Slaveowners in the North

AJC ^ | 03/02/2003 | Mike Toner

[billbears]

If your claim was true then that number should have remained constant or declined

It's not my claim, it was the law at the time. As for this population 'explosion' that you claim, if you would bother to look at the native-born numbers, you'd find that of the 7,628 blacks you are so happy to wave around, only 70 were not native born. So apparently blacks were having babies during the decade of which you speak (I know that's going to come as a shock to your lincoln myth of the ever busy underground railroad) and the population growth from immigration is not 50% but only .9%.

We'll not even get into the numbers of free black population between the ages under one year to fourteen. For the number of free blacks in that age frame, for your number of 50% growth by immigration they all walked there by themselves, even if they weren't born yet!!

[GOPcapitalist]

Gee how can that be

Running a stop light is illegal. Does that mean that nobody ever does it?

[GOPcapitalist]

President Lincoln was instrumental in getting the 13th Amendment passed in 1864-65 and sent to the states.

Yeah. The first one, which protected slavery, as well as the second one.

[Ciexyz]

Education bump.

[Non-Sequitur]

Yeah. The first one, which protected slavery, as well as the second one.

If you're correct then it's a good thing that he put more effort into the second one, isn't it?

[Non-Sequitur]

Running a stop light is illegal. Does that mean that nobody ever does it?

Apparently the south was more determined to uphold their 'traffic laws' than the North was, weren't they?

[RushLake]

A little touted FACT is that blacks also owned slaves.

Now you've gone and done it. Were those black slave owners living in the north or the south? If they were living in the south, were they among the blacks that wanted to or did join the Confederate Army?

Another little touted FACT is that nativehyphenamericans also owned slaves. Until I became aware of that, I thought the nativehyphenamericans were busy living peacefully as one with nature, massacreing other tribes, and selling land they didn't own to the evil white man.

[canalabamian]

Simple solutions for simple minds. Life is seldom black and white, and is never as simple as most would like. Regardless of how hard folks try to neatly package the WBTS and its causes, it doesn't lend itself to neatness. The fact that so many folks see it so many different ways lends weight to the fact that the whole ordeal was vastly more complex than most are willing to admit. Simplify it if you like, but you're mistaken if you think it was that cut and dry. Rich man's war, poor man's fight. The simple man usually doesn't have a vested interest in politics or "noble" causes. Most just do whatever is required to get through and get on with their lives. True today and, no doubt true back then.

[savedbygrace]

For later reading.

[Pietro]

You've written a reasoned and intelligent response to this "shocking" revelation which means, of course, that absolutely none of the usual suspects on the Lincoln debate squad will acknowledge it.

Go in peace, my friend, lest you too be drug into the dismal swamp of defending the obvious to the jeers of the oblivious.

[stand watie]

SOME slaveowners in the north were still holding slaves in 1866, a year after Richmond fell. one of those slaveowners was U.S. Grant.

FRee dixie,sw

[GOPcapitalist]

If you're correct then it's a good thing that he put more effort into the second one, isn't it?

Did he though? His efforts achieved exactly the same thing for both of them - 2/3rds approval for both amendments in congress.

[GOPcapitalist]

Apparently the south was more determined to uphold their 'traffic laws' than the North was, weren't they?

Just out of curiosity, is that your response to everything? I know you have claimed otherwise, but your track record speaks for itself. Whenever it is pointed out that the yankees did something wrong, you respond "well, the south did it too." Whenever it is pointed out that Sherman left hundreds of miles of burnt cities behind him, you respond "well, the south burnt a single town in pennsylvania." If this is indeed truly how you think, it is indicative that your sole concept of morality extends from some arbitrarily erected relationship you have drawn between north and south. And quite frankly, I find that very sad and deserving of pity.

[Non-Sequitur]

Did he though? His efforts achieved exactly the same thing for both of them - 2/3rds approval for both amendments in congress.

But only two states ratified the first amendment. If President Lincoln was such a strong supporter of that amendment, as you claim he was, you would think that he would have pushed harder for ratification. On the other hand, passage of the second 13th Amendment was added to the Republican platform with President Lincoln's enthusiastic support and he lobbied for passage of the amendment out of Congress and saw it ratified by 21 states before he was murdered.

[Non-Sequitur]

SOME slaveowners in the north were still holding slaves in 1866, a year after Richmond fell. one of those slaveowners was U.S. Grant.

That is complete and utter nonsense and there is not a shred of evidence that you could possibly provide to support it.

[BeachPaladin]

interesting discussion - an above poster stated it well when he stated that TWBS had many causes and motivations for the participants

it's very hard to judge the action of someone who lived 100 or 150 years ago by today's standards - placing their actions in the context and mores of their own times can be difficult but ultimately helps your understanding of them

[jimt]

Sounded more to me like true history finally being told, warts and all.

There are those here who disagree with that approach, especially when it diminishes someone they've deified.

They're not hard to recognize.

But I bet you already knew that !

[wasp69]

But I bet you already knew that !

Mmmm-hmmm...

[Non-Sequitur]

And quite frankly, I find that very sad and deserving of pity.

Save your pity, I doubt that it is sincere anyway. I point out the south's many failings when you sothron types start hammering away at the south for problems that were worse in the south, just to provide balance. If billbears wants to paint the North as racist without mentioning worse practices down south then he is free to do so, but I will challenge his implication that the North had some sort of monopoly on racist laws. I don't deny the racist practices in the North. I do believe, and I feel that the record shows, that as bad as things were up North they were as bad or worse down south. Sorry if being reminded of that offends you.

[stand watie]

may i once again (sigh) suggest that you read HERO WITH NOT A HALO about GRANT and his comments to the philadelphia inquirer in 1866. he said, when asked about HIS slaves: "good help is SO hard to find".

slavers were RIFE in the north;denying that FACT is not as important as opening your eyes to the TRUTH. you are SMARTER than that.

free dixie,sw