THERE IS DEATH IN THE POT - The University of Texas at Arlington

correspondence with American abolitionists, Elizabeth Pease assured the flow of
information about the BIS and its efforts from Britain to the United States. Pamphlets,
reports, and letters sent by Pease to American abolitionists were, as Lucretia Mott’s son-
in-law Edward M. Davis noted, kept in “constant motion.” 114
Not all abolitionists, however, were convinced that cotton cultivation in India
would have the desired effect on slavery in the South. William Adam claimed he did not
share Thompson’s “sanguine expectations of the effect on American slavery to arise from
the extension of cotton cultivation in India.” While he was convinced increased cotton
cultivation, “in combination with other causes” might improve the situation of “the
starving & degraded population of India,” its effect on American slavery might only be
“collateral.” Still, Adam resolved “to stand before the American public as its advocate to
the full extent of its object.” 115 Edward M. Davis displayed similar uncertainty about the
effects of cotton cultivation in India on the emancipation of slaves in the American
South. In late 1839, Davis wrote Elizabeth Pease that he believed reform in India “to be
not merely practicable, but of easy accomplishment.” Noting that such reform was
connected to British prosperity, Davis also imagined American slave-grown cotton driven
from European markets once Indian cotton was widely and inexpensively available.
“American slavery,” he wrote, “will have recd. its death blow.” 116 Yet, just three months
later, Davis questioned whether American funds spent in England on behalf of the BIS
114 Edward M. Davis to Elizabeth Pease, December 11, 1839, MS.A.1.2.8.89, AS BPL.
115 William Adam to Maria Weston Chapman, BAA, 86-87.
116 Edward M. Davis to Elizabeth Pease, December 28, 1839, BAA, 88.
180