Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:00:07]:
I feel like Faustin Soulouqe, Emperor Faustin the first, reign is one of the sort of most maligned and misunderstood eras in kind of Haitian presidential history, to a large degree, at least outside of Haiti, you know, within United States scholarship. So Luke has traditionally been kind of, you know, dismissed as sort of an ignorant, bumbling, foolish person who just fundamentally did not really need did not really fundamentally know how to lead his people or how to lead the nation. And one of the things that I wanted to do was to reposition the story of Sollek’s reign, first as president and then later as emperor Faustin the first, within the broader context of what was happening in the global political arena, particularly in terms of, you know, the efforts of white History nations to reimpose imperial control over Haiti. I think one of the reasons why Sollouk’s presidency and later his, you know, his reign as emperor has been so demonized is because he did lead endless military campaigns against what becomes the Dominican Republic in an effort to bring the Doctor back under Haitian rule. And in that process, you know, Solouk drives the Haiti farther and farther into, you know, financial ruin. He sacrifices tens of thousands of people’s lives, and he has a pretty brutal militaristic leadership style. So so Luke was a very, you know, difficult and, you know, militarily violent leader. But one of the points that I wanna make is that he is also a person who is a 100% committed to ensuring that Haiti never falls under colonial rule again, and that slavery is never imposed again.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:02:27]:
And that drives him to extreme measure. He’s very concerned that if the Dominican Republic remains independent, that the United States, Spain, France, essentially, any, white history power will gain a foothold in the Dominican Republic and use that as a launchpad to regain imperial control over Haiti and perhaps most importantly to reimpose slavery. And the truth is is that the historical record a 100% supports Soulouque’s fear and contention. The United States was in fact plotting to do exactly that, to use the Dominican Republic as a launch pad to impose US authority over Haiti and to reimpose slavery. That was precisely the plan. So Saliq was not wrong, but his fear about the potential of that leads to a situation in which his reign becomes very bloody and repressive, both against his own people, but, also, you know, he initiates these endless bloody campaigns trying to force the Dominican Republic back under Haitian rule so that the country would not be left vulnerable to, you know, United States or European imperialism. So Selk’s reign as emperor was a very problematic and disturbing time period in Haitian history. But I think it’s important that people understand why, that people understand that Saluk, at the end of the day, was really committed to ensuring that Haiti would remain independent and sovereign and that it would remain completely free of slavery.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:04:15]:
Interestingly enough, I think black activists in the United States at the time understood that, understood the reason for what Saliq was doing, even if they didn’t necessarily agree with the extreme measures that that Soulouque resorted to. I think they understood that that emperor Faustin the first was trying to protect Haiti from imperialism and from slavery, and they knew that the United States was conspiring to gain control over Haiti. And so black activists were very outspoken in their support of Saluk even though he was a very complicated political leader. And Frederick Douglass, famed United States abolitionist newspaper editor, activist, author, along with, his newspaper co editor, Martin Delaney, who is also an abolitionist and later a proponent of immigration to West Africa. Throughout this period of the late 18 forties into the early 18 fifties, they used the North Star newspaper. And later Frederick Douglass on his own as editor of the newspaper and then later editor of, his subsequent newspaper, the Frederick Douglass paper, used that those newspapers as a platform to advocate for Haitian sovereignty, but very specifically to defend salute. I think it is important to underscore the fact that black activists in the United States in the 19th century were a 100% fighting for Haiti’s right to full sovereignty and for diplomatic recognition. But in their minds, the struggle for Haiti was very much caught up with their own struggle.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:06:08]:
And I’ve actually had people ask me before, like, well, weren’t black activists in the United States really just kinda being selfish? Like, you know, isn’t it true that they were really only interested in Haiti because they cared about their own liberation struggle? But I think that’s a little, you know, too cynical. I think that that black activists in the United States in the 19th century saw hate the battle for the recognition of Haiti’s sovereignty as part of their struggle and that they they really believed that Haiti’s fate as the first independent black nation in the History Hemisphere that had gained its independence as the result of a slave rebellion and had resulted in the establishment of a sovereign black haitian, they felt like their fate in the United States and the fate of black people elsewhere across the diaspora were in part linked to Haiti’s success or failure. So was there, you know, in was their support of Haiti partly driven by self interest? Like, yes. To some degree, it was. Like, they did see their fate as being inextricably linked to Hades. But I think that’s because they actually had, like, an early Pan African consciousness that felt like every all black people free and enslaved across the dias African diaspora were inextricably linked with each other and that, you know, no one was going to be able to succeed unless everybody succeeded. So I don’t think it was necessarily selfish. Like, their their support of Haiti wasn’t necessarily driven just by selfishness.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:07:58]:
I think it was driven by a consciousness that they had that the black freedom struggle needed to be global in order for it to be successful. There was actually one, black activist during this period who essentially was pointing to the example of Haiti and saying, look. Whatever the United States is willing to do to Haiti, they’re willing to do to us. And so I think it’s a situation in which they saw their fates as being deeply connected, and they felt like they wanted Haiti to be successful on its own terms, but also because they knew that Haiti’s success was in some ways connected to the success of everyone of all African peoples throughout the diaspora. So in my mind, I think they really saw Haiti’s success as determining the success of the entire global black freedom struggle. What that means is that they fought for the recognition of Haitian sovereignty in a variety of ways. And as I mentioned earlier, one of the strategies that they used, particularly in the late 18 thirties and the early 18 forties, was petitioning. Now petitioning doesn’t necessarily sound like a particularly complicated or radical approach, but in fairness to black activists during that period, it is a strategy that had been successful up to that point, at least to some degree.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:09:35]:
To a large degree, the passage of Haitian acts that had led to the abolition of slavery in the North had come about to a large degree as the result of the use of petitions and also the use of court cases to argue for the right of all people under the constitution to live as free and equal citizens. And so petitioning is actually a strategy that over the long term did not particularly pan out well. But up to that point, petitioning had actually been successful within the

Patrick Jean-Baptiste [00:10:19]:
You said the years 18 25 through 29, you described those years as, quote, an explosive period, a time where France and the US increased their efforts to destroy Haiti’s sovereignty, unquote. Can you flesh that out for us, please?

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:10:37]:
This is a really important question. I I ended up writing an entire chapter on just the 4 year period between 18/25/18/29 because I felt like and I still feel like, that that time period really marked a profound and significant turning point, certainly for Haiti, but also for black activists in the United States. Of course, the most significant thing that takes place, during that time is that both France and the United States become utterly convinced that they have to use all of the means at their disposal to destroy Haiti’s sovereignty. The way I think, I describe it in chapter 2 was that, you know, Haitian the notion of Haitian sovereignty And Haiti’s existence as an independent nation by that time was a bitter pill that the French had still not swallowed. So, you know, this is now 20 years after Haiti had declared its independence. And, you know, my guess is that France, the United States, most of the the white history nations had assumed that Haiti would completely fail. Right? That it it would have kind of just internally collapsed. And France, United States, Britain, you know, whoever proved to be most powerful could then just sort of roll in and reimpose authority.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:12:14]:
But that turned out not at all to be the case. And by 18/25, Haiti had been a free and independent nation for over 2 decades. And, of course, there was all kinds of challenges and internal struggle and strife as any newly independent nation would experience. The United States certainly did. Right? So that’s not to say that, you know, all was peaceful and breezy in in Haiti, but it it was it could not have been viewed or understood as a failed project. Right? Slavery was not reimposed and Haiti remained free and independent and fully sovereign. And its existence really flew in the face of everything that the United States and France and and all of the the History slave holding nations, wanted to be true and to believe. And as Haiti continued to exist and grow and and thrive, it really presented a challenge to the institution of slavery and to the very notion of white supremacy.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:13:23]:
And so after 2 decades, it’s become clear that Haiti is not just going Toussaint kind of internally combust, but it’s going to continue to exist. And so France in particular decides that they need find some kind of a way to regain some kind of control over its former colony. And they had attempted a series of tie a number of times to try to get various Haitian leaders to accept the reimposition of French authority, and, of course, each time they were rebuffed. So by 18/25, the French government decides that they are going to sort of, you know, let Haiti go, but they are only going to do it if they get some kind of financial compensation for the losses that they had sustained after, Haiti gained its its freedom from slavery and from colonial rule. And so in July of 18/25, the king of France sends a warship into Port au Prince’s harbor and an additional squadron of 12 ships is immediately following behind, submit itself without any conditions to the supremacy of France. It is what I describe in my book as a menacing display of gunboat diplomacy. So, essentially, France says threatens, right, military violence, war, if Haiti does not concede to the terms that they present. Of course, I imagine most of your listeners know that what what France demands through this has become known as the indemnity.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:15:12]:
Right? An agreement that requires the Haitian government to pay France a 150,000,000 gold francs in annual installments. And in exchange, France agrees to recognize Hades’ independence. One of the points that I make in the book is that this obviously creates a sort of a major crisis for the leader of Haiti, president Jean Pierre Boyer, who had only been the president for about 5 years at that point. He then is sort of caught between a rock and a hard place. Right? He has to decide whether he’s going to submit to the terms and agree to the indemnity or reopen the door to full out warfare with France again, probably fully aware that France could potentially get support from the United States, from Great Britain, from other white history nations who want to bring Haiti back under white rule and to essentially force, Haiti to resubmit to slavery. So, you know, it’s important, I think, to keep in mind that from the perspective of of Haitian leaders, they’re not only grappling with how to maintain Haitian sovereignty and Haitian independence. They’re also trying to ensure that Haitians never again have to submit to slavery. And so both of those things are at stake.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:16:51]:
Right? The potential reimposition of slavery and the potential reimposition of colonial rule a colonial rule, especially if they lose a military conflict. So Jean Pierre Boyer is is faced with a real problem. Right? You either submit to the terms of the indemnity or you open yourself to warfare, which, again could lead to years of bloody conflict and could potentially result in a loss that would lose Haitian independence and also potentially result in the reimposition of slavery. Obviously, Jean Pierre Boyer ultimately makes the decision to agree to the indemnity. The terms, as I mentioned before, require that Haiti repay a 150,000,000 gold francs to France. And I’m using the term repay because in the minds of of the French government, this is reparations, right, that the Haitians are are required to pay back the the losses that the French suffered as the result of the revolution. And it’s important to underscore that that dollar amount does not just indicate, you know, the value of the land and the value of the colony, but, actually, also the value the total of the value of the human beings that had been formally enslaved. So this is literally a situation in which people are purchasing not only the independence of the colony, but literally purchasing their own physical freedom.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:18:31]:
In the years that follow, of course, the official debt is is lowered from a 150,000,000 francs to 60,000,000 gold francs. But, of course, it is still an impossibly large amount of money for a newly established nation to repay, and it leads to cycles of debt that end up having a completely disastrous effect on the Haitian economy. In that chapter, I actually, quote some statistics from Laurent Dubois who points out that by 18/98, fully half of Haiti’s government budget went to paying France and French banks. And by 1914, which, of course, is right on the eve of the United States military occupation, That proportion had climbed to 80%. So the indemnity, of course, really sets into motion these impossible cycles of debt where in order to pay back and in order to meet the the terms of the indemnity, Haiti is forced to borrow at incredibly high interest rates from French banks, and they just find themselves digging deeper and deeper into into extraordinary debt. One of the things that I point out in the epilogue is that, of course, in later years in 20th century, that cycle of debt transfers from Haiti to the United States. The US military occupation of Haitian, the United States really becomes the the primary holder of Haitian debt. And therefore, Haiti becomes stuck in these impossible cycles of debt now to the United States rather than during much of the 18 thirties, the antislavery movement relied heavily on petitioning to protest slavery in a variety of ways.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:20:39]:
They used it to argue against the extension of slavery into new territories. They used it to just ask for the abolition of slavery outright. They used it to attack the existence of the slave trade in the boundaries of the United States. So petitioning was a strategy that antislavery activists had used for quite some time. And starting in the late 1830, specifically in 18 37, black and white abolitionists used, petitioning as a strategy to try to bring the issue of Haitian sovereignty to the national agenda. This turned out to be a really effective strategy at least initially because during the year prior in 18/36, the United States Congress had been so overwhelmed by the volume of antislavery petitions that had been sent to the congressional floor that they passed a series of what became known as gag rules, essentially saying that the United States Congress was no longer going to hear petitions or issues or bills on the congressional floor related to the issue of slavery. What black and white abolitionists in the United States did then was to sort of bypass those rules in a couple of ways. One was that they just simply counter to bombard Congress with petitions anyway.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:22:04]:
But the other is that they used petitions dealing with Haitian sovereignty to get issues of slavery and race onto the national political agenda without actually having to explicitly deal with the issue of slavery. So since petitions explicitly mentioning slavery could not be heard on the congressional floor, what they did instead was submit petitions that simply said, we are calling for the United States Congress to extend formal diplomatic recognition to Haiti. There’s no mention in the petitions about race. There’s no mention in the petitions about slavery. They’re just saying, we want congress to recognize Haiti. Now, obviously, the subtext of those petitions are all about race and slavery, and it forces then those issues onto the national political agenda and very specifically onto the congressional floor. And so using the Haiti petitions, they’re able to kind of step around the gag rules and still force those topics onto the congressional floor. But in a very specific way, they’re also forcing the United States Congress to grapple with the question of whether or not they’re willing to extend formal recognition to Haiti and to sort of force a conversation around why they are not recognizing Haiti.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:23:26]:
Ultimately, I don’t wanna give away too much because I wanna be able to read the book, but I’ll just simply say that, you know, ultimately, that campaign turned out to be very disappointing for a variety of reasons, but I think it also ended up being extremely revealing about sort of, you know, mainstream white political consciousness, not just about the issues of race and slavery, but very specifically about Haiti. I think it’s also really, again, important to point out how how incredibly important the petitioning campaign was, That even though it was not successful in the way that activists had wanted it to be, it did show that there was a very powerful coalition of activists who were willing to bombard Congress with demands for Haitian recognition. And just in the course of, like, that 7 year period between 1837 1844, there’s almost 400 petitions containing over 16,000 signatures that find their way onto the congressional floor. Now this is not the sum total of the petitions that were actually submitted. These are the petitions that actually, you know, reached congress and were at least considered for discussion on the floor. So how many more hundreds of petitions and how many more thousands of signatures never reached consideration? We don’t know. But even that amount indicates that Haiti had really, seized the consciousness by the late 18 thirties and early 18 forties, not just of only black activists in the United States, but also of progressive white abolitionists as well.

Patrick Jean-Baptiste [00:25:16]:
Can you talk about an injured man of color and how his writings represented the kind of, burgeoning of black political consciousness in the US. I think you said it culminated in their in their view of Haiti as, quote, cradle of hope. As a Haitian, I cringe when I read that from from your book. That’s a hell of a charge to put on a young black nation.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:25:47]:
Yeah. I’m glad you raised the injured man of color because I sort of stumbled upon the injured man of color following up on a couple of footnotes that I had seen other historians reference. And other previous historians had kind of referenced this particular article in a rather passing way, and I just had a feeling that there was something more to it. So I actually went back to the original source and ended up uncovering this series of letters that were written by an anonymous black activist in 18/04 who called themselves an injured man of color. And what was really fascinating about those particular writings is that this was a person based in the United States who was defending very openly and very publicly the right of Haitians and very specifically the right at the time of the Haitian leader, Jean Jacques Dessalines, to defend the Haitian nation against French colonialism, against the attempted reimposition of French colonial authority and slavery in Haiti. And these letters were published in US newspapers and were published without, as far as I can tell, any significant backlash. Interestingly enough, the only printed response that appeared to the letter was one written by a white person who was actually endorsing and supporting the injured man of of color’s position. So I was really fascinated by the ways in which the injured man of color felt really empowered to articulate support for Haitian independence, for Haitian sovereignty, for the battle against slavery and French colonialism, and the right of black people and specifically Haitian to use, you know, to sort of paraphrase, you know, a 20th century phrase.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:27:57]:
The inter man of color was defending the right of Haitians and of black people to use any means necessary to maintain their freedom and to maintain their sovereignty. And so to see letters written like that by a black person that were then published in mainstream, you know, US newspapers in 18/04 was really quite shocking and but I think also really powerfully important and showed that black folks in 1804 in the United States were very clear about what was happening in Haiti, were very clear about the political stakes, understood entirely why Haitian independence and Haitian sovereignty was important, and were really publicly asserting black people’s right to fight for their own freedom and to defend their their independence and their, sovereignty. It did, as you point out, create a situation where black folks in the United States placed an extraordinary amount of importance and probably pressure on Haiti to become successful. As you pointed out, they thought about and understood Haiti as their cradle of hope, that they really thought of Haiti as as the first sovereign black Haitian, as, you know, the birthplace of hope for black freedom, black independence, black sovereignty. And for that reason, Haiti became profoundly important to them, certainly during the Haitian revolution. But the point that I’m making in this book is that it’s really following the revolution through the establishment of sovereign Haiti that Haiti becomes so important to black activists in the United States. And, yeah, I understand why from the perspective of Haitian, that would feel kind of cringeworthy because that is an extraordinary amount of pressure to put on a young black nation. But I think it also helps us understand why the establishment of sovereign Haiti was so important to the global black freedom struggle and why black activists in the 19th century were willing to dedicate so much time and energy to the mission to gain full recognition and an endorsement for Haiti.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:30:41]:
Yeah. In some ways, this chapter that focuses on the time period between 18/29/18/39 was one of the hardest to write because it was an incredibly, incredibly difficult time for black activists in the United States, particularly pertaining to their views about Haiti and the internal questions that they had to grapple with relative to what they what their relationship to Haiti was going to be. Obviously, Jean Pierre Boyer had agreed to the to the terms of the indemnity in 18/25. And by the end of that that decade, by the end of 18 twenties, it was clear that Haiti was already in severe financial difficulty. Boyer had made the decision to implement a series of very controversial taxation policies and even sort of, like, policing policies that forced a lot of Haitians, especially those who lived out into the countryside, into a form of of semislavery. I think that Boyer felt like he was trying to figure out how to meet the terms of the indemnity. He was trying to figure out an economic plan that would allow Haiti to actually meet the terms, the repayment plan, without having to resort to loans and without having to borrow. But it created a a deeply oppressive and exploitative labor system and taxation system that, obviously, black activists in the United States could not endorse, that Haitians on the ground reasonably found completely intolerable and, quite frankly too akin to the institution of slavery to tolerate.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:32:37]:
And it leads to a series of attempted uprisings against Boyer. So there is extreme economic and political turmoil, the 18 thirties, and creates a situation in which black activists in the US are really having to rethink their relationship, to Haiti. They’re having to rethink their political perspective about Haiti as a sovereign nation, and they’re having to think about how they’re gonna publicly position themselves within the United States. During those very early years between 18/29 and, like, 18/35, there’s a couple of black activists who are really who are kind of the the only public voices that are willing to sort of publicly articulate their views on Haiti and and continue to endorse Haiti and Haitian sovereignty. One is Mariah Stewart, who was, a black female abolitionist, a person who ultimately got driven out of the abolitionist movement for being a very outspoken, politically conscious black woman at a time when women were not particularly embraced or endorsed as political activists or as public speakers. But Mariah Stewart was a person who spoke very openly and very publicly about the fact that she believed that Haiti and Haitian sovereignty needed to be, celebrated and needed to be publicly recognized. And, again, she she was one of the few people during that time who who was actually willing to to speak out in such a fashion. The other one was Samuel Cornish, who had been a long standing activist and abolitionist in the black community.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:34:29]:
He was largely centered in New York where he had worked as the editor of the first black newspaper, a newspaper called Freedom’s Journal. And along with his coeditor, John Resworm, Samuel Cornish had been very much involved in keeping Haiti at the center of black political consciousness in the United States. Almost every issue of Freedom’s Journal during the time of its existence had focused or highlighted some aspect of Haiti or Haitian history or, you know, Haitian politics during the time that Freedom’s Journal was in existence. But Freedom’s Journal came to an end in 18/29. You know, the period between 1838 and 1848 is a really interesting one for black activists relative to the struggle for the recognition of Haitian sovereignty because it is in the aftermath of the congressional campaign that, again, had not quite followed the plan that they had hoped it would. And so black activists kind of find themselves on a political spectrum relative to their relationship to Haiti and how they wanna think about and advocate for Haiti. So on the one hand, you have people like Samuel Cornish, I mentioned before, who was an activist, an abolitionist, and a newspaper editor who was still advocating for Haitian immigration. And he’s joined by people like Charles Racism also an abolitionist, an activist, and newspaper editor.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:36:14]:
And the 2 of them are using their newspapers and their sort of public platform as a way to continue to advocate not just for, Haitian sovereignty, but also to urge black people to migrate from the United States to Haiti. In their minds, they feel like one of the ways to help and support Haiti is to have black activists from the United States and from elsewhere around the diaspora migrate to Haiti to help build up this sovereign black nation in the History Hemisphere. And so in their minds, immigration, it offers an opportunity to, again, kind of create this Pan African vision for folks coming from around the diaspora to build up and support the the nation of of Haiti. On the other side, and, again, just sort of, you know, in another part of the spectrum, you have people who are not necessarily interested in advocating for immigration anymore, largely because of the challenges that had come about as the result of the indemnity, a concern that immigration might not necessarily be the best strategy for defeating slavery in the United States and advocating for for Haitian sovereignty. So you have people like Charles Lennox Raymond, who certainly was a supporter of Haitian sovereignty, but who had been a longstanding abolitionist. He was actually one of the first Black activists to kind of become a speaker on the antislavery, circuit. Along with people like James McCune Smith, who was a very known well known abolitionist, a very prominent activist out of, New York City who fought not only for abolition, but also fought for suffrage rights. And he was also a pretty wealthy and influential person.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:38:17]:
He had actually left the United States, gone to Scotland, received a medical degree, and then came back to New York City to provide medical services to the black community. And so you have people like James McKeown Smith and Charles Lenox Raymond who are kind of changing their relationship to Haiti in the sense that they’re not endorsing immigration as a solution, but they are continuing to champion Haiti’s right to sovereignty and are perhaps most importantly using Haiti’s success in the revolution as an inspiration for the black freedom struggle. So they are traveling in the US and elsewhere abroad telling the story of Haiti’s try you know, the Haitian people’s triumph over slavery, their triumph over their for their former colonizers, and using that as a model for what the United States freedom struggle could look like. So to me, part of what’s interesting in this, you know, decade between, you know, the sort of decline of the the congressional petitioning campaign movement and president Jean Pierre Boyer’s reign as president. During that time period, you have this kind of, you know, fascinating moment where black activists are positioning themselves relative to Haiti in different ways. Some of them are still advocating for immigration, but far more of them are kind of embracing the the symbol of Haiti as a model for what black what the black liberation struggle could actually look like.

Patrick Jean-Baptiste [00:40:10]:
I found chapter 7 to be a fascinating chapter. So let’s see. During 18 the 18 fifties 18 sixties, you discovered a resurgence of the Haitian immigration movement. You said that that, topic logic ignored by scholarship. There’s a lot of infighting going on within the black activists in the US. Can you flesh that out for us, please?

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:40:36]:
Chapter 7 was a really interesting one for me to write because it forced me, as I dug deeper and deeper into the archives, to recognize that some of my previous understandings and assumptions had been wrong. To a large degree, prior to my book, people had assumed scholars of Haitian immigration had assumed that black activists in the United States during the 18 fifties 18 sixties had been somewhat interested in migration to Haiti, that there had really only been, like, a trickle of folks who came during that period. And those who did were really kind of driven primarily by religious reasons that they wanted to convert Haitians to protestant Christianity. And they also assumed that as soon as the shots were fired at Fort Sumter, signaling the beginning of the United States Civil War, that black activists immediately abandoned the immigration movement to Haiti. But as I dug deeper and deeper into the research for chapter 7, I just realized that, like, really all of that was wrong, that it was wrong on a number of different levels. 1st was to recognize that the Haitian immigration movement never really went away over the course of 19th century, That historians and scholars had kind of previously assumed there had been, you know, a big movement in, you know, the mid to late 18 twenties, then it completely disappeared. And then there’s another little trickle in the 18 fifties, and then the US civil war starts and it’s over. But that’s actually not the way it happens.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:42:17]:
There there certainly is a huge blossoming of immigration in the mid to late 18 twenties, and it does go into decline for the reasons that I talked about earlier. The, you know, Boyer’s decision to accept the terms of the indemnity forces a a situation where Haiti is in a bit of a crisis economically and politically, and it does cause US black activists to back off of immigration. And so the immigration movement definitely goes into a decline, particularly after the Haitian government decides they’re not going to continue the inducement plans, the real you know, the financial inducements that had encouraged immigration up to that point. But the immigration movement never goes away entirely. And over the course of the 18 thirties and the 18 forties, black folks are still migrating from the United States to Haiti. And, of course, this is a point that I talks I talk about in chapter 5 as well. Right? That you still have people like Samuel Cornish, Charles Ray, and others who are continuing to advocate, for immigration even though the immigration movement is not happening in numbers that were as large as they had been in the mid 18 twenties. But there there remains a trickle of migration throughout the 18 thirties and the 1840s, and then there’s a resurgence starting in the 18 fifties.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:43:45]:
Now one of the things that was really interesting for me is that this sort of, you know, resuscitation of or the new life that gets breathed into the movement is not as driven by religious reform as I think was previously suggested. In fact, all of the evidence that I uncovered show that it was really strongly politically motivated. And it was politically motivated really by 2 impulses. One is that the 18 fifties were just sort of a time of ultimate disaster for the black population in the United States. The 18 fifties begin with the passage of an extremely repressive and terrifying fugitive slave act that basically turns the north into open hunting season for slave catchers and slaveholders, making life very dangerous and tenuous. The 18 fifties really signal to black activists in the United States that the US may never be. Some, you know, through the leadership of folks like Martin Delaney and Henry Haitian Garnett and many others, repatriate to West Africa. A large number of folks, primarily led by people like Mary Ann Shadd Cary and others are choosing to migrate to Canada in part because of its proximity, largely because of its proximity to the United States, but also because they had abolished slavery and seemed any way to perhaps be passing some more, you know, progressive policies, relative to the free black population.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:45:32]:
And a large portion of people are also advocating for migration to Haiti. So you have folks like, James Theodore Holly, William Watkins junior, William Wells Brown, just to name a few, who are literally traveling around the United States, encouraging folks to, to migrate to Haiti in part to escape conditions in the United States, but more importantly, to build up, the nation of Haiti. And the movement really takes off, after, the coup d’etat occurs that removes emperor Faustin the first from power, and, Favre Gefard becomes the new president. When Haiti becomes a republic again counter the leadership of Giffard, you see a whole wave of migration to Haiti. I think what’s really significant about what haitian, during this period in the late 18 fifties, and even into the early 18 sixties is that the political conversation around immigration is very different in this period than it had been up to that point. In the 18 twenties, there’s just widespread support for migration to Haiti. But in the 18 fifties, the debate over immigration becomes extremely nasty and rancorous among and between Black activists. And this is for a couple of reasons.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:47:10]:
One is that you have a whole faction of people who are insisting that black people need to remain in the United States and fight for full equality and for full abolition. And this is an idea that is not new to the 18 fifties. It’s it was really born in the late 18 twenties, early 18 thirties, and was just continuing into the 18 fifties. But you have a lot of activists in the United States, including people like James McEwen Smith, who I mentioned earlier, who really believe that the only way that slavery is going to end in the United States and the only way that black people are gonna gain full equality and citizenship is if free black activists are willing to stay in the United States and fight. And so they’re just opposed to immigration anywhere. They believe that if if slavery is ever gonna come to an end in the United States, black people have to be willing to stay and fight. So there’s one contingency in the black community who’s just opposed to immigration anywhere, arguing instead that black people have to stay in the United States and fight. And in their minds, they feel like if black people don’t stay and fight for abolition, who will? And, you know, millions of enslaved people remain in bondage in the US.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:48:35]:
So that’s kind of one contingency. The other sort of conflict that is taking place is that those who support immigration, those who believe like, look. The only way black people are ever gonna be free is for us to get out of the United States and go somewhere else. Those folks have really profound disagreement about where to go. So, again, you have some people like Mary Anne Schad, Carrie, who are arguing that people need to go to Canada. Others, like Martin Delaney, are arguing in favor of West Africa, and still others, of course, are arguing in favor of Haiti. And even though these are all folks who support immigration, they are arguing with each other over location. And so the folks who are supporting either West Africa or Canada are often using very negative ideas and stereotypes and characterizations to argue against Haitian immigration.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:49:40]:
So chapter 7 turned out to be a really interesting one to me because it really showed the complexity of the political conversation and the political debates that were happening among black activists at the time. First, over the question of whether immigration should exist at all, should happen at all, versus those who are arguing among themselves about where in the world black people should go. And so the debates are really that chapter is really fascinating to me for that reason. The other the last sort of thing that was significant to me about this chapter is the way that the sources revealed the decline of the immigration movement. As I mentioned earlier, for a long time, historians and scholars had assumed that the outbreak of the US Civil War is what causes the Haitian immigration movement to go again into decline. That, you know, once shots are fired at Fort Sumter, everybody decides, oh, we’re gonna stay in the United States and fight to end slavery. But looking at the sources, you realize it’s it’s not as fast as that. Frederick Douglass makes the decision that he’s gonna turn away from haitian, and he’s gonna stay in the United States and fight against slavery.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:51:00]:
But the vast majority of people who supported immigration were not convinced that the beginning of the civil war was automatically going to result in the eradication of slavery. And so it’s not really until the passage of the haitian proclamation. It’s not really until 18/63 that black activists decide, okay. Maybe a northern victory in the civil war will actually bring about an end to slavery, and perhaps it means it will be safe to remain here. But to me, that timeline was really interesting that it was not a quick or automatic decision to back away from immigration, but rather a very specific and strategic decision based on real life political matters on the ground, both in the US and within Haiti. So I’m hopeful that people will really enjoy learning about the details, the ins and outs of

Patrick Jean-Baptiste [00:52:02]:
that in chapter.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:52:06]:
Chapter 8 was a really interesting one for me to research and write because what I found when I went into the archives and actually started looking at the documents, particularly the documents detailing the debate on the floor of congress over patient recognition was really very different than what I had thought it was going to be. You know, previous historical studies that I had looked at essentially said, you know, the United States refused to recognize Haiti, but once the civil war broke out, the north decided to just go ahead and recognize Haitian. Kind of like the south was the problem, and once they seceded, you know, Haitian recognition just sort of sailed through congress. But when you look at the debate and the discussion on the congressional floor, you realize that’s actually not at all the case and that the story is much more complicated. The part of that story that is true is that the United States, up until 1862, refused to extend formal diplomatic relations to Haiti and refused to recognize Haiti as a sovereign nation. And one of that is really one of the main points that I trace over the course of the entire book that the United States’ government’s policy towards Haiti was really driven by their obsession with slavery and with white supremacy. And the United States government was insistent that they could not recognize Haiti as a sovereign independent nation because to do so would be in their minds a tacit endorsement of slave rebellion and of the right of black people to have a sovereign nation and govern themselves. Right? And all of those things flew in the face of everything the United States government upheld, which was slavery and white supremacy.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:54:14]:
And so numerous times, and this is again something I trace throughout the book, you know, over the course of the 18 thirties, 18 forties, 18 fifties, activists, and even northern merchants were appealing to the United States Congress and to the government to change its policies towards Haiti and to formally recognize, Haitian independence. What’s interesting is is that it actually went against the financial interests of the United States and of Northern merchants to persist with a nonrecognition policy because Haiti imposed additional taxes on every merchant and on every nation that wanted to trade with Haiti without formally recognizing it. And so the United States and northern merchants lost 1,000,000 of dollars over the course of 19th century simply because of the United States’ refusal to recognize a fact that was already true, which was that Haitian was a Haiti was a sovereign nation. But the United States’ refusal to acknowledge that was extremely costly for the United States and for northern merchants. And so over the course of 19th century, a lot of pressure is put on congress to to form to extend formal diplomatic revolution, and yet over and over and over and over again, they refuse to do so. And it’s all because of their attachment to slavery and to white supremacy and because what Haiti’s rise as a sovereign black nation represented, to them. Finally, once the United States Civil War breaks out, you know, northern politicians push through a bill recognizing extending recognition actually not just to Haiti, but to both Haiti and Liberia. So they package, recognition for both of these, you know, black nations into one bill.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:56:28]:
It’s called senate bill number 184, and it’s a bill designed to have the United States extend formal recognition to both Haiti and the West African nation of Liberia that had gained its independence in 18 47. What was really interesting to me as a historian, but also just as a human, was the really vicious and ugly process of debate that senate bill number 184 had to go through. As I mentioned a moment ago, every kind of historical study that I had looked up looked at up to that point had kind of suggested that, you know, once the civil war broke out and the north controlled congress, they presented the bill in congress, and it was accepted. And, yay, Haiti was finally officially recognized. But when you look at the actual language of the debate on the floor and the intensity of the rancor between the politicians over this question, you realize that the conflict over this bill was much uglier and much nastier and much more laden with racism and white supremacy and economic greed than I had actually ever imagined. And as a historian, I tend to be a realist and to sort of expect the worst in some cases, but it was worse even than I had imagined. And I really hope that your listeners will take a really close look at chapter 8, as I mentioned before, because the process that the bill has to go through in order to get approved really shows the United States government’s attachment to white supremacy, to global imperialism, and to exploiting Haiti economically for the gain of the US government and wealthy business leaders in the United States. It becomes very clear that although there are a few people, in congress who support Haitian recognition because it’s the right thing to do, the vast majority of the people who finally vote in favor of formal recognition for Haiti really ultimately only support it because they feel that formalizing diplomatic relations with Haiti will better position the United States to exploit Haiti financially going forward.

Dr. Leslie Alexander [00:59:08]:
And that is in fact exactly what happens. And it’s part of the reason why I feel like chapter 8 is such an important bridge between the 19th century and the 20th century because the United States government’s attitude towards Haiti that is articulated in the debates around formal recognition really then play out over the course of the 20th century in terms of the United States’ imperialistic attitude towards

Patrick Jean-Baptiste [00:59:48]:
I hope you enjoyed this episode as much as I did. Please follow us on Twitter and Facebook at Negmawapodcast. That’s Mawon with a w, not an r.