The Official Early(pre-1950s) Haitian History Thread

[Bawon Samedi]

@Get These Nets The original letter that Orlando Aurélien posted doesn't specify Haitian refugees. And that seems like the original decree. Your source seems like a secondary one. Second, how do we even know Afram slaves were even excluded? More importantly, now that I remember I posted similar sources earlier in this thread of Dessaline hiring former USA slaves as sailors and seems to correlate with this. Anyways, I'm doing some extra digging myself.

Edit:

African Americans and the Haitian Revolution: Selected Essays and Historical

 

[Bawon Samedi]

Another source saying the same thing.

Haiti: A Shattered Nation

 

[get these nets]

@Get These Nets The original letter that Orlando Aurélien posted doesn't specify Haitian refugees. And that seems like the original decree. Your source seems like a secondary one. Second, how do we even know Afram slaves were even excluded? More importantly, now that I remember I posted similar sources earlier in this thread of Dessaline hiring former USA slaves as sailors and seems to correlate with this. Anyways, I'm doing some extra digging myself.

Edit:

African Americans and the Haitian Revolution: Selected Essays and Historical

Read the "primary source" (the DECREE) again...either in English or French...and note the words "RETURNING"and "RESTORE".

Unless the word "retourner" meant something different in the 19th century than it means today, who else could he have been referring to other than Haitians?

 

[Bawon Samedi]

Read the "primary source" (the DECREE) again...either in English or French...and note the words "RETURNING"and "RESTORE".

Unless the word "retourner" meant something different in the 19th century than it means today, who else could he have been referring to other than Haitians?

Already did. Point is my two other sources already confirmed that he WAS buying slaves. Whether it be from the primary source or not.

 

[get these nets]

Already did. Point is my two other sources already confirmed that he WAS buying slaves. Whether it be from the primary source or not.

You're moving the soccer net here.
The difference between what L'ouverture and Dessalines tried to do with Jamaica, and this decree is that the correspondence in those cases were directly with statesmen. They literally exchanged letters with Jamaican officials discussing paying the purchase price for newly arrived Africans and taking them to Haiti and freeing them from chattel slavery .

This decree, by it's wording is clearly something different. I'm surprised that the scholars you've quoted wouldn't have noted the difference between the direct overtures to purchase and free newly arrived (or not yet departed from slaveship) Africans from other colonies, and Dessalines paying for the passage of St. Domingue refugees back home to Haiti.

This decree was made into an ad in English AND French and money was paid for it to run in newspapers in the cities where the St. Domingue refugees ended up. Is that a coincidence, or does it bolster my point about who it was meant for?


What I'm going to in the next post is post the direct correspondence between Haitian leaders and statesmen from nearby colonies discussing the purchasing of Africans. And I will post figures from the largest slave port in America at that time outlining the market price for enslaved Africans being brought into the country.

If you and others want to continue running with the decree being an ad to pay "$40 dollars to purchase and ship Africans enslaved in America to Haiti" after that, it's on y'all.

 

[get these nets]

@Get These Nets The original letter that Orlando Aurélien posted doesn't specify Haitian refugees. And that seems like the original decree. Your source seems like a secondary one. Second, how do we even know Afram slaves were even excluded? More importantly, now that I remember I posted similar sources earlier in this thread of Dessaline hiring former USA slaves as sailors and seems to correlate with this. Anyways, I'm doing some extra digging myself.

Edit:

African Americans and the Haitian Revolution: Selected Essays and Historical

This source doesn't say what you believe it does. If you read it again, it implies directly that Dessalines used the decree/advertisement to recruit "free" Blacks from the United States. It contrasts that directive
with the actions of him negotiating the sale of Africans with slavetraders in Jamaica.

This is your source.

I obviously disagree with that writer's interpretation of who the decree was trying to get to return to Haiti, but this source doesn't support what you've been trying to say.

 

[Bawon Samedi]

@Get These Nets

I don't know what more there is to argue both my sources clearly state Dessalines was willing to purchase American slaves for $40 from ship captains. What the do you mean "its not saying what I think its saying?" No one here is moving any net. I wanted to see whether or not that claim of Dessalines buying slaves was true or not. But letter from the original tweet is shaky in terms of confirming or not but fact is two sources seem to confirm it. Especially the second one.

The first source doesn't even MENTION the term "refugees" or a decree or free slaves. And what on Earth are Haitian refugees doing on a AMERICAN slave ship? The Second source goes into deeper depth in labeling them as slaves. What on Earth were Haitian refugees doing as slaves in America and how would Dessalines or any American slave owner know who was a Haitian or not? No one is moving the goal post. You seem to have a vendetta against this topic.

Could it be that BOTH refugees and American slaves were imported to Haiti? How about you purchase both books(or find them online for free in pdf format) and see where the authors get there references from.

Either way I don't care if this is true or not. But different sources seem to say different things. If its false its false. But I'm seeing similar books say the same thing.

 

[get these nets]

@Get These Nets

I don't know what more there is to argue both my sources clearly state Dessalines was willing to purchase American slaves for $40 from ship captains.

Highlight the sentence(s) in the first source that says that.

 

[get these nets]

@xoxodede , if you don't mind, could you come here and confirm clarify something?
I called out a false post a few pages back in post #295. Pride, or hurt feelings won't allow the people I called out to admit that they were wrong.

This is an English translated ad placed in American newspapers in January 1804. The copy reads

It's obvious that this decree/ad is directed towards the (then) St. Domingue refugees who had fled during the Revolution and ended up in America. The money listed was to be the amount the govt. would guarantee for the fare/fee of the ship.
People won't walk back the claim that this ad and the amount ($40 USD) was meant to pay for the freedom and the transport of enslaved Africans in America to Haiti.

I said at the time of calling the post out that this interpretation insults the intelligence of anybody who is aware of the history of that region from that era.
One of the people cosigning and running with this false reading, is now pandering in other threads talking about pride/history, and "us and them"

Can you explain to him, and anybody else who reads this why the $40 fee would have been an unrealistic amount to purchase the freedom of a person enslaved in the US in 1804?

Thanks.

 

[Secure Da Bag]

What I'm going to in the next post is post the direct correspondence between Haitian leaders and statesmen from nearby colonies discussing the purchasing of Africans. And I will post figures from the largest slave port in America at that time outlining the market price for enslaved Africans being brought into the country.

I'd like to see that.

 

[xoxodede]

@xoxodede , if you don't mind, could you come here and confirm clarify something?
I called out a false post a few pages back in post #295. Pride, or hurt feelings won't allow the people I called out to admit that they were wrong.

This is an English translated ad placed in American newspapers in January 1804. The copy reads

It's obvious that this decree/ad is directed towards the (then) St. Domingue refugees who had fled during the Revolution and ended up in America. The money listed was to be the amount the govt. would guarantee for the fare/fee of the ship.
People won't walk back the claim that this ad and the amount ($40 USD) was meant to pay for the freedom and the transport of enslaved Africans in America to Haiti.

I said at the time of calling the post out that this interpretation insults the intelligence of anybody who is aware of the history of that region from that era.
One of the people cosigning and running with this false reading, is now pandering in other threads talking about pride/history, and "us and them"

Can you explain to him, and anybody else who reads this why the $40 fee would have been an unrealistic amount to purchase the freedom of a person enslaved in the US in 1804?

Thanks.

You are correct, $40 even back then was not enough to purchase any enslaved - no matter the age. If one was sold (rare) at that price it was either an elderly person and or sadly someone with health issues, or someone they were trying to get rid off (on death bed ).

Pricing of the enslaved varied due to many factors -such as -- sex, age, health, fertile, complexion (Fancy trade), strength and skill/trade. Babies/toddlers and elderly usually were the least expensive.

Example of pricing:

The two-day sale netted $303,850. The highest price paid for one family -- a mother and her five grown children -- was $6,180. The highest price for one individual was $1,750. The lowest price for any one slave was $250.

The Weeping Time.


https://www.measuringworth.com/slavery.php

Two great books to learn more are:

https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674005396

The Price for Their Pound of Flesh by Daina Ramey Berry: 9780807067147 | PenguinRandomHouse.com: Books

 

[get these nets]

You are correct, $40 even back then was not enough to purchase any enslaved - no matter the age. If one was sold (rare) at that price it was either an elderly person and or sadly someone with health issues, or someone they were trying to get rid off (on death bed ).

Pricing of the enslaved varied due to many factors -such as -- sex, age, health, fertile, complexion (Fancy trade), strength and skill/trade. Babies/toddlers and elderly usually were the least expensive.

Example of pricing:

The two-day sale netted $303,850. The highest price paid for one family -- a mother and her five grown children -- was $6,180. The highest price for one individual was $1,750. The lowest price for any one slave was $250.

The Weeping Time.


https://www.measuringworth.com/slavery.php

Two great books to learn more are:

https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674005396

The Price for Their Pound of Flesh by Daina Ramey Berry: 9780807067147 | PenguinRandomHouse.com: Books

Thanks.
I would have been ok if the evidence pointed against me, but glad your post helps confirm that the figure was off. Way off. The same way, I point out coli youtubers misleading people with half baked stories, I do the same whenever I hear something that doesn't add up. In this case, the false story about Dessalines "rescuing enslaved AAs"

Tell people what they want to hear, and want to believe, and they won't question or challenge it.

Slavery in the Western hemisphere was big business for others. For the children/descendants of the Africans
who were tortured under that system, it's a painful story. I can see why people are reluctant to study that period of time, but I don't think you can understand modern history without studying that era.

 

[Bawon Samedi]

 

[Bawon Samedi]

 

[mson]

When France extorted Haiti – the greatest heist in history