Sundry Free Moors Act Misconception

Fifty years following the passage of the Negro Act of 1740, and just four years after the signing of the 1786 Treaty of Peace and Friendship, a group of Moroccan nationals submitted a petition to the South Carolina House of Representatives[cite: 16].

Understanding the true nature, scope, and legal standing of this 1790 petition is essential to dispelling widespread legal misconceptions regarding state legislation versus international law[cite: 16].

Historical Context of the 1790 Petition

The Petitioners: Francis, Daniel, Hammond, and Samuel submitted a petition to the South Carolina legislature on behalf of themselves and their wives: Fatima, Flora, Sarah, and Clarinda[cite: 16].

Status & Captivity: The men were citizens of Morocco who were taken as prisoners of war[cite: 16]. Pursuant to the Treaty of Peace and Friendship, they were delivered to a European captain[cite: 16]. However, rather than returning them safely to Morocco, the captain unlawfully sold them into slavery within South Carolina[cite: 16].

The Legal Assertion: The petitioners asserted that as Moroccan subjects, they were not subject to statutory slave codes, specifically "An Act for the better Ordering and Governing of Negroes and other Slaves."[cite: 16]

Legal Realities & Widespread Misconceptions

A persistent misconception among many Moors is the belief that the "Sundry Free Moors Act" was ratified into binding law and that it holds enforceable legal standing today[cite: 16]. The historic record demonstrates otherwise[cite: 16]:

The petition never resulted in a enacted statutory law—it served strictly as an advisory opinion[cite: 16]. Furthermore, even if it had been enacted into local law, it was exclusively a South Carolina legislative matter and possessed no jurisdiction or legal force outside the state boundaries of South Carolina[cite: 16].

Coincidentally, the year 1790 also marked the development of the early federal United States immigration and naturalization acts, highlighting the evolving framework of citizenship and state jurisdiction during that era[cite: 16].

        The Sundry Free Moors petition was an advisory legislative response—never ratified into enforceable law, nor applicable beyond South Carolina's state borders[cite: 16].
    

Treaty Breaches & Primary Document Access

Although the Treaty of Peace and Friendship is frequently referenced as one of the longest unbroken treaties in United States history, the historical account of the 1790 petition demonstrates clear breaches[cite: 16]. Despite their acknowledged status as Moroccan citizens, these individuals were not repatriated to Morocco as required under international treaty terms, proving the treaty was violated at least eight times in this single instance[cite: 16].

View Sundry Free Moors Act PDF Document

Proper analysis requires distinguishing between unratified state legislative petitions and true sovereign status derived from international law and self-determination[cite: 15, 16].

Knowledge of Truth sets the standard of law

Return to Misconceptions & Research

Explore additional legal codes, historical records, and common misconceptions regarding national status[cite: 15, 16].

Back to Misconceptions View Nationality Declaration