• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Title Page
 Preface
 Table of Contents
 Introduction
 January to April: The French...
 April to September: The loss of...
 September to December: Renewal...
 Conclusion
 Bibliography
 Biographical sketch






Title: General Rochambeau and the French Expedition to Haiti in 1802
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00003982/00001
 Material Information
Title: General Rochambeau and the French Expedition to Haiti in 1802
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Creator: DeHoop, Herman Rauke
Publisher: Herman Rauke DeHoop
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: August, 1965
 Notes
General Note: A thesis presented to the Graduate Council of the University of Florida in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00003982
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Table of Contents
    Title Page
        Title Page
    Preface
        Page iii
        Page iv
    Table of Contents
        Page v
    Introduction
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
    January to April: The French conquest
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
    April to September: The loss of possesion
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
    September to December: Renewal of rebellion
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
        Page 65
        Page 66
        Page 67
        Page 68
        Page 69
        Page 70
        Page 71
        Page 72
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
        Page 76
        Page 77
        Page 78
        Page 79
    Conclusion
        Page 80
        Page 81
        Page 82
    Bibliography
        Page 83
        Page 84
        Page 85
        Page 86
    Biographical sketch
        Page 87
        Page 88
Full Text









GENERAL ROCHAMBEAU AND THE FRENCH

EXPEDITION TO HAITI IN 1802




















By
HERMAN RAUKE DeHOOP


A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS


UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


August, 1965













PREFACE

This thesis is a study of the role of the French expedition to

Haiti in 1802, The emphasis is placed on the actions of General

Rochambeau who was an important commanding officer in the expedition.

The thesis is also an elucidation of the interpretation of Haitian

history in 1802. The basic documentation consists of the private

papers of Rochambeau.

The name Saint-Domingue is used in this study to denote Haiti,

while Santo Domingo refers to what is today the Dominican Republic.

Saint-Domingue was used by the French and the inhabitants until the

achievement of independence when the name Haiti was adopted. Port-

au-Prince until 1803 was also called Port-Republicain, but the

former name is retained in this thesis. Fort Dauphin was also called

Fort Liberte until 1803, but Fort Dauphin is used in the paper.

Cap Frangais, or today Cap Ha'itien, also called Le Cap; the latter is

employed in this study. The insurgent forces are often referred to as

brigands by the French, and the author has at times used brigand

synonymously with rebel. The usage of-brigand does not necessarily

reflect a value judgement on the part of the author.

It is difficult to acknowledge all those who have made this study

possible. Special thanks are due to the chairman of the supervisory

committee, Dr, L. N. McAlister. His suggestions and challenging

seminar in Hispanic American History were invaluable. The author is

indebted to the other members of the committee, Dr. D. L. Dowd and

Dr. M. J. Wallace, whose criticisms were very helpful in the final


iii








stages of the thesis. He also appreciated very much the cooperation

and attention of the Special collections staff of the University of

Florida Library. Finally, much credit goes to my parents, Dr. and

Mrs. W. de Hoop, and to Mr. H. E. Nutter.


iv
















TABLE OF CONTENTS


Page


PREFACE................

Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION ........

II. JANUARY TO APRIL: THE FRENCH CONQUEST . .

III. APRIL TO SEPTEMBER: THE LOSS OF POSSESSION .

IV. SEPTEMBER TO DECEMBER: RENEWAL OF REBELLION. .

V. CONCLUSION . . . . . .......

BIBLIOGRAPHY . .. . .........


..... ii


1

8

34

58

80

83


. . .


. .















CHAPTER I


INTRODUCTION


In late 1801 Lieutenant-General Donatien Marie Joseph de Vimeur,

Vicomte de Rochambeau-was "-appointed as General de Division in the
------ ~~"'~`~~~~` --~-~-~- ----;------- ------
French military expedition to Haiti under command of General Victor

Emmanuel Leclerc, who was the brother-in-law of the First Consul of

France, Napoleon Bonaparte. In secret instructions to Leclerc,

Napoleon named Rochambeau second-in-command of the expedition.1

Because of his high position, Rochambeau played an important role in

the French forces to Haiti. The purpose of this paper therefore,

is to examine the French expedition in the light of the events and

actions with which Rochambeau was concerned.

The military education of Rochambeau was impressive. Born in

Paris in 1755, he was the son of the Marechal de Rochambeau, under

whom he served as aide de camp during the American Revolution. In 1792

(he then went by the name of Citizen Rochambeau), he served as the

French military commander in Haiti. In 1796, Rochambeau held a

similar post, but was sent to Martinique a few months later on account

of a quarrel with his civilian superior Sonthonax. After the defeat

of the French military expedition in 1803, Rochambeau surrendered to



iCarl L. Lokke (ed.), "The Leclerc Instructions," Journal of Negro
History, X (January, 1925), 88. Journal of Negro History is hereafter
cited as JNH,





-2-


the British and remained a prisoner of war until 1811. In 1813, he

was killed in the battle of Leipzig in Germany.2

For an understanding of the French expedition to Haiti, a short

discussion of the people and the events leading to the invasion is

helpful. Saint-Domingue prior to 1789 was a prosperous French colony

that thrived on the export of sugar, coffee, cocoa, cotton, and dyes.

Sugar in particular, provided the main source of income on the island.

It was exported to France and parts of continental Europe. The

United States was also becoming an increasingly important customer of

the island. France and the United States in turn supplied the colony

with manufactured goods. The cultivation of sugar was done on large

plantations. The latter was concentrated in the Northern Plain

around Le Cap, in the Artibonite Valley along the Artibonite River,

in the Cul-de-Sac area around Port-au-Prince, Jacmel, and Leogane,

and in the South province around Jeremie.

The population of the colony was comprised of three major racial

groups. The first consisted of the European population, which numbered

around 30,000 people. The second and largest was the Negro population.

This group, made up almost exclusively of slaves, was the backbone

of economic life, and it numbered around 400,000 people. The third

and smallest was the mulatto population, which was generally free

but restricted to certain occupations and possessed limited political

rights. It numbered around 15,000 people. Many of the mulattoes,


I /
2Georges Six, Dictionnaire biographique des generaux et amiraux
franyais de la revolution et de l'empire: 1792-1814. (2 vols.; Paris:
Georges Saffroy, 1934), II,.378.





-3-


well educated in contrast to the slave population, were the artisans

and the small merchants of the colony.3

The white population, which controlled the political life, was

a conglomeration of individuals of different stratas of society in

France and Europe. The majority of the Europeans came to Saint-

Domingue with the intention of getting rich quickly in order to retire

in comfort in their homelands. Often these persons had been forced

to leave Europe because of trouble with the legal authorities or

poverty. Most whites never rose above the position of overseer on

a plantation or the post of a small government official. Yet many

of the lesser dignitaries of the government were able to amass more

wealth than in similar positions in Europe. A small white minority

successfully acquired and held most of the property which consisted

of large extensive plantations. Despite their humble origins, they

aspired to titles of nobility. The whites controlled the darker-

skinned population through a series of laws the Code Noir, which

restricted the actions of mulattoes and Negroes. The wealthier

mulattoes were at times able to escape the restrictions of the Code

Noir by buying certificates of whiteness, which gave them the legal

status of a Creole, or by leaving the colony for France.

The French Revolution in 1789, brought an end to the rigid '
'f /I
S social and racial structure of the colony. Many of the larger

\ plantationIowners and high administrative government officials were 1
i


3C.L.R. James, The Black Jacobins (2nd rev. ed.; New York:
Vintage Press, 1963), p. 35.

4M.L.E. Moreau de Saint-Mery, Description topographique, physique,
civil, politique et historique de la parties franpaise de 1'isle Saint-
Domingue (3 vols.; new ed. by Blanche Maurel; Paris::Societe de
1 Histoire des Colonies Francaises, 1958), I, 100-106.





-4-


determined to maintain the royalist pattern of government. The

mulattoes and poorer whites, or petits blancs, were supporters of

the Revolution, and attempted to bring about a government to their

satisfaction through a rebellion. The mulattoes were strong supporters

of the Revolution because it offered equality for them. The petits

blancs saw the Revolution as a chance to free themselves from the

rule of the aspirants towards nobility and other wealthy officials.

They refused to cooperate with the mulattoes, however, and joined the

royalists in surpressing a mulatto revolt. The mulattoes had also

sent a delegation of representatives to the French National Assembly;

where, after some discussion, they were invited to represent the colony.

An official delegation,appointed by the white Colonial Assembly, was

refused seats in the National Assembly. In 1791, all slaves in the

French colonies in accordance with the French revolutionary creed, were

declared free.5

The struggle between the revolutionaries and the royalists, and

the mulattoes and whites, left the slave population as the pawns of

both sides. In 1791, Negro slaves of the plantations in the North

province rose against their masters and burned and destroyed the area

around Le Cap, the Northern Plain. Many of the white settlers fled

to Le Cap and other cities which were able to defend themselves

against the slave uprising. The mulattoes were generally not perse-

cuted by the slaves, although there was little cooperation between

the two groups. The uprising meant the ruin of many plantations in



5Adolphe Cabon, Histoire d'Ha'iti (3 vols.; Pott-au-Prince:
Petit Skminaire Collhge Saint-Martial, 1937-1941), III, 63.








the prosperous Northern Plain, and a consequent decline in the

exports from Saint-Domingue. Many of the colonists left the colony

for the United States and Cuba an estimated 20,000 by 1797.

The confusion and destruction in Saint-Domingue continued until

1800. In order to quell the rebellions, institute a revolutionary

government, and to provide protection against attacks from England

and Spain, France sent commissioners and troops to Saint-Domingue.

These reinforcements replaced the royalist factions, although bickering

among the mulattoes and whites continued to some extent. In 1793,

an invasion of the Spanish from Santo Domingo complicated the tense

situation on the island. The Spanish invasion was under the leader-

ship of a former French slave, Toussaint Louverture. He had received

military training in Santo Domingo. In 1795, Toussaint joined the

French after a peace treaty was made with the Spanish at Basel.

Toussaint Louverture became the commander of the French forces

when the English invaded in 1795. The British troops were unable

to conquer the island on account of the strong defense put up by

the forces of Toussaint. The English were pushed back to Mble-de-

Saint-Nicolas on the Northern tip of Saint-Domingue. A high rate of

mortality from tropical diseases also helped to break their morale

and resistance. In 1799, they were forced to surrender unconditionally

to Toussaint. By this action, the English recognized Toussaint as

the de facto ruler of the island, despite the presence of Governor

General Hedouville. The French government had to recognize Toussaint



6Rayford W. Logan, The Diplomatic Relations of the United States
with Haiti: 1776-1891 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina
Press, 1941), p. 46.





-6-


as governor general, because he controlled the island. Hedouville

was also powerless to stop his own imprisonment. The mulatto elements

under the leadership of General Rigaud refused to accept the Negro

government of Toussaint. A civil war ensued, which ended with the

annihilation of the mulatto forces and full subjection of the colony

to the rule of the Negro governor general in 1800.7

Toussaint controlled the whole French colony in 1800. He had

been recognized as the commander of all forces in Saint-Domingue by

the French, and later governor general. But the constant warfare

over the last decade of the eighteenth century wreaked havoc on the

economy. Many of the important cities were burned, and the exports

of Saint-Domingue were drastically reduced. Toussaint forced his

Negro armies to settle on the deserted plantations in order to restore

the economic life of the island. He did not reinstitute slavery,

although the peasants were not allowed to move from their domiciles

without special passports.

The independent actions of Toussaint were not in accordance with

the contemporary French policies. Thus, Toussaint maintained re-

lations with England, despite a war between England and France. The

political situation in France had become more conservative; Napoleon

represented a movement away from the Revolutionary period of earlier

years. The Negroes were regarded as an inferior race, and there was



7Erwin Rtsch, Die Revolution von Saint Domingue (Hamburg:
Friederichsen, de Gruyter & Company, 1930), pp. 104-108.




-7-


talk of reinstituting slavery. Napoleon was also incensed by the

threat of Toussaint to declare independence from France.8 Napoleon

was strongly influenced by the views of refugees from the colony and

by his wife Josephine, a Creole from Martinique; they all desired

restoration of French control. As early as 1800, an expedition to

Haiti by the French was planned. By October, 1801, an expedition

was secretly prepared for the restoration of direct French authority

over the island.



































8Georges Lefebvre, Napoleon (4th ed.; Paris: Presses Universitaires,
1953), p. 158.

9Napoleon I, Correspondance de Napoleon ler; public par ordre
de 1'Empereur Napoleon III (32 vols.;Paris: Henri Plon, 1858-1870),
VII, 278. Hereafter cited as Napoleon.














CHAPTER II


JANUARY TO APRIL: THE FRENCH CONQUEST


The French Expedition


The object of the expedition

The main purpose of the French expedition under General Leclerc

was to secure Saint-Domingue for the French, and to establish order

and economic productivity. The restoration of the sugar trade with

France would be an important part of the colony's economy. England,

Spain, and the United States had replaced France in the import of

sugar and other tropical products. The reestablishment of French

control would also serve as a steppingstone towards control of the

Caribbean area and for intrusions into North America through Louisiana.

France, through her alliance with Spain and the Netherlands had

virtually isolated the British possessions in the West Indies.

The success of the French expedition was dependent on cooperation

with the United States and Great Britain. The United States had

carried on a major portion of the trade with Saint-Domingue during the

revolutionary years. It was the major source of staples and manu-

factured products to the colony. The French were under the impression

that the Americans would welcome their return to the colony and provide



ILefebvre, Napoleon, p. 158.




-9-


supplies for the expedition. Pichon, the French Minister to

Washington, wrote to Napoleon and Leclerc that the American Govern-

ment was favorably disposed towards a French expedition to Saint-

Domingue, and that it would encourage American merchants to trade With

the French.2 This information was inaccurate, because President

Jefferson actually opposed any French intrusion.3

The expedition could not leave France until the peace of

Amiens was concluded with the British in October, 1801. The English

control of the seas had prevented any regular communication between

France and the colonies. Napoleon, hoping that the British would

support the expedition to Saint-Domingue, on November 13, instructed

Talleyrand, the French Foreign Minister, to warn the English of its

purpose. Napoleon stressed that the force was sent to set an example

to any colonies that tried to attain independence or self-rule. There

was always the threat that the independence of Saint-Domingue might

incite troubles in the British West Indian colonies. The English

reaction apparently was favorable, because Napoleon, in his instruc-

tions to Leclerc, even advised him to go to Jamaica, if necessary, for

his supplies.5

Napoleon instructed Leclerc to subjugate Saint-Domingue in three

stages. In the first fifteen days, the French were to establish their



2Lokke,.JNH, 93.

3Logan, Diplomatic Relations . ., p. 143.

4Napoleon, Correspondance . ., VII, 319 320.

5Lokke, JNPH, 93.








forces on the island. Napoleon advised that cooperation with the

troops of Toussaint Louverture would enable the expedition to gain

control of strategic areas. At the end of the allotted time, on the

assumption that the French then occupied the island, Toussaint and

all military and administrative personnel under his command over

the rank of captain were to be arrested. They would then be deported

to France and to Devil's Island in Guyana. In the last step, the Negroes

would be disarmed, and they would be put back to work in the fields

in order to restore the sugar production. Napoleon was unaware that

Toussaint Louverture already utilized his army for the purpose of

sugar production. On the restoration of slavery, Napoleon explicitly

stated: "Never will the French Nation give chains to men whom it

has once recognized as free."


The general staff

The leadership of the French expedition was made up of experi-

enced commanders. General en Chef Victor Emanuel Leclerc, although

only 29 years old, had served as general under Napoleon in the Italian

and Portuguese campaigns. In 1797, he married the sister of Napoleon,

Pauline, who accompanied Leclerc to Saint-Domingue. His relationship

to the Bonaparte family probably helped to give Leclerc the commanding

position of the expedition, because he had never been to the island.

Besides Leclerc and Rochambeau, about forty other generals held major

positions of leadership. Many of them had previously seen service in



6Lokke, JNH, 94-95.




-11-


Saint-Domingue. General Brunet, a General de brigade, was the

commander of the"avant-garde"of Rochambeau. At the age of 36, he

was one of the older generals in the expedition. Brunet spent his

whole army career in West Indian colonies in various posts. In

earlier years, he had also served under General Rochambeau. General

de division Desfourneaux was another veteran of the colony. He

had seen service only in Saint-Domingue, where he acquired a reputa-

tion for extreme cruelty. His unwillingness and inability to follow

Leclerc's commands, and his harsh treatment of the local population

later caused Leclerc to write to Napoleon: "Ce general est bien
t r I 7 I
mediocre, je manque de generaux. General de division Boudet had

some experience in the Italian and Egyptian campaigns. He served

in Guadeloupe in 1798, and was very active in the establishment of

a government of French Jacobins under Victor Hugues. The commander

of his "avant-garde" of the division, Pamphile de Lacroix, also a

capable general, is better known today for his memoirs, which pro-

vide an important source of information for this period.8

The naval detachment was headed by Admiral Villaret-Joyeuse.

Leclerc in his earlier letters had nothing but praise for Villaret;

but in a letter to Napoleon on the 17th of February, he wrote: "I

am not satisfied with Admiral Villaret; he retarded our arrival in

Saint-Domingue too much, because of waiting excessively at points of

rendez-vous for the fleet." Leclerc further wrote in a classic

statement: "Voulez-vous sauver votre marine, retirez-la de ses mains."


7paul Roussier (ed.), Lettres du general Leclerc (Paris: Societd
de l'Histoire des Colonies Frangaises, 1937), p..95.
8Cabon, Histoire d'Ha'iti, III, 229.

9Roussier, pp. 100-101.





-12-


Leclerc had considerable praise for the naval Captain Magon, whose

ships carried the Rochambeau division. Captain Magon, on the recom-

mendation of Leclerc and Rochambeau, was promoted to contre-amiral for

his cooperation with Rochambeau and for his brave behavior at Fort

Dauphin in February, 1802.

The generals chose their own staffs, although nominations were

subject to approval of Leclerc. On the staff of Leclerc was General

de division Dugua who was third-in-command. He provided the link with

the other commanding officers and coordinated their actions.

Rochambeau had, besides his aides, several generals on his staff.

General Brunet initially commanded the "avant-garde." General Lavalette,

a soldier of fortune with few abilities outside of being able to

impress his superior officers, commanded a regiment and he later

became an important advisor to Rochambeau. Among the former veterans

of Saint-Domingue, Rochambeau was popular among the officers on

account of his indulgence of men who conducted other business than

that of military affairs. General Pageot asked Rochambeau to write

a letter of recommendation for.him to General Leclerc, which would

permit Pageot to join the Rochambeau division. He complained that

his family fortune, which consisted of plantations on the island,

had been burned by the brigands; Pageot wanted a position under

Rochambeau that would enable him to restore his wealth. In July,

Pageot was stationed in Jacmel under Rochambeau's command.10 By



O0Letter of General de brigade Pageot, to General de Division
Rochambeau, Le Cap, July 17, 1802 (28 messidor An X), Rochambeau
Papers, 1802-1803 (University of Florida Libraries, Gainesville,
Florida), hereafter cited as Rochambeau Papers. Unless otherwise
indicated, letters in the Rochambeau Papers were sent General
Rochambeau.





-13-


June, 1802, Generals Lavalette, Quantin (a general who joined the

Rochambeau division in June), and Desbureaux (this general joined

the division in May) could all be considered wealthy on the basis of

the size of their personal possessions and of their staff.11


The organization of the armies

The French expeditionary force was taken from armies throughout

Europe, but was sent in demi-brigades, the French tactical units.

Most of the troops consisted of trained volunteers who had been in

the Italian and Portuguese campaigns with Leclerc. Later regiments

assigned to Saint-Domingue by Napoleon consisted primarily of Polish

and German troops. There were also some regiments composed of

deserters and other undesirables of the French Army. The estimates

of the strength of the troops varied by about 1,000 men. According

to Leclerc in a letter to Decr'es, the Minister of the Navy, the

initial expedition which embarked from Brest and Rochefort, consisted

of 9,400 men.12 These men were augmented by an additional 4,000

soldiers in mid-February, and periodically after this date reinforce-

ments arrived. The expedition was joined by about 2,000 Negroes and

mulattoes, who remained loyal to the French; this force grew con-

siderably through defections from the insurgents under Toussaint.

The defectors were incorporated into regiments with their own com-

manders and were called colonial troops. Local planters and their

subordinates were formed into National Guard units. These groups,



11Letter from Chef de l'Etat-Major, General Dugua, to Leclerc,
Le Cap, June 12, 1802 (23 prairial An X), Rochambeau Papers.

12Roussier, p. 79.





-14-


generally very undependable, were useful only in the fringe areas

around the mountains. Their activity was confined to their home

areas. The National Guard was primarily commanded by whites and

mulattoes, although many Negroes were included in the rank and file.

A Gendarmerie was formed, which was designed to serve as a general

patrolling and policing force; later in the year the Gendarmerie was

also used as a tactical force. This unit incorporated colonial as

well as regular troops. The initial composition was one-third

European men, one-third colonial troops, and one-third local recruits.13

The French expedition consisted of five divisions: The South

and West provinces (initially under command of General Boudet);

the division of the left in the North province (initially under com-

mand of General Desfourneaux); the division of the right in the North

province; the Spanish part of Saint-Domingue; and the Artibonite

region, which was later incorporated into the South and West provinces.

The divisions were made up of demi-brigades, which were subdivided

into three or more battalions. The cavalry, artillery, and the

engineering dorps were divided among the various brigades. The

lack of horses, carriages, wagons, and cannons made the artillery and

cavalry less effective. The engineering corps was almost inoperative,

because the mortality was so much higher than that of the other units;

Leclerc continually asked for more officers and men.

The insurgent forces were divided into a division of the North



13Letter from Andrieu, Port-au-Prince, June 14, 1802 (25 prairial
An X), Rochambeau Papers.

14Roussier, p. 116.




-15-


province and of the South and West provinces. These troops formed

the Gendarmerie, Garde Nationale (former colonial European troops),

and the regular army, which had a special elite corps, le Garde

d'Honneur. The number of the rebels was uncertain, but Toussaint

probably had about 10,000 men under his immediate control and another
15
eight thousand men spread throughout the country. These forces

also used farmers from the areas occupied by their units to supply

recruits. The revolutionary army was headed by Toussaint Louverture.

Although the rebels retained the original divisions of the acien /

regime for administrative purposes, the real-force was the local

bands and their leaders. These groups followed their leaders blindly.

Besides Toussaint, the other major leaders were: Christophe, stationed

at Le Cap; Dessalines, stationed near Saint-Marc; Charles Belair,

stationed in the interior.

























14Roussier, p. 116.

15Ibid., p;.95.















The Landing of the French


The capture of Le Cap and Fort Dauphin

On December 14, 1801, the fleet with the French expedition departed

from Brest and Rochefort. The ships did not all reach the Bay of

Samana in Santo Domingo until January 29, 1802, because of the incompe-

tent seamanship of Admiral Villaret, and of the adverse winds in the At-

lantic. Villaret and Leclerc were soon at odds with each other over

the slow progress of the fleet. Lemonnier-Delafosse, an officer

with the French expedition indicated that ten days were lost because

Villaret, who was in command as long as the expedition was still

embarked on his ships, could not decide on the time to land in Saint-

Domingue. He refused to permit the competent Captain Magon to continue

immediately with the Rochambeau division and land at Fort Dauphin.1

On January 29, 1802, the ships gathered for the attack in the Bay of

Samana. Admiral Gravina and General Kerverseau and 400 men were dis-

patched to Santo Domingo from there. General Boudet with 3,000 men

was sent ahead to Port-au-Prince from whence he would proceed North

through the Artibonite Valley. Generals Rochambeau, Humbert, and

Leclerc marched along the North coast in order to drive the insurgents

towards Boudet. The forces would then encircle the rebels near Gonalves.17



16J. B. Lemonnier-Delafosse, Seconde champagne de Saint-Domingue
du ler decembre 1803 au 15 juillet 1809. . (Le Havre: H. Brindeau
et Co., 1846), pp. 37-38.

17Roussier, p..72.





-17-


Leclerc had been led to believe by pilots taken abroad at Montecrist

in Santo Domingo that the forces of Toussaint would allow the French

to land without resistance. Minister Pichon in the United States held

similar views on the basis of the news that was reported in the

American newspapers, which were believed to be the best informed

sources concerning Haiti at that time.18 The delay of Admiral Villaret

gave the forces of Toussaint adequate warning to prepare plans for

resistance. Prior to the arrival of Leclerc, Christophe had had some

disagreements with Toussaint. The differences occurred because of

jealousy, on the part of Christophe and the Negro generals who

supported him, of the commanding position of Toussaint. Napoleon,

in a letter on November 19, 1801, warned Leclerc of this situation

and he advised him to take advantage of the discord by befriending

Christophe.19 Pichon, the French Minister to America, had advised

Napoleon of this situation. When Leclerc arrived on the shores of

Santo Domingo, Christophe was willing to surrender to the French in

order to spite Toussaint. The delay of the French landing gave

Toussaint time to persuade Christophe to join in fighting against

the expedition.20

On February 2, General Rochambeau was left with 1,900 men at

Fort Dauphin, which was defended by three forts one at the mouth of

the bay, and two near the city. The ships were under command of

Captain Magon. Without any prior proclamation of war, Rochambeau's



18Letter of Minister Pichon, to General Leclerc, New York,
February 2, 1802, Rochambeau Papers.

19Napoleon, VII, 301.

20Thomas Madiou, Histoire d'Ha'iti (3 vols.; Port-au-Prince:
Department de 1'Instruction Publique, 1922-1923), II, 127.








men landed at the mouth of the bay. The troops were unable to gain

adequate foothold because of heavy enemy fire, but the son of the

Duke de La ChAtre, son of a prominent French family, rallied the

troops and secured the fort at the cost of his life. General Brunet

commanded the landing. The next day, the city forts were taken,

after Captain Magon ordered his ships to bombard the forts with their

cannon. After only two broadsides, Fort Dauphin was French. The

landing cost twelve casualties and forty wounded men. The soldiers

found a considerable amount of ammunition and food supplies.21

Rochambeau, leaving a garrison of naval forces behind, marched

immediately towards Le Cap. Christophe threatened to burn Le Cap,

when the French ships appeared in the harbor. Under heavy fire,

Leclerc landed at the nearby Bay of Acul. Christophe carried out
22
his threat, and he then retreated into the hills.2 In order to

prevent any further destruction and pillage of the area, both

Rochambeau and Leclerc quickly occupied the Northern Plain surrounding

Le Cap, a rich agricultural area. The French were successful;and

by February 9, the NorthernPlain and the coast from Fort Dauphin to

Le Cap were in French hands. The quick landing by Rochambeau at

Fort Dauphin had helped considerably in driving away the brigands from

the coastal area. On the other hand, Rochambeau's arrival without

any proclamation of his intent could also have been construed as an

act of provocation by the French against the brigands, contrary to



21Roussier, 67.

22Madiou, II, 127.


-18-





-19-


the promises of amnesty that were made by Leclerc a few days later
23
at Le Cap.2 The occupation of the Northern coast around Le Cap

was carried out with a force of less than 7,000 men. In order to

impress the brigands in Le Cap, Leclerd had declared in his proclama-

tion, that he had 12,000 men with him. He was afraid of rebel attacks
24
on his troops, if the enemy discovered the actual size of his force.24


Foreign cooperation

The French met with more opposition from the Americans and

British than they had expected, when the expedition finally reached

Saint-Domingue. The troops were forced to embark as early as

October, 1801, in ports along the Atlantic Ocean, although plans

for provisions and supplies had not been adequately carried out.

Much hope therefore, was placed on the aid from the British and

Americans by the French. Cooperation between the French and the

British proved to be disappointing. In a letter to Leclerc before

his departure, Napoleon had advised him that the English had promised

supplies for the expedition, which would be provided from Jamaica.

He instructed Leclerc to remember: 'Mettez dans vos relations avec

le commandant anglais beaucoup d'ame'nite, mais toute la dignite

qu'exige la grandeur de la nation."25 General Leclerc, however, lost

his "dignity" when Admiral Duckworth of Jamaica refused to give help.

He claimed all supplies had been taken away by an English fleet that

had left Jamaica earlier that year. Nor did the English permit Leclerc



23Roussier, 67.

24Ibid., 61.

25Napoleon, VII, 325.





-20-


to use banks in Jamaica for the purpose of borrowing money to pay

off debts already incurred in Saint-Domingue.26 The cause of English

opposition was not clear; the more likely reason appeared to be

mistrust of the French.

Napoleon and Leclerc expected that the Americans would provide

most of the supplies. But in a letter on February 9, Leclerc had

written indignantly to Napoleon that there were about twenty American

ships in Le Cap at his arrival, but that the Americans supplied the

insurgents rather than the French: "Ces juifs avec lesquels il est

impossible de traiter."27 The Americans apparently tried to steer

clear from a commitment to the French cause.

Spanish cooperation was more generous than expected. A small

detachment under General Kerverseau and the Spanish Admiral Gravina

had been sent to Santo Domingo. This part of the island was held by

the rebel general, Paul Louverture, a brother of Toussaint, and Clairveau,

a mulatto general. Leclerc praised the actions of Admiral Gravina,

whose ships carried the troops. On leaving Saint-Domingue, Gravina

left behind all his extra supplies, and made a trip to Havana in Cuba

to secure men and money for Leclerc. Napoleon later asked the Spanish

King to commend Gravina for his services to the French Republic.28







26Madiou, II, 173-174.

27Roussier, p..79.

28Napoleon, VII, 173.














The Campaign of Crgte-'a-Pierrot


The capture of Le Cap and Fort Dauphin in the North gave the

French a firm foothold. In the West, General Boudet had established

himself in Port-au-Prince, which had been partially burned by the

brigands. General Leclerc, through negotiations, tried to entice

Toussaint to his side. He returned Toussaint's sons who had been

students in France, but the brigand leader refused to yield to the

French. Leclerc then resumed his campaign, after he had given the

brigands a four-day period of grace during which time they could have

surrendered without punishment. On February 17, the date of the

resumption of the operations, the expedition was augmented by 20,000

men from Cadiz.29

General Leclerc intended to push the troops of Toussaint and

Christophe towards Gonalves, but he wanted to prevent the rebels from

entrenching at any particular location. The forces of Boudet were to

head North along the Artibonite River, in order to encircle the brigands.

Boudet first had to defeat Dessalines, however, who was in the Leogane

area in the Southern part of the West province. Rochambeau, who was

in close pursuit of the troops of Toussaint, would push forward to

St. Raphael. Generals Hardy and Desfourneaux would flank him, while



29H. de Poyen, Histoire militaire de la revolution de Saint-
Domingue (Paris:: Berger-Levrault, 1899), p. 142.





-22-


Leclerc and 1,500 men who had embarked for Port-au-Prince, would

march from the South together with the Boudet division. General

Humbert was sent by sea to subjugate Port-de-Paix, which was defended

by General Maurepas and a well-trained brigand regiment.30

Leclerc's plan partially failed, on account of the delays of

General Boudet and General Humbert. Humbert, through his incompetence
31
in military strategy was defeated at Port de-Paix. In order to

rescue the remnants of the French forces there, and to attempt the

reduction of Maurepas, General Desfourneaux and troops from General

Hardy's division were sent to Port-de-Paix. These troops were also

defeated by Maurepas. He was finally forced to surrender when General

Debelle and his troops arrived. Altogether, more than 4,000 men

were used in this battle. The diversion of these troops gave the

brigands under Christophe a chance to move away from the Gonaives

area. Toussaint only had to deal with the troops of Rochambeau,

instead of a combined force of General Hardy and Rochambeau. The

battle of Port-de-Paix caused a delay of time in the plans of

Leclerc.32

In the South, another delay took place. General Boudet was

unable to contain or contact Dessalines. Dessalines, in a daring

forced march through the mountains around Port-au-Prince, captured

Leogane and burned the city. After circling around Boudet, who had

in the meantime arrived in Leogane by sea, Dessalines tried to attack



30Roussier, p..67.

31Ibid., p. 116.

32poyen, p.: 142.





-23-


the Port-au-Prince garrison under General Pamphile de Lacroix, but

instead Dessalines lost 1,000 men of his"avant-garde"in a French

ambush. Dessalines with the remnant of his forces then marched

Northward into the Cahos Mountains to join with Christophe and Toussaint.33

Rochambeau was successful in making contact with Toussaint and

his forces in the mountains near Gona'ives. Rochambeau advanced from

Dondon, from where his forward columns fought several skirmishes

with troops of Toussaint. No major engagements were possible because

of the brigand's elusiveness and knowledge of the area. On February 10,

Rochambeau sighted the brigands at Coup-a-Pintades, and he pursued
.34
them into a ravine.3 On February 23, a battle took place. Toussaint

withdrew in good order, however, and he then marched towards the South

into the Cahos Mountains near Crete-b-Pierrot. Leclerc and his forces

from Port-au-Prince had also arrived at Cr~te-a-Pierrot, where the

troops of Dessalines had entrenched themselves in the fort, which

overlooked the pass into the Cahos Mountains. Both Christophe and

Toussaint remained nearby with their men.35

At Crite-a-Pierrot, Dessalines and Toussaint combined some of

their troops, after which the latter withdrew into the mountains.

Rochambeau had tried to continue the pursuit of Toussaint, but had

been led towards Mirebalais on a false trail. In order to reinforce

the forces under Leclerc, Rochambeau was recalled to Crfte-'a-Pierrot,



33poyen, p. 143.

34Letter of Commandant Miguel, Habitation Moyse, February 19, 1802
(30 pluviase An X), Rochambeau Papers.

35Roussier, p. .106.





-24-


and by March 9, the forces of Hardy and Boudet were also concentrated

there. Dessalines remained in Crite-b-Pierrot with about 1,200 men.

He later left to direct outside attacks on the French, while General

Lamartini're was left in command of the fort. Leclerc had to capture

Crite-la-Pierrot that guarded the gateway to the mountains. Defeat of

the brigands at this fort would hurt the moral of the enemy and destroy

a large portion of his armies. The French also regarded defeat of

the brigands as a necessary demonstration of the superiority of the

European troops over the native forces.36

Generals Boudet and Leclerc immediately directed a charge on

Cr'te-1-Pierrot, and lost several hundred men and a large number of

wounded, including Generals Dugua, Leclerc, Boudet, and Debelle. On

March 10, Rochambeau arrived. After directing heavy artillery fire

on the fort from a hilltop, which had been considered inaccessible by

the other generals, Rochambeau also tried a charge; he lost 300 men.

The French then decided on keeping the fort under siege, rather than

risk more lives. A heavy bombardment of the fort was maintained, which

killed about 600 brigands. Lamartiniere and the remaining rebels, at

nijht, brol' through the cordon of French troops escaping with 500 men,
37
and joinJrd with thef forces iof Dessalines in the mountains.

The battle of Crete--'Pierrot was the culmination of the struggle

againLt the rebels in early 1802. Dt-spite the 2,000 casualties of





dI;> 1 fieVr'ttr, 1i4W110,1E3^j'lr scrvilr ^ 1'igstoire de -a
revoi uti-n ,.e -,Rio -0-'u.gIc, (2 vols.; Paris: Pillet Aine, 1819),
II, 162-164.





-25-


the French, the brigands had received a set back in moral. Many of

the brigands returned to their farms, rather than suffer through the

continual pursuit by the French armies. Only the personal followers

of the brigand leaders remained with them. Desertion among the rebels

was encouraged by a decree of Leclerc on February 17, 1802, which

declared Toussaint and Christophe and their collaborators outlaws,

but provided a pardon for those who surrendered to the French. All

farmers that would return to their lands and lay down their arms would

be exempt from punishment.38 To the French the battle of Crlte-l-

Pierrot demonstrated that the quality of the Negro armies was much

higher than they expected, and that conventional European tactics of

charging en masse did not work against the guerrilla tactics of the

brigands. Maurepas, at Port-de-Paix, surrendered only after being

overwhelmed and his army threatened with extinction. Dessalines,

through skillful maneuvers, had been able to escape the French pursuing

armies.

The French were also in a weak position. Leclerc had started the

campaign against the brigands on February 17, with about 13,000 men.39

Yet, by the first of April, he had lost close to 3,000 men in the

various campaigns. Some reinforcements arrived, but in a letter to

the First Consul on April 1, Leclerc reported that with 3,000 men in

the hospitals, there were only 7,000 soldiers left. The French were

reinforced by an additional 7,000 colonial troops, but they were not



38Roussier, p..99.

39Ibid., p. 94.








considered reliable by Leclerc.40 The manpower of the French was

inadequate to defeat the remaining insurgent forces. The brigands

stayed in the mountains rather than on the plains or coast where

French battle tactics were superior to those of the rebels. The

divisions of the French were stationed along the mountains in the

Cahos region and in the North. General Hardy, who was garrisoned

at Le Cap on the Northern Plain, was defeated in two battles by

Christophe, however, and only barely managed to hold Le Cap against

the brigand onslaught. The near success only demonstrated the ability

of the rebels to break through the French cordon of soldiers in the

interior.41

General Rochambeau, since the landing at Fort Dauphin, had

consistently followed the orders of Leclerc. He had landed at

Fort Dauphin and through prompt action saved an important plantation

region from complete destruction by the brigands of Christophe. By

pursuing the troops of Toussaint, he reduced the strength of these

forces to the extent that Toussaint was unable to face the French for

a full-scale battle or confrontation. Rochambeau's bombardment of

Cr@te-a-Pierrot had also helped to reduce the brigand forces there.

In the letters from Leclerc to Napoleon, Rochambeau was praised for

his ability.42



40Roussier, p 99.

41Madiou, II, 228.

4Roussier, pp. 65-120.














French Establishment


The need for reinforcements

Leclerc received promises of new troops in early April from

France. Napoleon, in a letter to the Minister of War during this

period, ordered new regiments to be sent from Italy.43 These promised

troops did not provide any immediate aid, since it required about a

month and a half for an ocean voyage to the colonies. On April 7, 2,500

men who should have arrived with the original expedition, finally

came from ports in the Netherlands, while another 1,400 men soon

followed.44 The troops were welcomed by Leclerc; they were needed

against attacks by brigands on Le Cap, and for replacement of the

high losses that were incurred.

When General Leclerc landed in Saint-Domingue, Toussaint decided

on a policy of complete destruction of goods and provisions which might

fall into the hpnds of the French.45 The destruction of towns was

effective,- as these areas and their surroundings contained many materials

that were necessary to the expedition. Christophe burned Le Cap, and

only prompt action of Generals Rochambeau and Leclerc saved the sur-

rounding area from complete obliteration. In early February, Port-au-

Prince was partly burned by the brigand General Lamartiniere before



43Napoleon, VII, 225

44Lemonnier Delafosse, pviii.

45Madiou, II, 129.









General Boudet was able to prevent it. Boudet also failed to stop

Leogane from being sacked by Dessalines. Archaye, Saint-Marc, and

Gona'ives were destroyed at the approach of French divisions in

late February. Leclerc needed the food that could be acquired from

the local farmers, but many were unwilling to supply the armies.

They often destroyed their crops rather than have them fall into the

hands of the French. Maurepas was permitted to join the colonial

forces of the French after his capitulation, because of his value

in persuading the farmers around Port-au-Paix to remain and produce

their crops. Rochambeau even sent out patrols around Verettes to

persuade farmers to return to their lands.46

Another problem that faced the French was inadequate finances.

The Americans would sell only on a cash basis, but Leclerc had a

comparatively small amount of money available. Need for money remained

constant; throughout Leclerc's correspondence in 1802, requests were

included. The Spanish Admiral Gravina was able to secure credit and

supplies in Havana, which provided enough to keep the expedition in

operation. With an increasing number of defectors of the brigands,

heavier demands were made on the treasury. At the same time, the

policy of complete destruction by the rebels prevented the French from

living off the land. The confiscation of rebel property therefore

brought in an important amount for the treasury.47

A record of the port of Bordeaux, from which the supplies were



46Letters of Commandant Cyprien, Verettes, April, 1802, Rochambeau
Papers.

4Roussier, pp. 65-120.





-29-


sent, showed that ships left regularly for Saint-Domingue with wine and

flour. By late March, 14,229 quintaux of flour had been exported.48

Much of this amount, however, was lost in the process of being trans-

ported. The irregularity of the arrival of the ships, and the poor

quality of flour caused a shortage. There were very few animals and

carts to move materials, because they had not been brought from France

by the expedition. Thus, there was much accumulation of provisions

in the port cities that could not be transported into the interior.

The importation of Cuban draft animals later alleviated the problem.

After the battle of Cr@te-a-Pierrot, Rochambeau's troops were marching

with rations for two days only, due to the lack of adequate transporta-
49
tion to distribute the provisions.


Restoration of French rule

The establishment of the French in the major cities and strategic

locations gave Leclerc an opportunity to institute some semblance of

civil administrative positions. Under the previous brigand governments,

only at the local level had civil government operated at all; and even

then, the commander of the local National Guard usually predominated

over civilian officials. This practice was continued, but the civil

.authorities got more jurisdiction. The local governments were organized

in administrative units.headed by a maire or mayor who also was the

judge of the area. The French generals in charge of the provinces still

constituted the highest authority. Plans were made for the establish-

ment of a national judiciary and for a civilian administrative unit



48Bordeaux Flour Record, March 17, 1802, Rochambeau Papers, a
quintal is 100 kilograms.

49Letter of General Hardy, Mirebalais, March 15, 1802 (24 vent~se
An X), Rochambeau Papers.




-30-


headed by an executive officer, the prefet colonial. A committee

in France was formed to define the legal status of the colony and

the place of the Negro in it.50

Until full order was restored, no reliable French civil ad-

ministration could be established. The military therefore worked

in close cooperation with the few civilian directors or commissaires,

who supervised the logistical aspects of the colony. Rochambeau,

after he was stationed in the area of the Artibonite River, and

later in April when he became commander of the West and South

provinces, was besieged with letters which asked favors from him.

Most of the requests dealt with recommendations, applications for

positions to administrative posts, and other similar inquiries. There

were several letters of former colonists who wanted information on

their former estates, or who made inquiries about lost husbands and

families. Rochambeau received various gifts ranging from commissions

on sales of land to a case of liqueur from Martinique.51 On leaving

France, Rochambeau was also given the powers of attorney for several

people in order to secure property for them. These groups were

interested in the development of the sugar trade between France and

Saint-Domingue.

In the correspondence of Rochambeau, there were several letters

from a treasurer of a Genoa hospital, General Hauterome, who had been

in the Italian campaigns with Rochambeau. The general had also spent



50Napoleon, VII, 430.

51Letter from Malespine, Fort-de-France, Martinique, April 3,
1802, Rochambeau Papers.








some time in Saint-Domingue. Hauterome proposed a plan for the

restoration of slavery by importing Negroes from Africa. The existing

population was to remain free and to live in a separate area from the

European population. The plan was interesting as it revealed the

thinking of a former inhabitant of Saint-Domingue, and because

similar ideas were expressed by other friends of Rochambeau.52


Behavior of the armies

In the war between the French and the brigands, much violence

was inflicted; particularly the civilian population suffered. Haitian

historians have judged Rochambeau more severely than they have the other

generals. Thomas Madiou, a prominent historian, recorded that while

in pursuit of Toussaint in late February, Rochambeau's men "raped,

disemboweled and killed several women,and they hung the children and

elderly by the ears."53 This statement, although not based on any

documentary evidence, was probably accurate in view of the severe

methods that Rochambeau endorsed in later months. Rochambeau also

demonstrated an acute hatred for the mulattoes. This probably

explained the condemnation of his actions by the Haitian historians

Thomas Madiou and Beaubrun Ardouin who were mulattoes. The other

French generals were not blamed for so many atrocities. An exception,

however, was General Desfourneaux, who on an earlier tour of duty in

Saint-Domingue, had earned a reputation for violence, which he con-
54
tinued in the same fashion when he returned with the Leclerc expedition.



52Letter from Hauterome, treasurer of hospitals, Genoa, Italy,
November 15, 1801 (23 brumaire An X), Rochambeau Papers.

53Madiou, II, 142.

54Ibid.





-32-


On the other hand, the atrocities committed by the brigands

on the white colonists were even more extreme. Dessalines on leaving

Leogane, murdered several hundred white inhabitants. Only those who

were able to board American ships escaped his wrath.5 He also

relentlessly pursued his own countrymen for infractions of his orders.

At Cr@te-a-Pierrot, General Lacroix complained of the stench created

by the bodies of dead white civilians murdered by Dessalines as an
56
example to the French. Subordinates of Rochambeau reported dis-

coveries of bodies of women and children, who had been mutilated.

Christophe and Toussaint were equally violent. Toussaint had not

been afraid to have his own nephew hanged, and Christophe, on leaving

Le Cap, committed several atrocities against the population.57

The courage of both sides in battle was exemplary since mountain-

ous terrain and tropical climate imposed strong barriers. The

regiments in the French divisions behaved well, except for the two
58
regiments consisting of felons and deserters. Both of these

regiments were under Rochambeau's command, and it was due to Rochambeau's

generalship that he managed to keep his division an effective fighting

force. Rochambeau praised the National Guard of Verettes under

Commandant Repussard for their bravery. This detachment was to perform

many more outstanding deeds for the French. The brigands were a brave



55"Decrit succinct des evenements arrives a Leogane," Rochambeau
Papers.

5Lacroix, II, 94.

57Madiou, II, 132.

58Roussier, p. 101.





-33-


fighting force, and behaved in almost foolhardy fashion against a

better-trained enemy. The auxiliary units of the brigands, consisting

of farmers, were less dependable.















CHAPTER III


APRIL TO SEPTEMBER: THE LOSS OF POSSESSION


Surrender of the Brigands and French Reorganization


Surrender of the brigands

The battle of Cr@te-1-Pierrot proved to be the decisive blow to

brigand resistance in early 1802. The battle showed that the brigands

were not strong enough to dislodge the French from the island without

a sustained effort. The farmers who made up the majority of the army

were already deserting because of the desire to go home and the

discouragement with continual defeats. The return of many brigands

to their farms left only the generals with their corps of personal

followers that ranged from small bands of twenty men to more than 1,500

men under Christophe and Dessalines. The return of the farmers was

noted in reports to Rochambeau by the local commanders of the outlying

posts near the mountains. Repussard, Commandant of the National Guard

of Verettes, reported the return of many brigands to their farms

and the fact that the small bands in the mountains intensified their

raids for plunder.l These small bands were made up of maroons,

descendants of escaped slaves that refused to recognize any law.



1Letter of Commandant Repussard, Verettes, April 1, 1802 (11 germinal
An X), Rochambeau Papers.


-34-




-35-


The French troops were in a disorganized state because they had

concentrated forces at Crete-a-Pierrot. This left the northern coast

protected by nominal forces and sailors from the ships. Toussaint,

in order to take advantage of the situation, tried to cut the French

army off and ordered Christophe to attack Le Cap; but timely reinforce-

ments, the courage of the sailors, and the successful return of General

Hardy with his troops overland prevented the execution of this plan.

Leclerc and some troops left for Port-au-Prince, from which he later

returned to Le Cap. Rochambeau was stationed at Saint-Marc, where he

commanded the Artibonite River region.

Toussaint and his personal guards, after an armistice with the

French, settled down on plantations near Ennery, while Dessalines

and Charles Belair, who had combined their troops, also remained in

that vicinity. Christophe was located in the mountains in the North,

and he was under constant attack by the French. Toussaint. had

decided that only patience would permit the rebel forces to survive

against French domination of Haiti. In a letter to Dessalines which

was captured by the French, he wrote: "Do not forget while waiting,

the rainy season, which will rid us of our enemies; we have only for

resources destruction and fire . .2 Rochambeau received regular

reports from his troops stationed in and near Saint-Marc and Gona'ives,

on the activities of the rebels in the area: but the French had been



2Beaubrun Ardouin, Etudes sur l'histoire d'Ha'iti (11 vols.;
Port-au-Prince: Dalencour, 1959), V. The original work was written
in 1853.





-36-


so weakened by the high casualty rate of battle and disease that
3
Leclerc and Rochambeau did not want to start a counter-offensive.

While Toussaint was planning another attack, Christophe decided

to capitulate to the French on April 26, after which Toussaint gave

up any immediate hope of regaining control of Saint-Domingue. On

May 1, Toussaint capitulated and was allowed to settle at Ennery with

a large guard, which was to prevent any French attempt to capture him

on his plantation. Toussaint and Christophe, as well as any other

surrendering brigand general, were given amnesty by Leclerc. This
4
action was later confirmed by Napoleon. Dessalines and Charles

Belair capitulated on May 6, but chose to join the French army as

Christophe had done.

The insurgent generals were incorporated with their troops in the

colonial army. Dessalines and Belair were stationed at Saint-Marc

under the close supervision of Rochambeau, who was then commander

of the South and West provinces. The troops of Dessalines were

assigned to patrol the mountain areas for, despite the surrender of

the leaders of the rebellion, small brigand groups remained active.

These small bands were more interested in plunder than in the pursuit

of freedom. The colonial troops were used for actual repression of

the brigands, since they were more effective than the French troops

who, diminished through lack of reinforcements and disease, remained

on garrison duty.

Because of the slow action on the part of the French generals in



Madiou, Histoire d'Haiti, II, 113.

Napoleon, Correspondance, VIII, 23.





-37-


recapturing the island, Napoleon's instructions to Leclerc on the

conquest of Haiti were not followed. Napoleon had expected Leclerc

to be ready to send back to France the brigand generals in fifteen

days.5 In April, only Rigaud, the former mulatto opponent of Toussaint,

who had come with the French expedition to lure the mulatto generals to

the French, was sent to France. His departure caused some stir among

the mulattoes, but as he had also made many enemies, this move was

generally looked upon with some favor by the mulattoes. In early

June, Toussaint was lured from Ennery to Le Cap by General Brunet,

former commander of the "avant garde" of Rochambeau. On June 7, he

was secretly abducted and sent to France, where he died in prison.

As early as May 10, General Pageot, then with the general staff in

Le Cap, wrote to Rochambeau that Toussaint was to be deported because

of his color, his revolutionary activities in earlier years, and his

order of the execution of his brother Moyse without recourse to a

trial. Moyse was hanged for his indiscriminate cruelties towards the

white population among other things. Leclerc did not dare do the

same to the other brigand generals because they were all protected by

well-armed troops that controlled strategic areas. The reaction of the

other Negro generals was mild. Dessalines had actually been part of

the plot to capture Toussaint by urging him to visit Le Cap. The

colonial troops received the news without much notice.


Reorganization of administration

In April and May, the French began preparation for the establish-



5Lokke, JNH, 90.

6Letter of General de Brigade Pageot, Le Cap, May 10, 1802 (20
floral An X), Rochambeau Papers.




-38-


ment of civil French rule. In France, an advisory council to Napoleon

was formed. The council was ordered to determine the judicial organ-

ization of the colony.7 This committee, made up of officials of the

Ministry of the Navy and Colonies and former colonists, recommended the

restoration of slavery, and a legal order similar to that of the ancien

regime. In a note to Consul Combaceres, Napoleon proposed that all

blacks free prior to 26 Pluviose An II (date of the earlier abolition

of slavery) and those who had served the Republic should remain free.

All other Negroes would be re-assigned to proprietors by the police.

The importation of slaves and restoration of the code noir were also

8
part of this plan.8 When the orders were proposed to Leclerc by

Napoleon in August, the general feared the consequences and did not

execute them. They were not carried out until 1803. He explained

to Minister of the Navy Decres on August 25:

Do not think of re-establishing slavery here for some time.
I believe that it is possible to do it so that my successor
will have to do no more than execute the decree of the
Government, but after the numerous proclamations that I have
made here to ensure the liberty of the Negroes, I will not
contradict myself. But assure the first consul that my
successor will find all disposed of.9

On April 25, Leclerc issued a proclamation in Saint-Domingue, in

which he announced the appointment to a council of some citizens from

the North province and several from the South and West Provinces. These

appointments were made by the commanding officers of the provinces. The

council was to serve inAan advisory capacity on problems dealing with the



7Napoleon, VII, 430.

8Ibid., VII, 444-447.

9Roussier, Lettres du general Leclerc, p. 219.





-39-


establishment of a constitution and the restoration of property to

promote cultivation. The council was abolished on June 20, however,

when a state of siege was declared by Leclerc on account of the French

losses. To head the civil administration, a prefet colonial was sent

with the French expedition. The Prefet, Benezech, a former revolution-

ary in France, worked in close cooperation with Leclerc. The prefet

and his staff were to head the police as well as the civilian adminis-

tration. A commissaire de justice and his staff were also sent to

erect a judicial system. The commissaire and prefet held only that

power allocated to them by the captain-general, because the military

controlled the colony. This fact is well demonstrated in a reply

of Benezech to Rochambeau on the question of civilian patronage:

Do not forget, general, that the organization that the govern-
ment has given to the colony has not yet been activated;
presently I have no positions at my disposition, they are
all nominated by the general-en-chef.10

The prefet and his assistants or sous-prefets were distributed to

the departments (West, South and North), quarters and communes

which were the basic subdivisions of the political administration. The

civilians simply were assigned military functions. Each district had

a military officer as its commander. The military also supplied

passports, that were required of all who travelled outside of their

own communes.

Napoleon felt that cultivation of sugar and coffee had to be

encouraged because the economy of the colony rested on it. Special

inspectors for the promotion of cultivation were appointed who regu-

larly toured the country-side. The taxation of property was made as



10Letter from Prefet Colonial Benezech, Le Cap, May 14, 1802 (24
floral An X), Rochambeau Papers.





-40-


light as possible. Local commanders encouraged peasants to return

from the hills. Napoleon personally ordered plans to be drawn up

to permit immediate restoration of land to colonists who had fled

in earlier years, and who returned to find their lands taken away or

occupied by others.11 This problem involved many suits of law that

were still pending in late 1802.

The expedition remained in constant need of greater financial

resources. The only income came from custom duties and the confisca-

tion of brigand property. The income from the former was inadequate

because only the foreign ships yielded profitable revenues; the

French ships paid only half rates but their products were given

preferential treatment over foreign ones. The latter was dubious

because it was difficult to pinpoint valuable rebel property. An

exception .to this was the confiscation of Toussaint's extensive estates

near Gonaives, and the capture of a payroll for his troops by

Rochambeau's detachment.12

When Rochambeau became commander of the South and West provinces

in late April, many problems faced him. Besides his military duties,

he had to execute administrative functions as well. Most of his

concern was with the West province, because the South province was

put under command of Genaral de Division Desbureaux who was responsible

in turn to Rochambeau. The South province also played a less important

role because of the poor communications and small isolated communities



11Napoleon, VIII, 18.

12Madiou, II, 225.





-41-


that could adequately be reached only by sea. The South province

had active National Guard units who were able to provide some

degree of defense against brigands in the mountains. In the West

province, Rochambeau had troops patrolling from Gonaives to

Mirebalais and Port-au-Prince. The soldiers of Dessalines were used

extensively for this purpose. The patrolling of areas also involved

the disarmament of peasants, which Dessalines performed perfunctorily.

The brigand activities were few in May and June. The heavy losses of

the French due to disease, forced them to incorporate colonial troops

into their ranks.13
































13Letter from General de Brigade Martial-Besse, June 30, 1802
(11 messidor An X), Rochambeau Papers.















Disaster Strikes


Yellow fever

From April to September, coinciding with the rainy season, the

French expedition was plagued by an exceedingly high fatality rate of

tropical diseases. The high death incidence among Europeans was a

normal occurrence in Saint-Domingue; many Europeans had lost their

lives in earlier years during the rainy season. The English army in

the 1790's had been forced to withdraw, an event that was accelerated

by the high mortality rate. Napoleon, warned about this phenomenon

by his advisors, had ordered the fleet to leave in November, 1801,

so that it would arrive before the start of the rainy season.4

The predominant diseases were yellow fever and dysentery. Dysentery

was not so deadly, or at least not so rapid a killer, because of the

length of the disease; but yellow fever developed in epidemic pro-

protions. As early as March 18, Leclerc reported "I fear the many

sick. I am afraid of the influence of the climate."5 In earlier

letters to Napoleon, Leclerc intimated that there were many in the

hospitals, of which few came from the battlefields. On the first of

April, Leclerc reported to Napoleon that 5,000 soldiers were in the

hospitals, while about thirty to fifty men a day were dying. By this



14Napoleon, VII, 320.

15Roussier, p. 282.





-43-


time about 5,000 men had died, of which only about one-third had

died on the battlefields.16 The early figures that Leclerc gave for

his casualties were conservative in comparison to the estimates of

Pamphile de Lacroix. Lacroix's figures on casualties were 2,000
17
men higher than those of Leclerc. By September, close to 10,000

men had died from the diseases that were rampant, and there were few

signs of abatement.18 The deaths in the hospitals were all blamed on

yellow fever; but prior to March, many soldiers were sick of

malnutrition and of other diseases incurred during the five-month

voyage from France. Another problem that the hospitals faced was

that the soldiers preferred to feign sickness to fighting. The

rations in.the hospital were better and more liberal, and General

Urbain complained in March to Rochambeau about the laxity with which

opportunists were tolerated.19

The descriptions of yellow fever varied. Leclerc, in June,

wrote to Minister of the Navy Decres that he was having the disease

investigated:

The disease shows itself with some people through signs,
such as slight headaches, or upset stomach or the shakes.
With others it strikes them suddenly; but one does not
find more than one-fifth that escape death.20

In the same letter, he continued, "Mortality in the other cities is



16Roussier, p. 150-151.

17Lacroix, Memoires . ., II, 72.

18Roussier, p. 217.

19Letter from General de Brigade Urbain, Saint-Marc, March 31, 1802
(10 germinal An X), Rochambeau Papers.

20Roussier, pp; 154-155.





-44-


not equal to that of Le Cap, and the disease is not contagious."

Other descriptions of yellow fever varied. Gilbert, a physician on

Leclerc's staff, felt that the action of the hot sun "blood wants

to boil," the damp and pestilent atmosphere, and the lack of public

hygiene were causes, and he cites several case studies in support

of this theory.21 He also found that the best cure was the excellent

care provided by the mulatto women. Gilbert noted that the incidence

of yellow fever on troops that were active in the mountains was

negligible. Another physician, who studied the high disease mortality

of yellow fever in the French expedition and on the other islands of

the Antilles, felt that yellow fever was an epidemic disease. However,

he did not pinpoint the mosquito as its carrier. The physician noticed

that among the English there was a lower incidence, which he attributed

to better hygiene regulations of English generals.22

There were many other dramatic descriptions of yellow fever.

One anonymous writer in a pamphlet, Dissertation sur la fievre jaune,

attributed the cause of yellow fever to eating unripened foods, humid

public places, lack of constant winds, debauchery in liquor, bad food,

and very surprisingly, insects. He also noted that Le Cap had less

trouble with yellow fever, prior to 1792, when it was first burned.23

As noted by Leclerc, the fever did not affect the South and West



21C.N.P. Gilbert, Histoire mndicale de l'armee frangaise a Saint-
Domingue en l'an dix ou memoire sur la fievre jaune. (Paris: Imprimerie
de Guilleminet, 1803, pp. 54-71.

22Alexandre Moreau-de-Jonnes, Observations pour servir "a 1'histoire
de la fievre jaune des Antilles. (Paris: Imprimerie Mignuet, 1808), pp. 6-10.

23France, Archives Nationales, Section outre-mer, biblioth'eque Moreau
de Saint-Mery, deuxieme serie, "Dissertation sur la fievre jaune."





-45-


provinces so severely, but by late June, General Lavalette, commander

of Port-au-Prince, in his daily reports to Rochambeau, referred to

the increasing number of deaths from fever. Many of the sick from

Gonaives and Saint-Marc were sent to Port-au-Prince. As early as

May 12, Lavalette forbade the entry of more sick from ships into the

hospitals of Port-au-Prince, because "the germ might affect the whole

population . .24 Because of this danger and inadequate hospital

facilities, it was decided to send the worst cases to the island

of Gonave, where a colony was established. In the North, Tortuga

served a similar purpose.

Rochambeau received a report by his medical staff in May on the

state of health, from which it was concluded that there was no yellow

fever in the West, but only various dysenteries and other fever-producing

ailments. There were only 710 hospital cases, of which 400 were men

wounded on the battlefield. There were about 3,000 troops stationed

in the West province at that time.25 The official death register of

Port-au-Prince showed a high of 241 deaths at the time the report was

made, a number which compared favorably to years before the French

occupation. These figures only indicated that there was no excessive

mortality rate among the local population.

The effects of the epidemic on the French troops were demoralizing.

The high rate of mortality and the long periods of convalescence of

the survivors seriously impeded the effectiveness of the fighting



24Letter of General Lavalette, Port-au-Prince, May 12, 1802 (22
floreal An X), Rochambeau Papers.

25Haiti, Archives Nationales, Registre de Port-au-Prince (Port-
au-Prince, 1802).





-46-


forces. Because of the higher resistance of the colonial troops to

the diseases, many were combined with the remaining regiments, but

in most cases, the French simply depended upon the colonial troops to

keep order. Leclerc ordered severe reprisals for activities of

brigands, and surprisingly the native troops executed these orders

with the utmost severity.26 Among the leadership there was also a

high death toll. Generals Hardy and Debelle died in June; Prefet

Benezech died in August; and many generals were incapacitated by

constant illness. Leclerc, Rochambeau, and Burnet, veterans of Saint-

Domingue, also suffered from fever.

The French were unable to start a new offensive, because there

were inadequate fighting forces. Reinforcements were useless, since

they suffered even higher mortality rates as is aptly illustrated and

exaggerated in a description by a contemporary planter, Peter Chanzotte:

Ten days after the landing of these two beautiful regiments,
more than half of their number were carried off by the yellow
fever; they fell down as they walked, the blood rushing out
through their nostrils, mouth and eyes; they died without any
apparent sufferings; their bodies grew yellow, they could not
move they were dead. And yet there was not at this time,
a single country soldier or planter on the sick list within
the encampment.

Few effective measures for protection against yellow fever were

taken by Leclerc. The report made by his physicians in May, recommended

that excess troops were to be moved out of Le Cap, that wet clothes

were to be dried after the rain, and that better hygienic measures



26Roussier, p. 217.

27Peter Chazotte, Historical Sketches of the Revolutions, and the
Foreign and Civil Wars in the Island of Santo Domingo, with a Narrative
of the entire Massacre of the White Population of the Island (New York:
Applegate, 1840), p..31.





-47-


were to be taken.2 These measures were not put into effect by

Leclerc, although he did advise commanders in other areas that these

measures would be helpful in combatting the diseases. Thus Leclerc

ordered General Boudet in September to give special treatment to

some new European troops:

Save your European troops by marching them only in the morning
or evening, except if under attack. You should have today the
first battalion of the Polish Legion, 745 men strong at Haut
du Cap: Forbid these men to imbibe in drink.29



































28'Rapport du Conseil de Sante Colonial." Le Cap, May 31, 1802
(11 prairial An X), Rochambeau Papers.

29poyen, Histoire militaire . ., p. 261.





-48-


Troops and Supplies


When Leclerc and the expedition left France, reinforcements of

two thousand to three thousand men.per month were promised. It was

believed that an army with a strength of about 20,000 men was

necessary to subdue Saint-Domingue. Yet Leclerc never had more than

thirteen thousand European troops in fighting condition available,

and usually part of that number included sick or colonial troops.

The reinforcements that did arrive, were cancelled by the high

casualty rate. From April to June, 5,000 men died.30 On Leclerc's

arrival in Saint-Domingue, there were 9,000 men who were soon increased

to 13,000. In late September, there were 24,000 men. Of these troops,

about 7,000 were in the hospital and at least 6,000 were colonial

troops.31 Leclerc in a letter to Napoleon added that by October 7,

he expected to have only 4,000 fighting men left with an equal number

in the hospital or dead.32 The French in the period of February to

September lost about 10,000 men, of which less than twenty per cent

died on the battlefield.

There were some curious comparisons in the hospitalization rates

of the divisions. In Rochambeau's division of the South and West,



3Roussier, p. 155.

31"Tableau general des forces de l'armee de St. Domingue,"
Archives Nationales, serie AF IV, dossier 1213.

32Roussier, p. 233.





-49-


about 1,200 men out of 7,300 were in the hospital, while in the two

divisions in the North, 3,000 men out of 8,500 men were in the hospital.

These figures apparently indicated a lower mortality rate in the West,

as might be expected from Rochambeau's comments. In early September,

reinforcements arrived from France. These 6,700 men were part of a

twelve-thousand man expedition that was destined for Louisiana.

Napoleon had ordered Minister of the Navy Decres to prepare this

expedition on which he said:

My intention, citizen minister, is that we will take posses-
sion of Louisiana in.the shortest possible time; prepare this
expedition with the greatest secrecy; let it appear as if it
will be sent to Saint-Domingue.33

Apparently the dire need for reinforcements in Saint-Domingue prevented

the expedition from being sent to Louisiana, since the troops remained

in Saint-Domingue.

The supply situation of the expedition improved very little over

that of April. Leclerc continued to lack adequate finances. After

the initial Spanish contributions in early April, Leclerc received

very small additional sums of money. In despair, Leclerc wrote to

Napoleon in early October, that he had received a cumulative total of

only 6,300,000 francs, while the English in a comparative period

of occupation in the 1790's had received 200,000,000 francs.34 Custom

duties and taxes did not produce adequate income. Leclerc, because of

his bad credit record, was forced to pay in silver specie. Unfortu-

nately for him, half of his money was in the form of promissory notes.



33Napoleon, VII, 485.

34Roussier, p. 257.





-50-


The Americans, English, and Spanish in Mexico who also raised their

prices for the French, refused to sell on credit; the French Navy

was unable to supply adequate quantities of supplies for the expedition.

The dire need for funds reflected itself among the local commanders

who resorted to confiscation of American ships, imposition of illegal

taxes and other irregularities in order to pay the troops.35

The French reinforcements generally came poorly equipped.

Clothing and footwear were hard to get and many troops apparently

had little to wear as was indicated in.a letter of a subordinate of

Rochambeau who requested equipment for his troops: "They are absolutely

,,36
naked. Please give the order that they may be issued equipment . .

The supply of food was not so pressing. Adequate quantities were

imported, but in many cases the quality was so low that the food had

to be thrown into the ocean. A considerable amount of graft went on

so the food that was rejected was salvaged by enterprising characters

who resold it to the army. The rations were divided on the basis of

cost per soldier. Leclerc gave the officers extra rations, since he

37
felt that their pay was too low.3 The generals obviously had less

trouble with their pay; Rochambeau ordered two carriages and several

horses while he was in Port-au-Prince during that same period.



35Letter of Andrieu, Port-au-Prince, June 20, 1802 (1 messidor
An X), Rochambeau Papers.

36Letter of chef de brigade Drouin, May 22, 1802 (2 prairial
An X), Rochambeau Papers.

37Roussier, p. 157.





-51-


Continuing Opposition to the French


Renewal of brigand activity

With the capitulation of the brigand leaders in early May, most

of the fighting ceased in the West and South provinces. The raids of

small brigand groups continued, but these groups were motivated by a

desire for plunder rather than the expulsion of the French. On May 12,

General Lavalette, commander of Port-au-Prince, reported brigand

activities close to the city, and warned Rochambeau that further

attacks might be forthcoming.38 No attacks were again reported for

two months. On orders from Rochambeau, General Dessalines disarmed

the peasants in the Artibonite region.39 Another problem that faced

the French was desertion of their colonial regiments; General Lavalette

in the latter part of May, reported to Rochambeau that more than 100

men had deserted from Port-au-Prince.40 This high rate of desertion

was apparently due to the cessation of hostalities with the brigands.

The abduction of Toussaint Louverture on June 6 raised few distur-

bances in the West province. Rochambeau had kept Toussaint under

continual surveillance during May, and had also received from officers



38Letter from General de Brigade Lavalette, Port-au-Prince, May 12,
1802 (22 floreai An X), Rochambeau Papers.

39Letter from General de Brigade Martial-Besse, Saint-Marc,
July 6, 1802 (17 messidor An X), Rochambeau Papers.

40Letter from General Lavalette, Port-au-Prince, May 29, 1802
(9 prairial An X), Rochambeau Papers.









stationed in Saint-Marc reports on the activities of Dessalines and

Charles Belair. On orders of General Rochambeau, French officers

were put in responsible commands and positions in the colonial forces.

There were no reports of agitation among the high colonial officers

on account of the abduction of Toussaint. Letters from Chef de

Battalion Margaret and General Martial-Besse, who were stationed in

Saint-Marc for surveillance purposes, indicated that Dessalines left

for Le Cap on June 5, where he helped the French with the deportation

of Toussaint.41

In the South, this event created some disturbances. Supporters

of Toussaint fled to the South, where they instigated some minor

peasant rebellions. In late June, Delpech, the commander in Petite

and Grande Goave, reported a peasant insurrection in the mountains.

Chancy, a former aide de camp of Toussaint, escaped to the West province.

Ironically, Chancy was arrested in Port-au-Prince when he walked into

the general headquarters and demanded a passport for further travels.

42
He was promptly seized and sent to Le Cap. When General Rochambeau

made an inspection tour of the South province in June and July, he

found everything in order. But three hours after he left Leogane,

43
sixty men of the third Colonial Demi-Brigade deserted to the brigands.43



41Letter of Chef de Battalion Margaret, Saint-Marc, June 6, 1802
(16 prairial An X), Rochambeau Papers.

42Letter of General de Brigade Lavalette, Port-au-Prince, June 24,
1802 (5 messidor An X), Rochambeau Papers.

43Letter of Chef de Battalion Poyer, Leogane, July 6, 1802 (17
messidor An X), Rochambeau Papers.





-53-


Despite the small insurrections, most of the South remained

peaceful. There were occasional threats of disturbances. General

Desbureaux reported to Rochambeau that a plot was uncovered in

Jeremie and asked for more reinforcements on July 17. Further rumors

of plots were circulated in Les Cayes and Jeremie, but only a few

small brigand raids took place. In September, however, a major

uprising developed.

The West remained free of any large-scale brigand activity until

late July. General Lavalette did report to Rochambeau on the execution

of brigands, but these were local bandits and prisoners sent from the

South province. In the mountain sections, there were increasingly

bolder raids towards Archaye and towards the border communities of

Mirebalais, Petite Riviere, and Verettes. These attacks were to some

extent discouraged by constant patrols of the National Guard units

stationed there, but the colonial troops under Charles Belair provided

little support.

Belair's inefficiency in the mountain area came to light in late

August. Repussard, commander of the National Guard in Verettes, had

been forced to relinquish his arms when Belair became the commanding

general. Repussard, in a letter to Rochambeau, protested the loss of

44
arms, which made defense of the area impossible. His case lost some

validity when it was discovered that men of his unit had been actively

plundering in the area. Repussard's men, however were each allowed

to retain one rifle. On August 21, Duquesne, Commandant of the French



44Letter of Commandant Repussard, Verettes, July 23, 1802,
Rochambeau Papers.





-54-


troops in Saint-Marc, reported an accusation of Repussard against

Belair. The accusation contained evidence that Belair had been

dealing with the enemy troops for some time, and that several of

the brigand chieftains were officers in Belair's detachment.45 This

evidence was verified by a letter from Barzelais, Chef d'Etat-Major

of Dessalines, who confirmed the evidence that Belair was dealing with

the brigands.46

An ardent admirer of Toussaint, Belair had been dissatisfied

with French rule ever since the abduction of Toussaint. The news of

the possible defection of Belair came as a surprise to Rochambeau,

who relied upon information from Belair's secretary, a Frenchman.

To silence him, Belair had ordered him executed. On August 23,

Duquesne reported to Rochambeau that Belair had changed his allegiance:

The traitors have finally shown themselves; yesterday at
ten o'clock in the evening, Charles Belair with the
Battalion of the 8th Colonial left Verettes. He killed
his own secretary who was a soldier of the 5th light
Demi-Brigade, fearing that he would tell us his plans.

Dessalines, General Jablonowski, a Polish general who had arrived with

later reinforcements from France, and Repussard encircled Belair and

his troops. Repussard reported to Rochambeau that they received the

major brunt of the attack, while Dessalines' troops saw little or

no action. Belair was evidently afraid to fight his commanding general



45Letter of Commandant Duquesne, Saint-Marc, August 21, 1802
(3 fructidor An X), Rochambeau Papers.

46Letter to Chef d'Etat-Major Barzelais, Saint-Marc, August 23,
1802 (5 fructidor An X), Rochambeau Papers.

47Letter from Commandant Duquesne, Verettes, August 23, 1802
(5 fructidor An X), Rochambeau Papers.





-55-


or Dessalines may have tried to aid Belair. In early September,

Belair was forced to surrender to Repussard, who sent him to Le Cap.

There Belair was executed on orders of Leclerc by troops of Dessalines,

probably a convenient way of getting rid of a competitor for national

leadership.

With the exception of Belair's defection, the months from April

to September were relatively free from any serious military conflict.

At the same time, a state of agitation continued among the population.

Rumors circulated about possible brigand plots, which at times were

uncovered, and about increased punitive measures by the army. The

faith of the French in the colonial troops was completely lost after

three quarters of the colonial forces had to be dismissed because of

lack of funds, on which occasion the remaining forces immediately

demanded their pay.48 This sudden demand jeopardized Leclerc's treasury

that was too low to maintain the whole colonial army.





















48Roussier, p. 201.















Increase in Punitive Measures


The high mortality rate from disease, the increasing comparative

size of the colonial troops, and renewed brigand activities helped

to promote severe punitive measures on the part of the French as the

only answer to the problem of restoration of order. Suspicions of

the loyalty of the colonial troops became more prevalent. Leclerc

mistrusted Dessalines and Christophe; Toussaint was deemed unimportant

only when he was safely jailed in France. The rebellion of Belair

created some suspicion of Dessalines, who had once been one of

Belair's closest allies. General Jablonowski accused Dessalines of

permitting Belair to escape and of preventing him from capturing

Belair.

When Leclerc named General Rochambeau commander of the South

and West provinces in April, the old colonists rejoiced, but the

mulattoes opposed it. Rochambeau, despite his activities in the French

Revolution, had approved of the policies of the ancien regime towards

Saint-Domingue. Rochambeau held the mulatto in very low esteem,

evidence of which is cited by Pamphile de Lacroix in a letter written

by Rochambeau in 1795 in the United States:

You can see, citizens, that in my view I have little regard
for the mulattoes, whereas I have a high degree of confidence
in the Negroes; the latter.are less vicious, more brave,




-57-


more sober, and above all, more aware of the merit of
liberty than the first.49

Although there was little evidence in his latter correspondence of

any discrimination against mulattoes, his subsequent actions did

confirm this charge. Yet he was quite able to recognize the services

of Repussard, who was a mulatto.

Haitian historians, such as Thomas Madiou and Beaubrun Ardouin,

delighted in describing the many atrocities performed on the local

population by the French troops. Ardouin cited the many prisoners

killed by Rochambeau's troops on his orders at the capture of Fort

Dauphin in February.50 These remarks are often exaggerated. Many

of the men shot were regarded as rebels by the French. The troops

did receive orders to make severe reprisals. Correspondence of

Rochambeau indicated a large number of executions from July on, but

there was little evidence of indiscriminate and baseless murders.

prior to August.




















49Lacroix, II, 187.

50Ardouin, V, 8.















CHAPTER IV


RENEWAL OF REBELLION


Defection of the Negro Leaders


The increase of brigand activity

In September there was an increase in brigand activities, par-

ticularly in the South and West provinces. In the West the French

troops were conducting operations in the Cahos Mountains against

supporters of Charles Belair. General Dessalines, who was in charge

of these operations, was also ordered to continue the disarmament

of peasants in this area. He conducted this task with.efficiency

but a great deal of bloodshed. The brigands were still able to

concentrate their forces in the Matheux Mountains near Archaye,

where they cut communications overland between Saint-Marc and Port-

au-Prince. The forces were led by Leroux, Destrade, and Larose, who

had been subordinates of Charles Belair. They had also conducted

brigand operations while Belair still served as a French officer.

Chef de Battalion Lamartiniere, who had been an ardent follower

of Toussaint Louverture but had surrendered with him in June, was

despatched to the Archaye area by General Pageot with the Third

Colonial Demi-Brigade. In correspondence with his direct superior,

General Lavalette, Lamartiniere reported the capture and execution


-58-





-59-


of several brigands, and that the area appeared quiet. In order to

find the main body of the brigands, Lamartiniere decided to pursue

them into the mountains. On September 16, Roy, Commander of Archaye

reported sounds of shooting there; he surmised that the shots were

fired by Lamartiniere and his men. By this time, Lamartinikre's

communications with Roy were broken off. Roy's dispatches contained
3
no indications of laxity of Lamartiniere towards his duties. According

to the Haitian historian Thomas Madiou, Lamartiniere had intended to

surrender to the brigands when he would be able to contact them in the

mountains. Because of a misunderstanding with Larose, the brigand

leader there, Lamartiniere and his battalion were ambushed. Lamartiniere

was murdered by one of the brigand officers. The remainder of his

battalion surrendered to the brigands, however, while the other battalions

of the Third Demi-Brigade surrendered shortly afterwards. In later

French operations, the men belonging to Lamartiniere's regiment were

recaptured by the French and executed for desertion.

Lamartiniere's action stopped an immediate attack on Archaye,

which at the time was defended by only a skeleton force. This decision

gave the French time to send more troops into Archaye. The intensification

of French forces concentrations in Archaye, drove many of the rebels

to the South. One column under Larose also marched towards Verettes



1Chef de Bataillon Lamartiniere, to General de Brigade Lavalette,
Archaye, September 13, 1802 (26 fructidor An X), Rochambeau Papers.

2Madiou, Histoire d'Haiti, II, 296.

3Letter from Commandant Roy, September 16, 1802 (29 fructidor
An X), Rochambeau Papers.





-60-


but was driven back by Repussard. The brigands aroused the peasants

in the areas they marched through and were not adverse to using terror

to force the peasants to join their bands. Thomas Madiou estimated

that they numbered about 3,000 men.4 The brigands concentrated around

Leogane, while they instigated several insurrections throughout the

South province. At the time Leogane was cut off from French support,

the brigands also threatened the Jacmel area.

Raids by the insurgents were made into the Cul-de-Sac valley as

far as Port-au-Prince according to Panisse, commander of Port-au-

Prince who reported the destruction of plantations in this rich

valley, and the flight of inhabitants into the city. Among the

destroyed plantations were those belonging to General Lavalette and

Vice-Admiral Latouche-Treville. On September 23, brigands even

approached the hospital in Port-au-Prince, but the attack was warded

off by the French. Commandant Panisse's task of defending Port-au-

Prince was made more difficult by the increasing number of desertions

from the colonial troops to the brigands. The high rate of deserters

probably explained the bold attacks of the brigands on the city.

Most of the troops stationed in Port-au-Prince had been despatched

to Jacmel, where Generals Rochambeau, Pageot, and Lavalette were

conducting operations against the brigands.

In the Leogane area, an insurrection had broken out on September 12.

This had been fostered by the extreme behavior of the local French



4Madiou, II, 296.

5Letter from Commandant Panisse, Port-au-Prince, October 16, 1802,
Rochambeau Papers.





-61-


commander, General Pageot and his subordinates. The French had

attempted to disarm the peasants, and rumors of the reestablishment

of slavery were rampant. The insurrection was aided by brigands under

Destrade, who had come from the Archaye area.6 General Lavalette was

sent to the area with French reinforcements. General Rochambeau,

who had just started a tour of the Southern part of Saint-Domingue,

personally directed part of the campaign to eradicate the brigands.

Serious rebellions, which were probably instigated by brigands from

the Leogane area broke out in the Grande Goave area. These insurrections

were eventually quelled by Delpech, the local commander, with a great

deal of bloodshed, and only by late October did Delpech fully suppress

the uprising. In Saint-Louis, General Desbureaux had to suppress an

insurrection, which had been started by an officer of the local

Gendarmerie. The rebels spread rumors that slavery was to be

reestablished and that the French were going to disarm and slaughter

the population.

In Jeremie, attempts to rebel were made by local peasants, but

despite the death of the commander General Jablonowski, the local

officers of the National Guard and European regiments were able to

prevent the rebellion from coming to fruition. The major culprit was

Captain Dommage, who was caught with documents that proved his complicity

with the brigands. According to the French Interim Commander of Jeremie,

Bernard, Dommage had terrorized the plantation owners and their workers

in order to switch their support to the brigands. He also spread


6Ardouin, Etudes . ., V, 59.

7
Letter from General de Division Desbureaug St. Louis, September
8,.1802 (21 fructidor An X), Rochambeau Papers.









rumors among the Negro population and mulattoes that the French

intended to establish slavery again. Dommage also provided arms for

his followers and had contacts with other brigand groups in the

mountains. He thus alarmed the country-side for several weeks under

pretense of being a strong French supporter. Dommage was brought to

trial in Le Cap, and later executed.8 Bernard also imprisoned

several other prisoners, among whom there were a judge and several

officers of the National Guard; Je'remie was generally a stronghold of

mulattoes, which indicated the suspicions that many mulattoes held

towards the intentions of the French in the colony. Les Cayes also

suffered from insurrections in the surrounding areas, but the mulatto

commander Berger kept tight reign on the city and was not afraid of

terrorizing the local farmers .into supporting the French cause.

The insurrections throughout the South and the Cahos Mountains

were motivated in many cases by the example of neighboring areas.

Much blame for the apparent discontent came from the arrogant and

rude behavior of the local commanders when the peasants resisted any

attempts to disarm them. Similar insurrections took place in the North;

but because the French never fully controlled the mountains in that

area, these insurrections were more difficult to suppress. In the

Plaisance area brigands, led by Sans Souci who fought under Toussaint

Louverture against the French, formed a confederation of rebels called

the "Congos" which was patterned after the African tribal organization.



8Letter from Interim Commandant of Jeremie, Bernard, Jeremie,
October 2, 1802 (10 vendemiaire; An XI), Rochambeau Papers.




-63-


The "Congos," aroused little enthusiasm among other brigands. They

were of little importance in the eyes of brigands of the other districts,

yet Christophe and Dessalines pursued them even more intensively
9
than other rebels.


The loss of control over Haiti

With the increase of rebellious activity on the part of the

brigands, the French suffered a sharp: decline in morale. Yellow

fever did not abate as expected and, particularly in the North, many

perished or were convalescent. Because of the serious losses of

European troops, many regiments were augmented by colonial forces,

among whom there was a high rate of desertion. The deserters pro-

vided an excellent source of information for the brigands on the morale,

organization, and strength of the troops stationed in the various areas.

In Port-au-Prince, in late September, about thirteen men per day

deserted.10 Because of the loss of soldiers and the illnesses of

many, the French concentrated their forces in the cities along the

seaboard, while they withdrew from the countryside and interior

cities.

In the face of brigand attacks and occupation many plantations

were left by their owners as the native laborers deserted or remained

only to cultivate their own little plots of land. The French civilians

and French supporters suffered even more heavily, and many were forced



9Madiou, III, 303.

10Letter from Commandant Panisse, Port-au-Prince, October 7, 1802
(15 vendemiaire An XI), Rochambeau Papers.









to flee their homes for the cities. The threat of loss of lands

made the civilian population sensitive to the threat of brigands.

Even in the relatively isolated area around Les Cayes, where there

was less of a problem in guarding the countryside, the population

complained about inadequate protection by the troops. In a personal

letter to Rochambeau, a civilian in Les Cayes complained about the

small number of troops and the apprehension of the native inhabitants.11

The fear of many inhabitants and destruction of the plantations helped

to decrease production for exportation to France and the United'States.

A commercial embargo on foreign ships was received with little

opposition in November.

The high rate of desertion to the brigands and the increasing

intensity of brigand attacks further encouraged the French to resort

to excessive violence to quell the rebellions. In order to punish

raids the French retaliated through hostages. Deserters who were

caught again met with instant execution, and many brigand prisoners

were shot. Rochambeau had 100 men of a colonial battalion drowned in

retaliation for some desertions from that regiment.12 General

Desbureaux in a letter to Rochambeau wrote that he had established

a crack battalion which was ordered "to shoot the brigands on sight."13



11Letter from Pellissiere, Les Cayes, September 7, 1802 (20
fructidor An X), Rochambeau Papers.

12Ardouin, V, 59.

13Letter from General de Division Desbureaux, St. Louis,
September 8, 1802 (21 fructidor An X), Rochambeau Papers.




-65-


Commandant Panisse in Port-au-Prince reported to Rochambeau that he

was sending prisoners to the "ponton."4 The pontonn" was used

repeatedly for imprisoning men, and because none of the prisoners

sent there ever survived the French occupation, it probably served

as a device to drown prisoners. The French reacted severely against

their own countrymen, particularly the Creoles. In order to levy

taxes for the support of his forces, Rochambeau ordered the five

reputedly richest men in Port-au-Prince to contribute a certain amount

of money. A wealthy man by the name of Fedon, who was one of the m

asked to contribute, refused to do so and was threated with the

death penalty for his refusal. Despite the threats, Fedon refused

to pay. He was convicted of treason and officially sentenced to death.

A last minute reprieve was given minutes after Fedon was hanged.15

The French were also faced with a lack of qualified commanding

generals. Many of the officers were more concerned with adding to

their personal fortunes; General Lavalette and General Rochambeau had

extensive property around Port-au-Prince, .although much of it was

destroyed by brigands. Vice-Admiral Latouche-Treville also owned

property there. General Leclerc complained to Napoleon that he had

been unable to attend to his own income and asked for the island of

Gonave.16



14Letter from Commandant Panisse, Port-au-Prince, October 27,
1802 (5 brumaire An X), Rochambeau Papers.

15Ph-Albert de Lattre, Campagnes des frangais a Saint-Domingue et
refutation des reproches faits au capitain-general Rochambeau (Pakis:
Locard, 1805), p. 121.

16Roussier, Lettres du general Leclerc, p. 147.









The pre-occupation of the commanding officers with their own affairs,

often drew them away from their military responsibilities. Thus,

General Fressinet complained to Rochambeau that General Quantin was

preoccupied with his personal business at the time that Saint-Marc,

where both generals were stationed, was actually under attack by

Dessalines.17 The example of the commanding officers was often followed

by their subordinates as well. Leclerc wrote to Napoleon as early as

June:

The Minister sends me the rejects of the army as far as officers
are concerned; he has sent me about 150 . How can one think
of sending men who have been sent away from their corps because
of defects in morality or ability in order to employ them as
commanders of cities or officers of the gendarmerie in a land
that does not know any God but money.18


The emergence of the organization of the brigand forces

There was no national organization of the brigand forces after the

surrender of Toussaint Louverture. By August several large bands had

been formed in the Cahos Mountains and other groups had formed in the

Plaisance region. Sans Souci became the leader there and by declaring

himself commander in chief tried to assert himself over other brigand

groups.

In the Cahos Mountains, brigands led by Larose, Leroux,and

Destrade tried to organize their bands into a larger force. Destrade

also declared himself commander in chief after the execution of Charles

Belair. Destrade, however, was never able to enforce his claim to the



17Letter from General de Brigade Fressinet, Saint-Marc, November
2, 1802 (11 brumaire An XI), Rochambeau Papers.

18Roussier, p. 163.





-67-


command of the brigands. The forces under Destrade were about 3,000

men. Including brigands outside of the Cahos Mountains, there were

about 5,000.19

General Dessalines actively pursued Charles Belair for the French,

and he later promptly executed Belair. Apparently, Dessalines was

afraid of the power and influence that Belair had over the local

population. Dessalines' loyalty was questioned, later, in a letter

from General Pageot to Rochambeau in which, on the basis of hearsay

evidence, a fisherman claimed that Dessalines had aroused all the

Negroes of the Artibonite region to combine with Charles Belair.20

However, Leclerc wrote to Napoleon on September 16, that Dessalines

had asked him for assurance that he would be welcomed in France if
21
the French were unable to remain on Saint-Domingue. In a letter to

Rochambeau on October 4, Dessalines protested his loyalty to the

French, but he did warn Rochambeau, "I see, General, that you have

opened your eyes to the position in which we find ourselves. And

all those who tell you that it is good, are enemies of tranquility."22

In the North, the commanding colonial Generals Petion, Christophe,

and Clairveaux repeatedly assured the French of their loyalty. The

colonial troops outnumbered the European forces considerably,

particularly since the larger part of the European armies was inca-



19Roussier, p. 255.

20Letter from General Pageot, Archaye, September 2, 1802 (15
fructidor An X), Rochambeau Papers.

21Roussier, p. 234.

22Letter from General de Division Dessalines, Grand Bois, October 4,
1802, Rochambeau Papers.









pacitated by yellow fever. After a revolt of some colonial troops,

the French, suspicious of the other colonial troops and their

intentions towards them, sent the larger part of the colonial regi-

ments out of Le Cap, while restrictions were imposed on the Negro

generals and their retinue. An attempt which failed was made by the

French to arrest the Generals Petion, Christophe, and Clairveaux. On

October 15, the generals and their troops joined the brigands. Clairveaux,

who was later caught by the French, was drowned with his troops in the

harbor of Le Cap.23

The actions of the French precipitated the defection of Dessalines.

Events in the Northern province, aroused the suspicions of the French

in the West and South as well. Dessalines, who had been sent into the

mountains in order to disarm the peasants there, had actually provided

them with arms. General Quantin, stationed at Saint-Marc, ordered

Chef de Brigade Andrieu to arrest Dessalines. Andrieux enlisted the

help of a priest, Abbe Videau, who invited Dessalines for a dinner at

Crete-a-Pierrot. When they sat down at the meal, a mulatto girl warned

Dessalines that the French had surrounded the house. Dessalines

was able to escape the French by jumping through a window. He joined
24.
the insurgent forces on October 17.2

Dessalines marched immediately for Verettes, where he tried to

surprise Repussard. He had already evacuated Verettes and left for

Saint-Marc because of a warning given by Abbe Videau, who had also



23Ardouin, V, 65.

24Madiou, II, 338.




-69-


fled immediately after the failure of the French to capture Dessalines.

Crete-a-Pierrot, which had been commanded by Andrieu, was also evacuated.

Dessalines then concentrated his troops for an attack on Saint-Marc

and Gona'ives. Gona'ives was eventually evacuated by the French, and

Saint-Marc was almost captured by a ruse of the brigands. With

the many retreating troops, a battalion of the Twelfth Colonial Demi-

Brigade also returned. The officers, with the exception of the

commanding officer, had been instructed to attack Saint-Marc from within.

Generals Fressinet and Quantin were warned of the plan by an informer.

A roll was called, and the battalion was surrounded by loyal troops

and ordered to surrender its arms. When the rebellious troops re-

fused to lay down their arms, General Quantin ordered the surrounding

troops to execute :the battalion. According to a report from
25
General Fressinet, only four men escaped alive from the massacre.25

An attack by Dessalines followed promptly; but he was unable to

dislodge the French from Saint-Marc, although he did cut all overland

communications with the rest of the island.

The failure of Dessalines to secure the West province for the

brigands, did not deter their forces. But internal dissent among the

brigands in the West, and the desire of Dessalines to become the

national leader of Saint-Domingue temporarily stopped further intensi-

fication of brigand activities against the French. The failure to

capture Saint-Marc meant that the French still controlled an important

harbor and the entrance of the Artibonite valley.



25Letter from G~ndral de Brigade Fressinet, Saint-Marc, October 31,
1802 (9 brumaire An XI), Rochambeau Papers.




-70-


The Death of General Leclerc


As early as March 25, Leclerc complained of his poor health to

Napoleon, and for the next few months he suffered intermittently from

a feverish condition.26 Leclerc left several times for the island

of Tortue, which was a place for recuperation of convalescing troops.

In late October, Leclerc came down with yellow fever and after several

days of suffering died on November 1, in Le Cap.27 Leclerc, who

had been able to give orders until a few hours before he died named

Rochambeau as his successor. Because Rochambeau was in Port-au-Prince

at the time, Prefet Colonial Daure became Interim Captain-General until

Rochambeau's arrival in Le Cap, where the latter was to be invested

with the powers of his office.

The problem of a successor had weighed heavily on Leclerc. In

his correspondence with Napoleon, he repeatedly had asked for a

successor to be appointed. He did not feel that any of the commanding

officers in Haiti were capable of succeeding him, and even about

Rochambeau he wrote:

The General Rochambeau, brave and a good commander in war
does not know anything when it comes to his appearance to
others or to tact in his behavior. Besides he lacks character
and allows himself to be led easily by others.28



26Roussier, p. 117.

27Prefet Colonial Daure to General Rochambeau, Le Cap, November
2, 1802 (11 brumaire An XI), Rochambeau Papers.

28Roussier, pp. 234-235.




-71-


In the same letter, Leclerc wrote his opinion of the other senior

officers in Haiti: "Boudet thinks only of money, Desbureaux is

afraid of dying, Quantin can not assemble two ideas, and Dugua is

too weak to direct." He finished the letter stating:

Rochambeau has served well here; it would not be necessary to
be dissatisfied with him and I would be at ease if before my
departure you give him a recognition of satisfaction and
place him in France or the colonies. I believe that he has
earned and appointment to the Legion of Honor.29

Napoleon never replied as to his intentions for a successor for

Leclerc. According to the instructions of Napoleon to Leclerc,

Rochambeau had been designated as second-in-command.30 The positive

response of Rochambeau to the increase of brigand activities in the

South and West had impressed Leclerc greatly and a month later he

wrote to Napoleon, "The Generaux de Division, whom you have sent

me are with the exception of Rochambeau very uncapable."31

The personal life of Leclerc has been the subject of much

scrutiny by the colony and by later historians. Leclerc's wife,

Pauline, who later gained much notoriety on account of her extra-

marital activities, found little excitement in Le Cap. Many rumors

existed about her lovers, the more important one being General Boyer,

later Chef d'Etat-Major.32 In the letters to Napoleon, Leclerc only

cites Pauline as being an excellent wife, and he repeatedly came to



29Roussier, pp. 234-235.

3See Chapter II.

31Roussier, p. 258.

32H. Pauleus Sannon, Le Cap Francais vu par une americaine (Port-
au-Prince: Aug. A Heraux, 1936), p. 11,




-72-


Tortue where Pauline resided with her son during the summer season.

The amorous adventures of Pauline were also probably hampered by the

fear of the diseases that rampaged in Le Cap and took such a high toll

of life.33

The death of General Leclerc came as a shock to the French colony.

The brigands used the confusion to launch an attack on Le Cap, which

was beaten back by the defenders although the city remained closely

surrounded by brigand forces. Yellow fever still took a high toll among

the men stationed in Le Cap, and communications with the rest of the

colony were maintained only by sea. The administrative and high military

personnel were retained in their operating functions by Prefet Daure

and General Clauzel who commanded the area until the arrival of General

Rochambeau. The colonists received the news of the change of commanders

with much optimism, and as the Haitian historian Ardouin noted: "With

the news, the heart of the colonists lit up with joy: Leclerc was

not the man that they needed, they thought; it was Rochambeau"34

Rochambeau had shown considerable ability in surpressing insurrections

in the South, while in earlier years of his career he had earned the

reputation of being a formidable supporter of the policies as they were

before 1789 towards the colony. He was faced with the considerable task

of restoring the colony to order, restoring the morale of the armed

forces, and with reviving a corrupt bureaucracy.



33Roussier, p. 17.

34Ardouin, V, 70.





-73-



The body of General Leclerc was sent to France with a fitting

large retinue and was buried with great fanfare. Pauline Leclerc

and her son, Peyre, the chief physician of the colony, and the members

of the staff returned to France on a ship that arrived in early January.

The news of the confirmation of Rochambeau's position by Napoleon

reached the island in February.














A New Agressive Policy


Although Leclerc died on November 1, Rochambeau did not receive

the news until November 6,and did not arrive in Le Cap until November 17.

After he was installed as Captain-General on his arrival by the Cure

Lecun,35 he soon brought about a change in the French military.tactics

against the brigands. Despite inadequate numbers of troops and an

attack by the brigands on Le Cap only two days after Rochambeau's

arrival, he ordered preparations made for an attack on Fort Dauphin.

General Lavalette and General Clauzel were sent to the city. General

Brunet was ordered to make preparations to restore French authority

in M'le-de-Saint Nicolas. The brigand Generals Christophe and Petion

were pushed back into the mountains, while Dessalines failed to

capture Saint-Marc and was defeated by Troy in his attempts to capture

Mirebalais.36

Yellow fever still raged, and in the West General Watrin, who had

been designated by Leclerc as Rochambeau's successor in that area, died

from the disease. Unrest among the remaining colonial troops also

persisted. Just before the death of Leclerc, orders were given to arrest

General Maurepas who was accused of supporting the brigands because some

of his men had defected with his knowledge. Maurepas, according to



35Ardouin, V, 73.

36Letter from Commandant Panisse, Port-au-Prince, November 22, 1802
(1 frimaire An X), Rochambeau Papers.





-75-


the Haitian historian Thomas Madiou, was drowned with his family
37
while being transported to France.37 Madiou also noted that this

act was on orders of the French leaders, but in a letter to General

Rochambeau by Vice-Admiral Latouche-Treville, the drowning was blamed

on the greed of some ship-officers who found money and other valuables

among Maurepas' possessions and baggage. The ships-officers were

punished for their actions.38

The social life of Rochambeau also found more expression in the

colony in comparison to that of Leclerc. Gala balls were given on

his arrival in Le Cap, and were continued regularly. An eyewitness

report of that period indicated:

Leclerc was not inclined to pleasure; he devoted most of
his time to administrative affairs . .But with his
successor, all changed; Mars bowed before Venus, the
feasts, the pleasures triumphed over the cares of war and
politics . The number of mistresses of Donatien de
Rochambeau were uncountable. His private life was a
scandal in all circumstances.39

Despite his private preoccupations, Rochambeau found time to

direct the affairs of the colony. He replaced a number of officials,

among them Prefet Colonial Daure, and he attempted to organize the

administrative sectors. The more drastic changes were in his policies

towards the native population. Negroes and mulattoes were limited,

if possible, in positions of power and influence; on a plantation, they

could only cultivate, while overseers, when possible, had to be



37Madiou, II, 348.

38Letter from Vice-Amiral Latouche-Treville, Le Cap, December 2,
1802 (11 frimaire An XI), Rochambeau Papers.

39Sannon, p. 7.









European. The National Guard was reorganized into units commanded by

European officers. In a letter on December 10, to the Minister of War,

Berthier, Rochambeau pointed out that the Creoles were dissatisfied

and that he was trying to force them to face the real danger to the

French.40 Rochambeau accomplished this by requiring them to attend to

their places and property, rather than to live on their rents.

Rochambeau also tried to cut off the foreign trade with the island.

One reason for coastal reoccupation was to cut off the brigands from

the sea in order to prevent them from receiving supplies from the

Americans and to some extent from the British. At the time of

Rochambeau's new command, supplies were adequate. By late December,

supplies were running low and he was forced to deal with foreign

interests again and lift the embargo on foreign goods. The French

were simply incapable of importing an adequate amount of provisions.41

The strategy of Rochambeau was different from that used by Leclerc.

Leclerc had concentrated on a few strongholds, from which with new

reinforcements he eventually hoped to be able to expand into the country-

side. Rochambeau preferred to concentrate on small objectives, although

he also regarded a large complement of forces necessary to hold the

colony. These ideas were reflected in a letter from Chef de Brigade

Alix who elaborated on this question. Alix felt that because the



40General Rochambeau to General Berthier, Le Cap, December 10,
1802 (20 frimaire An XI), Rochambeau Papers.

41General Rochambeau to Contre-Amiral Decres, Le Cap, December 17,
1802 (27 frimaire An XI), Rochambeau Papers.





-77-


conflict between black and white was unsurmountable, the only way

to reconquer the colony was by imposing slavery on the Negroes by

military rule.42


















































42Letter from Chef de Brigade Alix, Le Cap, October 18, 1802
(26 vendemiaire An XI), Rochambeau Papers.





-78-


The Change of Tactics


The successful military campaigns under Rochambeau were aided by

new reinforcements from France in the form of troops, supplies and

money. Leclerc's major problem in getting reinforcements was that

under favorable circumstances, a response from France might arrive

in three months. But unfavorable winds and administrative red tape

often delayed orders even longer. Rochambeau received only reinforce-

ments that had been requested in August when the news of the frighten-

ing mortality rate of troops had barely arrived in France. Money had

been supplied adequately since September, while on December 1,

Napoleon further authorized another 1,500,000 francs.43 Rochambeau

was also able to secure finances from the banks in Mexico and Curagap,

Napoleon on November 27 also despatched another 12,000 men, who
44
arrived in late January.

Rochambeau used reinforcements that arrived in November to

Launch the attack on Fort Dauphin and Mole-de-Saint Nicolas. .he

battles cost the lives of 1,500 men, however, and some casualties from

yellow fever still occurred. It was estimated by Rochambeau that

although the mortality rate was decreasing, about 2,000 out of 5,400

convalescing men would eventually die from this disease In late



43Napoleon, Correspondance . ., VIII, 119.

44Ibid., VIII, 112.




-79-


December, only 6,634 active European combatants remained. There

were about 5,000 men left in the colonial divisions and the National

Guard who consisted of Negroes and mulattoes commanded by white

officers.45

The French forces were aided by internal dissent among the brigands.

Larose and Dessalines were both eager to become leaders in the West,

and preferred to fight each other rather than the French.46 In the

North, Sans Souci tried to assert himself over Christophe and Petion.

Dessalines, after defeating Larose and subduing Sans Souci, was able

to have himself recognized as commander of the brigand forces. Only in

late December, when Dessalines became a nationally recognized commander,

did the brigand forces choose a flag. Prior to this time, they had
47
always flown the French revolutionary tri-color flag.47

The brigands in-December began a concerted campaign in the South,

which had returned to normal order after the disturbances in September

and October. On December 10, Leogane and Jacmel were attacked again

by Derance and his troops, but the French repulsed the attackers under

General Pageot. Petion, a few weeks later., met with the same fate

in the Cul-de-Sac region around Port-au-Prince.8 Dessalines, in

another attempt to secure a harbor, was beaten back from Saint-Marc.

The rebels were thus removed from the coastal areas by the French, but

they fully controlled the interior and the overland communication routes.



45General Rochambeau to Contre-Amiral Decres, Le Cap, December 8,
1802 (16 frimaire An XI), Rochambeau Papers.

46Madiou, II, 354.

47Ibid., II,.361.

48General Rochambeau to Contre-Amiral Decres, Le Cap, December 12,
1802 (20 frimaire An XI), Rochambeau Papers.















CHAPTER V


CONCLUSION


The occupation of Haiti by the French expedition under the

leadership of General Leclerc was divided into three periods. From

January to April, the island was invaded and occupied by the French

troops at the cost of a high rate of casualties. April to September

was a period during which the French established themselves on Saint-

Domingue, but the occupation cost an exceedingly high number of lives

of Europeans who died from yellow fever. From September to the end

of 1802, the French expedition virtually had to reestablish itself

and assert control over the native population. Altogether, the

French lost more than 10,000 men in one year, and only reinforcements

permitted the French to retain their hold on this island. Reinforcements

at first consisted of colonial troops who were secured through benevolent

treatment of their leaders by the French, but by October, most of

the colonial troops had defected.

The inability of the French to retain the friendship of the

native population of Saint-Domingue was'due to a desire of the

leaders of the expedition to return the colony to the regime under

which it was ruled prior to 1789. This condition was repugnant to

the Negroes and mulattoes who would have to return to their former

positions in society slavery. The rebellions by the native groups

could be attributed to a fear of French rule, which was encouraged









by the excessively cruel behavior the European commanders demonstrated

in the latter part of the year.

The months of September to December witnessed failure of the

French to restore the colony to the old order and to pacify the

native population. The aid sent by sea from outside Saint-Domingue

was highly important to the survival of the expedition because France

was the source of reinforcements. The Americans and English showed a

reluctance to cooperate with the French, and they actually impeded the

French expedition by aiding the brigands at times, or ignoring French

requests for supplies and provisions. The lack of reinforcements

stopped the French from using adequately provisioned and supplied

troops to enforce their control of Saint-Domingue.

The French expedition was sent out on the basis of faulty

intelligence and information. The French expected to land without

opposition, but found immediate opposition. The military ability of
A \
the brigands was underestimated; the campaign of Crete-a-Pierrot showed

that the rebels were able to offer stiff resistance to the European

troops. The tactics of the French, which were according to European

rules, were not suited to the hot climate and the mountainous country.

The French were also unfamiliar with much of the territory they fought

in, because no adequate information was available on the geography

of the interior part of the island. The deadly effects of yellow fever

had not been adequately anticipated, while no action was taken to

lessen the effects of the disease. The supplies and provisions arrived

only sporadically, and anticipated cooperation from America materialized

in the form of resistance towards the French expedition.





-82-


General Rochambeau played an important role in Haiti. Because of

the high position he held, Rochambeau was able to influence decisions

on the conduct of policy towards the inhabitants of the island.

Rochambeau wanted a return to the situation as it was under the ancien

regime. By ignoring or persecuting the Negro and mulatto opponents

of this policy, Rochambeau encouraged resistance to the expedition.

Able military leadership by Rochambeau helped to keep the French in

Saint-Domingue, but Rochambeau was unable to do more than recover the

coastal areas. The lack of moderation of Rochambeau's views hurt the

recovery of Saint-Domingue by France. Rochambeau appears to have

been more capable than any of the other ranking commanders. Leclerc's

letters bear witness to this fact. While the North province suffered

under revolts, Rochambeau kept control with a minimum of trouble in the

South and West.















BIBLIOGRAPHY


Documents

Brotonne, Leonce de (ed.). Dernieres lettres inedites de Napoleon ler.
2 vols. Paris: Honore Champion, 1903.

France, Archives Nationales, Section Outre-Mer, Bibliotheque Moreau
de Saint-Mery, deuxieme serie. University of Florida microfilm
copy, Gainesville, Florida.

series AF IV, dossier 1213. University of Florida
microfilm copy, Gainesville, Florida.

serie AD VII, dossiers 17, 18, 19, 20, 24-33, 47.
University of Florida microfilm copy, Gainesville, Florida.

Haiti, Archives Nationales, Registre de Port-au-Prince. Port-au-
Prince. 1802. University of Florida microfilm copy, Gainesville,
Florida.

Napoleon I. Correspondence de Napoleon ler; public par ordre de
l'Empereur Napoleon III. 32 vols. Paris: Henri Plon, 1858-
1870.

Rochambeau, Donatien Marie Joseph de Vimeur, vicomte de. "Papers,
1802-1803." Unpublished papers at the University of Florida
Libraries, Gainesville, Florida.

Roussier, Paul (ed.). Lettres du General Leclerc. Paris: Societe
de l'Histoire des Colonies Francaises, 1937.


Books

Adams, Henry. History of the United States during the Administration
of Thomas Jefferson. 9 vols. New York: Charles Scribner, 1891.

Ardouin, Beaubrun. Etudes sur l'histoire d'Ha'iti. 11 vols. Port-
au-Prince: Dalencour, 1959. (First published in 1853).

Bellagarde, Dantes. Histoire du people ha'itien: 1492-1952. Port-
au-Prince: Collection du Tricinquantenaire de l'Independance
d'Haiti, 1953.

Bissainthe, Max. Dictionnaire de bibliographie haitienne. Washington:
The Scarecrow Press, 1951.


-83-





-84-



Cabon, Adolphe. Histoire d'Ha'iti. 3 vols. Port-au-Prince: Petit
Seminaire Collige Saint-Martial, 1937-1941.

Chazotte, Peter Stephen. Historical Sketches of the Revolutions, and
The Foreign and Civil War in the Island of St. Domingo, with a
Narrative of the Entire Massacre of the White Population of the
Island: Eyewitness Report. New York: Applegate, 1840.

Cobban, Alfred. A History of Modern France. Vol. II. 1799-1945.
Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1961.

Davis, H. P. Black Democracy: The Story of Haiti. rev. ed. New York:
Dodge Publishing Co., 1936.

Descourtilz, M. E. Voyages d'un naturaliste en Haiti, 1799-1803. Ed.
by Jacques Boulanger. Paris: Henri Plon, 1935.

Duvivier, Ulrick. Bibliographie general et methodique d'Ha*iti. Port-
au-Prince: Imprimerie de l'Etat, 1941.

Gilbert, C.N.P. Histoire medical de 1'armee frangaise a Saint-
Domingue en l'an dix ou memoire sur la fievre jaune. Paris:
Imprimerie de Guilleminet, 1803.

James, C.L.R., The Black Jacobins. 2nd rev. ed. New York: Vintage
Books, 1963.

Justin, Placide. Histoire politique et statistique de l'le d'Hayti,
Saint-Domingue. Paris: Briere, 1826.

Lacroix, Pamphile de. M4moires pour servir a l'histoire de la revolution
de Saint-Domingue. 2 vols. Paris: Pillet Aine, 1819.

Lattre, Ph-Albert de. Campagnes des franpais a Saint-Domingue et
refutation des reproches faits au capitain-gendral Rochambeau.
Paris: Locard, 1805.

Laujon, A.P.M. Precis historiques de la derniere revolution de Saint-
Domingue. 2 vols. Paris: Delafolie, 1802.

Laurent, Gerard M. Pages d'histoire d'Ha'iti. Port-au-Prince:
Imprimerie La Phalange, 1960.

Lefebvre, Georges. Napoleon. 4th rev. ed. Paris: Presses Universitaires
de France, 1953.

Leger, J. N. Haiti: Son histoire et ses detracteurs. New York: The
Neale Publishing Co., 1907.


Leomonnier-Delafosse, .J...... Second champagne de Saint-Domingue, du ler
decembre 1803 au 15 juillet 1809; preceded de souvenirs historiques
et succincts de la premiere champagne, expedition du general en
chef Leclerc, du ler decembre 1801 au ler decembre 1803. Le
Havre: H. Brindeau'et Co., 1846.





-85-


Leyburn, J. G. The Haitian People. New Haven: Yale University Press,
1941.

Logan, Rayford W. The Diplomatic Relations of the United States with
Haiti, 1776-1891. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina
Press, 1941.

Madiou, Thomas. Histoire d'Haiti. 3 vols., 2nd ed. Port-au- Prince:
Department de l'Instruction Publique, 1922-1923.

Mahan, A.T. The Influence of Sea Power upon the French Revolution
and Empire: 1793-1812. 2 vols. Boston; Little, Brown and
Co., 1892.

Metral, A. Histoire des francais a Saint-Domingue sous le consulate de
Napoleon Bonaparte. Paris: Faujat Aine, 1825.

Moreau-de-Jonnes, Alexandre. Observations pour servir'a l'histoire
de la fievre jaune des Antilles. Paris: Imprimerie Mignuet, 1808.

Moreau de Saint-Mery, M.L.E. Description topographique, physique,
civil, politique, et historique de la parties franchise de l'isle
Saint-Domingue. 3 vols. new ed. by Blanche Maurel. Paris:
Society de 1'Histoire des Colonies Frangaises, 1958.

Nemours, C. Histoire militaire de la guerre d'independance de Saint-
Domingue. 2 vols. Paris: Berger-Levrault, 1925-1928.

Poyen, H. de. Histoire militaire de la revolution de Saint-Domingue.
Paris: Berger-Levrault, 1899.

Rusch, Erwin. Die Revolution von Saint Domingue. Hamburg: Friederichsen,
de Gruyter & Co. m.b.H., 1930.

Sannon, H. Pauleus. Le Cap Francais vu par une americaine, Port-
au-Prince: Aug. A. Heraux, 1936.

Six,Georges. Dictionnaire biographique des generaux et amiraux
franpais de la revolution et de l'empire: 1792-1814. 2 vols.
Paris: Georges Saffroy, editeur, 1934.

Les generaux de la revolution et de l'empire. Paris: Bordas,
1947.

Stoddard, T. Lothrop. The French Revolution in San Domingo. Boston:
Riverside Press Cambridge, 1914.

Thiers, M. A. Histoire du consulate et de l'empire. 20 vols. Paris:
Paulin, 1845-1862.

Villat, Louis. La revolution et 1'empire: 1789-1815. 2 vols. 2nd
ed. Paris: Les Presses Universitaires de France, 1940.









Periodicals


Adams, Henri. "Napoleon ler et Saint-Domingue," Revue Historique,
XXIX (1884), 92-130.

Lokke, Carl Ludwig, (ed.). "The Leclerc Instructions," Journal of
Negro History, X (January, 1925), 80-98.

S"Jefferson and the Leclerc Expedition," American Historical
Review, XXXIII (January, 1928), 322-328.

Roussier, Paul. "Lettres du general Leclerc," Revue d'Histoire des
Colonies, XXIX (1936), 101-152.









BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH


Herman R. DeHoop was born on January 18, 1944, in Heerenveen,

Netherlands. He attended public schools in the Netherlands in Aruba

and Canada. He was graduated from Gainesville High School, Gainesville,

Florida in 1960. Mr. DeHoop entered the University of Florida in

September of that same year. In April, 1964, he was awarded a

Bachelor of Arts degree in History. From September, 1964 to January,

1965, he worked as a graduate assistant in the Center for Latin

American Studies.

Mr. DeHoop is a member of the American Historical Association

and Phi Alpha Theta Honorary History Fraternity.








This thesis was prepared under the direction of the chairman

of the candidate's supervisory committee and has been approved by

all members of that committee. It was submitted to the Dean of

the College of Arts and Sciences and to the Graduate Council, and

was approved as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

degree of Master of Arts.






August 14, 1965







Dean, College of Arts and Sciences










Dean, Graduate School

Supervis ry Committee:



Chairman





QII




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs