There are several documents concerning a damage caused by Capt. Laborde or his ship to another ship at the port of St Pierre, Martinique, illustrating how such damages were compensated: The Lieutenant Général of the French Admiralty in Martinique passed a sentence condemning Capt. Labored to pay for the damages. However, instead of the amount he had to pay being decided by the Lieutenant Général, it was decided by two other shipmasters who, as experts, assessed the damage.

Indenture (B45): Three men signed an indenture with Capt. Laborde agreeing to serve an (yet) unknown master for three years in return for their passage to Martinique on board the ‘Amphitrion’. During that time they were not allowed to change their employer or place of residence without permission and the captain was to sell this indenture to an employer at Martinique (HCA 32/94/3/B45). An official receipt confirms their arrival in St Pierre, Martinique (HCA 32/94/3/B47).

In a letter to the secretary of the Comte de Maurepas, a royal notary at Martinique requested permission to leave the island in order to move to New Orleans, Mississippi. He praised the addressee as the ‘tutelary deity’ (“le genie Tutelaire”) of the colonies and asked him to present a petition to the Comte, who was minister of the royal household and navy and therefore administered the navy, colonies and seaborne trade. The letter’s author complained about the infertility of Martinique’s soil consisting of tuff (a rock composed of volcanic ash) and the strain it put on the farmers (“Je ne Suis pas le Seul oprimé par La Sterilité des terres; Il y en à un Nombre d’autres qui Gemissonts sous Lepoid dela même Infortune …”).

This letter was accompanied by the actual petition to the Comte revealing the authors true source of discontent (HCA 32/94/3/D60): He was not allowed to take his slaves on board a ship to New Orleans, but was told to sell them and buy new ones after his arrival. In his petition he argues that it should be possible for him, as their owner, to take his slaves from one province of the kingdom to another. What is striking is the stark contrast between his insistence on owning humans and his lament about the perceived restrictions of his own freedom: The author wrote that - while providence granted him slaves (“quelques N*****, que La Providence luy à donné”) -  denying him to transport his slaves was depriving him of his liberty as a loyal subject and good citizen (“Comme un fidel Sujet, Comme un Bon Citoyen, qui à Remply tous Ses devoir dans La societé”). He then continued by arguing that freedom was the most precious gift that nature granted him (“de toute saliberté; qui En Effet Est leplus prétieux don quil ayt Recu dela Nature”), before underlining this statement by emphasizing that after all they were no longer living in the dark era of serfdom (“Joint à cela que Nous ne Sommes plus dans ces Siècles Reculés, ou les serfs Corporels et Gens de Mainmorte faisoent partie duCorps dela Nation.”) The author finally claims that the suffered injustice caused him tears (“Conbien Ce Refus luy à cause de Larmes.”).

In conclusion, his notion of freedom as a subject and citizen seems to include the right to own slaves. 

(all quotes from p.2, HCA 32/94/3/60)