Colonial America in 1793-94, Many

Colonial America

In 1793-94, many backcountry Southerners from Georgia collaborated with the French government in a plan to liberate Florida from Spanish rule even though the United States government was at peace with Spain. Since the Revolutionary Legion of America, which was formed as a consequence, was working against the wishes and national interests of the United States, the events that took place in 1793-94 can, prima facie, be used to raise doubts over Southern patriotism and loyalty during that period. However, as this paper will attempt to demonstrate, a closer analysis of Georgia's history will reveal that the events of 1793-94 were motivated more by a need to secure local interests rather than any desire to subvert the Federal government.

Local interests often conflict with national interests in the affairs of men and government. However, whenever such conflicts take place, patriotism and civic duty are expected to lead to national interests superceding local ones. Viewed from such a perspective, it would indeed be possible to call into question Georgia's patriotism and loyalty to the newly formed United States of America. However, as Bertram Wyatt-Brown points out in his 1986 work, Honor and Violence in the Old South, the southern idea of patriotism was vested more in a place, a people, and a past, rather than upon abstract concepts of democracy and freedom (Morris, 2003). Thus, perhaps the events of 1793-94 are best analyzed by first examining the implications, if any, of Wyatt-Brown's observation.

In fact, Georgia's active involvement in the French plan to liberate Florida from Spanish rule is better understood when placed in the context of Georgia's political and cultural history. for, it must be remembered that the colony of Georgia had been chartered in the classical tradition. In other words, when James Oglethorpe was seeking a charter to found Georgia, his vision for the colony had been based on the Greek and Roman colonial tradition of "planting (colonies) on the frontiers of their new empires" that would give a new strength to the whole. Therefore, Oglethorpe conceived Georgia's role to be that of a provider of raw materials, a military buffer, and a population overflow valve (Goon, 2002).

In the 1790s, Georgia was plagued by problems of runaway slaves to Florida, Indian attacks that were incited and aided by the Spanish, and dissatisfaction over the Creek lands retroceded by the Treaty of 1790 (Morris, 2003). These problems, it can be inferred, affected not just immediate local interests but also Georgia's perception of its very role as a buffer colony or state. True, the events of 1793-94 were the result of the efforts of local people and not the official governments of Georgia or South Carolina. Nevertheless, Georgia's political and cultural tradition helps place the underlying motivations behind the plan to liberate Florida in clearer perspective because the local citizenry of Georgia were steeped in the virtues of the classical tradition through an education system that embraced the works of Cicero, Seneca, and Plutarch (Goon, 2002).

In fact, Oglethorpe himself had played a central role in ensuring that the people of Georgia understood his vision for the colony as a provider of raw materials, an economically and militarily self-sufficient buffer state, and a population overflow valve. This is evident in the efforts he took to publish his views in several pamphlets, including a volume of selected tracts relating to Georgia's colonization and its motivations. Oglethorpe's mission was further aided by the then prevalent practice of public debate, which took place usually through essays that were published by the local newspaper. This practice, as Peter Gay asserted, assured that the people of Georgia were exposed to and influenced by the classical allegories that were dominant in that period (Goon, 2002).

Several other principles of Georgia's charter serve to further explain Georgia's ready compliance with Edmund Charles Genet's plan to liberate Florida from Spanish rule. For instance, one of Georgia's founding principles had been the maintenance of citizen-based militias, which Oglethorpe had felt was a necessary precaution against any future likelihood of an army led revolt (Goon, 2002). Unfortunately, this principle later placed Georgia in a position where it had to rely on its own meager militia for defending its interests against both the Spanish and the Indians. Georgia's situation was only exacerbated by Washington's refusal to assist Georgia in removing the Indian population from its borders, and his promise that the government would not occupy Indian lands without tribal consent. To make matters worse, the 1790 Treaty of New York invalidated all earlier treaties made between the Creeks and the Georgia government and actually returned certain lands that were already occupied by Anglo-Americans to the Creeks (Morris, 2003). Nor surprisingly, therefore, the Georgians were more than ready to protect their own interests by falling in with the plans of the French Revolutionary government to liberate Florida.

Georgia had also a long tradition of expecting that the colony would be economically self-sufficient through adopting the principles of mercantile economics, preferably at the expense of Spain (Goon, 2002). Thus, the Georgians were extremely envious of the Spanish monopoly of the southern postwar Indian trade. In fact, it is more than evident that the backcountry Southerners, especially Samuel Hammond, were as motivated by the lure of destroying this trade monopoly, as they were by the prospect of regaining their land or solving their problems vis-a-vis the Spanish and Indian antagonism (Morris, 2003).