True State of the Present Difference Between the Royal African Company, and the Separate Traders

1710. First Edition. (SLAVERY) ANONYMOUS. A True State of the Present Difference Between the Royal African Company, and the Separate Traders. London: No publisher, 1710. Slim octavo, period-style full tan sheep gilt, red morocco spine label, raised bands; pp. 40. $1650.First edition of this argument against providing a monopoly over the British slave trade to the Royal African Company, with tipped-in diagram of one of the Royal African Company's forts.This work attempts to highlight the irregularities of the business practices of the Royal African Company and to argue for the superiority of open trade in Africa particularly as a means of supplying slaves to the American plantations. Founded in 1660 by the royal Stuart family and the City of London, the Royal African Company was founded to exploit natural resources like gold along the west coast of Africa. While the Royal African Company did participate heavily in the gold trade, the majority of their income came from slave-trading. The Royal African Company was part of a concerted effort—fully elaboration in the Navigation Acts—to establish dominance in the slave trade, since the Dutch had been the leading slave-traders prior to the Restoration. To that end, the Royal African Company established a brutal and highly efficient slave-trading system, eventually providing more slaves to the West Indies than any other company or state. The slaves were branded with the initials of the company or its longtime governor, the Duke of York. Children were included in the transports. Between 1662 and 1731, the Company transported approximately 212,000 slaves, a fifth of whom died enroute. While the Company formally gave up slave-trading in 1731, they remained involved in the trade of ivory and gold dust, industries dependent on labor exploitation and slavery. Goldsmiths 4605. Kress 2677. Early ink underlining and marginal notations.Small paper repair to diagram, text and diagram trimmed close, affecting portion of imprint and scattered catchwords, not affecting readability. A very good copy.