Edit: some final notes. The answers to this question depend on how the claim is interpreted. During my research for this answer I found an anecdote, I can't find it anymore but I believe it was by Frederick Douglass, where a lame female slave was flogged and send away because she was useless to her master. The anecdote concluded that she likely starved to death. Does that mean that the claim is true? In this specific case her owner decided that she was worth absolutely nothing, does that verify the claim? Or is the claim about the widespread use of this practice during economic hard times? The ambiguity makes the question hard to answer, but I hope this answer brought some perspectives that are helpful.
EDIT: I did a little more digging and found the following table by Eltis et al.
This table shows that at the lowest point a slave was worth about 20KG of sugar. I assume sugar was a relative expensive product in those days, meaning that they were probably worth a lot more than 20kg of "normal" food.
What about the second definition by Merriam-Webster?
Eltis, D., Lewis, F. D., & Richardson, D. (2005). Slave prices, the African slave trade, and productivity in the Caribbean, 1674–1807 1. The Economic History Review, 58(4), 673-700.
What about the second definition by Merriam-Webster?
EDIT: I did a little more digging and found the following table by Eltis et al.
This table shows that at the lowest point a slave was worth about 20KG of sugar. I assume sugar was a relative expensive product in those days, meaning that they were probably worth a lot more than 20kg of "normal" food.
What about the second definition by Merriam-Webster?
Eltis, D., Lewis, F. D., & Richardson, D. (2005). Slave prices, the African slave trade, and productivity in the Caribbean, 1674–1807 1. The Economic History Review, 58(4), 673-700.