Nash Response To The Haitian Revolution

Foreign relations were of the utmost importance to the continuing livelihood and well being of the newly formed and fragile United States. Early on, the French and Haitian Revolutions presented challenges for the government that needed to be dealt with. One such problem was the lingering commitment to France in the form of the treaty signed in 1778 that required the United States to aid France “as France had assisted the American states” during their own revolution. (Nash, et al., 2007., p. 227) While some were sympathetic to France’s cause others feared becoming entangled in a European conflict believing the treaty lapsed when the French king was deposed. (Nash, et al., 2007., p. 227) In this chaos, however, merchants benefited from the so-called
227) The response to the Haitian Revolution differed greatly, while some citizens went to France to witness the movement and the country took in those fleeing the political upheaval the United States government spurned the Haitian republic fearing the implications of the triumph of the slave revolt and refused any fleeing events there. (Nash, et al., 2007., pp. 229-230) Another example of foreign policy in the early years of the national government is the treaty John Jay brokered with the English in 1795 that sparked protest as the treaty failed to address issues such as compensation for lost slaves, the British not leaving military posts, not stopping impressment or open trade with the West Indies. (Nash, et al., 2007., p. 231) Thomas Pinckney had greater success with Spain in the same year in which they recognized the boundary of the United States at the Mississippi and allowed free navigation on the river for three years. (Nash, et al., 2007., pp. 231-232) The XYZ Affair during the Adams administration in which French minister Talleyrand essentially tried to bribe the American agents incited anti-French feelings, which led to naval clashes and growing tensions domestically. (Nash, et al., 2007.,