The Soulful Veteran's Blog

In 1772, Lord Mansfield’s judgment in the Somersett’s Case emancipated a slave in England, and that helped launch the movement that would abolish slavery in the British Empire. If the thirteen American colonies had stayed in the Empire, there would have been no Civil War to end slavery, because slavery in the United States would have ended peacefully without a shot being fired.

Is it a coincidence that this fight for independence from the British Empire followed the beginning of the movement in England to end slavery in the British Empire?

Comparing the two timelines offers a compelling argument that the American Revolution wasn’t about freedom—it was about slavery disguised as a freedom movement.

On December 15, 1773—about one year after the Somersett Case in the UK—the Boston Tea Party signaled a movement for independence in America leading to the formation of the United States of America. Then in April 1775…

View original post 841 more words

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “

  1. Pingback: SLAVERY HAS A FACE « DIGITAL FAITH

  2. Well… I think only John Adams and the guys from New York and Maine were Dec signers who didn’t own slaves. The loudest voices for independence came out of Virginia and were owners of plantations. Independence was good for business on many levels. It may be a simplistic conclusion, but I’m not sure it’s all that far from the truth. Food for a lot of thought!

    • It seems that in the United States the slave owners had more power than the abolitionists in the north. I wonder where most of the loyalists to the British Empire were located. Another question might be, what concept holds more power in the United State?

      A. capitalism
      B. individual freedoms
      C. today’s democracy in the US
      D. the republic the US Founders created

      Thomas Jefferson was quite unhappy about some of the edits made to his original draft of the Declaration of Independence. He had originally included language condemning the British promotion of the slave trade (even though Jefferson himself was a slave owner with more than 150 slaves that he kept as slaves his entire life). This criticism of the slave trade was removed in spite of Jefferson’s objections.

      Thomas Jefferson may have expressed serious misgivings about slavery but his actions speak louder than his words.

      Of the first five presidents of the United States, four owned slaved and all four owned slaves while they were president. The last president to own slaves was the 18th president, Ulysses S. Grant, who set his slaves free.

      So twelve of our presidents owned slaves and eight of them owned slaves while serving as president.

      George Washington owned more than 200 slaves
      Thomas Jefferson owned more than 100 slaves
      James Madison owned and sold slaves all his life
      James Monroe owned 30-40 slaves
      Andrew Jackson owned about 160 slaves
      Martin Van Buren owned at least one slave
      William Henry Harrison had several slaves
      John Tyler had slaves
      James K. Polk had 15 slaves
      Zachary Taylor owned more than 100 slaves
      Andrew Johnson owned 8 slaves
      Ulysses S. Grant freed his slaves

      There were thirty-nine Founding Fathers that signed the U.S. Constitution. Fourteen owned or managed slave-operated plantations or large farms, and many of the wealthy Northerners owned domestic slaves. Benjamin Franklin owned slaves but later freed his slaves and was a key founder of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society.

      Thirteen of the Founding Fathers were merchants; seven were major land speculators, and eleven speculated in securities on a large scale. Two were small farmers. Eight earned most of their income from public office. Three had retired. Two were scientists and three were physicians. Only one was a college president.

      A few of the 1787 delegates were wealthy, but many of the country’s top wealth-holders were Loyalists who went to Britain. Most of the others had financial resources that ranged from good to excellent, but there are other founders who were less than wealthy. On the whole they were less wealthy than the Loyalist

Comments are welcome — pro or con. However, comments must focus on the topic of the post, be civil and avoid ad hominem attacks.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s