The Unveiling of Canadian History, Volume 4.
To Shining Sea – Ireland, Haiti, and Louisiana, and the Idea of a Continental Republic, 1797 – 1804.
Part 2 – The Haitian Frontier
Chapter 15 - Toussaint’s Clause, February 9th 1799
A great debate now took place about whether the United States should open its trade with Saint-Domingue and risk the anger of the French Directory. The ‘republicans’ wished to remain allies with France, and feared that this trade might cause the newly-freed slaves of Saint-Domingue ‘to spread their views among the negro people’ of the southern states.
Governor-General Toussaint Louverture and President John Adams
General Toussaint was faced with a decision that could decide the fate of Saint-Domingue. Because the island’s economy was so focussed on exports of sugar and coffee, there was almost no foodstuffs grown; and all military equipment also had to be imported. While the North and West Provinces, under General Toussaint’s command, were in desperate need of food supplies and military supplies for his army, Rigaud in South Province was receiving supplies from British merchants in Jamaica!
This was another reason why General Toussaint did not trust the British – who wanted to isolate Saint-Domingue and to stop any attempt of a rebellion occurring in any of the British plantation islands. And he could not trust the French – who wished to start slave rebellions in British Jamaica and in the southern United States – an undertaking that General Toussaint thought that he would lose, resulting in the destruction of his army and the loss of their freedom.
He decided that he could trust the Americans!
One week after the departure of Hedouville, General Toussaint deputized a Cap Francais businessman, Joseph Bunel, to go to Philadelphia, accompanied by the American consul at Cap Francais, Jacob Mayer, in order to deliver a letter to President Adams, proposing that American trade with St. Domingue be permitted, writing that:
“you can be assured, Mr. President, that Americans will find protection and security in the ports of the Republic and St. Domingue, that the flag of the United States will be respected there, as that of a friendly power and ally of France; that orders will be given to our privateers on cruise to act in that manner; and that I will facilitate by all means available to me, their prompt return to their country, and that they will be paid promptly for cargoes that have been brought to us.”
Note: Joseph Bunel was a successful French merchant in Saint-Domingue and was married to Marie Francoise Mouton Bunel, who had been born into slavery, who had gained her freedom and had also become a successful merchant in Saint-Domingue. This was at a time when inter-racial marriages were illegal in the United States – except for Pennsylvania, that repealed its ban in 1780. (Virginia would not repeal its ban until it was found unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court in 1967!!!)
Bunel arrived at Philadelphia on December 19th, and a few days later, met privately with Secretary of State, Pickering. On December 26th, Bunel dined with Pickering and with some important Federalist congressman – Otis, Harper, and Dayton – the Speaker of the House. On December 31st, Bunel met secretly with President Adams, and would later dine with President Adams, Pickering and a few others at the President’s House on January 7th 1799.
On January 3rd, Otis, from the Committee of Defence, reported a bill entitled ‘an act further to suspend the commercial intercourse between France and the dependencies thereof’, and on January 8th, Gallatin proposed that debate on this bill should not begin until the House had received the despatches from the President, that he had received during the recess, and that he had promised to communicate to Congress.
The debate finally began on January 18th, but was soon interrupted ‘by a Message from the President, communicating the despatches which had given rise to this conversation’.
President Adams sent to Congress, Gerry’s letter of October 1st, with his letters of May 12th and 13th; and with the correspondence between Gerry and Talleyrand. The President also informed them that ‘a report from the Secretary of State on the subject of these despatches, would be communicated to both Houses on Monday, January 21st.’ Pickering’s report demonstrated the new arret (of July 31st) ‘to be a bold imposture, intended to mislead the citizens of the United States into a belief that the French Government was going to put an end to the depredations of French cruizers on American commerce, while the means proposed are so gross as to be an insult on our understandings.’
The next day, January 22nd, the debate was resumed on this new bill – that contained a new (4th) section:
“that if, at any time after the passing of this act, the Government of France, or any persons claiming and exercising command and authority, in any island, port or place, belonging to the French Republic, shall clearly disavow, and shall be found to refrain from the aggressions, depredations, and hostilities, which have been, and are by them encouraged and maintained against the vessels and other property of the citizens of the United States, and against their natural rights and sovereignty, in violation of the laws of nations, it shall therefore be lawful for the President of the United States, being ascertained of the premises, if he shall deem it expedient and consistent with the interest of the United States, to remit and discontinue the restraints and prohibitions aforesaid, either with respect to the French Republic, or to any such island, port, or place, belonging to such Republic, with which a commercial intercourse may safely be renewed; and also to revive the said restraints and prohibitions, after the same shall have discontinued, whenever in his opinion the interest of the United States shall require; and he shall be, and hereby is, authorized to make proclamation thereof accordingly.”
This became known as ‘Toussaint’s Clause’.
The ‘republicans’, however, seemed obsessed with securing peace with France (and allying against Britain) and that the original bill [without Toussaint’s clause] had been passed, as Mr. Gallatin said:
“with a view of compelling France, by the loss of our trade to the islands, to come to reasonable terms of settlement with the United States.”
The ‘republicans’ thought that the bill didn’t stand on its own – to protect the trade and commerce of the United States, but that the bill was simply a form of diplomacy – to be used to influence the way that France would act.
But that, as Mr. Nicholas said:
“a clause of this kind held out an invitation to agents to abandon their country and set up governments of their own … could anything afford a more lasting cause for war than an act of this kind? If there be any disposition in the French Government to treat … a conduct of this kind would effectually root it out, and there could be no treaty – no peace between the two countries – for years to come.”
The ’federalists’ were committed to defending the commerce of the nation, and that the bill to suspend commerce with France was agreed to, as Mr. Harper said:
“to save our commerce from that speculative and hazardous enterprise which the high profits made by successful voyages enticed the merchant to go into, which was a species of gambling by which some made large fortunes, and others sustained heavy losses … and to deter the French government from committing depredations upon our commerce; [but now] ‘we know that these colonies have privateered against us. Whether they have done what they were not authorized to do, is not for me to inquire. If they will not give up the privilege of privateering, they cannot have the benefit of our trade. If they have not the authority to do so, he supposed they would not do it; but if General Toussaint prohibits privateering, we shall suppose he has the right to do it.”
Mr. Gallatin replied that he had voted against the bill in the last session because ‘the trade to the West Indies was even more advantageous to the United States than to France.’ Now he claimed that:
“he was ready to vote for a continuance of it; but the section now under consideration goes entirely upon new ground … This would be to encourage insurrections … If it be the intention of the General (Toussaint) to declare it, the independence of St. Domingo is a very problematic event … Suppose that island, with its present population, under certain circumstances, should become an independent State. What is this population? It is known to consist, almost altogether, of slaves just emancipated, of men who received their first education under the lash of the whip, and who have been initiated to liberty only by that series of rapine, pillage, and massacre, that have laid waste and deluged that island in blood; of men, who, if left themselves, if altogether independent, are by no means likely to apply themselves to the peaceable cultivation of the country, but will try to continue to live, as heretofore, by plunder and depredations. No man wishes more than I do to see an abolition of slavery, when it can be properly effected; but no man would be more unwilling than I to constitute a whole nation of freed slaves, who had arrived to the age of thirty years, and thus to throw so many wild tigers on society.
If the population of St. Domingo can remain free in that island, he had no objection; but, however free, he did not wish to have them independent, and he would rather see them under a government that would be likely to keep them where they are, and prevent them from committing depredations out of the island … Did not gentlemen recollect what an alarm was sounded last year, with the respect to the probability of an invasion of the Southern States from the West Indies; an alarm upon which some of the strongest measures of the last session were grounded? (He) could not help hoping, there would be a general wish not to take any measure which may imbody so dangerous a description of men in our neighborhood, whose object may be plunder, and who might visit the States of South Carolina and Georgia, and spread their views among the negro people there, and excite dangerous insurrections among them. He did not wish, therefore, to see this black population independent.”
In response to Gallatin’s assertion, the ‘federalists’ argued that, as Mr. Smith said:
“But suppose this independence were to take place, would all the danger to this country actually take place which has been stated? In his opinion the reverse would be true. Refuse to these people our commerce, and the provisions of which they stand in need, and you compel them to become pirates and dangerous neighbors to the Southern States; but, so long as you supply them, they will turn their attention to the cultivation of their plantations.”
And also, as Mr. Brace said:
“Our treaties with the French Government have been declared void, on account of the conduct of that government. We have proceeded further, and suspended all our commercial intercourse with France and her dependencies … leaving a power, however, with the President, to repeal the suspension, whenever the French shall cease from their depredations. If we follow this course, and these depredations are discontinued in any of the West India islands, we have a right to relax this suspension with respect to them. And it is a strange idea to suppose that such a step can give offence … He wished to treat that nation with justice; but could never consent to prostrate the dignity of the country, by supposing that, in doing an act merely to regulate our own commerce, we are about to give offence to the French Government, and that, therefore, we ought not to adopt it.”
The bill was passed by the House of Representatives on January 28th, passed by the Senate on February 6th, and approved and signed by President Adams on February 9th.
Note: Regarding the question of General Toussaint’s authority, it should be recalled that in July 1795 the French National Convention promoted him to Brigadier-General; that in April 1796 Laveaux promoted him to Lieutenant-Governor; and that in May 1797 Sonthonax appointed him as Governor-general and as Commander-in-chief of all French forces in Saint-Domingue. And, it should also be recalled that it was General Toussaint who refused the French Directory’s plan (that was sent with Hedouville) to invade the British colony of Jamaica and the southern states of America, in order to instigate a slave rebellion.
[next week - chapter 16 - Hamilton’s Constitution for Saint-Domingue, February 21st 1799]
*************
For those who may wish to support my continuing work on ‘The Unveiling of Canadian History’, you may purchase my books, that are available as PDFs and Paperback (on Amazon) at the Canadian Patriot Review :
Volume 1 – The Approaching Conflict, 1753 – 1774.
Volume 2 – Forlorn Hope – Quebec and Nova Scotia, and the War for Independence, 1775 – 1785.
And hopefully,
Volume 3 – The Storming of Hell – the War for the Territory Northwest of Ohio, 1786 – 1796, and
Volume 4 – Ireland, Haiti, and Louisiana – the Idea of a Continental Republic, 1797 – 1804,
may also appear in print, in the near future, while I continue to work on :
Volume 5 – On the Trail of the Treasonous, 1804 - 1814.