The Treaty of Paris of 1783
The American Revolutionary War continued, and by early 1782, France had withdrawn its military. America’s treasury was nearly empty, and the U.S. teetered on financial collapse and possible anarchy. In response, the United States sought peace with England, appointing Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, John Jay, John Adams, and Henry Laurens to negotiate the terms in Paris, France. This delegation successfully negotiated and signed a peace treaty on behalf of the United States with England, the Treaty of Paris of 1783, on November 30, 1782.
In this peace treaty, the United States and England agreed to cease all “hostilities immediately,” and the parties agreed to release all prisoners upon the treaty’s ratification. Releasing prisoners back to their sovereign as a practice was an international tradition. The language in the treaty was as follows:
“There shall be a firm and perpetual peace between His Brittanic Majesty and the States and between the subjects of the one and the citizens of the other, wherefore all hostilities both by sea and land shall cease. All prisoners on both sides shall be set at liberty.”
History supports that once news of a preliminary peace treaty with England was known, the Founding Generation in America began kidnapping black Englishmen with impunity. Black individuals were kidnapped off public streets, in their homes, and placed into slavery. The kidnappings were widespread and organized, and this broke the cessation of hostility truce between England and the United States.
Reacting to these events in a May 1783 meeting, British General Guy Carleton formally complained to a U.S. delegation headed by America’s General George Washington. Carleton asserted that America’s practice of mass kidnapping of black colonials renewed “hostilities” against British subjects. At that time, Washington and others were told that it was the official policy of the British imperial government that all former slaves were British subjects under English law and entitled to freedom under the Treaty of Paris of 1783.
Washington blustered and disagreed with Carleton, claiming all former slaves were “property” of American citizens based upon colonial statutes, and in being “property,” he performatively demanded their surrender, control, and custody. Carleton refused on behalf of the British imperial government, stating that he had no intention of surrendering any black colonial as they were British subjects because Clinton’s Phillipsburg Proclamation of 1779 had emancipated all black colonials. Most were entitled to their birthright liberty due to their births in colonial America under English law.
Calvin’s Case (1608) is a landmark case that supports Carleton’s position as the English Court established that individuals born in territories under the English monarch’s control were natural-born subjects. Moreover, during the 18th century, a “British subject” was broadly defined as anyone who owed allegiance to the British Crown, whether by birth—jus soli or naturalization, within the expansive realms of the British Empire.
Carleton stated to Washington that he did not see any provision in the Articles of Peace as being a relinquishment or an abandonment of Britain’s policies of liberation of the colonial black population. Carleton then went on to state, to Washington’s horror and dismay, that it would be a breach of faith and duty for him not to honor the British imperial government’s emancipation of all black colonials suffering as slaves and that he was planning on removing all Revolutionary War-era blacks from the United States.
But General Carleton stated that if removing blacks proved to be a violation of the Treaty of Paris, then compensation would have to be paid by the British government. Further, to provide for this possibility, both Carleton and Washington agreed to keep a listing of all black colonials exported out of the United States by way of separate registries called the Book of Negroes—listing their names, ages, and occupation, along with the names of their former master, so that “the owners might eventually be paid for the slaves who were not entitled to their freedom by British Proclamation and promises.”
Having clearly articulated the British imperial government’s position on Revolutionary War-era blacks in the thirteen American colonies and England’s rationale for considering black colonials as being subjects of King George III—entitled to liberty under the Treaty of Paris and aware that the U.S. Congress had yet to ratify the treaty, Carleton adjourned the meeting, concluding that nothing could be settled.
Washington understood the British imperial government’s position on the legal status of Revolutionary War-era blacks, as communicated by Carleton—meant that all black colonials were British subjects under controlling law and should be “set at liberty” under the Treaty of Paris of 1783 once the U.S. Congress ratified the treaty.
Washington, in a letter to Founder and fellow Virginian Richard Henry Lee, memorialized the meeting:
“The measure is totally different from the letter and spirit of the treaty, but waiving the specialty of the point, leaving this decision to our respective sovereign, I find it my duty to signify my readiness in conjunction with you to enter into agreement, or take measures which may be deemed expedient to prevent the future carrying away any Negroes or other property of the American people.”
General Carleton commanded his troops to “remain on duty until every [black] man, woman, and child who wanted to leave the United States is safely moved to British soil.” However, the U.S. employed detention, coercion, and deception to obstruct the mass departure of black colonials to British ships. So, by November 28, 1783, when the British left America, only 3,000 black colonials, memorialized in the Book of Negroes gained their freedom and were transported for resettlement to Nova Scotia, Canada, and other British territories. Meanwhile, 500,000 other black colonials found themselves stranded in the United States.
Congress did not release the 500,000 detained black Englishmen, nor did it grant them due process of law. Further, the issue as to whether black colonials were “English subjects” and entitled to their liberty was never formally addressed by the U.S. Congress despite General Washington’s assurance to British General Carleton that Congress would address this treaty dispute. Instead, the United States made these black individuals and their descendants the foundation of America’s slave-based economy, violating international norms, and then sanctified this misanthrope action by enacting the U.S. Constitution.