Black Loyalists

           In some respects, the American Revolution has been deemed an exclusive struggle between the British Crown and the rebellious colonies.  In the effort to attain independence and freedom from tyranny, the majority of America turned a blind eye to its slave population which desired the exact same thing.  As the war progressed and manpower became limited, the British opened its enlistments to runaway slaves or free blacks under Lord Dunmore’s Proclamation.  Many slaves believed that aligning themselves as Loyalists would be beneficial for their self-interests and that of the entire slave population in the colonies.  Even though Lord Dunmore promised freedom to the runaway slaves, many black loyalists found that they were still in a state of servitude to the British Crown after the war – especially in the colony of Sierra Leone.  This research will address whether freedom was truly given or taken by the British Crown from the black loyalists and provide reflection on what Lord Dunmore may have meant by the term “freedom” in his proclamation.  By evaluating the use of black troops during the American Revolution for both the Patriot and Loyalist cause, the story of the black soldier can be further appreciated during this momentous event in the Atlantic World.

            Once war ravaged the colonies, both the American colonies and the British Crown struggled to provide adequate manpower to sustain the war.  Lord Dunmore, the royal governor of Virginia, felt obligated to resolve the issue due to the rising tension between the colonists and Parliament.  As a result, Lord Dunmore established martial law in the colony of Virginia in hopes of preventing a rebellion.  The colonists of Virginia were furious by this seemingly abuse of power as stated by the Virginia Delegates, “If the governor can be authorized to introduce martial law and annul the laws of this land, let us at once bend our neck to the galling yoke and hug the chains prepared for us” (Convention, 64).  On November 7, 1775, Lord Dunmore announced that he would provide freedom to any runaway slaves that wished to serve under the British Crown against the American rebels.  As announced by Lord Dunmore in the Virginia Gazette,


And to the end that peace and good order may the sooner be restored, I do require every person capable of bearing arms to resort to his majesty’s standard, or be looked upon as traitors to his majesty’s crown and government, and thereby become liable to the penalty the law inflicts upon such offenses, such as the forfeiture of life, confiscation of lands, and etc.  And I do hereby farther declare all indentured servants, Negroes, or others (appertaining to rebels) free (Dunmore, 2).
         
          Colonial newspapers such as the Virginia Gazette published Lord Dunmore’s Proclamation not only to inform the colonists of British intentions, but to also warn and discourage free blacks and slaves from joining the Loyalist cause (Quarles, 498).  For example, directly following Lord Dunmore’s Proclamation in the Virginia Gazette, John Pinkney, the editor of the paper, forms a response which reassures the colonists and warns potential runaway slaves that Lord Dunmore intends to mislead them with false promises of freedom.  Pinkney warns that only young male slaves that can provide military service will be granted freedom while, “The aged, infirm, the women, and children, are still to remain the property of their masters who will be provoked to severity should part of their slaves desert them (Pinkney, 2).  The editor also places blame on the British government for bringing the institution of slavery to the American colonies and questions whether Lord Dunmore would upkeep his promise of freedom to the slaves when the royal governor himself even owned slaves.  Various newspapers declared that the slaves would simply be sold to slavery in the West Indies to the profit of the British Crown and never get the chance to experience battle.  Despite warnings by various colonial newspapers such as, “Be not then, ye negroes tempted by this proclamation to ruin yourselves,” many slaves and free blacks ran to British lines anyway – perhaps because the slaves trusted the British over their current masters or because the great majority of slaves were illiterate (Pinkney, 2).  

          Hundreds of free blacks and runaway slaves responded to the Proclamation – much to the surprise of Lord Dunmore.  As stated by Quarles, “Some two hundred immediately joined him, and within a week after the proclamation the number had reached three hundred” (Quarles, 501).  It is important to note, however, that the free blacks and runaway slaves did not join Lord Dunmore’s army simply because they wanted to escape the institution of slavery.  As stated in the article, Blacks as American Loyalists: The Slaves’ War for Independence, “Theirs was indeed a quest for the American Dream, for freedom, for a small farm, for dignity and security as citizens of the realm” (Walker, 54).  If runaway slaves simply wanted to escape slavery, they could have ventured to the West or formed their own maroon communities outside the control of the colonies – yet the majority did not, including free blacks.  Runaway slaves and free blacks joined ranks with Lord Dunmore, a representative of the British government; because they desired to be treated like other British subjects and believed that a British victory would mean the end of slavery in the American colonies.  In other words, the runaway slaves and free blacks aligned themselves as Loyalists in the hope of equality and to improve their individual interests as well as that of the whole slave population in the colonies – in accordance to British promises made during the American Revolution.  Unfortunately after the war, the runaway slaves and free blacks would discover that the British had no intention to commit its resources to the black loyalists or to abolish slavery.

          Lord Dunmore’s Proclamation issued widespread fear in the colonists in respects to slave rebellions and insurrections – especially in communities where slaves outnumbered whites as in South Carolina.  In Virginia, intense vigilance was practiced by the colonists to prevent runaway slaves from joining Lord Dunmore’s ranks.  Often, when a slave was captured, they were returned to their master if possible, were forced to work in the lead mines, or sold to slavery in the West Indies where they would surely die (Quarles, 500). The Virginia Convention offered to pardon the runaway slaves if they returned to their masters within ten days or be subjected to punishment, yet this proved to be ineffective (Convention, 64).  Afterwards, the Convention stated, “that all negro or other slaves, conspiring to rebel or make insurrection, shall suffer, death, and be excluded all benefit of clergy” (Convention, 66).  Despite the various ordinances issued by the colonies, slaves continued to join Lord Dunmore and the British Crown against their masters in the American Revolution. 

          George Washington and the members of Congress became overwhelmed by the size of British forces which had increased due to the enlistment of runaway slaves and free blacks.  The issue of allowing blacks into the Continental Army was not only a military question; it was also a political, economic, and social one.  Blacks already had a presence in various state militias since slaves often served as substitutes for their masters.  In Virginia, the plan was entirely struck down, “Provided always, that no recruiting officer shall be allowed to enlist into the service any servant whatsoever, unless he be an apprentice, bound under the laws of this colony, nor any such apprentice, unless the consent of his master be first had in writing” (Convention, 30).  As pressure mounted during the war, the Northern colonies began to allow the inclusion of blacks into their regiments often in non-combatant service positions and even formed all black regiments.  In New England, blacks did not constitute a large portion of the population as in the South and were not as readily needed on plantations, so many were committed to military service such as the First Rhode Island Regiment – an all-black regiment.  In the South, where prejudice was widespread and economics depended on slavery, less progress was made.  As one delegate in Congress stated, “Many northern blacks were excellent soldiers, but southern troops would not brook an equality with whites” (Maslowski, 4).  Nevertheless, many blacks joined naval services loyal to the Patriot cause since, “Danger, discomfort, and separation from home for long periods discouraged recruits, so that a captain would settle for any able-bodied hand regardless of race” (Nalty, 23).  Many black sailors helped sail the ships of the Continental and state navies and even participated in commercial raiding of British ships in hopes of profit.  Runaway slaves and free blacks did not readily join the Patriot cause as they did the Loyalists, since the Patriots offered them little in terms of their service.  Even so, many slaves and free blacks joined the Patriots in hopes of elevating their status for themselves and their fellow slaves – as well as their loyalty to the ideals of the Revolution (Greene, 124).

          Lord Dunmore’s plan to enlist numerous runaway slaves to win the war against the American colonies ultimately failed.  Smallpox and fever spread among Lord Dunmore’s ranks and especially caused high mortality among the blacks (Quarles, 505).  With a British defeat after the war, the fate of the black Loyalists was undecided.  Some slaves were given back to their masters under the Treaty of Paris in 1783 which demanded that property be returned to the Americans.  Some blacks were even sold back to slavery and those that belonged to Loyalists were never given freedom (Walker, 59).  It is important to note that the British government and army were never fully committed to the abolition of slavery or the equality of blacks.  Runaway slaves and free blacks were offered freedom because the British needed to increase its manpower during the war as stated by the British Secretary-at-War, “Things are now come to that Crisis, that we must avail ourselves of every resource, even to raise the Negroes in our case” (Maslowski, 4).  As previously stated, blacks that served behind British lines and belonged to Loyalists were rarely offered freedom (Whitfield, 7).  Thus, it appears that freedom was only granted to those that would harm the American rebels.  By enlisting numerous runaway slaves into their forces, the British were able to harm the economy of the colonists and to sequentially increase their own manpower. Thus it can be determined that Dunmore’s Proclamation was an, “isolated and desperate attempt to bring the rebellious colonies to their knees by any available means (Walker, 60).  After the British defeat, however, the British generals felt that they should keep their promises to the free blacks and runaway slaves to escape slavery by allowing them to settle in British territories such as London and Nova Scotia.  Even though their intentions perhaps meant well, the British were not able to effectively care for the destitute American slaves or to ensure their success as is evidenced in Nova Scotia, London, and Sierra Leone.

           The blacks that settled in Nova Scotia found that their promises were unfulfilled on many levels in terms of their equal rights and access to arable land as is, “Consistent with their lack of any formulated plans during the war for the ultimate disposition of blacks, British officials continued to ignore and overlook the black Loyalists in their new homes” (Walker, 64).  The land in Nova Scotia proved to be difficult to cultivate and the blacks that lived there were often oppressed by their white neighbors – who had access to the very best land almost exclusively.  Instead of owning their own land and being self-sustaining British subjects as promised, the black loyalists found that they were reduced to indentured servitude and share-cropping agreements (Walker, 65).  Consequently, in London, the destitute blacks found that their situation was no better.  Unable to find employment, the American slaves were completely dependent on the government to provide their basic needs – which proved to be an unwanted expense in Britain.  Many of the Africans turned out to be common beggars on the streets and received very little compensation in comparison to the white Loyalists who ventured to London, “The contrast with whites is instructive: few whites were denied assistance altogether, although more than half the blacks were; the allowances awarded to even the very poorest whites were usually higher than that given to the most fortunate black” (Norton, 404).  It was suggested by the British government that the blacks be moved elsewhere so that they can find employment and not be a seemingly further burden to the city (Norton, 409).  The colony of Sierra Leone appeared to be the best alternative.   Accordingly, in Nova Scotia, the blacks appeared before Parliament stating their grievances of poor land and their desire to be treated like other British subjects as promised during the American Revolution – Sierra Leone once again was deemed the appropriate solution (Walker, 75-76).

          Parliament assured the blacks that, “It is therefore declared by the Company, that every free black, upon producing such a certificate, shall have a grant of no less than twenty acres of land for himself, ten for his wife, and five for every child, upon such terms, and subject to such charges . . . whether black or white” (Company, 4-5).  Sierra Leone appeared to be the answer to what the American slaves were looking for all along: freedom, the ability to own land that was arable, to participate in such political rights as serving on jury, the exclusion of slavery, and to be free of discrimination based on their race.  Unfortunately, the Sierra Leone colony proved to provide the same disappointments as experienced in Nova Scotia and in London.  The land was inadequate and the climate harsh as noted in the official account, “In speaking of the cultivation that has taken place since the institution of the colony . . . the Directors are not yet able to report any considerable progress” (Company, 67).  Many of the emigrants to Sierra Leone died from disease, an estimated one out of ten, on the ship and found their housing provided by the government insufficient protection from the seasonal rains in Sierra Leone – which led to more death and disease (Company, 49). The black colonists also struggled with subsistence in which the British government did not adequately provide for the entire population - another indication of the British Crown’s lack of concern with the colony’s success (Norton, 413).  Eventually, the colonists began to demand their rights and reminded Parliament of their promises.  Parliament made some efforts to appease the situation for the Sierra Leone colonists, but they proved ineffective.  The problem with the Sierra Leone colony was that it was never properly planned, it was rushed, and the success of the colony was never a major concern with the British government. 

           In conclusion, the American Revolution was not simply a war between American Patriots and the supposed British oppressors; it was a complex conflict that involved Americans with various ideals and interests.  The runaway slaves and free blacks that joined Lord Dunmore did so in hopes of elevating their individual status and those of their fellow bondsmen.  Even though Lord Dunmore promised freedom to runaway slaves that served in the British military, few actually gained the freedom they hoped for – which was to be treated like other British subjects, not simply to escape slavery.  The black loyalists hoped to have the freedom to own land, be politically active, and have rights as British subjects - but were disappointed in Nova Scotia, London, and in Sierra Leone.  In fact, very few black loyalists attained the improved status they hoped for in exchange for their military service.  Further, the form of freedom that the British offered to the runaway slaves was to escape the institution of slavery, but consequently their promises of equality as British subjects never materialized.

 Bibliography 

Convention, Virginia. The Proceedings of Convention of Delegates for the Counties and Corporations in the Colony of Virginia. Ritchie, Trueheart & Du-Val Printers, 1816.

Dunmore, John. "A Proclamation." Virginia Gazette, November 23, 1775, 1775, sec. 2.

Greene, Lorenzo J. "THE NEGRO IN THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES, 1619-1783." Negro History Bulletin 14, no. 6 (03, 1951): 123.

Maslowski, P. "National Policy Toward the use of Black Troops in the Revolution." The South Carolina Historical Magazine 73, no. 1 (1972): 1-17.

Nalty, Bernard C. "A Record of Valor: Black Soldiers before Independence." American Visions 3, no. 4 (08, 1988): 18.

Norton, Mary Beth. "The Fate of some Black Loyalists of the American Revolution." The Journal of Negro History 58, no. 4 (Oct., 1973): pp. 402-426.

Pinkney, John. "Response to Lord Dunmore's Proclamation." Virginia Gazette,1775.

Quarles, B. "Lord Dunmore as Liberator." The William and Mary Quarterly 15, no. 4 (1958): 494-507.

Sierra, Leone Company. . An Account of the Colony of Sierra Leone, from its First Establishment in 1793. being the Substance of a Report Delivered to the Proprietors. Published by Order of the Directors. London, 1795.

Walker, James W. St G. "Blacks as American Loyalists: The Slaves' War for Independence." Historical Reflections/Réflexions Historiques 2, no. 1 (22, 1975): 51.

Whitfield, Harvey Amani. "Black Loyalists and Black Slaves in Maritime Canada." History Compass 5, no. 6 (-11-01, 2007): 1980-1997.