My comments were about the British. You're conflating my addtions to the thread with others. As to that area of what is now the United States:
Posted on 05/07/2026 7:39:36 AM PDT by ProgressingAmerica
Yes, the United States effectively inherited the existing institution of slavery in the territory acquired through the Louisiana Purchase of 1803 from France (which had briefly reacquired it from Spain in 1800). The U.S. did not introduce slavery there as a new practice; it was already well-established under prior colonial rule, and the transfer preserved the property rights of slaveholders.
Historical Context of Slavery in the Louisiana Territory
* French origins: France introduced chattel slavery to the Louisiana colony starting in the early 1700s, importing enslaved Africans (beginning around 1710) to support plantation agriculture, alongside some raids on Native American groups for labor. The Code Noir (1685) regulated slavery in French colonies, outlining rules for treatment, manumission, and rights of free people of color.
* Spanish period (1762–1800): Spain continued and expanded the transatlantic slave trade in the territory. By the time of the Purchase, there was a significant population of enslaved Africans, especially in the lower Mississippi Valley (present-day Louisiana), along with free people of color. Spain had banned enslavement of Native Americans in 1769, but some mixed-descent individuals remained in bondage.
* Brief French return (1800–1803): Napoleon reacquired Louisiana from Spain via the secret Treaty of San Ildefonso but never fully reimposed control on a large scale. His broader plans for a New World empire (including using Louisiana to supply Saint-Domingue/Haiti) collapsed due to the successful Haitian Revolution (a massive slave rebellion that led to Haiti's independence in 1804) and disease among French troops. Napoleon restored slavery in other French colonies in 1802 but sold Louisiana before deeply reasserting it there.
At the time of the Purchase, slavery was a functioning economic and social institution in parts of the territory, particularly around New Orleans and agricultural areas. The Purchase doubled the size of the U.S. and brought in a diverse population that included thousands of enslaved people.
The Louisiana Purchase Treaty and Its Provisions
The 1803 treaty (signed April 30, 1803) made no direct mention of slavery or its abolition. Key relevant language came in Article III:
"The inhabitants of the ceded territory shall be incorporated in the Union of the United States and admitted as soon as possible according to the principles of the federal Constitution to the enjoyment of all these rights, advantages and immunities of citizens of the United States, and in the mean time they shall be maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property and the Religion which they profess."
In the legal and social context of the era, enslaved people were treated as property under colonial (and later U.S.) law. Protecting "property" rights thus meant the U.S. recognized and upheld existing claims to enslaved individuals. President Thomas Jefferson and Congress had no intention of ending slavery in the acquired lands; they focused on governance, citizenship for free inhabitants (including free people of color in some cases), and eventual statehood.
Early U.S. actions included:
* Temporary restrictions on importing new slaves into the Orleans Territory (except those brought by migrating owners), but these were quickly weakened or removed due to local opposition.
* The territory (later split into the Orleans and Louisiana Districts) adopted laws similar to those in southern U.S. states while incorporating some French/Spanish precedents. Slavery expanded significantly post-Purchase, fueled by the cotton gin, sugar plantations, and the domestic slave trade. New Orleans became a major slave-trading hub.
Broader Impacts
The Purchase did not "create" slavery in the region but integrated an existing slave society into the U.S., exacerbating sectional tensions over whether new states carved from the territory would allow slavery. This contributed to debates leading to the Missouri Compromise (1820), the expansion of the domestic slave trade, and ultimately tensions culminating in the American Civil War. Parts of the territory (e.g., future Missouri) already had some slaveholders; lower Louisiana had many more.
In short: The U.S. acquired a territory where slavery was a longstanding colonial practice under France (and Spain). By guaranteeing property rights and incorporating the inhabitants without disrupting the institution, the U.S. inherited and then expanded slavery there under American law and governance. The Haitian Revolution indirectly enabled the sale by derailing Napoleon's plans, creating an ironic link between the end of slavery in one former French colony and its reinforcement in another.
There is no part of the Louisiana Purchase for the Civil War. The year is 1803. This should not be startling new information.
There’s the U.S. and there’s France. That’s it. It’s 1803.
Either the U.S. inherited slavery from the pre-existing conditions or the U.S. bought the land and then the U.S. introduced slavery on its own. Those are pretty much the only two available options.
Perhaps it would result in a more complete picture if you asked Grok for a timeline of slavery in North America. Prior to 1803, British and French colonial policies covered two different portions of the continent.
The US clearly was complicit in slavery, but Europe has a bad habit of propping itself up as morally, culturally, and intellectually superior to the US - and slavery has been one of their talking points. Actually, when looking at the Louisiana Purchase, the elephant in the room is that France sold off Native American lands that they had no right to. Much of what was sold was not controlled in any meaningful way by the French - but that didn’t keep them from selling it (or us from buying it).
To me, the most important lesson when looking at the history of the world is that it is replete with human aggression against humans - and with the arrogance of perceived superiority based upon pedigree. The US, for all of its flaws, remains the most important and successful nation to recognize the rights of individuals and that these rights are ordained by God - not granted by a governing body. The left has been waging an incessant battle against those ordained rights.
The United States inherited the institution of slavery from France (via Spain, then briefly France again) through the 1803 Louisiana Purchase. Upon acquiring the territory, the U.S. government took ownership of a region where slavery was deeply embedded, with roughly half of the 60,000 non-native inhabitants in the Louisiana Territory being enslaved Africans at the time of the sale.
Slavery was established by French colonists in the early 18th century, with the Code Noir (Black Code) governing the treatment, legal status, and duties of enslaved people and free people of color.Transition from Spain: While France originally introduced slavery, the territory was under Spanish control from 1762 until immediately before the 1803 sale.
The United States inherited the population, enslaved people, and legal frameworks established by both nations. Instead of abolishing slavery, the U.S. purchase authorized the expansion of slavery into the new western territories, which became a focal point for political conflict, leading to the Missouri Compromise of 1820.
The U.S. accepted the existing French/Spanish practices that recognized enslaved people as property. In 1803-1804, Louisiana was organized into territories that implemented slavery laws similar to the American South. The sale itself was prompted by the success of a slave rebellion in Haiti, which decimated Napoleon’s forces and prompted him to abandon his American empire, making the purchase possible.
Essentially, the Louisiana Purchase doubled the size of the United States and expanded the “empire of slavery” in the United States, creating new battles over slavery that would eventually contribute to the Civil War.
Yeah, there's that pesky little Corwin amendment to be the fly in your ointment.
Slavery goes back thousands of years a must read book (Lies My Liberal Teacher Told Me) has the facts the liberals don’t want known it’s bad for their agenda and power.
I think you don't want to answer the question because you know what the answer is and you don't like it.
What "Northern Republican strongholds?"
Boston. Chicago. Baltimore. New York. You know, the places where Republicans were strong in 1860.
What are those places like now?
Ping
Slavery has been practiced since the beginning of civilization. Christian nations ended it.
My comments were about the British. You're conflating my addtions to the thread with others. As to that area of what is now the United States:
Slavery was introduced in 1585 with the Roanoke colony. After it was apparent that the climate was too harsh in the summers, slavery took off in earnest wit the Jamestown settlement and southern colonies. Eventually all 13 colonies had slaves, including GW.
“What is this? Someone trying to blame France for US slavery?”
You see.
I knew it. This is what is at the root.
Some of you do blame the U.S. and want to grant Europe innocence.
Europe does not deserve innocence. Europe did not EARN it. America had abolitionism first.
Why don't you correct me then? But to continue the discussion, "The Democratic Party of the Confederate States and Whig Party of the Confederate States, for starters down south, and that interesting amalgam, the National Union Party in the north." What's not to like?
Simply and correctly put. Kudos.
The largest number of slaves in the New World were held in Brazil... by Portugal. Portugal— not UK,France or Spain. The data is available online. Millions before the US became a country.
Thanks for that addition to this thread.
Over and done with,let it die.
Slavery was extremely widespread historically, but pretending there was no slavery in the colonies and US before the Louisiana Purchase is delusional.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.