⁵Canning, toLiverpool,, 27111825Google Scholar, printed inSome Official Correspondence of George Canning, ed.Stapleton,Edward J. (2 vols.,London,1887),1,334.Google Scholar

⁶⁶Canning, toStuart,, no. 1, 12011826, F.O. 84/56.Google Scholar AlsoCanning, toHuskisson,, 2211, 2611, 30121825Google Scholar, Canning Papers, 117.Inhambupe, toParanaguá,, 9011826Google Scholar,A.D.I.,11,324Google Scholar;Canning, toStuart,, no. 2, 12011826, F.O. 13/17.Google Scholar The Law Officers of the Crown supported this ‘generally recognized principle’, 8 Dec. 1825, F.O. 83 (Great Britain and General)/2343. Dr Stephen Lushington, a well-known abolitionist M.P. and student of international law, could not recall that the principle had ever been maintained by any writer on international law, nor upheld by any state, Memorandum, 26 Jan. 1826, F.O. 84/60.

⁶⁷Canning, toStuart,, no. 1, 12011826, P.O. 84/56.Google Scholar

⁶⁸memorandum,Huskisson, 1011826, F.O. 13/33Google Scholar;Huskisson, toCanning,, 1011826, Priv., Canning Papers, 68.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ SeeAlves,,op. cit., pp.192–3.Google Scholar

⁷⁰Canning, toGordon,, no. 1, 108, no. 3, 1081826, F.O. 13/25.Google Scholar

⁷¹Canning, toGordon,, 18121826, Priv., Canning Papers, 126.Google Scholar

⁷² Quoted inCalógeras,,op. cit.,11,497.Google Scholar

⁷³A'Court, toCanning,, 3101826, F.O. 84/54Google Scholar; seeBandinel,,op. cit., pp.157–8.Google Scholar In the event, it was December 1836 before Portugal prohibited the slave trade by law and July 1842 before a new and comprehensive Anglo-Portuguese abolition treaty was signed, following the adoption by Britain in 1839 of coercive anti-slave trade measures. See my article‘Britain, Portugal and the Suppression of the Brazilian Slave Trade: the Origins of Lord Palmerston's Act of 1839’,English Historical Review,80 (1965),767–84.Google Scholar

⁷⁴Gordon, toCanning,, no. 1, 2711, no. 2, 27111826, F.O. 84/56Google Scholar;Gordon, toCanning,, no. 5, 2711, no. 6, 2711, no. 7, 27111826, F.O. 13/26Google Scholar;Inhambupe, toItabayana,, 2711, 4121826, A.H.I. 268/1/14.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Treaty of 23 Nov. 1826,B.F.S.P.,14,609–12Google Scholar;Pinto,Percira,op. cit.,1,389–93.Google Scholar There was widespread and vehement opposition in Brazil to a treaty which, as Gordon later remarked, had been ‘ceded at our request in opposition to the views and wishes of the whole Empire’ (Gordon to Dudley, no. 1, 17 May 1828, P.O. 84/84). For the angry debate in the Chamber nf Deputies, 2–4 July 1827, seeRodrigues,,op. cit., pp.144–54.Google Scholar The Brazilian government tried and failed to persuade Britain to agree to a postponement of the date now set for final abolition.

⁷⁶ On the negotiation of the Anglo-Brazilian commercial treaty of 1827, seePryor,,op. cit., pp.45–7Google Scholar;de Freitas,Caio,op. cit.,11,375–7Google Scholar;Manchester,,British Preeminence, op. cit., pp.206–11.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ SeeAlves,,op. cit., pp.208–11Google Scholar;Malheiro,Agostinho Marques Perdigão,A Escravidão no Brasil (3 vols.,Rio de Janeiro,1867),111, Appendix 2.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ SeeWalsh,,op. cit.,11,322Google Scholar;Filho,Luís Vianna,O Negro na Bahia (Rio de Janeiro,1946), p.98.Google Scholar Also quarterly returns of British consuls in Brazil.

⁷⁹Stein,,Vassouras, op. cit., p.12.Google Scholar See alsoFurtado,,op. cit., pp.123–4Google Scholar;Costa,Emília Viotti da,Da Sentala à Colônia (São Paulo,1966), pp.19–24.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ See my forthcoming book,The Abolition of the Brazilian Slave Trade. Britain, Brazil and the Slave Trade Question, 1807–1869, to be published by Cambridge University Press.