um and
revolution have been associated together for centuries. Rum
is “the global spirit with its warm beating heart in the
Caribbean,” the one factor that is
shared by all the
cultures of the region, and enthusiastically drunk by the
descendants of those who were enslaved to produce it.
I began drinking rum
with uninformed enthusiasm at an age that would have had the
child welfare crowd taking me into care if I had been in New
York instead of Liverpool. But I began researching the
subject seriously many years later while working in the
Caribbean, which was my point of departure.
All over the islands
are massive forts and harbors, barracks and other monuments
to the time when the Caribbean was to the world what the
Gulf is now. Literally hundreds of thousands of soldiers
died in the struggles to control these fecund volcanic
hilltops where ample supplies of sun and water combined to
make sugar.
It was not the only
parallel with the modern world: rum and sugar anticipated
modern problems of globalization, of empire and deficits, of
war and taxation.
The sugar trade
provided the liquid capital to fund the British National
Debt, the real secret weapon that ensured British dominance
against the threat from a much richer and more populous
France. So where does rum fit?
It was in Barbados in
the first half of the seventeenth century that the British
colonists realized that the by-product of sugar refining,
molasses, was more than just an inferior sweetener. In the
tropics it fermented quickly, and although the immediate
product was an intestinal challenge of a high order to any
drinker, when distilled, a gallon of molasses produced a
gallon of high-octane spirit.
Known as Kill-devil,
Barbados Water, or rumbullion, before rum became
the common term, it was a desirable commodity that quickly
enhanced the profits of the sugar trade, while making more
bearable the endless toil in the tropical heat necessary to
grow and refine it.
The production of rum
in Barbados transformed the economics of the island, which
switched rapidly to a sugar-growing monoculture and equally
rapidly from a majority white indentured work force to a
chattel slave based economy. Incidentally, the white workers
also rose, and were suppressed with mass executions in the
early stages before racism was added to the Planters’ sins
of cupidity and cruelty.
It would repay study to
see how much the mainland North American colonies benefited
from the experience of the Barbadian plantation owners. Not
only did they invent the principle of no taxation without
representation in an agreement with the Cromwellian
government during the Civil Wars in Britain, they were the
first to introduce legislation that codified African slavery
as different from the traditional indentures for white
workers and to justify this breach of Common Law by
inveighing against the supposed inferiority of Africans.
Many of the English
settlers in North America came via Barbados and they brought
their social innovations with them, as well as a thirst for
rum, which became a major item of trade.
It was not until much
later that the British Isles and their North Atlantic
colonies produced enough of a grain surplus to make gin or
whisky on a regular basis, and even when they did, it took
much more bulk of grain to produce the same amount of
alcohol. Nor did they produce grapes and wine on any scale,
so the metropolitan government saw no problems with rum
production within the colonial system.
Not so France, where in
the early eighteenth century the cognac producers
successfully lobbied for a ban on rum production for export
from the French islands.
On the one hand, the
lucrative production of rum gave the British colonies an
economic advantage; on the other hand, Adam Smith’s
invisible hand was busily mixing it between the North
Americans and the British.
The British islands
used all their molasses to make their own rum, which the
colonial elite drank for preference. The colonists largely
benefited from the imperial connection, but rum was a
crucial commodity. The presence of lakes of molasses in the
French islands proved an irresistible temptation, so much so
that the Yankee traders were easily able to overcome any
scruples that may have resulted from the wars being fought
between France and Britain, even though a major purpose of
those wars was to safeguard the American colonies from the
French threat in Canada.
The colonists drank
prodigious quantities of their own rum, but they also used
it to trade for furs with the Indian tribes, while many of
them quietly rejoiced at the damage rum did to Indian
societies which amounted to alcoholic ethnic cleansing. Even
more sinisterly, New England rum was the major trade item
for slaves on the African coast.
When the French and
Indian war was over, the British were paying over a quarter
of their GDP in taxation, mostly to pay off the National
Debt. The colonies offered but never delivered
contributions. It was clear that “no taxation” was the
primary thought, not representation. The British sent in the
Navy to enforce customs collection, and played into the
hands of the secessionists by providing an excuse for
insurrection.
Even when the war came,
rum was an essential war supply, with both sides fighting to
deprive the other side. George Washington, that unlikely
socialist, even advocated government owned distilleries to
meet the need and was as scornful as any modern Virginian
about French fries in the Congressional canteen at any
attempts to substitute a French wine ration for rum for the
continental armies.
Aided by temperance and
prohibition, this inconvenient history, both rum and the
essential Yankee role in the slave trade has been edited out
of popular historical consciousness.
But then, more
recently, who remembers that the Bacardi family bankrolled
Fidel Castro up in the hills, and greeted him when he
arrived in Havana with a banner “Gracias a Fidel” draped
across their headquarters? Of course, they took it
personally when he nationalized their distilleries, but they
had already gone multinational, incorporating in the Bahamas
and distilling in Puerto Rico, so they still conduct their
grudges against Castro in the American courtrooms for
ownership of the Havana Club brand, which, although banned
by the Embargo from the US, is selling far more successfully
than Cuban sugar across the rest of the world. And
touchingly, Fidel was telling Cubans that drink was bad for
them, so that there would be more for export.
Perhaps more damaging
than this family feud is the way that Bacardi has used its
economic and political clout to flood out better rums from
the rest of the Caribbean with its own undistinguished
spirit. For many islands, faced with competition from
European sugar beet, Archer Daniel Midland’s high fructose
corn syrup and their accompanying tariff barriers, making
high value added branded rum from their sugar crop is one of
their ways forward in a world where the empires have moved
on and forgotten how much of their own and African blood
they shed to conquer these volcanic rocks, and how much
money they made from it.
* * *
For its first two
centuries, Barbados’ position as the first port of call for
ships to the other British colonies in the Western
Hemisphere gave it an importance greater than its tiny. Any
“good” ideas that originated in the island, whether rum,
sugar plantations, African slavery, or even the idea of
calling the head of the local government the President, were
sure to spread to all the British colonies, and in those
early days, they were carried by the departing colonists.
Some of them founded
Charleston, where they left their marks on the names and
habits of the Carolinian town and helped to establish a long
established but frequently forgotten connection between the
Caribbean and the Eastern seaboard. Eleven of the first 23
governors of South Carolina came from the islands, seven
from Barbados.[i]
Henry Winthrop, son of John Winthrop, New England’s first
governor had put in three years in Barbados before moving
north.[ii].
While maintaining the trading connections that progressively
expanded over the following century they took something far
more pernicious than rum. Slavery had no basis in
contemporary English Law, and it took the autonomy of the
Barbadian planters to codify it separately.
The Barbadian slave
code in 1661 was a legal breakthrough that was in fact
adopted by Antigua and Jamaica, and then copied and emulated
by South Carolina and Virginia, transforming the English
legal idea of indentures for a fixed period into a state of
perennial servitude for one group of people only. Whom the
planters wished to enslave, they first insulted. “The Act
for the Better Ordering and Governing of Africans and
Negroes,” began by referring to its subjects as
“heathenish,” “brutish,” and a “dangerous kind of people.”[iii]
So, along with an
aversion to taxation, and the title of President, the
codification of black slavery went along with rum as
Barbados’ contribution to the development of the North
American colonies. Two out of three of Churchill’s triptych
on the Navy, Rum and the Lash are definite Barbadian exports
to the mainland. Buggery was optional, one supposes.
Many other aspects of
the economic and social structures of the Southern
Plantation system had a dry run in Barbados. Even at this
early stage Barbados had some amusing precursors of later
stereotypical Southern lifestyles. Long before the Kentucky
Colonel’s heyday, every planter or “gentleman” on the island
is titled as “Captain” – or “Colonel.” But there were more
serious precursors, a persistent semi-feudal politics
setting poor whites as the first bulwark against the
possibility of slave revolts. You could say that the fuse
for the American Civil War fizzled its way north from
Barbados, the sugar colony that rum made profitable and
habitable.
Many of the founding
fathers had family connections and current ties to the
islands, ranging from George Washington’s sojourn in
Barbados to Alexander Hamilton’s birth in Nevis, and Thomas
Jefferson’s visit to St Kitts, where his grandfather had had
a plantation. There they had time to appreciate the model
mix for the new republic, at least from the Southern
colonies perspectives – slave-owners’ autonomy.
Washington visited
Barbados in 1751 and was almost tempted to stay by his
calculations – which could have started a whole new
alternative history. He confided to his diary, “Canes is
from 40 to 70 ton of sugar, each ton valued at 20/ out of
which a third is deducted for expenses, unless rum sells for
2/ and upwards pr Gallon than it is, though the sugar is
near clean.”[iv]
Adam Smith put it more
cogently than the founder of the US, whose grammar and style
improved over the years. “It is commonly said that a sugar
planter expects that rum and molasses should defray the
whole expense of his cultivation, and that his sugar should
be all clear profit.”[v]
The presence of Washington is testimony once again to the
connections between the mainland colonies and the Caribbean.
However it was not just
the South, but also New England that owed its heritage to
the island. It was two Indian slaves, John and Tituba,
brought from Barbados to Salem by minister Samuel Parris,
whose native rituals inspired the Salem Witch-hunts, thus
setting the precedent for the periodic paroxysms of
intolerance that still beset the American mainland.[vi]
Barbados was everywhere – in spirit and in rum – throughout
the new colonies.
But it was not only the
plantation system that the Barbadians exported northwards –
it was also one of the more commercially lucrative ideas
about what to do with their rum, and morally on a par with
the “customs of the country” that they had exported. Soon
emulated by Jamaica and the other islands, they took their
rum to Africa to trade for slaves.
John Winthrop was a
pioneer of the Barbadian- Boston connection. His journals
record the first documented slave voyage from Boston
November 1644, with a voyage that took staves for casks to
Cape Verde Islands, traded them for slaves which they took
to Barbados and exchanged for sugar and tobacco which
eventually reached Boston after a five month round trip
voyage.
Rum Rapine and
Revolution – the Triangle
It was one thing
selling dried fish to feed slaves and drinking the profits.
But in the hands of the New England merchants, rum soon
became a double enslaver, depending on the toil of slaves to
make and being the main trade item to buy slaves in West
Africa. To get their drinks, from an early stage coastal
monarchs staged slave raids on their weaker neighbors. By
1679, French slave traders were already complaining that the
brandy they had formerly used in trade for slaves in Africa
had been flooded out by cheaper rum, and one recorded that a
large bull was bought for one pint of spirit in 1697 in
Senegal. The Monarchs along the coast had a huge thirst and
in Gabon, they gave an elephant tusk for a measure of liquor
which they had emptied before they left the vessel.[vii]
British histories
always depicted the Triangle Trade with its apex in
Liverpool and Bristol. Manufactured goods left Britain for
West Africa, and were traded for slaves who were taken to
the Caribbean and the mainland colonies where they were
exchanged for with sugar, molasses and rum for the British
home market.
The New England
colonies had a triangle all their own, although it shared a
base on the same gruesome middle passage. But its apex was
across the Atlantic in New England, Boston and Providence
rather than Bristol and Liverpool. Regardless of whose
“triangle” it is, reality does not always favor simple
geometrical metaphors and the so-called triangle was much
more like a cats cradle with multiple nodes. There was a lot
of direct trade between the American colonies and the
Caribbean and between both and Britain, not to mention the
voyages carrying Grand Banks fish to Southern Europe.
From a moral dimension,
there was indeed a triangle, or rather the trinity, of
disrepute: slaves, rum and sugar. In this “triangle,” the
rum that was made from the molasses that had been traded for
cod, was then bartered in West Africa for yet more slaves
who were taken to the Caribbean or southern mainland
colonies. The resulting trade links connected the frozen
seas of the North West Atlantic to the torrid beaches of the
Bight of Benin – with the keystone of the structure the
slave-worked sugar plantations of the Caribbean.
The mainland colonies
were “the key to the Indies without which Jamaica, Barbadoes
and ye Charibby Islands are not able to subsist,”[viii]
one writer commented in 1661 – and it became truer as the
decades rolled by – and as the hogsheads of molasses and rum
rolled into the holds of the trading fleets. But it was also
doubtful whether the mainland colonial economies would have
taken off so quickly without the trade to the islands.
The movements of men,
goods and ships which rum impelled ensured that New England
and the North American colonies were not like French Canada,
or the Spanish Main. The traditions of local autonomy and
lively entrepreneurship ensured that they did not linger as
a sleepy backwater fossilized economically and socially at
the time of the settlement, but became a major link in the
global network, with a vigorous and growing commercial and
industrial life of their own.
The ships were built,
supplied and equipped locally in New England, on a scale
that matched the mother country’s capabilities. Indeed their
shipbuilding and navigation techniques overreached that of
their more conservative transatlantic cousins. For example,
Franklin remarked on British captains’ refusal to take
advantage of the extra speed offered by the Gulf Stream.
Yankee skippers roamed the globe in emulation of the Viking
example of seeking riches at sea that they assuredly could
not cultivate in their cold and relatively infertile home.
However, the rum trade
also distorted economic development. George Weedon concluded
that, “the substitution of rum for food affected the whole
business of commercial exchange in this period. Between the
derangement of an inflated currency, and the diversion of
productive industry to distilling and its collateral slave
importation, the building of vessels and the catch of fish
fell off.”
While allowing for some
effects from the wars with France, he concluded
unequivocally, “the main cause in the decline in these
important industries must be found in rum.”[ix]
It did not take long for the New England traders to get in
on the act. In the late seventeenth century, Taussig
comments with bitter irony, the Yankee merchants’ first
battle for “Free Trade and Sailors’ Rights” was their
petitioning parliament, along with their English colleagues,
to break the monopoly of the Royal Africa company on the
slave trade along the coast of Africa. They enthusiastically
proposed export duties of 10% on goods leaving for Africa to
defray the costs of the slave forts and factories along the
coast. Their proposal was adopted: whether they paid the tax
as scrupulously is another story.
[x]
In the Treaty of
Utrecht – following the War of Spanish Succession in 1713,
in addition to Gibraltar, Britain secured Newfoundland,
along with confirmation of the Royal Assiento, whereby
British ships, in return for a large cash payment up front
to Spain, were licensed to trade slaves to the Spanish
colonies. British for these purposes included the British
colonies as well and the trade just grew and grew.
By 1721 the factor for
the British Royal African Company on the Slave Coast
reported that rum had become the “chief barter” there even
for gold, let alone slaves.
There was much more to show in the way of negative results
for the people on the base of the triangle. In 1740, four
out of every ten slaves bought by the Codrington Plantation
in Barbados died within three years. We must not belabor
the New England divines alone for their flexible ethics.
They were drawing on an old tradition. Since the Codrington
Plantation was owned by the Society for the Propagation of
the Gospel, its overseers branded slaves on the chest with
“SOCIETY,” to remind them and others that these human
chattels were doing the Lord’s work. James Oglethorpe when
he founded Georgia tried to keep out both rum and slavery –
with only very temporary success. The great evangelist
George Whitefield sympathized with the colonists against
John Oglethorpe, who he complained deprived them of - rum
and slaves.
The heartland of abolitionism, piety and the Union in the
Civil War, and Prohibitionism afterwards, has not often been
ecstatic about being reminded of its close connections to
rum and the lash. So popular histories have tended, if
anything, to minimize both.
Even at the time, there
were some mild signs of embarrassment about the business.
For example, Captain David Lindsay of Newport called the
vessels engaged in the trade “rum Ships” rather than slave
ships and another slaver captain referred to “us rum men.”
Even the rum for the slave trade was euphemized into “Guinea
Rum.” As Taussig put the hypocrisy, “New Englanders in
honesty referred to ‘Missionaries on deck and rum in the
hold.’”[xi]
“Guinea Rum” was what
we now call overproof. It was double or even triple
distilled to save the cost of freight, and water would be
added at the destination to get it to the appropriate and
more drinkable strength. Champlin’s trade book of the Rhode
Island slaver, the Sloop Adventure, records
that they traded 500 more gallons of rum than they had
shipped – despite evaporation,– which could have been sharp
practice – or just normal business.[xii]
As Simeon Potter, who
had himself made his fortune privateering, ordered his
Captain Earle of the King George in 1764 “Make Yr Chief
Trade with the Blacks and Little or none with the white
people if possible to be avoided. Worter yr rum as much as
possible and sell as much by short mesuer as you can.”
One could say that
Potter’s political principles were just as flexible. Despite
calling his ships “The Prince Charles” and “The King
George”, he became a superpatriot at the time of Revolution
and was made Major General of the Rhode Island Colonial
Forces. More consistently, he was as remiss at paying taxes
to the revolutionary government as he had been to the royal
government.
He anticipated his
successors in American politics by having his legal
residence in the town of Swansey, Massachusetts, where the
taxes were much lower than in Bristol RI, where he made most
of his money. Neither tax evasion, nor slave trading stopped
him finishing his days as a vestryman at St Michael’s church
in Bristol. It was what Weedon called “A casuistry of
culture, combined with rude impassioned humanity- a
commingled hash of Satanic civilization and simple savage
nature. ” that enabled such to speak of the inalienable
rights of man, and liberty or death, while either dealing in
slaves, or owning them.
[xiii]
And what was the price
of soul? In 1764 it was £12, - or 110 gallons of rum in
the standard unit of exchange.
[xiv] In 1755 was 799 gallons of rum, two
barrels of beef and one of pork for four men, three women,
three girls and one boy.
Twenty years later,
just before the Revolution, Rhode Islander Aaron Lopez was
paying only 22 gallons a head.[xv]
George Washington was
perhaps the most outstanding example of weighing souls
against spirits and the osmosis of deceit involved in the
process. In 1766, while still a British officer and a
gentleman, the future President shipped off a slave called
Tom to the West Indies to be sold in exchange for other
things, a hogshead of best Jamaican rum.[xvi]
With no truth in
advertising law to inhibit him, he did not tell prospective
purchasers that Tom seemed to have nursed the spirit of
independence and freedom that later canonized his master and
was being sold because he was “unruly.” Somehow, it seems
more shocking that he actually sent Tom to sell himself! He
sent him to the Captain of a sloop bound for the Caribbean
with a letter saying that “With this letter comes a negro
(Tom) which I beg the favor of you to sell in any of the
islands you may go to, for whatever he will fetch, and bring
me in return for him,
One hhd. of best molasses
One ditto of best rum
One barrel of lymes, if good & cheap
One pot tamarinds, containing about 10 lbs.
Two small ditto of mixed sweetmeats about 5 lbs each.
And the residue, much or little in good old spirits.”[xvii]
Setting the price of a
human being in such tawdry trade goods rather than in coin
of the realm appears more shocking even if the effect is the
same. To sell ones own soul for a cask of rum is one thing,
but to sell someone else’s certainly tarnishes the halo of
the founding father.
Like most people of
taste, Washington preferred the West Indian to the New
England rum, just as he preferred the Virginian definition
of freedom to that elaborated by Lord Mansfield in England
in his famous declaration that slavery was illegal in
Britain itself. “How is it that we
hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of
negroes?” Samuel Johnson asked, and has never been
adequately answered.
But one of the side
effects of the Revolution for freedom and liberty was that a
critical shortage of New England rum affected all the slave
traders along the coast. The locals had become habituated
and were unhappy with the substitutes.
[iii] Beckles, Barbados 33
[iv]
Washington Diaries, q in Taussig, p 37
[viii]
see Barty-King, p 158 TK original
[ix] Weedon op cit., cited in
Taussig 18