When Barbary pirates captured an obscure Yankee sailing brig off the coast of North Africa in 1812; enslaving eleven American sailors; President James Madison first tried to settle the issue through diplomacy. But when these efforts failed; he sent the largest American naval force ever gathered to that time; led by the heroic Commodore Stephen Decatur; to end Barbary terror once and for all. Drawing upon numerous ship logs; journals; love letters; and government documents; Frederick C. Leiner paints a vivid picture of the world of naval officers and diplomats in the early nineteenth century; as he recreates a remarkable and little known episode from the early American republic. Leiner first describes Madison's initial efforts at diplomacy; sending Mordecai Noah to negotiate; reasoning that the Jewish Noah would fare better with the Islamic leader. But when the ruler refused to ransom the Americans--"not for two millions of dollars"--Madison declared war and sent a fleet to North Africa. Decatur's squadron dealt quick blows to the Barbary navy; dramatically fighting and capturing two ships. Decatur then sailed to Algiers. He refused to go ashore to negotiate--indeed; he refused to negotiate on any essential point. The ruler of Algiers signed the treaty--in Decatur's words; "dictated at the mouths of our cannon"--in twenty-four hours. The United States would never pay tribute to the Barbary world again; and the captive Americans were set free--although in a sad; ironic twist; they never arrived home; their ship being lost at sea in heavy weather. Here then is a real-life naval adventure that will thrill fans of Patrick O'Brian; a story of Islamic terrorism; white slavery; poison gas; diplomatic intrigue; and battles with pirates on the high seas.
#2056267 in Books Seymour Drescher 2004-10-14Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 6.10 x 1.00 x 9.20l; 1.04 #File Name: 0195176294318 pagesThe Mighty Experiment Free Labor versus Slavery in British Emancipation
Review
5 of 6 people found the following review helpful. British Political Arguments on Emancipation and Ending the Slave TradeBy WALThis book has a narrow focus; basically summarizing the political debate in Britain dealing with the economic and demographic aspects of British emancipation in the West Indies and the Royal Navy's interdiction of the transatlantic slave trade. The author convincingly; and at length; shows that one of the abolitionist's foundational arguments; derived from Adam Smith; that free labor was more cost effective than slave labor; with the implication that economic benefits would accrue to both the West Indies and Britain as a consequence of emancipation; was not supported by the actual outcome. It becomes clear that the economic superiority of slave-based enterprise derived from managing and using the slaves no differently that other tools and equipment of industrial production; i.e.; as inanimate objects.The book; then; makes a significant addition to the understanding of the slavery in the Western Hemisphere. I have several reservations about it; however. First; while the arguments used by the political economists in this debate are covered in detail; the author does not present any data that would allow the reader to evaluate them. For example; it was apparently economically advantageous for a planter to work a slave to death (equivalent to a "run to failure" equipment strategy) and replace him/her with a new one; than to care for; or maintain; them. How was this possible? The author provides no data that addresses this question. Also; while Adam Smith's argument on the superiority of free labor over slave is covered at length; his more fundamental position; that `the property of every man in his own labor was "the most sacred and inviolable foundation of all property"'(p. 21) is not explored at all. Why did it not factor in the economic debate?Other issues that potential readers should be aware of deal with approach and tone. The book is written for the specialist and assumes the reader is knowledgeable about British political parties; ideologies; and issues during the 1750-1860 period. Finally; I found the tone adopted by the author wearing by the end of the book. The repetitive; almost gleeful; presentation of arguments that appeared to demonstrate the economic superiority of plantation slave labor; as if the price and source of sugar in Britain was the supreme criteria by which to judge emancipation; eventually becomes disproportionate and seems out of place.
