Frederick Douglass on Slavery & the US Constitution

[Galileo]

Frederick Douglass on Slavery & the US Constitution

The constitution is interposed. It always is.

“Let me tell you something. Do you know that you have been deceived and cheated? You have been told that this government was intended from the beginning for white men, and for white men exclusively; that the men who formed the Union and framed the Constitution designed the permanent exclusion of the colored people from the benefits of those institutions. Davis, Taney and Yancey, traitors at the south, have propagated this statement, while their copperhead echoes at the north have repeated the same. There never was a bolder or more wicked perversion of the truth of history. So far from this purpose was the mind and heart of your fathers, that they desired and expected the abolition of slavery. They framed the Constitution plainly with a view to the speedy downfall of slavery. They carefully excluded from the Constitution any and every word which could lead to the belief that they meant it for persons of only one complexion.

The Constitution, in its language and in its spirit, welcomes the black man to all the rights which it was intended to guarantee to any class of the American people. Its preamble tells us for whom and for what it was made.”

Frederick Douglass (June 1863)

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=777

Modern liberals and neocons use slavery to bash the Constitution and the Founding Fathers.

Let Frederick Douglass retort them in his own words. Douglass has great authority on the subject. He was a brilliant man, born a slave in 1818, but taught himself to read when he was 6 years old (without the benefit of the public schools). He was a man who valued liberty, and escaped from slavery when he was 20, in 1838.

Then he worked for the liberty of others, and at the same time, educated himself. He read the Founding documents of our nation, and commentaries on them, like the Federalist Papers. After 1840, he was able to get his hands on Madison's Notes on the Federal Constitution. Hence his great statement of liberty, above, from 1863.

Douglass was there.

[ChumpDumper]

If they were so against slavery, why didn't they just abolish it when they founded the country?

[Galileo]

If they were so against slavery, why didn't they just abolish it when they founded the country?

There were too many racists and Klansmen among the populace, for that idea to go over too good.

Frederick Douglass thinks you're a copperhead.

:rollin

[Galileo]

There were no Klansmen during that time. Racism and the idea of free labor is why they didn't abolish it. Keep in mind, Douglass, like MLK were Negroes that were using their wit to try and fit in amongst people who originally had no intention of making a Nation of equality for all.

Not sure if you read the post. Douglass was not trying to "fit in". In fact, he broke with the famous white abolishionist Garrison on this above issue.

Douglass went back and studied his history, while all Garrison did was thump the Bible.

The Founding Fathers did indeed want all races to be equal in one nation, as Douglass observed. It says so right in the preamble.

The problem was that the rank and file people on the street didn't agree. Most of the common people were racists in those days, while only a couple minor Founding Fathers were racists.

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

[ChumpDumper]

So why didn't they just establish the US as a slave free nation in the first place?

[Winehole23]

The question is not whether the colored man is mentally equal to his white brother, for in this respect there is no equality among white men themselves.



The question is not whether colored men will be likely to reach the Presidential chair. I have no trouble here: for a man may live quite a tolerable life without ever breathing the air of Washington.



But the question is: Can the white and colored people of this country be blended into a common nationality, and enjoy together, in the same country, under the same flag, the inestimable blessings of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, as neighborly citizens of a common country?This.

[Winehole23]

I didn't know poor white trash went back that far.

[Galileo]

So why didn't they just establish the US as a slave free nation in the first place?

Are you a moron? All the states had slavery before the Founding Fathers came upon the scene.

[ChumpDumper]

Are you a moron? All the states had slavery before the Founding Fathers came upon the scene.But the claim is they were all against slavery, so they could have abolished it when they wrote the Constitution.

Why didn't they?

[Galileo]

Well, for one thing the Constitution had to be ratified by the People. If the Constitution had banned slavery, then Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, Delaware, Maryland, and New York would not have ratified it. They put in a provision that allowed for the banning of the slave trade.

They also put incentives to abolish slavery, like the 3/5th rule. The 3/5th rule gave an incentive to free slaves, as each freed slaves increased the state's representation in the House, the Electoral College, and gave them more clout on appointing Supreme Court Justices.

The 3/5th rule also acknowledged that slavery was bad for the economy, as it was taken from the Articles of Confederation, where it was assumed that a slave had only 60% of the economic input of a free person.

I should know better than to argue with a copperhead.

[Winehole23]

All they did was set an expiration date on legally importing slaves to the US, I think.

[ChumpDumper]

So every founding father was against slavery.

Even the ones who owned slaves....

[Winehole23]

Hard to believe.

[Galileo]

All they did was set an expiration date on legally importing slaves to the US, I think.

They did, and then President Jefferson got rid of it in 1808.

Without the Constitution, states could still be legally importing slaves today.

[Galileo]

So every founding father was against slavery.

Even the ones who owned slaves....

I know of only three who supported slavery; John Rutledge, Charles Pinckney and General Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, all of South Carolina.

[Galileo]

Hard to believe.

James Madison even tried to get a clause put in the Constitution, it was in the Virginia Plan, that would allow the federal government to nullify state laws. That clause would have been used against slavery.

Madison also tried to get this same clause put into the Bill-of-Rights a couple years later.

[ChumpDumper]

I know of only three who supported slavery; John Rutledge, Charles Pinckney and General Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, all of South Carolina.So which ones owned slaves?

[Winehole23]

What's a founding father? Do you mean the Constitutional Convention delegates? Early US officers, revolutionary heroes, Ben Franklin, what?

How big is the club?

[Galileo]

So which ones owned slaves?

At the time of the Contitutional convention, or at any time in their lives?

[ChumpDumper]

At the time of the Contitutional convention, or at any time in their lives?At the time of the convention or after.

[Winehole23]

James Madison even tried to get a clause put in the Constitution, it was in the Virginia Plan, that would allow the federal government to nullify state laws. That clause would have been used against slavery.Psychic in the counterfactual universe...


Madison also tried to get this same clause put into the Bill-of-Rights a couple years later.Didn't work either time, did it?

[Galileo]

What's a founding father? Do you mean the Constitutional Convention delegates? Early US officers, revolutionary heroes, Ben Franklin, what?

How big is the club?

For purposes of Chumper's query, the people who signed the Constitution.

In general, Founding Fathers would include those who attended the Constitutional convention, but didn't sign, or those who signed the Declaration of Independence, plus several other important heroes of the early Republic.

[Galileo]

At the time of the convention or after.

Why not at the time of the Convention or before?

[Winehole23]

Jesus, you checked them all Galileo? SC was the only pro-slavery haven at that point?

Hmm...

[Galileo]

I'm aware of everything of importance that's ever been written about Douglass. Of course I read your post. Whats shocking is you trying rationalize the founding fathers of this country wanting equality for all men, when some of those founding fathers owned slaves.

Slavery was legal at the time. You are supposed to follow the existing law until it is changed. Sort of like you should not smoke pot until it legal. Just because you don't smoke pot, doesn't mean you support the Drug War.

[ChumpDumper]

Why not at the time of the Convention or before?Because you asked.

If you have all that information available for before, during and after, just give it all then.

[Galileo]

Jesus, you checked them all Galileo? SC was the only pro-slavery haven at that point?

Hmm...

It was by far the biggest one. Georgia fell into that catagory as well, but they were very small, not even founded until 1732. They had little clout.

None of the delegates at the Constitutional Convention defended slavery, except three from South Carolina, as far as I know. You can check the record to see if there were others. Dr. Hugh Williamson of North Carolina gave lukewarm support of slavery. Of course, a real racist & defender of slavery would not mince words. Williamson appears to be speaking for his constituents, not his own personal beliefs.

In the First congress, some representatives from Georgia defended slavery, but I'm not sure these were the same people who were at the Convention. Even if they were at the Convention, I'm not sure they said anything at the Convention.

[Winehole23]

We have passed through the furnace and have not been consumed.This.

[Galileo]

Because you asked.

If you have all that information available for before, during and after, just give it all then.

I don't have it all memorized for every delagate.

Some, in the North, owned slaves earlier in their lives, but then gave it up.

Most of the Southern delegates owned slaves. James Madison is one who is usually labeled as a large slave owner. But it is unclear if he owned any slaves until his father died in 1801.

Until that time, Madison's father owned the plantatation, but young James was rarely home. In 1801, Madiosn was the Secretary of State for eight years, and then the President for another eight years. He was busy getting the Lousiana Purchase going, and getting the Lewis & Clark Expidition off the ground, and then was fighting the War of 1812. So Madison did not really own and live on the planatation until he was an old man, when he retired in 1817 at the age of 66.

Not sure what people expected the old geezer to do, as he was still President James Monroe's chief advisor for anther eight years, until 1825, and then he was Andrew Jackson's advisor from 1828 until 1834. Madison was also the Rector of the newly founded University of Virginia after Jefferson died in 1826, and before that, helping Jefferson found it. Madison was also a key delegate at the Virginia Constitutional Convention of 1829/1830, where slavery was debated, and rights for people were expanded, and slave power decreased. Madison's disciples then entered the Virginia state legislature, where another fiery attempt to get rid of slavery, or at least reduce its power ensued in 1832.

By 1834, Madison was 83 years old and ready to kick the bucket, and he died in 1836.

[ChumpDumper]

So Madison did not really own and live on the planatation until he was an old man, when he retired in 1817 at the age of 66.No he really owned the plantation and the slaves on it from 1801 on.

[Galileo]

No he really owned the plantation and the slaves on it from 1801 on.

He did, but he didn't have time to deal with it until 1817. I'm sure you would have rushed back there and let all the slaves go, and left your wife destitute.

[ChumpDumper]

He did, but he didn't have time to deal with it until 1817. I'm sure you would have rushed back there and let all the slaves go, and left your wife destitute.He had about 100 slaves pretty consistently from 1801 on.

Why wouldn't his wife just be with him?

He talked the talk against slavery, he just never walked the walk. He also believed that if blacks were freed, they should live separately from whites.

[Winehole23]

He did, but he didn't have time to deal with it until 1817. I'm sure you would have rushed back there and let all the slaves go, and left your wife destitute.Chumpy is col' blooded. Won't give poor Madison a break. :lol

[ChumpDumper]

I don't think a man who owned 100 slaves could really be considered poor. He didn't even free his slaves upon his death like Washington did.

[Winehole23]

I don't think a man who owned 100 slaves could really be considered poor. He didn't even free his slaves upon his death like Washington did.No, I meant Galileo's hysterical suggestion that you would somehow have Madsion and his family starve for his professed values. That was the *poor Madison* I was referring to.

[ChumpDumper]

I know, I just wanted to drive the point home with the number.

[Galileo]

I don't think a man who owned 100 slaves could really be considered poor. He didn't even free his slaves upon his death like Washington did.

That's because Washington profited from slavery. He died in 1799, when the slave economy was still cookin', so he had enough money to free them. Also, Washington's wife had been the richest women in the United States.

Madison did not profit from slavery like Washington. Madison's plantation lost a lot of money after he inherited it. As I said earlier, Madison was not around to make decisions until 1817. He was busy fighting the Barbary Pirates so the rest of America could enjoy the fruits of free trade in the Mediterrainean Sea. Madison also was supposed to go home in the summer of 1813, but got so sick that he almost died. Dolley Madison nursed him back to health.

Also, Dolley Madison's son (Madison's step-son) was a drunk and a gambler, and Dolley had to constantly bail him out, spending $50,000.

When Madison first inherited his father's estate, Madison was only making $5000 per year as Secretary of State.

Washington also didn't have a wife when he died. Madison did, so he had to leave his stuff to her. Dolley Madison was supposed to free the slaves, but didn't, even though Madison left her Madison's papers, worth $100,000.

The slaves in Haiti got freed back in 1809, how they doin' now?

[Galileo]

He had about 100 slaves pretty consistently from 1801 on.

Why wouldn't his wife just be with him?

He talked the talk against slavery, he just never walked the walk. He also believed that if blacks were freed, they should live separately from whites.

That's liberal bullshit.

[Galileo]

:wow

You do know that many prominent wealthy white people chose not to own slaves, even though it was allowed. Were they disobeying the law?

Yes, it was illegal to free slaves at that time.

[ChumpDumper]

That's because Washington profited from slavery. He died in 1799, when the slave economy was still cookin', so he had enough money to free them. Also, Washington's wife had been the richest women in the United States.

Madison did not profit from slavery like Washington. Madison's plantation lost a lot of money after he inherited it. As I said earlier, Madison was not around to make decisions until 1817. He was busy fighting the Barbary Pirates so the rest of America could enjoy the fruits of free trade in the Mediterrainean Sea. Madison also was supposed to go home in the summer of 1813, but got so sick that he almost died. Dolley Madison nursed him back to health.

Also, Dolley Madison's son (Madison's step-son) was a drunk and a gambler, and Dolley had to constantly bail him out, spending $50,000.

When Madison first inherited his father's estate, Madison was only making $5000 per year as Secretary of State.

Washington also didn't have a wife when he died. Madison did, so he had to leave his stuff to her. Dolley Madison was supposed to free the slaves, but didn't, even though Madison left her Madison's papers, worth $100,000.So basically what you are saying is that Madison sold out his antislavery beliefs for money.

I completely agree.


The slaves in Haiti got freed back in 1809, how they doin' now?So basically what you are saying is that Haitians would be better of if they were still slaves.

I completely disagree.

[ChumpDumper]

That's liberal bullshit.They are matters of fact -- and as such very much true.

You are trying to make excuses for his not practicing what he preached. That is bullshit.

[Galileo]

No, I meant Galileo's hysterical suggestion that you would somehow have Madsion and his family starve for his professed values. That was the *poor Madison* I was referring to.

Actually, Dolly Madison almost starved to death, after James died. Paul Jennings a former slave who had been freed by the Madison's, gave Dolly food and money so she would not starve to death. This is even though Dolly had once owned Paul Jennings.

As I said before, James Madison almost bankrupted himself, trying to support 100 slaves, 2/3 of whom were too old, too young or too infirm to work.

Madison, unlike Jefferson, was not an extravangant spender, so you cannot blame Madison for what happened.

Will of President Madison

I, James Madison of Orange County do make this my last will and testament, hereby revoking all wills by me heretofore made.

http://www.jamesmadisonmus.org/textpages/will.htm

[ChumpDumper]

When Madison first inherited his father's estate, Madison was only making $5000 per year as Secretary of State.That's over $60,000 in today's money.

Add that to his land, slaves and plantation income and cry me a river about his finances.

[Galileo]

So basically what you are saying is that Madison sold out his antislavery beliefs for money.

I completely agree.

So basically what you are saying is that Haitians would be better of if they were still slaves.

I completely disagree.

That's neocon bullshit.

[ChumpDumper]

Actually, Dolly Madison almost starved to death, after James died. Paul Jennings a former slave who had been freed by the Madison's, gave Dolly food and money so she would not starve to death. This is even though Dolly had once owned Paul Jennings.

As I said before, James Madison almost bankrupted himself, trying to support 100 slaves, 2/3 of whom were too old, too young or too infirm to work.

Madison, unlike Jefferson, was not an extravangant spender, so you cannot blame Madison for what happened.

Will of President Madison

I, James Madison of Orange County do make this my last will and testament, hereby revoking all wills by me heretofore made.

http://www.jamesmadisonmus.org/textpages/will.htmLooks like he was impressively far from bankrupt, but thanks for including the tidbit that he wanted to leave money to an organization he founded that was dedicated to getting freed blacks shipped out of the settled states. It helps to prove my contention he didn't believe free blacks and whites couldn't or shouldn't live together in the US.

He did many great things in his life, but he was not without flaws.

[Galileo]

Looks like he was impressively far from bankrupt, but thanks for including the tidbit that he wanted to leave money to an organization he founded that was dedicated to getting freed blacks shipped out of the settled states.

So you oppose freeing the slaves now? Do you have something against Liberia? Oh, that's right, they don't have the U.S. Constitution there.

[ChumpDumper]

So you oppose freeing the slaves now?No. It was Madison who was opposed to freeing his own slaves.
Do you have something against Liberia?I have something against the belief that free blacks and whites cannot live together in the US and must be separated.

I did not found an organization dedicated to that end.

Madison did.

[Galileo]

No. It was Madison who was opposed to freeing his own slaves.I have something against the belief that free blacks and whites cannot live together in the US and must be separated.

I did not found an organization dedicated to that end.

Madison did.

Madison was in favor of freeing his slaves, but after he died, Dolly was in charge of evereything.

Paul Jennings:

"Mr. Madison, I think, was one of the best men that ever lived. I never saw him in a passion, and never knew him to strike a slave, although he had over one hundred; neither would he allow an overseer to do it. Whenever any slaves were reported to him as stealing or "cutting up" badly, he would send for them and admonish them privately, and never mortify them by doing it before others. They generally served him very faithfully."

http://docsouth.unc.edu/neh/jennings/jennings.html

[ChumpDumper]

Madison was in favor of freeing his slaves, but after he died, Dolly was in charge of evereything.When Madison himself was alive and in charge, he was not in favor of freeing his slaves. Otherwise, he would have freed his slaves.

[Galileo]

When Madison himself was alive and in charge, he was not in favor of freeing his slaves. Otherwise, he would have freed his slaves.

It wasn't legal to do it at that time. They would have been tracked and hunted down by evil slave hunters.

Attacks on James Madison & the Constitution are just a clever way to apolgize for the racist war on drugs and the racist war on terror.

You are a racist.

[ChumpDumper]

It wasn't legal to do it at that time. They would have been tracked and hunted down by evil slave hunters.He sold one of his slaves to a person in Pennsylvania, where in a matter of years he was set free along with all slaves in that state. Madison could have done that with other slaves, even if the law you say existed at the time actually did exist. The law I saw from 1669 required that freed slaves be deported from the state, which we all know Madison fully supported.


Attacks on James Madison & the Constitution are just a clever way to apolgize for the racist war on drugs and the racist war on terror.

You are a racist.Nah, it has nothing to do with either. It simply has to do with getting some facts straight.

[Wild Cobra]

He did, but he didn't have time to deal with it until 1817. I'm sure you would have rushed back there and let all the slaves go, and left your wife destitute.
I think people miss one fundamental thing about slavery.

Slavery was the norm for some states. It is likely that nearly all wealthy people had slaves weather the agreed with slavery or not. The difference is how they treated the slaves.

Look at it this way. Someone who didn't agree with owning another person could have them anyway to keep them out of the clutches of someone who treated them as nothing more than property. There were n o free slaves in the south. Not owning some would mean they would go to someone who treated them like animals.

[ChumpDumper]

I think people miss one fundamental thing about slavery.

Slavery was the norm for some states. It is likely that nearly all wealthy people had slaves weather the agreed with slavery or not. The difference is how they treated the slaves.

Look at it this way. Someone who didn't agree with owning another person could have them anyway to keep them out of the clutches of someone who treated them as nothing more than property. There were n o free slaves in the south. Not owning some would mean they would go to someone who treated them like animals.Nice paternalism.

They could have been freed and deported.

[Galileo]

Nice paternalism.

They could have been freed and deported.

You just said you opposed deportation. You are a hypocrite AND a racist.

:nope

[ChumpDumper]

You just said you opposed deportation. You are a hypocrite AND a racist.

:nopeI never said I opposed deportation per se; I opposed the thinking that it was the only possible outcome of freeing slaves, and the only course of action that could be taken since people like Madison thought free blacks and whites could not live together in the US. Madison didn't free any of his slaves, even though he could have done so and legally deport them to a northern state.

If, in fact, it was the only option open to Madison after he hypothetically freed his slaves, then it proves your contention that freeing his slaves would have been completely illegal is completely wrong.

[Galileo]

'A Glorious Liberty Document'
Frederick Douglass' case for an anti-slavery Constitution
http://reason.com/archives/2006/10/01/a-glorious-liberty-document

[Galileo]

The Changing View of Frederick Douglass
http://www.ocic.k12.ok.us/SMASH_Resources_files/Less-Was%20Const%20Pro-Slavery%3F.pdf

[Galileo]

I never said I opposed deportation per se; I opposed the thinking that it was the only possible outcome of freeing slaves, and the only course of action that could be taken since people like Madison thought free blacks and whites could not live together in the US. Madison didn't free any of his slaves, even though he could have done so and legally deport them to a northern state.

If, in fact, it was the only option open to Madison after he hypothetically freed his slaves, then it proves your contention that freeing his slaves would have been completely illegal is completely wrong.

slavery was legal in 1836/

In 1812, James Madison invaded Canada, in an attempt add free states to the Union, so the slaves could be freed. 5 new states would have been added; Upper Canada, Lower Canada, New Brunswick, Novia Scotia, and Newfoundland. But the invasion was botched.

In 1829, at the Virginia Constitutional Convention, Madison pushed through changes that allowed poor whites (who didn't own slaves) to vote, and reduced slave power by giving less weight to slaves for puposes of seating the legislature.

Then, in 1832, Madison sent his people & elected representatives into the Virginia legislature. They tried to end slavery in Virginia, but that didn't work either. I was a real fight.

Madison went the extra mile to help free all the slaves.

[ChumpDumper]

slavery was legal in 1836/

In 1812, James Madison invaded Canada, in an attempt add free states to the Union, so the slaves could be freed. 5 new states would have been added; Upper Canada, Lower Canada, New Brunswick, Novia Scotia, and Newfoundland. But the invasion was botched.

In 1829, at the Virginia Constitutional Convention, Madison pushed through changes that allowed poor whites (who didn't own slaves) to vote, and reduced slave power by giving less weight to slaves for puposes of seating the legislature.

Then, in 1832, Madison sent his people & elected representatives into the Virginia legislature. They tried to end slavery in Virginia, but that didn't work either. I was a real fight.

Madison went the extra mile to help free all the slaves.Except actually freeing his own slaves.

[iggypop123]

just cause 1808 ended slave trade that didnt mean it stopped. black markets no pun intended

[Wild Cobra]

just cause 1808 ended slave trade that didnt mean it stopped. black markets no pun intended
Maybe that's where the term came from?

[angrydude]

When Madison himself was alive and in charge, he was not in favor of freeing his slaves. Otherwise, he would have freed his slaves.

slaves weren't freed in the constitution because there was no guarantee there would be a constitution.

the anti-slave ppl thought it'd be better to have a country where the possibility of freeing the slaves would remain an option rather than not having a country at which time there would be no chance of freeing the slaves at all.

[The Franchise]

I think people miss one fundamental thing about slavery.

Slavery was the norm for some states. It is likely that nearly all wealthy people had slaves weather the agreed with slavery or not. The difference is how they treated the slaves.

Look at it this way. Someone who didn't agree with owning another person could have them anyway to keep them out of the clutches of someone who treated them as nothing more than property. There were n o free slaves in the south. Not owning some would mean they would go to someone who treated them like animals.

OUCH!!! My head hurts. How do you come up with this shit? :lol

[Galileo]

OUCH!!! My head hurts. How do you come up with this shit? :lol

Wild Cobra is pretty much of a jaggoff, but what he just said is basically sad, but true.

I have studied the life of James Madison in detail, including his relation to slavery, and the one thing that slaves feared most was being sold to the cotton fields of the deep south, were they were beaten on a regular basis and were always outside, plus split up from their families.

Upper south slaves were terrified at being sent south. The fact is, the slaves and the slaveowners both agreed that keeping them in the Upper South was humane. In the upper south, slavery was expected to end.

Also note that upper south slavery was dying and unproductive economically, while deep south slavery was getting worse. The Upper south slave owners who were losing money supporting slaves HAD A VERY STRONG ECONOMIC INCENTIVE to just say "fuck it", and sell their slaves south.

[Galileo]

Except actually freeing his own slaves.

In 1732, James Madison's grandfather Ambrose was poisoned to death by slaves.

[MannyIsGod]

Tell me - how did the founding fathers react to women's equal rights? Perhaps you can shed some light on why Abigail Adams was refuted so hard.

The founding fathers were no smarter than many of the philosphers writing about the ideas that went into our documents at the time and while those ideas were emerging they were still fucking twisted. Rousseau anyone?

[ChumpDumper]

In 1732, James Madison's grandfather Ambrose was poisoned to death by slaves.So there was even more incentive for James to sell his slaves.

[Galileo]

Tell me - how did the founding fathers react to women's equal rights? Perhaps you can shed some light on why Abigail Adams was refuted so hard.

The founding fathers were no smarter than many of the philosphers writing about the ideas that went into our documents at the time and while those ideas were emerging they were still fucking twisted. Rousseau anyone?

Very well.

In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson wrote; "all men are created equal..."

But his best buddy Madison, in promotion of women's rights, changed the Preamble of the Constitution to say; 'We the PEOPLE...."

James Madison was the second smartest man who ever lived.

[Galileo]

So there was even more incentive for James to sell his slaves.

you're stretching.

[ChumpDumper]

you're stretching.You're the one who brought it up for no reason.

[Galileo]

You're the one who brought it up for no reason.

Madison didn't hold grudges against black people or slaves. Most people would hold grudges like that if their grandfather was murdered. Madison's grandmother even lived to tell young James about it, as James was 10 years old when his grannie died.

FACTOID

James Madison's grandmother was the sister of Zachery Taylor's grandfather.

[ChumpDumper]

Madison didn't hold grudges against black people or slaves. Most people would hold grudges like that if their grandfather was murdered. Madison's grandmother even lived to tell young James about it, as James was 10 years old when his grannie died.So he didn't free one of his slaves because he didn't hold grudges.

James Madison didn't free any of his slaves.

[Galileo]

So he didn't free one of his slaves because he didn't hold grudges.

James Madison didn't free any of his slaves.

Dolly Madison was supposed to free the slaves. But she didn't because she wasted the family fortune, $50,000, on her son, the gambler and drunkard.

Also, Madiosn did not live near the border like Washington. Washington lived on the Maryland border so it was easier to free them. Madison lived in the heart of Virginia, and his wife was still alive, unlike Washington's.

Also, crop prices were way down and the soil was depleted by 1836, Washington died in 1799.

Madison had 100 slaves, but 2/3rds of them were too old, too young, or too sick to free, they could not survive on their own. So he had about 30 healthy slaves. But half were women, many of them pregnant, so he had only 15 able bodied men to grow the crops. So if he freed those 15 men, then the rest of the 85 slaves would starve to death. Woman couldn't be out alone in society in those days without a man.

In 1787, Madison wrote the Virginia Plan at the Constitutional Convention. In it, he did not have the 3/5th rule, that was put in later against his wishes and votes.

Madison also put in a provision for the federal government to nullify state laws. That would have been used to outlaw slavery. But Madison was again outvoted. Then he tried to get the provision put in at the end of the Convention, to no avail.

Then when James Madison wrote the Bill-of-Rights, a bill, that protects all people, he tried to get hs provision for the feds to outlaw state laws again, he put it in the Bill-of-Rights.

But again, it was taken out in committee.

Madison did everything humanly possible to end slavery. He was a divine man, an angel.

[ChumpDumper]

Madison did everything humanly possible to end slavery.Except free his own slaves.

[Galileo]

Except free his own slaves.

James Madison Bell made up for it.

[ChumpDumper]

We aren't talking about James Madison Bell.

We're talking about James Madison.

James Madison didn't do everything humanly possible to end slavery because he didn't free his own slaves.

[Galileo]

We aren't talking about James Madison Bell.

We're talking about James Madison.

James Madison didn't do everything humanly possible to end slavery because he didn't free his own slaves.

Madison opposed Jim Crow laws. He was protecting his friends from Jim Crow laws.

[ChumpDumper]

James Madison didn't free his own slaves. Nothing you've posted changes that fact.

[Galileo]

James Madison didn't free his own slaves. Nothing you've posted changes that fact.

He died before he got a chance to do it.

[ChumpDumper]

James Madison could have freed his slaves at any time during the 35 years he owned them.

He didn't.

He could have freed them upon his death.

He didn't.

James Madison never freed any of his slaves.

[MannyIsGod]

He died before he got a chance to do it.

Oh shit. :lmao

The forum is so fucking good today.

[Winehole23]

He was a divine man, an angel.I wasn't aware people reverenced the founding fathers as holy men. That's a brand new one on me.

[Galileo]

I wasn't aware people reverenced the founding fathers as holy men. That's a brand new one on me.

Not all the Founding Fathers were holy.

But one was, James Madison, a divine man who walked on water, an angel living in our midst, a God-inspired law-giver who has granted us liberty.

[ChumpDumper]

James Madison didn't grant his slaves liberty.

[Galileo]

James Madison didn't grant his slaves liberty.

Liberty is a natrual right, from God, not an artificial right, created by man.

[ChumpDumper]

Liberty is a natrual right, from God, not an artificial right, created by man.So James Madison didn't grant us liberty either.

[Galileo]

So James Madison didn't grant us liberty either.

Madison granted us liberty. It was his idea, in the Virginia Plan, to set up a reasonable way to amend the Constitution (unlike the Articles of Confederation).

The 13th amendment freed the slaves, as Madison wished.

[ChumpDumper]

Madison granted us liberty. It was his idea, in the Virginia Plan, to set up a reasonable way to amend the Constitution (unlike the Articles of Confederation).

The 13th amendment freed the slaves, as Madison wished.You just said man can't grant us liberty.

So Madison didn't grant us liberty.

He certainly didn't grant liberty to any of his slaves.

[Galileo]

You just said man can't grant us liberty.

So Madison didn't grant us liberty.

He certainly didn't grant liberty to any of his slaves.

He freed some of his slaves. Dolly Madison was supposed to free the rest of them.

[ChumpDumper]

He freed none of his slaves. He sold one to a person in a state where slavery was scheduled to end in a few years, but he never directly freed any of his slaves. He died with about 100, roughly the same number he started out with 35 years earlier.

James Madison never freed any of his slaves. It will forever be a blight on his otherwise mostly distinguished history.

[SpurNation]

I love it how some people look past the intention of somebody no matter how difficult the situation may have been at the time just to try and discredit them for anything good they may have been attempting to do.

We didn't live back in that time...the goals were probably so far reaching that the everyday person couldn't comprehend or accept what might have been thought would never change.

Much like Columbus proving the world wasn't flat.

[Winehole23]

a God-inspired law-giver who has granted us liberty.This is totally overblown IMO, particularly the granted us liberty part, but I think I know what you mean. You like Madison, you treasure his influence and contribution to our history, and you consider him to be God-inspired. Fine.

If Madison was no angel himself, maybe there was an angel in his vicinity at some point. I can handle that, G.

[ChumpDumper]

I love it how some people look past the intention of somebody no matter how difficult the situation may have been at the time just to try and discredit them for anything good they may have been attempting to do.I give full credit for all the good Madison did.

That doesn't change or excuse the fact that he owned 100 human beings and never freed any of them. Why is this such a problem for you to acknowledge?

[Galileo]

He freed none of his slaves. He sold one to a person in a state where slavery was scheduled to end in a few years, but he never directly freed any of his slaves. He died with about 100, roughly the same number he started out with 35 years earlier.

James Madison never freed any of his slaves. It will forever be a blight on his otherwise mostly distinguished history.

Madison never bought any slaves. He opposed that. There can't be any slavery without slave buyers.

[Winehole23]

Liberty is a natrual right, from God, not an artificial right, created by man.In principle, perhaps.

In practice liberty is an artificial right, created and enforced by states, and contingent upon the state's recognition and the vigilance of the people for its continued survival.

[ChumpDumper]

Madison never bought any slaves. He opposed that. There can't be any slavery without slave buyers.Madison owned 100 slaves.

Madison never freed any of his slaves.

There was slavery on Madison's plantation because Madison owned other human beings -- human beings he never freed.

[Winehole23]

So basically what you are saying is that Haitians would be better of if they were still slaves.http://www.independent.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00172/The_Black_Jacobins_172652s.jpg

[Winehole23]

I would put Dr. Williams in first place, but now I am quibbling with the blurb.



Despite being a commie, CLR James wrote a dam fine book about the Haitian Revolution.

Haiti was the second free republic in the New World, and the only politically successful slave revolt anywhere that I am aware of. Survived the invading armies of France, Spain and England successively.

[Winehole23]

Toussaint L'Ouverture was their George Washington.

A very impressive man.

[exstatic]

Oh shit. :lmao

The forum is so fucking good today.

Kinda fun to watch CD tap dance all over G. :lol

[MannyIsGod]

I love it how some people look past the intention of somebody no matter how difficult the situation may have been at the time just to try and discredit them for anything good they may have been attempting to do.

We didn't live back in that time...the goals were probably so far reaching that the everyday person couldn't comprehend or accept what might have been thought would never change.

Much like Columbus proving the world wasn't flat.

:lol Columbus didn't prove the world wasn't flat.

[ChumpDumper]

Why do you hate Christopher Columbus?

[Galileo]

Madison owned 100 slaves.

Madison never freed any of his slaves.

There was slavery on Madison's plantation because Madison owned other human beings -- human beings he never freed.

What didya think Madison was gonna do? His mom was born, lived and grew up on the plantation. She lived to be 97 years old, she died in 1829. By that time, Madison was almost 80 and in bad health.

That's why he left his papers, including his notes from the Constitutional Convention to Dolley when he died in 1836. The papers were worth over $100,000.

Dolley was supposed to use some of that that money to free the slaves. Remember, Madison was supporting 2/3 of the slaves. 2/3 of the slaves were too old, too young, or too infirm to do much work. Of the remaining 1/3, half were women who were pregnant half the time, or taking care of kids. Madison's plantation was not profitable. The soil was depleted from growing tobacco, which depletes soil quickly. Western lands were producing many crops, driving down prices.

James Madison did the best he could.

He wrote the first draft of the US Constitution, the Virginia Plan, and was the Father of the Constitution, securing our liberty.

He wrote the Bill-of-Rights, securing our liberty. Madison's Bill-of-Rights was the first one in history to be legally enforcible, and was the most comprehensive.

He co-wrote the Federalist Papers, the greatest commentary ever on the Constitution, preventing later generations from twisting the text of the Constitution.

Madison wrote Federalist # 10, the most famous Federalist Paper, and the most famous political essay in American history. This regarded the nature of factions in government.

Madison, along with Jefferson, are the two most quotable Founding Fathers. For great quotes on liberty, they have no peer. For great quotes on the nature of government, Madison has no peer in world history.

Madison organized the Constitutional Convention of 1787. He secured ratification in the key states of New York and Virginia.

Madison took the only detailed notes of the Constitutional Convention. Because of Madison, we know exactly what the Founding Fathers were thinking when they wrote the Constitution. The US Constitution is the only Constitution in history with detailed notes like this extant.

He wrote the 1st draft of Washington's Farewell Address, the most significant statement of foreign policy in US history.

He wrote the 1st draft of the Monroe doctrine (1823), the most influential foreign policy statement of all time.

He won Marbury vs Madison, the most important Supreme Court case of all time, establishing judicail review.

He orchestrated Thomas Jefferson's election to president in 1800, known as the Revolution of 1800.

He helped orchestrate the Louisiana Purchase and Lewis & Clark expedition as Secretary of State under Thomas Jefferson.

He was the Commander-in-Chief during the War of 1812, the war that secured our economic liberty by opening up the Great Lakes, Atlantic ocean, Mississippi river, Gulf of Mexicao, and the West Indies to free trade, free from British interference. He did this while also following th Constitution. All future presidents violated the Constitution during war and used war propaganda. Not Madison.

Madison, while in the Virginia legislatue, in 1776 (age only 25), helped write the Virginia Declaration of Rights, and wrote the clause on religious freedom, the strongest clause ever written.

10 years later, Madison pushed the Virginia statute on religious freedom (written by Jefferson) through the legislature, while Jefferson was in Europe. This was the first statute of its kind on religious liberty in history.

Madison & Jefferson, in retirement, founded the University of Virginia, the first university in the United States not founded by a church.

In 1829, Madison again attended the Virginia Constitutional Convention, and pushed for changes that allowed more democracy and less slavery. Following this, in 1832, Madison's friends in the Virginia legislature pushed for the emancipation of the slaves.

In 1774, Madison was elected to the Virginia Committee on safety, to supply the coming revolution. Although too sickly to be a soldier, he still was commissioned as a colonel, trained in military drills, and marched with the militia. He was at the center of the revolution in Virginia through 1779, then he was elected to the Contitental congress. He was the youngest man there, age 28.

From 1780 to 1783, during the end to the war and the Peace Treay negotitiations, Madison emerged as the LEADER of the Continental congress. He wrote state papers and never once, MISSED A SINGLE DAY of work, then only man to do this.

Madison also organized and attended the influential Annapolis Convention of 1786, the forerunner to the Constitutional Convention.

He also organized the Mount Vernon Conference, the forerunner to the Annaoplis Convention.

Madison learned to read French, Spanish, Italian, ancient Greek, and Latin when he was 8 years old. He was very smart.

Madison wrote the Virgina Resolution on 1798, the most eloquent and balanced statement of states rights ever written.

He also wrote the Report of 1800, the 2nd most important staement on state's rights and the most important essay ever on freedom of the press.
Madison did all this for your liberty, and more.

Between 1828 and 1834, Madison, while a very old man, almost single-handidly prevented Civil War. Madison worked with leaders of the North and South, including Andrew Jackson, Henry Clay, and Daniel Webster, to solve the crisis.

Madison was the Leader and most important member of the 1st congress on 1789, in which the first federal laws were written, including setting up all the basic laws of our nation, setting up the court system, etc.

Madison's 2nd cousin was war hero and 12th president Zachery Taylor.

James Madison was modest. He never bragged. And he had the hottest wife with the biggest knockers in Washington DC; Dolley Madison.

Madison has more cities, towns and counties named after him than any other president in history.

James MADISON is the ARCHITECT of the AMERICAN REPUBLIC.

James Madison
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Madison

James Madison Liberty Quotes
http://home.att.net/~midnightflyer/madison.html

[Galileo]

The slaves took over and revolted in Haiti in 1790. They drove the whites off the plantation. Look how fucked up that country is. It has been a cesspool of corruption for 219 years. The per captia gross national product is $300 per year. They have no Constitution. A lot of good freeing the slaves did for them down there.

[ChumpDumper]

What didya think Madison was gonna do?If he was so against slavery, I would think he'd have freed his hundred or so slaves.

[ChumpDumper]

The slaves took over and revolted in Haiti in 1790. They drove the whites off the plantation. Look how fucked up that country is. It has been a cesspool of corruption for 219 years. The per captia gross national product is $300 per year. They have no Constitution. A lot of good freeing the slaves did for them down there.So you are pro slavery now?

I think Madison would be disappointed in you.

And Haiti does have a constitution.

[jman3000]

The slaves took over and revolted in Haiti in 1790. They drove the whites off the plantation. Look how fucked up that country is. It has been a cesspool of corruption for 219 years. The per captia gross national product is $300 per year. They have no Constitution. A lot of good freeing the slaves did for them down there.

From Rouseau's letter to Geneva:

"Peoples once accustomed to masters are not in a condition to do without them. If they attempt to shake off the yoke, they still more estrange themsevles from freedom, as, by misatking for it an unbridled license to which it is diametrically opposed, they nearly always manage, by their revolutions, to hand themselves over to seducers, who only make their chains heavier than before"

[jman3000]

That's not to say slavery is a good thing... but there is something to be said for a gradual transition to freedom as opposed to Haiti's shock treatment. Especially when there is chaos. It's hard for democracy to form from chaos, you usually need an iron fisted ass hole to get things in check and then from there transition.

[xrayzebra]

What a dumbass argument. There are not slaves or former slaves alive
to verify what occured and those that don't like the results of slavery
are now free to travel to whatever country they prefer to live.

I think we now have a half-black man as President.

[ChumpDumper]

What a dumbass argument. There are not slaves or former slaves alive
to verify what occured and those that don't like the results of slavery
are now free to travel to whatever country they prefer to live.:lol

[Galileo]

If he was so against slavery, I would think he'd have freed his hundred or so slaves.

He did not want his wife to be thrown off the plantation. He left her his papers, which she sold for $100,000. That was enough money for her to take care of the slaves and shut down the plantation, and still support herself.

Instead, Dolly wasted money and the slaves suffered.

Dolly Madison was supposed to free the slaves. Some of them were freed.

Instead, they had to wait for the Civil War.

[ChumpDumper]

He did want his wife to be thrown off the plantation. He left her his papers, which she sold for $100,000. That was enough money for her to take care of the slaves and shut down the plantation, and still support herself.

Instead, Dolly wasted money and the slaves suffered.

Dolly Madison was supposed to free the slaves. Some of them were freed.

Instead, they had to wait for the Civil War.Why didn't Madison free any slaves himself?

[Galileo]

Frequently Asked Questions

This FAQ arose out of the June 2007 Montpelier Slave Descendents Reunion hosted by James Madison's Montpelier. If you have any further questions please use our contact form, selecting "Education" as the contact department. Please be aware of our research inquiry policies when you contact us.

Please click on one of the questions, below:

How many enslaved people lived at Montpelier during the Madison period?
Background on the history of slavery at Montpelier.
How many slaves did President James Madison own?
Where did the slaves work and live at Montpelier?
Did President James Madison ever free any of his slaves?
Did any of Madison's slaves run away or ever try to run away?
What do we know about Madison as a slave owner?
What do we know about modern descendants of Montpelier slaves?
What were some of the religious practices of the Montpelier slaves?
How many enslaved people lived at Montpelier during the Madison period?

Ambrose Madison in 1732 had 29 slaves. (Inventory at death.)
James Madison, Sr., in 1801 had 108 slaves. (Inventory at death.)
President James Madison in 1820 had 106 slaves.
President James Madison in 1830 had 97 slaves.

Background on the history of slavery at Montpelier

In 1723 Ambrose Madison and Thomas Chew received a patent for 4,600 acres in the Virginia Piedmont. The plantation was initially named "Mount Pleasant," and the house that came to be known as Montpelier was not actually built until the 1760s. Ambrose sent his slaves and an overseer to develop the land long before his family moved there in 1732. Thus, slaves were probably the first inhabitants of the Madison family estate.

In 1732 Ambrose died as a result of poisoning. Court documents reveal that three slaves were accused of conspiring to murder him, two of which, Dido and Turk, were owned by Ambrose, and the third, Pompey, was leased from a local landowner. Dido was a female slave and the other two were males. All were tried and convicted of murder. Pompey was sentenced to death by hanging. Dido and Turk were sentenced to be whipped and then returned to Mount Pleasant to Ambrose's window, Frances Taylor Madison.

James Madison, Sr., inherited the estate when he came of age, but did not officially take over total management of the plantation until the death of his mother Frances in 1761.

James Madison, Sr., cultivated tobacco as his primary source of economic support, but he added other ventures for profit such as a grist mill, a saw mill, whiskey and brandy distillation, and a blacksmith shop. All of these activities relied on the use of slave labor and probably slave supervision as well. Most of our knowledge about these ventures come from ledger books that James Madison, Sr., kept throughout his ownership of Montpelier (1740s to 1801). Mentions of slaves are mainly confined to accounts of Madison leasing slave labor to other people or acquiring goods or services for his slaves.

According to his inventory, James Madison, Sr., owned 108 slaves in Orange County at the time of his death in 1801.

How many slaves did President James Madison own?

President James Madison, along with his father and grandfather owned slaves at Montpelier. Madison's mother, Nelly Madison, and grandmother, Frances Madison, also owned slaves at Montpelier. The 1820 Census notes the Madison household as having 15 free white persons, 106 enslaved African Americans (54 of which were men and 52 of which were women), and 0 free African Americans. In the 1830s Census, Montpelier is described as having 2 free white males, 56 enslaved men, and 41 enslaved women.

Additional information also suggests that the number of slaves owned by President James Madison fluctuated. This data is drawn from Orange County personal property tax records, which recorded the number of "tithables" or taxable individuals (and items) for which a property owner was responsible. Ill, infirm, aged, juvenile, or injured slaves were not considered productive and were not taxed, nor do they appear in these records. In regard to Madison's personal property taxes, the least number of slaves for whom Madison was taxed was nine, and the most was 66.

Some of the slaves President James Madison owned were sold for financial reasons prior to his death in 1836. Dolley also sold some after his death, and some were included in the sale of Montpelier to Henry Moncure in 1844. Dolley also willed some of the slaves to her relatives.

Where did the slaves work and live at Montpelier?

Under President Madison's father, we know that many enslaved people worked as field laborers, in connection with the family's ironworking business, as skilled carpenters, and as domestics in the main house.

The documentary record had shed very little light on the number and position of outbuildings that surrounded the Montpelier mansion during Madison ownership. As an active plantation, the mansion was at the core of the estate and was flanked by kitchens, slave quarters, smokehouses, barns, and other outbuildings. However, archaeological investigations in the yard between the garden and the mansion have revealed a number of outbuildings that date to the late 18th and early 19th centuries, including a kitchen, a slave quarter, and a possible outbuilding associated with the slave quarter. This portion of the yard was likely the "service" complex for the mansion. Daily activities of the enslaved domestics working and living in this yard would have revolved around preparing the Madison family's meals, laundry, and providing for their own households. An 1837 insurance map further confirms that three residences, each a duplex for two slave families, and two smokehouses once stood in the south yard area.

Slaves who worked in the Madison's household lived in the nearby area known as the "south yard." The yard of these homes, where most of the household activities took place, were in direct sight of the mansion. As a result, the Madisons would have controlled not only the appearance, but also the activities within this space. In Madison's day, all of the buildings in the side yard were shielded from the view of a visitor approaching Montpelier by a row of trees and shrubs. These plantings were placed in this manner to direct attention to the mansion and away from the outbuildings. Within the service yard, a series of stone pathways connected these buildings to each other and the mansion. In addition to the more formal stone pathways, a series of less formal dirt pathways likely connected the services complex to the quarters of the field slaves and wider community beyond the mansion yard.

Archaeological investigations have also found the remains of the Madison plantation farm complex, which served as the hub of the working farm and the home for several generations of field slaves. Included in this area were slave quarters, tobacco barns, an overseer's house, and work yards. Slave quarters for field slaves would have been made of logs, with dirt floors, simple plank shutters to shut out the weather, and chimneys made of sticks and mud. The slaves built the homes themselves, receiving only nails and door hardware from the Madisons. The crude home of the field slaves stand in marked contrast to the much better homes of the house slaves located near the mansion, which included glazed windows, wooden floors, and brick chimneys.

Did President James Madison ever free any of his slaves?

There are no reports that indicate that President James Madison ever freed any of his slaves. However, there are cases in which enslaved African Americans at Montpelier were able to gain their freedom.

Paul Jennings was an enslaved man who served as Madison's body servant in both Washington, D.C., and at Montpelier. The 47-year old Jennings was sold in 1846 by Dolley Madison to cover debts. Daniel Webster subsequently purchased Jennings in 1847, and he made an agreement with Jennings for him to work off his debt at $8 a month until he was fully free. Jennings was a member of the free black population of Washington from 1847 until his death in 1870.

Billey, another enslaved man from Montpelier, also eventually gained his freedom. Billey accompanied President James Madison to the Contintental Congress in 1780. In 1783, Madison wrote to his father to tell him that he was reluctant to bring Billey back to Montpelier. Madison apparently feared that the ideas of equality and freedom that Billey had been exposed to in Philadelphia might lead to dissent among the rest of the slave community at Montpelier. Therefore, Madison sold Billey in Philadelphia, where he was eventually freed after seven years of servitude and took the last name of Gardner.

In general, it appears that Madison did not think slavery was good politically, economically, or morally, and from that perspective he would have liked to have seen it restricted or eliminated. In his view, slavery perpetuated an inefficient system of production that could, ultimately, be detrimental to the future of the nation. Moreover, Madison viewed slavery as "a blot on our republican character." In his personal life, however, Madison continued to own many slaves. He does remind his overseers to treat the slaves with "humanity," but not so much as to make them forget their proper place as slaves. Furthermore, he does request in his will that his slaves not be sold without their consent, contingent upon their good behavior. However, this stipulation later falls second to Dolley's financial needs. In his retirement years as a member and eventually the president of the American Colonization Society, Madison advocated the manumission of slaves, but not so that they could join American society as free citizens. Rather, he preferred that they be freed and relocated away from white society, either in the American west or in Africa. He makes it clear that while he does not endorse slavery in principle or as the base of a system of production, he did not believe blacks could live in harmony with whites, unlike some of his close abolitionist peers and colleagues.

Read more...

http://www.montpelier.org/explore/community/enslaved_faqs.php#manumission

[ChumpDumper]

Did President James Madison ever free any of his slaves?

There are no reports that indicate that President James Madison ever freed any of his slaves.Thanks for driving my point home.

[Galileo]

James Madison
An Eye for Farming

Slavery

Slavery was a Southern tradition and was practiced on the Madison plantation. James Madison’s father owned 118 slaves. Yet, unlike most plantations of the time slaves were treated well by the Madison’s, often being referred to as, “part of the family.” James Madison while growing up played with both black and white children. This is reflected in James Madison’s abhorrence of slavery.

Madison continued his father’s humane treatment of slaves, yet his dependence on them increased. He told one of his overseers, “treat the Negroes with all the humanity and kindness consistent with their necessary subordination and work.”

In his later years Madison believed strongly in the American Colonization Society and gradual abolition of slavery. In his last years he attempted to free his slaves, yet an increasing amount of debt caused him to sell some of them.

http://www.jamesmadisonmus.org/hoa/madison.htm

[Galileo]

Thanks for driving my point home.

Did you read the whole thing, or are U just a cherry-picker?

[ChumpDumper]

James Madison
An Eye for Farming

Slavery

Slavery was a Southern tradition and was practiced on the Madison plantation. James Madison’s father owned 118 slaves. Yet, unlike most plantations of the time slaves were treated well by the Madison’s, often being referred to as, “part of the family.” James Madison while growing up played with both black and white children. This is reflected in James Madison’s abhorrence of slavery.

Madison continued his father’s humane treatment of slaves, yet his dependence on them increased. He told one of his overseers, “treat the Negroes with all the humanity and kindness consistent with their necessary subordination and work.”

In his later years Madison believed strongly in the American Colonization Society and gradual abolition of slavery. In his last years he attempted to free his slaves, yet an increasing amount of debt caused him to sell some of them.

http://www.jamesmadisonmus.org/hoa/madison.htmSo he never freed any slaves because of money?

A real man of principle, that one.

[ChumpDumper]

Did you read the whole thing, or are U just a cherry-picker?I was the first person who linked that website in this thread.

James Madison never freed any of his slaves.

You can try to make excuses for it, but you can never change that fact.

[Galileo]

What was James Madison's view on slavery?

In: Founding Fathers [Edit categories]

Answer

James Madison was strongly opposed to slavery, and believed that it was bad for both the slave and the slave-holder. However, even though he had this view, Madison kept his slaves for his whole life.

Answer

Another of my wishes is to depend as little as possible on the labour of slaves.

-- James Madison, Letter to R. H. Lee, July 17, 1785 (Madison, 1865, I, page 161)

[W]e must deny the fact, that slaves are considered merely as property, and in no respect whatever as persons. The true state of the case is, that they partake of both these qualities: being considered by our laws, in some respects, as persons, and in other respects as property. In being compelled to labor, not for himself, but for a master; in being vendible by one master to another master; and in being subject at all times to be restrained in his liberty and chastised in his body, by the capricious will of another, the slave may appear to be degraded from the human rank, and classed with those irrational animals which fall under the legal denomination of property. In being protected, on the other hand, in his life and in his limbs, against the violence of all others, even the master of his labor and his liberty; and in being punishable himself for all violence committed against others, the slave is no less evidently regarded by the law as a member of the society, not as a part of the irrational creation; as a moral person, not as a mere article of property.

-- James Madison, Federalist, no. 54

American citizens are instrumental in carrying on a traffic in enslaved Africans, equally in violation of the laws of humanity and in defiance of those of their own country. The same just and benevolent motives which produced interdiction in force against this criminal conduct will doubtless be felt by Congress in devising further means of suppressing the evil.

-- James Madison, State of the Union,1810

It is due to justice; due to humanity; due to truth; due to the sympathies of our nature; in fine, to our character as a people, both abroad and at home, that they should be considered, as much as possible, in the light of human beings, and not as mere property.

As such, they are acted on by our laws, and have an interest in our laws. They may be considered as making a part, though a degraded part, of the families to which they belong.

-- James Madison, Speech in the Virginia State Convention of 1829-30, on the Question of the Ratio of Representation in the two Branches of the Legislature, December 2, 1829.

Outlets for the freed blacks are alone wanted for the erasure of the blot from our Republican character.

-- James Madison, Letter to General La Fayette, February 1, 1830.

f slavery, as a national evil, is to be abolished, and it be just that it be done at the national expense, the amount of the expense is not a paramount consideration.

[I]-- James Madison, Letter to Robert J. Evans

In contemplating the pecuniary resources needed for the removal of such a number to so great a distance [freed slaves to Africa], my thoughts and hopes have long been turned to the rich fund presented in the western lands of the nation . . ."

-- James Madison, Letter to R. R. Gurley, December 28, 1831.

"[The Convention] thought it wrong to admit in the Constitution the idea that there could be property in men."

We have seen the mere distinction of color made in the most enlightened period of time, a ground of the most oppressive dominion ever exercised by man over man."

-- James Madison, speech at the Constitutional Convention, June 6, 1787

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_was_James_Madison's_view_on_slavery

[ChumpDumper]

James Madison never freed any of his slaves.

[Galileo]

I was the first person who linked that website in this thread.

James Madison never freed any of his slaves.

You can try to make excuses for it, but you can never change that fact.

He never bought any slaves either, so we are even.

[ChumpDumper]

He never bought any slaves either, so we are even.He didn't need to.

He had 100 of them.

And never freed one of them.

[Galileo]

Descendants of Madison's slave to tour White House

By Kristin E. Holmes

Inquirer Staff Writer

Five generations separate Elsie Styles-Harrison of Malvern and the ancestor who served as a slave in the White House.

In the years between them, Paul Jennings, the property of President James Madison, became the subject of a passing reference. He had something to do with an attempted slave escape, an aunt mentioned to Styles-Harrison decades ago.

It wasn't until she got her first computer that Styles-Harrison discovered the historic importance of her great-great-great-grandfather.

Jennings, she learned, is credited with writing the first documented memoir of an insider living in the White House. And he was likely among those who saved the portrait of George Washington during the War of 1812.

Today, Styles-Harrison and dozens of Jennings descendants will tour the White House, where they will view the famous Gilbert Stuart portrait of Washington.

"We are living in a day when we have a black president in the White House," said Styles-Harrison, 79, a retired administrative assistant and former Philadelphia police officer. "And it's the result of all the unsung work of the heroes who came before him."

Nearly two centuries ago, Styles-Harrison's ancestor walked into the White House as a 10-year-old slave. Born in 1799 at Montpelier, the Madison family plantation, Jennings was the son of an English trader and a slave woman who was part American Indian. Jennings was a footman, serving dinner, aiding the coachman, and acting as a messenger, said Beth Taylor, director of education at Montpelier, who is writing a book about Jennings.

"When you came onto [Montpelier] during Madison's time, you would see five white faces and about 100 black faces," Taylor said. "We know a lot about the white people who lived here but very little about the black people. We want to tell the authentic history."

Taylor organized today's White House tour. President Obama and his family are away on vacation.

Efforts such as Taylor's book and the President's House project on Independence Mall are part of a growing movement to include the lives of slaves in "the public narrative," said historian Michael R. Winston, emeritus vice president for academic affairs at Howard University. This would add to earlier works pioneered by black scholars, said Winston, who has written about Jennings for the White House Historical Association.

"We are in some ways reaching a point where the difficult parts of our history are being approached," he said, "and that's a good thing."

Lisa Collins, Styles-Harrison's daughter, called it a sign that people - black and white - are now able to get beyond the shame of having slavery in their family tree.

In 1865, Jennings' account of his life as a slave was published. A Colored Man's Reminiscences of James Madison gave a glimpse into the White House.

Jennings warmly discussed his masters. He recounted being with Madison when the former president was dying. He wrote of giving Dolley Madison a few "sums from my own pocket" when she was poverty-stricken after her husband's death. By then, Jennings had purchased his freedom with the help of Daniel Webster.

The memoir also recounted the scurry of activity in the White House as the British approached Washington after winning the Battle of Bladensburg. They captured the city and set many public buildings on fire, including the White House. But before they arrived, Jennings was among those who helped spirit away the portrait of Washington, which still hangs in the White House, Taylor said.

Dolley Madison is given most of the credit, although Jennings wrote that she hadn't taken down the portrait. He credited other servants for taking it down, but historians say Dolley Madison instructed her servants to do it.

Once a free man, Jennings built a life for himself and his wife, Fanny. They had five children.

In 1848, Jennings secretly helped organize an attempted escape of more than 70 slaves from Washington on a boat called the Pearl. An informant foiled the plan. The slaves were returned to their masters, and many were sold away.

"I feel like he was fighting back then, and I'm living in the times he fought for," said William McNally, 22, Styles-Harrison's grandson. "I'm so proud of it."

Jennings went on to work in a job with the federal government, and purchased two homes in Washington. He died in 1874.

Members of the Jennings family met for a reunion this year at Montpelier. Styles-Harrison walked into a cellar where plantation artifacts were displayed. There, she saw pieces of a yellow mixing bowl identical to one that had been handed down to her.

"I almost fell out on the floor," Styles-Harrison said.

Today she, along with Collins, will walk the halls of the White House with her family to view the portrait that her ancestor helped preserve.

The date is significant. The life-size depiction of Washington was saved from the British on Aug. 24, 1814.

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/home_top_stories/20090824_Descendants_of_Madison_s_slave_to_tour_Wh ite_House.html

I noticed that Obama, who comes from a slave-holding family, left town before this event. I guess he didn't want to be seen with the Madison kin.

Ironically, James Madison and Barack Obama are distant cousins.

[Galileo]

James Madison:

"But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature?

If men were angels, no government would be necessary.

If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.

In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.

A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions."

The Federalist No. 51
The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments
Independent Journal
Wednesday, February 6, 1788
[James Madison]
To the People of the State of New York:
http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa51.htm

[Galileo]

He didn't need to.

He had 100 of them.

And never freed one of them.

He tried to. They had a law that said all freed blacks had to leave the state. But when Virginia passed that, then all the border states passed the same laws.

Madison served in the Viginia legislature three times; 1776-1777, 1784-1786, and 1798-1800.

Interesting, but this anti-slave law was passed in around 1806, not long after Madison went to Washington DC to become Secretary of State.

[Galileo]

He didn't need to.

He had 100 of them.

And never freed one of them.

He only had only a few able-bodied males, he was in need of more slaves. But he resisted the temptation.

[ChumpDumper]

He only had only a few able-bodied males, he was in need of more slaves. But he resisted the temptation.You'll have to give me a link to how many able bodied males he had out of 100.

He still never freed any slaves.

[ChumpDumper]

He tried to. They had a law that said all freed blacks had to leave the state. But when Virginia passed that, then all the border states passed the same laws.

Madison served in the Viginia legislature three times; 1776-1777, 1784-1786, and 1798-1800.

Interesting, but this anti-slave law was passed in around 1806, not long after Madison went to Washington DC to become Secretary of State.So he could have freed the slaves, who then would only have to have left the state in which they had been enslaved.

And still James Madison never freed even one slave.

[Galileo]

You'll have to give me a link to how many able bodied males he had out of 100.

He still never freed any slaves.

About 1/6 were able bodied males. 2/3 were old, young, sick, or physically disabled. Of those, half were women.

1/6 of 100 is only about 17 for a giant plantation. Not enough. If he had bought more slaves, he might have turned a profit, but then of course, you'd be bitching about that.

That might even be too high, as usually about 10% of a given population is fit for the army.

[ChumpDumper]

About 1/6 were able bodied males. 2/3 were old, young, sick, or physically disabled. Of those, half were women.

1/6 of 100 is only about 17 for a giant plantation. Not enough. If he had bought more slaves, he might have turned a profit, but then of course, you'd be bitching about that.

That might even be too high, as usually about 10% of a given population is fit for the army.So he could have freed any number of slaves.

But he never freed even one slave.

[Galileo]

So he could have freed the slaves, who then would only have to have left the state in which they had been enslaved.

And still James Madison never freed even one slave.

He couldn't free the old slaves, because they were too old to work. The young slaves were too young to work. The disabled slaves could not work either.

So the only slaves who could survive oj their own in a cruel world, were exactly the sames slaves who could work the plantation.

But if he fred those slaves, the rest of the old and sick slaves would die of starvation. You don't want that to happen, do you?

[ChumpDumper]

He couldn't free the old slaves, because they were too old to work. The young slaves were too young to work. The disabled slaves could not work either.

So the only slaves who could survive oj their own in a cruel world, were exactly the sames slaves who could work the plantation.

But if he fred those slaves, the rest of the old and sick slaves would die of starvation. You don't want that to happen, do you?How do you know they were all incapable of living free? Washington freed all his slaves upon his death -- I haven't read about any of them immediately dying.

How very paternalistic of you.

You are saying you would rather live as a slave than die free. I don't want to hear you whining about the government or freedom again.

And the reason he never freed "useful" slaves is because he thought he could make money off of them.

James Madison owned about 100 human beings and never freed any of them.

[Galileo]

So he could have freed any number of slaves.

But he never freed even one slave.

He was waiting for the Civil War to break out.

:lmao

[ChumpDumper]

No, he was merely hoping to make some money off of the human being he owned.

[Galileo]

No, he was merely hoping to make some money off of the human being he owned.

Wrong, he was losing money. The plantation was a net loser. Madison kept it going, just so he could help the slaves. He protected them from the slave-hunters.

[ChumpDumper]

Wrong, he was losing money. The plantation was a net loser. Madison kept it going, just so he could help the slaves. He protected them from the slave-hunters.So he could have just sold the plantation, freed the slaves and given them some money to start there new lives as freed slaves in the north.

But he didn't.

Instead, he kept them enslaved in an attempt to make money off of them on the plantation. It's not their fault he sucked at it.

James Madison never freed any of the hundred human beings he owned.

[Galileo]

So he could have just sold the plantation, freed the slaves and given them some money to start there new lives as freed slaves in the north.

But he didn't.

Instead, he kept them enslaved in an attempt to make money off of them on the plantation. It's not their fault he sucked at it.

James Madison never freed any of the hundred human beings he owned.

You never freed any slaves either, so you should talk!

:lmao

[ChumpDumper]

You never freed any slaves either, so you should talk!

:lmaoI never owned another human being -- literally anyway.


James Madison literally owned about 100 human beings, and never freed one.

[Galileo]

I never owned another human being -- literally anyway.


James Madison literally owned about 100 human beings, and never freed one.

You're getting owned in this forum!

:lmao

:lmao

[ChumpDumper]

Internets shouting isn't helping you.

James Madison never freed any of his slaves.

[Galileo]

Here is what happens when you free your slaves:

Robert Carter III

Robert "Councillor" Carter III (February 1727/28 – March 10, 1804) was an American plantation owner, founding father and onetime British government official. After the death of his wife, Frances Ann Tasker Carter, in 1787, Carter embraced the Swedenborgian faith and freed almost 500 slaves from his Nomini Hall plantation and large home in Williamsburg, Virginia. By a "Deed of Gift" filed with the county in 1791, he began the process of manumitting slaves in his lifetime. His manumission is the largest known release of slaves in North American history prior to the American Civil War and the largest number ever manumitted by an individual in the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Carter_III

never heard of Robert Carter? That's because he freed his slaves. Hence, he was not around to write the Constitution or Bill of Rights.

If Madison had freed his slaves, we would not have the liberty we now enjoy.

[ChumpDumper]

Most of the founding fathers did not own slaves.

Why are you so pro-slavery?

[Winehole23]

Being too pro-Madison led him to it. Pobrecito.

[Galileo]

Internets shouting isn't helping you.

James Madison never freed any of his slaves.

OK, Madison was never aorund at his plantation until 1817, when he retired from the presidency at age 66.

At that time, his mom was still living there, her childhood home, as was his wife Dolley. Madison was also busy founding the University of Virginia, the first secular university in the history of the United States. He worked with Thomas Jefferson on this difficult project, and was a member of the Board of Regents. Plus, he was adviser to President James Monroe until 1825. In 1826, Jefferson died, and the full task of Founding the University fell to Madison. he became the Rector.

In 1829, Madison's mother finally died at age 97. He might have freed his slaves then, but his wife Dolley did not want to. As Madison was now 78, he needed his much younger wife to help him, Dolley was only about 60 at that time.

But Madison was elected to the Virginia Constitutional Convention on 1829 & 1830, so he was gone trying to change the Constitution to increase democracy and decrease slave power.

Also, in the middle of all this was the Nullification Crisis of 1828 to 1834. The Civil War almost started at this time, with South Carolina on the brink of war, as well as the North and Andrew Jackson. Madison was in the middle of this crisis and was the key player in keeping the Union together.

By the time this was over, in 1834, Madison was 83, and started to get close to death. He couldn't walk anymore. He made his will and his last advice to his country. Dolley, still alive and healthy at about age 65 was supposed to free the slaves, either with the money left to her, or in her will if she stayed at the plantation.

Advice to My Country

1834

"As this advice, if it ever see the light will not do it till I am no more,

it may be considered as issuing from the tomb, where truth alone can be

respected, and the happiness of man alone consulted. It will be entitled

therefore to whatever weight can be derived from good intentions, and from

the experience of one who has served his country in various stations through

a period of forty years, who espoused in his youth and adhered through his

life to the cause of its liberty, and who has borne a part in most of the

great transactions which will constitute epochs of its destiny.



The advice nearest to my heart and deepest in my convictions is that the

Union of the States be cherished and perpetuated. Let the open enemy to it

be regarded as a Pandora with her box opened; and the disguised one, as the

Serpent creeping with his deadly wiles into Paradise."

http://www.constitution.org/jm/18340000_advice.htm

[Galileo]

LAST LETTER OF JAMES MADISON

written the less than 20 hours before his death:

To George Tucker

"June 27, 1836.

My dear Sir,

"I have received your letter of June 17th, with the paper enclosed in it.

A part from the value put on such a mark of respect from you in a dedication of your "Life of Mr. Jefferson" to me, I could only be governed in accepting it by my confidence in your capacity to do justice to a character so interesting to his country and to the world; and, I may be permitted to add, with whose principles of liberty and political career mine have been so extensively congenial.

It could not escape me that a feeling of personal friendship has mingled itself greatly with the credit you allow to my public services. I am, at the same time, justified by my consciousness in saying, that an ardent zeal was always felt to make up for deficiencies in them by a sincere and steadfast cooperation in promoting such a reconstruction of our political system as would provide for the permanent liberty and happiness of the United States; and that of the many good fruits it has produced which have well rewarded the efforts and anxieties that led to it, no one has been a more rejoicing witness than myself.

With cordial salutations on the near approach to the end of your undertaking, &c."

http://www.constitution.org/jm/18360627_tucker.htm

James Madison died on June 28, 1836, the last and the greatest of the Founding Fathers. They wanted to keep him alive and pump him with drugs until July 4 so he could die on July 4 like John Adams did (in 1826), Jefferson did (in 1826), and James Monroe did (in 1831).

But Madison refused. This last act shows the character of the beloved and divine James Madison, a man who went out on his own terms, without fanfare.

[Galileo]

LAST WORDS OF JAMES MADISON:

June 28, 1836

Quoted by Paul Jennings, his former slave:

"I was always with Mr. Madison till he died, and shaved him every other day for sixteen years. For six months before his death, he was unable to walk, and spent most of his time reclined on a couch; but his mind was bright, and with his numerous visitors he talked with as much animation and strength of voice as I ever heard him in his best days. I was present when he died. That morning Sukey brought him his breakfast, as usual. He could not swallow. His niece, Mrs. Willis, said, "What is the matter, Uncle Jeames?" "Nothing more than a change of mind, my dear.

His head instantly dropped, and he ceased breathing as quietly as the snuff of a candle goes out. He was about eighty-four years old, and was followed to the grave by an immense procession of white and colored people. The pall-bearers were Governor Barbour, Philip P. Barbour, Charles P. Howard, and Reuben Conway; the two last were neighboring farmers."

http://docsouth.unc.edu/neh/jennings/jennings.html

[Galileo]

Frederick Douglass was a big fan of James Madison.

When Douglass studied the Constitution, he relied on the Federalist Papers and Madison's Notes on the Federal Constitution.

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

[ChumpDumper]

OK, Madison was never aorund at his plantation until 1817, when he retired from the presidency at age 66.That's a load of shit.

Orange is only 90 miles away from Washington DC.


Phase III (1809-1812)
Phase III Montpelier

Montpelier as it is believed to have appeared from 1809-1812. (Montpelier Foundation and PartSense Inc.)

Changes during the third construction period included interior renovations to include a large drawing room and the construction of one-story wings at each end of the house. Many of these changes were initiated due to Madison's new standing as the president of the United States and they reflect the need to accommodate the additional guests that his new status would bring.

http://www.montpelier.org/explore/estate/madisons_montpelier.php

[Galileo]

John Quincy Adams on James Madison (1836)

"Is it not to preserve, to cherish, to improve the inheritance which they have left us—won by their toils —watered by their tears—saddened but fertilized by their blood?

Are we the sons of worthy sices, and in the onward march of time have they achieved in the career of human improvement so much, only that our posterity and theirs may blush for the contrast between their unexampled energies and our nerveless impotence?

Between their more than Herculean labors and our indolent repose?

No, my fellow citizens—far be from us; far be from you, for he who now addresses you has but a few short days before he shall be called to join the multitudes of ages past—far be from you the reproach or the suspicion of such a degrading contrast.

You too have the solemn duty to perform, of improving the condition of your species, by improving your own.

Not in the great and strong wind of a revolution, which rent the mountains and brake in pieces the rocks before the Lord—for the Lord is not in the wind—not in the earthquake of a revolutionary war, marching to the onset between the battle field and the scaffold—for the Lord is not in the earthquake—Not in the fire of civil dissension—In war between the members and the head—In nullification of the laws of the Union by the forcible resistance of one refractory State—for the Lord is not in the fire ; and that fire was never kindled by your fathers!

No!

It is in the still small voice that succeeded the whirlwind, the earthquake and the fire.

The voice that stills the raging of the waves and the tumults of the people—that spoke the words of peace—of harmony—of union.

And for that voice, may you and your children's children "to the last syllable of recorded time," fix your eyes upon the memory, and listen with your ears to the life of James Madison!"

[Galileo]

That's a load of shit.

Orange is only 90 miles away from Washington DC.



http://www.montpelier.org/explore/estate/madisons_montpelier.php

90 miles is a long way in those days. Bad roads. Mud. Lack of bridges, etc.

[Galileo]

That's a load of shit.

Orange is only 90 miles away from Washington DC.



http://www.montpelier.org/explore/estate/madisons_montpelier.php

If he had crowds of visiters, he would be too busy too deal with the slaves. Plus he was president and the War of 1812 was raging on.

[LnGrrrR]

I know you two are having fun, but it seems to break down this way:

Madison was a hypocrite for keeping his slaves. Madison realized that he was a hypocrite, and it wore on his conscience, but not enough to release them.

[ChumpDumper]

90 miles is a long way in those days. Bad roads. Mud. Lack of bridges, etc.But he spent a lot of time in Orange.


If he had crowds of visiters, he would be too busy too deal with the slaves.Yes, he was too busy having them work his expanding plantation.
Plus he was president and the War of 1812 was raging on.Yeah, he tried to invade Canada and got Washington DC burned instead. :tu

[ChumpDumper]

I know you two are having fun, but it seems to break down this way:

Madison was a hypocrite for keeping his slaves. Madison realized that he was a hypocrite, and it wore on his conscience, but not enough to release them.Exactly.

[Galileo]

LAST LETTER OF JAMES MADISON

written the less than 20 hours before his death:

To George Tucker

"June 27, 1836.

My dear Sir,

"I have received your letter of June 17th, with the paper enclosed in it.

A part from the value put on such a mark of respect from you in a dedication of your "Life of Mr. Jefferson" to me, I could only be governed in accepting it by my confidence in your capacity to do justice to a character so interesting to his country and to the world; and, I may be permitted to add, with whose principles of liberty and political career mine have been so extensively congenial.

It could not escape me that a feeling of personal friendship has mingled itself greatly with the credit you allow to my public services. I am, at the same time, justified by my consciousness in saying, that an ardent zeal was always felt to make up for deficiencies in them by a sincere and steadfast cooperation in promoting such a reconstruction of our political system as would provide for the permanent liberty and happiness of the United States; and that of the many good fruits it has produced which have well rewarded the efforts and anxieties that led to it, no one has been a more rejoicing witness than myself.

With cordial salutations on the near approach to the end of your undertaking, &c."

http://www.constitution.org/jm/18360627_tucker.htm

James Madison died on June 28, 1836, the last and the greatest of the Founding Fathers. They wanted to keep him alive and pump him with drugs until July 4 so he could die on July 4 like John Adams did (in 1826), Jefferson did (in 1826), and James Monroe did (in 1831).

But Madison refused. This last act shows the character of the beloved and divine James Madison, a man who went out on his own terms, without fanfare.

btw - Tucker was a noted abolishionist. The Founding Fathers did their work, they expected the next generation or two to free the slaves. Madison was left waiting in the lurch.

[ChumpDumper]

btw - Tucker was a noted abolishionist. The Founding Fathers did their work, they expected the next generation or two to free the slaves. Madison was left waiting in the lurch.Madison never freed any of his approximately 100 slaves.

[Galileo]

But he spent a lot of time in Orange.



Not much time, and when he was, he did not have a spare minute.


Yes, he was too busy having them work his expanding plantation.

No, his plantation was actually reduced in size.


Yeah, he tried to invade Canada and got Washington DC burned instead. :tu

He tried to invade Canada, so he could add free states to the Union and free the slaves. Canada would have added 5 new states right away, plus more later; Upper Canada, Lower Canada, Quebec, New Brunswick, and Novia Scotia.

That would have added 10 senators and a few dozen new congressmen.

The slave states would ahve been way outnumbered and emancipation would have been worked out by a gradual process, plus selling western lands to fund the project.

In fact, the New England States, those supposedly most against slavery, sabatouged Madison's war effort. They would not provide militia nor help with the war effort, plus they threatened to secede at the Hartford Convention of 1814.

How many people do you know who would go to those lengths to free the slaves? Invade Canada, that is quite a project.

[Galileo]

I know you two are having fun, but it seems to break down this way:

Madison was a hypocrite for keeping his slaves. Madison realized that he was a hypocrite, and it wore on his conscience, but not enough to release them.

Madison was not a hypocrite. He tried as hard as he could to free the slaves, but the BOSS (his wife) wouldn't let him.

[ChumpDumper]

Not much time, and when he was, he did not have a spare minute.Right. He was too busy running the plantation with the human beings he owned.


No, his plantation was actually reduced in size.The house certainly got bigger.



He tried to invade Canada, so he could add free states to the Union and free the slaves. Canada would have added 5 new states right away, plus more later; Upper Canada, Lower Canada, Quebec, New Brunswick, and Novia Scotia.

That would have added 10 senators and a few dozen new congressmen.

The slave states would ahve been way outnumbered and emancipation would have been worked out by a gradual process, plus selling western lands to fund the project.

In fact, the New England States, those supposedly most against slavery, sabatouged Madison's war effort. They would not provide militia nor help with the war effort, plus they threatened to secede at the Hartford Convention of 1814.

How many people do you know who would go to those lengths to free the slaves? Invade Canada, that is quite a project.I would have been more impressed have he just freed his own slaves and not gotten the White House burned to a crisp.

[Galileo]

Exactly.

Exactly wrong.

[ChumpDumper]

Exactly wrong.James Madison never freed any of his slaves.

Exactly right.

[Galileo]

Right. He was too busy running the plantation with the human beings he owned.

The house certainly got bigger.


I would have been more impressed have he just freed his own slaves and not gotten the White House burned to a crisp.

Madison died in 1836, before you were born. I'm sure he would have checked in with you before solving all the nations problems.

[Galileo]

James Madison never freed any of his slaves.

Exactly right.

They were already slaves before he inherited them.

If his brother Ambrose had not died unexpectadly, he wouldn't have had any slaves.

Ambrose ran the plantation when his father got old.

[ChumpDumper]

They were already slaves before he inherited them.

If his brother Ambrose had not died unexpectadly, he wouldn't have had any slaves.

Ambrose ran the plantation when his father got old.James Madison never freed any of his slaves.

[LnGrrrR]

Madison was not a hypocrite. He tried as hard as he could to free the slaves, but the BOSS (his wife) wouldn't let him.

Eh, he could've found other means to support her, I'm sure. I don't doubt Madison was better than alot of other slave owners, but he still kept his slaves.

One could even argue the fact that him realizing this conflict of interest at all shows an advanced morality compared to the mindset of the day. But he still kept the slaves, and no matter what proof there was negating the negative impact of that information, that fact can not be disputed.

[Galileo]

Another point, James Madison's grandfather, also named Ambrose, was poisoned to death by slaves in 1832. His grandmother was still alive when James was born and was alive well into his childhood, to tell him the story.

Yet James never harbored any ill felling or prejeduces against slaves, despite that. It would be easy to become racist if something like that happened to your grandfather, especially in those days.

Madison, almost unique in his time, never uttered a racist word in his life. And he had a LOT of words documented, a vast amount of material.

Three generations later, Abe Lincoln was still making racist comments in 1858.

[Galileo]

Eh, he could've found other means to support her, I'm sure. I don't doubt Madison was better than alot of other slave owners, but he still kept his slaves.

One could even argue the fact that him realizing this conflict of interest at all shows an advanced morality compared to the mindset of the day. But he still kept the slaves, and no matter what proof there was negating the negative impact of that information, that fact can not be disputed.

He left his collected papers to her. They were sold for $100,000. But Dolley didn't free all the slaves, only some of them.

Dolley lived until 1848. She became so poor that her fomer slave Paul Jennings had to bring her food and money so she would not starve to death.

[Galileo]

James Madison never freed any of his slaves.

please say it three times fast, without breathing or thinking.

:bang :bang :bang

[ChumpDumper]

\Dolley didn't free all the slaves, only some of them.That's more than James Madison.

James Madison didn't free any of his slaves.

[Galileo]

Eh, he could've found other means to support her, I'm sure. I don't doubt Madison was better than alot of other slave owners, but he still kept his slaves.

One could even argue the fact that him realizing this conflict of interest at all shows an advanced morality compared to the mindset of the day. But he still kept the slaves, and no matter what proof there was negating the negative impact of that information, that fact can not be disputed.

he was going to free them, but he died before he was finished.

[ChumpDumper]

he was going to free them, but he died before he was finished.He had no intention of freeing them while he was alive, and he did not free any of them upon his death.

[Galileo]

That's more than James Madison.

James Madison didn't free any of his slaves.

Yeah, but he left her papers worth $100,000.

A healthy, able bodied male slave back then was worth $1000.

So that money was worth way more than all his slaves put together. Old slaves are worth anything, and sick and/or disabled ones not worth much.

[Galileo]

He had no intention of freeing them while he was alive, and he did not free any of them upon his death.

He did have the intention, but he was too busy building the American Republic, securing our Liberty. And he didn't have the money, as his papers weren't sold yet.

Frankly, when his father died, he should just have sold the slaves off, down to the backbreaking southern plantations, and let someone else take the blame.

[ChumpDumper]

Yeah, but he left her papers worth $100,000.

A healthy, able bodied male slave back then was worth $1000.

So that money was worth way more than all his slaves put together. Old slaves are worth anything, and sick and/or disabled ones not worth much.So he should have freed them all at least on his death.

Jame Madison didn't free any slaves, alive or dead.

[ChumpDumper]

He did have the intention, but he was too busy building the American Republic, securing our Liberty. And he didn't have the money, as his papers weren't sold yet.He had no intention.


Frankly, when his father died, he should just have sold the slaves off, down to the backbreaking southern plantations, and let someone else take the blame.Another pro slavery argument from you.

[Galileo]

So he should have freed them all at least on his death.

Jame Madison didn't free any slaves, alive or dead.

If he freed them at death, the lien holders on his property would have a claim to the slaves to pay off the debt. Then the slaves would have been sold south to the malaria filled race fields and cotton farms.

That's why he left his papers to Dolley Madison, his wife. It was her fault the slaves weren't freed.

In 1787, Madison took a pledge with the other delegates not to release his Notes on the Constitutional convention until after all the Founders had died. As it turned out, Madison was the last surviving Founder. Also, the passage of time made the Notes worth more. By 1836, they were worth a medium sized fortune.

The Notes were first published in 1840, one of the most valuable documents of all time.

[Galileo]

Another pro slavery argument from you.

No, it would the fault of the slavebreakers who bought them, not Madison's.

You are defending the deep south slavebreakers.

[ChumpDumper]

If he freed them at death, the lien holders on his property would have a claim to the slaves to pay off the debt. Then the slaves would have been sold south to the malaria filled race fields and cotton farms.So he should have freed them while he was alive.

He didn't.

[ChumpDumper]

No, it would the fault of the slavebreakers who bought them, not Madison's.

You are defending the deep south slavebreakers.No, you are defending Madison's owning of slaves.

[Galileo]

So he should have freed them while he was alive.

He didn't.

It was illegal to free slaves in Virginia in 1836 because they were considered a threat and danger to the community.

Plus, the banks had liens on the slaves. As I said, he left his valuable papers with his wife. She was supposed to use the money to pay off the debts and free the slaves.

Also, Madison had no children, so there was no one left to inherit the property or run the plantation.

[Galileo]

No, you are defending Madison's owning of slaves.

At one time, Madison toyed with the idea of freeing the slaves and sending them to Liberia. But the slaves said no.

Later, Frederick Douglass endorsed the idea of sending freed slaves to Florida.

Madison also endorsed selling off western land to buy out and free the slaves.

[ChumpDumper]

It was illegal to free slaves in Virginia in 1836 because they were considered a threat and danger to the community.You'll have to show me that statute, because the George Tucker you cited earlier did free slaves in Virginia.


Plus, the banks had liens on the slaves.I saw no quote anywhere saying that. I believe you are making it up.


Also, Madison had no children, so there was no one left to inherit the property or run the plantation.All the more reason to sell the plantation and free the slaves.

[ChumpDumper]

At one time, Madison toyed with the idea of freeing the slaves and sending them to Liberia. But the slaves said no.His own slaves? All he had to do was send them to Pennsylvania.


Madison also endorsed selling off western land to buy out and free the slaves.So he wanted a federal bailout before he freed his slaves.

[Galileo]

James Madison's Plan for the
Emancipation of the Slaves
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

James Madison openly acknowledged that slavery was a "great evil"; nonetheless, he continued to regard slaves as property. In his retirement he received several letters with questions concerning slavery. In the letter below he presented a proposal for the gradual emancipation of the slaves.

—JMU editor


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sir,

I have received your letter of the 3d instant, requesting such hints as may have occurred to me on the subject of an eventual extinguishment of slavery in the United States.

Not doubting the purity of your views, and relying on the discretion by which they will be regulated, I cannot refuse such a compliance as will, at least, manifest my respect for the object of your undertaking.

A general emancipation of slaves ought to be — 1. Gradual. 2. Equitable, and satisfactory to the individuals immediately concerned. 3. Consistent with the existing and durable prejudices of the nation.

That it ought, like remedies for other deep-rooted and widespread evils, to be gradual, is so obvious, that there seems to be no difference of opinion on that point.

To be equitable and satisfactory, the consent of both the master and the slave should be obtained. That of the master will require a provision in the plan for compensating a loss of what he held as property, guarantied by the laws, and recognised by the Constitution. That of the slave, requires that his condition in a state of freedom be preferable, in his own estimation, to his actual one in a state of bondage.

To be consistent with existing and probably unalterable prejudices in the United States, the freed blacks ought to be permanently removed beyond the region occupied by, or allotted to, a white population. The objections to a thorough incorporation of the two people are, with most of the whites, insuperable; and are admitted by all of them to be very powerful. If the blacks, strongly marked as they are by physical and lasting peculiarities, be retained amid the whites, under the degrading privation of equal rights, political or social, they must be always dissatisfied with their condition, as a change only from one to another species of oppression; always secretly confederated against the ruling and privileged class; and always uncontrolled by some of the most cogent motives to moral and respectable conduct. The character of the free blacks, even where their legal condition is least affected by their colour, seems to put these truths beyond question. It is material, also, that the removal of the blacks be to a distance precluding the jealousies and hostilities to be apprehended from a neighbouring people, stimulated by the contempt known to be entertained for their peculiar features; to say nothing of their vindictive recollections, or the predatory propensities which their state of society might foster. Nor is it fair, in estimating the danger of collision with the whites, to charge it wholly on the side of the blacks. There would be reciprocal antipathies doubling the danger.

The colonizing plan on foot has, as far as it extends, a due regard to these requisites; with the additional object of bestowing new blessings, civil and religious, on the quarter of the Globe most in need of them. The Society proposes to transport to the African coast all free and freed blacks who may be willing to remove thither; to provide by fair means, and, it is understood, with a prospect of success, a suitable territory for their reception; and to initiate them into such an establishment as may gradually and indefinitely expand itself.

The experiment, under this view of it, merits encouragement from all who regard slavery as an evil, who wish to see it diminished and abolished by peaceable and just means, and who have themselves no better mode to propose. Those who have most doubted the success of the experiment must, at least, have wished to find themselves in an error.

But the views of the Society are limited to the case of blacks already free, or who may be gratuitously emancipated. To provide a commensurate remedy for the evil, the plan must be extended to the great mass of blacks, and must embrace a fund sufficient to induce the master, as well as the slave, to concur in it. Without the concurrence of the master, the benefit will be very limited as it relates to the Negroes, and essentially defective as it relates to the United States; and the concurrence of masters must, for the most part, be obtained by purchase.

Can it be hoped that voluntary contributions, however adequate to an auspicious commencement, will supply the sums necessary to such an enlargement of the remedy?

May not another question be asked? Would it be reasonable to throw so great a burden on the individuals distinguished by their philanthropy and patriotism?

The object to be obtained, as an object of humanity, appeals alike to all; as a national object, it claims the interposition of the nation. It is the nation which is to reap the benefit. The nation, therefore, ought to bear the burden.

Must, then, the enormous sums required to pay for, to transport, and to establish in a foreign land, all the slaves in the United States, as their masters may be willing to part with them, be taxed on the good people of the United States, or be obtained by loans, swelling the public debt to a size pregnant with evils next in degree to those of slavery itself?

Happily, it is not necessary to answer this question by remarking, that if slavery, as a national evil, is to be abolished, and it be just that it be done at the national expense, the amount of the expense is not a paramount consideration. It is the peculiar fortune, or, rather, a providential blessing of the United States, to possess a resource commensurate to this great object, without taxes on the people, or even an increase of the public debt.

I allude to the vacant territory, the extent of which is so vast, and the vendible value of which is so well ascertained.

Supposing the number of slaves to be 1,500,000 and their price to average 400 dollars, the cost of the whole would be 600 millions of dollars. These estimates are probably beyond the fact; and from the number of slaves should be deducted: 1. Those whom their masters would not part with. 2. Those who may be gratuitously set free by their masters. 3. Those acquiring freedom under emancipation regulations of the States. 4. Those preferring slavery where they are to freedom in an African settlement. On the other hand, it is to be noted that the expense of removal and settlement is not included in the estimated sum; and that an increase of the slaves will be going on during the period required for the execution of the plan.

On the whole, the aggregate sum needed may be stated at about six hundred millions of dollars.

This will require 200 millions of acres, at three dollars per acre; or 300 millions at two dollars per acre; a quantity which, though great in itself, is perhaps not a third part of the disposable territory belonging to the United States. And to what object so good, so great, and so glorious, could that peculiar fund of wealth be appropriated? Whilst the sale of territory would, on one hand, be planting one desert with a free and civilized people, it would, on the other, be giving freedom to another people, and filling with them another desert. And if in any instances wrong has been done by our forefathers to people of one colour, by dispossessing them of their soil, what better atonement is now in our power than that of making what is rightfully acquired a source of justice and of blessings to a people of another colour?

As the revolution to be produced in the condition of the Negroes must be gradual, it will suffice if the sale of territory keep pace with its progress. For a time, at least, the proceeds would be in advance. In this case, it might be best, after deducting the expense incident to the surveys and sales, to place the surplus in a situation where its increase might correspond with the natural increase of the unpurchased slaves. Should the proceeds at any time fall short of the calls for their application, anticipations might be made by temporary loans, to be discharged as the land should find a market.

But it is probable that for a considerable period the sales would exceed the calls. Masters would not be willing to strip their plantations and farms of their labourers too rapidly. The slaves themselves, connected, as they generally are, by tender ties with others under other masters, would be kept from the list of emigrants by the want of the multiplied consents to be obtained. It is probable, indeed, that for a long time a certain portion of the proceeds might safely continue applicable to the discharge of the debts or to other purposes of the nation; or it might be most convenient, in the onset, to appropriate a certain proportion only of the income from sales to the object in view, leaving the residue otherwise applicable.

Should any plan similar to that I have sketched be deemed eligible in itself, no particular difficulty is foreseen from that portion of the nation which, with a common interest in the vacant territory, has no interest in slave property. They are too just to wish that a partial sacrifice should be made for the general good, and too well aware that whatever may be the intrinsic character of that description of property, it is one known to the Constitution, and, as such, could not be constitutionally taken away without just compensation. That part of the nation has, indeed, shown a meritorious alacrity in promoting, by pecuniary contributions, the limited scheme for colonizing the blacks, and freeing the nation from the unfortunate stain on it, which justifies the belief that any enlargement of the scheme, if founded on just principles, would find among them its earliest and warmest patrons. It ought to have great weight that the vacant lands in question have, for the most part, been derived from grants of the States holding the slaves to be redeemed and removed by the sale of them.

It is evident, however, that in effectuating a general emancipation of slaves in the mode which has been hinted, difficulties of other sorts would be encountered. The provision for ascertaining the joint consent of the masters and slaves; for guarding against unreasonable valuations of the latter; and for the discrimination of those not proper to be conveyed to a foreign residence, or who ought to remain a charge on masters in whose service they had been disabled or worn out, and for the annual transportation of such numbers, would require the mature deliberations of the national councils. The measure implies, also, the practicability of procuring in Africa an enlargement of the district or districts for receiving the exiles sufficient for so great an augmentation of their numbers.

Perhaps the Legislative provision best adapted to the case would be an incorporation of the Colonizing Society, or the establishment of a similar one, with proper powers, under the appointment and superintendence of the National Executive.

In estimating the difficulties, however, incident to any plan of general emancipation, they ought to be brought into comparison with those inseparable from other plans, and be yielded to or not according to the result of the comparison.

One difficulty presents itself which will probably attend every plan which is to go into effect under the Legislative provisions of the National Government. But whatever may be the defect of existing powers of Congress, the Constitution has pointed out the way in which it can be supplied. And it can hardly be doubted that the requisite powers might readily be procured for attaining the great object in question, in any mode whatever approved by the nation.

If these thoughts can be of any aid in your search of a remedy for the great evil under which the nation labors, you are very welcome to them.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letter to Robert J. Evans, author of the pieces published under the name of Benjamin Rush, June 15, 1819

http://www.ungardesign.com/websites/madison/main_pages/madison_archives/era/african/elite/emancipation.htm

[Galileo]

His own slaves? All he had to do was send them to Pennsylvania.

So he wanted a federal bailout before he freed his slaves.

Why not? He orchestrated the Louisiana Purchase.

[Galileo]

You'll have to show me that statute, because the George Tucker you cited earlier did free slaves in Virginia.

I saw no quote anywhere saying that. I believe you are making it up.

All the more reason to sell the plantation and free the slaves.

Tucker was much younger than Madison, so it was easier for him to skirt the law.

[ChumpDumper]

Tucker was much younger than Madison, so it was easier for him to skirt the law.What law?

The one you made up?

[Galileo]

What law?

The one you made up?

Slavery was legal back then. Why should Madison give away all his money? Would you give away all your money?

[ChumpDumper]

Slavery was legal back then. Why should Madison give away all his money? Would you give away all your money?So you, like he, consider human beings to be property.

I would free slaves I inherited because I am against slavery.

You would not because you consider them to be property.

James Madison never freed any slaves because he considered them property.

[Galileo]

So you, like he, consider human beings to be property.

I would free slaves I inherited because I am against slavery.

You would not because you consider them to be property.

James Madison never freed any slaves because he considered them property.

That's bullshit. You have a one-track mind and are a walking talking reason to bring it back. You also defend the Bush mass murders of 9/11.

[ChumpDumper]

That's bullshit. You have a one-track mind and are a walking talking reason to bring it back.To bring back slavery?

Another pro slavery post from you
You also defend the Bush mass murders of 9/11.What do you think really happened on 9/11?

[Winehole23]

Due to a loophole in the 13th Amendment, we had convict leasing in Texas formally until 1910, until 1914 in practice.





The South’s defeat and the abolition of slavery plunged the Texas economy into a depression. Deprived of their labor force, most of the sugar plantations on the Lower Brazos went bankrupt. One of the few that survived was the Williams plantation, which was purchased after the war by Edward H. Cunningham and Littleberry A. Ellis, business partners and Confederate veterans.

https://www.texasmonthly.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/reporter-cane-car.jpgConvicts unloading a cane car at the Imperial Sugar Company’s mill sometime around 1900.
Photograph of the Sugar Land Heritage Foundation

Cunningham and Ellis survived the abolition of slavery by finding a new source of cheap labor: the Texas prison system. Although they weren’t the first growers to use convict labor, they were the biggest: in 1878 they signed a contract with the state to lease Texas’s entire prison population. This was perfectly legal, since the Thirteenth Amendment, which outlawed slavery, made one very consequential exception: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” (Italics added.)

In the years before the Civil War, Texas’s state prisons had held around two hundred inmates, all kept at a single facility, in Huntsville. After abolition, the prison population exploded, disproportionately with black men. Unable to house and feed all the new prisoners, the state began renting them out to private companies, who were grateful for the supply of cheap labor.



The working conditions in Cunningham and Ellis’s sugar fields were as bad or worse than they had been on the slave plantations. Mosquito-borne epidemics, frequent beatings, and a lack of medical care resulted in a 3 percent annual mortality rate. The plantation soon became notorious across the state as the “Hellhole on the Brazos.”https://www.texasmonthly.com/articles/sugar-land-slave-convict-labor-history/

[Winehole23]

Convict leasing and debt peonage were formally ended in the US by a DOJ opinion circulated in 1941:


Circular No. 3591 was a directive from Attorney General (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:United_States_Attorney_General) Francis Biddle to all United States attorneys (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:United_States_Attorney) concerning the procedure for handling cases relating to involuntary servitude, slavery and peonage (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Peon). Following the formal abolition of slavery in the United States at the end of the Civil War (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:American_Civil_War), freed slaves in the American South (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Southern_United_States) often found themselves subject to conditions of forced labor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Unfree_labour) that approximated slavery. [1] (https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Circular_No._3591#cite_note-1) Author Douglas A. Blackmon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Douglas_A._Blackmon) has called this period, which lasted until the end of World War II (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:World_War_II), "the Age of Neoslavery." [2] (https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Circular_No._3591#cite_note-2) "Peonage," the working out of a debt, was the term most frequently used for this form of bondage. A federal statute, 18 United States Code 444, enacted in 1867 to criminalize the practice, was upheld by the Supreme Court in 1905; [3] (https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Circular_No._3591#cite_note-3) and in 1911, the Court struck down an Alabama law that compelled contract workers to continue in service to their employers.[4] (https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Circular_No._3591#cite_note-4) Nevertheless, peonage and other forms of forced labor persisted. "Convict leasing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Convict_lease)" permitted private employers to pay state and local governments for the labor of persons convicted of crimes; [5] (https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Circular_No._3591#cite_note-5) and a practice known as "confessing judgment" forced African Americans to admit to minor offenses, often based on spurious accusations, and bind themselves to white employers who agreed to pay their fines and costs. [6] (https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Circular_No._3591#cite_note-6) Because traditional reliance on the peonage law resulted in few convictions and only minor penalties in cases where convictions were obtained, Attorney General Biddle opted to refocus the efforts of the Department of Justice (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:United_States_Department_of_Justice) on the broader issue of slavery, directing the department's prosecutors to attack the practice by name and use a wider array of criminal statutes to convict both slave-holding employers and the local officials who abetted them. [7] (https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Circular_No._3591#cite_note-7) He announced the new policy in Circular No. 3591.https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Circular_No._3591

[Winehole23]

It could be lucrative for the states: in 1898, some 73% of Alabama's entire annual state revenue came from convict leasing.

[Winehole23]

In the news this week:


Fort Bend ISD will no longer pursue legal action for a school construction site where the graves of 95 freed slaves were uncovered nearly a year ago.


On Thursday, the school district said its board of trustees voted unanimously to give the superintendent the power to negotiate with Fort Bend County on establishing an alternate site for James Reese Career and Technical Center, while also preserving the historic grave site.https://abc13.com/society/fbisd-drops-legal-actions-linked-to-graves-on-school-site/5149995/

[Winehole23]

the implication is clear: legal involuntary servitude lasted well into the 20th century.

[boutons_deux]

the 21st century: "contemporary prison labor (https://www.google.com/search?q=contemporary+prison+labor&spell=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi06uDjhNLgAhVI-6wKHXC6AKQQBQgrKAA)"

Prison labor is modern slavery. I've been sent to solitary for speaking out

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/23/prisoner-speak-out-american-slave-labor-strike

[Winehole23]

more legalized slavery.

for some reason that's considered less disreputable than convict leasing and debt peonage.

even Kamala Harris can get behind that:


Ordered to reduce the population of California’s overcrowded prisons, lawyers from then-California Attorney General Kamala Harris’ office made the case that some non-violent offenders needed to stay incarcerated or else the prison system would lose a source of cheap labor.https://www.thedailybeast.com/kamala-harris-ag-office-tried-to-keep-inmates-locked-up-for-cheap-labor

[Winehole23]

“Extending 2-for-1 credits to all minimum custody inmates at this time would severely impact fire camp participation—a dangerous outcome while California is in the middle of a difficult fire season and severe drought,” lawyers for Harris wrote in the filing, noting that the fire camp program required physical fitness in addition to a level of clearance that allowed the felon to be offsite.

Not only that, they noted, draining the prisons of “minimum custody inmates” would deplete the labor force both internally and in local communities where low-level, non-violent offenders worked for pennies on the dollar collecting trash and tending to city parks. A federal three-judge panel ordered both sides (https://www.clearinghouse.net/chDocs/public/PC-CA-0057-0110.pdf) to confer about the plaintiffs’ demands, and the state agreed to extend the 2-for-1 credits to all eligible minimum security prisoners.

“Once we ridiculed and flagged them for that, they changed their tune, but that was their initial response,” Donald Specter, executive director of the Prison Law Office and lead counsel on Brown v. Plata, said.

[Chris]

welp


https://twitter.com/ChuckCallesto/status/1099794891079667714

[Pavlov]

welp


https://twitter.com/ChuckCallesto/status/1099794891079667714So she actually didn't say anything about reparations.

:lol

[Winehole23]

Gullible Chris never reads past the lede and isn't beneath misreading it -- even though we can all read it too!

[Spurminator]

It seems like Ilovemyfreedom.org is a test site to gather information from the dumbest partisans in existence.

They consistently contradict their own stories in their headlines, and yet somehow they still get shared by lazy basement virgins like Qhris, who have so little dignity that they think nothing of sharing articles from a site called Ilovemyfreedom.org.

[Spurtacular]

So why didn't they just establish the US as a slave free nation in the first place?

Are you under the impression that the Constitution would have been ratified if slavery were to be abolished right off?

[Pavlov]

Are you under the impression that the Constitution would have been ratified if slavery were to be abolished right off?Thanks for proving my point from nine years ago, derp.

:lmao

[Spurtacular]

Thanks for proving my point from nine years ago, derp.

:lmao

Are you under the impression that the Constitution would have been ratified if slavery were to be abolished right off?

[Pavlov]

Are you under the impression that the Constitution would have been ratified if slavery were to be abolished right off?Thanks again nine years ago.

:lmao

[DMC]

It seems like Ilovemyfreedom.org is a test site to gather information from the dumbest partisans in existence.

They consistently contradict their own stories in their headlines, and yet somehow they still get shared by lazy basement virgins like Qhris, who have so little dignity that they think nothing of sharing articles from a site called Ilovemyfreedom.org.

Who in SA has basements?

Basements aren't that bad, I've seen some really tricked out basements with pool tables and wetbars. I'd dwell there.

[Spurtacular]

Thanks again nine years ago.

:lmao

Are you under the impression that the Constitution would have been ratified if slavery were to be abolished right off?

If you're afraid of a straight-forward question, just say so.

[Winehole23]

Are you under the impression that the Constitution would have been ratified if slavery were to be abolished right off?

If you're afraid of a straight-forward question, just say so.You constantly demand answers, but never answer any.

If you're afraid to read through the thread to get a flavor of the conversation, just say so.

[Spurtacular]

You constantly demand answers, but never answer any.

If you're afraid to read through the thread to get a flavor of the conversation, just say so.

Thanks for the chime-in, chump's fluffer. Now let's watch as chump refuses to answer the simplest of questions which was generated based upon his own original input and directly related to the OP.

[Pavlov]

Are you under the impression that the Constitution would have been ratified if slavery were to be abolished right off?No.

That was my whole point in posting that rhetorical question.

Nine years ago.

Anyone who isn't an idiot could get the point.

The United States was founded as a slave country.

Any other questions?

[Spurtacular]

No.

That was my whole point in posting that rhetorical question.

Nine years ago.

Anyone who isn't an idiot could get the point.

The United States was founded as a slave country.

Any other questions?

"Founded as a slave country" is not even an ambivalent answer.

Are you under the impression that the Constitution would have been ratified if slavery were to be abolished right off?

Yes or no.

[Pavlov]

"Founded as a slave country" is not even an ambivalent answer.

Are you under the impression that the Constitution would have been ratified if slavery were to be abolished right off?

Yes or no.Jesus Christ you dumbass.

Read the very first word in the above response.

What is that word?

You fucking quoted it.:lmao

[Spurtacular]

Jesus Christ you dumbass.

Read the very first word in the above response.

What is that word?

You fucking quoted it.:lmao

:lol Lashing out.

So, basically you were making a nothing point in the first place. You were not making a real counter to the OP; you were casting aspersions. Par.

[Pavlov]

:lol Lashing out.

So, basically you were making a nothing point in the first place. You were not making a real counter to the OP; you were casting aspersions. Par.:lmao

No.

Nine years ago Galileo made the stupid assertion that the Founding Fathers uniformly didn't want slavery.

I asked him a question he couldn't answer because it destroyed his stupid assertion.

You should be very familiar with not answering simple questions because you're getting destroyed.

Par.

lol.

Derp.

:lmao going back nine years to fail to understand an argument someone else had.

[Spurtacular]

:lmao

No.

Nine years ago Galileo made the stupid assertion that the Founding Fathers uniformly didn't want slavery.

I asked him a question he couldn't answer because it destroyed his stupid assertion.

You should be very familiar with not answering simple questions because you're getting destroyed.

Par.

lol.

Derp.

:lmao going back nine years to fail to understand an argument someone else had.

"uniformly" is your spin. Nay, he made the point that the Constitution was an inspired document that was ultimately there to support all races in time. What is your objection to that? You don't seem to have one that isn't now made up.

[Pavlov]

"uniformly" is your spin. Nay, he made the point that the Constitution was an inspired document that was ultimately there to support all races in time. What is your objection to that? You don't seem to have one that isn't now made up.How could it support all the races at the time when one race was enslaved and that slavery was enshrined in the document?

Explain.

[Spurtacular]

How could it support all the races at the time when one race was enslaved and that slavery was enshrined in the document?

Explain.

"in time"

I guess that modifier just went right over your head.

[Pavlov]

"in time"

I guess that modifier just went right over your head.:lmao "in time"

Why is slavery enshrined in the Constitution?

[Spurtacular]

:lmao "in time"

Why is slavery enshrined in the Constitution?

:lol Chump begging for a civics lesson.

So, is your contention that the Constitution is currently racist?

[Pavlov]

:lol Chump begging for a civics lesson.Sorry. I asked you a question:

Why is slavery enshrined in the Constitution?

If you're not going to answer it, just say so.

[Spurtacular]

Sorry. I asked you a question:

Why is slavery enshrined in the Constitution?

If you're not going to answer it, just say so.

The Constitution originally conceded the South's right to slaves.

So, is your contention that the Constitution is now currently racist?

[Pavlov]

The Constitution originally conceded the South's right to slaves.

So, is your contention that the Constitution is now currently racist?No. That is your strawman.

The Constituiton has been amended.

[Blake]

"in time"

I guess that modifier just went right over your head.

Lol what a stupid modifier.

Goddam you're an idiot

[Pavlov]

Lol what a stupid modifier.

Goddam you're an idiot:lolDude is trying to resurrect a decade old Galileo argument by completely misstating it.

[Spurtacular]

:lolDude is trying to resurrect a decade old Galileo argument by completely misstating it.

:lol You mad that another one of your aspersions got the light shined on it.

[Bleke]

Lol what a stupid modifier.

Goddam you're an idiot

Stupid AF.

So idiotic.

[Spurtacular]

No. That is your strawman.

The Constituiton has been amended.

No. That is exactly what is at issue with the OP.

:lmao "strawman"
:lmao Psychopav Chump

[Spurtacular]

No. That is your strawman.

The Constituiton has been amended.

So, you were lashing out; the OP made the fair point that the Constitution was helping blacks; and you did your.... :cry but but but slavery :cry schtick

:lmao Psycohpav Chump

[Pavlov]

No. That is exactly what is at issue with the OP.Was the Constitution amended to end slavery after Douglass's writing?

Yes or no.

[Pavlov]

So, you were lashing out; the OP made the fair point that the Constitution was helping blacks; and you did your.... :cry but but but slavery :cry schtick

:lmao Psycohpav ChumpWas the Constitution amended to end slavery after Douglass's writing?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

Was the Constitution amended to end slavery after Douglass's writing?

Yes or no.

:lol Pop quiz

[Pavlov]

:lol Pop quizWas the Constitution amended to end slavery after Douglass's writing?

Yes or no.

Just say if you're not going to answer.

[Spurtacular]

Was the Constitution amended to end slavery after Douglass's writing?

Yes or no.

Just say if you're not going to answer.

Feel free to make whatever point you're trying to make (if you even have one to make).

[Pavlov]

Feel free to make whatever point you're trying to make (if you even have one to make).You can't even say you're not going to answer.

Was the Constitution amended to end slavery after Douglass's writing?

Yes or no.

Just say if you're not going to answer

[Spurtacular]

:cry Muh quiz questions :cry

Just say if you're not going to make your point.

[spurraider21]

derp takin his game to 'nother level

[Pavlov]

Just say if you're not going to make your point.So you can't even answer the question "Are you going to answer the question?"

Good talk, derp.

:lol

[Spurtacular]

So you can't even answer the question "Are you going to answer the question?"

Good talk, derp.

:lol

So, you don't want to make your point :tu

[Pavlov]

So, you don't want to make your point :tuSure I do.

I'm simply waiting for you to answer my question first.

Was the Constitution amended to end slavery after Douglass's writing?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

Sure "I do."

I'm simply going to throw a tantrum and stomp my feet and demand answers to my random questions.

[Pavlov]

It's not random at all. It's completely relevant to the topic.

Was the Constitution amended to end slavery after Douglass's writing?

Here are your possible responses:

a) Yes.

b) No.

c) I am never going to answer this simple yes or no question.

All you have to do is post a letter.

I will post my point if you choose a or b.

You are finished talking about the topic if you choose c.

[Spurtacular]

:cry Muh check for understanding :cry

[Pavlov]

:cry Muh check for understanding :cryMake your choice known.

Was the Constitution amended to end slavery after Douglass's writing?

Here are your possible responses:

a) Yes.

b) No.

c) I am never going to answer this simple yes or no question.

Any further response other than these three choices defaults you to c.

[Spurtacular]

Here are your possible responses:

a) Yes.

b) No.

c) I am never going to answer this simple yes or no question.



Here's your inevitable actions:

a) Stomp your feet and demand answers to your pop quiz.

b) Take your ball and go home.

c) Rinse / repeat.

[Pavlov]

Here's your inevitable actions:

a) Stomp your feet and demand answers to your pop quiz.

b) Take your ball and go home.

c) Not make your point unless out of spite or shame.Good talk, derp.

The correct answer is Yes.

That itself is the point.

The Constitution wasn't helping blacks at the time he made that speech. It had to be amended to do so.

Congratulations on your complete surrender to me. I accept your eternal white flag. I can't wait til you demand an answer to one of your questions.

You're going to lash out now.

lol

[Spurtacular]

Good talk, derp.

The correct answer is Yes.

That itself is the point.

The Constitution wasn't helping blacks at the time he made that speech. It had to be amended to do so.

Congratulations on your complete surrender to me. I accept your eternal white flag. I can't wait til you demand an answer to one of your questions.

You're going to lash out now.

lol

The Emancipation Proclamation had already been given by a sitting president in the constitutional republic.

:lmao "eternal" fail for Psychopav Chump
:lmao This is why you want random trivia questions instead of making (inept) points

[Pavlov]

The Emancipation Proclamation had already been given by a sitting president in the constitutional republic.That's not the Constitution and that did nothing for the slaves in the union.

This is why you fail completely every time.

[Spurtacular]

that did nothing for the slaves in the union.


It freed all slaves in the union.

:lol "did nothing for the slaves in the union."