Walter Hoye

Archive for 2013|Yearly archive page

Chouteau v. Pierre (1845) And Charlotte v. Chouteau (1847) Freedom Suits

In Abortion, Special Edition on December 30, 2013 at 12:01 am
Share this page

Without Life, nothing Matters.

Freedom Suit Series

“Anyone who kidnaps someone and either sells him as a slave or still has him when he is caught must be put to death.” — Exodus 21:16, New Century Version (NCV) 

Freedom suits are legal petitions filed by slaves for freedom. Between America’s colonial period and the American Civil War, a number of civil actions were brought to courts of law by STRONG BLACK WOMEN that challenged both the moral maxim and the legal legitimacy of JUST-SUBJECTION 1 and WRONGFUL-ENSLAVEMENT 2 in America. This series of columns will explore those lawsuits and expose lessons that can be engaged by the Body of Christ and the Pro-Life movement today, in the wake of the 1973 United States Supreme Court (USSC) decisions in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton.

White Space Holder


Summons: Rachel, a woman of color v. Walker, William

STATE OF MISSOURI CHOUTEAU V. PIERRE AND CHARLOTTE V. CHOUTEAU CASES

“In Chouteau v. Pierre it was held that ‘the system being recognized in fact, it devolved upon the plaintiff, he being a negro, to show the law forbidding it‘ (9 Mo., 3).” 3 In Charlotte v. Chouteau which was argued three times before the Missouri supreme court to settle the status of a negress whose mother was born in Canada, the court each time declared that no positive law was necessary.4 In the final hearing in 1857 it was held that ‘slavery now exists in Louisiana, Missouri, and Florida without any act of legislation introducing it, and none was necessary, for being in existence under the sanction at least of France and Spain in 1803 … it was continued, and was not dependent on any positive law for its recognition.’ 5 It was stated that the existence of slavery in fact was presumptive evidence of its legality (11 Mo., 193).6 The next time this case was tried it was held that African slavery was recognized as legal in the Spanish, French, and British colonies, though no law could be found reducing that race to bondage (21 Mo., 590).” 7


Chouteau v. Pierre (1845) And
Charlotte v. Chouteau (1847) Freedom Suits

“In Chouteau v. Pierre, supra which was a suit on part of a slave for freedom, the court refused to permit a question to be put to a juror, whether he felt in conscience bound to find a verdict in favor of the freedom of the plaintiff (i.e., a negro slave), notwithstanding the law might hold him in slavery, and the refusal was held error.” — Cases Determined in the St. Louis 8

“When the case of Charlotte v. Chouteau came before the Missouri Supreme Court in 1847, Justice [William Barclay] Napton stated: Whatever may be the policy of other governments, it has not been the policy of this State to favor the liberation of negroes from that condition in which the laws and usages have placed the mass of their species.” — Robert Moore, Jr. 9

“Slaves are in truth a species of property sui generis [Latin for ‘ of its own kind‘], to be held, disposed of, and regulated according to the laws of each particular state where slavery exists. In all slaveholding states color raises the presumption of slavery and until the contrary is shown a man or woman of color is deemed to be a slave.” — Judge William Barclay Napton 10

1840 Nov Case Number 192 - Pierre, a mulatto v. Choteau, Therese Cerre While the children of the wealthy founding fathers of St. Louis, Missouri were defendants in numerous freedom suits (Missouri slaves filed petitions against the Chouteau, Cabanne, Sarpy, and Papin families), Pierre and Charlotte brought separate and parallel suits for freedom against Therese and Gabriel Chouteau.11 Both brother and sister claimed that their mother, Rose (“a negress), was born in Montreal, in Lower Canada, around the year 1768 and at a time when slavery in that country was outlawed. 12 According to legal historian Elektra Tig, Esq., “in about 1791, she was taken to Prairie du Chien, in the Northwest Territory. She remained there until about 1794. In 1795 she was taken to St. Louis. Pierre was born in Missouri, probably in the late 1790s, and lived there in slavery for over forty years. It is not clear whether Charlotte was born before or after her brother. By the 1840s, Rose was presumably dead, having lived in slavery her entire life.”  13 In both suits, Pierre and Charlotte claimed that they were free persons because their mother was born free in a country where slavery was illegal and lived in places where the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 14 (an ordinance for the Government of the Territory of the United States, North-West of the River Ohio, and also known as the Freedom Ordinance) was enforced. Missouri State Supreme Court Judge William Barclay NaptonNotwithstanding these facts and that both the Circuit Court of St. Louis and the Supreme Court of Missouri (between 1824 and 1837) had previously laid down the law in at least seven (7) slave freedom suits freeing slaves,15 an “ill wind of judicial activism” that meant nobody any good began to blow. In 1839 Missouri Governor Lilburn Williams Boggs,16 the sixth (6th) Governor of Missouri from 1836 to 1840, appointed William Barclay Napton, Esq. to the Missouri Supreme Court.17 Judge Napton was a slave holder himself, held strong Pro-Slavery opinions and favored overturning earlier and lesser courts rulings that might free the slaves in the state of Missouri.18 As an activist Judge favoring the legal institution of slavery in the antebellum South, Napton’s efforts began to show results by the late 1840s.19 So while the courts ruled in favor of Pierre’s 1845 petition for freedom from slaveholder Marie Therese Cerre Choteau, Charlotte’s 1847 petition for freedom from Gabriel Choteau (legally filed under the same circumstances as her brother Pierre) was turned down.20

White Space HolderJUDGE WILLIAM BARCLAY NAPTON’S MAJORITY OPINION!William Barclay Napton Missouri State Supreme Court Justice: “The instructions asked by the plaintiff [slave] need no particular comment. Their general spirit is not in conformity to the policy of our laws or the principles heretofore adjudicated by our courts. Whatever may be the policy of other governments, it has not been the policy of this State, to favor the liberation of negroes from that condition in which the laws and usages have placed the mass of their species. On the contrary, our statute expressly throws the burden of establishing a right to freedom upon the petitioner, and the provision is both wise and humane. Neither sound policy nor enlightened philanthropy should encourage, in a slaveholding State, the multiplication of a race whose condition could be neither that of freemen nor of slaves, and whose existence and increase, in this anomalous character, without promoting their individual comforts or happiness, tend only to dissatisfy and corrupt those of their own race and color remaining in a state of servitude. Different principles and other presumptions may be very safely and perhaps very wisely indulged in where the institution of slavery has never existed or has been entirely abolished.” 21

Interestingly, Judge Napton was an ardent Democrat 22 and one of the founders of the “Central Clique” of Boons Lick politicians who gained control of the Democratic Party in Missouri in 1835.23 As one of the three (3) justices on the Missouri Supreme Court, drafted the Jackson Resolutions 24 at the request of Claiborne Jackson and recorded in his diary that he intended to use the Dred Scott case to bring the principles of the Southern Address to bear on Missouri law.25 Much like the Pro-Abortion forces in the 1960s needed a federal supreme court decision to legalize BIG Abortion in every state, in the 1850s Pro-Slavery forces needed the same to stem the tide of free states entering the Union and the Dred Scott freedom suit in Missouri set the stage for the perfect opportunity. At the end of the day, the other Missouri State Supreme Court Justices agreed with Napton and the focus on fixing the Dred Scott decision was on.26

Open Letter To Black America

LESSON: Anomalous Character Is Lukewarm

A Lesson We Can Learn From The Chouteau Cases

“The Negro cannot win … if he is willing to sell the future of his children for his personal and immediate comfort and safety.” — Martin Luther King, Jr. (“The Living King”, Ebony, Vol. 41, No. 3, January 1986, Page 63.) 27

“I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of My mouth.” — Revelation 3:15,16 28

Sign: You Will Never Influence The World By Trying To Be Like ItFirst, even in the jurisdiction of free states in the North, a slave’s freedom depended upon his or her ability to prove that he or she was not a fugitive (i.e., still legally the property of his or her master under the Constitution of the United States of America).29 Second, even when slaves were plaintiffs in their respective freedom suits, their presence in the courtroom seeking freedom (i.e., legal personhood) only affirmed the legitimacy of the institution of slavery.30 Third, the formal acceptance of freedom suits created a state of conflicted feelings towards slavery in the public square, which often countered the will to appeal to the state for the recognition of legal personhood on the behalf of slaves.31 So real was this ambivalence towards slavery that by the 1840s the Missouri Supreme Court had drifted away from its humane and moral line of legal precedent. During this time, the Missouri Supreme Court interpreted at least three (3) cases contrary to the spirit of the law 32 (i.e., the “once free, always free” doctrine upheld by Missouri courts in determining slave freedom suits). So deep was the divide in the heart of the people of Missouri, that by 1850 the Missouri Supreme Court’s heart had hardened to the point, that their 1852 Dred Scott decision was already a foregone conclusion. The history behind the freedom suits of Chouteau v. Pierre (1845) and Charlotte v. Chouteau (1847) makes it clear that when our character becomes anomalous or deviates from truth (John 14:6) to pursue our personal and immediate comfort and safety, we are neither free nor slave. More importantly, we learn that when our self-interests rule our decisions we are lukewarm in the eyes of God and His judgement isn’t far away.


Could It Be?When I think about Black America moving into the year 2014, I recall the fact that in 1960, sixty-one percent (61%) of us were married, compared to only thirty-one percent (31%) of us today and I cried for my people.33 When I read in the Thursday, December 19th, 2013 Guttmacher Institute’s report that Black women have the highest rate of unintended pregnancy in the United States of America,34 I was embarrassed and knew that after 150 years of struggle between the White man and the Black man (Matthew 18:21-35), this was not the kind of freedom our forefathers and foremothers died for. When I realize that Black America is moving into the forty-first (41st) year of legalized abortion on demand in America, with over twenty (20) million Black lives already lost to abortion 35 at a 3,796 to 1 ratio when compared to the number of Black Americans lynched in America between 1864 and 1968 36 I grimace and recoil in horror. When I confirmed the Bureau of Justice statistics for the period from 1980 to 2008 and saw that Black Americans were six (6) times more likely than White Americans to be homicide victims and eight (8) times more likely to commit a homicide,37 my heart sank into deep disappointment and discouragement. Could It Be?However, when I reflected on the silence in our pulpits regarding these life-or-death issues, I experienced an unsettling sinking sensation as Ezekiel 18:20 38 came to mind and I wondered out loud: Could it be true, that biblical accountability is real? Could it be true, that the son shall not be punished for his father’s sins, nor the father punished for the sins of his son? Could it be true, that the righteous person will be rewarded for his own righteousness and the wicked person rewarded for his own wickedness? Could it be true, that God will hold each of us accountable for our own deeds, our own works, and our own words? Could it be true, that the soul that sinneth, it shall die?

Yeah, I think it could.

Brothers, we need to talk.


Note(s):

 In my very, very strong opinion, THE BIBLE DOES NOT JUSTIFY SLAVERY. If pastors (christian leaders) of the South taught their congregants to obey the Mosaic laws that criminalized kidnapping human beings, the harsh treatment of servants, the return of runaway servants and without preferring the rich over the poor or men over women, held everyone accountable for their own actions in the public square, slavery would not have existed.

Kidnapping


Deuteronomy 24:7 says: “If someone kidnaps a fellow Israelite, either to make him a slave or sell him, the kidnapper must be killed. You must get rid of the evil among you.”

Harsh Treatment


Exodus 21:26,27 says: “If a man hits his male or female slave in the eye, and the eye is blinded, the man is to free the slave to pay for the eye. If a master knocks out a tooth of his male or female slave, the man is to free the slave to pay for the tooth.”

Runaway Servants


Deuteronomy 23:15-16 say: “If an escaped slave comes to you, do not hand over the slave to his master. Let the slave live with you anywhere he likes, in any town he chooses. Do not mistreat him.”


The New Testament speaks equally as strong against the kidnapping of human beings (which is the basis of slavery) as the Old Testament. Please read the Apostle Paul’s warning against false teaching in 1st Timothy 1:8-10 (NCV): “But we know that the law is good if someone uses it lawfully. We also know that the law is not made for good people but for those who are against the law and for those who refuse to follow it. It is for people who are against God and are sinful, who are unholy and ungodly, who kill their fathers and mothers, who murder, who take part in sexual sins, who have sexual relations with people of the same sex, WHO SELL SLAVES, who tell lies, who speak falsely, and who do anything against the true teaching of God.


In 1st Corinthians 7:21 the Apostle Paul directs Christians who are slaves but have the opportunity to become free to take that opportunity. How could a Christian slaveholder, or a legal system based on Christian principles, deny slaves an opportunity that the Bible commands them to take? Here is 1st Corinthians 7:21 (NLV): “Were you a servant who was owned by someone when you became a Christian? Do not worry about it. But if you are able to become free, do that.”


“Perhaps the most compelling argument AGAINST SLAVERY in the New Testament is Paul’s letter to Philemon, in which the Apostle asks Onesimus (a fellow Christian) to free his Christian slave.


Reference(s):

01. A paradox noted by Edlie Wong in her book “Neither Fugitive Nor Free” (2009), slave states had statutes that provided for slaves to sue for “wrongful enslavement”, based on slave laws that established “just subjection”, page 5 and 153 (http://bit.ly/17xS6Ty).
02. Ibid.
03. Harrison Anthony Trexler, Slavery in Missouri, 1804-1865, page 59 (http://bit.ly/1d2oDiX).
04. Herbert Baxter Adams, “The Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science”, page 241 (http://bit.ly/1el6cYS).
05. Ibid.
06. Ibid., page 241 (http://bit.ly/1aifths).
07. Ibid., page 241 (http://bit.ly/1cBpOte).
08. Missouri Courts of Appeals, “Cases Determined in the St. Louis and the Kansas City Courts of Appeals of the State of Missouri”, Volume 51, page 365 (http://bit.ly/1cBrG56).
09. Robert Moore, Jr., “A Ray of Hope, Extinguished: St. Louis Slave Suits for Freedom”, Gateway Heritage magazine, vol. 14, no. 3, Winter 1993-94, copyright Missouri Historical Society (http://bit.ly/1ggA2Qg). and Joseph Fred Benson, “Missouri’s Evolving Jurisprudence: A Brief History of the Supreme Court of Missouri, 1821 to 2008” (http://bit.ly/1jZcsfP).
10. Dennis K. Boman, “Lincoln’s Resolute Unionist: Hamilton Gamble, Dred Scott Dissenter and Missouri’s Civil War Governor ” (http://bit.ly/JpJrti).
11. St. Louis Circuit Court, History Records Project, Freedom Suits Case Files, 1814-1860 (http://bit.ly/JFpVsn).
12. Elektra Tig, Esq., “Slave Freedom Law in Missouri in the 1840s: “This Anomalous Character” (http://bit.ly/KfAP9A).
13. Ibid.
14. Northwest Ordinance, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/1emaM9g).
15. Elektra Tig, Esq., “Slave Freedom Law in Missouri in the 1840s: “This Anomalous Character” (http://bit.ly/KfAP9A).
16. Lilburn Boggs, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/1ajd71W).
17. William Barclay Napton, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/18U4lfG).
18. Ibid.
19. David Thomas Konig, Paul Finkelman, Christopher Alan Bracey, “The Dred Scott Case: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives on Race and Law”, page 199 (http://bit.ly/1eR9Q1p) and Robert Moore, Jr., “A Ray of Hope, Extinguished: St. Louis Slave Suits for Freedom”, Gateway Heritage magazine, vol. 14, no. 3, Winter 1993-94, copyright Missouri Historical Society (http://bit.ly/1ggA2Qg). Quote: “By the mid-1840s, the composition of the court had changed entirely with retirements of Mathias McGirk (1841) and George Tompkins (1845). Replacing them were William Scott and William Napton, both strong Pro-Slavery men. Within the space of seven years, this new court completely reversed earlier legal precedent regarding slave suits, closing an avenue to freedom.”
20. St. Louis Circuit Court, History Records Project, Freedom Suits Case Files, 1814-1860 (http://bit.ly/JFpVsn).
21. Elektra Tig, Esq., “Slave Freedom Law in Missouri in the 1840s: “This Anomalous Character” (http://bit.ly/KfAP9A) and Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri, Volume 11 (http://bit.ly/1h9yw5m).
22. Charles Clark, “William B. Napton”, KansasBoqusLegislature.Org (http://bit.ly/1hQm9c5).
23. Ibid.
24. William Barclay Napton, “The Union on Trial: The Political Journals of Judge William Barclay Napton, 1829-1883”, page 108 (http://bit.ly/1dPndKm).
25. University of Missouri-St. Louis, St. Louis, “Dred Scott – Missouri Supreme Court” (http://bit.ly/1bxxN5Q).
26. Ibid.
27. Martin Luther King, Jr., “The Living King”, Ebony, Vol. 41, No. 3, January 1986, Page 63. (http://bit.ly/JFLLfl).
28. Revelation 3:15-16, King James Version “I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.” (http://bit.ly/1cQYqcf).
29. Edlie L. Wong, “Neither Fugitive nor Free: Atlantic Slavery, Freedom Suits, and the Legal Culture of Travel”, page 5 (http://bit.ly/1iqscH5).
30. Ibid., Edlie L. Wong (http://bit.ly/KhpMvW).
31. Ibid., Edlie L. Wong (http://bit.ly/1k1aU59).
32. David Thomas Konig, Paul Finkelman, Christopher Alan Bracey, “The Dred Scott Case: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives on Race and Law”, page 199 (http://bit.ly/19AFbhl).
33. Star Parker, “Overreliance on entitlements harms U.S.” (http://bit.ly/1fWCgU8).
34. Guttmacher Institute, “Unintended Pregnancy Remains A Persistent Problem In The United States; Disparities By Income Continue To Grow” (http://bit.ly/1l18Sx5).
35. LaVerne Tolbert, Ph.D., “Over 20 Million Aborted: Why Planned Parenthood Targets The Inner-City” (http://bit.ly/18Un76F).
36. Dennis M. Howard, “The Abortion Index” (http://bit.ly/18oqGSm).
37. Star Parker, “Preserve Gun Rights, Save Black Lives” (http://bit.ly/1fWEe71).
38. Ezekiel 18:20, King James Version “The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.” (http://bit.ly/1d4djmx).

Rachel v. Walker

In Abortion, Special Edition on December 16, 2013 at 12:00 am
Share this page

Without Life, nothing Matters.

Freedom Suit Series

“Anyone who kidnaps someone and either sells him as a slave or still has him when he is caught must be put to death.” — Exodus 21:16, New Century Version (NCV) 

Freedom suits are legal petitions filed by slaves for freedom. Between America’s colonial period and the American Civil War, a number of civil actions were brought to courts of law by STRONG BLACK WOMEN that challenged both the moral maxim and the legal legitimacy of JUST-SUBJECTION 1 and WRONGFUL-ENSLAVEMENT 2 in America. This series of columns will explore those lawsuits and expose lessons that can be engaged by the Body of Christ and the Pro-Life movement today, in the wake of the 1973 United States Supreme Court (USSC) decisions in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton.

White Space Holder


Summons: Rachel, a woman of color v. Walker, William

STATE OF MISSOURI SUMMONS FOR THE RACHEL V. WALKER CASE3

Rachel (a Black Slave) sued William Walker (a slave trader) for her freedom in St. Louis, Missouri in 1834. Rachel and her son James Henry had been the slaves of Thomas Stockton (a lieutenant in the United States Army) at Fort Snelling (present-day Minnesota) and at Fort Crawford (present-day Michigan). Please note that both military assignments were military fortifications located in free territories. William Walker planned to take Rachel and James Henry “downriver” (down the Mississippi river) to sell them in New Orleans. Rachel sued for her freedom based on having been illegally held as a slave in clearly free territories. At this point, I cannot resist mentioning that the phrase “sold down the river” originated in antebellum Mississippi in the 1800s. Apparently, slaves who didn’t like being slaves and|or caused trouble were “sold down the river” (from slave states in the North) into harsher conditions on Mississippi plantations.


Rachael v. Walker (1834) Freedom Suit

“[S]hall it be said, that because an officer of the army owns slaves in Virginia, that when as officer and soldier, he is required to take command of a post in the non-slave holding States or territories, he thereby has a right to take with him as many slaves, as will suit his interests and convenience? It surely cannot be the law; if this be true, then it is also true that the convenience or supposed convenience of the officer repeals as to him and others who have the same character, the ordinance and the act of 1821 admitting Missouri into the Union, and also the prohibitions of the several laws and constitutions of the non-slaveholding states.” — Matthias McGirk, Supreme Court Justice of the State of Missouri 4

Rachel v. Walker PapersCounsel for Walker contended that Thomas Stockton (Rachel’s owner) was an officer of the United States army, under proper authority with no choice in his assignments as he served his country in the free territories of Fort Snelling and Fort Crawford.5 Counsel further contended that such orders constituted and satisfied residency exceptions in the Northwest Ordinance and that the Supreme Court of Missouri Julia v. McKinney case of 1833 drew a distinction between traveling through and residing in a free territory or state.6 As such, while Stockton held the plaintiff (Rachel) in slavery as a personal attendant to himself and to the needs of his family in free territories, such residency was of “necessity” and did not entitle Stockton to lose his slave property (Rachel) and|or entitle Rachel to her freedom.7 The Circuit Court agreed with the counsel for Walker and Rachel lost her case in the lower court. Josiah Spalding, Esq., court appointed lawyer for Rachel, appealed the case to the Missouri Supreme Court and won.8

White Space HolderJOSIAH SPALDING’S RESPONSE WAS SIMPLE!
A Black female slave leaving a plantation for freedom behind Union lines“Mr. Spalding answers this argument, by saying although this officer was bound by law and authority, to be and remain in a country where slavery is not allowed, yet no law nor public authority required nor compelled him to [bring a] person there as a slave nor as a servant.” 9

In other words, Stockton could have obeyed his orders, served his country and complied with the law without buying, owning and selling slaves. The bottom line was, Stockton wanted a slave and was simply using his position as a United States Army officer as a thinly veiled smoke screen to skirt the law. According to Justice Matthias McGirk of the Supreme Court of Missouri, Stockton enslaving Rachael as his personal servant in a free territory was “his voluntary act, done without any other reason than that of convenience” 10 not necessity. Consequently, Stockton “and those claiming under him must be holden to abide the consquences of introducing slavery both in Missouri territory and Michigan, contrary to law. [So] the judgment of the Circuit Court is reversed.” 11

Open Letter To The Pro-Life Movement

LESSON: Convenience Trumps Conscience

A Lesson We Can Learn From The Rachel v. Walker Case

“If any man thinks that the interest of these Nations and the interest of Christianity are two separate and distinct things, I wish my soul may never enter into his secret.” — Oliver Cromwell 12

“I believe, that Republicans profoundly misunderstood and underestimated both the institution of slavery and the attitudes of white southerners. Slavery was not economically moribund, and southern whites, rich and poor alike, were deeply invested in it, as their tenacious defense of the institution, both during and after the war, was to show. In light of these considerations, the Republican program was thin gruel indeed.” — Elektra Tig, Esq. 13

Sign: You Can't Compromise On PrinciplesIn the 1860s the Republican Party had a plan to end slavery. James Oakes is an American Historian, and a distinguished Professor of History and Graduate School Humanities Professor at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York where he teaches history courses on the Civil War and Reconstruction, Slavery, the Old South, Abolitionism and United States and World History.14 In his book, “Freedom National: The Destruction of Slavery in the United States, 1861-1865,” 15 Professor Oakes describes the plan and the policies the Republicans believed would ultimately end slavery. According to Oakes, “in his first major anti-slavery speech as a member of the U.S. Senate, ‘Freedom National; Slavery Sectional,’ delivered on August 1852″,16 Charles Sumner, the United States Senator from Massachusetts and leader of both the anti-slavery forces in Massachusetts and the Radical Republicans in the United States Senate,17 “spelled out those policies which included the following elements: 18

  • Ban slavery in America by reversing Scott (Reverse Roe and Doe)
  • Admit no new slave states (Reverse State Level Pro-Abortion Legislation)
  • Congressionally repeal the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 (Repeal Obamacare)
  • Buy all border state slaves and free them (Welfare And Entitlement Programs)
  • Restore free speech in the South (Restore Free Speech And Secure Religious Freedom)
  • Tax the sale of slaves and outlaw coastwise slave trading (Use IRS As A Weapon)

The above Republican plan (or approach if you will), to end slavery in 1860, seems so very much like what the Grand Old Party (GOP) is trying to do today to end abortion. I agree with legal historian Elektra Tig, Esq.,19 the Republican plan to end slavery in 1860 failed because it did not understand or at best profoundly underestimated the heart of people (Jeremiah 17:9; 20 Mark 7:21-23 21). By 1860, human slavery was a way of life for half the country. In the South, slave labor was an institution all of the slave states were willing to die for to protect and preserve which the American Civil War clearly attests to. Yeah, just like United States Army Lieutenant Thomas Stockton wanted slaves to serve him and his family, the slave states wanted slaves to serve them.

WHY?

Economically, the benefits of slave labor were not confined to agriculture. Slave labor would work in industries such as textiles, tobacco and cordage factories, iron works and railroad construction to only name a few.22 Yeah, the slave states wanted slavery. Geographically, wanting slave labor was not confinded to southern slave states.23 Professor Kenneth Milton Stampp cites the complaint of an Austin, Texas newspaper in 1858-59 “that Texas needed at least six million more Negroes.” 24 Yes, I’m hoping the number six (6) million was hyperbole, but the point is nevertheless very well made. Yeah, the slave states wanted slavery. Culturally, the most compelling evidence that political and economic solutions would not end slavery was the fact that the slave states themselves had no plan to end slavery.25 By 1860 the slave states understood that freeing millions of Black slaves was not simply an untenable and|or unfeasible proposition. The slave states understood that freeing millions of Black slaves was a nightmare. The reality of the 1860s, is that no amount of political or economic maneuvering would have ended slavery. Yeah, just like United States Army Lieutenant Thomas Stockton wanted slaves to serve him and his family, the slave states wanted slaves to serve them.

HISTORY IS CLEAR …

Political and economic solutions alone would not and did not end slavery in America. In my opinion, there is every reason to believe that if not for the American Civil War, slavery would have continued indefinitely.26

Got Religion!As I pause to think about the Pro-Life movement moving into the forty-first (41st) year of legalized abortion on demand in America, the over fifty-seven (57) million 27 lives lost to legalized abortion on demand in America (that’s 30% of the under forty-five (45) generation 28 today) and the plight of my people (we are the abortion industry’s #1 customer,29 ugh!), Romans 1:21 comes to mind:

White Space HolderTHE APOSTLE PAUL SAYS: “YES, THEY KNEW GOD!”
The Holy BibleYes, they knew God, but they wouldn’t worship Him as God or even give Him thanks. And they began to think up foolish ideas of what God was like. As a result, their minds became dark and confused.” — Romans 1:21 (NLT)

I WONDER …

Could It Be?Could it be true, that a woman wants an abortion because she does not believe that God loves her, that God loves her baby and that tangible help without judgement, hidden agendas and strings attached is a right now reality? Could it be true, that like the Republican Party on the eve of the secession crisis looking to end slavery, the Pro-Life movement is looking at ending legalized abortion on demand through political and economic prisms that blind us to seeing why a woman wants an abortion? Could it be true, that even though Christians know God and know that legalized abortion on demand is clearly and wholeheartedly an evil of extraordinary moral depravity, that some Christians want abortion because they also know that convenience trumps conscience, that luxury trumps loyalty, and that lifestyle trumps liberty? Could it be true, that America wants abortion because men and women view legalized abortion on demand as a “Get Out of Jail Free” card that allows them to live life without God? Could it be true, that the Democratic Party wants abortion because they understand the reality of fallen human nature better than either the Republican Party or the Pro-Life movement? Could it be true, that as long as the public views legalized abortion on demand as a necessary evil, that the political will to end legalized abortion on demand will continue to wane? Could it be true, that until the Church solves the reasons why abortion is wanted that legalized abortion on demand will not come to an end? Could it be true, that until the Pro-Life movement works together as one (1) Body in Christ, we’re working as though we want abortion? Could it be true, that America wants abortion the same way the United States Army Lieutenant Thomas Stockton and the slave states wanted slaves? Could it be true, that just as politics and economics didn’t stop the slave states from fighting for slavery, that politics and economics won’t stop people from fighting for abortion?

Yeah, I think it could.

Brothers, we need to talk.


Note(s):

 In my very, very strong opinion, THE BIBLE DOES NOT JUSTIFY SLAVERY. If pastors (christian leaders) of the South taught their congregants to obey the Mosaic laws that criminalized kidnapping human beings, the harsh treatment of servants, the return of runaway servants and without preferring the rich over the poor or men over women, held everyone accountable for their own actions in the public square, slavery would not have existed.

Kidnapping


Deuteronomy 24:7 says: “If someone kidnaps a fellow Israelite, either to make him a slave or sell him, the kidnapper must be killed. You must get rid of the evil among you.”

Harsh Treatment


Exodus 21:26,27 says: “If a man hits his male or female slave in the eye, and the eye is blinded, the man is to free the slave to pay for the eye. If a master knocks out a tooth of his male or female slave, the man is to free the slave to pay for the tooth.”

Runaway Servants


Deuteronomy 23:15-16 say: “If an escaped slave comes to you, do not hand over the slave to his master. Let the slave live with you anywhere he likes, in any town he chooses. Do not mistreat him.”


The New Testament speaks equally as strong against the kidnapping of human beings (which is the basis of slavery) as the Old Testament. Please read the Apostle Paul’s warning against false teaching in 1st Timothy 1:8-10 (NCV): “But we know that the law is good if someone uses it lawfully. We also know that the law is not made for good people but for those who are against the law and for those who refuse to follow it. It is for people who are against God and are sinful, who are unholy and ungodly, who kill their fathers and mothers, who murder, who take part in sexual sins, who have sexual relations with people of the same sex, WHO SELL SLAVES, who tell lies, who speak falsely, and who do anything against the true teaching of God.


“Perhaps the most compelling argument AGAINST SLAVERY in the New Testament is Paul’s letter to Philemon, in which the Apostle asks Onesimus (a fellow Christian) to free his Christian slave.

Reference(s):

01. A paradox noted by Edlie Wong in her book “Neither Fugitive Nor Free” (2009), slave states had statutes that provided for slaves to sue for “wrongful enslavement”, based on slave laws that established “just subjection”, page 5 and 153 (http://bit.ly/17xS6Ty).
02. Ibid.
03. Rachel v. Walker Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/1fnJIIj).
04. Reports of Cases Argued and Decided in the Supreme Court of the United States: 1-351 U.S; 1790, October Term, 1955, page 761 (http://bit.ly/18ERM2m).
05. The State Historical Society of Missouri: Missouri State Archives, “Before Dred Scott: Freedom Suits in Antebellum Missouri” Rachel v. William Walker (1836) (http://on.mo.gov/1bI8vX0).
06. Ibid.
07. Elektra Tig, Esq., “Rachael v. Walker: An Officer and A Slave” (http://bit.ly/1hPmxdo).
08. Ibid.
09. Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri: 1835/1837, Volume 4 (http://bit.ly/IRSrqn) and Elektra Tig, Esq., “Rachael v. Walker II: The Arguments” (http://bit.ly/1aZJguI).
10. Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri: 1835/1837, Volume 4 (http://bit.ly/1hPnAKk) and Elektra Tig, Esq., “Rachael v. Walker III: Justice McGirk Becomes Annoyed” (http://bit.ly/1h3R6ZT).
11. Elektra Tig, Esq., “Rachael v. Walker III: Justice McGirk Becomes Annoyed” (http://bit.ly/1h3R6ZT).
12. Oliver Cromwell, FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL: Mr. Sumner’s Speech for the Repeal of the Fugitive Slave Bill (1852) by Charles Sumner, cover page (http://bit.ly/19F2FkT).
13. Elektra Tig, Esq., “Was Slavery on the Way Out in 1860? The Republican Plan” (http://bit.ly/1cE7krO).
14. James Oakes, The Graduate Center, CUNY (http://bit.ly/1ducLYR) and James Oakes, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/19kxoaH).
15. Freedom National: The Destruction of Slavery in the United States, 1861-1865, Amazon (http://amzn.to/1e8p8OX).
16. Charles Sumner, FREEDOM NATIONAL; SLAVERY SECTIONAL: Mr. Sumner’s Speech for the Repeal of the Fugitive Slave Bill (1852) by Charles Sumner, cover page (http://bit.ly/19F2FkT).
17. Charles Sumner, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/1h3U9Bn).
18. Elektra Tig, Esq., “Was Slavery on the Way Out in 1860? The Republican Plan” (http://bit.ly/1cE7krO).
19. Ibid.
20. Jeremiah 17:9, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” (http://bit.ly/1bAIecb).
21. Mark 7:21-23, “For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.” (http://bit.ly/1j0CNtB).
22. Elektra Tig, Esq., “Was Slavery on the Way Out in 1860?” (http://bit.ly/18GuRqB).
23. Ibid.
24. Kenneth Milton Stampp: The peculiar institution: Slavery In The Ante-Bellum South (http://bit.ly/1cqGT5o).
25. Ibid.
26. Elektra Tig, Esq., “Was Slavery on the Way Out in 1860? The Republican Plan” (http://bit.ly/1cE7krO).
27. Dennis Howard, Movement For A Better America (http://bit.ly/1fnWg2r) and Dennis Howard, “No Kids No Future YouTube (http://bit.ly/1bZIUdD).
28. Ibid.
29. Dennis Howard, Movement For A Better America: The Abortion Index (http://bit.ly/18oqGSm), Guttmacher Institute, “Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States”, October 2013 (http://bit.ly/1bZJLuQ), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), “Abortion Surveillance — United States, 2010”, October 2013 (http://1.usa.gov/1dlO2Wv). The CDC Abortion Surveillance Report dated November 2013 (http://1.usa.gov/1bZLqRh), reveals that in 2010, 56.7% of abortions reported to the CDC nationwide were done on Hispanic and Black women. According to the report, there were 415,479 abortions for known ethnicity reported for selected states in 2010 and 153,045 (or 36.8 percent) were non-Hispanic white babies, 148,261 (or 35.7 percent) were non-Hispanic black babies, 87,240 (or 21.0 percent) were Hispanic babies, and 26,933 (or 6.5 percent) were babies of other races or ethnicities.

Charlotte Dupuy

In Abortion, Special Edition on December 2, 2013 at 12:00 am
Share this page

Without Life, Nothing Matters.

Freedom Suit Series

“Anyone who kidnaps someone and either sells him as a slave or still has him when he is caught must be put to death.” — Exodus 21:16, New Century Version (NCV) 

Freedom suits are legal petitions filed by slaves for freedom. Between America’s colonial period and the American Civil War, a number of civil actions were brought to courts of law by STRONG BLACK WOMEN that challenged both the moral maxim and the legal legitimacy of JUST-SUBJECTION 1 and WRONGFUL-ENSLAVEMENT 2 in America. This series of columns will explore those lawsuits and expose lessons that can be engaged by the Body of Christ and the Pro-Life movement today, in the wake of the 1973 United States Supreme Court (USSC) decisions in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton.

White Space Holder


Bill of Sale for Charlotte Dupuy from James Condon to Henry Clay

Bill of Sale for Charlotte Dupuy from James Condon to Secretary of State Henry Clay.3

Bill of Sale from James Condon
May 12, 1806

I have this day bargained sold and delivered, and by these presents do bargain sell and deliver, to Henry Clay, for and in consideration of four hundred & fifty dollars, a negro female slave named Charlotte, aged about nineteen, which said slave I warrant & defend to said Clay against the claim of all & every person whatsoever; and I likewise warrant her to be sound.

Witness my hand & seal this 12th May 1806
(signed) Jas. Condon {L.S}
Teste.
Isaac Wells



Bill of Sale for Charlotte Dupuy from James Condon to Henry Clay

Charlotte Dupuy’s petition to summon Secretary of State Henry Clay to court.4

To the Honbl Judges of the circuit court of the District of Columbia for the county of Washington.

The several petitions of Charlotte or Lotty Charles and Mary Ann respectfully and humbly sets forth to your honors that they are people of color who are entitled to their freedom and who are now held in a state of slavery by one Henry Clay (Secty of State) contrary to law and your petitioners just rights and that they are about to be taken out of this district and carried into the state of Kentucky, there to be held as slaves for life whereupon they severally pray your honors to grant them such releif [sic] as they may be lawfully entitled to and such process of your honorable court against the said Henry Clay as is usual in such cases to compel the attendance of the said Henry Clay in your honbl court to answer this petition and to enter the usual security and recognizance not to remove your petitioners or any of them beyond the jurisdiction of your honorable court and as in duty bound they will ever pray

Robt Beale pro
petitioners
[opposite side lists filing date as: “13th Feb 1829”]



Henry Clay's letter to his agent in Washington, Philip Fendall regarding Charlotte Dupuy

Former Secretary of State Henry Clay’s letter regarding Charlotte Dupuy’s bid for freedom.5

This only represents a portion of this four-page handwritten letter.

To Philip R. Fendall
Lexington, September 10, 1830

I received you favor of the 31t. Ulto. I approve entirely of your order to the Marshall to imprison Lotty. Her husband and children are here. Her refusal therefore to return home, when requested by me to do so through you, was unnatural towards them as it was disobedient to me. She has been her own mistress, upwards of 18 months, since I left her at Washington, in consequence of the groundless writ which she prompted against me for her freedom; and as that writ has been decided against her, and as her conduct has created insubordination among her relatives here, I think it high time to put a stop to it, which can be best done by her return to her duty. How shall I now get her, is the question? There are persons frequently bringing slaves from the district to this State, some one of whom might perhaps undertake to conduct her to Maysville, Louisville or Lexington, or some other point from which I could receive her. Or perhaps some opportunity might occur to send her from Alexandria [Va.] to N. Orleans, free from much expense, to my son in law Martin Duralde Esqr. I should be content to receive her in either way. But I cannot think of troubling you unnecessarily with this affair. Perhaps Mr. John Davis (if you would have the goodness to speak to him) would undertake to look out for some person coming in this quarter who would engage to bring her. In the mean time, be pleased to let her remain in jail and inform me what is necessary for me to do to meet the charges …


Secretary Of State Henry Clay, Sr.

“I had rather be right than be President.” — Henry Clay, Sr. 6

“An oppressed people are authorized whenever they can to rise and break their fetters.” — Henry Clay, Sr. 7

Henry Clay: The Essential AmericanHenry Clay, Sr. (April 12, 1777 - June 29, 1852) was a very skilled orator and politician that represented Kentucky in the House of Representatives and in the Senate. He also served three (3) different terms as Speaker of the House of Representatives.8 It is note worthy to mention that Clay was chosen Speaker of the House on the first day of his first session, something never done before or since.9 Clay was a major player in America’s early history favoring the War of 1812.10 Henry Clay’s fame as the “Great Pacificator” grew as he brokered the key concessions on the slavery issue during the Nullification crisis, the Missouri Compromise of 1820 and the Missouri Compromise of 1850.11 Many viewed Clay as the champion of Western interests which earned him the names “Henry of the West” and “The Western Star.” 12 In congressional circles, Henry Clay was also known as the leader of the “Great Triumvirate” or “Immortal Trio,” along with his colleagues Daniel Webster and John C. Calhoun.13 In 1824 Clay ran for and lost his bid for the Presidency of the United States.14 When it was clear he had lost the race, Clay threw his electoral votes behind John Quincy Adams, who went on to become the 6th President of the United States of America and in turn made him Secretary of State in 1825.15 In the halls of congress, this move became widely known as: “The Corrupt Bargain.” 16 Henry Clay And Wife Lucretia Hart-ClayAccording to historians David and Jeanne Heidler, Henry Clay’s personal life was exemplary.17 He was a faithful husband and doting father of eleven children.18 The record is also clear that Clay “found slavery morally troubling and ultimately regarded it as incompatible with American ideals of liberty.” 19 According to Abraham Lincoln, then the Whig leader in Illinois, Henry Clay was his “ideal of a great man.” 20 According to a 1957 Senate Committee, Henry Clay was one (1) of the five (5) greatest United States Senators, along with Daniel Webster, John C. Calhoun, Robert La Follette, and Robert Taft in our country’s history.21 Nevertheless, Henry Clay was a slave owner. His father “Sir John” Clay was a Baptist Minister and member of the elite Planter Class (men who owned twenty (20) or more slaves) in Virginia.22 In 1718, just four (4) years after Henry’s birth, “Sir John” Clay died and left his son Henry Clay, eighteen (18) slaves and four hundred and sixty-four (464) acres of land.23 Henry Clay owned slaves and supported his family from the proceeds of slave labor his entire life. In 1829, when Clay was Secretary of State, he was sued by his slave Charlotte Dupuy for her freedom.24 Ultimately, the jury ruled against Dupuy. Henry Clay then had his agent in Washington (Philip R. Fendall above 25), arrest and imprison Charlotte while he made arrangements for her to be a domestic slave for his daughter and son-in-law Martin Duralde.26 This case preceded the Dred Scott case by seventeen (17) years and as anyone can imagine, received much attention in the public square. To his credit, what Henry Clay was unwilling to do in his life time, he did do in his death. When he died, Clay freed his slaves via his Will.27

Open Letter To The Church

LESSON: Our Walk Must Match Our Talk.

A Lesson We Can Learn From The Case Of Charlotte Dupuy

“Walk in wisdom toward them that are without [ wisdom ], redeeming the time.” — Colossians 4:5

“The hardest thing for a human being to do is to admit he [ or she ] is wrong.” — Herbert W. Armstrong, Worldwide Church of God 28

Sign: You Can't Compromise On PrinciplesHave you ever wondered why the world doesn’t hear or heed what Christians have to say? In my humble opinion, it’s because our walk doesn’t match our talk. Over the years, Christians have worked hard earning the reputation of being uncaring, undependable and lacking in character. We are viewed as hypocrites. We’re the people who don’t mind conferring advice, while at the same time, living everyday contrary to it. When the heat is on, or when our “well-being” or “welfare” is at stake, we’ll rationalize and justify our behavior while finding fault with the same behavior in others. Brothers, there is no way we can expect to be Ambassadors for Christ with lives that communicate: “Do as I say, not as I do.” While Henry Clay was an honorable man, dedicated to the Christian ideals of family and marriage between one (1) man and one (1) woman, a skilled orator and legendary politician committed to the American ideals of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, there was no way he could be successful convincing slave owners to free their slaves while owning, arresting, imprisoning and financially benefiting from slaves himself. Our walk has to match our talk, because the reality is that “actions speak louder than words.” What Henry Clay “did” with his slaves in his life, spoke so much louder than what he “did” with his slaves in his death. As such, what Henry Clay “said” about the evils of slavery or even about the blessings of liberty itself in the North, was drowned out by his slave owning life style in the South. So much so was Clay’s professional life compromised by his personal life, that in the end the political and financial realities of his time were able to force him to abandon his fight to end slavery in Kentucky.

Jeannie W. French, Founder Of The National Women's Coalition For Life QuoteAs I think about Henry Clay and the Pro-Life movement, Proverbs 29:18a comes to mind (“Where there is no vision, the people perish“) and I wonder … Could it be true, that without a visible model, that’s both tangible and objective, people will ignore logic and even physical evidence that contradicts their lifestyle? Could it be true, that without a working model, people are more than reluctant to embrace change? Could it be true, that because qualities such as kindness, faithfulness, honesty, integrity, trustworthiness, loyalty, honor, dependability and even good old-fashioned manners are character traits that so few Christians exhibit there is a credibility gap between society and the Church? Hmmmmmm … Could it be true, that the glaring inconsistencies between our message and our lifestyle is responsible for our lack of power in the public square? Could it be true, that because we don’t live what we learn in His Word that no one cares what we say? Could it be true, that all of our Divinely inspired gifts and Holy Ghost powered anointing won’t make up for our lack of Christian character? Could it be true, that the world has become so disillusioned with the Pro-Life movement, that Pro-Abortion forces look more Christ-Like than we do? If Christian character is the sum of moral qualities associated with a person, I wonder, could it be true, that Christian character is more about doing what’s right when it’s hard, than it is about doing what’s right when it’s easy? I wonder, could it really be true, that until our walk matches our talk, neither the Church nor the Pro-Life movement will see an end to abortion?

Yeah, I think it could.

Brothers, we need to talk.


Note(s):

 In my very, very strong opinion, THE BIBLE DOES NOT JUSTIFY SLAVERY. If pastors (christian leaders) of the South taught their congregants to obey the Mosaic laws that criminalized kidnapping human beings, the harsh treatment of servants, the return of runaway servants and without preferring the rich over the poor or men over women, held everyone accountable for their own actions in the public square, slavery would not have existed.

Kidnapping


Deuteronomy 24:7 says: “If someone kidnaps a fellow Israelite, either to make him a slave or sell him, the kidnapper must be killed. You must get rid of the evil among you.”

Harsh Treatment


Exodus 21:26,27 says: “If a man hits his male or female slave in the eye, and the eye is blinded, the man is to free the slave to pay for the eye. If a master knocks out a tooth of his male or female slave, the man is to free the slave to pay for the tooth.”

Runaway Servants


Deuteronomy 23:15-16 say: “If an escaped slave comes to you, do not hand over the slave to his master. Let the slave live with you anywhere he likes, in any town he chooses. Do not mistreat him.”


The New Testament speaks equally as strong against the kidnapping of human beings (which is the basis of slavery) as the Old Testament. Please read the Apostle Paul’s warning against false teaching in 1st Timothy 1:8-10 (NCV): “But we know that the law is good if someone uses it lawfully. We also know that the law is not made for good people but for those who are against the law and for those who refuse to follow it. It is for people who are against God and are sinful, who are unholy and ungodly, who kill their fathers and mothers, who murder, who take part in sexual sins, who have sexual relations with people of the same sex, WHO SELL SLAVES, who tell lies, who speak falsely, and who do anything against the true teaching of God.


“Perhaps the most compelling argument AGAINST SLAVERY in the New Testament is Paul’s letter to Philemon, in which the Apostle asks Onesimus (a fellow Christian) to free his Christian slave.

Reference(s):

01. A paradox noted by Edlie Wong in her book “Neither Fugitive Nor Free” (2009), slave states had statutes that provided for slaves to sue for “wrongful enslavement”, based on slave laws that established “just subjection”, page 5 and 153 (http://bit.ly/17xS6Ty).
02. Ibid.
03. The White House Historical Association “The Half Had Not Been Told Me”, African Americans in Lafayette Square, 1795-1965, Charlotte Dupuy, “She has been her own mistress” (http://bit.ly/1inMMIV).
04. Ibid.
05. Ibid.
06. The Independent, Volume 65 (http://bit.ly/1dKciq3).
07. Rudy Reyes, Hero Living: Seven Strides to Awaken Your Infinite Power (http://bit.ly/Io8wUW).
08. Henry Clay, Sr., Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/bbQXb).
09. Ibid.
10. Ibid.
11. Ibid.
12. Clement Eaton, Henry Clay and the Art of American Politics. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company, page 21 (http://bit.ly/1dKe2zA).
13. Merrill D. Peterson, The Great Triumvirate: Webster, Clay, and Calhoun, page 5 (http://bit.ly/18TuDgi).
14. Henry Clay, Sr., Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/bbQXb).
15. Ibid.
16. Ibid.
17. David S. Heidler and Jeanne T. Heidler, Henry Clay: The Essential American (http://bit.ly/1ir4r2u).
18. Henry Clay, Sr., Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/bbQXb).
19. David S. Heidler and Jeanne T. Heidler, “Why Henry Clay?” Wiki (http://bit.ly/IzGdTd).
20. Henry Clay, Sr., Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/bbQXb).
21. Ibid.
22. Ibid.
23. Ibid.
24. Charlotte Dupuy, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/1cUfA4I).
25. The White House Historical Association “The Half Had Not Been Told Me”, African Americans in Lafayette Square, 1795-1965, Letter written written by Henry Clay to his agent in Washington, Philip Fendall, regarding Charlotte Dupuy’s bid for freedom. (http://bit.ly/1cUfTfR).
26. Charlotte Dupuy, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/1cUfA4I).
27. Henry Clay, Sr., Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/bbQXb).
28. Herbert W. Armstrong, “SIN” Sermon (http://bit.ly/1irc2y0) and YouTube of Sermon starting at 53:50 (http://bit.ly/1cLHal3).

Winny v. Whitesides (1824)

In Abortion, Special Edition on November 25, 2013 at 12:00 am
Share this page

Without Life, Nothing Matters.

Freedom Suit Series

“Anyone who kidnaps someone and either sells him as a slave or still has him when he is caught must be put to death.” — Exodus 21:16, New Century Version (NCV) 

Freedom suits are legal petitions filed by slaves for freedom. Between America’s colonial period and the American Civil War, a number of civil actions were brought to courts of law that challenged both the moral maxim and legal legitimacy of JUST-SUBJECTION 1 and WRONGFUL-ENSLAVEMENT 2 in America. This series of columns will explore those lawsuits and expose lessons that can be engaged by the Body of Christ and the Pro-Life movement today, in the wake of the 1973 United States Supreme Court (USSC) decisions in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton.

White Space Holder


Fugitive Slave Law 1850

Winny v. Whitesides (1824) established Missouri’s judicial criteria for freedom.
If a Slave Owner took a Slave to free territory and established residence there, the Slave
would be free. Winny’s case for freedom was allowed under the provisions of the 1789
Northwest Ordinance
and gave rise to the phrase: “Once Free, Forever Free.” 3


Northwest Ordinance Of 1789

“There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in the said territory.” — Northwest Ordinance; July 13, 1787, Section 14, Article 6 4

Map Of The Northwest TerritoryArticle VII of the United States Constitution stipulated that nine (9) states had to ratify the United States Constitution for it to be adopted.5 In June of 1788 New Hampshire became the ninth (9th) state to ratify our Constitution.6 In July of 1789, our newly created United States Congress reaffirmed the Northwest Ordinance of 1789 (with slight modifications).7 In August of 1789 our first President George Washington signed the Northwest Ordinance of 1789 into law.8 The Northwest Ordinance of 1789 set up how the territories could make new States and forbade Slavery in the federal (i.e., northern) territories. While the ordinance did prohibit Slavery, it did not emancipate the Slaves already held by Slave Holders within the territory.9 By the 1820s the Pro-Slavery Lobby was working overtime to legalize Slavery.10 While the Pro-Slavery Lobby fought valiantly for the virtue of Slavery, the Pro-Slavery Lobby failed. However, after closer examination, it is easy to see that the Pro-Slavery Lobby merely failed on paper and not in practice. In the end, the Pro-Slavery Lobby employed the ancient art of compromise, and a deal was struck. “Indentured Servants” 11,12 were allowed and while Slaves could not be bought or sold,13 this enabled Slaveholders to bring their Slaves into the territory under the status of “Indentured Servants.” Slave Kidnapping PosterTo sweeten the deal, the compromise also allowed for the recapture and return of any runaway Slaves who just “happened” to venture into Slave Holding Territories.14 This compromise worked for the Southern states for two (2) reasons. First, the Pro-Slavery Lobby knew Slavery would be legal south of the jurisdiction of the Northwest Ordinance, that is to say the Ohio River.15 Thus, with most Slave States in 1790 located south of the Ohio River, the balance of the number of Free States versus the number of Slave States would not be affected. Second, (and in my earnest opinion, the most important reason), the Pro-Slavery Lobby did not want to compete with the then Free States over tobacco as a commodity crop. The Pro-Slavery Lobby knew that growing tobacco was very labor intensive and that tobacco could only be grown profitably with Slave Labor.16 Truly the love of money is the root of all evil (1st Timothy 6:10).


Missouri Compromise Of 1820

“I was losing interest in politics, when the repeal of the Missouri Compromise aroused me again. What I have done since then is pretty well known.” — Abraham Lincoln, December 20th, 1859 17

Missouri Compromise 1820

In 1820 the Missouri Compromise was passed by the Democratic Congress as congressional policy.18 This allowed and promoted Slavery in close to half of the federal territories, the very opposite of what the Northwest Ordinance stated.19 This is where our Congress officially started promoting Slavery in an effort to preserve the balance of power in Congress between Slave and Free States.20 The Missouri Compromise admitted Missouri (already compromised) as a Slave State and Maine as a Free State.21 Furthermore, with the exception of Missouri, this law prohibited Slavery in the Louisiana Territory north of the 36° 30´ latitude line.22 While on paper the Missouri Compromise of 1820 was a mutual concession between two (2) parties, Elektra Tig (Lawyer and Historian) notes that an “overwhelming majority of southern senators and a slim majority of southern representatives voted in favor of the compromise.” 23 Tig goes on to say that “to the North, the Compromise of 1820 was not a compromise. It was not even an armistice. It was a defeat. Of those northern legislators who voted, 82% of Senators and 86% of Representatives voted against compromise or against the key concession they were asked to make.” 24 Clearly, when truth is at stake, the art of compromise is the practice of illusionists.


Winny v. Whitesides (1824)

“We are clearly of the opinion that if, by a residence in Illinois, the plaintiff [ Mrs. Whitesides ] lost her right to the property in the defendant [ Winny ], that right was not revived by a removal of the parties to Missouri.” — Justice George Tompkins, Missouri Supreme Court 25

Winny v. Whitesides, Phebe Suit

St. Louis Courthouse, Credit: Missouri Historical SocietyWinny, a “Negro Girl” and Slave, was owned by Mr. and Mrs. Whitesides.26 Between 1794 or 1795, the Whitesides took Winny from Carolina to Illinois, which in 1795 was within the 1789 Northwest Ordinance Territory.27 The Whitesides then resided in Illinois until about 1798 or 1799.28 After which the Whitesides moved to the Missouri Territory.29 In 1818 Winny filed suit to win her freedom in the Superior Court of the Missouri Territory.30 The basis of Winny’s argument was that her residence in the Northwest Territory made her free.31 The jury decided in Winny’s favor and awarded her the sum of $167.50 in damages.32 In response Mrs. Whitesides, that is to say Phebe Whitesides now a widow and sole owner of Winny, appealed the judgement against her to the Missouri State Supreme Court.33 In the end, Winny and her nine (9) children won their freedom as this time the Missouri State Supreme Court ruled in her favor. It was this decision that firmly established the legal precedent of “Once Free, Forever Free.” 34 However, by 1852 the ever vigilant Pro-Slavery Lobby in Missouri led a now Pro-Slavery Missouri State Supreme Court to deny Dred Scott his freedom in the Dred Scott v. Irene Emerson case.35 This decision marked the end of the “Once Free, Forever Free” doctrine.36 Book Cover: Dred Scott And The Dangers Of A Political CourtIn 1854, the Missouri Compromise was repealed by the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which some say “may have been the single most significant event leading to the Civil War.” 37 By 1857 the Missouri Compromise was declared unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court in their notorious Dred Scott decision. 38 In their Scott decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled that Black Americans, whether Slave or Free, could not be citizens of the United States of America, that Black Americans had no standing to sue in a federal court and that Congress did not have the authority to prohibit Slavery in the territories.39 The United States Supreme Court Dred Scott decision not only upheld the earlier de facto end of the 1824 precedent “Once Free, Forever Free,” it drove the proverbial nail in the coffin deeper by legally establishing the South’s “Once A Slave, Forever A Slave” doctrine as the law of the land.40 If it is true, that compromise weakens a reputation or a principle by accepting standards that are lower than desirable, then the United States Supreme Court Dred Scott decision is the logical conclusion to the Northwest Ordinance of 1789 and the Missouri Compromise of 1820.


Open Letter To The Church

LESSON: Compromising On Principle Compromises Culture.

A Lesson We Can Learn From The Case Of Winny v. Whitesides

“Compromise is meant for those competing interests, NOT for the core principles of the country that the Constitution exists to protect and secure. When the principles of our free nation under God are under siege, it is a time for confrontation, not compromise.” — Star Parker 41

Sign: You Can't Compromise On PrinciplesWhen the issue at stake does not contradict the Word of God, that is to say biblical principles and|or biblical convictions, but is rather a matter of differences in mode or methodology, there is no need to be dogmatic. We are free to be flexible. We are free to allow the law of expediency to operate. However, in doing so, we must never allow our mode or methodology to mask or manipulate our theology. For example, in Acts 21:18-26, the Apostle Paul agreed to the compromise proposed by James (the son of Alphaeus) and the Elders of the church at Jerusalem. Paul did so because the compromise did not contradict the Word of God nor did it conflict with the fundamentals of the faith. It’s clear that the Apostle understood the righteous relationship between principle and practice and the world of difference between mode, methodology and theology. As God’s missionary to the Gentiles (Acts 13:47), Paul knew that while our opinions may change, the Word of God never will.

Sign: You Can't Compromise On PrinciplesIn Revelation 2:12-17 Christ shares with us the sin of the church at Pergamum, then the capital of Asia Minor. Pergamum was known for its rampant idolatry. Pergamum hosted the altar of Zeus and was the center of Caesar worship. Idolatry, wickedness, and sexual immorality were commonplace. The sin of the church at Pergamum was not the evil in the city, but rather her toleration of the evil within her midst. It’s clear from the biblical record, that the leadership of the church at Pergamum not only pardoned the “teaching of Balaam (Revelation 2:14) who taught Balak how to make the people of Israel sin,” but also the “teaching of the Nicolaitans” (Revelation 2:15) who believed man can freely partake in sin because God understands the needs of our flesh. Because the leadership at the church of Pergamum conceded and compromised on biblical standards to accommodate the corrupt culture of the city, the message of Christ to the church at Pergamum was to change their hearts and repent.

Civil War SolidersYOU CAN’T FIGHT FOR BOTH SIDES! “Have you ever heard the story of the guy who could not decide what side he wanted to fight for during the Civil War? He put on the coat of the North and the trousers of the South, and guess what? He got shot at from both sides! This is what happens to the compromiser, the person who tries to live in two worlds. It’s one miserable place to be.” 42

No Compromise Cartoon

Pro-LifeAs I think about the Pro-Life movement, could it be true, that compromise has left us feeling like our plate is half-empty instead of half-full? Could it be true, that whatever we gained by compromising yesterday, we have lost today? Could it be true, that whatever we have gained by compromise, we will have to make more compromises to keep it? Could it be true, that compromise breeds compromise? Could it be true, that what we have lost by compromise is greater that what we would have gained if we had refused to compromise? Could it be true, that compromising a little has led us to compromising much? Could it be true, that our non-compromise positions of yesterday are just not enough to compensate for our compromised positions of today? Could it be true, that the great British preacher, G. Campbell Morgan, was right when he said: “It is a remarkable thing that the church of Christ persecuted has been the church of Christ pure. On the other hand, the church of Christ patronized has been the church of Christ impure.” 43 Could it be true, that by compromising our principles we compromised both our culture and our future?

Yeah, I think it could.

Brothers, we need to talk.


Note(s):

 In my very, very strong opinion, THE BIBLE DOES NOT JUSTIFY SLAVERY. If pastors (christian leaders) of the South taught their congregants to obey the Mosaic laws that criminalized kidnapping human beings, the harsh treatment of servants, the return of runaway servants and without preferring the rich over the poor or men over women, held everyone accountable for their own actions in the public square, slavery would not have existed.

Kidnapping


Deuteronomy 24:7 says: “If someone kidnaps a fellow Israelite, either to make him a slave or sell him, the kidnapper must be killed. You must get rid of the evil among you.”

Harsh Treatment


Exodus 21:26,27 says: “If a man hits his male or female slave in the eye, and the eye is blinded, the man is to free the slave to pay for the eye. If a master knocks out a tooth of his male or female slave, the man is to free the slave to pay for the tooth.”

Runaway Servants


Deuteronomy 23:15-16 say: “If an escaped slave comes to you, do not hand over the slave to his master. Let the slave live with you anywhere he likes, in any town he chooses. Do not mistreat him.”


The New Testament speaks equally as strong against the kidnapping of human beings (which is the basis of slavery) as the Old Testament. Please read the Apostle Paul’s warning against false teaching in 1st Timothy 1:8-10 (NCV): “But we know that the law is good if someone uses it lawfully. We also know that the law is not made for good people but for those who are against the law and for those who refuse to follow it. It is for people who are against God and are sinful, who are unholy and ungodly, who kill their fathers and mothers, who murder, who take part in sexual sins, who have sexual relations with people of the same sex, WHO SELL SLAVES, who tell lies, who speak falsely, and who do anything against the true teaching of God.


“Perhaps the most compelling argument AGAINST SLAVERY in the New Testament is Paul’s letter to Philemon, in which the Apostle asks Onesimus (a fellow Christian) to free his Christian slave.

Reference(s):


01. A paradox noted by Edlie Wong in her book “Neither Fugitive Nor Free” (2009), slave states had statutes that provided for slaves to sue for “wrongful enslavement”, based on slave laws that established “just subjection”, page 5 and 153 (http://bit.ly/17xS6Ty).
02. Ibid.
03. St. Louis Circuit Court Historical Records Project “History of Freedom Suits in Missouri” (http://bit.ly/1eSaxXk).
04. The Northwest Ordinance, TeachingAmericanHistory.org is a project of the Ashbrook Center at Ashland University (http://bit.ly/IiMRwX).
05. Article Seven of the United States Constitution, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/MuSoPw).
06. New Hampshire, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/aD7R74).
07. Steve Straub, “The Northwest Ordinance of 1787”, The Federalist Papers, December 17th, 2012 (http://bit.ly/UDZUcf).
08. Ibid.
09. Charles G. Mills “Did the Old South Change its Mind?”, The Confederate Lawyer
January 13, 2012 (http://bit.ly/I6dBkF).
10. William Earl Parrish, Perry McCandless, William E. Foley, “A History of Missouri: 1820-1860”, page 287 (http://bit.ly/1az7KyR).
11. David Brion Davis and Steven Mintz, “The Boisterous Sea of Liberty”, 2000, page 234 (http://bit.ly/18rP2sH).
12. Paul Finkelman, “Evading the Ordinance: The Persistence of Bondage in Indiana and Illinois”, Journal of the Early Republic, Vol. 9, No. 1, Spring 1989, page 21 (http://bit.ly/17REizP).
13. George Washington And Slavery, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/c2TXi6).
14. Marcus D. Pohlmann, Linda Vallar Whisenhunt, “Student’s Guide to Landmark Congressional Laws on Civil Rights”, page 14 (http://bit.ly/17NPDpV).
15. Fredericksburg.Com, “American Civil War, A Nation Divided. Slavery In The Territories” (http://bit.ly/1i0qSLU).
16. Northwest Ordinance: Prohibition Of Slavery, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/18U86MD).
17. The History Place: Abraham Lincoln, Short Autobiography 1859 (http://bit.ly/18rZAYA).
18. Freedom Fighter Moe’s Blog, “Northwest Ordinance 1789 and Missouri Compromise 1820” (http://bit.ly/1e5ilBr).
19. Missouri Compromise, The Library of Congress (http://1.usa.gov/xwfvR2).
20. This Day In History, “March 3rd, 1820: Congress passes the Missouri Compromise” (http://bit.ly/ezegsM).
21. Ibid.
22. Missouri Compromise, The Library of Congress (http://1.usa.gov/xwfvR2).
23. Elektra Tig, “The Missouri Compromise: Compromise, Armistice or Defeat?” (http://bit.ly/Gw0Mo).
24. Ibid.
25. Robert Moore, Jr., “A Ray of Hope, Extinguished: St. Louis Slave Suits for Freedom” (http://bit.ly/1g0amqL) or St. Louis Circuit Court Records “Harriet Scott vs. Irene Emerson” (http://bit.ly/1h62Xt4).
26. Winney a free blackwoman vs. Phebe Pruitt, Washington University In St. Louis, Court Records (http://bit.ly/18sac9U).
27. Elektra Tig, Winny v. Whitesides I: A Suite for Freedom (http://bit.ly/1bGNlEJ), Winny v. Whitesides II: The Northwest Ordinance (http://bit.ly/1dmnNDS), Winny v. Whitesides III: Recognition of Status Conveyed By Foreign Law (http://bit.ly/1el5Dzd), Winny v. Whitesides IV: Residence vs. Transit (http://bit.ly/19MmYw5).
28. Ibid.
29. Ibid.
30. Ibid.
31. Ibid.
32. Ibid.
33. Ibid.
34. Tim McNeese, “Dred Scott V. Sandford: The Pursuit of Freedom”, page 85 (http://bit.ly/I6EYey).
35. Missouri State Archives , Missouri’s Dred Scott Case, 1846-1857″ (http://on.mo.gov/8Yr703).
36. Freedom Suit: History, (http://bit.ly/1e5Hzje).
37. U.S. History, Pre-Columbian to the New Millennium, The Kansas-Nebraska Act (http://bit.ly/17ShLmH).
38. Missouri Compromise, The Library of Congress (http://1.usa.gov/xwfvR2).
39. Dred Scott, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/DJQ4B).
40. Ibid.
41. Star Parker, “Compromise in politics? No, confront” (http://bit.ly/17pDRzu).
42. Greg Laurie, “The Danger of Compromise”, Article By A new Beginning (http://bit.ly/Hup9xy).
43. Ibid.

Jackey Wright

In Abortion, Special Edition on November 18, 2013 at 12:00 am
Share this page

Without Life, Nothing Matters.

Freedom Suit Series

“Anyone who kidnaps someone and either sells him as a slave or still has him when he is caught must be put to death.” — Exodus 21:16, New Century Version (NCV) 

Freedom suits are legal petitions filed by slaves for freedom. Between America’s colonial period and the American Civil War, a number of civil actions were brought to courts of law by STRONG BLACK WOMEN that challenged both the moral maxim and the legal legitimacy of JUST-SUBJECTION 1 and WRONGFUL-ENSLAVEMENT 2 in America. This series of columns will explore those lawsuits and expose lessons that can be engaged by the Body of Christ and the Pro-Life movement today, in the wake of the 1973 United States Supreme Court (USSC) decisions in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton.

White Space Holder


Mariah Carey As A Field Slave In The Butler Movie

Lee Daniels’ movie “The Butler” upset some people when a photograph of Mariah Carey playing the role of a field slave went viral. The picture caught a barrage of flak from those on social
media who felt that anyone with a complexion like Mariah’s wouldn’t actually have to
work in the field, therefore deeming the illustration inaccurate.
As you can see, even today, skin color is an issue3


Hudgins v. Wright (1806)

“This is not a common case of mere Blacks suing for their freedom; but of persons perfectly White.” 4

Elizabeth Freeman (Mum Bett)

Hudgins v. Wright (1806) was a freedom suit decided in the favor of the Slave Jackey Wright by the Virginia Supreme Court. Jackey sued for freedom for herself and her two (2) children based
on her claim of being descended from Native Americans, instead of Black Americans
as her Slave Master Houlder Hudgins argued for the basis of her legal slavement. 5


Perfectly White

“What more than strong characteristic features would be required, to prove a person White?” 6 — George K. Taylor, Legal Counsel For The Appellees

“The Chancellor (George Wythe) in person viewed the complainants (Jackey Wright and her children) and perceived the youngest to be perfectly White, and that there were gradual shades of difference in color between the grandmother, mother and grand-daughter. Upon his own view, and all the other evidence the chancellor determined the appellees to be entitled to freedom: and moreover, (on the ground that Freedom is every human being’s birthright — according to the first article in the Virginia Bill of Rights, “That all men are by nature equally free and independent“), he laid it down as a general position, that whenever one person claims to hold another in slavery, the onus probandi (i.e., the burden of proof) lies on the claimant.” 7 — Reports Of Cases In The Supreme Court Of Appeals Of Virginia

G. K. Taylor, Esq.Jackey Wright was a slave serving Houlder Hudgins. On Thursday, November 11th, 1806 Jackey sued in the Virginia Court of Appeals (today the Virginia Supreme Court) for her freedom and for the freedom of her two (2) children. 8 Jackey’s case was based on her being descended from multiple generations of Native American Indian women. 9 Jackey and her children appeared “White” 10 by the justices of the Virginia Court of Appeals, which relied on the visual and factual finding of trial judge George Wythe. According to George K. Taylor (Jackey Wright’s legal counsel) Phoebe Wilson (Jackey’s mother) 11 was an Indian 12 and thus Jackey was wrongfully enslaved based on the 1776 Virginia Declaration of Rights. Wright herself said Phoebe (her mother) was the daughter of Hannah and granddaughter of Butterwood Nan. 13 Both Hannah and Butterwood Nan were Indian described by witnesses as having “Indian” characteristics, such as long straight hair. 14

Virginia 1662 LawVirginia was one of the first states to acknowledge slavery in its laws, initially enacting such a law in 1661. However, in 1662 the American Colony of Virginia enacted a law of hereditary slavery meaning that a child born to an enslaved mother inherits her slave status. This law would have a profound effect on the continuance of slavery, even after the slave trade was abolished in 1863.

Act XII
Negro Womens Children To Serve
According To The Condition Of The Mother

“WHEREAS some doubts have arrisen whether children got by any Englishman upon a Negro woman should be slave or free, Be it therefore enacted and declared by this present grand assembly, that all children borne in this country shalbe held bond or free only according to the condition of the mother, And that if any christian shall committ ffornication with a Negro man or woman, hee or shee soe offending shall pay double the ffines imposed by the former act.” 15

This law officially recognized “Slavery” as an “Institution” that needed to be defined, controlled and regulated.

Slavery for American Indians in the American Colony of Virginia was outlawed after 1691 and|or 1705 (“depending on judicial interpretation“).16 Houlder Hudgins, the Wright’s Slave Master, argued that Jackey and her children were justly subjected to slavery because Jackey was of mixed race and partial African descent.17 However, Judge Wythe had ruled that, based on the 1776 Virginia Declaration of Rights, there was a presumption that White men and women were born free. Without the benefit of DeoxyriboNucleic Acid (i.e., DNA) Technology,18 Hudgins could not prove his claim that Jackey and her children were the product of African ancestry 19 and consequently born slaves. In the end, Jackey Wright with her blue eyes 20 and her children looked perfectly White and were set free.

Open Letter To The Church

LESSON: Skin Color Still Matters In America

A Lesson We Can Learn From The Case Of Jackey Wright

“By contrast, a person who appeared ‘Negro’ would be presumed a Slave, unless affirmative evidence could prove that she was free. Indians were by default citizens of a free nation; Africans were by default members of an enslaved race.” — Ariela Julie Gross 21

“A nation rises or sinks on the physical or mental quality of its citizens. It cannot thrive when its fundamental structure is based on defective stock, the increase of morons, feeble minded, psychopaths or diseased slum populations.” — Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood Founder 22

Skin Color Still MattersSkin color mattered from 1800 to 1866 when Black Codes,23 restricted the Civil Rights and Civil Liberties of Black Americans with no pretense of equality. Skin color mattered between 1876 and 1965 when Jim Crow Laws 24 mandated racial segregation in all public facilities in Southern states of the former Confederacy. Skin color mattered in 1890, as “separate but equal” 25 status for Black Americans was a legal doctrine in United States constitutional law.

Christians And The Color LineSkin color mattered in 1921 when Margaret Sanger founded the American Birth Control League, which later would become the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.26 Sanger’s New York Birth Control Clinic was located in Harlem, staffed by all female doctors and an entirely Black American staff.27 Apparently, skin color mattered to Sanger. Skin color mattered in 1924 when the Virginia General Assembly addressed Margaret Sanger’s concerns for America (see quote above) and community concerns about eugenics and race by passing two (2) laws that reflected the racial presumptions of the American Colony of Virginia’s “Hereditary Slavery Law” of 1662. So on Thursday, March 20th, 1924 the “Racial Integrity Act” and the “Sterilization Act” were passed.28 The “Racial Integrity Act” defined race by the “One-Drop Rule” (meaning any person with “one drop of Negro blood” was considered Black) and required that every person be recorded at birth as either White or Black. As a bonus, the “Racial Integrity Act” safeguarded the purity of the White race by expanding the scope of Virginia’s seventeenth century ban on interracial marriage and criminalized all marriages between White persons and Non-White persons. Furthermore and in concert, with the Sanger inspired “Racial Integrity Act”, the “Sterilization Act” legalized compulsory sterilization of persons deemed to be “feebleminded, insane, idiotic, imbecile, or epileptic.” The “Sterilization Act” was challenged, but ultimately upheld by the United States Supreme Court in the 1927 Buck v. Bell case.29

The Persistence Of The Color LineSkin color mattered in 1968 when Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated at the Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Tennessee 30 and when my Dad broke the Color-Line in the National Football League by becoming the first Black American to work in the front office as Assistant Director of Public Relations for the San Diego Chargers.31 To say my life would never be the same, while a very true saying, is nevertheless a gross understatement of my experiences growing up Black in America. From my birth in Detroit, Michigan in 1956 to my incarceration in Oakland, California in 2009,32 skin color mattered. Skin color mattered in the 2008 33 and 2012 34 Presidential elections. Even today, as my wife (Lori) and I work to reach Black Americans with the message of LIFE in the Pro-Life movement, skin color matters.35

John Bull NegroCould it be that victory for the Pro-Life movement will only come when we acknowledge that skin color matters in America? Could it be that victory will only come when we learn to reach across the Color-Lines with compassion (Jude 2236 and with courage (Jude 23)? 37 Could it be that victory will only come when we recognize that in the United States of America where skin color mattersone-size-fits-allcommunity strategies will NOT end abortion? Could it be that victory will only come when we forgive one another, embrace our divinely inspired differences and in love hold on to the Christ-Like sameness of our souls?

Yeah, I think it could.

Brothers, we need to talk.


Note(s):

 In my very, very strong opinion, THE BIBLE DOES NOT JUSTIFY SLAVERY. If pastors (christian leaders) of the South taught their congregants to obey the Mosaic laws that criminalized kidnapping human beings, the harsh treatment of servants, the return of runaway servants and without preferring the rich over the poor or men over women, held everyone accountable for their own actions in the public square, slavery would not have existed.

Kidnapping


Deuteronomy 24:7 says: “If someone kidnaps a fellow Israelite, either to make him a slave or sell him, the kidnapper must be killed. You must get rid of the evil among you.”

Harsh Treatment


Exodus 21:26,27 says: “If a man hits his male or female slave in the eye, and the eye is blinded, the man is to free the slave to pay for the eye. If a master knocks out a tooth of his male or female slave, the man is to free the slave to pay for the tooth.”

Runaway Servants


Deuteronomy 23:15-16 say: “If an escaped slave comes to you, do not hand over the slave to his master. Let the slave live with you anywhere he likes, in any town he chooses. Do not mistreat him.”


The New Testament speaks equally as strong against the kidnapping of human beings (which is the basis of slavery) as the Old Testament. Please read the Apostle Paul’s warning against false teaching in 1st Timothy 1:8-10 (NCV): “But we know that the law is good if someone uses it lawfully. We also know that the law is not made for good people but for those who are against the law and for those who refuse to follow it. It is for people who are against God and are sinful, who are unholy and ungodly, who kill their fathers and mothers, who murder, who take part in sexual sins, who have sexual relations with people of the same sex, WHO SELL SLAVES, who tell lies, who speak falsely, and who do anything against the true teaching of God.


“Perhaps the most compelling argument AGAINST SLAVERY in the New Testament is Paul’s letter to Philemon, in which the Apostle asks Onesimus (a fellow Christian) to free his Christian slave.


Reference(s):

01. A paradox noted by Edlie Wong in her book “Neither Fugitive Nor Free” (2009), slave states had statutes that provided for slaves to sue for “wrongful enslavement”, based on slave laws that established “just subjection”, page 5 and 153 (http://bit.ly/17xS6Ty).
02. Ibid.
03. Bossip Staff “You’re Not Black Enough! Mariah Carey’s Role As A Field Slave In Movie Causes Controversy ‘She Would Have Been In The House’.” Bossip.com is the premier destination for African American popular culture and entertainment, with a voice that’s edgy, viciously hilarious, politically aware-and completely unique. (http://bit.ly/1hBwRXf).
04. Professor Vernellia Randall, Hudgins v. Wrights (1806), “Race and Racism in American Law”, The University of Dayton School of Law (http://bit.ly/17rih02).
05. Hudgins v. Wright (1806), Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/1aPLqTc).
06. Professor Vernellia Randall, Hudgins v. Wrights (1806), “Race and Racism in American Law”, The University of Dayton School of Law (http://bit.ly/17rih02).
07. Lucian Minor, William Walter Hening, William Munford, “Reports of cases in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia, from October 1806 to October 1809; and in the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District from September 1806 to February 1809”, page 119 (http://bit.ly/1j0y4CX).
08. W&M Digital Archive, Hudgins v. Wright Case Material (http://bit.ly/17pxd9F).
09. Andrew Fede “Roadblocks to Freedom: Slavery and Manumission in the United States South” (http://bit.ly/18shjeP).
10. Ibid. “appeared to be white” (http://bit.ly/19ko7dP).
11. Ibid. “Jackey’s mother, Phoebe Wilson” (http://bit.ly/1aEFvua).
12. John Bailey, “Jefferson’s Second Father” (http://bit.ly/HMR8IS) and Quote: “Taylor told the court that he had witnesses ready to trace Jackey Wright’s lineage back through four generations to a woman called Butterwood Nan, an Indian.” (http://bit.ly/HMR8IS).
13. Hudgins v. Wright, Background, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/1e3IZex).
14. Ibid.
15. Act XII, Laws of Virginia, December 1662, Hening, Statutes at Large, 2: 170, (http://1.usa.gov/pMnhrJ).
16. Hudgins v. Wright, Background, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/1e3IZex).
17. Ibid.
18. DNA Junction, “Friedrich Miescher — 1869 — By collecting and washing out bandages from a local hospital, Miescher isolated what he called the ‘nuclein molecule,’ named after the nucleus in which it was found. At the time, Miescher did not realize it, but he had isolated DNA. Later, it would be determined that the nuclein molecule present in all cells was actually DNA.” (http://bit.ly/185iDb1).
19. 23andMe, “Exceptions to the “One Drop Rule“? DNA evidence of African Ancestry in European Americans” (http://bit.ly/1buOdzN).
20. Wythe Holt, “George Wythe: Early Modern Judge”, University of Alabama Law Review, Volume 58:5:1009, page 1032 “Phoebe’s daughter Jackey was “perfectly white” with blue eyes.” (http://bit.ly/1apDyVZ).
21. Ariela Julie Gross, “What Blood Won’t Tell: A History of Race on Trial in America” (http://bit.ly/172h8JK).
22. Angela Frank, “Margaret Sanger’s Eugenic Legacy: The Control of Female Fertility”, page 13 (http://bit.ly/1apJBK1). See also Clenard Childress, “When Is A Racist A Racist?” (http://bit.ly/17TTrq5).
23. Black Codes, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/4mZM5k).
24. Jim Crow Laws, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/eMhWhO).
25. Separate But Equal, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/7MgcR6).
26. Margaret Sanger, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/Qx1mh).
27. Ibid.
28. Racial Integrity Act of 1924, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/94h4eM).
29. Carrie Buck, was a plaintiff in the United States Supreme Court case Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/4Ty2kd).
30. Assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/bHW4vx).
31. San Diego Chargers, “Walter Hoye Passes Away” (http://bit.ly/1iadCSm).
32. Henry K. Lee, “Pastor Jailed For Oakland Anti-Abortion Acts”, San Francisco Chronicle Staff Writer (http://bit.ly/18sKEWl).
33. 2008 Presidential Election “National Exit Polls”, The New York Times , (http://bit.ly/1aEV0ST).
34. Daniel Greenfield, “One Graph That Shows Which Party Really Looks Like America”, FrontPage Magazine (http://bit.ly/12j154o).
35. Betrayal Trauma Series, “Betrayal Trauma” is a theory that tries to predict the degree to which a negative event, perpetrated by a trusted and needed other, will influence the way events (past, present and future) are both processed and remembered. In this seven (7) part series I expose and explain the four (4) reasons why Black leadership struggles with the Pro-Life movement.” To read the series look in my newsletter archive for “Betrayal Trauma” under my 2011 columns (http://bit.ly/aRZHYl).
36. Jude 22, “And of some have compassion, making a difference”, King James Version (http://bit.ly/1aTUYg2).
37. Jude 23, “And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.”, King James Version (http://bit.ly/1aTUYg2).

Elizabeth Freeman (Mum Bett)

In Abortion, Special Edition on November 11, 2013 at 12:00 am
Share this page

Without Life, Nothing Matters.

Freedom Suit Series

“Anyone who kidnaps someone and either sells him as a slave or still has him when he is caught must be put to death.” — Exodus 21:16, New Century Version (NCV) 

Freedom suits are legal petitions filed by slaves for freedom. Between America’s colonial period and the American Civil War, a number of civil actions were brought to courts of law by STRONG BLACK WOMEN that challenged both the moral maxim and the legal legitimacy of JUST-SUBJECTION 1 and WRONGFUL-ENSLAVEMENT 2 in America. This series of columns will explore those lawsuits and expose lessons that can be engaged by the Body of Christ and the Pro-Life movement today, in the wake of the 1973 United States Supreme Court (USSC) decisions in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton.

White Space Holder


Elizabeth Freeman (Mum Bett)

This Ruling Informally Ended Slavery In Massachusetts …

Elizabeth Freeman (Mum Bett)

Elizabeth Freeman (Mum Bett), in early life known as Bett and later Mum Bett (circa 1742 — December 28th, 1829), was among the first Black slaves in Massachusetts to file a “Freedom Suit” and win in the Massachusetts Bay Colony county court under the 1780 Massachusetts constitution,
with a ruling that slavery was illegal. 3


Black, Female, Illiterate And A Slave

“She was a strong, courageous, powerful woman who despite the triple disadvantages of being Black, a woman, and illiterate never saw herself as a victim and instead lived a rich and independent life with much of her time and energy devoted to helping others. She continues to be a role model whose story continues to speak to many women today, rich and poor and Black and White.” 4 — Emilie Piper and David Levinson

Elizabeth was born to enslaved parents (native Africans) around 1742 at the farm of Pieter Hogeboom in Claverack, New York. When Hannah (Hogeboom’s daughter) married Colonel John Ashley of Sheffield, Massachusetts, she was sold as a young teenager, along with her sister, to the newlyweds. On the Sheffield plantation Elizabeth was married, given the name “Bett” and her daughter was given the name “Little Bett.” Bett served Hannah and Colonel Ashley until 1781. It is both note worthy and important to acknowledge here that Elizabeth’s husband (name unknown) was killed while fighting in the American Revolutionary War (1775 — 1783).

According to American novelist, Catharine Maria Sedgwick 5 (December 28th, 1789 — July 31st, 1867) who by the way promoted “Republican motherhood,” 6 Bett was strong spirited and had a healthy sense of self. One day (circa 1780), Hannah Ashley, who was raised in the very strict and Christian Dutch culture of the New York colony, was disciplining Little Bett (that is Bett’s daughter) with a heated shovel. In an effort to protect her daughter, Bett stepped in between the heated shovel 7 and her daughter receiving a very deep wound in her arm. While the wound would eventually heal, Bett was scarred for life and left the wound uncovered as evidence of Hannah’s brutal treatment of slaves. Again, according to Catharine Maria Sedgwick, Bett is quoted saying: “Madam (i.e., Hannah Ashley) never again laid her hand on Lizzy [sic]. I had a bad arm all winter, but Madam had the worst of it. I never covered the wound, and when people said to me, before Madam, ‘Betty, what ails your arm?’ I only answered … ‘ask missis!’ 8 [Now] which was the slave and which was the real misses?”

All Men Are Born Free And Equal

All men are born free and equal, and have certain natural, essential, and unalienable rights; among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; that of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property; in fine, that of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness.” 9 — Massachusetts Constitution, Article 1 (1773)

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” 10 — United States Declaration of Independence (1776)

Sheffield Declaration 1773As a Yale University educated lawyer, wealthy landowner, businessman and leader, Colonel Ashley opened his home to the community. On many occasions, Ashley’s house was the site of political discussions and according to the record, the probable location of the signing of the Sheffield Resolves 11 which predated the United States Declaration of Independence (Thursday, July 4th, 1776). The Sheffield Resolves, also known as the Sheffield Declaration, was a Colonial American petition against British tyranny and a manifesto for individual rights, approved by the Town of Sheffield, Massachusetts, on Tuesday, January 12th, 1773. While it is easy to see how Article 1 of the Massachusetts Constitution (above) was echoed in the most famous line of Thomas Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence 12 (above) three (3) years later, it is also easy to understand how such words as “all men are born free and equal” caught Bett’s attention as they were being read at Sheffield’s home.

The 1781 Berkshire County Case Of Brom And Bett vs. Ashley

“I heard that paper read yesterday, that says, all men are created equal, and that every man has a right to freedom. I’m not a dumb critter; won’t the law give me my freedom?” 13 — Elizabeth Freedom (Mum Bett)

Court Order To Free Elizabeth FreemanAfter overhearing discussions of the new Massachusetts State Constitution, the Bill of Rights and that all people were born free and equal in the Ashely’s home, Bett believed the law had to be applicable to her as well. As such, Bett asked for the counsel of a young abolition-minded lawyer named Theodore Sedgwick 14 to help her use the law to sue for freedom. Sedgwick believed slaves were indeed human beings, accepted her case and that of Brom, another of Colonel Ashley’s slaves. Next, Sedgwick recruited the help of the founder of America’s first law school (located at Litchfield, Connecticut), Tapping Reeve. When the case of Brom and Bett vs. Ashley 15 was heard before the County Court of Common Pleas in Great Barrington, Massachusetts, Sedgwick and Reeve argued that the constitutional provision that “all men are born free and equal” nullified the slave system in the state. In the end, the jury ruled in Bett’s favor and found that: “Brom and Bett are not, nor were they at the time of the purchase of the original writ the legal Negro of the said John Ashley.” So in August of 1781, the court assessed damages of thirty (30) shillings, awarded both plaintiffs (i.e., Brom and Bett) compensation for their labor and Bett became the First Black American Woman To Be Recognized As A Legal Person And Set Free under the Massachusetts State Constitution. Although this victory was a lower court decision with very limited influence, the case was a serious blow to slavery in Massachusetts.

Open Letter To The Church

LESSON: Personhood Resonates And Registers In Black America

A Lesson We Can Learn From The Case Of Elizabeth Freeman (Mum Bett)

“Any time, any time while I was a slave, if one minute’s freedom had been offered to me, and I had been told I must die at the end of that minute, I would have taken it just to stand one minute on God’s airth [sic] a free woman.” — Elizabeth Freedom (Mum Bett) 16

Emilie Piper - Mumbet - Story of Elizabeth FreemanClearly, Bett understood what it’s like not to be a legal person in the American colonies and would rather live a single minute free and die, than live her life as a slave17 The fight for personhood is found everywhere in Black American history. Personhood strikes a chord that runs deep in the experiences of Black Americans. The wholly heartfelt desire for Personhood strikes a chord that rings so true and runs so deep in my people that it can even be found in the souls of those who have been violently subjected to slavery since the American Colony of Virginia’s “Hereditary Slave Law” of 1661. The reality is Personhood resonates in the heart, registers in the mind, generates soul searching conversation and has the power to reconcile the very strained relationship between the Pro-Life movement and communities of color. In Black America, Personhood speaks to the need to have the words “we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” apply to all human life and not just some human life.

The Book Cover: One Minute A Free WomanToday, Alveda King, daughter of A.D. King and niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. says: “The cause of personhood is the final chapter of the civil rights movement18 And each person who’s spared because of it will receive a priceless gift — the chance to write the chapters of his or her own life story.” Certainly, Bett received this gift from her freedom suit and wrote the last chapters of her life as a free woman. While Bett’s real age is not known, her tombstone estimates that she died at the age of eight-five (85). As such, in December of 1829 Elizabet Freeman (Mum Bett) was buried in the Sedgwick family plot in Stockbridge, Massachusetts. Her tombstone, inscription reads as follows:

Elizabeth Freeman's (Mum Bett) TombstoneELIZABETH FREEMAN, known by the name of MUMBET died Dec. 28th 1829. Her supposed age was 85 Years. She was born a slave and remained a slave for nearly thirty years; She could neither read nor write, yet in her own sphere she had no superior or equal. She neither wasted time nor property. She never violated a trust, nor failed to perform a duty. In every situation of domestic trial, she was the most efficient helper and the tenderest friend. Good mother, farewell.” 19

Could it be that victory for the Pro-Life movement will come only when we all work together, hand in hand, as brothers and sisters in the body of Christ? Could it be that victory will only come when there is room at the table and provision made for strategies like Personhood? Could it be that victory in the fight to end abortion on demand anywhere and everywhere it exists in the world, cannot be realized without leadership from members within communities of color? Could it be that victory in the public square, from the righteous reign of Christ on the hearts and minds of men and women, will not come until His Body lives out the reality that “she is not the master or the servant of the state, but rather the conscience of the state?” 20

Yeah, I think it could.

Brothers, we need to talk.


Note(s):

 In my very, very strong opinion, THE BIBLE DOES NOT JUSTIFY SLAVERY. If pastors (christian leaders) of the South taught their congregants to obey the Mosaic laws that criminalized kidnapping human beings, the harsh treatment of servants, the return of runaway servants and without preferring the rich over the poor or men over women, held everyone accountable for their own actions in the public square, slavery would not have existed.

Kidnapping


Deuteronomy 24:7 says: “If someone kidnaps a fellow Israelite, either to make him a slave or sell him, the kidnapper must be killed. You must get rid of the evil among you.”

Harsh Treatment


Exodus 21:26,27 says: “If a man hits his male or female slave in the eye, and the eye is blinded, the man is to free the slave to pay for the eye. If a master knocks out a tooth of his male or female slave, the man is to free the slave to pay for the tooth.”

Runaway Servants


Deuteronomy 23:15-16 say: “If an escaped slave comes to you, do not hand over the slave to his master. Let the slave live with you anywhere he likes, in any town he chooses. Do not mistreat him.”


The New Testament speaks equally as strong against the kidnapping of human beings (which is the basis of slavery) as the Old Testament. Please read the Apostle Paul’s warning against false teaching in 1st Timothy 1:8-10 (NCV): “But we know that the law is good if someone uses it lawfully. We also know that the law is not made for good people but for those who are against the law and for those who refuse to follow it. It is for people who are against God and are sinful, who are unholy and ungodly, who kill their fathers and mothers, who murder, who take part in sexual sins, who have sexual relations with people of the same sex, WHO SELL SLAVES, who tell lies, who speak falsely, and who do anything against the true teaching of God.


“Perhaps the most compelling argument AGAINST SLAVERY in the New Testament is Paul’s letter to Philemon, in which the Apostle asks Onesimus (a fellow Christian) to free his Christian slave.

Reference(s):


01. A paradox noted by Edlie Wong in her book “Neither Fugitive Nor Free” (2009), slave states had statutes that provided for slaves to sue for “wrongful enslavement”, based on slave laws that established “just subjection”, page 5 and 153 (http://bit.ly/17xS6Ty).
02. Ibid.
03. Elizabeth Freeman (Mum Bett), Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/iveMtL).
04. Tammis Coffin, “Elizabeth Freeman’s Life Researched in New Book”, iBerkshires.com. (http://bit.ly/179aQFl).
05. Catharine Maria Sedgwick, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/1bj1oQM).
06. Republican Motherhood, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/WXHAg1).
07. Elizabeth Freeman (Mum Bett), “Biography and Trial” Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/17hjscYL).
08. Charles Dickens, William Harrison Ainsworth, Albert Smith, George Cruikshank, “Bentley’s Miscellany”, Volume 34, page 418. (http://bit.ly/17hkvtn).
09. Constitution of Massachusetts “Part the First: A Declaration of the Rights of the Inhabitants of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts” (http://bit.ly/1hxImPo).
10. The Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, “In Congress, July 4th, 1776 The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America”. (http://bit.ly/bPqF8f).
11. Sheffield Declaration, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/17p1tXj).
12. The Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, “In Congress, July 4th, 1776 The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America”. (http://bit.ly/bPqF8f).
13. Charles Dickens, William Harrison Ainsworth, Albert Smith, George Cruikshank, “Bentley’s Miscellany”, Volume 34, page 421. (http://bit.ly/18jNZad).
14. Theodore Sedgwick, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/NpsnTm).
15. Massachusetts Judicial Branch, “The Massachusetts Constitution, Judicial Review and Slavery”, The Mum Bett Case (http://1.usa.gov/19s2e0n).
16. Charles Dickens, William Harrison Ainsworth, Albert Smith, George Cruikshank, “Bentley’s Miscellany”, Volume 34, page 421. (http://bit.ly/18jPnd1).
17. Mumbet — Story of Elizabeth Freeman, Co-authors David Levinson and Emilie Piper discuss their new book “One Minute a Free Woman, Elizabeth Freeman and the Struggle For Freedom” at the Litchfield History Museum. (http://bit.ly/17pkFUX).
18. Alveda C. King, “The Final Chapter”, California Equal Rights Amendment Campaign (http://bit.ly/1ahwv1A).
19. John Sedgwick, “In My Blood” Six Generations of Madness and Desire In An American Family (http://bit.ly/1deaDVb).
20. Martin Luther King, Jr., “Strength to Love,” Published in 1963. This is a collection of classic sermons preached by Martin Luther King, Jr., page 64. (http://bit.ly/1hZjJZB).

Elizabeth Key Grinstead

In Abortion, Special Edition on November 4, 2013 at 1:31 am
Share this page

Without life, nothing matters.

Freedom Suit Series

“Anyone who kidnaps someone and either sells him as a slave or still has him when he is caught must be put to death.” — Exodus 21:16, New Century Version (NCV) 

Freedom suits are legal petitions filed by slaves for freedom. Between America’s colonial period and the American Civil War, a number of civil actions were brought to courts of law by STRONG BLACK WOMEN that challenged both the moral maxim and the legal legitimacy of JUST-SUBJECTION 1 and WRONGFUL-ENSLAVEMENT 2 in America. This series of columns will explore those lawsuits and expose lessons that can be engaged by the Body of Christ and the Pro-Life movement today, in the wake of the 1973 United States Supreme Court (USSC) decisions in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton.

White Space Holder


Elizabeth Key Grinstead

Meet The First Black Woman To Sue For Her Freedom From Slavery And Win …

Elizabeth Key Grinstead

Elizabeth Key Grinstead (born circa 1630 – deceased circa 1665) was the first Black woman
in the North American colonies to sue for her freedom from slavery and win. 3


Daughter of Thomas Key

” … race has been a profound determinant of one’s political rights, one’s location in the labor market, and indeed one’s sense of ‘identity.'” 4 — Michael Omi and Howard Winant

Elizabeth was born about 1630 in historical Warwick County, Virginia (modern Newport News), not far from Jamestown and Williamsburg in the original Virginia Colony. Her mother was a Black slave and Elizabeth was the illegitimate child of Englishman and Burgess, Thomas Key. As an Englishman, a planter, Thomas Key was also a member of the Virginia House of Burgesses during its March 1629|1630 session and represented pre-Revolutionary Warwick County. Key’s wife lived on the Isle of Wight County across the James River. There Mrs. Key owned a considerable amount of property. Both Mr. and Mrs. Key were born in England. The Keys were known as pioneer planters because after having paid their own passage to Virginia before 1616, they remained for more than three (3) years and even survived the Indian massacre of 1622. However, fourteen (14) years later, in a 1636 civil case at the Blunt Point court, Thomas Key was charged with being the father of Elizabeth. While he at first denied being Elizabeth’s father, blaming an unidentified “Turk” (which the English colonists would not have considered a free English subject or a Christian), court testimony from witnesses proved his paternity. As such, Key then took responsibility for Elizabeth and even arranged for her baptism in the established Church of England.

Nineteen (19) Years Of Servitude

“Although indentured servitude was temporary and not inheritable, in many respects servitude was indistinguishable from slavery, masters treated indentured servants like land or chattel, selling or gambling them away at will.” 5 — Taunya Lovell Banks

Sometime before Key’s death around 1636, he put then six (6) years old Elizabeth Key in the custody of Humphrey Higginson by way of a nine (9) year indentured servant contract. Higginson, a wealthy planter in his own right, was expected to act as Elizabeth’s legal guardian until she reached the age of fifteen (15). At that time, which was the “coming of age” for girls in colonial Virginia where young girls often married or started to work for wages, Elizabeth would be free. However, once Key was dead, Higginson did not live up to his commitment to care for Elizabeth as his own. Instead, Higginson transferred (or sold) Elizabeth’s indentured contract to Northumberland County’s first settler, Colonel John Mottram. Around 1640, Mottram took Elizabeth at the age of ten (10) as his servant to the undeveloped county.

Married And A Mother By Common Law

“Under common law the legal identity and status of a wife merged with that of her husband; they became one in the eyes of the law, and that one was the husband.” 6 — United States v. Yazell

At about 1650 Colonel Mottram paid for passage to his Coan Hall plantation in Northumberland County for a group of twenty (20) White young Englishmen as indentured servants. Each indentured person would serve for six (6) years to pay for his passage from England. Among the group was a young sixteen (16) year old lawyer by the name of William Grinstead (also spelled Greenstead). While William’s parents are not known, it is believed young Grinstead learned law as the younger son of an attorney. Interestingly, under English common law, only the eldest son could inherit the father’s real property and in William’s day it was common for the younger son to seek his own fortune in the American colonies. Colonel Mottram, recognizing Grinstead’s value as a lawyer, used Williams for legal representation in matters concerning Coan Hall. It was during this time that Grinstead and Elizabeth Key met. While William and Elizabeth were prohibited from marrying because Grinstead was still serving his indenture and Elizabeth’s future was uncertain, they nevertheless began a relationship and had a son together, whom they named John.

Elizabeth’s Freedom Suit Begins

“In the typical freedom suit there would be no need for an English servant to assert free birth since by the seventeenth century English men and women were presumptively free. Likewise the typical English indentured servant would not have to assert her Christian belief since Christianity also was presumed for English subjects. Evidently, Elizabeth (or the person who drafted the pleadings) understood that her claim was atypical suggesting a sophisticated understanding of community norms.” 7 — Taunya Lovell Banks

After Colonel Mottram died in 1655, the overseers of his estate classified Elizabeth Key and her infant son John as Negro slaves and part of the property assets of the Mottram estate. In an effort to win the freedom of his wife and son, young Grinstead acted as Elizabeth’s attorney and sued the Mottram estate on behalf of his common law wife, Elizabeth, over her status. The lawsuit claimed Elizabeth was not a slave, but a free woman, (an indentured servant who had faithfully served her time) with a freeborn son. According to the record, not only was Elizabeth’s Father (Thomas Key) a free English man, but Elizabeth had served as an indentured servant ten (10) years beyond the terms of her indenture. Again, interestingly and according to Jacob A. France Professor of Equality Jurisprudence at the Francis King Carey School of Law of the University of Maryland, Taunya Lovell Banks,8 at that time “English Subjecthood” and not “Citizenship” was more important for determining social status in the colony and at the crux of the matter. Apparently, in the early seventeenth (17th) century, “children born to English parents outside the country became English subjects at birth. While others could become naturalized English subjects,” there was no clear process at the time in the colonies. Moreover and what was clearly unsettled, was the status of children of such relationships if only one of the parents was an English subject. As foreigners were not considered English subjects. Because Non-Whites were ultimately denied civil rights as foreigners, mixed-race persons seeking freedom often had to establish their English ancestry in court.

Establishing Elizabeth’s English Ancestory

“Thus by asserting that her father was a free Englishman, Elizabeth was arguing that she too was born free.” 9 — Taunya Lovell Banks

In order to establish whether Elizabeth’s father was a free English man, the Court relied on the testimony of witnesses. Again, according researcher and author Taunya Lovell Banks, “the most persuasive evidence” came from Elizabeth Newman, eighty (80) and a former servant of Colonel Mottram. Newman testified that “it was a common Fame in Virginia that Elizabeth a Molletto (sic mulatto), now (e) servant to the Estate of Col. John Mottrom, deceased, was the Daughter of Mr. Kaye (Key); and the said Kaye (Key) was brought to Blunt-Point Court and there fined for getting his Negro woman with Childe, which said Negroe was the Mother of the said Molletto, and the said fine was for getting the Negro with Childe which Childe was the said Elizabeth.” Having proved Thomas Key’s paternity, by common law the Court granted his daughter Elizabeth her freedom. However, needing two (2) more slaves, the Mottram’s estate appealed the decision to the General Court, where the lower court’s decision was overturned. The General Court ruled that Elizabeth Key was indeed a slave because of her mother’s status as Negro.

Overturned But Not Over By Long Shot

“[I]f a villain taketh a free woman to wife, and have issue between them, the issues shaIl be villains. But if a nief [bondwoman] taketh a free man to her husband, their issue shall be free.” 10 — Sir Edward Coke’s British Jurisprudence

Unable to see his wife and child denied freedom, William took Elizabeth’s case to the Virginia General Assembly, which appointed a committee to further investigate the matter. Ultimately the Virginia General Assembly sent the case back to the lower court for retrial. In the end Elizabeth won her freedom on three (3) counts of which the most important was that, by English common law, the status of the father determined the status of the child. Clearly, Elizabeth’s father (Thomas Key, a man of considerable reputation who expressly desired his wishes for his acknowledged daughter Elizabeth be carried out) was a free Englishman and that Elizabeth herself was a practicing Christian. Additionally, the case was strengthened by other cases that held Black Christians could not be held in servitude for life. Furthermore and to drive the point home regarding the status of the father determined the status of the child, the court ordered the Mottram estate to compensate Elizabeth with corn and clothes for her lost years.

On 21th July 1659 This Certificate Was Published In Open Court 11

“I Capt. Richard Wright administrator of the Estate of Col. John Mottrom deceased doe assigne and transfer unto William Greensted a maid servant formerly belonging unto the Estate of the said Col. Mottrom commonly called Elizabeth Key being nowe Wife unto the said Greensted and doe warrant the said Elizabeth and doe bind my Selfe to save here [i.e., her] and the said Greensted from any molestation or trouble that shall or futurely arise from or by any person or persons that shall pretend or claime any title or interest to any manor of service [original torn] from the said Elizabeth witness [my ha]nd this 21th of July 1659 Test William Thomas, Richard Wright, James Austen.”

The Aftermath Of The Victory

“Elizabeth’s life, even as a servant, was probably more comfortable than most slaves due to the efforts of her father, Thomas Key, who undertook several actions to protect Elizabeth from the unscrupulous and greedy members of the Virginia colony. He placed her in a relatively comfortable servitude setting and provided written instructions about her care and status. In this respect she was luckier than most Anglo-African children of her era.” 12 — Taunya Lovell Banks

Although William fought and won the court battle for his wife’s (Elizabeth) and son’s (John) freedom, Grinstead could not marry Elizabeth until he completed his indenture, which occurred in 1656. Accordingly, the marriage between William Grinstead and Elizabeth Key was one of the few recorded marriages in the seventeenth century between an Englishman and a free Black woman. Together they had two (2) sons before William died early in 1661. As a widow Elizabeth Grinstead later remarried, to the widower John Parse (Pearce). Upon his death, she and her sons John and William Grinstead II inherited 500 acres, which helped secure their future.

Legally Discouraging Holy Matrimony With Black Women 13,14

“Under a 1642 law free Black women had special burdens unlike free Englishwomen. The statute provided that the labor of Black, but not White women was taxed, thus marriage to a free Black woman automatically increased the tax burden of the family without regard to the husband’s race. Arguably the financial burden colonial Virginia’s tax laws placed on free Black women may have decreased their chances of marrying, and may be one reason why despite an equal sex ratio between Black women and men, many free Black men, at least on the eastern shore, married White women. In addition, when you consider the implications of the later 1662 law tying perpetual slavery to the wombs of Black women, you have another factor discouraging free men, Black or White, from selecting Black women as wives.” Very clearly, William Grinstead Loved Elizabeth Key!

The Aftereffects Of The Victory

When humans considered mere chattel by law can exert power or influence the law, these humans become dangerous, thus Elizabeth Key and others like her who resisted their enslavement were dangerous women!” — Taunya Lovell Banks 15

Because White men did not want to be held responsible for the children they fathered with Black women, the need for the means to be relieved from both the moral and legal responsibility of having children with slaves presented itself. Consequently and as historian Edmund S. Morgan16 may suggest, a harsher scheme of racial slavery evolved, resulting in “a hardening of racial lines” and contributing to a growth in a clear “commitment to democracy, liberty, equality” and finance for White men. You see, unlike slaves, White servants and free workers could not be stripped naked and whipped to death without legally actionable repercussions. As such, it was quickly determined that the law was the perfect tool to justify rake, raw, rogue and reprobate behavior. So in order to both accommodate the unrestrainable sexual desires of wealthy White men and to facilitate the propagation of Christianity, the law was manipulated as detailed by historian William Waller Hening17 below:


December 1662

“Whereas some doubts have arisen whether children got by any Englishman upon a Negro woman should be slave or free, be it therefore enacted and declared by this present Grand Assembly, that all children born in this country shall be held bond or free only according to the condition of the mother; and that if any Christian shall commit fornication with a Negro man or woman, he or she so offending shall pay double the fines imposed by the former act.”

September 1667

“Whereas some doubts have risen whether children that are slaves by birth, and by the charity and piety of their owners made partakers of the blessed sacrament of baptism, should by virtue of their baptism be made free, it is enacted and declared by this Grand Assembly, and the authority thereof, that the conferring of baptism does not alter the condition of the person as to his bondage or freedom; that diverse masters, freed from this doubt may more carefully endeavor the propagation of Christianity by permitting children, through slaves, or those of greater growth if capable, to be admitted to that sacrament.”

September 1668

“Whereas it has been questioned whether servants running away may be punished with corporal punishment by their master or magistrate, since the act already made gives the master satisfaction by prolonging their time by service, it is declared and enacted by this Assembly that moderate corporal punishment inflicted by master or magistrate upon a runaway servant shall not deprivate the master of the satisfaction allowed by the law, the one being as necessary to reclaim them from persisting in that idle course as the other is just to repair the damages sustained by the master.”

October 1669

“Whereas the only law in force for the punishment of refractory servants resisting their master, mistress, or overseer cannot be inflicted upon Negroes, nor the obstinacy of many of them be suppressed by other than violent means, be it enacted and declared by this Grand Assembly if any slave resists his master (or other by his master’s order correcting him) and by the extremity of the correction should chance to die, that his death shall not be accounted a felony, but the master (or that other person appointed by the master to punish him) be acquitted from molestation, since it cannot be presumed that premeditated malice (which alone makes murder a felony) should induce any man to destroy his own estate.”


“An Act For Suppressing Outlying Slaves” (1691) 18

Transcription From Original

April 1691

“And be it further enacted by the authoritie aforesaid, and it is hereby enacted, That if any English woman being free shall have a bastard child by any negro or mulatto, she pay the sume of fifteen pounds sterling, within one moneth after such bastard child be born, to the Church wardens of the parish where she shall be delivered of such child, and in default of such payment she shall be taken into the possession of the said Church wardens and disposed of for five yeares, and the said fine of fifteen pounds, or whatever the woman shall be disposed of for, shall be paid, one third part to their majesties for and towards the support of the government and the contingent charges thereof, and one other third part to the use of the parish where the offence is committed, and the other third part to the informer, and that such bastard child be bound out as a servant by the said Church wardens untill he or she shall attaine the age of thirty yeares, and in case such English woman that shall have such bastard child be a servant, she shall be sold by the said Church wardens, (after her time is expired that she ought by law to serve her master) for five yeares, and the money she shall be sold for divided as is before appointed, and the child to serve as aforesaid.

And forasmuch as great inconveniences may happen to this country by the setting of negroes and mulattoes free, by their either entertaining negro slaves from their masters service, or receiveing stolen goods, or being grown old bringing a charge upon the country; for prevention thereof, Be it enacted by the authority aforesaid, and it is hereby enacted, That no negro or mulatto be after the end of this present session of assembly set free by any person or persons whatsoever, unless such person or persons, their heires, executors or administrators pay for the transportation of such negro or negroes out of the countrey within six moneths after such setting them free, upon penalty of paying of tenn pounds sterling to the Church wardens of the parish where such person shall dwell with, which money, or so much thereof as shall be necessary, the said Church wardens are to cause the said negro or mulatto to be transported out of the countrey, and the remainder of the said money to imploy to the use of the poor of the parish.”


Open Letter To The Church

LESSON: You Cannot Legislate Morality!

A Lesson We Can Learn From The Case Of Elizabeth Key Grinstead

“Thus the existence of mixed-raced children was seen as a threat to the very existence of the colonial community’s and English nation’s identity. Elizabeth’s father, understanding the unscrupulousness of his fellow colonialists, tried to protect his offspring from the cruelties of American indenture as well as possible enslavement. His efforts coupled with those of Elizabeth and her advocate resulted in her freedom.” — Taunya Lovell Banks 19

First and foremost, in the midst of the horrors of being Black and female in the American colonies in the seventeenth century, we find Elizabeth Key boldly fighting for her freedom against all odds. Elizabeth Key is recognized as being the first person, male or female, to sue for her freedom and win.20 The record is clear, that not only did she free herself, but Elizabeth also gained the freedom of her newborn son. In so doing, Elizabeth planted hope in the heart of slaves everywhere, that they too could be free. Elizabeth’s life story stands out in the annuals of Black American history, as not only a bright light in a very dark world, but also a testament to the intestinal fortitude of Black women standing up for justice in the midst of unimagineable, and perhaps for some unforgivable injustice. Moreover, the record is also clear that Elizabeth did not win her battle alone. Thomas Key (Elizabeth’s Father), after first denying his paternity and yet at the same “understanding the unscrupulousness of his fellow colonialists,” manned up to his fatherhood and tried to protect his daughter Elizabeth. Further still, William Grinstead fell in love with Elizabeth at Coan Hall,21 became her husband, fathered their sons John and William Grinstead II 22 and spent the rest of his life fighting for the freedom of his family.

Yes, the record is indeed clear that both Black and White Christians worked together to manifest the righteousness of God in the American colonies of the seventeenth century. First we have a strong Black woman fighting for her freedom. Second we have a wealthy White colonialist coming to grips with his Christian responsibility as a father and upon recognizing the reality of the immoral mindset of his fellow “church going” colonialists, fighting until his death for the freedom of his daughter. Third and finally we have a color blind husband and lawyer, loving his wife and children and faithfully fighting until his death for his family. Wow! What a model for both the Pro-Life movement and the Church today! Just look at what God can do, when we accept the reality of His righteous reign, the reality of the sin in our midst (1st Peter 4:17) and love one another enough to live and labor together as one Body in Christ to effect His Will on earth.

Could it be, that the Body of Christ will not see victory, until we understand that judgement must begin in the Church (1st Peter 4:17) and both acknowledge and repent from the evil in our midst? Could it be, that the Body of Christ will continue to lose ground, until we learn to work together as brothers and sisters in Christ to meet the physical, emotional and spiritual needs of the most vulnerable population among us, that is to say until we meet the needs of women and children (James 1:27)? Could it be, that the Body of Christ will continue to languish in the lamentation of bitter weeping (Jeremiah 31:15) from the millions upon millions of Rachels weeping for their children, until we get that Rachel is weeping because her children are not? Could it be, that the Body of Christ will continue to suffer loss in the public square, until we stop leaning more on legislating morality, than we do on the everlasting mercy and grace (Psalm 100:5, 1st Corinthians 15:10) of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to advance His kingdom?

Yeah, I think it could.

Brothers, we need to talk.


Note(s):

 In my very, very strong opinion, THE BIBLE DOES NOT JUSTIFY SLAVERY. If pastors (christian leaders) of the South taught their congregants to obey the Mosaic laws that criminalized kidnapping human beings, the harsh treatment of servants, the return of runaway servants and without preferring the rich over the poor or men over women, held everyone accountable for their own actions in the public square, slavery would not have existed.

Kidnapping


Deuteronomy 24:7 says: “If someone kidnaps a fellow Israelite, either to make him a slave or sell him, the kidnapper must be killed. You must get rid of the evil among you.”

Harsh Treatment


Exodus 21:26,27 says: “If a man hits his male or female slave in the eye, and the eye is blinded, the man is to free the slave to pay for the eye. If a master knocks out a tooth of his male or female slave, the man is to free the slave to pay for the tooth.”

Runaway Servants


Deuteronomy 23:15-16 say: “If an escaped slave comes to you, do not hand over the slave to his master. Let the slave live with you anywhere he likes, in any town he chooses. Do not mistreat him.”


The New Testament speaks equally as strong against the kidnapping of human beings (which is the basis of slavery) as the Old Testament. Please read the Apostle Paul’s warning against false teaching in 1st Timothy 1:8-10 (NCV): “But we know that the law is good if someone uses it lawfully. We also know that the law is not made for good people but for those who are against the law and for those who refuse to follow it. It is for people who are against God and are sinful, who are unholy and ungodly, who kill their fathers and mothers, who murder, who take part in sexual sins, who have sexual relations with people of the same sex, WHO SELL SLAVES, who tell lies, who speak falsely, and who do anything against the true teaching of God.


“Perhaps the most compelling argument AGAINST SLAVERY in the New Testament is Paul’s letter to Philemon, in which the Apostle asks Onesimus (a fellow Christian) to free his Christian slave.

Reference(s):

01. A paradox noted by Edlie Wong in her book “Neither Fugitive Nor Free” (2009), slave states had statutes that provided for slaves to sue for “wrongful enslavement”, based on slave laws that established “just subjection”, page 5 and 153 (http://bit.ly/17xS6Ty).
02. Ibid.
03. Elizabeth Key, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/w504mD).
04. Michael Omi and Howard Winant, “Racial Formation In The United States: From The 1960s To The 1990s 1 (1994); see also Howard Winant, Racial Conditions 13-21 (1994)”, page 1. (http://bit.ly/16IgVOb).
05. Taunya Lovell Banks Dangerous Woman: Elizabeth Key’s Freedom Suit — Subjecthood And Racialized Identity in Seventeeth Century Colonial Virginia (http://bit.ly/1bAD6mJ). Specifically see, William M. Wiecek, The Origins of the Law of Slavery In British North America, 17 Cardozo L. Rev. 1711, 1755 n.157 (1996); supra note 2, at 1720-21. See also Edmund S. Morgan, American Slavery, American Freedom: The Ordeal of Virginia 333 (1975); supra note 95, at 127-29 (referring to treatment of servants during the boom period).
06. See United States v. Yazell, 382 U.S. 341, 361 (1966) (Black, J., dissenting) (explaining the common law rule). (http://bit.ly/1dnVbGU).
07. Taunya Lovell Banks Dangerous Woman: Elizabeth Key’s Freedom Suit — Subjecthood And Racialized Identity in Seventeeth Century Colonial Virginia (http://bit.ly/1bAD6mJ).
08. Taunya Lovell Banks is the Jacob A. France Professor of Equality Jurisprudence at the University of Maryland School of Law where she teaches constitutional law, torts, and seminars on law in popular culture (film or literature), citizenship and critical race theory. (http://bit.ly/16MJVic).
09. Taunya Lovell Banks Dangerous Woman: Elizabeth Key’s Freedom Suit — Subjecthood And Racialized Identity in Seventeeth Century Colonial Virginia (http://bit.ly/1bAD6mJ).
10. Sir Edward Coke, Lord Coke, “A systematic Arrangement Of Lord Coke’s First Institute Of The Laws Of England 322, § 187.123a (J.H. Thomas ed., 1836) [hereinafter Coke’s First Institute]’. See Taunya Lovell Banks Dangerous Woman: Elizabeth Key’s Freedom Suit — Subjecthood And Racialized Identity in Seventeeth Century Colonial Virginia (http://bit.ly/1bAD6mJ).
11. Warren M. Billings, “The Old Dominion In The Seventeenth Century, A Documentary History Of Virginia, 1606-1689” (http://bit.ly/17X6Ibu).
12. Taunya Lovell Banks Dangerous Woman: Elizabeth Key’s Freedom Suit — Subjecthood And Racialized Identity in Seventeeth Century Colonial Virginia (http://bit.ly/1bAD6mJ).
13. Ibid.
14. Today, strategies discouraging marriage is alive and well. The script is the same only the faces of the actors have changed. Star Parker, Founder and President of the Center for Urban Renewal and Education (CURE) puts it this way: “Playing the race card instead of promoting free markets, discouraging marriage with a welfare state and a homosexual agenda, and hampering economic opportunity with complex tax codes, these liberals have caused the destruction of our African-American communities for almost 50 years.” (http://bit.ly/HEhvR4).
15. Ibid.
16. William Waller Hening, “Virginia Slave Laws”, Digital History ID 71, 1662 (http://bit.ly/16vMDsw).
17. Ibid.
18. Encyclopedia Virginia, Primary Resource, “An act for suppressing outlying slaves” (1691). “In April 1691, the General Assembly passed “An act for suppressing outlying slaves,” designed to deal with the problem of runaway slaves. It came in the wake of alleged slave conspiracies in, among other places, Westmoreland County in 1687 and 1688.” (http://bit.ly/16ner1m).
19. Taunya Lovell Banks Dangerous Woman: Elizabeth Key’s Freedom Suit — Subjecthood And Racialized Identity in Seventeeth Century Colonial Virginia (http://bit.ly/1bAD6mJ).
20. Elizabeth Key-Grinstead, “Slavery Activist And Radical Woman”, WordPress.Com (http://bit.ly/17xvv9u).
21. Patrick Jones is descendant of Elizabeth Key Grinstead, Frequent Traveler Ancestry, Sunday February 19th, 2012, (http://bit.ly/UOU3lJ).
22. Elizabeth Key, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/w504mD).

Open Letter To The Pro-Life Movement

In Abortion, Politics, Special Edition on July 15, 2013 at 12:01 am
Share this page

Open Letter To The Pro-Life Movement

Congressman Robert Smalls [R-SC5 and SC7]

Meet The First Black Captain Of A Vessel In The Service Of The United States …

Henrietta and David Lacks In 1945

Robert Smalls (Friday, April 5th, 1839 – Tuesday, February 23rd, 1915) was a Black American slave who, during and after the American Civil War, became a ship’s pilot, sea captain, and politician. He freed himself, his crew and their families from slavery on Tuesday, May 13th, 1862, by commandeering a Confederate transport ship, the CSS Planter (a “wood-burner” launched in 1860), in the Charleston, South Carolina harbor, and sailing it to freedom beyond the Union Army’s blockade. As one of the first Black Americans to serve in the United States Congress, all of whom were Republicans during the Reconstruction Era, Smalls authored legislation that created the first free and compulsory public school system in America in South Carolina, founded the Republican Party of South Carolina,1 and with Frederick Douglass successfully convinced President Abraham Lincoln to accept Black Americans as soldiers in the Union army.2 Most notably, Smalls was the first and last Republican to represent South Carolina until Republican Tim Scott became the first Black United States Congressman and now United States Senator to represent South Carolina since Reconstruction after the Civil War. 3


Slave, Husband, Father and Freeman

After waiting apparently in vain, for many years for our deliverance, a party consisting of nine (9) men, myself included, of the City of Charleston, conferred freedom on ourselves, five (5) women and three (3) children; and to the Government of the United States we gave the Planter, a gunboat which cost nearly thirty thousand dollars ($30,000), together with six (6) large guns, from a twenty-four (24) pounder howitzer to a hundred (100) pound Parrott rifle. We are all now in the service of the navy, under the command of our true friend, Rear Admiral Dupont, where we wish to serve till the Rebellion and Slavery are alike crushed out forever.” 4 — Robert Smalls, Washington, D.C., Wednesday, August 27th, 1862.

Robert Smalls' Planter CrewBorn into slavery in the “Dependency House” (i.e., a cabin behind the house of his master Admiral Henry McKee on 511 Prince Street in Beaufort, South Carolina) Robert Smalls received a sense of pride, self worth, dignity from his mother, Lydia Polite (who was also a slave held by McKee) and a set of skills from his owner.5 Instead of sending Robert out to the slave fields, when Robert was twelve (12) years old McKee sent him to his sister-in-law in Charleston where he would be hired out to work in the city.6 Hiring a slave’s time out to other persons in the city was simply another form of slavery that allowed the owner of the slave to profit from the slave’s labor. Here Robert would learn new skills and eventually find work on the docks. By 1854 Robert was fifteen (15) years old and earning fifteen dollars ($15.00) a month which belonged to Mckee who in turn would allow Robert to keep one dollar ($1.00).7 With his one dollar ($1.00) Robert would purchase things like tobacco and candy and then sell it on the docks.8 As a young man Robert had learned to start a business and save his money. By 1856 Robert would meet a hotel maid named Hannah Jones and marry her.9 By 1858 Hannah and Robert had their first child, Elizabeth Lydia.10 Robert Smalls' Planter CrewUnderstanding that Hannah was being physically abused by her master and could be sold, Smalls attempted to buy his family’s freedom with the money he saved. However, Hannah’s freedom would cost him eight hundred dollars ($800.00) and because he only had one hundred ($100.00) to his name, escaping to the North was Smalls’ only option to save his family and the clock was running.11 By 1860 the tensions between the North and the South over the future of labor (paid-labor versus slave-labor) were so heated that the secession of states was more than a possibility, it was imminent and South Carolina was at the heart of it all.12 By 1861 Southern slave states declared their secession from the Union and formed the Confederate States of America (CSA) and the The Planter On Open WaterAmerican Civil War was on.13 By 1862 Robert Smalls was a twenty–three (23) year old illiterate slave in the employ of Confederate Commander Brigadier General Roswell S. Ripley who commanded the CSS Planter.14 The Planter was a three hundred (300) ton side wheel steamship, built for commercial purposes, but during the Civil War served the Confederate Army as a heavily armed transport and dispatch vessel.15 Early on the morning of Tuesday, May 13th, 1862, the Confederate commander at Charleston, South Carolina, Brigadier General Roswell S. Ripley, was astounded to learn his dispatch boat, stationed at a wharf directly in front of his headquarters, had disappeared.16 Dressed as the Planter Captain C. J. Relyea,17 familiar with the waters and where the mines were, because as a slave he had laid them himself,18 Robert Smalls used the correct signals for safe passage through the five (5) Confederate gun batteries including Fort Sumter and boldly sailed and surrendered the CSS Planter to Union forces currently blockading the ports.19 In so doing Smalls freed himself, his wife, two children, and twelve other slaves by approximately 4:30 A.M. that morning.20

Robert Smalls PortraitBe Free Or We Perish Together!
“One of the most heroic acts of the war” 21

“As soon as the officers [on the Planter] were gone, Smalls and his fellows consulted and all agreed: the time had come. Word was sent to the sailor on the other boat and to the women and children: Proceed. Quietly, on the Planter, Smalls broke into the cabin to secure the captain’s straw hat and jacket and any small arms he could find. It was firmly understood among the conspirators that if they met with any interference they would resist and, if it came to that, rather than suffer capture, they would sink the Planter and all aboard. If scuttling failed, they ‘would all take hands … and jump overboard and perish together.'” 22

The First Black American Civil War Hero

“My race needs no special defense, for the past history of them in this country proves them to be equal of any people anywhere. All they need is an equal chance in the battle of life.” 23 — Robert Smalls

Robert Smalls As A Young ManAs a result of the fame that came from Robert Smalls’ daring theft of the CSS Planter, he was awarded an audience with President Abraham Lincoln where he sat at the conference table next to Frederick Douglass in an effort to convince President Abraham Lincoln to enlist Black men to fight for the Union forces in the Civil War. Smalls and Douglass helped recruit nearly 5,000 Black American men for the Union army.24 Smalls boldly backed his beliefs by fighting the Confederate Army as a pilot on the now USS Planter (the ship that he had commandeered to freedom) in the fall of 1862. As a solider, Smalls led the Union Navy efforts to deactivate mines that he had helped plant while enslaved by the Confederacy and then guided the Union forces to Confederate outposts and assisted in the destruction of railroad bridges in the harbor area.25 By 1863 Smalls piloted the USS Keokuk (i.e., one of the Casemate Ironclad gunships) in the Union attack on Fort Sumter. The USS Keokuk Under Construction In 1862The attack failed miserably.26 Understanding former slaves were traitors to the Confederacy and would be executed without question, Smalls took command of the ship from the surrendering Captain James Nickerson (who was hiding in a coal bunker below deck), navigated it out of harm’s way and rescued the crew just minutes before the USS Keokuk sank.27 Nickerson was dismissed as a coward and Smalls became the first Black Navy Captain in the service of the United States.28 By 1865 Smalls would return to Fort Sumter with the USS Planter to witness the Union’s “Stars and Stripes” raised marking the defeat of the Confederate Army and the end of the Civil War. As the first hero of the Civil War declared by the United States Congress, Robert Smalls would later be appointed to the rank of Major General in the South Carolina Militia during the Reconstruction period.29

Serving in the United States Congress

Representing South Carolina’s 5th and 7th Districts

“The party of Lincoln which unshackled the necks of four million human beings.” In his campaign speeches he said, “Every colored man who has a vote to cast, would cast that vote for the regular Republican Party and thus bury the Democratic Party so deep that there will not be seen even a bubble coming from the spot where the burial took place.” Later in life he recalled, “I can never loose [sic] sight of the fact that had it not been for the Republican Party, I would have never been an office-holder of any kind from 1862 to present.” 30 — Robert Smalls

Congressman Robert Smalls

Robert Smalls founded the Republican Party of South Carolina, served in the South Carolina House and Senate from 1865 to 1874, was a delegate to the South Carolina Constitutional Convention in 1868 and served in Congress off and on from 1875 to 1887.31 The gap in Smalls congressional service took place after the Compromise of 1877 when Republican President Rutherford Birchard Hayes withdrew Union troops from the south 32 and was due to false accusations that he took a $5,000.00 bribe in connection with the award of a printing contract in January of 1873 while serving as a state senator.33 Due to the “the uncorroborated testimony of an admitted felon” who was testifying to save his own hide, 34 Smalls was arrested at home on Saturday, October 6th, 187735 found guilty and sentenced to three (3) years of hard labor.36 In the absence of Union troops, racists Southern White Democrats called the “Redeemers” (i.e., members of the Klu Klux Klan who wanted to return the state to its pre-war status of white supremacy) used violence and election fraud to regain control in the state legislature.37 Ultimately Smalls fought back and was pardoned by South Carolina Governor William Simpson.38 As part of the agreement that pardoned Smalls, charges were also dropped against the Democrats who had been accused of election fraud.39 Having regained his congressional seat, Smalls continued to fight to protect the civil rights of Black Americans, promote their representation and participation in state politics and move forward legislation for a public school system in South Carolina.40

Congressman Robert SmallsSouth Carolina Constitutional Convention
By 1895, Benjamin Ryan “Pitchfork Ben” Tillman, Jr. and the “Redeeming” Democrats (i.e., Ku Klux Klan and Red Shirt White Supremacist) in South Carolina had succeeded through violence, terror, and election fraud to reduce the number of Black Americans registered to vote in the state from 81,000 in 1868 to less than 10,000 in 1894.41 Tillman called for a constitutional convention in 1895 to rewrite South Carolina’s constitution of 1868 and to take away the right to vote of Black Americans in South Carolina.42 After leaving the convention to attend to the illness and eventual death of his second wife, Annie Wigg Smalls, Robert returned to the convention and refused to sign the new constitution that changed South Carolina’s suffrage requirements and disenfranchised Black Americans.43 Without the aid of Congressman Robert SmallsUnion troops on guard in the South, the Redeemers gained the upper hand through fear and violence and by 1890Pitchfork Ben” became the 84th Governor of South Carolina.44 By 1912, and even though a Republican President William Howard Taft was in office, South Carolina’s two Democratic Senators, Benjamin Tillman and Ellison D. Smith, successfully blocked Smalls’ reappointment as South Carolina’s Collector of Customs for the Port of Beaufort.45 By 1915 Robert Smalls would die of diabetes.46 By 1940 a statue of Governor Tillman was unveiled on the state capitol grounds in Columbia, South Carolina. 47

Robert Smalls Was Concerned About The U.S. Navy

” [ Robert ] Smalls told Samuel Francis Du Pont, commander of the U.S. Navy’s South Atlantic Blockading Squadron, that he worried more about the U.S. Navy shooting at Planter than the Confederates.” 48

Robert Smalls' Great, Great Grandson Michael Moore

Rear Admiral Samuel Francis Du Pont Was A True Friend

“One of the coolest and most gallant naval acts of war.” 49 — Samuel Francis duPont

“The bringing out of this steamer would have done credit to anyone … This man Robert Smalls is superior to any who has yet come into lines, intelligent as many of them have been. His information has been most interesting, and portions of it of the utmost importance.” 50
 — Samuel Francis duPont

Rear Admiral Samuel Francis duPontSamuel Francis Du Pont was a direct descendent of Pierre Samuel du Pont de Nemours. His uncle was Eleuthère Irénée du Pont, the founder of E.I. du Pont de Nemours Company, which today is the multinational DuPont chemical corporation.51 During the American Civil War, DuPont was one of the chief suppliers of black powder to the United States military.52 According to the Hagley Museum & Library exhibition entitled: “An Oath of Allegiance to the Republic: The du Ponts and the Civil War,” Flag Officer Samuel Francis Du Pont at Port Royal praised Smalls for his heroism and promised to take care of him, his family and his crew.53 Being a man of his word and in need of Robert’s extensive knowledge of the waters around Charleston and the Confederate military signals and approaches,54 Du Pont not only took care of the nine (9) crew members, five (5) women and three (3) children on the Planter by helping them get settled in Union occupied territory near Port Royal, South Carolina, he then made Robert the pilot of his flagship, USS Wabash.55 As the relationship between Smalls and DuPont grew, DuPont lobbied for Robert and his crew. United States Colored TroopsOn Friday May 30th, 1862, the United States Congress passed an act for the relief of Robert Smalls and the Planter crew. This legislation directed the Navy Department to appraise the steamer and its cargo and pay them one half of the value. Du Pont was charged with obtaining the appraisal and dividing out the money. The Planter and her cargo was valued at $9,168.00, leaving $4,584.00 for Smalls and his crew. As architect of the Planter’s rebellion and ranking member of the slave crew, Robert received $1,500.00 and the rest was split among the crew and their families.56 In the month of June 1862, Rear Admiral DuPont appointed Smalls as his personal representative to oversee a program designed to help former slaves successfully work on the land abandoned by slave plantation owners called the “Port Royal Experiment“.57 Because Smalls spoke both Gullah and “regular” English Rehearsal for Reconstruction: The Port Royal Experimentand he understood the views of both Blacks and Whites, he was needed to meet with and facilitate the efforts of private Northern charity organizations stepping in to help the former slaves become self-sufficient.58 Smalls was so successful, that on Wednesday, August 20th, 1862, at the request of Major General David Hunter, Smalls met with United States Secretary of War Edwin Stanton. A few days later Smalls, Hunter and Stanton met with President Abraham Lincoln.59 Thank you Rear Admiral Samuel Francis Du Pont, the “Port Royal Experiment” was indeed a rehearsal for reconstruction and Robert Smalls was the right man for the job. By Monday, August 25th, 1862 Secretary of War Edwin Stanton authorized the enlistment of Black troops into the Federal Army.60 By declaration on Wednesday, May 10th, 1865 the American Civil War ended 61 and then Democratic President Andrew Johnson ended the “Port Royal Experiment” by returning the land to its previous White owners.62

Open Letter To The Pro-Life Movement

2013 Marks The 40th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

“I will go, and where you die, I will die.” — Hannah Smalls 63

“How can I expect to keep my freedom if I’m not willing to pay for it?” — Robert Smalls 64

Sarah Weddington's Signed Copy of Roe v. Wade By All Nine JusticesWe’re in the fortieth (40) year of legalized abortion in the United States of America. At this point, we’ve lost over fifty-six (56) million lives to surgical abortion on demand alone and counting.65 The enormous impact of fifty-six (56) million lives lost to abortion on demand, is equivalent to the population of our eighty-two (82) largest cities,66 from New York all the way down to cities the size of Chandler, Arizona. To put it another way, fifty-six (56) million abortions are equal to twenty-two (22) times the human lives lost from ALL the wars America has ever fought (from the American Revolutionary War in 1775 to the Iraq and Afghanistan War today).67 Further still, the toll includes some eighteen (18) million Black American babies 68 and thirty-seven (37) million others. Honestly, that’s about 3,796 times as many Black Americans as were lynched since the American Civil War.69 All this adds up to a 30% loss in the younger generation under age forty-five (45). These numbers amount to a holocaust against Blacks and against the young. Without question, this is the greatest loss ever inflicted on any generation in the history of our country. The Center for Reproductive Rights Black Man Celebrating Roe!Could it be, that now is the time to take a page from Rear Admiral Samuel Francis Du Pont and seriously invest in communities of color to end abortion on demand? Could it be, that with Black and Hispanic Americans representing the number one (1) and number two (2) customers of the Abortion Industrial Complex 70,71 now is the time to lead with color? Could it be, that because communities of color speak the language and understand the views of both the franchised and disenfranchised, they hold the key to the reconciliation of a country split evenly over the issue? Could it be, that because communities of color have been both courted and targeted by BIG Abortion, like Robert Smalls we have extensive knowledge of the dangers in the waters of life and understand the signals and approaches needed to safely navigate the way to victory over abortion on demand in America? Could it be, that just as Republican President Rutherford Birchard Hayes compromised in 1877 and Democratic President Andrew Johnson scuttled the “Port Royal Experiment“, the solution to the problems that perplex the Pro-Life movement isn’t political? Could it be, that after forty (40) years of The Center for Reproductive Rights Black Man Celebrating Roe!legally protected abortion on demand in America combined with the loss of over fifty-six (56) million lives with thirty (30) percent of those babies being Black Americans, it’s now clear that like Robert Smalls, Pro-Life leaders in communities of color will have to commandeer the Pro-Life movement’s ship and rescue our people? Could it be, that at the rate Black America is aborting her children,72 that at the rate her children are being born to unwed mothers,73 that at the rate her children acquire STDs,74 that at the rate her children account for the people living with HIV in the United States,75 that at the rate her children in High School are below basic proficiency in math,76 that at the rate her children are being incarcerated,77 that time is running out on her future? Could it be, that like Hannah Smalls “I will go, and where [ my people will ] die, I will die trying to reach them for Christ’s sake?”

I think it could.

Brothers, we need to talk.

Reference(s):

01. Robert Smalls, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/7lSdB7).
02. Avis Thomas-Lester, “Civil War hero Robert Smalls Seized The Opportunity To Be Free”, The Washington Post (http://bit.ly/YfCtec).
03. Joel Allen, “”Scott Sworn In As 1st Black Republican in Congress From The Deep South Since reconstruction”, CarolinaLive.Com, WPDE News Channel 15 (http://1.usa.gov/S3TKnv).
04. Robert Smalls, “Letter From The Negro Robert Smalls”, The Washington Repuplican (http://bit.ly/16ZMaQz) or (http://bit.ly/12ygyhd).
05. Robert Smalls, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/7lSdB7).
06. Ibid.
07. Dennis Adams, “Robert Smalls War Hero And Legislator (1839-1915)” (http://bit.ly/9MqIcI).
08. Public Broadcasting System (PBS), Slavery And The Making Of America – Episode 4: “The Challenge of Freedom” (http://to.pbs.org/12d6wSO).
09. Robert Smalls, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/7lSdB7).
10. Ibid.
11. The Robert Smalls Collection, “Who Was Congressman Robert Smalls? (1839-1915): The Early Years” (http://bit.ly/RwMGBs).
12. Public Broadcasting System (PBS), Slavery And The Making Of America – Episode 4: “The Challenge of Freedom” (http://to.pbs.org/12d6wSO).
13. Confederate States of America, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/TFxeY).
14. USS Planter (1862), Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/1bixAqx).
15. Ibid.
16. Ibid.
17. Ibid.
18. History Revived, “Smalls’ Contributions” (http://bit.ly/16joe8v).
19. Robert Smalls, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/7lSdB7).
20. Ibid.
21. Howard Westwood, “Black Troops, White Commanders And Freedmen During The Civil War”, SIU Press, October 1st, 1991, p.74 (http://bit.ly/12ddveD).
22. Ibid.
23. Robert Smalls Annual Lecture Series, The University of South Carolina African American Studies Program, 2012 Lecturer (http://bit.ly/16jsyEA).
24. The Robert Smalls Collection, “Who Was Congressman Robert Smalls?: Smalls During The Civil War” (http://bit.ly/18486OM).
25. Ibid.
26. Ibid.
27. Michael Canaan, “05/13/1862 – Robert Smalls Comandeers His Way to Freedom and Greatness”, BlackHistory.Com (http://bit.ly/1a6MTBj).
28. Robert Smalls, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/7lSdB7).
29. Andrew Billingsley, “Yearning to Breathe Free: Robert Smalls of South Carolina and His Families”, University of South Carolina Press, 2007, p. 1 (http://bit.ly/12SZS32).
30. Robert Smalls, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/7lSdB7).
31. Ibid.
32. Walter Hoye, “Environmental Products (4): The Compromise of 1877: The Republican Party Preferred Power”, Issue No.: 2012.149 (http://bit.ly/K13YAe).
33. African American Registry, “Naval Hero And Politician, Robert Smalls”, Date: Friday, April 5th, 1839 (http://bit.ly/HnurI7).
34. Andrew Billingsley, “Yearning to Breathe Free: Robert Smalls of South Carolina and His Families”, University of South Carolina Press, 2007, p. 147 (http://bit.ly/12U2WjG).
35. Andrew Billingsley, “Yearning to Breathe Free: Robert Smalls of South Carolina and His Families”, University of South Carolina Press, 2007, p. 142 (http://bit.ly/1bjzoQg).
36. Andrew Billingsley, “Yearning to Breathe Free: Robert Smalls of South Carolina and His Families”, University of South Carolina Press, 2007, P. 132 (http://bit.ly/15sciUO).
37. Redeemers, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/1WW9bS).
38. The Robert Smalls Collection, “Who Was Congressman Robert Smalls?: Reconstruction and Smalls’ Political Career” (http://bit.ly/12zyjNo).
39. Eric Foner, “Freedom’s Lawmakers: A Directory of Black Officeholders During Reconstruction” Oxford University Press, 1993, p. 198. (http://bit.ly/184Zd7I).
40. The Robert Smalls Collection, “Who Was Congressman Robert Smalls?: Reconstruction and Smalls’ Political Career” (http://bit.ly/12zyjNo).
41. Benjamin Tillman, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/aJFC4c).
42. Fox Butterfield, “All God’s Children: The Bosket Family and the American Tradition of Violence” (http://bit.ly/10K8IDM).
43. The Robert Smalls Collection, “Who Was Congressman Robert Smalls?: Robert Smalls at the 1895 South Carolina Constitutional Convention” (http://bit.ly/12zyjNo).
44. Mark Yost, “From Slave to Statesman”, Wall Street Journal, May 9, 2012 (http://on.wsj.com/Jwa9gw).
45. The Robert Smalls Collection, “Who Was Congressman Robert Smalls?: Robert Smalls During the Latter Years” (http://bit.ly/14FlyUu).
46. Dennis Adams, “Robert Smalls War Hero And Legislator (1839-1915)” (http://bit.ly/9MqIcI).
47. Ben Tillman Statue, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/12A694S).
48. Hagley Museum & Library, “The duPonts And The Civil War”, Robert Smalls: Freedom (http://bit.ly/13y6oUg).
49. Howard Westwood, “Black Troops, White Commanders And Freedmen During The Civil War”, SIU Press, September 9th, 2008, p.74 (http://bit.ly/12A7d8H).
50. Andrew Billingsley, “Yearning to Breathe Free: Robert Smalls of South Carolina and His Families”, University of South Carolina Press, 2007, p. 60 (http://bit.ly/15sPBjf).
51. Samuel Francis Du Pont, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/12A7WXo).
52. DuPont, “1804 Black Powder” (http://bit.ly/184doq6).
53. Hagley Museum & Library, “The duPonts And The Civil War”, Robert Smalls: Freedom (http://bit.ly/13y6oUg).
54. Blain Roberts and Ethan J. Kytle, “Robert Smalls’s Great Escape”, The New York Times, Saturday, May 12th, 2012 (http://nyti.ms/18L7jls) and Robert Smalls, “Service to the Union”, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/1856ReX).
55. Hagley Museum & Library, “The duPonts And The Civil War”, Robert Smalls: Freedom (http://bit.ly/13y6oUg).
56. Ibid.
57. Andrew Billingsley, “Yearning to Breathe Free: Robert Smalls of South Carolina and His Families”, University of South Carolina Press, 2007, p. 67 (http://bit.ly/12p97b6).
58. Ibid, p. 68 (http://bit.ly/12WgKG1).
59. Blain Roberts and Ethan J. Kytle, “Robert Smalls’s Great Escape”, The New York Times, Saturday, May 12th, 2012 (http://nyti.ms/18L7jls) and Robert Smalls, “Service to the Union”, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/1856ReX).
60. National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, “Appomattox Court House: Black Soldiers on the Appomattox Campaign” (http://1.usa.gov/12jJNba).

Did You Know: “Several regiments of United States Colored Troops fought on the front line in the Battle of Appomattox Court House on the morning of April 9, 1865. Blacks served in segregated units under white officers. The U.S. Army would not be integrated until the Korean War.”

61. American Civil War, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/BWGAf) and IMPORTANT PROCLAMATIONS, “The Belligerent Rights of the Rebels at an End. All Nations Warned Against Harboring Their Privateers. If They Do Their Ships Will be Excluded from Our Ports. Restoration of Law in the State of Virginia. The Machinery of Government to be Put in Motion There.”, The New York Times, Wednesday, May 10th, 1865 (http://nyti.ms/1dfjYL0).
62. Port Royal Experiment, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/15bHWDM).
63. Andrew Billingsley, “Yearning to Breathe Free: Robert Smalls of South Carolina and His Families”, University of South Carolina Press, 2007, p. 65 (http://bit.ly/18Lfm1q).
64. Edward A. Miller, “Gullah Statesman: Robert Smalls from Slavery to Congress, 1839-1915”, University of South Carolina Press, 1995, p. 17 (http://bit.ly/12jNptP).
65. Dennis M. Howard, “The Abortion Index” (http://bit.ly/9FPAN1).
66. Ibid.
67. Lori Hoye, “Practicality, Pragmatism And Polls”, Thursday, March 4th, 2010 (http://bit.ly/aUt60q).
68. Dennis M. Howard, “The Abortion Index” (http://bit.ly/9FPAN1).
69. Ibid.
70. According to the Guttmacher Institute, “Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States: Who Has Abortions?”, August 2011 (http://bit.ly/12p97b6) “non-Hispanic Black women for 30%, Hispanic women for 25%” have abortions.
71. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) the most recent “Abortion Surveillance Report” of 2009 (http://1.usa.gov/T6gz7H) “non-Hispanic white women and non-Hispanic black women accounted for the largest percentages of abortions (37.7% and 35.4%, respectively).”

Please Note: That of the 52 reporting areas (the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and New York City) the above CDC report excludes data from California, Delaware, Maryland, and New Hampshire. Still further note that according to the latest information available from the Guttmacher Institute “State Facts About Abortion: California”, January 2011 (http://bit.ly/11QeYuT), California could be considered, by its sheer numbers, the nation’s Abortion Capital. For more information click here: http://bit.ly/12Wyndk.

72. Ibid., See the Guttmacher Institute report and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s above.
73. Kirsten West Savali, “72 Percent of African-American Children Born to Unwed Mothers”, HuffPost BlackVoices: By The Black Spin, Monday, November 8th 2010 (http://aol.it/9zXmYc).
74. Walter Hoye, “The Urgency Of Abstinence Education”, Monday, June 6th, 2011 (http://bit.ly/185l0Zq).
75. AIDS.Gov, HIV/AIDS 101: United States Statistics (http://1.usa.gov/MZTIWX).
76. California Department of Education, Assessment and Accountability Division, Revised: Tuesday, February 5th, 2013 (http://bit.ly/RR0BSy).
77. Prison Policy Initiative, “Incarceration Rates By Race and Ethnicity, 2010” (http://bit.ly/5j9yYI).

Open Letter To The Republican Party

In Abortion, Personhood, Politics, Special Edition on June 17, 2013 at 7:42 am
Share this page

Open Letter To The Republican Party

The 150th Anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation

Republican President Abraham Lincoln played the “Race Card” to win …

Henrietta and David Lacks In 1945

This classic commentary on the Emancipation Proclamation, “Abe Lincoln’s Last Card; or, Rouge et Noir” (Red and Black), created by Englishman John Tenniel for the London Punch (a British weekly magazine of humour and satire, Volume 43, October 18th, 1862, p. 168.), was inspired after the London Times stated that Lincoln had played his “last card” in issuing the Emancipation Proclamation. Notice that Lincoln is a bit pudgy around the waist, suggesting that he is out of shape and not fit to fight. Also notice Lincoln’s hair is in points, suggesting the horns of a devil. Apparently the London Punch viewed the Emancipation Proclamation as the gesture of a wily but weary and desperate gambler driven to engage his last resource. 1


Emancipation Proclamation

“In his heart of hearts he loathed and hated slavery …” — Frederick Douglass 2

Republican President Abraham Lincoln considered the Emancipation Proclamation to be the heart and soul of his legacy: “I never, in my life, felt more certain that I was doing right, than I do in signing this paper. If my name ever goes into history it will be for this act, and my whole soul is in it.” 3 — Abraham Lincoln, Thursday, January 1st, 1863

Abraham Lincoln presenting the preliminary Emancipation Proclamation to his cabinet on July 22, 1862Fearing the Emancipation Proclamation would be received as the desperate act of a Commander-In-Chief losing the war, Secretary of State William Seward asked the president to wait for a Union victory before issuing the order.4 Two (2) months later, when Union troops rejected Confederate General Robert E. Lee’s invasion of Maryland at Antietam Creek on September 17th, 1862, Lincoln saw his opportunity.5 On September 22nd, 1862, President Lincoln issued his Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation,6 giving the South one hundred (100) days to reverse their rebellion or face losing their slaves. On both sides of the Missouri Compromise Line, Lincoln’s order was condemned and cursed as a usurpation of property rights (i.e., the right to own and sell slaves) and a calculated effort to start race war.7 Nevertheless, when the South refused to relent, President Lincoln, kept his word and issued the final Emancipation Proclamation on Thursday, January 1st, 1863.8 With this unnumbered Executive Order,9 Abraham Lincoln on the Antietam BattlefieldPresident Lincoln took a definitive stand on the most contentious issue in American history and clearly redefined the Union’s goals and strategy. By playing the “Race Card” President Lincoln sounded the death knell for both slavery and the confederate resistance. Still the President wasn’t done. Please notice how skillfully Lincoln chose his words in the final version of the Emancipation Proclamation in an effort to affect only those states still in rebellion as of Thursday, January 1st, 1863 10 and at the same time shape the framing of the Civil War’s end game document (i.e., the 14th Amendment to United States Constitution).

Playing The Race Card In 1863

It Was Not About Racism. It Was About Winning!

“Once let the black man get upon his person the brass letters, U.S., let him get an eagle on his button, and a musket on his shoulder, and bullets in his pockets, and there is no power on earth which can deny that he has earned the right to citizenship in the United States.” 11 — Frederick Douglass

The Impending Crisis of the SouthIn 1857, Hinton Rowan Helper (1829-1909), a rabid racist and the son of a western North Carolina farmer, published one of the most controversial books ever written about slavery. In his book entitled “The Impending Crisis of the South,” Helper argued that slavery was incompatible with economic progress. Using statistics drawn from the 1850 census, Helper maintained that the North was growing far faster than the South and that slavery was the cause of the South’s economic failure. Helper believed slavery doomed the South because it was inefficient, wasteful, degraded labor, inhibited urbanization, thwarted industrialization, and stifled progress.12 Not only did slavery choke commerce and malign manufacturing, it also impacted the South’s ability to fight the war. As the slave population increased, so did the demand for the human resources (i.e., fighting men), financial resources (i.e., gold) and natural resources (i.e., land) to manage the very real threat of an internal rebellion from a very hostile slave population. This is clearly seen in the decennial census tables below.13

1790 - 1860 U.S. Census Chart

Centerfold: The Battle of Antietam, Fought September 17th, 1862 - Burnside Holding the HillAs the slave population increased, so increased the inevitability of the North’s victory and Lincoln knew it. President Lincoln had finally come around to understand what Frederick Douglass was advising and knew all along (i.e., that Black slaves had a deeper interest in the defeat and humiliation of the rebels than all others.).14 So in an effort to win the war, seize the moral high ground and slow down the momentum the property rights advocates in the North were building up for the South, Lincoln played the Race Card, executively ordered the Emancipation Proclamation, enlisted, equipped, empowered and earnestly encouraged former slaves to fight for the North and in little more than two (2) years won the war.

Open Letter To The Republican Party

I’m Hearing The GOP Is Dead In Black America

The Effects Of The Proclamation—Freed Negroes Coming Into Our Lines At Newbern, North Carolina“By abandoning their owners, coming uninvited into Union lines, and offering their assistance as laborers, pioneers, guides, and spies, slaves forced federal soldiers at the lowest level to recognize their importance to the Union’s success. That understanding traveled quickly up the chain of command. In time, it became evident even to the most obtuse federal commanders that every slave who crossed into Union lines was a double gain: one subtracted from the Confederacy and one added to the Union. The slaves’ resolute determination to secure their liberty converted many White Americans to the view that the security of the Union depended upon the destruction of slavery.” 15 — Ira Berlin


It’s The Fortieth (40) Year Since Roe And Doe

In The 150th Year Since The Emancipation Proclamation

“The Emancipation Proclamation, one of the most important documents in the nation’s history, led to the greatest freeing of people in history until the liberation of Nazi-occupied Europe in World War II.” 16 — Rick Moriarty

Cartoon of the Emancipation ProclamationIt’s clear, the Emancipation Proclamation redefined the war, altered end-game goals, immediately freed thousands of slaves in Union held territories of the South and offered freedom to all slaves as the Union Army pushed deeper into the South towards the Confederate capital in Richmond, Virginia.17 It’s clear the Emancipation Proclamation shrewdly stayed the hand of foreign powers such as Britain and France who were considering supporting the South, but reconsidered because of the North’s victory at Antietam, as many in Europe were against slavery and many more were reluctant to intervene on the side of a lost cause.18 It’s clear that the Emancipation Proclamation set the stage for improved race relations in the nation (i.e., the passage of the Thirteenth (13th) Amendment to the United States Constitution that formally abolished slavery),19 Reconstruction in the South 20 and laid a sure foundation (Isaiah 28:16) for the Fourteenth (14th) Amendment to the United States Constitution that passionately, purposefully and resolutely established PERSONHOOD.21 It’s clear that maintaining an increasing slave population, managing desertions, defeats and casualties, and mooring morale while fighting a foe whose numbers were increasing from the inrush of former Black slaves was more than an impending crisis for the South. It’s clear that President Lincoln’s cabinet of advisors did not initially support the Emancipation Proclamation.22 It’s clear that emancipating the slaves was not unanimously supported in the North as the Honorable William Allen, the Democratic Representative from Ohio vehemently Cartoon of the Emancipation Proclamationargued against a bill calling for the use of Negro soldiers in his speech to the House of Representatives on Monday, February 2nd, 1863.23 Congressman Allen argued that such legislation would “destroy the relation of MASTER and SLAVE in the slaveholding States” 24 and that Lincoln’s Republican Party “has presented for the admiration of the American people the Negro in nearly every attitude which it was thought might win popular favor, and the last act in the great ‘drama’ is the Negro playing soldier.” 25 It’s clear that even in the North, racism was alive and well. Yes, it’s clear that the Emancipation Proclamation was the “signature moment” of President Abraham Lincoln and the Republican Party’s legacy. Come Join Us Brothers. Recruiting Black Soldiers After EmancipationHowever, it’s also very clear that as of Sunday, January 1st, 2013, we’ve entered both the forieth (40) year of legalized abortion and the 150th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation and thus far the Republican Party has done NOTHING to celebrate or draw attention to its illustrious history. I wonder why? With more than fifty-five (55) million lives lost to legalize abortion thus far.26 With the ratio of United States abortions to battle deaths in all United States wars being eighty-four (84) to one (1) in favor of abortions.27 With over fifty-six (56) trillion dollars of total United States Gross Domestic Product (GDP) lost to abortion since 1967.28 With an estimated four hundred (400) trillion dollars of United States Gross Domestic Product (GDP) lost by the year 2040 if abortion continues.29 With seventy-one percent (71%) of the Hispanic vote, seventy-three percent (73%) of the Unidentified Black Enlisted USCT SoldierAsian vote and ninety-three percent (93%) of the Black vote going to Democratic President Barack Hussein Obama II.30 With College Republicans abandoning their Party’s platform planks on abortion,31,32 contraception (i.e., abortifacients),33 same-sex marriage34 and on record applauding Planned Parenthood’s rebranding and public relations offensive against life at conception as “especially effective with young people, leading many of those who self-identify as Pro-Life to support the abortion giant.35 With a recent survey finding nearly half of those college-aged being completely unaware that Planned Parenthood (the largest abortion provider in the entire world) performs abortions.36 I cannot help but wonder why the Republican Party has not learned from the 1st Republican President of the United States 37 and realized that playing the Race Card by enlisting, equipping, empowering and earnestly encouraging Black Americans to fight for the eternal and transcendent values of Life and Liberty in its platform is the empirical road to victory. Hmmmmm … now that I think of it, there have been seventeen (17) Republican Presidents of the United States since Abraham Lincoln. Hmmmmm … perhaps, it’s really just a small wonder why the The Republican Party hasn’t celebrated the 150th Anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation thus far after all. 38,39 Hmmmmm … maybe, if I’m honest with myself, I really don’t have to wonder why. Maybe I know why. Maybe we all do.

Brothers, we need to talk.

Reference(s):

01. Rufus Rockwell Wilson, Lincoln in Caricature, “ABE LINCOLN’S LAST CARD; OR, ROUGE-ET-NOIR” October 18, 186, History Gallery (http://bit.ly/11xQ4ff).
02. Frederick Douglass, “Frederick Douglass: Selected Speeches and Writings”, Philip S. Foner, Yuval Taylor, Chicago Review Press, April 1st, 2000, p. 621 (http://bit.ly/12EBKIw).
03. Abraham Lincoln, “The Emancipation Proclamation”, by Daniel J. Vermilya, Antietam National Battlefield (http://1.usa.gov/S3TKnv).
04. Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, “Emancipation Proclamation Draft” (http://bit.ly/11V0d4C).
05. Antietam Creek, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/11unE59).
06. American Originals, “Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, 1862” (http://1.usa.gov/b8BmkI).
07. Seth Kaller, “An Evolving Stance on Emancipation” (http://bit.ly/118zt5v).
08. Emancipation Proclamation, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/QO4AJg).
09. List Of United States Federal Executive Orders, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/Sb70Yi).
10. American History, “Abraham Lincoln: The Emancipation Proclamation 1863”, University of Groningen – Humanities Computing (http://bit.ly/12kIkCw).
11. Civil War Defenses of Washing | District of Columbia, “The United States Colored Troops and the Defenses of Washington”, National Park Service (http://1.usa.gov/sGN3X9).
12. Hinton Rowan Helper, “The Impending Crisis of the South: How to Meet It”, Electronic Edition, 1829-1909, Documenting the American South, Copyright 2004 by the University Library, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, all rights reserved. (http://bit.ly/zPI6Vi).
13. John Joseph Lalor, SLAVERY, Cyclopaedia of Political Science, Political Economy, and of the Political History of the United States, vol. 3 Oath – Zollverein [1881], Online Library of Liberty, A project of Liberty Fund, Inc. (http://bit.ly/xCDm31).
14. Frederick Douglass, “Selected Addresses of Frederick Douglass: An African American Heritage Book”, p. 55. (http://bit.ly/14V3TFT).
15. Seth Kaller, “The Myth of Non-Emancipation” (http://bit.ly/12kKMc8) via Ira Berlin, American historian, a Distinguished University Professor at the University of Maryland (http://bit.ly/12EFGJ9).
16. Rick Moriarty, “Historic Lincoln document that changed America coming to Syracuse” (http://bit.ly/PFjRPx).
17. Ibid., Seth Kaller, “The Myth of Non-Emancipation”
18. Civil War Trust, “10 Facts About The Emancipation Proclamation” (http://bit.ly/15idIAQ).
19. Mark Whittington, “The Emancipation Proclamation Turns 150 Years Old” (http://yhoo.it/14V75Bo).
20. Reconstruction Era, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/13tTzEi).
21. The Human Life Review, “Human at Conception: The 14th Amendment & the Acquisition of Personhood” 2007 Summer (http://bit.ly/14V7i7m).
22. Ibid., Civil War Trust
23. Library of Congress, “Historical Analysis and Interpretation: William Allen’s Speech” (http://1.usa.gov/11utIKI).
24. Ibid., Library of Congress
25. Ibid., Library of Congress
26. Dennis M. Howard, “The Abortion Index”, The Movement for a Better America, Inc. (http://bit.ly/9FPAN1).
27. Ibid., Dennis M. Howard
28. Ibid., Dennis M. Howard
29. Ibid., Dennis M. Howard
30. Daniel Greenfield, “One Graph That Shows Which Party Really Looks Like America”, November 13th, 2012 (http://bit.ly/12j154o).
31. Kirsten Andersen, “College Republicans to GOP: Back off Planned Parenthood, Contraception, Same-Sex ‘Marriage'”, LifeSiteNews.Com (http://bit.ly/12Gb22f).
32. 2012 Republican Party Platform, “The Sanctity and Dignity of Human Life“, Republican National Committee (http://bit.ly/QPSjnO).
33. 2012 Republican Party Platform, “Supporting Federal Healthcare Research and Development“, Republican National Committee (http://bit.ly/PZPrZ2).
34. 2012 Republican Party Platform, “Preserving and Protecting Traditional Marriage“, Republican National Committee (http://bit.ly/RWa4c5).
35. Kirsten Andersen, “College Republicans to GOP: Back off Planned Parenthood, Contraception, Same-Sex ‘Marriage'”, LifeSiteNews.Com (http://bit.ly/12Gb22f).
36. Kristan Hawkins, “SFLA Releases Poll Results on Young People, Abortion, and the 2012 Election”, Students for Life of America (SFLA), June 22nd, 2012 (http://bit.ly/KZHYVQ).
37. Who’s Who Republican Presidents, “Republican Presidents of the United States” (http://bit.ly/MWS8pf).
38. Associated Press (AP), “Bible Backed Slavery, Says A Lawmaker“, The New York Times, May 10th, 1996 (http://bit.ly/10cgc4g)
39. Associated Press (AP), “Slavery Slip Costs State Senator” The Victoria Advocate, May 13th, 1996 (http://bit.ly/11zrgDD).

Open Letter To Black America: The Immortal Cells of Henrietta Lacks

In Abortion, Personhood, Special Edition on June 10, 2013 at 12:01 am
Share this page

Open Letter To Black America

The Immortal Cells of Henrietta Lacks

For the first time in history, human cells are replicated, outside the body …

Henrietta and David Lacks In 1945


Henrietta Lacks’ cells (i.e., “HeLa” cells) were essential in developing the polio vaccine
and were used in scientific landmarks such as cloning, gene mapping and in vitro fertilization. 1


Henrietta Lacks

[ George Otto ] “Gey [ pronounced Guy ] took any cells he could get his hands on — he called himself ‘the world’s most famous vulture, feeding on human specimens almost constantly.'” 2 — Rebecca Skloot

Henrietta and David Lacks In 1945Henrietta Lacks (Monday, August 1st, 1920–Thursday, October 4th, 1951) was a poor Black American tobacco farmer and mother of five children, from southern Virginia who contracted cervical cancer at the age of thirty (30) and died from the same cancer at the age of thirty-one (31).3 In 1950 the great-granddaughter of slaves walked into the Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, Maryland complaining of abnormal bleeding.4 Soon Henrietta Lacks was being treated for cervical cancer at Hopkins. While under anesthesia, Dr. Lawrence Wharton, Jr. (the “Hopkins Surgeon On Duty” that morning), without her knowing and entirely unrelated to her treatment, took a piece of her cancerous tumor and literally sent it down the hall to fellow scientists who (without success) were trying to grow human cells in culture.5 For years, scientist had been trying to keep human cells alive in the laboratory to no avail,6 but all of those years of utter futility were about to come to an end. The House Henrietta Lacks Was Raised InThe missing element and the most critical tool in testing was here at last. No one knows why, but Henrietta’s cells would not die.7 In the Tissue Culture Laboratory at Johns Hopkins University, laboratory scientist George Otto Gey (again pronounced Guy) cultured and created an immortal cell line for medical research.8 Today, this is very well known as the HeLa cell line. Henrietta’s cells were essential in developing the Polio Vaccine Henrietta Lacks Death Certificateand used without exception in far-reaching, ground breaking and cutting edge scientific landmark research such as Molecular Cloning (i.e., the replication of recombinant DNA molecules within host organisms), Genome Mapping (i.e., the creation of a genetic map assigning DNA fragments to chromosomes) and In Vitro Fertilization (i.e., IVF or the process by which an egg is fertilized by sperm outside the body in a laboratory).9 For the next sixty (60) years, HeLa cells were both inexhaustible and indispensable to advances in medical science.10

The Demand For HeLa Cells

“I’ve tried to imagine how she’d [ Henrietta Lacks ] feel knowing that her cells went up in the first space missions to see what would happen to human cells in zero gravity, or that they helped with some of the most important advances in medicine; the Polio vaccine, Chemotherapy, Cloning, Gene Mapping, In Vitro Fertilization.”11 — Rebecca Skloot

Main Street In Clover, VirginiaThe demand for the HeLa cells was unprecedented. Once Henrietta’s cells were put into mass production, HeLa cells have been mailed to scientists around the world for “research into cancer, HIV-AIDS, the effects of radiation and toxic substances and incalculable other scientific pursuits”.12 Scientists have grown some twenty (20) tons13 of Henrietta’s cells and there are virtually eleven thousand (11,000) patents involving HeLa cells.14 According to Sarah Zielinski HeLa of the Smithsonian.com, “HeLa cells were the first human biological materials ever bought and sold, which helped launch a multi-billion dollar industry.”15 According to Jab Abumrad, host and creator of the award winning radio show Radiolab, “the cells from this one tumor [i.e., Henrietta Lacks’ cancerous tumor] would spawn a multi-billion dollar industry and become a foundation of modern science leading Margaret Gey, Wife Of George Otto Gey Inside Gey Lab At Johns Hopkins Hospitalto breakthroughs in Gene Mapping, Cloning and Fertility and helping to discover how viruses work and how cancer develops (among a million other things).”16 According to Michael A. Rogers, author, futurist and columnist for MSNBC.com, “the growth of HeLa by a researcher at the hospital helped answer the demands of the 10,000 who marched for a cure to Polio shortly before Lacks’ death.”17 According to award-winning writer, journalist and teacher Rebecca Skloot, author of the #1 New York Times Bestseller, “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks“, Henrietta’s cells “were the first cells ever commercialized. HeLa cells are still the most widely used cells in the world. You cannot overestimate how important HeLa cells have been.”18

Henrietta’s Family Lacks

“Everybody always saying Henrietta Lacks donated those cells. She didn’t donate nothing. They took them and didn’t ask. What really would upset Henrietta is the fact that Dr. Gey [ George Otto Gey ] never told the family anything — we didn’t know nothing about those cells and he didn’t care. That just rubbed us the wrong way. I just kept asking everybody, ‘Why didn’t they say anything to the family?’ They knew how to contact us! If Dr. Gey wasn’t dead, I think I would have killed him myself.”19 — Bobbette Lacks

“I almost feel raped, like the family feels raped … they did it, nobody told it.”20 — Bobbette Lacks

David and Bobbette LacksDavid “Day” and Henrietta Lacks had five (5) children, Lawrence Lacks. Elsie Lacks, David “Sonny” Lacks, Jr., Deborah (Lacks) Pullum and Zakariyya Bari Abdul Rahman (born Joseph Lacks).21 Understanding that David and Henrietta’s family lived in abject poverty most of their married lives.22 Understanding that Zakariyya, one of her sons, was homeless and living on the streets of Baltimore, Maryland.23 Understanding that Henrietta’s middle child Sonny, David and Bobbette Lackswas one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) in debt after bypass surgery.24 Consider this: The family whose wife and mother’s cells changed medical history forever, literally giving birth to a multi-billion dollar industry, cannot afford medical insurance. Okay, let’s really get the picture. No medical coverage. No money. No help. No answers. No recognition and in Zakariyya’s case, No place to stay. However The Lacks Family In 2009and perhaps the most difficult cross to bear was the fact that their mother (until 2010), was buried in an unmarked grave.25 Although the family believes Henrietta was buried within a few feet of her mother’s gravesite in “Lackstown” (a rural part of Clover in Halifax County, Virginia), her exact burial location is still not known. Perhaps, at this point, the Lacks family will never know.26

Henrietta’s Story

It’s Not About Racism, Bioethics Or Money

“On Monday, February 5th, 1951, after Jones got Henrietta’s biopsy report back from the lab, he called and told her it was malignant. Henrietta didn’t tell anyone what [ Howard W. Jones, Jr., M.D. ] said, and no one asked. She simply went on with her day as if nothing had happened, which was just like her — no sense upsetting anyone over something she could deal with herself.”27 — Rebecca Skloot

Henrietta Lacks SmilingYES! The HeLa cells line proved to be the holy grail of mid-century biology, providing scientists “a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation” (Isaiah 28:16, KJV) for countless medical breakthroughs. YES! The Henrietta Lacks story raises very important issues surrounding science, bioethics, race relations, economic class, poverty and even personhood. YES! The Johns Hopkins Hospital claims they never sold HeLa cells, but clearly the same cannot be said for a multitudinous number of medical supply companies. YES! HeLa cells or products made from HeLa cells sold anywhere from $200 to $10,000 a vile 28 and YES! even today, HeLa cells are still the most widely used cells in the world. YES! The Henrietta Lacks story shines a bright light on the very dark truth that her family could not afford health care insurance to treat the diseases their mother’s cells were used to cure. Moreover, let’s be very clear. The Henrietta Lacks story IS NOT ABOUT human tissue culturing being bad. The truth is without HeLa cells life saving advances such as HIV|AIDS testing, basic drugs and all vaccines would not exist. Henrietta Lacks Grave MarkerThe Henrietta Lacks story IS NOT ABOUT racism and|or racist White American scientists abusing a poor Black American woman. The truth is Johns Hopkins was born on a tobacco plantation in Anne Arundel County Maryland where his father later freed his slaves in 1807, nearly sixty (60) years before the Emancipation Proclamation ordered by Republican President Abraham Lincoln on Thursday, January 1st, 1863.29 The truth is Hopkins was an abolitionist, philanthropist and entrepreneur who made his enormous wealth as a banker and grocer selling his own brand of homemade whiskey.30 The truth is Johns Hopkins never married, never fathered children and just before his death, generously donated seven (7) million 1873 dollars ($7,000,000.00) to start a school of medicine to help those who could not pay for their medical care.31 The Henrietta Lacks story IS NOT ABOUT HeLa cells being immortal and scientists being good. The truth is that HeLa cells are not immortal,32 scientists are fallen and fragile human beings and sometimes even with the very best of intentions, things can and do go wrong. Be that as it may and notwithstanding any of the above, what the Henrietta Lacks story IS ABOUT inspires and impels. The Henrietta Lacks story IS ABOUT a beautiful Black American woman who loved her husband, served her family, met crippling cancer with calm and composure and conquered the cold, cruel and callous circumstances of her day with courage. In the end and in the light of my faith in Christ, the Henrietta Lacks story IS ABOUT the eternal efficacy of truth, in a sinful world. Because after all is said and done, the Henrietta Lacks story is a resurrected record, that once was lost, but now is found.

Open Letter To Black America

Quote From Alveda King In The Maafa21 DVD“We need to remember, that over sixty (60) years ago, a man that could today be called the father of modern day eugenics, proposed that population control clinics be concentrated in minority neighborhoods. And now today, the vast majority of Planned Parenthood clinics are located in our neighborhoods. Are we really so naive to believe that this is all a coincidence? We all know that drugs, alcohol and tobacco are devastating, especially in the Black community. We know that the BIG CORPORATIONS target us with the ads and marketing campaigns. And yet, we don’t notice that PLANNED PARENTHOOD is doing the very same thing? We need to pay attention to the fact, that in the 1960s, when we as African-Americans began to demand our civil rights, for the first time in American history, there began a wide spread cry in our government for legalized abortion. Was that coincidence too? Or could it be, that when we said we would no longer sit on the back of the bus, a place was being reserved for us down at the abortion clinic?” 33 — Alveda King, Niece of Dr. Martin L. King, Jr.


Henrietta’s Story Is Clear

So What’s Wrong With Us Today?

Walter Hoye At the May 14th, 2013 Press ConferenceWhat the Henrietta Lacks story makes so very, very clear is that in the 1950s Black Americans were being used without our knowledge to create life and make money for others. However, by 1966 Mississippi added an exception for rape using the American Law Institute (ALI) model penal code.34 By 1967 abortion on demand became legal in Mississippi, Colorado, North Carolina and California based on exception arguments (i.e., permanent mental or physical disability of either the child or mother, rape, incest and the life of the mother).35 By 1973, just six (6) years later, thirteen states had passed laws based on the American Law Institute abortion model and finally the United States Supreme Court (USSC) would declare abortion on demand during all nine (9) months of pregnancy to be a federally protected constitutional right of women.36 By 2008 sixty-seven (67) percent of Black American pregnancies would be unintended.37 By 2011 Planned Parenthood (the leading abortion on demand provider in the world today), would receive over half a billion dollars in government grants and reimbursements from tax-payers.38 By 2012 abortion on demand would take more Black American lives in four (4) days than the Ku Klux Klan could lynch in eighty-six (86) years.39 What’s more today, Black American women who account for thirty (30) to thirty-five (35) percent of all abortions in the United States of America would suffer three times (3x) the risk of an early preterm birth (EPB) and four times (4x) the risk of an extreme preterm birth (XPB) as non-Black American women.40,41,42 YES! While Henrietta Lacks story makes it clear that in the 1950s Black Americans were being used to create life, sustain life, heal and advance life, Henrietta’s story also makes it easy to see that Black Americans are being used with their knowledge today by BIG ABORTION (funded by BIG GOVERNMENT), to end our own lives and still make money for others. BLACK AMERICA, are we really so blind that we can’t see the handwriting on the American Eugenics Society’s 43 wall? Are we really so blind that we can’t see today what our foreparents 44,45 could clearly see yesterday? I gotta ask, what’s wrong with us?

Brothers, we need to talk.

Reference(s):

01. Ron Claiborne and Sidney Wright IV, “How One Woman’s Cells Changed Medicine” ABCNews (http://abcn.ws/cTnrbj).
02. Rebecca Skloot, “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks”, p.30. (http://bit.ly/11ypUIa).
03. Henrietta Lacks, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/Zv4WG).
04. Rebecca Skloot, “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks”, p.27. (http://bit.ly/18Iqs4J).
05. Ibid., p.33. (http://bit.ly/11yr06Q).
06. Jim Axelrod, “The Immortal Henrietta Lacks”, CBSNews (http://cbsn.ws/11g8xgm).
07. Ron Claiborne, “Legacy of Life”, YouTube: “Henrietta Lacks Family” ABCNews (http://bit.ly/17hIahm).
08. Lucey B.P., Nelson-Rees W.A. and Hutchins G.M., “Henrietta Lacks, HeLa Cells, And Cell Culture Contamination.” PubMed.gov (http://1.usa.gov/13faflt).
09. Sarah Zielinski, “Henrietta Lacks’ ‘Immortal’ Cells”, Smithsonian.com (http://bit.ly/by9bRs).
10. Ewen Callaway, “Most Popular Human Cell in Science Gets Sequenced”, Center for Genetics and Society (http://bit.ly/11yu4j8).
11. Rebecca Skloot, “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks”, p.2. (http://bit.ly/13fdxVD).
12. Merdis Hayes and Matthew Mcwhorther, “Medical Apartheid: Bad Medicine”, August 19th, 2010, OurWeekly.com (http://bit.ly/15w3wEw).
13. Henrietta Lacks, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/Zv4WG).
14. Liz Hunt, “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks: a bittersweet legacy”, The Telegraph (http://bit.ly/aXP7hO).
15. Sarah Zielinski, “Henrietta Lacks’ ‘Immortal’ Cells”, Smithsonian.com (http://bit.ly/by9bRs).
16. Rebecca Skloot, “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks [Paperback]” Amazon.com (http://amzn.to/17Q3xaw).
17. Henrietta Lacks, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/IQKiyd).
18. Jim Axelrod, YouTube: “Henrietta Lacks Galerie Myrtis CBS Sunday Morning” (http://bit.ly/1aUriua).
19. Rebecca Skloot, “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks”, p.169. (http://bit.ly/18IwZwf).
20. Jim Axelrod, YouTube: “Henrietta Lacks Galerie Myrtis CBS Sunday Morning”, (http://bit.ly/1aUriua).
21. Henrietta Lacks, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/Zv4WG).
22. Ibid., Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/18IxqXm).
23. Rebecca Skloot, “Skloot Chapter Summaries, Part III – Immortality”, Class-y Writing (http://bit.ly/14asmtH).
24. Jim Axelrod, YouTube: “Henrietta Lacks Galerie Myrtis CBS Sunday Morning” (http://bit.ly/1aUriua).
25. Denise M. Watson, “After 60 Years Of Anonymity, Henrietta Lacks Has A Headstone”, (http://bit.ly/bz6LVf).
26. Henrietta Lacks, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/14atU6X).
27. Rebecca Skloot, “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks”, p.31. (http://bit.ly/17hTvOo).
28. Jim Axelrod, YouTube: “Henrietta Lacks Galerie Myrtis CBS Sunday Morning” (http://bit.ly/1aUriua).
29. John Hopkins, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/bQCzV2).
30. Idid.
31. Ibid.
32. Dianne N. Irving, Ph.D., “Re: Code name HeLa” Message to the Walter Hoye. September 17, 2012 1:18:12 P.M. (PDT), Quote: “First, when the term “immortal” is used, it is not meant literally. And over time the cells — any cells — in culture media change characteristics, even have genetic mutations and known to turn malignant if passed in culture too many times and for too long a time. So if you were to take the HeLa cells used today and compare them with the first few batches of HeLa cells — or with those still part of Henrietta Lacks at the time — there would be tremendous differences.” Dr. Irving also writes for LifeIssues.net (http://bit.ly/tLE8zB).
33. Alveda King, “Alveda King (Maafa21)” (http://bit.ly/15uF1Xv).
34. National Right to Life Committee, “Abortion History Timeline” (http://bit.ly/18ICBGS).
35. Ibid.
36. Ibid.
37. Guttmacher Institute, “Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States” (http://bit.ly/99dVdw).
38. Caroline May, “$542.4 million in government grants and reimbursements from 2011 to 2012” (http://bit.ly/ZztFBH).
39. The Tuskegee Institute, “Lynchings: By State and Race, 1882-1968” (http://bit.ly/eJ5Zvd) and Lynching, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/LlRoA).
40. Guttmacher Institute, “Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States” (http://bit.ly/99dVdw).
41. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “2009 Abortion Surveillance” (http://1.usa.gov/T6gz7H). Please note that the CDC report is based on abortion data for 2000-2009 and excludes data from California, Delaware, Maryland, and New Hampshire.
42. Guttmacher Institute, Note: “17.7% of all abortions are performed in California, that’s more than any other state in the United States of America” (http://bit.ly/11QeYuT).
43. American Eugenics Society, Wikipedia (http://bit.ly/hkJYVL).
44. SaySumthn’s Blog, “R.I.P. Samuel Yette , Black Journalist Fired From Newsweek After Authoring A Book Exposing Eugenic Plans To Limit The Black Population” (http://bit.ly/eTCAvM).
45. Samuel F. Yette, “Obituary: Samuel F. Yette, Influential Newsman, First Black Washington Correspondent For Newsweek Magazine” (http://bit.ly/ZGEnrj).