Document Set C: Reparations and Relationships with former Colonial Power
Document C1: “France's Debt of Dishonour to Haiti” by Isabel Macdonald
Following Haiti's independence, former French slave-owners submitted detailed tabulations of their losses to the French government, with line items for each of "their" slaves that had been "lost" with Haitian independence. In 1825, the French King, Charles X, demanded that Haiti pay an "independence debt" to compensate former colonists for the slaves who had won their freedom in the Haitian Revolution. With warships stationed along the Haitian coast backing up the French demand, France insisted that Haiti pay its former coloniser 150m gold francs – ten times the fledgling black nation's total annual revenues.
Under threat of a French military invasion that aimed at the re-enslavement of the population, the Haitian government had little choice but to agree to pay. Haiti's government was also forced to finance the debt through loans from a single French bank, which capitalised on its monopoly by gauging Haiti with exorbitant interest rates and fees.
The original sum of the indemnity was subsequently reduced, but Haiti still disbursed 90m gold francs to France. This second price the French exacted for the independence Haitians had won in battle was, even in 1825, not lawful. When the original indemnity was imposed by the French king, the slave trade was technically illegal; such a transaction – exchanging cash for human lives valued as slave labour – represented a gross violation of both French and international laws. And Haiti was still paying off this "independence debt" in 1947 – 140 years after the abolition of the slave trade and 85 years after the emancipation proclamation.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/aug/16/haiti-france
Under threat of a French military invasion that aimed at the re-enslavement of the population, the Haitian government had little choice but to agree to pay. Haiti's government was also forced to finance the debt through loans from a single French bank, which capitalised on its monopoly by gauging Haiti with exorbitant interest rates and fees.
The original sum of the indemnity was subsequently reduced, but Haiti still disbursed 90m gold francs to France. This second price the French exacted for the independence Haitians had won in battle was, even in 1825, not lawful. When the original indemnity was imposed by the French king, the slave trade was technically illegal; such a transaction – exchanging cash for human lives valued as slave labour – represented a gross violation of both French and international laws. And Haiti was still paying off this "independence debt" in 1947 – 140 years after the abolition of the slave trade and 85 years after the emancipation proclamation.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/aug/16/haiti-france
Document C2: Treaty of Paris 1783
The Treaty makes no reparation demands; only Articles 4-6 discuss monetary issues:
Article 4:
It is agreed that creditors on either side shall meet with no lawful impediment to the recovery of the full value in sterling money of all bona fide debts heretofore contracted.
Article 5:
It is agreed that Congress shall earnestly recommend it to the legislatures of the respective states to provide for the restitution of all estates, rights, and properties, which have been confiscated belonging to real British subjects;
Article 6:
That there shall be no future confiscations made nor any prosecutions commenced against any person or persons for, or by reason of, the part which he or they may have taken in the present war, and that no person shall on that account suffer any future loss or damage, either in his person, liberty, or property;
http://library.thinkquest.org/TQ0312848/treatyofparis1783.htm
Article 4:
It is agreed that creditors on either side shall meet with no lawful impediment to the recovery of the full value in sterling money of all bona fide debts heretofore contracted.
Article 5:
It is agreed that Congress shall earnestly recommend it to the legislatures of the respective states to provide for the restitution of all estates, rights, and properties, which have been confiscated belonging to real British subjects;
Article 6:
That there shall be no future confiscations made nor any prosecutions commenced against any person or persons for, or by reason of, the part which he or they may have taken in the present war, and that no person shall on that account suffer any future loss or damage, either in his person, liberty, or property;
http://library.thinkquest.org/TQ0312848/treatyofparis1783.htm
Document C3: “The King’s Men: After the Revolution” by Thomas Bender reviewing LIBERTY’S EXILES: American Loyalists in the Revolutionary World by Maya Jasanoff
Jasanoff estimates that 60,000 loyalists opted to leave America, including at least 8,000 free blacks. In addition, 15,000 enslaved people of African descent were carried away by their owners. The migration was hardly a small one: in proportion to population, the American Revolution resulted in five times more departures than its more violent French counterpart. Why did so many go? There were many reasons, but the largest and most obvious factor was the availability of the commodious British Empire. The loyalists were able to leave their homeland while remaining under the British king. And the king’s own loyalty to his American subjects also made a difference: his government provided the loyalists with transportation and established a mechanism for making claims on the British treasury for loss of property.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/01/books/review/book-review-libertys-exiles-by-maya-jasanoff.html?pagewanted=all
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/01/books/review/book-review-libertys-exiles-by-maya-jasanoff.html?pagewanted=all
Document C4: "The American Revolution in Comparative Perspective", R.R. Palmer
The average American at that time probably enjoyed better food, lodging, and conditions of work than the average European... (under Great Britain) the 13 colonies had not been exploited... The Thirteen Colonies were economically undeveloped, though in some cases they rivaled England itself, as in fisheries and shipbuilding; but in any event they had the means of rapid development in their human and natural resources and in their institutional setting, a development aided in the generations following the Revolution by the continuing investment of foreign capital and influx of European immigration, which brought skilled labor and and professional talents to the new country.
The average American at that time probably enjoyed better food, lodging, and conditions of work than the average European... (under Great Britain) the 13 colonies had not been exploited... The Thirteen Colonies were economically undeveloped, though in some cases they rivaled England itself, as in fisheries and shipbuilding; but in any event they had the means of rapid development in their human and natural resources and in their institutional setting, a development aided in the generations following the Revolution by the continuing investment of foreign capital and influx of European immigration, which brought skilled labor and and professional talents to the new country.
Discussion Questions
1. How were reparations dealt with after the Haitian Revolution?
2. How were reparations dealt with after the American Revolution?
3. How might reparations (or the lack thereof) impact the development of a new democracy?
4. According to doc C3, what happened to many loyalists after the American Revolution? How might this have impacted the development of the US?
5. How do these documents help to answer the question:
"Why were British North American colonists better prepared for Independence than their Latin American neighbors to the south?”
2. How were reparations dealt with after the American Revolution?
3. How might reparations (or the lack thereof) impact the development of a new democracy?
4. According to doc C3, what happened to many loyalists after the American Revolution? How might this have impacted the development of the US?
5. How do these documents help to answer the question:
"Why were British North American colonists better prepared for Independence than their Latin American neighbors to the south?”