Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
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

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250251-261 next last
To: U S Army EOD
U2
151 posted on 01/09/2004 11:07:06 PM PST by dwd1 (M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Main Street
Not sure about wanting to live that way unless I were in "upper management" but I would have to say that the times were different.... At this same time, women were not encouraged to have anathesia during childbirth until Queen Victoria did so(nine kids, I think) so we have to be fair and look at things in the context of the times... Someone else stated quite accurately that our modern system of charging interest on money would be considered reprehensible from the point of view of some from other times...
152 posted on 01/09/2004 11:12:20 PM PST by dwd1 (M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: dwd1
anesthesia....
153 posted on 01/09/2004 11:13:03 PM PST by dwd1 (M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: billbears
With Great Britain, France, Portugal, Spain, and the United States all having outlawed the Slave Trade by 1820, military efforts were begun by all these nations to enforce the ban

Well, England outlawed slavery in 1833.

"The common law of England did not recognize anyone as a slave (although in Scotland, which does not have the common law, bondage still existed until the late eighteenth century, when it was abolished by legislation). Slavery, however, existed in a number of British colonies, principally in the West Indies.

The Slavery Abolition Bill 1833 was passed by the House of Commons and by the House of Lords.

It received the Royal Assent (which means it became law) on 29 August 1833 and came into force on 1 August 1834. On that date slavery was abolished throughout the vast British Empire.

The Act automatically applied as new possessions (principally in Africa) subsequently became part of the British Empire.

Section 64 excluded Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) and the territories then under the control of The Honourable East India Company, namely, British India and St Helena, but the section was subsequently repealed. The Honourable East India Company, in theory, administered large parts of India as an agent for the Mogul emperor in Delhi."

See this link:

http://www.anti-slaverysociety.addr.com/huk-1833act.htm

Walt

154 posted on 01/10/2004 4:16:34 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa (Virtue is the uncontested prize.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: billbears
Slavers in the 19th century often found protection for the illicit trade by sailing their vessels under the American flag.

Be that as it may, they couldn't legally land in this country after 1808. Most ships used in the slave trade were flagged in Britain.

Found this, written by Charles Dickens:

"Public opinion! hear the public opinion of the free South, as expressed by its own members in the House of Representatives at Washington. `I have a great respect for the chair,` quoth North Carolina, `I have a great respect for the chair as an officer of the house, and a great respect for him personally; nothing but that respect prevents me from rushing to the table and tearing that petition which has just been presented for the abolition of slavery in the district of Columbia, to pieces.` - `I warn the abolitionists,` says South Carolina, `ignorant, infuriated barbarians as they are, that if chance shall throw any of them into our hands, he may expect a felon`s death.` - `Let an abolitionist come within the borders of South Carolina,` cries a third; mild Carolina`s colleague; `and if we can catch him, we will try him, and notwithstanding the interference of all the governments on earth, including the Federal government, we will HANG him.`

Public opinion has made this law. - It has declared that in Washington, in that city which takes its name from the father of American liberty, any justice of the peace may bind with fetters any negro passing down the street and thrust him into jail: no offence on the black man`s part is necessary. The justice says, `I choose to think this man a runaway:` and locks him up. Public opinion impowers the man of law when this is done, to advertise the negro in the newspapers, warning his owner to come and claim him, or he will be sold to pay the jail fees. But supposing he is a free black, and has no owner, it may naturally be presumed that he is set at liberty. No: HE IS SOLD TO RECOMPENSE HIS JAILER. This has been done again, and again, and again. He has no means of proving his freedom; has no adviser, messenger, or assistance of any sort or kind; no investigation into his case is made, or inquiry instituted. He, a free man, who may have served for years, and bought his liberty, is thrown into jail on no process, for no crime, and on no pretence of crime: and is sold to pay the jail fees. This seems incredible, even of America, but it is the law.

Public opinion is deferred to, in such cases as the following: which is headed in the newspapers:

`INTERESTING LAW-CASE.

`An interesting case is now on trial in the Supreme Court, arising out of the following facts. A gentleman residing in Maryland had allowed an aged pair of his slaves, substantial though not legal freedom for several years. While thus living, a daughter was born to them, who grew up in the same liberty, until she married a free negro, and went with him to reside in Pennsylvania. They had several children, and lived unmolested until the original owner died, when his heir attempted to regain them; but the magistrate before whom they were brought, decided that he had no jurisdiction in the case. THE OWNER SEIZED THE WOMAN AND HER CHILDREN ITS THE NIGHT, AND CARRIED THEM TO MARYLAND.`

`Cash for negroes,` `cash for negroes,` `cash for negroes,` is the heading of advertisements in great capitals down the long columns of the crowded journals. Woodcuts of a runaway negro with manacled hands, crouching beneath a bluff pursuer in top boots, who, having caught him, grasps him by the throat, agreeably diversify the pleasant text. The leading article protests against `that abominable and hellish doctrine of abolition, which is repugnant alike to every law of God and nature.` The delicate mamma, who smiles her acquiescence in this sprightly writing as she reads the paper in her cool piazza, quiets her youngest child who clings about her skirts, by promising the boy `a whip to beat the little niggers with.` - But the negroes, little and big, are protected by public opinion.

Let us try this public opinion by another test, which is important in three points of view: first, as showing how desperately timid of the public opinion slave-owners are, in their delicate descriptions of fugitive slaves in widely circulated newspapers; secondly, as showing how perfectly contented the slaves are, and how very seldom they run away; thirdly, as exhibiting their entire freedom from scar, or blemish, or any mark of cruel infliction, as their pictures are drawn, not by lying abolitionists, but by their own truthful masters.

The following are a few specimens of the advertisements in the public papers. It is only four years since the oldest among them appeared; and others of the same nature continue to be published every day, in shoals.

`Ran away, Negress Caroline. Had on a collar with one prong turned down.`

`Ran away, a black woman, Betsy. Had an iron bar on her right leg.`

`Ran away, the negro Manuel. Much marked with irons.`

`Ran away, the negress Fanny. Had on an iron band about her neck.`

`Ran away, a negro boy about twelve years old. Had round his neck a chain dog-collar with "De Lampert" engraved on it.`

`Ran away, the negro Hown. Has a ring of iron on his left foot. Also, Grise, HIS WIFE, having a ring and chain on the left leg.`

`Ran away, a negro boy named James. Said boy was ironed when he left me.`

`Committed to jail, a man who calls his name John. He has a clog of iron on his right foot which will weigh four or five pounds.`

`Detained at the police jail, the negro wench, Myra. Has several marks of LASHING, and has irons on her feet.`

`Ran away, a negro woman and two children. A few days before she went off, I burnt her with a hot iron, on the left side of her face. I tried to make the letter M.`

`Ran away, a negro man named Henry; his left eye out, some scars from a dirk on and under his left arm, and much scarred with the whip.`

`One hundred dollars reward, for a negro fellow, Pompey, 40 years old. He is branded on the left jaw.`

`Committed to jail, a negro man. Has no toes on the left foot.`

`Ran away, a negro woman named Rachel. Has lost all her toes except the large one.`

`Ran away, Sam. He was shot a short time since through the hand, and has several shots in his left arm and side.`

`Ran away, my negro man Dennis. Said negro has been shot in the left arm between the shoulder and elbow, which has paralysed the left hand.`

`Ran away, my negro man named Simon. He has been shot badly, in his back and right arm.`

`Ran away, a negro named Arthur. Has a considerable scar across his breast and each arm, made by a knife; loves to talk much of the goodness of God.`

`Twenty-five dollars reward for my man Isaac. He has a scar on his forehead, caused by a blow; and one on his back, made by a shot from a pistol.`

`Ran away, a negro girl called Mary. Has a small scar over her eye, a good many teeth missing, the letter A is branded on her cheek and forehead.`

`Ran away, negro Ben. Has a scar on his right hand; his thumb and forefinger being injured by being shot last fall. A part of the bone came out. He has also one or two large scars on his back and hips.`

`Detained at the jail, a mulatto, named Tom. Has a scar on the right cheek, and appears to have been burned with powder on the face.`

`Ran away, a negro man named Ned. Three of his fingers are drawn into the palm of his hand by a cut. Has a scar on the back of his neck, nearly half round, done by a knife.`

`Was committed to jail, a negro man. Says his name is Josiah. His back very much scarred by the whip; and branded on the thigh and hips in three or four places, thus (J M). The rim of his right ear has been bit or cut off.`

`Fifty dollars reward, for my fellow Edward. He has a scar on the corner of his mouth, two cuts on and under his arm, and the letter E on his arm.`

`Ran away, negro boy Ellie. Has a scar on one of his arms from the bite of a dog.`

`Ran away, from the plantation of James Surgette, the following negroes: Randal, has one ear cropped; Bob, has lost one eye; Kentucky Tom, has one jaw broken.`

`Ran away, Anthony. One of his ears cut off, and his left hand cut with an axe.`

`Fifty dollars reward for the negro Jim Blake. Has a piece cut out of each ear, and the middle finger of the left hand cut off to the second joint.`

`Ran away, a negro woman named Maria. Has a scar on one side of her cheek, by a cut. Some scars on her back.`

`Ran away, the Mulatto wench Mary. Has a cut on the left arm, a scar on the left shoulder, and two upper teeth missing.`

I should say, perhaps, in explanation of this latter piece of description, that among the other blessings which public opinion secures to the negroes, is the common practice of violently punching out their teeth. To make them wear iron collars by day and night, and to worry them with dogs, are practices almost too ordinary to deserve mention.

`Ran away, my man Fountain. Has holes in his ears, a scar on the right side of his forehead, has been shot in the hind part of his legs, and is marked on the back with the whip.`

`Two hundred and fifty dollars reward for my negro man Jim. He is much marked with shot in his right thigh. The shot entered on the outside, halfway between the hip and knee joints.`

`Brought to jail, John. Left ear cropt.`

`Taken up, a negro man. Is very much scarred about the face and body, and has the left ear bit off.`

`Ran away, a black girl, named Mary. Has a scar on her cheek, and the end of one of her toes cut off.`

`Ran away, my Mulatto woman, Judy. She has had her right arm broke.`

`Ran away, my negro man, Levi. His left hand has been burnt, and I think the end of his forefinger is off.`

`Ran away, a negro man, NAMED WASHINGTON. Has lost a part of his middle finger, and the end of his little finger.`

`Twenty-five dollars reward for my man John. The tip of his nose is bit off.`

`Twenty-five dollars reward for the negro slave, Sally. Walks AS THOUGH crippled in the back.`

`Ran away, Joe Dennis. Has a small notch in one of his ears.`

`Ran away, negro boy, Jack. Has a small crop out of his left ear.`

`Ran away, a negro man, named Ivory. Has a small piece cut out of the top of each ear.`

There's a lot more; see this site:

http://www.underthesun.cc/Classics/Dickens/americannotes/americannotes18.htm

All of this is suported by what Bruce Catton wrote:

"Lincoln said at Springfield on June 18 that the condition of the Negroes in the United States had deteriorated sharply since the era of the fathers, "and their ultimate destiny has never appeared so hopeless as in the last three or four years"

And yet harshness was no real part of the temper of Americans of the South, who differed no whit from Americans of the North. The main excitant impulse was fear, and they wanted to protect the institution, not to penalize the individual. It was because the free Negro menaced the institution, because manumission undermined it, because all self-help systems for the slave corroded It, that pro- slavery men urged new legislation. Their object was not to surround slavery with an atmosphere of terror. It was to shore up an institution built on quick- sand and battered bv all the forces of world sentiment and emergent industrialism.

Ruffin was personally the kindliest of masters. The unhappy fact was that it had become impossible to safeguard slavery without brutal violence to countless individuals; either the institution had to be given up, or the brutality committed.

The legislators of Louisiana and Arkansas, of Alabama and Georgia, with humane men like Ruffin and the Eastern Shore planters of Maryland, had faced this alternative. They had chosen the institution. The Richmond Examiner stated their choice in unflinching language:

It is all an hallucination to suppose that we are ever going to get rid of slavery, or that it will ever be desirable to do so. It is a thing that we cannot do without;that is righteous, profitable, and permanent, and that belongs to Southern society as inherently, intrinsically, and durably as the white race itself. Southern men should act as if the canopy of heaven were inscribed with a covenant, in letters of fire, >that the negro is here, and here forever—is our property, and ours forever—is never to be emancipated—is to be kept hard at work and in rigid subjection all his days.

This has the ring of the Richmond publicise Fitzhugh, and would have been repudiated by many Southerners. But Jefferson Davis said, July 6, 1859, "There is not probably an intelligent mind among our own citizens who doubts either the moral or the legal right of the institution of African slavery." Senator A. G. ' Brown said September 4, 1858, that he wanted Cuban, Mexican, and Central American territory for slavery; "I would spread the blessings of slavery . . . to the uttermost ends of the earth." Such utterances treated slavery as permanent, and assumed that it must be defended at every point."

-- "The Coming Fury" by Bruce Catton

Walt

155 posted on 01/10/2004 4:29:55 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa (Virtue is the uncontested prize.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner; mhking
"When you eliminate the black Confederate soldier, you've eliminated the history of the South."

Spoken by a black professor of history, and the most potentious comment in the whole article.

History is written by the victors, and will be re-written by the PC, UNTIL THESE UPPITY PeRFESSORS get it right!!

156 posted on 01/10/2004 6:28:22 AM PST by ninenot (So many cats, so few recipes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: U S Army EOD
GGG grandfather was Nimrod Washington Long, b. 1800. He lived in or near Washington, Wilkes County. His father was Evans Long and his mother was Lucy Apperson. His father was originally from Spotsylvania Cy VA, his grandfather was Reuben Long, a Revolutionary soldier. I think Evans is buried in Wilkes County. He married Catherine Davis, who supposedly was some sort of cousin of Jefferson Davis (but we have no proof of that!)

I know we have some Bunches on the family tree, but I think they married cousins, not in my direct line.

We drive through Clayton to go camping and kayaking! Pretty country up that way!

157 posted on 01/10/2004 7:47:54 AM PST by AnAmericanMother (. . . sed, ut scis, quis homines huiusmodi intellegere potest?. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck; stainlessbanner
Some of my ancestors, about 4 generations back, fought for the Confederate States.

They didn't own any slaves. They were too poor to own sheep. In fact, vile unsubstantiated yankee propaganda has it that they were run out of North Carolina for STEALING sheep.

They weren't fighting to keep slaves, they didn't have any.

The war was in great part about slavery. But anyone who says it was ALL about slavery is a victim of liberal education, or a liar.

158 posted on 01/10/2004 8:12:27 AM PST by LibKill ("Two crossed, dead, Frenchmen emblazoned on a mound of dead Frenchmen.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother
There is still a Long family that goes back a long way living here. The next time you go to Clayton, go toward Franklin, NC to Mountain City. On that road you will see a sign to the York house. It is an old hotel that used to belong to my family. It has been sold several times but is still a neat place to stay. If it is still there, the house behind it up on the mountain is my father's home and we used to own that mountain. Go in the hotel and tell them you know some of the Yorks and that you would like to see the log cabin. The log cabin is inside of the hotel with the hotel built over it.

As far as the Davis' go there is that possibility. Jefferson Davis was finally captured in Wilkes county, I think, but don't hold me to that.
159 posted on 01/10/2004 10:01:22 AM PST by U S Army EOD (When the EOD technician screws up, he is always the first to notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: U S Army EOD
looks like one of those Yankee slave ships from Nantucket. These are the ones that brought the slaves in, not the Stars and Bars

No, thats an image of the slave deck on the Brookes , an English slaver circa 1802. It was built to hold about 450 slaves in chains, but would often sail with many more, in the conditions I described above.

The Yankees you refer to made that image widely known as part of their abolition efforts, which might be why you don't recognize it.

160 posted on 01/10/2004 10:27:35 AM PST by mac_truck (Aide toi et dieu l’aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: U S Army EOD
Nimrod Washington had six or seven sisters but only one brother, whose name was Lunceford or Lunsford - either your local Longs are descended from him or from one of his uncles - there were four or five of those, and I'm sure some never felt the urge to migrate westward . . . :-D
161 posted on 01/10/2004 10:28:54 AM PST by AnAmericanMother (. . . sed, ut scis, quis homines huiusmodi intellegere potest?. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: U S Army EOD
I've seen the York House - on the right as you go up IIRC - but never stayed there. Didn't realize there was a log cabin in the middle of it though! Next time we go through, we'll stop and take a look. I love old houses. Some of our family's houses still survive in East Alabama, it's very interesting to look at the way things were built in those days.
162 posted on 01/10/2004 10:30:40 AM PST by AnAmericanMother (. . . sed, ut scis, quis homines huiusmodi intellegere potest?. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: LibKill
The war was in great part about slavery. But anyone who says it was ALL about slavery is a victim of liberal education, or a liar.

I don't think anyone has said or believes that every soldier who fought in the Civil War did so because they were fighting for or against slavery. For the most part, soldiers fight for home, family, friends, and native land. They fight because it becomes a question of "them against us." Many soldiers on both sides fought for ideas of freedom, as well.

But these reasons apply to every war, so they don't explain why wars are fought. To figure that out we need to look at the speeches of statesmen, newspapers, books, laws and debates. There were other issues. Events and passions had their own momentum, and people were drawn into war for the union or their section by emotion and reaction to provocations and changing circumstances. But if we want or need to find a root cause, slavery is a good one. Slavery and the conflicts over its defense and expansion were the chief reason for the first secessions, and secession sparked the war.

So, I don't think anyone's said that slavery was the only reason for the war, save perhaps in this sense: the US wouldn't have become a country so divided that intersectional war was possible if it hadn't been for an issue as divisive as slavery. It's hard to realistically think of another issue that could have destroyed the political system to the point where the country would split into two hostile nations facing off against each other. Though even here, one could argue that it wasn't slavery alone that did this and that something like the territorial question and the way it was botched were necessary to bring things to the point of war.

Some say "it wasn't all about slavery" as a prelude to simply brushing slavery aside as an issue, and making the war about something else. A lot of these people aren't so much interested in what happened and why, as in ideas of guilt and innocence, sin and purity, moral equivalence and moral superiority. Such issues can hardly be avoided, but it helps to know if people are arguing about different things while thinking that they are debating each other. So often the real argument isn't about what caused the Civil War, but about "my ancestors were better (or no worse) than your ancestors."

163 posted on 01/10/2004 11:05:22 AM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck
I know I can read the caption on the image.

One of the worst things the slave ships used to do was keep the entire human cargo attached to one chain. They would run this to one of the ships anchors and have a cut out in the hull. If they were being chased by a ship intent on enforcing the anti slave laws they would drop the anchor pulling the entire cargo out with it into the ocean. Nice folks.

Bulley Hayes was one of the most notorious of the American slave traders. The entire system from the time they were captured until they finally made it was brutal and inhuman beyond belief.
164 posted on 01/10/2004 11:47:11 AM PST by U S Army EOD (When the EOD technician screws up, he is always the first to notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: x
Everyone has and opinion on this. From my research, I have concluded that the War was basically about States Rights but one of the major parts on the States Rights was based on if the state would be a Slave State or a Free State. The fact of the state being a free or slave state would determine the economy of the state and therefore support the idea the war was about slavery.

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.
165 posted on 01/10/2004 11:59:02 AM PST by U S Army EOD (When the EOD technician screws up, he is always the first to notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: U S Army EOD
I know I can read the caption on the image.

And yet that knowlege didn't prevent you from fabricating that it was a Yankee ship from Nantucket anyway, did it?

A little southern bias goes a long way I guess.

166 posted on 01/10/2004 12:56:30 PM PST by mac_truck (Aide toi et dieu l’aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck
Goes both ways, since it was implied these people were treated the same way on the slave ships as they were on the plantations, with the original statement being that medical care was available on the plantations.

The questions from you was if the medical care on the slave ship was a representation on how well the slaves were treated on the plantations.

Would you be willing to give me $10.00 for every ship that did operate out of Nantucket that did carry slaves? Have you ever been to the Whaling Museum on Nantucket? I was there when I sailed my 24' sailboat, "Georgia Peach I" up there off shore from Annapolis, MD in 1971. We flew the Confederate Battle Flag on her as we went into the harbor but were not carrying any contraband human cargo during in the trip in case you are suspecting I might do so.
167 posted on 01/10/2004 1:21:17 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 166 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck
He didn't say it was; he said it looked like.

If you're going to call somebody a liar, make sure you're accurate.

His point, I think, still stands - most of the Triangle Trade was conducted by New Englanders. Certainly there were Englishmen (early on) and Southerners (later on) involved, but if you look at the bulk of the slave trade in the most active years it was slaves-sugar-rum and New England was one corner of the triangle and running most of (not all) the ships. And remember until 1776 the Americans were trading under the British flag . . .

NEWPORT, R.I. & TRIANGLE TRADE: THE ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS OF THE RHODE ISLAND SLAVE TRADE *An estimated 59,070 slaves were taken by Newport Slavers prior to the American Revolution. An estimated 15 million were taken to the West in total. Between 1709 and 1807, Rhode Island merchants sponsored at least 934 slaving voyages to the coast of Africa. Their ships carried an estimated 106,544 Africans from their homeland to the New World (Coughtry). Of the 421 Rhode Island slavers tabulated for the period of 1784 to 1807, 402 or 95% can be identified today by port of ownership. Three hundred and ninety-seven (98.8%) of the vessels were registered in one of the following Rhode Island towns: Bristol, Newport, Providence, and Warren. The remaining vessels were owned by merchants in Little Compton, or North Kingstown. Together, Newport and Bristol accounted for 318 African voyages, or 79.2% of post war trade which they shared equally (Coughtry). Each financed 159 ventures or 39.6% of the joint total. Providence made 55 trips, 13.74% of the total, and tiny Warren, R.I. made 24 trips with 6% of the share (Coughtry). All together, 204 different Rhode Island citizens owned a share or more in a slave voyage at one time or another. It is evident that the involvement of R.I. citizens in the slave trade was widespread and abundant. For Rhode Islanders, slavery had provided a major new profit sector and an engine for trade in the West Indies.
Read all about it here. From Providence College in Rhode Island. Not exactly a bastion of "southern bias."
168 posted on 01/10/2004 1:28:24 PM PST by AnAmericanMother (. . . sed, ut scis, quis homines huiusmodi intellegere potest?. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: U S Army EOD

Are you willing to give me $10.00 for every one of these devices?

169 posted on 01/10/2004 1:38:18 PM PST by mac_truck (Aide toi et dieu l’aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
Ran away, Joe Dennis. Has a small notch in one of his ears.`

`Ran away, negro boy, Jack. Has a small crop out of his left ear.`

`Ran away, a negro man, named Ivory. Has a small piece cut out of the top of each ear.`

Those ear notches must have been part of the excellent medical attention those plantation owners gave their african workers

170 posted on 01/10/2004 1:43:36 PM PST by mac_truck (Aide toi et dieu l’aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck
No way, because they were used a lot along with much worse devices.

The point of the original thread was if Blacks fought for the South. I don't think there is any doubt that a number did, but not as many that were willing to fight for the North. I am sure that the vast majority of the slaves living in Georgia were a lot happier to see Sherman's Army coming than ones living in Pennsylvania were to see Lee's Army coming.

You seem to want to imply that everyone who owned slaves or saw a black in the South wanted to torture the poor guy or tie him to the whipping post. Also this was the only part of the country giving the blacks a raw deal during that time frame.

It was going on everywhere in the world for the black man at that time with the worse probably being in Africa itself. That is basically just the way thing were.

Like it or not, based on the circumstances, the living conditions for slaves in sections of the South was better than industrial workers in the North. The difference was that the slaves did not have freedom of choice and were treated as property instead of free men.

Even the so called free blacks were not treated equally in the South or any other place in the United States. Being black was not good where ever you lived.
171 posted on 01/10/2004 2:04:46 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 169 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother
He didn't say it was; he said it looked like.

And when I corrected him the first time, he also said 'I know I read the caption'.

If you're going to call somebody a liar, make sure you're accurate.

If I show you an image of a slave deck and you say "that looks like a Yankee ship from Nantucket" when you know its actually a slave deck from an English ship, then you are either showing your southern bias by fabricating or doing your best Bill Clinton impression. Take your pick.

While your factoids regarding Rhode Island are interesting, the last time I checked, Nantucket was a part of Massachusetts, not RI.

172 posted on 01/10/2004 2:11:37 PM PST by mac_truck (Aide toi et dieu l’aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: U S Army EOD
It was going on everywhere in the world for the black man at that time with the worse probably being in Africa itself.

Vermont amended its constitution to ban slavery in 1777. 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.

While some of the state laws stipulated gradual emancipation, ear notching and iron collars were not used.

I am well aware that neither you or I had anything personally to do with slavery, but you'd be well advised to transcend the myth regarding the benevolence of that peculiar institution.

173 posted on 01/10/2004 2:21:23 PM PST by mac_truck (Aide toi et dieu l’aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck
Just because the Northen States banned slavery doesn't mean blacks were treated well. You need to get over the fact that the entire South was not like in "Uncle Tom's Cabin". This seems to be the image you want to portray.
174 posted on 01/10/2004 2:29:11 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 173 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck
I was just trying to lower myself down to your level, bubba, so we could talk about things.
175 posted on 01/10/2004 2:32:32 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 172 | View Replies]

To: U S Army EOD
How ironic. Stowe was sympathetic to the situation of the average southerner with regard to slavery. Simon Legree was a transplanted Yankee, not a southerner. This fact was not lost on those who read the book. Its one of the reasons it was so sucessful in changing northern attitudes.

Too bad it got banned in the south.

176 posted on 01/10/2004 2:40:06 PM PST by mac_truck (Aide toi et dieu l’aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: cyborg
In my youth I recall blacks and whites not only "getting along", but working together and posessing mutual respect. That was the early 1960's.

Then liberal anti-white racism started in, and there has been Hell to pay ever since.

Funny, we were 'integrated' in school for seven years when the Yankees in Boston were burning busses so their children didn't have to go to school with black kids.

Seems they can't stomach the idea that Southern whites and blacks got along with a few execptions, when in the North, the converse seemed to be the case.

177 posted on 01/10/2004 2:41:10 PM PST by Smokin' Joe (This tagline manufactured in the U.S.A. and is certified prion-free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck
I see your point, I can certainly see where the jaws of a narrow mind could snap shut on something like that. I learn something every day.
178 posted on 01/10/2004 2:43:24 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 176 | View Replies]

To: U S Army EOD
right back atcha.
179 posted on 01/10/2004 2:49:23 PM PST by mac_truck (Aide toi et dieu l’aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe
I had the same experince growing up, or maybe I dreamed it. The first civil rights demonstrations in Lincolnton, Georgia came to an abrupt end when all the local whites and blacks got together and threw the outsiders out. This made national news about 1967.

When I moved to New Jersey in 1967, I caught hell all the time from blacks because I had a Georgia tag on my car. I could stop and try to get gas but when the attendent happened to see my tag, I would not get service.

On the other hand when I broke down on I 295 a car stops after hundreds had passed me, which happened to be some black guy from Georgia who saw my tag. He said he just had to help out someone from home. My being from Georgia is the only reason he stopped.

The guy who I hung with at Picatinny Arsenal, NJ was a black LT from New Orleans. We seemed to have the most in common.

During my first trip to Baltimore, God knows how many down and out blacks I saw on the street I stopped and bought a meal for. I had never witnessed anything like that in my home town with people in need not getting help.

I guess it has something to do with the values you are raised with.
180 posted on 01/10/2004 2:55:47 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 177 | View Replies]

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.

Walt

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:



And:



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 commonplace...as 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 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250251-261 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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