Great Britain and Anti-Slavery

Great Britain is widely lauded in history for abolishing slavery in its Empire in 1834 via the 1833 Anti-Slavery Act. Although it is not as all encompassing as one would think, with exemptions for those owned by the Honourable East India Tea Company (Ceylon and Saint Helena), it do have the affect of essentially ending slavery in the Empire. No one talks about the indentures of the former slaves or the fact that the slaves essentially had no choice but to stay and work the plantations as they were not compensated and cast adrift. All of these things are sadly ignored in history’s discussion.

What is most often discussed is that Great Britain acknowledged the evil that slavery was nearly 3 decades before the United States. Then these people of purer heart helped work towards the emancipation of slaves in the evil United States. This is true as far as it goes. But I had a thought.

At the time of the abolition of slavery in the British Empire, it was only about a half a century since the American Revolution. My question is simple, what if the British had prevailed in the American Revolution?

Then the land of the United States would have still been a British colony. They southern economy would still be agrarian, with cotton being a major cash crop. Whether the size of the country would have been the same is open for question, but the Eastern Seaboard would have been essentially the same in regards to Colonies versus States.

So my question is: with the monies involved, would Great Britain abolished slavery in 1833 or would they have waited it out?

I think I know the answer to that.