#The Fugitive Slave Law

[reasoningdaily]

The Fugitive Slave Law was enacted by Congress in September, 1850, received the signature of Howell Cobb, of Georgia, as Speaker of the House of Representatives, of William R. King, of Alabama, as President of the Senate, and was “approved,” September 18th, of that year, by Millard Fillmore, Acting President of the United States.

The authorship of the Bill is generally ascribed to James M. Mason, Senator from Virginia. Before proceeding to the principal object of this tract, it is proper to give a synopsis of the Act itself, which was well called, by the New York Evening Post, “An Act for the Encouragement of Kidnapping.”

SYNOPSIS OF THE LAW

Section 1. United States Commissioners “authorized and required to exercise and discharge all the powers and duties conferred by this act.”

Section. 2. Commissioners for the Territories to be appointed by the Superior Court of the same.

Section. 3. United States Circuit Courts, and Superior Courts of Territories, required to enlarge the number of Commissioners, “with a view to afford reasonable facilities to reclaim fugitives from labor,”.

Section. 4. Commissioners put on the same footing with Judges of the United States Courts, with regard to enforcing the Law and its penalties.

Section. 5. United States Marshals and deputy marshals, who may refuse to act under the Law, to be fined One Thousand dollars, to the use of the claimant. If a fugitive escape from the custody of the Marshal, the Marshal to be liable for his full value. Commissioners authorized to appoint special officers, and to call out the posse comitatus.

Section. 6. The claimant of any fugitive slave, or his attorney, “may pursue and reclaim such fugitive person,” either by procuring a warrant from some judge or commissioner, “or by seizing and arresting such fugitive, where the same can be done without process;” to take such fugitive before such judge or commissioner, “whose duty it shall be to hear and determine the case of such claimant in a summary manner,” and, if satisfied of the identity of the prisoner, to grant a certificate to said claimant to “remove such fugitive person back to the State or Territory from whence he or she may have escaped,”—using “such reasonable force or restraint as may be necessary under the circumstances of the case.” “In no trial or hearing under this act shall the testimony of such alleged fugitive be admitted in evidence.” All molestation of the claimant, in the removal of his slave, “by any process issued by any court, judge, magistrate, or other person whomsoever,” to be prevented.

Section. 7. Any person obstructing the arrest of a fugitive, or attempting his or her rescue, or aiding him or her to escape, or harboring and concealing a fugitive, knowing him to be such, shall be subject to a fine of not exceeding one thousand dollars, and to be imprisoned not exceeding six months, and shall also “forfeit and pay the sum of one thousand dollars for each fugitive so lost.”

Section. 8. Marshals, deputies, clerks, and special officers to receive usual fees; Commissioners to receive ten dollars, if fugitive is given up to claimant; otherwise, five dollars; to be paid by claimant.

Section. 9. If claimant make affidavit that he fears a rescue of such fugitive from his possession, the officer making the arrest to retain him in custody, and “to remove him to the State whence he fled.” Said officer “to employ so many persons as he may deem necessary.” All, while so employed, be paid out of the Treasury of the United States.

Section. 10. [This Section provides an additional and wholly distinct method for the capture of a fugitive; and, it may be added, one of the loosest and most extraordinary that ever appeared on the pages of Statute book.] Any person, from whom one held to service or labor has escaped, upon making “satisfactory proof” of such escape before any court of record, or judge thereof in vacation—a record of matter so proved shall be made by such court, or judge, and also a description of the person escaping, “with such convenient certainty as may be;”—a copy of which record, duly attested, “being produced in any other State, Territory, or District,” and “being exhibited to any judge, commissioner, or other officer authorized,”. “shall be held and taken to be full and conclusive evidence of the fact of escape, and that the service or labor of the person escaping is due to the party in such record mentioned;” when, on satisfactory proof of identity, “he or she shall be delivered up to the claimant.” “Provided, That nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring the production of a transcript of such record as evidence as aforesaid; but in its absence, the claim shall be heard and determined upon other satisfactory proofs competent in law.”

[thehours2002]

i’m going to ask my students to read 68 pages from incidents in the life of a slave girl in one week and i just know they’re not going to do it. and i know they all have busy lives and demands on their time but i just want to hold each of their faces in my hands and say, “read this. it is good for you. it will nourish you. it will enrich your soul.”

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Jack Ohman, Tribune Content Agency

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

May 1, 2024

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

MAY 02, 2024

Today, Florida’s ban on abortions after six weeks—earlier than most women know they’re pregnant—went into effect. The Florida legislature passed the law and Florida governor Ron DeSantis signed it a little more than a year ago, on April 13, 2023, but the new law was on hold while the Florida Supreme Court reviewed it. On April 1 the court permitted the law to go into operation today. 

The new Florida law is possible because two years ago, on June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court  overturned the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that recognized the constitutional right to abortion. In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the modern court decided that the right to determine abortion rights must be returned “to the people’s elected representatives” at the state level. 

Immediately, Republican-dominated states began to restrict abortion rights. Now, one out of three American women of childbearing age lives in one of the more than 20 states with abortion bans. This means, as Cecile Richards, former president of Planned Parenthood, put it in The Daily Beast today, “child rape victims forced to give birth, miscarrying patients turned away from emergency rooms and told to return when they’re in sepsis.” It means recognizing that the state has claimed the right to make a person’s most personal health decisions. 

Until today, Florida’s law was less stringent than that of other southern states, making it a destination for women of other states to obtain the abortions they could not get at home. In the Washington Post today, Caroline Kitchener noted that in the past, more than 80,000 women a year obtained abortions in Florida. Now, receiving that reproductive care will mean a trip to Virginia, Illinois, or North Carolina, where the procedure is still legal, putting it out of reach for many women. 

This November, voters in Florida will weigh in on a proposed amendment to the Florida constitution to establish the right to abortion. The proposed amendment reads: “No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider.” Even if the amendment receives the 60% support it will need to be added to the constitution, it will come too late for tens of thousands of women.

It is not unrelated that this week Texas attorney general Ken Paxton, along with other Republican attorneys general, has twice sued the Biden administration, challenging its authority to impose policy on states. One lawsuit objects to the government’s civil rights protections for sexual orientation and gender identity. The other lawsuit seeks to stop a federal rule that closes a loophole that, according to Texas Tribune reporter Alejandro Serrano, lets people sell guns online or at gun shows without conducting background checks.  

In both cases, according to law professor and legal analyst Steve Vladeck, Paxton has filed the suit in the Amarillo Division of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, where it will be assigned to Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, the Trump appointee who suspended the use of mifepristone, an abortion-inducing drug, in order to stop abortions nationally. 

Last month the Judicial Conference, which oversees the federal judiciary, tried to end this practice of judge-shopping by calling for cases to be randomly assigned to any judge in a district; the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas says it will not comply. 

And so the cases go to Kacsmaryk, who will almost certainly agree with the Republican states’ position.

Republicans are engaged in the process of dismantling the federal government, working to get rid of its regulation of business, basic social welfare laws and the taxes needed to pay for such measures, the promotion of infrastructure, and the protection of civil rights. To do so, they have increasingly argued that the states, rather than the federal government, are the centerpiece of our democratic system. 

That democracy belonged to the states was the argument of the southern Democrats before the Civil War, who insisted that the federal government could not legitimately intervene in state affairs out of their concern that the overwhelming popular majority in the North would demand an end to human enslavement. Challenged to defend their enslavement of their neighbors in a country that boasted “all men are created equal,” southern enslavers argued that enslavement was secondary to the fact that voters had chosen to impose it.

At the same time, though, state lawmakers limited the vote in their state, so the popular vote did not reflect the will of the majority. It reflected the interests of those few who could vote. In 1857, enslaver George Fitzhugh of Virginia explained that there were 18,000 people in his county and only 1,200 could vote. “But we twelve hundred…never asked and never intend to ask the consent of the sixteen thousand eight hundred whom we govern.” State legislatures, dominated by such men, wrote laws reinforcing the power of a few wealthy, white men. 

Crucially, white southerners insisted that the federal government must use its power not to enforce the will of the majority, but rather to protect their state systems. In 1850, with the Fugitive Slave Act, they demanded that federal officials, including those in free states, return to the South anyone a white enslaver claimed was his property. Black Americans could not testify in their own defense, and anyone helping a “runaway” could be imprisoned for six months and fined $1,000, which was about three years’ income. A decade later, enslavers insisted that it was “the duty of the Federal Government, in all its departments, to protect…[slavery]…in the Territories, and wherever else its constitutional authority extends.”

After the Civil War, Republicans in charge of the federal government set out to end discriminatory state legislation by adding to the Constitution the Fourteenth Amendment, establishing that states could not deny to any person the equal protection of the laws and giving Congress the power to enforce that amendment. That, together with the Fifteenth Amendment providing that “[t]he right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude,” Republicans thought, would stop state legislatures from passing discriminatory legislation.

But in 1875, just five years after Americans added the Fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution, the Supreme Court decided that states could keep certain people from voting so long as that discrimination wasn’t based on race. This barred women from the polls and flung the door open for voter suppression measures that would undermine minority voting for almost a century. Jim and Juan Crow laws, as well as abortion bans, went onto the books.

In the 1950s the Supreme Court began to use the Fourteenth Amendment to end those discriminatory state laws—in 1954 with the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, decision that prohibited racial segregation in public schools, for example, and in 1973 with Roe v. Wade. Opponents complained bitterly about what they called “judicial activism,” insisting that unelected judges were undermining the will of the voters in the states. 

Beginning in the 1980s, as Republicans packed the courts with so-called originalists who weakened federal power in favor of state power, Republican-dominated state governments carefully chose their voters and then imposed their own values on everyone. 

Just a decade ago, reproductive rights scholar Elizabeth Dias told Jess Bidgood of the New York Times, a six-week abortion ban was seen even by many antiabortion activists as too radical, but after Trump appointed first Neil Gorsuch and then Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, the balance of power shifted enough to make such a ban obtainable. Power over abortion rights went back to the states, where Republicans could restrict them.

Trump has said he would leave the issue of abortion to the states, even if states begin to monitor women’s pregnancies to keep them from obtaining abortions or to prosecute them if they have one. 

Vice President Kamala Harris was in Jacksonville, Florida, today to talk about reproductive rights. She put the fight over abortion in the larger context of the discriminatory state laws that have, historically, constructed a world in which some people have more rights than others. “This is a fight for freedom,” she said, “the fundamental freedom to make decisions about one’s own body and not have their government tell them what they’re supposed to do.” 

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[writinghistorylit]

Frederick Douglass-”The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass"

My term of actual service to Mr. Edward Covey ended on Christmas day, 1833. The days between Christmas and New Year’s day are allowed as holidays, and, accordingly, we were not required to perform any labor, more than to feed and take care of the stock.  This time we regarded as our own, by the grace of our masters; and we therefore used or abused it nearly as we pleased. 

Those of us who had families at a distance, were generally allowed to spend the whole six days in their society. This time, however, was spent in various ways. The staid, sober, thinking and industrious ones of our number would employ themselves in making corn-brooms, mats, horse-collars, and baskets; and another class of us would spend the time in hunting opossums, hares, and coons.  But by far the larger part engaged in such sports and merriments as playing ball, wrestling, running footraces, fiddling, dancing, and drinking whisky; and this latter mode of spending the time was by the far the most agreeable to the feelings of our masters. 

A slave who would work during the holidays was considered by our masters as scarcely deserving them. He was regarded as one who rejected the favor of his master. It was deemed a disgrace not to get drunk at Christmas; and he was regarding as lazy indeed, who had not provided himself with the necessary means, during the year, to get whisky enough to last him through Christmas.”

[almackey]

Making Freedom

This is Professor Richard Blackett of Vanderbilt University discussing the Underground Railroad. The video’s description reads, “Vanderbilt University history professor emeritus Richard Blackett talked about Underground Railroad and the enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Law. The Virginia Civil War Museum in Richmond, Virginia, hosted this…

[cat-in-a-mech-suit]

Transmasculinity Throughout Time: Antonio de Erauso

Alright everyone, fasten your seatbelts. This historical trans man had a wild and complicated life! Be warned that this history deals with violence, war and colonialism as it is set in 1600s Spain and South America. Also, if you are reading this post looking for a hero to look up to, you will not find one. Read a different post.

Historians aren’t sure if Antonio was born in 1585 or 1592, but we do know he was born in Spain, and from an early age, showed an interest in traditionally masculine things, like the art of warfare. He was confined to a convent as a nun, much to his distaste, from the ages of (we think) 4 to 15, after which, in 1600, he escaped and started passing as a man.

He became a fugitive, first going to Vitoria and staying with a distant in law who did not recognize him as a boy. The man he was staying with began abusing him, so he left again, and this time went to Valladolid and became a page for the king’s secretary. He worked there for seven months. One day, his father came in to ask about his missing “daughter” to him while he was working there, and did not recognize him! After that, he left and went to Bilbao. There, he got into a rock fight after a group of boys started harassing him, and he spent a month in jail. So, he went to Estella, and became a page again for a lord for two years. After that time, he went back to his home town of San Sebastian and continued life as a man, regularly interacting with people who he was related to and knew before - they all didn’t recognize him.

Then he set off to travel to the Americas in search of wealth (yikes..). He began as a cabin boy on a ship destined for the new world. He headed to Venezuela and confronted a Dutch pirate ship, emerging victorious. Later he killed his own uncle and stole 500 pesos from him, lying to the crew about it. The journeys continued until a strong wind destroyed the ship and only Erauso and his master survived. They went to Zana together and acquired a home. They also bought slaves (yikes again…).

He got into another fight and this time cut the guys face entirely off. A deal was made for him to marry a specific girl to avoid another prison sentence, but he refused to marry her and simply moved again, to Trujillo. The guy who got his face cut off came to challenge him again, bringing company this time. He won the fight again and killed someone, and went to jail again, and his master paid the bail. He got a letter of recommendation to become a shop manager in Lima. After nine months of working there he got fired for inappropriate relations with a woman (his master’s wife’s sister). He got recruited by a company trying to conquer Chile, became a llama driver and then a soldier.

The secretary of the governor in Chile was his own brother, who did not recognize him. They got into a fight (likely over a girl) and he was banished to Paicabi, where he gained a reputation for being skilled with weapons. There he was promoted to captain. He was not promoted any higher than this because he was too violent, even by the standards of other Spanish colonizers, so in retaliation, he started killing people indiscriminately, burning crops, vandalizing places, and generally being an extremely dangerous individual. He killed the chief auditor of the city of Concepción which led to him being locked up in a church for six months. After he got out, he killed his own brother in a duel (who still didn’t recognize him). That got him eight more months. Then, he fled again, and was briefly taken in by a villager in Tucamán but left again after promising marriage to two girls - ditching both of them. He kept their gifts though, including money and fine clothing.

After that he became a soldier again and killed even more people. He got accused of a crime but this time, he actually was innocent. Shocker. He still got tortured though, but they never found out he was trans. Then he started smuggling wheat and cattle, and also killed another guy. He was sentenced to death, but released at the last minute. He stayed in the church to have sanctuary, after he got into a duel with a jealous husband. He got sentenced to death again in La Paz, but he fled again to Peru.

In 1623 he was arrested in Peru because of a dispute. He was again on trial for execution. In his defense, he confessed to being assigned female and a virgin and was spared for these reasons and sent to Spain. He died in 1650 and a statue of him is on display in Mexico, with his birth name.

[3rdeyeblaque]

September 9th marks the 284th anniversary of The Stono Rebellion of 1739✊🏾

When an Angolan brotha called, Jemmy, led a band of 20 slaves into rebellion on the banks of the Stono River in Charleston, S.C., which put unprecedented fear in Whites. It was because of this uprising that laws were enacted that outlawd the enslaved from learning how to read, gathering in groups, & growing their own food. Thus, making it one of the most significant rebellions in the history of the U.S. colonies.

Jemmy & the rebel band marched southbound on a road toward the river, carrying banners that proclaimed their war very, "Liberty!". Their numbers swelled with more enslaved women and men as they went. By nightfall, 100 rebels had joined the cause. They broke into a local firearms store, arming themselves with guns & ammo. As they marched, they killed every overseer in their path and forced any reluctant slaves to join them.

From there the band marched toward the house of a Mr. Godfrey, where they burned the house & killed Godfrey and his family. It was just shy of dawn when they reached Wallace's Tavern. Because the innkeeper at the tavern was kind to his slaves, his life was spared. The White inhabitants of the next several houses in their path were all slaughtered. Those enslaved by a Thomas Rose reluctantly joined the rebellion, but not before hiding their slaver - of which they were later rewarded for. Still, many more rebels gladly joined the cause. By this point, a Lieutenant Governor Bull eluded the rebels & rode on horseback to spread the alarm. Once the band reached the Edisto River, Whites colonists set out in armed pursuit. Shots were exchanged across both lines. By dusk, about 30 rebels had fallen & at least 30 more had escaped. In the end, most rebels were captured over the next month, then executed. The remainder were pursued and captured over the following 6mo - all except 1 who remained a fugitive for 3 years. The few survivors were sold off to plantations in the West Indies.

The immediate factors that sparked the uprising remain uncertain. Many rebels knew of small groups of runaways had made their way from SC to FL, where they had been given freedom and land. There was also an ongoing malaria epidemic surging across SC. Ultimately, this unprecedented act of rebellion demanded unprecedented legislature. The European colonists finalized a Negro Act into law which aggressively limited the privileges & movement of the enslaved. No longer would slaves be allowed to grow their own food, assemble in groups, earn their own money, or learn to read. Some of these restrictions had been in effect before the Negro Act of 1740, but had not been strictly enforced. This also resulted in the forced indoctrination of slaves into Christian schools systems.

Let us remember Brother Jemmy and those who fought, willingly or not, against the colonizers. Their sacrifice may have set a great legal precedent in European colonizer politics, but it set an even greater one that would spark many fires and fan many more flames of rebellion, war, and freedom. Every step taken from this moment onward was a necessary one to achieve our "freedom" as we experience it today.

We pour libations of water (especiallyfrom the Stono River), speak their names, & offer prayers toward their elevation.

‼️Note: offering suggestions are just that & strictly for veneration purposes only. Never attempt to conjure up any spirit or entity without proper divination/Mediumship counsel.‼️

[marxism-transgenderism]

The fugitive slave clause required [by the Northwest Ordinance of 1787] in each new state constitution secured their right to hold enslaved people as chattel property and to recover this property if enslaved individuals sought to obtain freedom by moving to northern free states. At the same time, article 6 of the Ordinance theoretically prohibited slavery in the Northwest Territory, stating, “There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in the said territory,” creating a clear North-South divide over the issue of the expansion of slavery in the Trans-Appalachian West. This regional distinction regarding slavery proved to be less sharp than the Ordinance implied. Arthur St. Clair, the first governor appointed to the Northwest Territory, made it known publicly that he regarded the elimination of slavery in the region as aspirational, a law that would only be fully implemented at some unspecified date.[...] Slavery survived in similar fashion, and even expanded in the southern tier of the Northwest Territory. Not only had French habitants in the Illinois country held enslaved laborers, but once it was formed as a territory, Illinois became home to a large slaveholding southern diaspora seeking affordable western land.[...] Indiana, like Illinois, had a large enslaved population held by families whose residence in the region predated the existence of the United States. These influential citizens also used their newly established territorial legislature to adapt laws that effectively transformed enslaved persons into indentured servants or they created “rental contracts” that similarly codified and regulated the involuntary servitude of enslaved Black persons either resident or brought into the Indiana Territory. In both Illinois and Indiana, federal officials allowed planters and merchants to manipulate and control the legal conventions regarding slavery and involuntary servitude because their presence in newly formed territories gave the United States political power in a region of the Northwest that had been dominated by independent Native nations willing to resist U.S. expansion. The federal government and territorial officials prioritized the recruitment of a settler population, particularly wealthy individuals whose estates included the enslaved, as a counterweight to the political and economic power of Native villages in the newly organized territories. Allowing for a flexible interpretation of antislavery laws not only enticed economically powerful settlers but also enhanced a regional economy that was not tied to the fur trade and Native hunters. The ultimate goal of the political project envisioned by the Northwest Ordinance was the dispossession and displacement of the Native population, and this project occasionally required the inclusion of slave labor within the legal regime of an ostensibly free state.

— Michael John Witgen, Seeing Red: Indigenous Land, American Expansion, and the Political Economy of Plunder in North America (my emphasis)

[militantinremission]

What does being 'Black' really mean?

I have thought about this for a long time. Over the years, I spoke w/ Moors, Israelites, Indigenous, & Pan Afrikans about 'Blackness' & what it means to them. I also looked at Separate but Equal (Jim Crow) Laws, The Black Codes, The Fugitive Slave Act, Dred Scott, & related documents dating back to the Colonial Era. Writing on this Subject was always in the back of My Mind, but now I feel compelled to give an opinion. Dane Calloway & Yvette Carnell don't agree on much, but they're both in agreement about 'Blackness in America'; their perspectives intrigued Me. Cam'ron's Declaration of Blackness, followed by responses from Marc Lamont Hill & Umar Johnson inspired Me to chime in on the Subject.

Recently, Dane Calloway & Yvette Carnell both went into detail about 'Blackness' on their individual Channels. Both have expressed their view in the past, but the timing of their latest opinions caught My attention. They essentially agree that this 'designation' refers to a Bottom Caste status that sets Us up for Social Inequality as a Collective. They also agree that identifying as 'Black American' only clouds Our identity as a Lineage Group. The denial of (promised) resources to 'Black' Farmers, & the repeal of Affirmative Action on College Campuses were both done in the name of 'Race Neutrality'. Apparently, Whitefolk & Brownfolk thought that these (long overdue) measures offered too much(?)

I was still digesting Dane & Yvette's perspective, when Cam'ron declared that he prefers being called 'Black' over Afrikan American, citing a schism between Black Americans & Continental Afrikans. This prompted Dr. Marc Lamont Hill & Dr. Umar Johnson to respond- in the name of Pan Afrikanism. Over the last 5Yrs, Pan Afrikans have been very vocal about Reparations & who should be entitled. Groups like N'COBRA, NAARC, The NAACP, & The Urban League have pushed for Trans Atlantic based Reparations; but they favor Social Programs over cash payments. Grassroots Organizations like the ADOS Advocacy Foundation, stress the need for cash payments to American Descendants Of Chattel Slavery.

It's curious how the same U.S. Constitution that used Our skin color to classify Us as 3/5ths of Humanity, still uses Our skin color as a 'Racial identity' to restrict Our access to resources. Somehow, this skin color classification doesn't stop 'Minority Groups' (i.e. White Women, White LGBTQ..., Azkenazis, People Of Color [POC/ BIPOC]) from getting the resources that They want & need. Maybe it's just Me, but I see a double standard playing out. Edward Blum & his 'Minority Coalition' are hell bent on weaponizing Race as a means of maintaining Black Oppression. He recently resorted to applying the Civil Rights Law of 1866 against Black Women; meanwhile, ADOS was unsuccessful in their attempt to apply the Same Law to (naively?) support Byron Allen's Case against Comcast Communications.

I understand where Family is coming from, when they refer to dictionary definitions of 'Black'. In a 'White' Society, Blackness is depicted as antithetical. It's not unusual, when we consider the way Afrikan Tribes associate 'Whiteness' w/ Death & Disease (i.e. Leprosy). Historically, this attitude towards Blackness goes back to Our 1st Contact w/ Northern/ Step Europeans (Vikings, Scandanavians, ect...) who traditionally burned their dead. Our mummification process spooked them! Those bodies took on a dark hue, & hardened into a crystal like structure; the Europeans called it a 'Crust'. From this, came the word 'Curse'. The Europeans migrated south into Western Asia & transported their ideology w/ them. This fear of Black Mummies was shared w/ Mongolians & other Indo- European Tribes, like the Turks & Huns. In the same way that Afrikans came to associate Whiteness negatively, the Asiatics came to associate Blackness similarly. Today, We STILL hear Koreans, Japanese, & Chinese refer to a 'Black Devil'.

The modern regard for Blackness is a Social Construct created by 15th Century Castilians & Portugese. These beliefs were sanctioned by the Catholic Church, by way of Papal Bulls & adopted by Dutch, English, & French Colonizers. That's not to say Anti Black sentiment didn't exist; Maimonides (Musa Ibn Maimon) wrote 'The Curse of Ham' centuries earlier... Spain, Portugal, & Italy appeared tired of Moorish Rule, & took advantage of the waning years of their influence. Current Reparations discussions have included the prominence of Afrikan Slave Trading, & how Afrikan Kingdoms, like Mali & Kongo actually traded Slaves w/ Europeans; until they were also Colonized. Afrikan Kingdoms became dependent on the profits, decadent lifestyle, & overall efficacy of trading away their 'enemies'. They didn't concern themselves w/ Europe's intentions for these people.

European Colonizers told themselves that they were 'On a Mission' to Christianize the heathens. I don't know what THAT had to do w/ raping & pillaging Societies in 'The Americas' (Amaru Ca/ Turtle Island/ Atlantis). In 'Capitalism & Slavery' Eric Williams explains how Europeans rationalized their barbarism to offset the guilt of violating fellow Human Beings. The Fruits of Exploration clouded the moral judgement of Many. Thinking Men, like Samuel George Morton began to concoct a number Theories (Religious & Scientific) to condone their actions. It wasn't limited to Afrika or The Americas; ANY non- Christian was a potential target. Truth be told, Latin America had more Slaves coming from The Pacific, than The Atlantic. Many of the Illegal Immigrants that (so called) Native Americans in The Dakotas are calling 'Indigenous People', are descendants of 'Negritos' transported from The Philippines & the South Pacific Islands. Spanish & Portugese Conquistadors adopted Colorism from the Arabs, & used it as a tool for Divide & Conquer (Blanqueamiento/ Branqueamiento).

The Portugese & Spanish brought Colorism to the (so called) New World, but it was The English who refined it into the System of Racism. Benjamin Franklin was credited w/ using the term 'White' in 1751, but Black Codes were already in play for decades. Bacon's Rebellion of 1675- 1676 resulted in 'Racial' (Chattel) Slavery in Virginia. White Indentured Servants that were treated no differently than their Black counterparts, were elevated to Overseers & Slave Hunters; later to become Militiamen & Police Officers. Legally, 'White' represented the Wealthy Class of Land Owners & Bankers (Gentlemen of Property & Standing). 'Black' represented Indigenous Americans- Free & Enslaved; Poor Whites were stuck in the middle. The Lessons of Bacon's Rebellion brought Laws that ensured that the average White Person had a better lifestyle than the average Black Person. This is the crux of 'White Privilege'.

Dictionaries define 'Whiteness' as: Fair & Pure. 'Blackness' is defined as: Ugly & Evil. All of this helped perpetuate Indigenous/ Aboriginal People as inferior to the European. The 1790 Census brought the first reclassification of American Indians to 'Negro' & 'Colored'. This reclassification continued w/ each subsequent Census. Census Enumerators were not just instructed, but encouraged to use their personal judgement when making Racial Assignments; particularly when making classifications of Negro & Colored. In 1924, Dr. Walter A. Plecker pushed 'The (Preservation of) Racial Integrity Act' in Virginia. This Act sought to reclassify ALL Indigenous People in Virginia as Colored or Negro, & penalized them (w/ violence or death). The 'One Drop Rule' was added in 1930. The Census completed it's reclassification w/ designations of 'Black' in 1970, & 'Afrikan American'(?) in 1990... Chris Rock once joked: "Have you ever seen an American Indian Family in an IHOP?" He probably didn't know that depending on which IHOP, he may have been SURROUNDED by them!

The U.S. Government has been persistent in their efforts to erase America's 'Copper- toned Aborigines'. In addition to Local, State, & Federal Laws designed to keep Us out of contention, they also used Anthropology to prove the inferiority of Indigenous People, compared to Europeans. W.E.B. Du Bois countered, w/ the help of Franz Boas & a new generation of Anthropologists. Melville Herskovits, like Boas contributed to the Anti Black counter narrative; playing a role in setting up the Harlem History Club at the 135th Street YMCA. This is the same Club that inspired Ho Chi Minh... Since 1990, (Indigenous) Black Americans have been on a Pan Afrikan Crusade that sought to embrace EVERY melanated individual as 'Black'. Haitians, Dominicans, Columbians, Somalis & Nigerians have been very vocal about NOT being Black; they're right! Family thinks that they either want to be White, or at least avoid the negativity associated w/ Blackness. Regardless of their reason, they have a Right Of Expression.

History has been purposely skewed, to prop up self righteous White Men & their Female cohorts (WASPs) over Everyone Else. Their advanced weaponry & barbarism has motivated many to fall in line w/ the Western Agenda over the last 500 Years, but Indigenous/ Black Americans have been fighting them every step of the way. Despite the effort to "Kill the Indian & keep The Man", We continued to search for Our Truth. 100Yrs ago, that led Us into an extensive search on the Afrikan Continent. DuBois, Boas, & Herskovits ALL espoused Out of Afrika Theory; & in some shape or form, molded the Minds of many of Our Master Teachers & Scholars. Their search for Roots in Afrika (Alkebu- Lan) was a noble & fruitful endeavor. As Students, We learned of glorious Civilizations that predated Europe, Rome, & Greece by several millennia. We learned that The Kamau, Nubian, & Kushite referred to themselves as 'Black People'. They were the 'Children of The Sun'- Blessed by The Most High w/ Blackness (Melanin/ Ka Nu). The 'Afu Ra Ka Nu' & 'Afu Rat Kat Nut' are the First Born of The Most High; molded out of Primordial Blackness (CERN calls it: The 'God Particle') & assigned as Caretakers of Planet Earth (Geb). In a Nation that marginalizes the very Concept of Blackness, We were inspired to shout: "I'm Black & I'm Proud!".

Today We live in The Information Age, & as such, Our Generation(s) have access to sources that few of Our Elders had. As We put the pieces together, We discover that:

North America had a population of roughly 100 Million Indigenous People when the Colonizers arrived 500Yrs ago.

These People had highly functional Matrilineal Societies that existed for millennia.

They traded w/ The Moors & other Afrikan Kingdoms for Centuries, & They spoke the Lingua Franca.

They have a Legacy of Brick Making & Mound Building. Billy Carson & Walter Williams both say that Our Indigenous Ancestors have a direct connection to the Kamau. Archeological digs in Southern Illinois & Ohio uncovered Kamitic Ritual material & Pre Phoenician 'Proto- Hebraic Script' among the artifacts. Quiet as it's kept, North America has a plethora of Mounds & Pyramids; St. Louis is nicknamed 'Mound City'.

ALL of the European visitors admitted the 'Copper- toned Aborigines' or Indios practiced a higher Culture than ANY Culture in Europe.

Benjamin Franklin, Patrick Henry, John Hancock, et al were students of Indigenous American Culture. They adopted the Articles Of Confederacy & The U.S. Constitution from the existing Confederacy Of The 5 Nations (The Iroquois Constitution), written around 1200 A.C.E... The Iroquois are the True Founders of the 'American Democratic Experiment'. Remember, ALL of the European Colonizers hailed from Monarchies, so it stands to reason...

The possibility of transporting 12 Million Afrikans to North America from 1619- 1865 is highly improbable. Dane Calloway already broke down the logistics of Trans Atlantic Shipping, & personally compelled The State of Virginia to reduce their 'Afrikan Slave' count by more than 90%. Depending on who you talk to, the number of 'Afrikans' transported to North America ranges from 90,000- 300,000 individuals. At best, this accounts for less than 10% of the 4 Million Individuals that were emancipated. The 20 Young Women that arrived at Point Comfort in 1619, were originally called 'Negresses', not Afrikans. American Indians were called Negroes almost interchangeably.

Dane Calloway, Kurimeo Ahau, & The Research Guy have all pointed out how Europeans transported North American Indians to 'Slave Seasoning' (Buck Breaking) Camps in The Caribbean. Afterwards, they were either shipped back to America, or transported to Europe, & later West Afrika; from Sierra Leone, to Angola. The English & French used Caribbean Maroons in their assault on Afrikan Kingdoms.

All of this new information about Our Ancestors has led many to revisit their Family Genealogy. Many of Us recall a Story or two about the Family connection to a particular Tribe. I personally can't remember hearing an Afrikan Origin Story, before the airing of Alex Haley's 'Roots'. My family taught Us about Our Indian Roots; We don't have a Slave Ship Story in Our History. Most of the Blackfolk claiming Afrikan Tribes, have taken so called Genetic Swab Tests that are advertised as 'Entertainment'. Black Historians & Genealogists, like Dr. Henry Louis Gates have refuted the accuracy of these 'Tests' for years. NO ONE can determine their ancestry from a mouth swab; you need the actual DNA of an Ancestor to make an accurate analysis. Most people don't know that their genetic material is being held (& utilized) by proponents of the [Mormon] Church Of Latter Day Saints. The largest Genealogy Library on Earth, is in Salt Lake City, Ut.

As We put the pieces together, We can clearly see the ongoing process of Colonization. AmeriKKKa cannot be as bold as Israel in their removal of Indigenous Black Americans, so The U.S. Government uses a trickbag of classifications & legislative measures to keep Blackfolk in a state of 'Arrested Development'. They hope that We 'migrate' to Afrika, but most of Us can't afford to visit; let alone relocate. Meanwhile, The Government continues to Flood the Zone w/ immigrants (for 175Yrs & counting). The Mainstream Media speaks about Venezuelan 'migrants' daily, but We hear nothing about the 100,000 Afghani & 100,000 Ukrainian immigrants they prepared for. These people are literally White on arrival. If illegal Venezuelans are getting 5 Star treatment, what are these folk getting?

I felt obligated to go in-depth on this topic, because so many cling to a definition created by Colonizers & Oppressors. How does someone define themselves using the language of their Oppressor? It's the same as someone saying: "A N-- like me", or "A B-- like me". We have been programmed into accepting a wretched (ratchet) image of Ourselves. Some of the people refusing to use the term 'Black', have No Problem referring to themselves as 'N--s' & 'B--s'. I question their logic. Richard Pryor said 40Yrs ago, in 'Here & Now' that he was wrong about using The N- Word. He went on to say that it was a Word that describes Our Wretchedness. He vowed never to use that Word again, but since his declaration, there has been an explosion of 'N-- Comics' over the last 40Yrs. Use of The N- Word is more prevalent than wearing that dress, but few talk about this particular assault on Our Culture. Is it just a coincidence that many of these N- Comics have 'funny looking Wives', as Katt Williams described them?

The lion's share of Our Master Teachers & Scholars were literally spoon-fed Out Of Afrika Theory, so We were primed for Pan Afrikanism. Marcus Garvey was actually 'fishing in a barrel' on those Harlem Streets. This isn't a bad thing in itself. Our Problem has been giving Our 'Cousins' too much access to Our Cultural Mores. Many of the Celebrities, Athletes, & Entertainers being spotlighted & engaging in miscegenation, are descendants of Black Immigrants. They're the Same Ones misrepresenting Our Culture, while telling Us that We're 'Culturally Lost'. Like Hindi/ Bangladeshi/ & Pakistani/ Americans, these folk are situational about their Blackness. They relish being 'Afrikan American' when it's profitable, but are quick to remind you of their Nationality (in a thick accent) when it isn't... It's time to delineate. EVERY melanated group has an identifiable lineage, except Black America. We had a clear identity, until We allowed Jesse Jackson to reclassify Us as 'Afrikan American'. To quote Dane Calloway: "We're named after 2 Continents". Now We're being amalgamated into an 'Afrikan/ Black Diaspora' that is looking to fleece Us like Everyone Else. Most of these folks are 'Black' Capitalists looking for a quick buck. The commercialization of Kwanzaa is a prime example. Our argument for Lineage Based Reparations has revealed this well kept secret.

The (current) Reparations discussion has brought important issues to the conversation. ADOS, FBA, Freemen, & Indigenous Family all agree that We're a specific Lineage Group w/ a specific Experience. No other group has endured what We have endured in America. Some Black Immigrants make a valid point that They have endured over 100Yrs of White Supremacy in America; few admit that They also had more autonomy & opportunity than We had. Many of the 'First Faces' that We tout, aren't Us, but Our Cousins. Colin Powell, Eric Holder, & Susan Rice aren't just descendants of Immigrants, they're also Cousins! Barack Obama was Harvard's 1st Black Law Review Editor & Claudine Gay was their 1st Black President, but NEITHER have Indigenous Black Roots. BOTH have more in common w/ the descendants of Slave Holders, than those Enslaved on Harvard's properties. We have far too many of their Faces in Our Spaces. 'Afrikan American' is not working for Us. It skews perspectives regarding Wealth & Inequality, while rewarding newcomers for their 'proximity to Blackness'.

I have to go back to The Black Power Movement, to get a clear understanding of what Blackness truly means. During that Era, 'Blackness' was an American Phenomenon that was Globally acknowledged. No One else said: 'I'm Black & I'm Proud' w/ as much authority. John Carlos & Tommie Smith proudly threw up their Black fists, knowing they would pay a price. Muhammad Ali lost his Prime Boxing Years to make a point. The Culture of Blackness permeated Music & Cinema; We were doing Our Thing, Our Way. The Culture was distinctly Ours. It WAS a Black Thang, & No One understood it; but EVERYONE respected it. As We travelled The World, We were called Soul Brothers & Soul Sisters, but most called Us Black American. We have a distinct Pedigree. The World knows WHO We are. If we're being honest, Black Culture & Music was generally more respectable before 1990, when We became 'Afrikan American'. Hollywood has been denigrating Us since 'Birth Of A Nation', but their images contradicted who We are. We're a Righteous & Noble People. Our Love of Our Collective progeny is unrivaled. The Slave Experience stripped Us of Our individual lineage, but it also eliminated any Tribalism. Indigenous Black Americans- from New York to Oakland, & from Detroit to Houston refer to each other as: 'Family from...' We compete against each other, & toss The Dozens; but when it's time to Put in The Work- We're ALL On Code.

I laugh at this notion of 'Race Neutrality'. What exactly is meant by Race? Chief Justice John Roberts & Justice Clarence Thomas both lean on this term pretty heavily, but how? Black, White, Asian, & Latinx aren't Racial Groups, they're Socio- Demographic Classifications. Every Middle School Student has learned by 8th Grade of 3 Races: Negroid, Mongoloid, & Caucasoid. This 'Racial Re- tread' only seems to affect Indigenous Black Americans/ Copper-toned Aborigines on the basis of Our skin color. Everyone Else, including Black Immigrants have a Right of Expression under the current demographic structure. This is the Same System that holds Black America stagnant at 13% of the population since Emancipation, while bringing Ethnic Europeans (Caucasians, Catholics) & Asians under the umbrella of Whiteness; to offset the declining birth rate in their demographic. The Biden Administration has implied the same thing is being done w/ Latinx. I STILL ask: What is a 'Latino/ Hispanic'- are they a specific Nationality? No, they're a Socially Engineered Group (Buffer Class) created to marginalize the Indigenous Black American Population. Our Collective, is not a grouping of different Ethnicities & Nationalities under a particular demographic- We're One Nationality. As We search for a uniform description of Our specific Lineage Group, 'Black American' is a No Brainer... Cam'ron is correct.

'Black American' actually describes a specific Ethnic Group w/ a specific Culture & Experience that NO OTHER GROUP can tout. It describes a Group of People in a specific Region, not a (Global) Racial Group. We are as distinct, as Australian Aborigines. Other than Our Cousins- the 'Black Brits', melanated People tend to describe themselves Tribally or Nationally. They only identify as 'Black', when they Come to America. Meanwhile, Native (Siberian) Americans have used the Dawes Rolls to appropriate Our Ancestral [Tribal] Identity, forcing Us to Collectively reestablish Ourselves from scratch. Indigenous, Aboriginal, or American Indian describes Our connection to The Land. The Blood & Bones of Our Ancestors are buried Here, not in Afrika. Black American, describes who We are today. It defines Us as a unique Nationality. This description makes it easier for Us to point out Centuries of legislative policy crafted & used against Us as a specific Lineage Group. Afrikan American, is a monolithic classification that ignores the diverse Cultural experiences & Tribalism of the Collective. Ultimately, Our Name may change, but The Culture stays the Same.

In a nutshell, Black American IS Our Tribal Identity. We're World renowned for Standing Out & Standing Our Ground, & NO ONE does it better. As Professor Black Truth puts it: 'We create Icons'.

-Just making My Case

[reasoningdaily]

https://x.com/KeneAkers/status/1701254573145649254?s=20

The Christiana Riot

In the town of Christiana, Pennsylvania, a clash occurred. a group of African Americans and white abolitionists, against a posse from Maryland. The posse had come with the intention of capturing four fugitive enslaved people who were hiding in the town.

This violent incident took place a year after Congress passed the second fugitive slave law, which required the return of escaped slaves to their owners in the South.

During the skirmish, one member of the posse, a landowner named Edward Gorsuch, was killed and two others were wounded.

Following what became known as the Christiana Riot, 37 African Americans and one white man were arrested and charged with treason under the Fugitive Slave Law.

However, most of them were eventually acquitted. In February 1793, Congress passed the initial fugitive slave law, which mandated that all states, even those that prohibited slavery, had to forcibly return escaped slaves to their original owners.

This law stated that any enslaved person who had escaped from one state to another would not be freed by the laws of the state they fled to, but instead would be returned to the person who claimed ownership of them.

[thoodleoo]

do you have any non-fiction book recs on slavery and the Third Servile War in ancient rome? I've seen posts that defended or played down slavery in ancient Rome claiming they treated their slaves well and typically didn't abuse them without a good reason, because they'd risk the loss of property and these posts just didn't seem right to me. If they actually treated them well there wouldn't have been slave uprisings. If they slaves had rights they wouldn't have been called slaves.

i haven't read a lot of modern accounts of the third servile war, but shaw's spartacus and the slave wars is a phenomenal sourcebook for you to look through ancient documents about the servile wars and the general treatment of slaves. it contains ancient historical texts, but it also pulls from relevant sources like letters and inscriptions that discuss things like laws pertaining to fugitive slaves. some of my followers and other classicists in the tumblr classics community who know more about the subject than i do might be able to offer up some other sources.

as far as treating their slaves well- the first thing to remember is that slavery, no matter how "well" the slaves were treated, is still slavery. at its core, slavery treats human beings as if they were property and strips them of their rights. in addition, while some particularly skilled slaves or slaves that had been in a household for a long time were treated more compassionately than others, the vast majority of slaves were not given this treatment. many of them were treated with little to no dignity and were forced to complete difficult, sometimes dangerous, jobs. for every tiro we know of, there were probably thousands of unnamed slaves being treated as little more than expendable farm equipment. the relative good fortune of a handful of slaves does not in any way justify slavery.

[fatehbaz]

As early as 1700, Samuel Sewall, the renowned Boston judge and diarist, connected “the two most dominant moral questions of that moment: the rapid rise of the slave trade and the support of global piracy” in many American colonies [...]. In the course of the eighteenth century, [...] [there was a] semantic shift in the [literary] trope of piracy in the Atlantic context, turning its [...] connotations from exploration and adventure to slavery and exploitation. [...] [A] large share of Atlantic seafaring took place in the service of the circum-Atlantic slave trade, serving European empire-building in the Americas. [...] Ships have been cast as important sites of struggle and as symbols of escape in [...] Black Atlantic consciousness, from Olaudah Equiano’s Interesting Narrative (1789) and Richard Hildreth’s The Slave: or Memoir of Archy Moore (1836 [...]) to nineteenth century Atlantic abolitionist literature such as Frederick Douglass’s My Bondage and My Freedom (1855) or Martin Delany’s Blake (1859-1862). [...] Black and white abolitionists across the Atlantic world were imagining a different social order revolving around issues of resistance, liberty, (human) property, and (il)legality [...].

---

Using black pirates as figures of resistance [...], Maxwell Philip’s novel Emmanuel Appadocca (1854) emphasizes the nexus of insatiable material desire and its conditions of production: slavery. [...] [T]he consumption of commodities produced by slave labor itself was delegitimized [...]. Philip, a Trinidadian [and "illegitimate" "colored" child] [...], published Emmanuel Appadocca as a protest against slavery in the United States [following the Fugitive Slave laws of 1850.]. [...] [The novel places] at its center [...] a heroic non-white pirate and intellectual [...] [whose] pirate ship [...] [is] significantly named The Black Schooner [...]. One of the central discourses in [the book] is that of legitimacy, of rights and lawfulness, of both slavery and piracy [...]. About midway into the book, Appadocca gives a [...] speech in which he argues that colonialism itself is a piratical system:

If I am guilty of piracy, you, too [are] [...] guilty of the very same crime. ... [T]he whole of the civilized world turns, exists, and grows enormous on the licensed system of robbing and thieving, which you seem to criminate so much ... The people which a convenient position ... first consolidated, developed, and enriched, ... sends forth its numerous and powerful ships to scour the seas, the penetrate into unknown regions, where discovering new and rich countries, they, in the name of civilization, first open an intercourse with the peaceful and contented inhabitants, next contrive to provoke a quarrel, which always terminates in a war that leaves them the conquerors and possessors of the land. ... [T]he straggling [...] portions of a certain race [...] are chosen. The coasts of the country on which nature has placed them, are immediately lined with ships of acquisitive voyagers, who kidnap and tear them away [...].

In this [...], slavery appears as a direct consequence of the colonial venture encompassing the entire “civilized world,” and “powerful ships” - the narrator refers to the slavers here - are this world’s empire builders. [...] Piracy, for Philip, signifies a just rebellion, a private, legitimate [resistance] against colonial exploiters and economic inequality - he repeatedly invokes their solidarity as misfortunate outcasts [...].

---

All text above by: Alexandra Ganser. “Cultural Constructions of Piracy During the Crisis Over Slavery.” A chapter from Crisis and Legitimacy in the Atlantic American Narratives of Piracy: 1678-1865. Published 2020. [Bold emphasis and some paragraph breaks/contractions added by me.]

[scotianostra]

Scottish born abolitionist John Hossack died on November 8th in Ottawa, Illinois.

Hossack immigrated to North America at the age of twelve when he travelled to Quebec to work in an uncle's confectionery store. Upon becoming an adult, he set up his own confectionery store. He married Martha Lens in 1833; the couple would eventually have eleven children together. Soon after his marriage, Hossack left the confectionery business to become a contractor on the Long Sault canal being built on the Saint Lawrence River. Hossack then moved to Ottawa via Chicago, where he had done contract work on the Illinois and Michigan Canal. In Ottawa, Hossack was engaged in the lumber business and grain trade, and instrumental in the building of the first Illinois River Bridge.

Hossack's house, now named after the man, was part of The Underground Railroad, he was a strong opponent to slavery and hid as many as 13 fleeing slaves in this house until they could safely reach the next station.

By participating in the Underground Railroad, Hossack was violating not only the Federal Fugitive Slave Act, but also the infamous Illinois "Black Law," which forbade most African Americans from living within the State. In 1860, Hossack was one of several Ottawans charged and convicted in Federal Court in Chicago for violating the Fugitive Slave Law. The famous case involved Jim Gray, a slave who had reached Ottawa after fleeing slavery in a Southern state. During the trial Gray was abducted from the Ottawa courtroom and helped to freedom in Canada. The jury convicted Hossack, but recommended mercy, and Judge Drummond sentenced Hossack to only ten days in the Cook County jail and fined him $100.

Hossack addressed the court prior to his sentencing, in a speech subsequently published by the American Anti-Slavery Society. Hossack began "I am found guilty of a violation of the Fugitive Slave law, and it may appear strange to your honor that I have no sense of guilt" and then concluded

“ the jury have found me guilty; yes, guilty of carrying out the still greater principles of the Declaration of Independence; yes, guilty of carrying out the still greater principles of the Son of God. Great God! Can these things be? Can it be possible? What country is this? Can it be that I live in a land boasting of freedom, of morality, of Christianity? How long, O, how long shall the people bow down and worship this great image set up in this nation? Yes, the jury say guilty, but recommend me to the mercy of the Court. Mercy, sir, is kindness to the guilty. I am guilty of no crime. I therefore ask for no mercy; I ask for justice. Mercy is what I ask of my God. Justice in the courts of my adopted country is all I ask. It is the inhuman and infamous law that is wrong, not me”

During his ten days in prison, Hossack was taken out and banqueted by John Wentworth, mayor of Chicago, and greatly acclaimed by the people.

[kemetic-dreams]

SLAVE REVOLT OF 1842.

Of the Five Tribes, the Cherokees were the largest holder of Africans as chattel slaves. By 1860 the Cherokees had 4,600 slaves. Many Cherokees depended on them as a bridge to white society. Full-blood Indian slave owners relied on the Africans as English interpreters and translators. Mainly, however, enslaved persons worked on farms as laborers or in homes as maids or servants. The Cherokees feared the aspect of a slave revolt, and that is just what happened in 1842 at Webbers Falls.

On the morning of November 15 more than twenty-five slaves, mostly from the Joseph Vann plantation, revolted. They locked their masters and overseers in their homes and cabins while they slept. The slaves stole guns, horses, mules, ammunition, food, and supplies. At daybreak the group, which included men, women, and children, headed toward Mexico, where slavery was illegal. In the Creek Nation the Cherokee slaves were joined by Creek slaves, bringing the group total to more than thirty-five. The fugitives fought off and killed a couple of slave hunters in the Choctaw Nation.

The Cherokee Nation sent the Cherokee Militia, under Capt. John Drew, with eighty-seven men to catch the runaways. This expedition was authorized by the Cherokee National Council in Tahlequah on November 17, 1842. The militia caught up with the slaves seven miles north of the Red River on November 28, 1842. The tired, famished fugitives offered no resistance.

The party returned to Tahlequah on December 8, 1842. Five slaves were executed, and Joseph Vann put the majority of his rebellious slaves to work on his steamboats, which worked the Arkansas, Mississippi, and Ohio Rivers. The Cherokees blamed the incident on free, armed black Seminoles who lived in close proximity to the Cherokee slaves at Fort Gibson. On December 2, 1842, the Cherokee Nation passed a law commanding all free African Americans, except former Cherokee slaves, to leave the nation.

[focsle]

Hello! I don't know if this is exactly your wheelhouse, but I was reading about Fredrick Douglass and it briefly mentioned that he used a Seamans protection certificate in his escape from slavery; I was wondering if you had any thoughts/ info about these as it relates to Black seamen in the US, especially the South. If not, absolutely no worries! Love your blog.

Oh yeah, I went down a rabbit hole sometime back about seamen’s protection certificates in the context of what they meant for Black mariners and US Citizenship!

To summarize that above post, Seamen’s Protection Certificates spoke to the contradictory legal status of Black mariners in the antebellum US when naturalization was only accessible to white men. It’s a paper that says that one is a US citizen, but was not considered ‘valid’ documentation for accessing the rights of a US citizen. But for all intents and purposes, it still signaled that the man in question was indeed a citizen when abroad. This contradiction (as well as other legal contradictions) was leveraged by people fighting for access to naturalization and a full legal identity for African Americans.

But while the certificate did not truly grant citizenship to Black sailors, it still served as a form of protection both in states where slavery was law, as well as ‘free’ states, where the Fugitive Slave Act quickly destabilized any sense of security one might have there. The seamen’s protection certificates had only a brief vague description of the holder. As such, some free Black men would take the risk of loaning their papers out to those escaping enslavement who roughly matched the written description, similar to how States’ ‘free papers’ were also loaned out for the same purpose. As Douglass mentioned in his autobiography concerning his use of said papers:

“But I had one friend—a sailor—who owned a sailor’s protection, which answered somewhat the purpose of free papers—describing his person and certifying to the fact that he was a free American sailor. The instrument had at its head the American eagle, which at once gave it the appearance of an authorized document.”

Nearly 1/3rd of applications for seamen’s protection certificates were made by men of color because of the protection they afforded against being kidnapped into slavery. Even though there was a lot of backpeddling from officials saying that the protection certificates didn’t REALLY mean citizenship, it was still an official document stating someone’s freedom and thus had tremendous value in allowing a man to move freely through the world. Here’s an old but good article about seamen’s protection certificates in general that speaks a little more to that.

In the context of mariners in the South, here are some examples. This one, from the National Archives is for a man named William Wright, from Viriginia who applied for a certificate in New Orleans in 1810.

And another from the collections of Mystic Seaport of a man named Jonathan Miller, born in New York but applying for the paper in Galveston Texas. The language is a bit different from the boilerplate seamen’s protection certificates like the one above, so I think it’s slightly different as a legal document—but still, in 1856, would hold the same sort of odd wobbly status.

The museum’s interpretation of this was that it was likely applied for and used as a form of protection in moving freely through the South, rather than Mr. Miller specifically using it for a maritime purpose.

[todaysdocument]

Petition of Margaret S. Gittings in the Fugitive Slave Petition Book

Record Group 21: Records of District Courts of the United StatesSeries: Fugitive Slave Record Book

123 Record, 33, The United State of America District of Maryland to wit In the Matter of the Petition of Margaret S. Gittings Be it remembered, That on this day, to wit the Twenty Second day of May in the year of our Lord one thousand Eight hundred and fifty four, the said Margaret S. Gittings filed in the District Court of the United States in and for the Maryland District her Petition and proof in the words and of the [terms?] following, to wit, To the Honorable William F. Giles, Judge of the District Court of the United States in and for the District of Maryland. The petition of Margaret S. Gittings, of the City of Baltimore in the District aforesaid, respectfully shows, That she is the bona fide and lawful owner of a negro boy named William Thompson, or William Hemmings as he sometimes calls himself, now about sixteen or seventeen years of age, and that the said negro Boy, William is her slave for life and as such slave owed your petitioner service and labor within the State of Maryland, from which her said slave Escaped and ran away on or about the Eighteenth day of May, Eighteen hundred and fifty four and that your petitioner has not since recovered the possession of her said slave. She further shows that her said slave, William Thompson or William Hemmings, is five feet to four to six inches in height, stout of his age and square built, of a dark mulatto colour, very large feet & hands, has a scar on his forehead from a Fall, also a scar on one leg near the knee from the healing of a sore, had a large flat nose and a large mouth, with a bushy head of hair, speaks and understands German having lived in a German family understands it better than he speaks it, but can speak it so as to be understood. Your petitioner further shows that she is desired to reclaim her said slave and regain his services, wherefore she prays your Honor to inquire into the matter and facts stated in this her petition and to cause a record to be made of the matters provided under it, so as to enable her to obtain the benefits of the Act of Congress approved September 18, 1850 Entitled "An Act to amend and supplementary to the Act entitled An Act respecting fugitives from Justice and persons Escaping from the Service of their Masters approved February the Twelfth One thousand Seven hundred and ninety three" and as in duty bound, &c. Margaret S. Gittings Witness John Hanan