Thus, a 1714 emancipation plan had recommended that the slaves who desired freedom were to be deported. In this context, Noah Webster, suggested in 1793 that freed slaves could be provided with the status of free tenants and shifted to available land, within the US. In contrast to this, St. George Tucker had recommended the enactment of severe laws that would compel freed Negroes to leave the US rather than be subject to these laws (Kanstroom, 2007, p. 84).
During the 19th century there were a number of deportation schemes. In fact, it was believed that deportation would induce whites to free the slaves. The elimination of slavery would result in white immigrants who would prove to be much better workers. Several people held the optimistic opinion that slaves after being freed and deported would become happy, free, and useful (Kanstroom, 2007, p. 85).
Additionally, in the mid-19th century, laws were enacted in the US, which excluded coolies. This initiated a process that gradually led to the exclusion of each and every Chinese laborer. Thereafter, this process resulted in the federal deportation system. These laws effectively demonstrated the ubiquitous legacy of slavery and emancipation. They also illustrated the racialized underpinnings of the immigration and deportation structures of the US. Those who subsequently examined the Chinese deportation laws, discerned a clear association between the previous removal regimes and Chinese deportation (Kanstroom, 2007, p. 21). As such there was a similarity between Chinese deportation and indigenous deportations that had taken place in the past.
These removal regimes, per se, had formed a theoretical model for the emerging deportation system of the 1890s. In this context, the US Supreme Court stated in Fong Yue Ting v United States that the expulsion of a specific race of people was an act of despotism. In addition, it opined that deportation law made the liberty of one person subject to the total control of