The 1805 census implies the population fell by a third

The chapter assembles the accounting of cost. Judged from the Haitian census, the population fell by about a third across the revolution, and some contemporaries thought that much had already gone by 1798. Refugees are hard to count because many exiles returned and fled again, but as a share of total population they were roughly twice the proportion of American Loyalists and almost ten times that of French emigres, and the property they abandoned was valued by the French government at 272 million dollars, far above any other exile group. The three colonial powers lost close to 70,000 European soldiers and many thousands of seamen. Newly independent Haiti exported about a quarter of what the colony had. The chapter nonetheless calls it bogus to describe the change as the wealthiest colony becoming the poorest state, since living standards for most inhabitants almost certainly rose. Where this account departs from the standard one: Rejects the familiar characterisation of the revolution as the transformation of the Americas' wealthiest colony into its poorest state.

Lartigue reported to Ferrand that four vessels had just sailed from St Thomas for the Cap, Les Cayes and Jacmel, and that the traffic continued without fear of or regard for the general's proclamation, issued three months earlier, condemning to death merchants who traded with Haiti. He noted that he had done his part, that the order had been printed and displayed in the town and was well known to merchants and sailors, and that those with dealings among the revolted were not intimidated. Ships left daily with supplies of every kind. Gaffield uses this as the empirical core of her case against the isolation thesis. She adds a legal complication: in three Admiralty court decisions between 1804 and 1806 the British had ruled that arms and ammunition were contraband but that neutral trade in provisions with a belligerent was lawful, so Lartigue's definition of illegality was not shared by the courts that mattered. Where this account departs from the standard one: Against the long-standing view that the Atlantic powers collectively quarantined Haiti after 1804, Gaffield shows trade running openly and often lawfully throughout the period of diplomatic non-recognition.

The United States had prohibited the import of enslaved people from abroad in 1808. When ships from Cuba began arriving at New Orleans the following spring, Governor William Claiborne ordered the enslaved passengers held on board and the vessels impounded, which also trapped the clothing, furniture and small stocks of goods the families had brought with them. Petitions went to Washington within days. On 28 June 1809 the House of Representatives took up a bill remitting the fines and penalties incurred. Thomas Newton argued for it in the language of hospitality, quoting Dido receiving Aeneas after the fall of Troy, saying that one who has known misfortune knows how to relieve it in others. Nathaniel Macon of North Carolina and John Montgomery of Maryland backed the bill on a colder calculation, that the newcomers would never move on unless they kept the property that was their only means of leaving. It passed without a single vote against.

Girard accepts that Dessalines did not personally capture the Belairs and then shows what he did afterwards. He wrote to Leclerc stating that he had undeniable evidence that Charles Belair had led the latest insurrection and asking that Charles and his wife be punished. Both were sentenced to death and executed. The article treats this as one instance of a habit rather than an aberration. Denouncing rivals as traitors so that the French would execute or deport them was so common in his correspondence of that year that it amounts to a pattern, and such denunciations were frequent in the intensely competitive politics of the revolution. Personal animus was probably also involved, since Belair had served under his direct command in the spring campaign and had used his relationship with Louverture to appeal against and ignore his orders. Corroborated by 2 works in the library. Where this account departs from the standard one: This directly contradicts the reading in de Young's 1960 article, also in this batch, which argues that Dessalines was faced with a fait accompli and did not seek Belair's death.