Ottoman Algeria in Western Diplomatic History with ... - Bibliothèque

Moreover, clause XI of the same treaty stipulated that “no subjects of
His said Majesty shall be bought or sold, or made slaves, in any part of the
Kingdom of Algiers, upon any pretence whatsoever.” This clause, in fact,
ended enslavement of English captives at Algiers—which was not the case for
Algerian captives in England. It also provided for redemption “of His subjects
now in slavery” on the condition that “as reasonable a price as may be” would
be agreed “with their patrons or masters, for their redemption, without obliging
the said patrons or masters, against their wills, to set any at liberty.” The treaty,
however, did not mention exchange even though “thousands of Muslims were
held prisoners or enslaved by … England, Ireland and Wales.” 73 The chance of
exchanging Muslim captives in the British Isles seems to be null because they
were either sold as slaves in “ports stretching from Cadiz to Genoa,” or were
executed as pirates. Others simply disappeared when they “were hauled to
Portsmouth or Exeter or London as captives and slaves, to languish in jails, to
stand trial in southwestern courts, to beg for succor or to disappear into the
underworld of the growing metropolis.” 74
Despite the tragic fate of the
Algerian captives, inequalities, and irregularities, not to say crimes, that were
often committed against them, the different bilateral treaties providing for
redemption resisted over time and functioned well. One may even be tempted
to qualify them as ‘one-way’ treaties, and indeed they were so, because they
profited more to Christian captives than to Muslim ones. Despite this privileged
treatment, the Christian powers were never satisfied and blamed Algiers for
73 Rojas, “Insults Unpunished,” p. 164.
74 Matar, “Britain and Barbary,” pp. 3-6, 9; Barrows, “Review.”
134