Tag Archives: cadbury’s

The Two Faces of Chocolate: Food of the Gods and the Harbinger of Violence

March 29, 2020Multimedia Essay 1, Uncategorizedatlantic slave trade, cadbury's, Child Slavery, cocoa, Cote d'Ivoire, Slavery and Chocolatepompom9

A Brief History: Cocoa and Chocolate

The creamy, luxuriant, dark brown sweet of pure bliss – chocolate is the enticing candy with an irresistible taste of heaven and the Gods. Yet, little do we know, chocolate has had its tie to Gods since its origins in the New World. The story began in Mesoamerica where the cacao tree, termed Theobroma cocoa or “the food of the Gods”, flourished among the Mayan and Aztec civilizations way before the arrival of European colonizers (Coe and Coe, 1996). The cocoa beans were adopted in every aspect of life – beyond food, they were medicine; an offering in religious, marriage, and burial rituals; and money. The social, religious, and economic significance of cocoa was markedly noted by European ethnographers like Bernardino de Sahagun, and with the arrival of Columbus along with other colonizers, cocoa was brought to Europe. Using sugar, Europe transformed cocoa into chocolate, as the delicacy we know today, which quickly became a widely desired, palatable treat for the rich and poor alike. Not long after, chocolate was mass produced by chocolate manufacturers, and consequently, the chocolate empire took root.

Underneath the Veil

Hidden beneath the veil of sweetness, however, the history of chocolate reveals a much more bitter reality weaved with violence. To satisfy the insatiable demand in the chocolate market, chocolate manufacturers turned to an incredibly exploitative system of obtaining their raw ingredient, cocoa. Chocolate, like many other imperial commodities, was the refined product of slavery and forced labor on plantation farms, and the consequences of this system can be felt up to today in the global racial, economic, and social landscapes.

The Atlantic Slave Trade

What fed into the imperial market and its strong economic interests was none other than the trans-Atlantic slave trade that uprooted millions of African people to the Americas, the Caribbean, and Europe [figure 1]. An internal system of slavery persisted in Central and West Africa before the European exploitation, and this indigenous slavery provided fuel for the rise of this global slave trade (Rodney, 1966). The local slave trade was initially recorded and taken of interest by Portuguese chroniclers, who, in the 16^th century, were the first to engage in the trade trans-Atlantic (Rodney, 1966). Other Europeans soon followed, and the slave trade bloomed into what supported colossal economies of commodities like sugar, coffee, tobacco, cotton, and of course, cocoa. By the 19^th century, various countries passed laws to ban the importation of slaves, including Britain, the United States, Spain, France and Portugal, but at that point, demands soared, and cocoa’s market had become wholly dependent on the slave trade for mass production. Here, we saw a surge of illegal slave trading under the pretense of contract labor.

Figure 1. The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Route

The Chocolate Islands – Cadbury’s Cocoa Scandal:

The persistence of slave labor despite efforts to end it unfolded in the Cadbury cocoa scandal of the 1900s. Cadbury Bros, the British Quaker-owned chocolate company, dominated the market at the time and came under criticism when despite warnings of labor conditions and potential use of slaves, they continued to purchase cocoa produced by the plantations of the island of Sao Tome, a Portuguese colony (Satre, 2005). Notably, Henry W. Nevinson, a journalist who documented his encounters with slavery in Portuguese West Africa in his later published book, “A Modern Slavery” [figure 2], marked that the dynamics of the labor market were as reported – laws passed to ban slavery were worthless, commercial interests begged to be satisfied, and by signing a paper, the slave was a “free” worker and everyone was happy. His report brought into light injustices against native Africans disguised in the legal pretense of contract labor. Disregarding Nevinson and other accounts of anti-slavery campaigners, Cadbury chose to make their own investigations into labor conditions of Sao Tome. Yet, even when these confirmed conditions on par with slavery on the cocoa plantations, Cadbury continued to be a major consumer of the cocoa product from Sao Tome, simply choosing to lobby the Portuguese government to more strictly implement their labor contract laws (Satre, 2005). While Cadbury did make some effort against the use of slavery, they undoubtedly fell short of their Quaker moral and ethical principles of justice and fair trade. The key issue in the persistence of slavery is highlighted here – commercial interests for profit constrain moral action from truly taking root.

Figure 2. “A Modern Slavery” accounted Nevinson’s encounters with slavery in Portuguese West Africa, a land where slavery should have been banned by law. The book became the center of controversy in the English political, economic, and humanitarian landscapes and eventually brought Cadbury to court for their purchase of cocoa from Sao Tome.

Modern Slavery, Child Laborers, Implications

This also comes to explain the reality we see today in “modern slavery”. At the turn of the 21^st century, widespread media reports uncovered child slavery on cocoa plantations in Cote d’ Ivoire, one of the major exporters of cocoa to the world market (Manzo, 2005). An estimated 15,000 children workers were found to be working as slaves on the 600,000 cocoa farms in Cote d’ Ivoire and were subjected to inhumane conditions and extreme abuse (Chanthavong, 2002). The existence of a form of labor practically parallel to old slavery in modern times implicates many contributors in play, intentional and non-intentional. Whether it be the cocoa farmers, the slave traffickers, the Ivorian government, the chocolate manufacturers, or us the consumers who buy chocolate at a supermarket, all are relevant to the existence of slave labor and the sufferings it incites. Perhaps the wake of a ravenous market like cocoa and chocolate inevitably demands cheap labor that spirals into exploitative systems of forced labor driven by greed and convenience, but we all have the responsibility to challenge the inevitable. We can begin to ask the next time we stand in the sweets aisle for a Hershey bar, are we playing into the cycle of perpetuating labor abuses? What can we do in our power to mitigate these abuses?

Figure 3. A Child Laborer in the Ivory Coast Harvesting Cocoa Pods

Works Cited

Chanthavong, Samlanchith (2002). Chocolate and Slavery: Child Labor in Cote d’Ivoire. TED Case Studies, Number 664.

COE, SOPHIE DOBZHANSKY (1933-1995)|COE, MICHAEL D. (b. 1929). (1996). The True History Of Chocolate. London: Thames and Hudson Ltd.

Manzo, K. (2005). Modern slavery, global capitalism & deproletarianisation in West Africa. Review of African Political Economy, 32(106), 521–534. doi: 10.1080/03056240500467013

Rodney, W. (1966). African Slavery and other Forms of Social Oppression on the Upper Guinea Coast in the Context of the Atlantic Slave-Trade. The Journal of African History, 7(3), 431–443. doi: 10.1017/s0021853700006514

Satre, L. J. (2006). Chocolate on trial: slavery, politics, and the ethics of business. Athens, OH: Ohio Univ. Press.

Cocoa and Corruption: The Darker Side of Cadbury’s Business Practices

March 9, 2017Multimedia Essay 1business ethics, Cadbury, cadbury's, henry nevinson, labor, sao tome, Sao Tome and Principe, slave trade, slavery, william cadbury2017e431

By the late 19th century, Cadbury had become a renowned chocolate manufacturer and humanitarian enterprise with a model factory in Bournville providing accommodating working conditions (Coe and Coe 242). However, Cadbury was soon swept into a controversy surrounding claims of slavery on São Tomé and Principe, one of the firm’s major suppliers of cacao. The documentation of Joseph Burtt, who was appointed by Cadbury to visit São Tomé, was not published until almost a decade after William Cadbury first learned of slave labor in the islands. This delay as well as the firm’s deferment of boycotting São Toméan cocoa brings to question the company’s business ethics. Ethical scrutiny should extend not only to the Cadbury corporation but also to the Portuguese and British political bodies; however, a principal cause of the delayed and arduous path to reform stemmed from Cadbury’s prioritization of business incentives over moral practices.

British journalist Henry Nevinson traveled to Africa in 1904 and helped expose the unethical practices of cacao labor. The servicais, or “contracted laborers,” in São Tomé were actually slaves brought from Angola; although a Portuguese decree of 1903 required the option of repatriation after a five year labor contract, none of them actually returned to Angola (Satre 8-9). Plantation owners paid their laborers less than what was required by the decree and renewed their contracts without consulting the servicais; the Portuguese government, unconcerned by these breaches of law, were often encouraging Angolan natives to commit crimes so they could be enslaved, furthering the government’s economic self-interest through the money-making benefits of the slave trade (Satre 8, 11). Not only did the Portuguese deny slavery, British authorities also seemed to refrain from thorough investigations, perhaps because Britain depended on labor in the islands (Off 60). Both Portuguese and British authority figures were driven by the economical benefits of facilitating, rather than obstructing, slave labor practices.

Henry_Woodd_Nevinson_(1856-1941)_circa_1915 — Henry Nevinson actively reported on the slave labor he had witnessed in Portuguese West Africa (*Wikimedia Commons*). His outspokenness was often unfavored by the Cadburys, who believed explicit coverage of slavery would complicate the chocolate company’s business incentives or the Foreign Office’s diplomatic approaches to Portugal.

slaves to sao tome — Though called “indentured servants,” enslaved Angolans were forcibly brought to São Tomé to work on cacao plantations under dire conditions, for the benefit of companies like Cadbury (Nevinson).

In contrast to Nevinson, who published reports on slavery immediately after returning to Britain, the Cadburys took considerably more time in taking action (Satre 12). When William Cadbury visited Trinidad in early 1901, he heard claims of slave labor in São Tomé and traveled to Lisbon in 1903 to investigate. Despite hearing from some Portuguese plantation owners that the decree of 1903 would end labor abuses, missionaries to Africa and British authorities strongly doubted the new decree would mediate any genuine reform (Satre 23-24). Despite testimony confirming brutal labor, William provided an optimistic report to his firm: “I cannot but feel that things are going to mend a little … the onus of this will lie on the British” (Satre 24). When appointing an agent to investigate the situation in Portuguese West Africa, the Cadburys chose the rather incompetent Joseph Burtt over more experienced yet more outspoken researchers such as Nevinson (Satre 32). The fact that Burtt was encouraged to approach plantation owners amicably and spent almost two years traveling in Africa imply that the ordeal was not perceived as a significantly pressing issue (Satre 32).

slave quarters — *Slave Quarters in São Tomé –* English chocolate manufacturers like Cadbury were indirectly employing one-third of the slaves on São Tomé (Nevinson, Satre 82).

Cadbury may have stalled for time to secure an alternative cocoa supplier through the help of their cocoa buyer Edward Thackray, who began his research shortly after William heard of the slave labor in 1901 (Higgs 135). This may explain why the Cadburys agreed to the British Foreign Office’s suggestion to delay the publication of Joseph Burtt’s documentation (Satre 92-93). During this delay, the Foreign Office tried to amicably push the Portuguese towards reform, and Thackray escalated his search (Higgs 135). This delay may have also benefited the British government, which was wary about aggravating the Portuguese, key trading partners who could provide cheap labour forces for their holdings in Africa (e.g. diamond mines in Transvaal) (Off 65-66). For Cadbury and the British Foreign Office, a cautionary approach would help preserve their standings as business or economic powerhouses.

William Cadbury persistently rejected suggestions by Nevinson and others to boycott São Toméan cocoa, placing economic reasons at the fore of his argument; boycotting would ruin Cadbury’s buying influence and the valuable cocoa would be “very readily absorbed by other nations” (Higgs 137). Newspapers criticized Cadbury, and the company chose to sue the Standard for libel. Before their trial in 1909, William traveled to São Tomé, though the primary reason for this voyage may have been to confirm cocoa export possibilities in the Gold Coast. In his 1910 diary entry, Nevinson recorded a conversation between cocoa traders implying Cadbury had to verify Gold Coast production capacities before cutting ties with São Tomé (Off 71). Only after William’s trip did Cadbury decide to stop buying São Toméan cocoa, for an alternative source had been secured (Off 69). Almost a decade had passed since William first learned about the slave labor, and the business implications of this could only be magnified during the prosecution of the Standard trial; Cadbury had imported £1.3 million ($6.3 million) worth of São Toméan cocoa between 1901 and 1908 (Higgs 151). Cadbury had partaken in the investigation of slave labor on São Tomé but profit and quality of cocoa came first and foremost.

burtt documentation — Burtt’s documentation was not published for the British public until 1910, almost a decade after William Cadbury first learned of São Toméan slavery (*Internet Archive*). This adds to the controversy of whether Cadbury was truly proactive in mediating reform in cacao labor practices.

Cadbury had also attempted to discourage Nevinson from publishing another report on slavery, and The Daily News, owned by George Cadbury, remained quite reticent on the subject of São Tomé (Satre 82). This further implies that Cadbury was concerned with the effects on chocolate sales if more explicit coverage of São Tomé was released to the public (Higgs 151). The years Cadbury spent on silence or reliance on the British government cannot excuse the abuse or death of thousands of laborers while the company continued to profit from the cocoa sourced from São Tomé. Had it not been for individuals such as Nevinson, who favored “publicity, not silence,” the public’s awareness of cacao slave labor would have been limited (Satre 85). Had Cadbury provided an example by boycotting sooner and working with British authorities to press the Portuguese in a more threatening rather than cautious manner, reforms may have come sooner. In actuality, nearly a decade passed and Cadbury’s cautionary approach did not lead to substantial reform, as slavery persisted and the Portuguese continued to abuse their power to operate unfair labor practices (Higgs 153). The slow path to reform surely stems in part from corruptive flaws within the Portuguese and British political systems; however, Cadbury also shared a significant responsibility through their inclination to place their business before all else. For Cadbury, divided between jeopardizing their economic prospects and tainting their philanthropic reputation, securing other sources of cocoa was pivotal for their business success. This case study of Cadbury offers perspective into pressing labor problems even today, such as child labor and human trafficking; when political, economic, and moral issues become intertwined, it is critical that we ethically prioritize and preserve the welfare of human beings.

Works Cited

An LMS Railways Advertisement – Bournville. Cadbury. Cadbury. https://www.cadbury.co.uk/the-story. Accessed 4 March 2017.

Coe, Sophie, and Michael Coe. The True History of Chocolate. 3rd ed., Thames & Hudson, 2013.

Henry Wood Nevinson. Library of Congress. Wikimedia Commons. https://commons .wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Henry_Woodd_Nevinson_(1856-1941)_circa_1915.jpg. Accessed 5 March 2017.

Higgs, Catherine. Chocolate Islands: Cocoa, Slavery, and Colonial Africa. Ohio University Press, 2012.

Labour in Portuguese West Africa. Claire T. Carney Library. Internet Archive. https://archive.org /details/labourinportugue00cadb. Accessed 5 March 2017.

Martin, Carla. “Lecture 6: Slavery, Abolition, and Forced Labor.” Chocolate, Culture and the Politics of Food. Harvard University: Cambridge, MA. 1 March 2017. Lecture.

Nevinson, Henry. Slaves on Ship, Wearing Tin Disk and Cylinder. Photograph. “The Slave-Trade of To-day: Part VI.” Harper’s Monthly Magazine, Jan. 1906, pp. 237-246.

Nevinson, Henry. Slave-Quarters on a Plantation. Photograph. “The Slave-Trade of To-day: Conclusion.” Harper’s Monthly Magazine, Feb. 1906, pp. 327-337.

Off, Carol. Bitter Chocolate: Anatomy of an Industry. The New Press, 2006.

Satre, Lowell. Chocolate on Trial: Slavery, Politics, and the Ethics of Business. Ohio University Press, 2005.

The Importance of English Chocolate Houses

February 20, 2014Multimedia Essay 1cadbury's, chocolate houses, london, white's chocolate houseaaas119x42

In the midst of the 16^th century, Chocolate arrives in Spain marking the beginning of its introduction to the European countries. Soon after, the custom of drinking chocolate increases in popularity and spreads across Europe, reaching England specifically in the 1650s. Soon after, in London the first chocolate house is born in 1657. A chocolate house can be best described as a club designed to accommodate the chocolate drinking of the wealthy and elite with an atmosphere vaguely similar to modern day coffee houses. Due to the deluxe and delectable nature of chocolate during this era, chocolate houses were “central to London’s gregarious-all-male-gregarious-social life of the time.” However, despite the Chocolate Houses’ reputation as being incredibly classist by nature and segregated, in terms of income level and gender, or their depiction as “the most fashionable hell in London” (Green 1), chocolate houses established a market for chocolate consumption and a demand for chocolate as a product that later translated into the highly accessible and highly desired product it is today.

When the custom of drinking chocolate hot started to become popular in England, the country currently had little tradition of drinking hot beverages as coffee had only arrived five years prior. For this reason, “chocolate was an alien, suspect substance drink associated with popery and idleness.” (Green 1) Additionally, a form of the chocolate drink was currently sold at the already much more established coffee houses, however; the drink was not popular among this crowd since the beverage cost more due to its rare and luxurious demeanor and the caffeine content was much lower than that of either coffee or tea. Coffee shop customers wanted much more “bang” (caffeine) for their buck, and for this reason, hot chocolate did not gain popularity in the coffee houses and was a secondary, less popular option in addition to coffee or tea. The establishment of chocolate houses is crucial as these locations created an environment in which chocolate was sought out and was the only product being sold.

Cadbury_and_chocolate_history_of_chocolate_a_new_ingredient.jpg (500×363) — Chocolate advertisement for a Cadbury’s product.

As mentioned above, the first English chocolate house opened in London in 1657 and chocolate houses in Florence and Venice started to gain notoriety in the early 1700s. Of one of the first documented advertisements for the chocolate houses declared that: “In Bishopgate St., in Queen’s Head Alley, at a Frenchman’s house, is an excellent West Indian drink called Chocolate to be sold, where you may have it ready at any time and also unmade at reasonable rates” (Cadbury.com 1) (the chocolate houses also sold premade samples of the chocolate drink to be later made at home) thus creating an exciting new market full of mystery and wonder. One of the most notable chocolate houses, White’s Chocolate House, opened its shop in the fashionable St. James street neighborhood in 1693 by Frances White, an Italian immigrant. St. James Square was a self-contained (and self-segregated) aristocratic neighborhood full of the homes of nobles and gentry in close locational proximity to Charles II’s (a huge proponent of the chocolate houses who often brought a subset of his many mistress to fraternize with while enjoying his chocolate) favorite palace, thus making it the perfect region and allowing chocolate to be “consumed in one of the most exclusive addresses in Europe by the crème de la crème of British society, cementing chocolate’s association with decadence and luxury in the popular imagination.” (Green 1) Two other important chocolate houses are that of Ozinda’s, which was also located in the St. James Street region, and the Cocoa Tree, which was located in the Pall Mall region and thus served as the more respectable, informal headquarters of the Tory party where policy and parliamentary strategy were conducted over chocolate. (Green 1) In modern day, the club that formerly housed White’s Chocolate House remains to be an exclusive gentlemen’s club with current notable members such as Charles, Prince of Wales; Prince William, Duke of Cambridge; Conrad Black and Tom Stacey. The luxurious and trendy neighborhoods that housed the chocolate houses as well as the notable and elite clientele further supported an environment that thus led to the current modern depiction of chocolate as being a luxurious and decadent product that couldn’t be more different from the powdery, watery froth that is known as hot chocolate in modern day. (sci-news.com, see recipe).

The chocolate houses of London’s Georgian times provide an establishment in which the wealthy and elite could meet their peers to enjoy various rich chocolate drinks meanwhile discussing the pressing topics in politics or high-society gossip. Although the exclusivity of the clubs and the high prices of enjoying chocolate at these establishments (patrons paid not only for the expensive beverage but often times, an admittance fee) was incredibly classist and did not contribute in making chocolate the economically accessible product it is now today. The environment portrayed in the chocolate houses, the status of the patrons of these clubs, and the luxurious demeanor of the neighborhoods hosting these locations were crucial in creating a purpose and demand for chocolate, thus contributing to the establishment of chocolate as a luxurious and decadent product in current times.

Works Cited:

“Discovering Chocolate.” Discovering Chocolate. Cadbury.com.au, n.d. Web. 20 Feb. 2014.

<https://www.cadbury.com.au/About-Chocolate/Discovering-Chocolate.aspx>.

“Europeans.” – The Story of Chocolate. Thestoryofchocolate.com, n.d. Web. 20 Feb. 2014.

<http://www.thestoryofchocolate.com/Who/content.cfm?ItemNumber=3446&navItemNumber=3373>.

Green, Matthew. “The Surprising History of London’s Lost Chocolate Houses.” The Telegraph.

Telegraph Media Group, 13 Dec. 2013. Web. 20 Feb. 2014. <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/uk/london/10515620/The-surprising-history-of-Londons-lost-chocolate-houses.html>.

Morton, Marcia, and Sidney Morton. “London’s Chocolate Houses.” Chocolate: An Illustrated

History. N.p.: n.p., n.d. 21-23. Herb Museum. Web. 20 Feb. 2014. <http://www.herbmuseum.ca/content/londons-chocolate-houses>.

“Scientist Finds Manuscript with First English Recipes for Iced Chocolate Desserts.” Breaking

Science News SciNewscom. Sci-News.com, 4 Sept. 2013. Web. 20 Feb. 2014. <http://www.sci-news.com/archaeology/science-recipes-iced-chocolate-desserts-01354.html>.

Chocolate Class

Multimedia Essays on Chocolate, Culture, and the Politics of Food