Free-produce movement

The concept originated among members of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), in the late 18th century. Quakers believed in pacifism and in the spiritual equality of all humankind. Quakers opposed slavery, and by about 1790 had eliminated slaveholding from among their membership. Radical Quakers such as Anthony Benezet and John Woolman went further, voicing their opinion that purchasers of slave-derived goods were guilty of keeping the institution of slavery economically feasible. They argued for a moral and economic boycott of slave-derived goods. The concept proved attractive because it offered a non-violent method of combating slavery. In 1789, the Abolition Bill was introduced in parliament (by William Wilberforce; Quakers were not allowed to stand for parliament). Plantocratic interests slowed its adoption. By 1791, it had still not been passed, and frustration at parliamentary delaying tactics lead to boycott actions. William Fox published a pamphlet urging a boycott of slave sugar; this became the most popular pamphlet of the century, with over a quarter million copies printed (on both sides of the Atlantic). The pamphlet solidified and concentrated abolitionist efforts. Women, who could not vote, could promote and participate in a slave sugar boycott. which they did not regain until it became known that Napoleon Bonaparte opposed emancipation. ==19th century==

Elias Hicks's Observations on the Slavery of Africans and Their Descendents, published in 1811, advocated a consumer boycott of slave-produced goods to remove the economic support for slavery: Q. 11. What effect would it have on the slave holders and their slaves, should the people of the United States of America and the inhabitants of Great Britain, refuse to purchase or make use of any goods that are the produce of Slavery? A. It would doubtless have a particular effect on the slave holders, by circumscribing their avarice, and preventing their heaping up riches, and living in a state of luxury and excess on the gain of oppression… Observations on the Slavery of Africans and Their Descendents gave the free-produce movement its central argument for an embargo of all goods produced by slave labor including cotton cloth and cane sugar, in favor of produce from the paid labor of free people. Though the free-produce movement was not intended to be a religious response to slavery, most of the free-produce stores were Quaker in origin, for example the first such store, that of Benjamin Lundy in Baltimore in 1826. Spread In 1826, the American abolitionist boycott began in earnest when abolitionist Quakers in Wilmington, Delaware, drew up a charter for a formal free-produce organization; the same year in Baltimore, Maryland, Lundy opened his store selling only goods obtained by labor from free people. Quaker women joined the Society, including Lucretia Coffin Mott, who spoke out at Society meetings, giving some of her male associates their first experience of hearing a woman lecture. Lydia Child, who would publish an important volume of abolitionist writings, The Oasis, Non-slave enterprise Quaker George W. Taylor established a textile mill which used only non-slave cotton. He worked to increase the quality and availability of free-produce cotton goods. ==Lack of success==

The free produce movement was not a success and most places abandoned it after a few years. Non-slave produce was more expensive and sometimes hard to locate, or it faced high tariffs blocking imports. In some cases the origin of the goods could not be determined. Sometimes the non-slave goods were of poorer quality; one storeowner "not infrequently received sugar 'with a very disagreeable taste and odor' and rice that was 'very poor, dark and dirty.'" Benefits to slaves or reduction in demand for slave-produced goods was minuscule. Many abolitionists ignored the issue altogether. he later examined the results of the movement and criticized it as impossible to enforce,{{cite web ==See also==