Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Black Confederates
phxnews ^ | January 8, 2004 | Charles Goodson

Posted on 01/08/2004 6:40:27 PM PST by stainlessbanner

Black Confederates Why haven't we heard more about them? National Park Service historian, Ed Bearrs, stated, "I don't want to call it a conspiracy to ignore the role of Blacks both above and below the Mason-Dixon line, but it was definitely a tendency that began around 1910" Historian, Erwin L. Jordan, Jr., calls it a "cover-up" which started back in 1865. He writes, "During my research, I came across instances where Black men stated they were soldiers, but you can plainly see where 'soldier' is crossed out and 'body servant' inserted, or 'teamster' on pension applications." Another black historian, Roland Young, says he is not surprised that blacks fought. He explains that "some, if not most, Black southerners would support their country" and that by doing so they were "demonstrating it's possible to hate the system of slavery and love one's country." This is the very same reaction that most African Americans showed during the American Revolution, where they fought for the colonies, even though the British offered them freedom if they fought for them.

It has been estimated that over 65,000 Southern blacks were in the Confederate ranks. Over 13,000 of these, "saw the elephant" also known as meeting the enemy in combat. These Black Confederates included both slave and free. The Confederate Congress did not approve blacks to be officially enlisted as soldiers (except as musicians), until late in the war. But in the ranks it was a different story. Many Confederate officers did not obey the mandates of politicians, they frequently enlisted blacks with the simple criteria, "Will you fight?" Historian Ervin Jordan, explains that "biracial units" were frequently organized "by local Confederate and State militia Commanders in response to immediate threats in the form of Union raids". Dr. Leonard Haynes, an African-American professor at Southern University, stated, "When you eliminate the black Confederate soldier, you've eliminated the history of the South."

As the war came to an end, the Confederacy took progressive measures to build back up its army. The creation of the Confederate States Colored Troops, copied after the segregated northern colored troops, came too late to be successful. Had the Confederacy been successful, it would have created the world's largest armies (at the time) consisting of black soldiers,even larger than that of the North. This would have given the future of the Confederacy a vastly different appearance than what modern day racist or anti-Confederate liberals conjecture. Not only did Jefferson Davis envision black Confederate veterans receiving bounty lands for their service, there would have been no future for slavery after the goal of 300,000 armed black CSA veterans came home after the war.

1. The "Richmond Howitzers" were partially manned by black militiamen. They saw action at 1st Manassas (or 1st Battle of Bull Run) where they operated battery no. 2. In addition two black "regiments", one free and one slave, participated in the battle on behalf of the South. "Many colored people were killed in the action", recorded John Parker, a former slave.

2. At least one Black Confederate was a non-commissioned officer. James Washington, Co. D 35th Texas Cavalry, Confederate States Army, became it's 3rd Sergeant. Higher ranking black commissioned officers served in militia units, but this was on the State militia level (Louisiana)and not in the regular C.S. Army.

3. Free black musicians, cooks, soldiers and teamsters earned the same pay as white confederate privates. This was not the case in the Union army where blacks did not receive equal pay. At the Confederate Buffalo Forge in Rockbridge County, Virginia, skilled black workers "earned on average three times the wages of white Confederate soldiers and more than most Confederate army officers ($350- $600 a year).

4. Dr. Lewis Steiner, Chief Inspector of the United States Sanitary Commission while observing Gen. "Stonewall" Jackson's occupation of Frederick, Maryland, in 1862: "Over 3,000 Negroes must be included in this number [Confederate troops]. These were clad in all kinds of uniforms, not only in cast-off or captured United States uniforms, but in coats with Southern buttons, State buttons, etc. These were shabby, but not shabbier or seedier than those worn by white men in the rebel ranks. Most of the Negroes had arms, rifles, muskets, sabers, bowie-knives, dirks, etc.....and were manifestly an integral portion of the Southern Confederate Army."

5. Frederick Douglas reported, "There are at the present moment many Colored men in the Confederate Army doing duty not only as cooks, servants and laborers, but real soldiers, having musket on their shoulders, and bullets in their pockets, ready to shoot down any loyal troops and do all that soldiers may do to destroy the Federal government and build up that of the rebels."

6. Black and white militiamen returned heavy fire on Union troops at the Battle of Griswoldsville (near Macon, GA). Approximately 600 boys and elderly men were killed in this skirmish.

7. In 1864, President Jefferson Davis approved a plan that proposed the emancipation of slaves, in return for the official recognition of the Confederacy by Britain and France. France showed interest but Britain refused.

8. The Jackson Battalion included two companies of black soldiers. They saw combat at Petersburg under Col. Shipp. "My men acted with utmost promptness and goodwill...Allow me to state sir that they behaved in an extraordinary acceptable manner."

9. Recently the National Park Service, with a recent discovery, recognized that blacks were asked to help defend the city of Petersburg, Virginia and were offered their freedom if they did so. Regardless of their official classification, black Americans performed support functions that in today's army many would be classified as official military service. The successes of white Confederate troops in battle, could only have been achieved with the support these loyal black Southerners.

10. Confederate General John B. Gordon (Army of Northern Virginia) reported that all of his troops were in favor of Colored troops and that it's adoption would have "greatly encouraged the army". Gen. Lee was anxious to receive regiments of black soldiers. The Richmond Sentinel reported on 24 Mar 1864, "None will deny that our servants are more worthy of respect than the motley hordes which come against us." "Bad faith [to black Confederates] must be avoided as an indelible dishonor."

11. In March 1865, Judah P. Benjamin, Confederate Secretary Of State, promised freedom for blacks who served from the State of Virginia. Authority for this was finally received from the State of Virginia and on April 1st 1865, $100 bounties were offered to black soldiers. Benjamin exclaimed, "Let us say to every Negro who wants to go into the ranks, go and fight, and you are free Fight for your masters and you shall have your freedom." Confederate Officers were ordered to treat them humanely and protect them from "injustice and oppression".

12. A quota was set for 300,000 black soldiers for the Confederate States Colored Troops. 83% of Richmond's male slave population volunteered for duty. A special ball was held in Richmond to raise money for uniforms for these men. Before Richmond fell, black Confederates in gray uniforms drilled in the streets. Due to the war ending, it is believed only companies or squads of these troops ever saw any action. Many more black soldiers fought for the North, but that difference was simply a difference because the North instituted this progressive policy more sooner than the more conservative South. Black soldiers from both sides received discrimination from whites who opposed the concept .

13. Union General U.S. Grant in Feb 1865, ordered the capture of "all the Negro men before the enemy can put them in their ranks." Frederick Douglass warned Lincoln that unless slaves were guaranteed freedom (those in Union controlled areas were still slaves) and land bounties, "they would take up arms for the rebels".

14. On April 4, 1865 (Amelia County, VA), a Confederate supply train was exclusively manned and guarded by black Infantry. When attacked by Federal Cavalry, they stood their ground and fought off the charge, but on the second charge they were overwhelmed. These soldiers are believed to be from "Major Turner's" Confederate command.

15. A Black Confederate, George _____, when captured by Federals was bribed to desert to the other side. He defiantly spoke, "Sir, you want me to desert, and I ain't no deserter. Down South, deserters disgrace their families and I am never going to do that."

16. Former slave, Horace King, accumulated great wealth as a contractor to the Confederate Navy. He was also an expert engineer and became known as the "Bridge builder of the Confederacy." One of his bridges was burned in a Yankee raid. His home was pillaged by Union troops, as his wife pleaded for mercy.

17. As of Feb. 1865 1,150 black seamen served in the Confederate Navy. One of these was among the last Confederates to surrender, aboard the CSS Shenandoah, six months after the war ended. This surrender took place in England.

18. Nearly 180,000 Black Southerners, from Virginia alone, provided logistical support for the Confederate military. Many were highly skilled workers. These included a wide range of jobs: nurses, military engineers, teamsters, ordnance department workers, brakemen, firemen, harness makers, blacksmiths, wagonmakers, boatmen, mechanics, wheelwrights, etc. In the 1920'S Confederate pensions were finally allowed to some of those workers that were still living. Many thousands more served in other Confederate States.

19. During the early 1900's, many members of the United Confederate Veterans (UCV) advocated awarding former slaves rural acreage and a home. There was hope that justice could be given those slaves that were once promised "forty acres and a mule" but never received any. In the 1913 Confederate Veteran magazine published by the UCV, it was printed that this plan "If not Democratic, it is [the] Confederate" thing to do. There was much gratitude toward former slaves, which "thousands were loyal, to the last degree", now living with total poverty of the big cities. Unfortunately, their proposal fell on deaf ears on Capitol Hill.

20. During the 50th Anniversary of the Battle of Gettysburg in 1913, arrangements were made for a joint reunion of Union and Confederate veterans. The commission in charge of the event made sure they had enough accommodations for the black Union veterans, but were completely surprised when unexpected black Confederates arrived. The white Confederates immediately welcomed their old comrades, gave them one of their tents, and "saw to their every need". Nearly every Confederate reunion including those blacks that served with them, wearing the gray.

21. The first military monument in the US Capitol that honors an African-American soldier is the Confederate monument at Arlington National cemetery. The monument was designed 1914 by Moses Ezekiel, a Jewish Confederate. Who wanted to correctly portray the "racial makeup" in the Confederate Army. A black Confederate soldier is depicted marching in step with white Confederate soldiers. Also shown is one "white soldier giving his child to a black woman for protection".- source: Edward Smith, African American professor at the American University, Washington DC.

22. Black Confederate heritage is beginning to receive the attention it deserves. For instance, Terri Williams, a black journalist for the Suffolk "Virginia Pilot" newspaper, writes: "I've had to re-examine my feelings toward the [Confederate] flag started when I read a newspaper article about an elderly black man whose ancestor worked with the Confederate forces. The man spoke with pride about his family member's contribution to the cause, was photographed with the [Confederate] flag draped over his lap that's why I now have no definite stand on just what the flag symbolizes, because it no longer is their history, or my history, but our history."

TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: black; blackconfederates; confederate; dixie; dixielist; heritage; honor; soldier
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 261 next last
To: mac_truck
In other words personal instead of the subject of the thread which is not a surprise.
181 posted on 01/10/2004 2:57:25 PM PST by U S Army EOD (,When the EOD technician screws up, he is always the first to notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck
I never limited myself to Massachusetts - I've been saying New England from the git-go.

But, if you insist:

As the late legal historian, Judge A. Leon Higginbotham, Jr. observed, “Merchants from Massachusetts, the most vigorous slave traders in the world, made enormous profits from the slave trade.”

- Massachusetts Historical Society

IIRC, Rhode Island probably had the largest slave trading port, but Massachusetts probably traded more slaves. Six of one and half a dozen of the other.

182 posted on 01/10/2004 3:01:22 PM PST by AnAmericanMother (. . . sed, ut scis, quis homines huiusmodi intellegere potest?. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: U S Army EOD
Same thing happened here in Atlanta.

Stokely Carmichael showed up to try to make trouble. The local preachers bought him a plane ticket and sent him right back where he came from.

I caught a certain amount of h*ll in college up north - but not from most of the black kids (the ones I had trouble with were from up north - they expected the worst I suppose. Never mind that my parents marched at Selma . . . :-D )

183 posted on 01/10/2004 3:05:41 PM PST by AnAmericanMother (. . . sed, ut scis, quis homines huiusmodi intellegere potest?. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: U S Army EOD
I don't think there is any doubt that a number did...

There's no credible proof that more than a handful of blacks fought for the rebels.


184 posted on 01/10/2004 3:05:41 PM PST by WhiskeyPapa (Virtue is the uncontested prize.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother
I wonder who would have called the Smith-Jones game

Larry Munson.

185 posted on 01/10/2004 3:37:13 PM PST by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
OMG, I can hear him now! That would be a hoot!
186 posted on 01/10/2004 3:43:05 PM PST by AnAmericanMother (. . . sed, ut scis, quis homines huiusmodi intellegere potest?. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother
OMG, I can hear him now! That would be a hoot!

They held a Larry Munson sound-alike contest a few years ago and the winning guy (who sounded just like Larry, of course) did a routine which had Larry calling a game between Georgia and Mayberry.

I thought I'd just die when he started growling:

"Aunt Bea....with those great big thighs....goes driving... driving off the right side for four."

187 posted on 01/10/2004 4:01:38 PM PST by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
Is that a three-pack-a-day voice, or does he just sound that way?
188 posted on 01/10/2004 4:03:25 PM PST by AnAmericanMother (. . . sed, ut scis, quis homines huiusmodi intellegere potest?. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother
Cigars....and 80 something years.
189 posted on 01/10/2004 4:27:42 PM PST by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck
Other Northern states emancipated their slaves and banned the institution: Pennsylvania, 1780; Massachusetts and New Hampshire, 1783; Connecticut and Rhode Island, 1784; New York, 1799.

After they had sold all their slaves "down the river" to the Southern states.

No fools they.

190 posted on 01/10/2004 4:31:58 PM PST by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother
By the way, we are trying to organized a FReeper get together in Georgia and invite Herman Cain to it. Have you heard him speak. We had him down in Lincolnton several months ago at a Republican rally. Everybody liked him.
191 posted on 01/10/2004 4:49:07 PM PST by U S Army EOD (,When the EOD technician screws up, he is always the first to notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: U S Army EOD
That sounds good. I would like to hear what Mr. Cain has to say. What I have heard has been good, and I am not particularly enamored of Johnny Isakson (who is my representative). He's what we used to call a "country-club Republican" and I suspect he is a RINO.
192 posted on 01/10/2004 4:56:49 PM PST by AnAmericanMother (. . . sed, ut scis, quis homines huiusmodi intellegere potest?. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother
Keep checking the Georgia post, we are trying to come up with something.
193 posted on 01/10/2004 5:15:30 PM PST by U S Army EOD (,When the EOD technician screws up, he is always the first to notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
Wow, I hope he's having regular dental checkups then. Cigars and 80 years is not a good combination. (Just ask Grover Cleveland).
194 posted on 01/10/2004 5:33:41 PM PST by AnAmericanMother (. . . sed, ut scis, quis homines huiusmodi intellegere potest?. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: U S Army EOD
I'm on the ping list for that.
195 posted on 01/10/2004 5:33:57 PM PST by AnAmericanMother (. . . sed, ut scis, quis homines huiusmodi intellegere potest?. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother
He goes to the movies several times a week with a gaggle of UGA coeds.
Don't know if it helps the teeth, but invigorating nonetheless.

Hmmm...young women...fine cigars...SEC football.
Freud would have a field day.

196 posted on 01/10/2004 5:53:33 PM PST by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother
AmericanMother, thank you for the info. We wrote the National Archives some years ago, and they also had his records. I'd like to find out where he is buried, but after that explosion, I doubt there was anything left to bury.

I really enjoyed reading about your family history. You're very lucky to have those wonderful letters. Have you ever thought of publishing them? I know that there is a definite interest for such first hand history, as that of your family during the War.
197 posted on 01/10/2004 5:53:57 PM PST by Main Street (Stuck in traffic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother; U S Army EOD
"I think the major problem we are talking about is trying to determine on how the slaves were treated. When you discuss morality, you have to discuss the morality of the time then and not now. Most of the individuals who owned slaves regardless of the race of the individual seemed to see no problem with it which is another confusing issue for everyone. By the LOCAL standards of yesteryear, these people were not villians but they were to others during that time and to us over 100 years later that don't really know how life was then. It was basically difficult for everybody." -U S Army EOD

You're right. When those with a political bias look back at history, they do so with a selectivity that will advance their personal agenda, as we have seen here. The reality of life for most people in those days, who were not privileged to be members of the upper classes, regardless of race, was that it was often a short back-breaking and miserable existence. The Greek philosopher, Aristotle, wrote that, "Humanity is divided into two, the master and the slave." White "Slavs" were in bondage to such an extent that their very name became the word used to describe a "Slaves"; Arabs slavers often raided the coasts of Italy and Spain, taking Whites back to Africa as slave labor.

Orlando Patterson studied 55 slave societies for his 1982 book 'Slavery and Social Death: A Comparative Study' (1982).

He writes:

"It has often been remarked that slavery in the Americas is unique in the primary role of race as a factor in determining the condition and treatment of slaves. This statement betrays an appalling ignorance of the comparative data on slave societies.. . Throughout the Islamic world, for instance, race was a vital issue. The light-skinned Tuareg and related groups had decidedly racist attitudes towards the Negroes they conquered. Throughout the Islamic empires, European and Turkish slaves were treated quite differently from slaves south of the Sahara Desert. Slavery in Africa was more than simply "subordination"; it was considered a degraded condition, reinforced by racist attitudes among the Arab slave owners."

Writing on African slavery before 1600, the historian Paul Lovejoy notes: "For those who were enslaved, the dangers involved forced marches, inadequate food, sexual abuse, and death on the road."

"In fact Africa’s internal slave trade, which did not involve the United States or any European power, not only extended over the entire 500 years mentioned by Robinson, but also preceded it by nearly 1,000 years. In the period between 650 and 1600, before any Western involvement, somewhere between 3 million and 10 million Africans were bought by Muslim slavers for use in Saharan societies and in the trade in the Indian Ocean and Red Sea. By contrast, the enslavement of blacks in the United States lasted 89 years, from 1776 until 1865. The combined slave trade to the British colonies in North America and later to the United States accounted for less than 3 percent of the global trade in African slaves. The total number of slaves imported to North America was 800,000, less than the slave trade to the island of Cuba alone. If the internal African slave trade-which began in the seventh century and persists to this day in the Sudan, Mauritania and other sub-Saharan states-is taken into account, the responsibility of American traders shrinks to a fraction of 1 percent of the slavery problem."


"African tribes were some of the fiercest defenders of slavery when whites tried to outlaw the practice in the 19th century. Blacks in present-day Ghana rioted against the British as they destroyed the slave ports along Africa’s western coast.

In 1808, the King of Bonny (now Nigeria) told the British:

"You’re country, however great, can never stop a trade ordained by God himself."

One of America’s most famous black novelists, Zora Neale Hurston had a very different perspective on slavery than today’s reparations activists: "The white people held my people in slavery here in America. They bought us, it is true, and exploited us. But the inescapable fact that stuck in my craw was that my people had sold me. My own people had exterminated whole nations and tore families apart for profit before the strangers got their chance at a cut. It was a sobering thought. It impressed upon me the universal nature of greed and glory."- 'Racial Myths and Realities', By James Lubinskas

In the realm of political discussion, when focused on history, one cannot help but see the extreme defensiveness, boarding on hysteria, that the self-anointed "historians" with a liberal and/or anti-Southern or anti-White agenda, resort to, when confronted with the possibility that not ALL slaves were treated as brutally as they would like us to believe. The typical liberal American definition of a Black slave (in America) is one who was worked to death, beaten to death, raped, starved to death, and lynched. It is a wonder how so many survived at all!

To cut through any of this propaganda, and shed any light on the subject with historical facts, that do not agree totally with their politicized views on history, is to immediately be attacked and labeled a racist liar and hateful White supremacist, who wants nothing more than to see Blacks in chains working on HIS plantation.

As silly as it is, to even have to deny such absurd accusations; we are dealing with a group of emotionally immature reactionaries, separated from reality by their own propaganda, and desperately trying to protect their 'delusions' and 'political agenda' (which are one and the same).

The fact is, there are no slavery proponents here. There are no racist White supremacists bent on keeping Black people under-foot. There are no evil White posters plotting genocide. There are no Whites racist wishing to turn the clock back to the Jim Crow era. And there are no conservatives here who want to discriminate against ANYONE because of their race. Just the opposite! In today's society, it is the liberal Democrat who discriminates by race.

But most importantly, to the liberal propagandist, there was NO SLAVERY worse then BLACK SLAVERY. And there was NO WORSE BLACK SLAVERY than in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

This of course is absurd and historically inaccurate. In the history of slavery, there were numerous examples of bondage far more brutal, inhumane, and punishing then what generally occurred within the boarders of this nation. The most brutal and HARSHEST form of slavery, is one in which the slave is starved and worked to death, or killed when the work is completed. Human history is abundant with examples of this extreame form of slavery, which most recently was the case with White (Jewish) slaves in Germany, and German (P.O.W.'s) in Russia, during and after the period of WW2. This of course does not include the tens of millions of Whites and Asians that died in a similar manner of slavery under Communist dictatorships.

To get a true understanding of how much Blacks suffered under bondage, here in the U.S., one would have to examine each on an individual bases. The closest historians have come to this was during the depression era of the 1930's in which surviving slave narratives were recorded, and to my understanding, to the surprise to those who did a thorough and objective study of those narratives, discover that most Black slaves were not abused, or treated anymore inhumanly as one could expect under slavery, which in itself is inhumane by the very act of denying one his freedom. As for rank suffering most suffered far less than White slaves of the era, or 'free White men' serving under the harsh discipline of the Armed Services of that time. And most suffered no more than those poor White laborers of the period, and far less then some.

There WHERE of course examples of extreme brutality against some black slaves, but they were the minority of cases, as Black slaves were expensive and had value. Only a fool would abuse and destroy his "investments" from which he needed to make a livelihood.

However, it does the liberal and/or agenda biased historical revisionists no good to relate the majority of cases in which abuse of Blacks did not occur, but only those instances when it did. As we have seen with several posters here who have used selective historical examples of abused Blacks slaves, when in fact abuse of the lower classes, regardless of race, occured. One could easily counter each of their examples with examples of poor Whites of the period who were abused in the same manner. The fact that most Whites living today are desended from these poor White labor classes of Europe and America, should strike both Blacks and Whites living today, that we have a history rank in suffering more in common, than apart.

"Hard working Whites of the poor labor class, were considered of the lowest order, even Black slaves viewed them with contempt and felt themselves superior to them........

"When I was a boy, we used to sing, 'Rather be a n*gger than a poor white man.' Even in slavery we used to sing that." -(Former Sumter, South Carolina Black slave, Waters Mclntosh)

"You know, boss, dese days dere is three kind of people. Lowest down is a layer of white folks, then in de middle is a layer of colored folks, and on top is de cream, a layer of good white folks" -(Former South Carolina Black slave, Ella Kelly)

"The many ex-slaves who recalled the lot of the small farmers and poor whites as hard and even as bad off as their own knew what they were talking about."...."The slaves saw enough abject poverty, disease, and demoralization among the poor whites, to see their own condition under Ole Massa's protection as perhaps not the worst of evils." -(Slave Perceptions of Southern Yeoman and Poor Whites', By Eugene Genovese, pgs. 79, 81-82)

Many White Irish were used for hard dangerous work that was estimated would cost many lives to complete, such as the Erie Canal. Contracts were sent to Black Slave plantations for labor, and were often refused on account that the work was too brutal and dangerous. In one case the reply was, "The work is much too harsh for our negroes. Let the Irish do it."

"Frederick Law Olmsted, the architect of the Central Park in New York, toured the South in 1855. While in Alabama he witnessed black slaves recklessly throwing large bales of cotton from a considerable height into the ships hold. In the ship's hold, being hit by these bales of cotton, were white Irishmen. A concerned Olmsted asked a dock worker about this, and was told the following: "Oh, the n*ggers are worth too much to be risked here. If the Paddies are knocked overboard, or get their backs broke, nobody loses anything." -(Reference- 'A Journey to the Seaboard Slave States', By Frederic Law Olmsted, pgs. 100-101)

"Gangs of Irish immigrants worked ditching and draining plantations, building levees and sometimes clearing land because of the danger to valuable Negro slave property."..."A common joke in the South in the pre-Civil War period was that when blacks were ordered to work hard, they complained that their masters were treating them like Irishmen." - (Reference: 'The Wages of Whiteness: Race and the Making of the American Working Class', By David R. Roediger, pgs. 133, 146)

And not only Whites of Irish descent....

'From a letter by white slave Elizabeth Sprigs in Maryland to her father John Sprigs in London, England, September 22, 1756'.....

"Honored Father,

0 Dear Father, I am sure you'll pity your distressed daughter. What we unfortunate English people suffer here is beyond the probability of you in England to conceive.

Let it suffice that I am one of the unhappy number toiling day and night, and very often in the horse's drudgery, with only the comfort of hearing me called, 'You, b*tch, you did not do half enough.'

Then I am tied up and whipped to that degree that you'd not serve an animal. I have scarce any thing but Indian corn and salt to eat and that even begrudged. Nay, many negroes are better used.

After slaving after Master's pleasure, what rest we can get is to wrap ourselves up in a blanket and lay upon the ground. This is the deplorable condition your poor Betty endures."
--(Reference: Public Record Office, London, England, High Court of Admiralty).

"John Randolph of Roanoke, traveling in England and Ireland with his black manservant Johnny, wrote to a friend back home: ' Much as I was prepared to see misery in the south of Ireland, I was utterly shocked at the condition of the poor peasantry between Limmerick and Dublin. Why sir, John never felt so proud of being a Virginia slave. He looked with horror upon the mud hovels and miserable food of the white slaves, and I had no fear of his running away." -(Reference: 'Chattel Slavery and Wage Slavery', By Marcus Cunliffe, pg. 6)

Now let's look at how some other races treated each other during those days.........

Liberals believe that "aggression" and "oppression" is a (White) American condition, rather than a human one. They never name any other race or culture, when referring to those two characteristics. I would be interested in knowing how other races in history "obtained" territory on which to build their nations.

How did the Japanese, "integrate" with people of other territories? How did they treat the people of the Philippines, or the Chinese in such places as Nanking, for instance? Were they "aggressive" and "brutal" when they attacked they're lands by "force"? Where they "oppressive" and "hostile", when the enslaved their people, and flung their babies on the ends of bayonets?

What of the American indigenous tribes? Did they really live in peace and harmony with each other, as liberal revisionists would have us believe? Or were they in a near constant state of tribal warfare, killing and butchering others tribes with impunity to obtain new lands and hunting territory?

Despite the liberal PC history of the 'Noble Indian', thrown off his "tribal land" by the evil White eyes, a land that they "occupied since time began"(sic). Most tribes ended up on the lands that they lived, by either violently forcing out other tribes, or by being violently forced out themselves.

Up in my area 40,000 Huron once lived. Almost 400 years ago, the Iroquois, their relatives from upstate New York, attacked and annihilated them. Destroying one Huron village after another. 15 total. The Huron Nation in this area, was virtually wiped out. The few who survived tried for Minnesota, but were violently thrown out by the tribes already there! Unlike the Whites who made attempts to set aside Reservations, supply needed materials, with food and clothing, and tried to convert them to Western ways of living off the land through farming, their fellow Native Americans, did not. Preferring instead to often torture their captors to death, in the most hideous and horrific manners imagined, or to enslave them. As for the Iroquois, a common practice was to pluck out the eyes of their fellow Indian prisoners, and place red hot coals into the now empty eye sockets. Can liberals say,"discrimination, oppression, and brutality by Indians"?...NO!

And lest we forget, the Erie Tribe. You don't hear much about them anymore. And here's the reason why. They lived in the Ohio area, and fell to the Iroquois too. The Erie disintegrated. But it didn't stop there. The Iroquois also violently "threw out" the Cheyenne, who lived in Ontario and Quebec, who fled to Montana and the Dakotas, and are know remembered as one of the 'Great Plains' Indian tribes. Or how about the Chippewa, who in the 1600's fled from the upper Great Lakes, with the Iroquois hot on their tails, and in turn, invaded the Sioux lands in Minnesota! And what did the Sioux do then?? Did they cry about how unfair they were treated?? Did they demand compensation?? No! They gave up their cultivation of the woodlands and adopted a completely new culture and practices, such as hunting buffalo from horses, on the plains, with no compensation from their conquerors. And none expected.

Crows were frequently at war with the surrounding tribes of Cheyenne, Sioux, Blackfeet, and Arapahoe.

But when it comes to a greater power, there is an old Chinese saying, "When a tree is faced with a great wind, it must bend, or it will break." When the Indians were faced with the power of the "Euro Tribe", it chose not to bend. The Indians have their "Trail of Tears". We have our "Batton Death March". In the end it's all the same. One tribe brutally conquering another tribe, since time began.

But Liberals, and the other Leftist haters of the history of Western Civilization, never seem to remember the violent history and expansionism of Native Americans such as the 'Iroquois', or the African 'Zulus'.

The only difference is that the Indian and African warrior didn't allow his conscience to burden him with mercy and remorse for his enemies. But now, all of their violence, brutality, and atrocities against their enemies is completely forgotten, thanks to liberal revisionists in our education system.

The "White Warrior", in general, had a conscience. A sense of honor. And he had often used it to give mercy to his enemies. And he was burdened with remorse. No other "tribe" of warriors has ever set land and food aside for those they conquered. No other race of people has ever re-built the homes and cities of those they conquered. No other race of people sacrificed 300,000 of their sons, so that those enslaved, could be free. And no other race of people have ever given as much in money, time, and lives, so that past wrongs could be righted. And yet they are disrespected and hated.

American Indians Warriors rarely worried about the welfare and treatment of those they conquered........

"In civilized warfare, an obviously contradictory phrase, wounded soldiers could be left in a field hospital which might be occupied by the enemy; but when fighting Indians this would be a death sentence. An Indian thought a battle was not finished until he or his opponent lay dead. The white man's concept of mercy struck him as not only peculiar but cowardly".-'SON OF THE MORNING STAR', pg. 281-2

As was the same for the Black African Warrior.....

"The reason for this no-prisoners policy was seldom articulated by its practitioners. In many cases it was simply tradition, a practice so common and universal that it needed no explanation. For example during the Zulu War, a British officer asked the Zulu prisoners why he should not kill them, as Zulus always killed British that fell into their hands. One prisoner answered, `There is a very good reason that you should not kill us. We kill you because it is the custom of the black man, but it isn't the white man's custom.' Impressed by this appeal to the power of custom, the officer spared the Zulu prisoners." ["He ordered the prisoners released and gave them safe passage through British lines."] -'War Before Civilization', by Lawrence Keeley

["Two months earlier, a Zulu army had slaughtered a British force at Isandlwana. They had shown no quarter, killing and, in many cases, horribly mutilating more than 800 British soldiers and 52 officers – more British officers than were killed at Waterloo."]

Re: "Before Isandwhlana, we treated all your wounded men in our Hospital, but when you attacked our camp, your brethren, our black patients, rose and helped to kill those who had been attending on them. Can any of you advance any reason why I should not kill you ?" One of the younger men, with an intelligent face, asked, "May I speak ?" "Yes." "There is very good reason why you should not kill us. We kill you because it is the custom of the Black men, but it isn't the White men's custom!" So, putting them in charge of an officer and a couple of Colonel Bullcr's men, I had them sent safely past our Outposts, as far as the Zunguin mountain."


Below are actual eye-witness accounts of the way American Indians, captured by other American Indians, were treated in the 19th Century. Between two warring tribes. Reference from 'Son Of The Morning Star'. A small glimpse of real history that liberals would rather you didn't know about, lest you think that brutality is a human condition rather than a White American one......

"A certain Mr. Cox watched the Flatheads torture a Blackfoot. Not only did the captive endure it without wincing, he taunted his captors, jeered at their best efforts, and told them they knew nothing about the business. While they were shortening his fingers a joint at a time he addressed a one-eyed Flathead as follows: "It was by my arrow that you lost your eye," whereupon the enraged Flathead scooped out one of the Blackfoot's eyes with a knife and almost cut his nose in half. "I killed your brother, and I scalped your old fool of a father ," said the Blackfoot to another, whereupon the second Flathead leaped forward, scalped him, and was about to stab him when the Flathead chief interfered. Says Mr. Cox: "The raw skull, bloody socket, and mutilated nose now presented an horrific appearance, but by no means changed his attitude of defiance. Then said the irrepressible Blackfoot to the chief: "It was I that made your wife a prisoner last fall we put out her eyes; we tore out her tongue; we treated her like a dog. Forty of our young warriors. .." At which point the Flathead chief shot him through the heart." - pg. 338

"Consider one dead Shoshone scout. His name has been forgotten. He was not even a warrior, just a boy. He had asked Chief Washakie's permission to visit a spring or tributary of the Rosebud in order to paint his face. He was almost ready to fight-"his medicine song was half done," says Bourke, when a Sioux or Cheyenne found him, shot him through the back and stripped the top of his head "from the nape of the neck to the forehead, leaving his entire skull ghastly and white. It was the boy's first battle. ..." He was buried late at night in a deep trench beside the creek, [by U.S. Soldiers]. Next morning General Crook marched the entire command across the site to obliterate every trace of the excavation, for it was thought the savages might dig up and lacerate the cadaver." - pg. 91

"During the retreat the Crows scored one last coup. They heard a voice begging for water, "Mini! Mini!", and they discovered a blind Cheyenne warrior hidden among the rocks. He had been led to this place or had wandered there. When he heard the Crows talking among themselves he mistook the language for Sioux and called out. The Crows responded by chopping off his arms and legs." -91

Of Sitting Bull... "He was among the braves who returned from Crow territory with a harvest of ears, scalps, genitals, fingers, and the hand of a warrior tied to a stick by the thumb. Frank Grouard, who lived several years among the Sioux, claimed that during a Sun Dance he heard Sitting Bull recount sixty-three battle coups."- pg. 215

Nor were babies safe..... "[After the 3rd US Cavalry attacked the camp of the Cheyenne Chief Dull Knife on November 25, 1876], they discovered that he punished neighborhood enemies as well as encroaching whites; Mackenzie's troops discovered a necklace of brown fingers, the arm of a squaw, and in a buckskin bag the right hands of twelve Indian babies. "- pg. 341

Nor were the dead "safe". While liberal "historians"(sic) will conjure up stories of Whites desecrating Sacred Indian Burials, they will say nothing of the Indians doing the same... "They saw many Dakota burials. Some of these were quite old, which made no difference to Shoshone and Ute, who prodded them with lances until bones came tumbling down accompanied by an occasional ax or bow or a nickel-plated revolver. [One of the Indian burials was destroyed by an Indian named 'Ute John'] Bourke remarks parenthetically that Ute John was credited with having murdered his own grandmother and drunk her blood. He disdained speaking to any white man..."-pg. 333

Leftists have no respect for the history of Western Civilization. Though they live a life of luxury within it's social structures, and benefit daily from the luxuries of it's sciences, medicine, technologies, and inventions.

They're like a dinner guest who constantly complains about the cook and her food, but won't stop eating it, and refuses to leave her house.

Now let's go back to Black Africa prior to the White slave trade, and later colonization. Did they have tribal warfare to expand their land holdings, or did they just give it away, and others excepted it as "gifts"? When iron was introduced to the Zulus, did they make toys with it? Or did they make short spears to kill and conquer neighboring tribes, in their quest to expand the Zulu Nation? Did they kill those who resisted, or did they kiss them?

Thanks to the recorded history by European explorers, we know. From a history of Shaka (1787-1828) and the Zulus:

From a history of Shaka (1787-1828) and the Zulus....

"Shaka discarded the traditional throwing assegai and armed his men with a short stabbing-spear for hand-to-hand fighting. His barefooted soldiers, rigorously trained and disciplined, were schooled in highly organized, planned and original battle-tactics. Shaka greatly expanded the area of Zulu domination. His legendary military conquests, his enormous standing army - estimates of its numbers vary up to 80,000 men - forcing Zulu power throughout modern Natal and beyond."

"The traditions of the Zulu became the traditions of the nations they conquered; the Zulu dialect became the dialect of the nations and every inhabitant, whatever his origins, became a Zulu."

"The tribes in neighboring areas did not always submit to Zulu conquest. Many fled northwards with their peoples, establishing new kingdoms as far north as the Transvaal and, beyond the Limpopo, in Zimbabwe."

"These great population movements of masses of armed men had far-reaching repercussions. A period of conflict ravaged the interior of the country, disorganizing its settled population and impoverishing many."

And what of the Zulu's 'Great Father', Shaka (or as sometime spelled, "Chaka")?? He is revered, respected and honored by many in the liberal revisionist community.

"The first whites with whom Shaka came into contact were a group of British adventurers who settled in Tekwini (which they called Port Natal and subsequently Durban) from 1822, mainly to trade in ivory.

And in 1824 by a group of about 60 persons, led by H F Fynn and G F Farewell, the members of this party trading mainly in ivory, skins and gums.

On the first day of Fynn's arrival at court, ten men were carried off to death, and he soon learnt that executions occurred daily. On one occasion Fynn witnessed the dispatch of sixty boys under the age of twelve years before Chaka had breakfasted. On one occasion between four and five hundred women were massacred because they were believed to have knowledge of witchcraft. One of Chaka's concubines was executed for taking a pinch of snuff from his snuff-box. A group of cowherd boys was put to death for having sucked the nipples of cattle.

It was the rule in Zululand that no one might eat from any crop until the king had partaken of the first-fruits of the year at a special ceremony. If anyone transgressed, every member of his kraal (family) was executed. At the ceremony the king was accustomed to have many people executed for no other reason than to show his power and cause him to be feared.

Apparently the excesses of Shaka's murderous cruelty were brought to their pinnacle upon the death of his mother, Nandi:

"Universal mourning was immediately ordered. The chiefs and people began to assemble in a crowd estimated at eighteen thousand.... Those who could not force tears from their eyes--those who were found near the river panting for water--were beaten to death by others who were mad with excitement. Toward the afternoon I calculated that not fewer than 7,000 people had fallen in this frightful indiscriminate massacre. Whilst the masses were thus employing themselves, Chaka and his chiefs, the latter surrounding him, were tumbling and throwing themselves about, each trying to excel in their demonstrations of grief by alternate fits of howling. On his first appearance after the massacre Chaka ordered the execution of one of his aunts, who had been unfriendly to Nandi, and of all her attendants (some twelve or fourteen girls). Parties were sent out to execute those who had not come to express sorrow. During a period of one year after Nandi's death, all women found to be pregnant were executed with their husbands."

H.F. Fynn described the aftermath of one of the Zulu battles in 1824:

"The remnant of the enemy's army sought shelter in a nearby wood from which they were soon driven. Then began the slaughter of the women and children. They were all put to death. Early next morning Chaka arrived and each regiment, previous to its inspection by him, had picked out its 'cowards' and put them to death. Many of these, no doubt forfeited their lives because their chiefs were in fear that, if they did not condemn some as being guilty, they would incur the resentment of Chaka."
Re: Fynn, H.R., 'The Diary of Henry Francis Fynn'. Edited by J. Stuart, Pietermaritzburg: Shooter and Shooter, 1950.

And then there's Zulu Chief Cetshwayo, who slit open the stomachs of 13 pregnant Zulu women, killing them and their babies, so that he could observe the progression of the fetus.

"Social oppression within African tribes was likewise much worse than generally recognized today. Polygamy was universal, and wives and children could be killed at the husband's discretion, as documented in Achebe's first novel, 'Things Fall Apart' (1959), which tells of his own grandfather's hatcheting to death his adopted son at the demand of a tribal council simply to demonstrate his respect for a local witch doctor. Such sacrifice seems to have been commonplace." -Re: Achebe, C. 'Things Fall Apart', New York, Astor-Honor, 1959.

"Moreover, anybody could be killed or subjected to slavery at the command of an African king, and this power was often abused to an extraordinary degree, as illustrated by H.F. Fynn's account of the notorious Zulu king Shaka (aka. Chaka). "

One wonders how Shaka and the Black Zulus would have treated the Hurons, the Chippewa, the Cheyenne, the Sioux, or the Iroquois and their women and children, if they occupied land in Africa that the Zulus wanted in their never ending violence and wars to expand the Zulu Nation?? I wonder how many Indian children under the age of twelve years old would have been murdered before Shaka had breakfast, just to wet his African warrior appetite?? Show me a White Slave Master that exhibited this degree of cruelty, or a Black American slave population that suffered this degree of cruelty.

In history, all races suffered, and practiced cruelty.

In fact there is an extensive literature on African slavery which shows that there was plantation slavery in Africa as in America, that slaves were regularly sacrificed to the gods of their slavemasters, while young Black African boys were castrated to become court eunuchs of those Africans who owned them. The castration of these youngsters was so brutal (and without anesthesia) that an estimated nine out of every ten bled to death. Why aren't liberals demanding reparations from the governments of Benin, Ghana, Liberia, and the Ivory Coast? Why aren't liberal bleeding heart, bleeding for the African Black victims of Black African atrocities?? As cruel as some White slave masters were, show me a White American Slave master who sacrificed his Black American slaves to appease his god, or castrated his young Black male slaves, causing the 9 out of every 10 to bleed to death!

For more history of slavery, read:


Which leads us to the atrocities, brutality and cruelty of Black African Slavery today:

Excerpt from: 'Slavery in Sudan Must End' , By Black actavist Joe Madison Tuesday, Feb. 13, 2001

"I explored every aspect of slavery in Africa’s largest country. Nothing prepared me for what my eyes saw, my ears heard, my hands felt and my soul embraced. Members of the Christian Solidarity International group and I, on a trip earlier this month to Sudan, redeemed some 4,435 slaves, mostly women and children. After trekking through heat, mud flies and mosquitoes, I saw a scene that was directly out of the TV miniseries "Roots," except it was real. It was as if someone had placed me in a time machine and sent me back 400 years to the African slave trade, but it was today.

It was surreal. Hundreds, thousands of human souls, black, dirty, sick and hungry, in scorching sun, waited under the branches of a huge tree to be free. Many had walked for 10 days or more, led by a small band of Bedouins who served as their Harriet Tubman. As we approached, before they were in sight, we could hear the murmuring of these slaves; no shouting, no anger, just soft murmurs. As John Eibner of CSI explained through an interpreter what was happening, I uncovered harrowing stories of the abuse these slaves suffered at the hands, of their slave masters:

A 13-year-old boy, Yak Kenyang Adeiu, had all his fingers cut off by his slave master.

Mawien Aher Bol had his finger cut off by his master because he lost a goat.

Angot Wol Angra was attacked by her master's brother with a knife when she lost a goat.

Arek Kiir had her throat cut and her chest burned because she refused to give up her infant to a slave master.

Agom Bol Akuei and her children were forced to carry a heavy load of salt, looted by slave traders. She collapsed under the weight, and the load of salt crushed her jaw. She received no medical attention.

Garang Deng Yel and Athian Athian Athian had their arms chopped off with an ax by slave owners when they went north to try to rescue their enslaved wives and children.

A woman who walked with a severe limp recounted to me how she had been gang-raped by her master and 10 others. When she resisted, the men violently forced her legs apart, dislocating one of her hips from the joint.

These images will be with me for the rest of my life. I promised each of them and CSI that I would return to the United States and the African-American leadership and do all within my power to end slavery in Sudan."


More....Excerpts from, 'Modern Slavery: Human bondage in Africa, Asia, and the Dominican Republic' , By Ricco Villanueva Siasoco

"Chattel slavery in Sudan...

[b]"The enslavement of the Dinkas in southern Sudan may be the most horrific and well-known example of contemporary slavery. According to 1993 U.S. State Department estimates, up to 90,000 blacks are owned by North African Arabs, and often sold as property in a thriving slave trade for as little as $15 per human being.

There he found several Dinka men hobbling, their Achilles tendons cut because they refused to become Muslims.

Animist tribes in southern Sudan are frequently invaded by Arab militias from the North, who kill the men and enslave the women and children. The Arabs consider it a traditional right to enslave southerners, and to own chattel slaves (slaves owned as personal property).

Physical mutilation is practiced upon these slaves not only to prevent escape, but to enforce the owners' ideologies. According to an ASI report: "Kon, a thirteen-year-old Dinka boy, was abducted by Arab nomads and taken to a merchant's house. There he found several Dinka men hobbling, their Achilles tendons cut because they refused to become Muslims. Threatened with the same treatment the boy converted."

In a detailed article by Charles Jacobs for the American Anti-Slavery Group (ASI), Jacobs recounts how a 10-year-old child was taken in a raid on her village in southern Sudan, and branded by her master with a hot iron."


But back to the past when "Millions of African slaves were marched to death, by their African owners, on their way to coastal slave-trading posts owned by Africans. And that the slaves who survived the march to the coast were often slaughtered on the spot, by their African owners, if Europeans didn't purchase them." -from , 'So Much for History!' By Prof. Sheldon M. Stern ('Africans in America') March-April 1999.

An Englishman explained to King Gelele of Africa, that: "England has been doing her utmost to stop the slave trade in this country. Much money has been spent, and many lives sacrificed to obtain this desirable end, but hitherto without success. I have come to ask you to put an end to this traffic and to enter into some treaty with me."

And when he asked how much money he wanted to end the slave trade, King Gelele refused: "No money will induce me...I am not like the kings of Lagos and Benin. There are only two kings in Africa, Ashanti and Dahomey: I am King of all the Blacks. Nothing will compensate me for the lose of the slave trade." Gelele also said, "If I cannot sell my captives taken in war, I must kill them, and surely the English would not like that."

Further, Whites also suffered the "Middle Passage", as shown in history, but ignored...

"The percentage of White Losses in the Middle Passage were Higher than that of Blacks. White slaves transported to the colonies suffered a staggering loss of life in the 17th and l8th century. During the voyage to America it was customary to keep the White slaves below deck for the entire nine to twelve week journey. A White slave would be confined to a hole not more than sixteen feet long, chained with 50 other men to a board, with padlocked collars around their necks. The weeks of confinement below deck in the ship's stifling hold often resulted in outbreaks of contagious disease which would sweep through the "cargo" of White "freight" chained in the bowels of the ship.

Ships carrying White slaves to America often lost half their slaves to death. According to historian Sharon v. Salinger , "Scattered data reveal that the mortality for White servants at certain times equaled that for Black slaves in the 'middle passage,' and during other periods actually exceeded the death rate for Black slaves."
-( 'To Serve Well and Faithfully: Labor and Indentured Servants in Pennsylvania, 1682-1800', By Sharon V. Salinger, pg. 91.)

Salinger reports a death rate of ten to twenty percent over the entire 18th century for Black slaves on board ships enroute to America compared with a death rate of 25% for White slaves enroute to America (Salinger, pg. 92).

Foster R. Dulles writing in' Labor in America: A History', p. 6, states that "whether convicts, children 'spirited' from the countryside, or political prisoners, White slaves experienced discomforts and sufferings on their voyage across the Atlantic that paralleled the cruel hardships undergone by Negro slaves on the notorious Middle Passage."

Dulles states that the Whites were "indiscriminately herded aboard the 'white guineamen,' often as many as 300 passengers on little vessels of not more than 200 tons burden--overcrowded, unsanitary... The mortality rate was sometimes as high as 50% and young children seldom survived the horrors of a voyage which might last anywhere from seven to twelve weeks."

Independent investigator A.B. Ellis in the 'Argosy' writes concerning the transport of White slaves, "The human cargo, many of whom were still tormented by unhealed wounds, could not all lie down at once without lying on each other. They were never suffered to go on deck. The hatchway was constantly watched by sentinels armed with hangers and blunder busses. In the dungeons below all was darkness, stench, lamentation, disease and death."

Marcus Jernegan describes the greed of the shipmasters which led to horrendous loss of life for White slaves transported to America:

"The voyage over often repeated the horrors of the famous 'middle passage' of slavery fame. An average cargo was three hundred, but the shipmaster, for greater profit, would sometimes crowd as many as six hundred into a small vessel. The mortality under such circumstances was tremendous, sometimes more than half...Mittelberger (an eyewitness} saw thirty-two white children thrown into the ocean during one voyage." - ('Laboring and Dependent Classes in America, 1607-1783', By Marcus W. Jernegan, pgs. 50-51 ).

"The mercantile firms, as importers of white servants, were not too careful about their treatment, as the more important purpose of the transaction was to get ships over to South Carolina which could carry local produce back to Europe. Consequently the Irish--as well as others--suffered greatly. It was almost as if the British merchants had redirected their vessels from the African coast to the Irish coast, with the white servants coming over in much the same fashion as the African slaves." -('White Servitude in Colonial South Carolina', By Warren B. Smith, pg. 42).

"A study of the middle passage of white slaves was included in a 'Parliamentary Petition of 1659'. It reported that white slaves were locked below deck for two weeks while the slaveship was still in port. Once under way, they were "all the way locked up under decks...amongst horses."

They were chained from their legs to their necks.

"White transports traveled in double irons, were whipped and beaten. Captains such as Edward Brockett of the Rappahannock Merchant, were totally unfit." - ('Bound for America', By Roger A. Ekirch, pg. 101 )

Of the white slaves bound for Maryland from London aboard the slaveship 'Justitia', at the mercy of the savage Capt. Barnet Bond, nearly one-third of the whites died: "The very worst excesses were revealed during the voyage of the Justitia in 1743. Under the command of Barnet Bond...Bond set stringent water rations. Despite ample reserves of water on board, he allotted each transport only one pint a day. Some started to drink their own urine." -('Bound for America', By Roger A. Ekirch, pg. 102 )

"White slaves aboard ship were treated worse than dogs or swine and are kept much more uncleanly than those animals are." -('When I Was a Child' [Life of a White Servent] By Charles Shaw, pg. 35).

A witness who saw White slaves aboard a ship, reported: "All the states of horror I ever had an idea of are much short of what I saw this man in; chained to a board in a hole not above sixteen feet long, more than fifty with him; a collar and padlock about his neck, and chained to five of the most dreadful creatures I ever looked on." Another observer watching the auction of a hundred White slaves in Williamsburg, Virginia remarked, "I never seen such passels of poor wretches in my life. Some almost naked" -('Bound for America', By Roger A. Ekirch, pgs. 100 and 122).

["In order to realize the maximum profit from the trade in White slaves, the captains of the White Guineamen crammed their ships with as many poor Whites as possible, certain that even with the most callous disregard for the lives of the Whites the financial gain would still make the trip worth the effort. A loss of 20% of their White "cargo" was regarded as acceptable. But sometimes losses were much higher.

Out of 350 White slaves on a ship bound for the colonies in 1638 only 80 arrived alive. "We have thrown over board two and three in a day for many dayes together" wrote Thomas Rous, a survivor of the trip. A ship carrying White slaves in 1685, the Betty of London, left England with 100 White slaves and arrived in the colonies with 49 left.

A number of factors contributed to the higher death rates for White slaves than Blacks. Although the goal of maximum profits motivated both trades, it cost more to obtain Blacks from Africa than it did to capture Whites in Europe. White slaves were not cared for as well as Blacks because the Whites were cheaply obtained and were viewed as expendable.

Ship Captains involved in the White slave trade obtained White slaves either free of charge or were subsidized to take them, and for all other categories of White slaves, they paid at most a small sum to an agent to procure them, forfeiting only the cost of their keep on board ship if they died.

Moreover, traders in Black slaves operated ships designed solely for the purpose of carrying human cargo with the intent of creating conditions whereby as many Black slaves as possible would reach America alive. White slave ships were cargo ships with no special provisions for passengers.

In addition, transportation rules decreed that, in cases where White slaves were sold in advance to individual planters in America, if the White slave survived the voyage beyond the halfway point in the journey, the planter in America--not the captain of the slave ship-- would be responsible for the costs of the White slaves' provisions whether or not the slave survived the trip. Captains of the slaveships became infamous for providing sufficient food for only the first half of the trip and then virtually starving their White captives until they arrived in America."]
- From, 'They Were White And They Were Slaves'

"Jammed into filthy holds, manacled, starved and abused, they suffered and died during the crossings in gross numbers. Thousands were children under 12, snatched off the streets." -(Kendall, pg. 1 )

"The transportation became a profitable enterprise. Traders delivered thousands of bound laborers to Pennsylvania and exhibited a callous disregard for their cargoes" -('To Serve Well and Faithfully: Labor and Indentured Servants in Pennsylvania, 1682-1800', By Sharon V. Salinger, pg. 88).

As a result, White slaves on board these ships suffered a high rate of disease.

"Transportation of White slaves remained a branch of commerce wedded to carrying human cargoes at minimal expense...sizable numbers never reached American shores...from disease, mistreatment." -('Bound for America', By Roger A. Ekirch, p. 108).

"The number of diseased White slaves arriving was high enough for Pennsylvania officials to recommend a quarantine law for them. Thus a new torment was to be endured for White slaves who were often stopped just short of the New World, with land in sight, and forced to remain quarantined on board ships in which they had just spent a horrifying ten to twelve weeks" -('To Serve Well and Faithfully: Labor and Indentured Servants in Pennsylvania, 1682-1800', By Sharon V. Salinger, p. 89).

In 1738 Dr. Thomas Graeme reported to the colonial Council of Pennsylvania that if two ships crammed with White slaves were allowed to land, "it might prove Dangerous to the health of the Inhabitants of this Province." -("Minutes of the Provincial Council of Pennsylvania," Colonial Records, 4:306).

"Ships filled with diseased White slaves landed anyway. In 1750 an island was established for their quarantine, Fisher Island, at the mouth of Schuylkill River. But the establishment of the quarantine area did nothing to protect the health of the White slaves and the island was more typical of Devil's Island than a place of recuperation. In 1764 a clergyman, Pastor Helmuth, visited Fisher island and described it as "a land of the living dead, a vault full of living corpses."

How were some White Slave treated at compared to some Black Slaves ?

From, 'They Were White And They Were Slaves'....

" A White girl enslaved by a woman called Mistress Ward, was whipped so badly that she died from it. On the finding of a jury that such action was "unreasonable and unchristianlike," Mistress Ward was fined 300 pounds of tobacco."

"In 1678 Charles Grimlin, a wealthy American colonial planter, was found guilty of murdering a female White slave he owned. He was pardoned and set free. In the same year a White woman "of low origins," killed her husband, a man of some wealth. The same judge who had pardoned Grimlin sentenced the White woman (who was probably a descendant of White slaves) to be "burned alive according to the law."

Nor should it be concluded that because some trials were held for those masters who murdered their White slaves that this reflected a higher justice than that given to Black slaves.

In thousands of cases of homicide against poor Whites there were no trials whatsoever--murdered White slaves were hurriedly buried by their masters so that the resulting decomposition would prohibit any enquiry into the cause of their deaths. Others just "disappeared" or died from "accidents" or committed "suicide." Many of the high number of so-called "suicides" of White slaves took place under suspicious circumstances, but in every single case the slavemaster was found innocent of any crime. (For acquittals of masters in Virginia or instances of failure to prosecute them for the murder of White slaves, see Virginia General Court Minutes, VMH, XIX, 388).

At the same time, White slaves, White servants and poor White working men were forbidden to serve on a jury. Only Whites who owned property could do so. Judges were recruited solely from the propertied class. When the few cases regarding the torture and murder of White slaves reached a court it was not difficult to predict the outcome.


Torture and Murder of White Slaves

White slaves were punished with merciless whippings and beatings. The records of Middlesex County, Virginia relate how a slavemaster confessed "that he hath most uncivilly and inhumanly beaten a White female with great knotted whipcord--so that the poor servant is a lamentable spectacle to behold. "

"Whippings were were iron collars and chains." (Ekirch, p. 1 SO).

A case in the county from 1655 relates how a White slave was "fastened by a lock with a chain to it" by his master and tied to a shop door and "whipped till he was very bloody ." The beating and whipping of White slaves resulted in so many being beaten to death that in 1662 the Virginia Assembly passed a law prohibiting the private burial of White slaves because such burial helped to conceal their murders and encouraged further atrocities against other White slaves.

A grievously ill White slave was forced by his master to dig his own grave, since there was little likelihood that the master would obtain any more labor from him. The White slave's owner "made him sick and languishing as he was, dig his own grave, in which he was laid a few days afterwards, the others being too busy to dig it, having their hands full in attending to the tobacco." (Jaspar Danckaerts and Peter Sluyter, Journal of a Voyage to New York and a Tour of Several American Colonies, 1679-1680).

In New England, Nicholas Weekes and his wife deliberately cut off the toes of their White slave who subsequently died.

Marmaduke Pierce in Massachusetts severely beat a White slave boy with a rod and finally beat him to death. Pierce was not punished for the murder.

In 1655 in the Plymouth Colony a master named Mr. Latham, starved his 14 year old White slave boy, beat him and left him to die outdoors in sub-zero temperatures. The dead boy's body showed the markings of repeated beatings and his hands and feet were frozen solid.

Colonial records are full of the deaths by beating, starvation and exposure of White slaves in addition to tragic accounts such as the one of the New Jersey White slave boy who drowned himself rather than continue to face the unmerciful beatings of his master (American Weekly Mercury, Sept. 2-9, 1731).

Henry Smith beat to death an elderly White slave and raped two of his female White slaves in Virginia.

John Dandy beat to death his White slave boy whose black and blue body was found floating down a creek in Maryland.

Pope Alvey beat his White slave girl Alice Sanford to death in 1663. She was reported to have been "beaten to a Jelly."

Joseph Fincher beat his White slave Jeffery Haggman to death in 1664.

John Grammer ordered his plantation overseer to beat his White slave 100 times with a cat-o'-nine-tails. The White slave died of his wounds. The overseer, rather than expressing regret at the death he inflicted stated, "I could have given him ten times more."

There are thousands of cases in the colonial archives of inhuman mistreatment, cruelty, beatings and the entire litany of Uncle Tom's Cabin horrors administered to hapless White slaves.


One ad for a fugitive White slave stated, "The fellow may be easily known, being cut on his back and arms from a late whipping he had, on his attempting to run away, the night before." (Ekirch, p. 203).

"One culprit was described as having a string of bells (fastened) around his neck which made a hideous jingling and discordant noise, another wore an iron collar, and others bore the scars of recent whippings on their backs" (Morris, Government and Labor in Early America, p. 435).

Advertisements regularly appeared in early American newspapers for fugitive White slaves. One such wanted notice described a slave who had run off as having a "long visage of lightish complexion, and thin-flaxen hair; sometimes ties his hair behind with a string, a very proud fellow...very impudent..." (Jernegan, p. 52).

"Physical descriptions printed in provincial newspaper advertisements for runaway servants provide an invaluable profile...Bent backs, ugly burns, and crooked limbs reflected the common hardships...Scars criss-crossed entire bodies...knife and sword wounds were common over all parts of the body...Among injuries received during servitude were marks left by whips, chains and iron collars. Thomas Burns, for example, was 'remarkably cut on the buttocks by a flogging' from his master, whereas Sarah Davis's whipping had left 'many scars on her back." (Ekirch, pp. 157-159).

The history of "racist White toleration" of the hunting of black slaves as well as the controversy surrounding the capture of fugitive Black slaves in the North just prior to the Civil War is incomprehensible without being placed in the context of the body of Fugitive Slave Law that was first established for use against White slaves. In colonial America the fugitive White slave was considered the property of the master and the legal right to recovery was universally recognized."


Despite the fact that in today's politically correct revisionist history of Hollywood, in which ALL Black slaves must be portrayed with scars on his or her back. The reality of the matter is that whipping was THE common form of punishment in the 18th and 19th Centuries, and you were far more likely to find scars on the backs of White sailors, then you were on the back of Black slaves. This despite the effort by the left to contort history, with made-up revisionism such as the Black Afrocentric hoax called the 'Willie Lynch Letter', designed to elicit anger in one race and guilt in another.

"Savage whippings of white Americans also occurred in the U.S. Navy in the 19th century. An eyewitness to Black slavery in the South and the treatment of White sailors on American naval ships at sea reported, "That on board of the American man-of-war that carried him out...he had witnessed more flogging than had taken place on a plantation of five hundred African slaves in ten years." -(Herman Melville, White Jacket or The World in a Man of War, Oxford University Press edition, p.142).

"A decade before Melville's account was published, Richard Henry Dana's 'Two Years Before the Mast appeared'. The author, a Harvard law student who had signed on a ship to test his manhood, gave the following account of the whipping of a White sailor: "Can't a man ask a question without being flogged?' "No,' shouted the captain; 'nobody shall open his mouth aboard this vessel but myself;' and began laying the blows upon his back, swinging half round between each blow to give it full effect. As he went on his passion increased, and he danced about the deck, calling out as he swung the rope, 'If you want to know what I flog you for, I'll tell you. It's because I like to do it! It suits me! That's what I do it for!'

"The man writhed under the pain, until he could endure it no longer, when he called out... 'Oh, Jesus Christ! Oh, Jesus Christ!'

"Don't call on Jesus Christ,' shouted the captain; he can't help you. Call on Captain T, he's the man. He can help you. Jesus Christ can't help you now! You see your condition! You see where I've got you all, and you know what to expect!...I'll flog you all, fore and aft, from the cabin boy up!"

"In White Jacket, Melville describes the whipping of a teenage sailor named Peter who had defended himself against an attack by a bully, rather than report the attack to the ship's captain. For this he was ordered stripped and "scourged worse than a hound" : " As he was being secured to the gratings, and the shudderings and creepings of his dazzlingly white back were revealed, he turned round his head imploringly; but his weeping entreaties and vows of contrition were of no avail. 'I would not forgive God Almighty!' cried the captain. "

"The fourth boatswain's mate advanced, and at the first blow, the boy, shouting 'My God! Oh my God!' writhed and leaped so as to displace the gratings, and scatter the nine tails of the scourge all over his person. At the next blow he howled, leaped and raged in unendurable torture."
(Melville, White Jacket, p. 139).

"There was a special class of whipping, "known in the Navy as 'Flogging through the Fleet'...this law may be and has been, quoted in judicial justification of the infliction of more than one hundred lashes...a sailor, under the above article, may legally be flogged to death."

"To say, that after being flogged through the fleet, the prisoner's back is sometimes puffed up like a pillow; or to say that in other cases it looks as if burned black before a roasting fire; or to say that you may track him through the squadron by the blood on the bulwarks of every ship, would only be saying what many seamen have seen. Instances have occurred where he has expired the day after the punishment."
-(Melville, White Jacket, or, The World in a Man of War, Oxford University Press edition. pp. 373-375).

["Melville was an experienced sailor from the age of nineteen. He wrote White Jacket based on his fourteen month voyage aboard the Navy frigate 'United States'. During which he witnessed 163 floggings of sailors."]

White slave Joseph Mansbury had been whipped repeatedly to such an extent that his back appeared, "Quite bare of flesh, and his collar bones were exposed looking very much like two ivory, polished horns. It was with difficulty that we could find another place to flog him. Tony [Chandler, the overseer] suggested to me that we had better do it on the soles of his feet next time." -(Robert Hughes, The Fatal Shore, p. 115). Hughes describes the fate of White slaves as one of "prolonged and hideous torture."

To protect their voter base, liberals have subjugated many people to perpetual self-preserved victimhood, worthy of all the numerous social programs, entitlements, and preferential treatment, one would accord those who are wounded and suffering. In essence, the Democrats are buying votes.

"Black" Slavery is the new liberal PC hallmark of victimhood, and the scale by which all suffering is to now be weighed. Regardless how much other peoples have suffered.

If we are to ignore these historical facts, for the biases of political correctness, then let us also ignore the fact that White slaves and the indentured servants in America were often treated far worse than their Black counterparts, as African Slaves were expensive, requiring most slave owners to look after their sizable investments. White slaves could be had for a few pence, or by kidnapping and were expendable, therefore more often abused.

Let us ignore the fact that for most of the last 3000 years the vast majority of White people had no rights at all! For many working class Europeans, through out history, life was miserable and short. Just trying to stay alive was a day to day struggle. What liberals call "White male privilege", was for most, little more than the "privilege" for over two thousand years, of being forced en mass, to fight, suffer, and die BY the millions in THEIR master's many wars, and on thousands of battlefields. People like my ancestors were enslaved, used as cannon fodder for the King's army, lived in starvation and squalor; and finished their short lives in sickness and poverty.

Let us ignore the fact that, while Black slavery existed in America up to the Civil War, there were more than 10 million Black Slaves in Brazil and Cuba, who were not free until the later part of the 19th Century, and were treated far worse.

Let us ignore the fact that only 1 in 7 Southern Whites owned a slave.

Let us ignore the fact that today Black slavery is still practiced in parts of Africa.

And most importantly, let us also ignore the fact that it was Western Civilization and the White Abolitionist Movement in Europe, spurred on by Western Christian philosophy within the contemporary social politics, of the basic rights of Man (i.e. life, liberty, and self determination), that was the first catalyst to end slavery in most of the world, with full emancipation here in America, that cost of over 600,000 mostly White men and boys, buried in the ground. Or more simply put, one White man paid the butcher's bill for every 6 Black slaves that were freed. Such was the cost of Black freedom. The butcher's bill paid in our ancestor's blood.

198 posted on 01/10/2004 6:04:18 PM PST by Main Street (Stuck in traffic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: Main Street
MacPherson (who was my professor at Princeton) has used some of them in his books. They are currently in the Harrold Collection at Emory University (the Harrolds are collaterals of ours).

They would probably be worth publishing. N.W.E. was a bad speller, but he had a wonderful, spare, almost modern style and a gift for observation (and irony). It is interesting to contrast his attitude to war with that of one of my other gg grandfathers, S.H. Dent who commanded Dent's Alabama Battery, which pulled the cannon up Snodgrass Hill by hand at the climax of the battle of Chickamauga. His letters home are florid, full of classical turns of phrase and flights of oratory. He waxes eloquent re "our glorious cause" etc. N.W.E. is of a much more homely and practical turn of mind: "Chap Murrell has the measles but is not dangerous" - "Your parcel was gratefully received and we are making your eatables squat" - "I am not responsible for the horse's name and sold him partly on that account." (the name of the horse is lost to us!)

I would have enjoyed a dinner party with Grandpa Dent, but I think I would have liked to go fishing with Grandpa Long.

199 posted on 01/10/2004 6:07:19 PM PST by AnAmericanMother (. . . sed, ut scis, quis homines huiusmodi intellegere potest?. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother
I never limited myself to Massachusetts - I've been saying New England from the git-go.

Well, you haven't exactly limited yourself to those events that occurred prior to the American revolution, and those events that occurred after either.

Of course that would require a deeper, more thorough examination of the issues, and a chronological breakdown of those events that occurred in British America before the United States came into existence, and established its own form of government.

However, since you seem to prefer playing on Lew Rockwell's 'Lost Cause' slip -n- slide, try not to hurt yourself.

200 posted on 01/10/2004 6:28:17 PM PST by mac_truck (Aide toi et dieu l’aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 261 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson