No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Carried-Off and the Constitution: How British Harboring of Fugitives from American Slavery Led to the Constitution of 1787
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 February 2024
Abstract
Accounts of the factors that led to the drafting of the U.S. Constitutional Convention have focused on Congress' failures to levy taxes, regulate commerce, and provide security against internal unrest and foreign encroachments. Left out from history are the attempts of the founders to force Britain to return thousands of escapees from slavery they sheltered. Patriot state leaders tried to coerce the return of all fugitives from slavery evacuated with the British army by blocking payment of debts to England in violation of the Treaty of Paris. Such actions ultimately caused the breakdown of the agreement and exposed the structural inability of the Congress to enforce the terms of a duly ratified treaty over intransigent states. Ultimately, the issue of the “carried off” and with it the nation's ability to conduct foreign policy, was the paramount issue that could only be resolved by a fundamental restructuring of the federal structure of government.
- Type
- Original Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of American Society for Legal History
References
1 Historians’ original explanation for the drive to replace the Articles of Confederation centered around the British occupation of the western forts as the decisive issue. See McLaughlin, Andrew C., “Western Posts and British Debts,” Annual Report of the American Historical Association (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1895), 421Google Scholar. Then “Progressive” historians took a more cynical tack and tallied up the hectares of western land claims possessed by Washington, Madison, Jefferson, Franklin and other founders in explanation of their political positions. See Beard, Charles, An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution (New York: Macmillan, 1913)Google Scholar; Jameson's, John Franklin, The American Revolution Considered as a Social Movement (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1926)Google Scholar and Schlesinger's, Arthur M., Colonial Merchants and the American Revolution (New York: Columbia University Press, 1918)Google Scholar. Scholars of the “critical period” argued that economic and political chaos in the 1780s forced a new constitutional founding. See Bradburn, Douglas and Pearl, Christopher R., eds., From Independence to the U.S. Constitution: Reconsidering the Critical Period (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2022)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. More recently, Woody Holton and Michael Klarman have built Staughton Lynd's arguments to frame the convention as a counterrevolution against class insurrection. Holton, Woody, Unruly Americans and the Origins of the Constitution (New York: Hill & Wang, 2007)Google Scholar, Klarman, Michael J., The Framer's Coup: The Making of the United States Constitution (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016)Google Scholar. Two early scholars prefigured portions of the argument presented here: Lindsay, Arnett G., “Diplomatic Relations between the United States and Great Britain Bearing on the Return of Negro Slaves, 1783–1828,” The Journal of Negro History 5, no. 4 (October, 1920): 391–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Lowry, Ralph J., “The Black Question in Article Seven of the 1783 Peace Treaty,” Negro History Bulletin 38, no. 5 (June/July, 1975): 415–18Google Scholar. For diplomatic history with limited attention to fugitive slaves, see Ritcheson, Charles R., Aftermath of Revolution: British Policy Toward the United States, 1783–1795 (Dallas, TX: Southern Methodist University Press, 1969)Google Scholar. A more complete historiography of this question is presented in Timothy Messer-Kruse, “The ‘Carried Off’ Cover-Up: How Historians Hid the Founders’ Drive to Recapture British Fugitives from American Slavery,” Ethnic Studies Review 45:2 (Fall 2022), 27–42. See also Timothy Messer-Kruse, Slavery’s Fugitives and the Making of the United States Constitution (Louisiana State University Press, forthcoming Nov. 2024).
2 Farrand, Max, The Framing of the Constitution of the United States (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1913), 3–4Google Scholar. It was the late great Stanley Kutler, who I had the privilege of assisting in his constitutional history course at the University of Wisconsin, whose pet phrase, “power not powers,” I've borrowed.
3 The resistance and fate of fugitives from American slavery are well chronicled. See Quarles, Benjamin, The Negro in the American Revolution (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1961)Google Scholar; Sylvia R. Frey, Water from the Rock: Black Resistance in a Revolutionary Age (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991); Schama, Simon, Rough Crossings: The Slaves, the British, and the American Revolution (New York: Harper Collins, 2006)Google Scholar; Gilbert, Alan, Black Patriots and Loyalists: Fighting for Emancipation in the War for Independence (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Egerton, Douglas R., Death or Liberty: African Americans and Revolutionary America (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009)Google Scholar; Parkinson, Robert, The Common Cause: Creating Race and Nation in the American Revolution (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Jasanoff, Maya, Liberty's Exiles: American Loyalists in the Revolutionary World (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2011)Google Scholar; Bell, Karen Cook, Running from Bondage: Enslaved Women and their Remarkable Fight for Freedom in Revolutionary America (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021), 105CrossRefGoogle Scholar; The Black Loyalist Directory: African Americans in Exile After the American Revolution, Graham Russell Hodges, ed. (New York: Garland Publishing, 1996), xi, xvii–xx.
4 The Negro in the Continental Congress, Peter M. Bergman and Jean McCarroll, eds., Vol. 1 (New York: Bergman Publishers, 1969), 56–57.
5 Journals of Congress for September 1782, in The Negro in the Continental Congress, Peter M. Bergman and Jean McCarroll, eds. (New York: Bergman Publishers, 1969), 56–57.
6 Franklin to Oswald, November 26, 1782, The Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States of America, Vol. 4 (Washington: Francis Preston Blair, 1833), 40–41; Zilversmit, Arthur, The First Emancipation: The Abolition of Slavery in the North (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967), 130–31Google Scholar.
7 Hartley to Franklin, October 4, 1782, The Diplomatic Correspondence of the American Revolution, Vol. 4, Jared Sparks, ed. (Boston: Nathan Hale & Gray & Bowen, 1829), 24 [hereafter cited as DCAR].
8 The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States, Francis Wharton, ed., Vol. 5 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1889), 843 [hereafter RDC].
9 DCAR, Vol. 6, 466.
10 William Floyd to George Clinton, January 16, 1783, Letters of Delegates to Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. 7, Paul H. Smith, ed. (Washington: Library of Congress, 1993), 18 [hereafter LDC].
11 South Carolina Delegates to Carleton, March 27, 1783, LDC, Vol. 7, 110.
12 See Madison to Jefferson, April 22, 1783, LDC, Vol. 20, 203 and Madison to Randolph, April 15, 1783, LDC, Vol. 20, 186.
13 Secret Journals of the Acts and Proceedings of Congress, Vol. 3 (Boston: Thomas B. Wait, 1821), 328 [hereafter Secret Journals].
14 Washington to Carleton, May 6, 1783, The Writings of George Washington from the Original Manuscript Sources, 1745–1799, John C. Fitzpatrick, ed., Vol. 26 (Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office, 1931–44), 408–9.
15 The Writings of George Washington, Vol. 26, 402–6.
16 Hirschfield, Fritz, George Washington and Slavery (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1997), 23Google Scholar.
17 James Madison's Notes of Debates, May 8, 1783, in LDC, Vol. 20, 239.
18 Livingston to the Commissioners, May 28, 1783, DCAR, Vol. 10, 148.
19 Boudinot to Franklin, June 18, 1783, DCAR, Vol. 10, 175. Slightly different wordings of this letter are found in the published compendiums of diplomatic correspondence. DCAR, that was published by the Department of State in 1833, reads: “It has been an ill-judged scheme in the British to retain New-York so long and send off the negroes, as it has roused the spirit of the citizens of the several States greatly,” Vol. 1 (Washington: Francis Preston Blair, 1833), 8.
20 The Negro in the Continental Congress, Vol. 1, 73–75, 87–88.
21 Joseph Jones to Washington, May 6, 1783, in LDC, Vol. 20, 230.
22 The Papers of James Madison, William T. Hutchinson, et al., eds., Vol. 7 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962), 40.
23 Pennsylvania Archives, Samuel Hazard, ed. (Philadelphia: Joseph Severns & Co., 1854), 1st ser., vol. 10, 27.
24 Adams, Franklin, and Jay to Livingston, July 18, 1783, RDC, Vol. 6, 570.
25 To David Hartley, July 17, 1783, DCAR, Vol. 10, 185–86.
26 Ibid., 967. See also JCC, Vol. 28, 123.
27 JCC, Vol. 30, 387–88.
28 Emory G. Evans, “Private Indebtedness and the Revolution in Virginia, 1776 to 1796,” The William and Mary Quarterly 28, no. 3 (July, 1971): 349; Thad W. Tate, “The Coming of the Revolution in Virginia: Britain's Challenge to Virginia's Ruling Class, 1763–1776,” The William and Mary Quarterly 19, no. 3 (July, 1962): 336. See also Anthony S. Parent, Foul Means: The Formation of a Slave Society in Virginia, 1660–1740 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003); Woody Holton, Forced Founders: Indians, Debtors, Slaves, and the Making of the American Revolution in Virginia (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1999).
29 Charles Hobson, “The Recovery of British Debts in the Federal Circuit Court of Virginia, 1790–1797,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 92, no. 2 (April, 1984): 176–200.
30 Letters of Joseph Jones, 108, 111; David John Mays, ed., The Letters and Papers of Edmund Pendleton, Vol. 2 (Charlottesville: The University Press of Virginia, 1967), 133–34.
31 April 11, 1783, JCC, Vol. 24, 240.
32 Maclaine to Hooper, January 17, 1784, in The State Records of North Carolina, Vol. 17, Walter Clark, ed. (Goldsboro, NC: Nash Brothers, 1899), 125.
33 Secret Journals, Vol. 4, 189–202.
34 April 11, 1783, JCC, Vol. 24, 240.
35 Monroe to Harrison, March 26, 1784, LDC, Vol. 21, 460–61.
36 Monroe to Harrison, May 14, 1784, LDC, Vol. 21, 616.
37 Monroe to Harrison, April 10, 1784, LDC, Vol. 21, 513.
38 The Papers of James Madison, Vol. 7, 28; Ibid., Vol. 7, 172, n. 7.
39 “Resolutions on Private Debts Owed to British Merchants, Resolution A, June 7, 1784,” The Papers of James Madison, Vol. 8, 60; “Editorial Note: Resolutions on Private Debts Owed to British Merchants,” Ibid., 58–60.
40 Ibid., 63.
41 The Pennsylvania Packet (Philadelphia), July 22, 1784, 2.
42 The Virginia Gazette (Richmond), July 10, 1784, 1.
43 Jones to Madison, May 25, 1783, in Letters of Joseph Jones of Virginia, 1777–1787, Worthington C. Ford, ed. (Washington: Department of State, 1889), 108.
44 Lee to the Marquis of Lansdowns, March 3, 1786, in Richard Henry Lee, Life of Arthur Lee, Vol. 2 (Boston: Wells & Lilly, 1829), 167–68.
45 Monroe to Jefferson, July 20, 1784, LDC, Vol. 21, 733.
46 Hamilton to George Clinton, June 1, 1783, LDC, Vol. 20, 292–96.
47 A Second Letter from Phocion to the Considerate Citizens of New-York. Containing Remarks on Mentor's Reply (New York, Printed by Samuel Loudon, 1784) in The Papers of Alexander Hamilton, Vol. 3, 1782–1786, Harold C. Syrett, ed. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1962), 530–58.
48 A Letter from Phocion to the Considerate Citizens of New-York On the Politics of the Day (New York, Printed by Samuel Loudon, 1784) in The Papers of Alexander Hamilton, Vol. 3, 483–97. See also Chernow, Ron, Alexander Hamilton (New York: Penguin Press, 2004), 194–96Google Scholar.
49 “The American Commissioners to the Duke of Dorset, October 28, 1784,” The Adams Papers, Papers of John Adams, vol. 16, February 1784–March 1785, Gregg L. Lint, C. James Taylor, Robert Karachuk, Hobson Woodward, Margaret A. Hogan, Sara B. Sikes, Sara Martin, Sara Georgini, Amanda A. Mathews, and James T. Connolly, eds. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2012), 355–58.
50 John Adams to John Jay, October 25, 1785,” The Adams Papers, Papers of John Adams, Vol. 17, April–November 1785, Gregg L. Lint, C. James Taylor, Sara Georgini, Hobson Woodward, Sara B. Sikes, Amanda A. Mathews, and Sara Martin, eds. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2014), 541–51.
51 Smith, Robert W., Keeping the Republic: Ideology and Early American Diplomacy (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 2004), 37Google Scholar; Minute of Conversation with Mr. Adams, October 20, 1785, David Hartley Papers, Vol. 1, 426, Clements Library, University of Michigan.
52 Adams, John, A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America (London: John Stockdale, 1794), 364Google Scholar.
53 Gerry to Adams, February 24, 1785, in Letters of Members of the Continental Congress, Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Vol. 8 (Washington, DC: Carnegie Institution, 1936), 39 [hereafter LMCC].
54 “From John Adams to Richard Henry Lee, April 29, 1785,” The Adams Papers, Papers of John Adams, Vol. 17, Gregg L. Lint, C. James Taylor, Sara Georgini, Hobson Woodward, Sara B. Sikes, Amanda A. Mathews, and Sara Martin, eds. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2014), 72–73.
55 Jay to Congress, January 31, 1786, Secret Journals, Vol. 3, 609.
56 JCC, Vol. 32, 229.
57 JCC, Vol. 32, 379–80.
58 “John Adams to John Jay, May 25, 1786,” The Adams Papers, Vol. 18, 313–15.
59 “John Jay to John Adams, November 1, 1786,” The Adams Papers, Vol. 18, 501–4.
60 Secret Journals, Vol. 4, 44, 85, 107. The most complete account of Jay's interactions with Congress on the British Treaty remains Robinson, Donald L., Slavery in the Structure of American Politics, 1765–1820 (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1971), 347–52Google Scholar.
61 JCC, Vol. 31, 867.
62 JCC, Vol. 31, 863–64.
63 JCC, Vol. 31, 868.
64 Secret Journals, Vol. 4, 103–4.
65 JCC, Vol. 31, 797–98.
66 JCC, Vol. 32, 124–25.
67 JCC, Vol. 32, 177–84. For a thorough study of the constitutional issues raised in the clash of treaties and states sovereignty see Golove, David M., “Treaty-Making and the Nation: The Historical Foundations of the Nationalist Conception of the Treaty Power,” Michigan Law Review 98, no. 5 (March, 2000): 1075–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
68 Charles Pettit to Jeremiah Wadsworth, May 27, 1786, LMCC, 368–71.
69 Full and Faithful Report of the Debates in Both Houses of Parliament… (London: S. Bladon, 1783), 20–21.
70 Benjamin Franklin to David Hartley, September 6, 1783, The Papers of Benjamin Franklin, Vol. 40, May 16 through September 15, 1783, Ellen R. Cohn, ed. (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2011), 582–83.
71 “Charles Thomson to the American Commissioners, August 13, 1784,” The Adams Papers, Papers of John Adams, vol. 16, February 1784–March 1785, Gregg L. Lint, C. James Taylor, Robert Karachuk, Hobson Woodward, Margaret A. Hogan, Sara B. Sikes, Sara Martin, Sara Georgini, Amanda A. Mathews, and James T. Connolly, eds. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2012), 299.
72 The American Museum, (Philadelphia), May 1787, 343–49; Gould, Eliga H., Among the Powers of the Earth (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2012), 127Google Scholar.
73 The American Museum, May 1787, 349–52.
74 The American Museum, May 1787, 353–54.
75 The American Museum, May 1787, 364.
76 The American Museum, March 1787, 187–88.
77 Madison to Randolph, February 18, 1787, LMCC, 542.
78 Madison to Washington, February 21, 1787, LMCC, 545–46.
79 Madison to Pendleton, February 24, 1787, LMCC, 547. Gordon Wood, “Interests and Disinterestedness in the Making of the Constitution,” in Beyond Confederation: Origins of the Constitution and American National Identity, Richard Beeman, Stephen Botein, and Edward C. Carter II, eds. (Williamsburg: University of North Carolina Press, 1987), 75–76.
80 Madison to Randolph, March 25, 1787, LMCC, 565.
81 Irvine to Wilson, March 6, 1787, LMCC, 551.
82 Johnson to Williamson, March 31, 1787, LMCC, 568.
83 King to Parsons, April 8, 1787, LMCC, 572.
84 Grayson to Short, April 16, 1787, LMCC, 581.
85 Grayson to Short, April 16, 1787, LMCC, 582.
86 Hawkins to Jefferson, March 8, 1787, LMCC, 553.
87 Madison to Jefferson, April 23, 1787, LMCC, 589.
88 Grayson to Madison, November 22, 1785, LDC, Vol. 23, 24.
89 Lee to Washington, December 26, 1784, LDC, Vol. 7, 636. For a balanced analysis of the issue of the British forts from both sides of the Atlantic, see Burt, Alfred L., The United States, Great Britain, and British North America (New York: Russell & Russell, 1961)Google Scholar.
90 John Jay to John Adams, February 21, 1787, The Selected Papers of John Jay, Vol. 4, 1785–1788, Elizabeth M. Nuxoll, ed. (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2015), 478–79.
91 Madison to Jefferson, October 24, 1787, The Papers of James Madison, Vol. 10, May 27, 1787–March 3, 1788, Robert A. Rutland, Charles F. Hobson, William M. E. Rachal, and Frederika J. Teute, eds. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1977), 205–20. Hamilton used the phrase “excesses of democracy” while arguing for a more powerful Senate and executive during the Constitutional Convention. The Papers of Alexander Hamilton, Vol. 4, January 1787 – May 1788, Harold C. Syrett, ed. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1962), 195–202.
92 Madison's vote on tobacco is mentioned in p. 86. Madison to Jefferson, October 24, 1787, The Papers of James Madison, Vol. 10, May 27, 1787–March 3, 1788, Robert A. Rutland, Charles F. Hobson, William M. E. Rachal, and Frederika J. Teute, eds. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1977), 205–20.
93 The Papers of James Madison, Vol. 9, April 9, 1786 – May 24, 1787, Robert A. Rutland and William M. E. Rachal, eds. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1975), 345–58.
94 Matthews, Marty D., Forgotten Founder: The Life and Times of Charles Pinckney (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2004), 30–33Google Scholar.
95 Journal of the Constitutional Convention Kept by James Madison, Erastus H. Scot, ed. (Chicago: Scott, Foresman & Co., 1893), 59–60.
96 Charles Pinckney: “Observations On The Plan of Government Submitted to The Federal Convention, in Philadelphia, on the 28th of May, 1787” (May 28, 1787).
97 Andrew C. McLaughlin, “Sketch of Charles Pinckney's Plan for a Constitution, 1787,” American Historical Review 9, no. 4 (July, 1904): 735–47; Nott, Charles C., The Mystery of the Pinckney Draught (New York: The Century Co., 1908)Google Scholar; Ulmer, S. Sidney, “James Madison and the Pinckney Plan,” South Carolina Law Quarterly 9 (1957): 416–43Google Scholar; Jameson, John F., “Studies in the History of the Federal Convention of 1787,” Annual Report of the American Historical Association 1 (1902): 87Google Scholar.
98 Charles Pinckney: “Observations On The Plan of Government Submitted to The Federal Convention, in Philadelphia, on the 28th of May, 1787” (May 28, 1787); The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, Jonathan Elliot, ed., 2nd ed. Vol. 1 (Washington: Taylor & Maury, 1854), 68–69.
99 “James Madison to Thomas Jefferson, October 24, 1787,” The Papers of James Madison, Vol. 10, 27 May 27, 1787–March 3, 1788, Robert A. Rutland, Charles F. Hobson, William M. E. Rachal, and Frederika J. Teute, eds. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1977), 205–20.
100 Bemis, Samuel Flagg, Jay's Treaty: A Study in Commerce and Diplomacy (New York: Macmillan Co., 1924), 43–47Google Scholar; Chernow, Ron, Alexander Hamilton (New York: Penguin Press, 2004), 294–95Google Scholar; Report of Canadian Archives, 1890, Douglas Brymner, ed. (Ottawa: Brown Chamberlin, 1891), 125, 127, 239.