[DiogenesLamp]

“domestic insurrections” likely refers to all of the various factions that the Royal government was stirring up against the colonial rebels, not just one. This would have included the slaves responding the Dunmore’s, Mohawk and Seneca Indians being recruited by Loyalists up in New York, and Loyalist militias throughout the colonies.

Your thinking carries a lot more weight with me than does BroJoeK's. You may very well be correct on this point, but I have to admit to just a little bit of guilty pleasure in needling him with this. :)

But the person I recall arguing with him about this previously was making a pretty good argument that "Domestic Insurrection" very much encompassed slave revolts. By your response I must conclude it wasn't you.

Good to hear from you again.

[Pelham]

The fear of slave revolts in the American colonies/states probably didn’t amount to much until after Haiti. Haiti being the near genocide of French whites and mulattos. But that wasn’t until 1791.

There had been the Stono Rebellion of 1739 in South Carolina but I doubt that the Continental Congress had that in mind.

The Nat Turner rebellion didn’t happen until 1831. That one left the lasting fear of a Haiti style revolt.