The South Was Right

by James Ronald Kennedy

  The Desire was the first slave ship to be equipped in America.23 She was built in 1637, only seventeen years after the Pilgrims had landed at Plymouth Rock, and she sailed from Salem, Massachusetts. The Yankee commercial and industrial system had its roots in the profits made by engaging in the African slave trade. The “Good Ship” Desire was only the first of many Yankee ships that would prey upon the hapless people of Africa for the next two hundreds years. The slave trade became the cornerstone of Yankee commerce and furnished the financial capital for future investments in legitimate industries, much as modern-day drug dealers launder their tainted money in legitimate enterprises.24 The slave trade provided much commerce for many people in New England. Not only the seamen engaged in the act of slaving itself, but all those who worked to provide the goods that were used in the trade profitted. The New England slave trade was based on three commodities: rum, slaves, and molasses. In New England, the slave ships would take on a load of fish and rum to be traded in Africa for slaves, about two hundred gallons of rum per slave. In the West Indies, the slaves were traded for molasses, and the molasses was then taken back to New England to be sold to make more rum.25 As each transaction was made, the ever-mindful profiteer would make a little margin, so by the time he was back in New England he had earned a handsome dividend for the company that owned his ship.

  So important were the New England rum distilleries to the slave trade that, when the English parliament made a serious effort to collect a tax on molasses, the Massachusetts merchants protested that such a tax would ruin the slave trade and cause more than seven hundred ships to rot for lack of work.26 There were at this time in Massachusetts some sixty-three distilleries producing 12,500 hogsheads (barrels of 63 to 140 gallons) of rum.27 Also there were thirty-five distilleries in Rhode Island producing rum.28 In 1763 the colony of Rhode Island protested the imposition of the tax to the English Board of Trade in a resolution of its General Assembly in which it said, “This little colony, only, for more than thirty years past, have annually sent about eighteen sail of vessels to the coast, which have carried about eighteen hundred hogsheads of rum, together with a small quantity of provisions and some other articles, which have been sold for slaves. … This distillery is the main hinge upon which the trade of the colony turns, and many hundreds of persons depend immediately upon it for a subsistence.”29

  The New England slave trade, which started in 1640, was maintained legally and illegally for more than two hundred years. Even after Congress had outlawed the importation of slaves into the United States, the Yankee slaver found ready markets in the Caribbean and in South America, where ninety-four percent of the African slaves ended up.30 Off the coast of Zanzibar in 1836, the Yankee slaver was trading calico from Northern textile mills spun from slave-grown cotton for ivory and slaves. In 1831 an English seaman, Captain Isaacs made the following statement about the Yankee slaver: “Few have visited it [the port of Lamu] except the enterprising Americans whose star-spangled banner may be seen streaming in the wind where other nations would not deign to traffic.” There were so many Yankee slavers and traders active in Zanzibar that the local population thought that Great Britain was a subdivision of Massachusetts. For many years, even into modern times, the name for cotton cloth in that part of the world would remain “Americani.”31

  During this time, most civilized nations were trying to put an end to the slave trade. Although the United States had outlawed the trade, the government had not signed an agreement with the great powers of Europe to allow their agents to board and search American vessels. Because of this situation, most European slave ships kept at least one American national and a United States flag handy. If they were stopped by a European naval vessel, the European captain of the slave ship would execute a quick sale of his vessel to the American, hoist up the Stars and Stripes, and be safe from capture. This American was known by the slavers as the “Captain of the Flag,”32 and the flag was the United States flag, not the Confederate battle flag! Daniel Mannix in his book Black Cargoes states, “… the flag especially if it was American proved to be ample protection for a slaver.”33 It would have been so simple for the United States to have allowed the British or French navies to police the illegal American slave trade. The British and French navies attempted this practice, but the New England states set up such a protest that none other than the acting Secretary of State, John Quincy Adams of Boston, Massachusetts, sent a strong message to those nations that no nation would be allowed to stop and search an American vessel.34 Some forty years later, a Southerner, Henry A. Wise, consul at Rio de Janeiro in Brazil, reported to President Zachary Taylor about the use of the United States flag by Americans (Yankees) as they were engaged in the African slave trade. On February 18,1847, this Southerner wrote President Taylor these words: “You have no conception of the bold effrontery and the flagrant outrages of the African slave trade, and the shameless manner in which its worst crimes are licensed here, and every patriot in our land would blush for our country did he know and see, as I do, how our citizens sail and sell our flag to the uses and abuses of that accursed practice.”35 In his message to Congress on December 4, 1849 (just eleven years before South Carolina seceded from the Union), President Taylor made the following statement: “Your Attention is earnestly invited to an amendment of our existing laws relating to the African slave trade with a view to the effectual suppression of that barbarous traffic. It is not to be denied that this trade is still in part carried on by means of vessels built in the United States and owned or navigated by some of our citizens.”36 It is of interest to note that Henry Wise’s observation about the slave trade was made in a South American port. In studying the slave trade, we note that only six percent of all the Africans taken from Africa were brought to the United States. A full ninety-four percent of them were sold into slavery in the Caribbean and in South American countries. Those who would try to defend the North for its involvement in the illegal slave trade often attempt to shift the blame upon Southerners by saying, “If you Southerners had not provided the market for our slaves, we would never have been in the slave trade.” The truth is that after 1800 the South was never a viable market for the African slave traders.

  But the fact that the South was not a major market for the North’s black cargo never kept the profit-mindful Yankee peddlers from doing business in African slaves. Some of the more prominent families of New England were engaged in the slave trade and built huge fortunes in the process. The deWolf family, one of the more prominent families in Rhode Island, was very much involved in the slave trade. Members of that esteemed family invested the money earned from the slave trade in distilleries and (of all things) in textile mills.37 The Brown family, also slavers, invested their slave money in candle factories, the first cotton mills in America, and an iron furnace and foundry. These were used to provide Gen. George Washington with many cannons during the Revolutionary War. 38 Mannix, in Black Cargoes, states, “The slave trade in New England, as in Lancashire and the English Midlands, provided much of the capital that helped to create the industrial revolution.”39 Many fortunes were made by various families of New England. From Boston comes the story of Peter Faneuil, a man of great wealth who gave to the city of Boston Faneuil Hall, which became known as the “cradle of liberty.” It was in this building, a local and national shrine, that many patriot meetings were held before the Revolutionary War. One such meeting resulted in the famous “Boston Tea Party.” What is not told about Faneuil is that he was a major backer of a slaving venture.40 Now if he had been a Southerner, he would be censured and written off as a racist cur. How often have we heard the cry of the liberal media demanding the removal of a Confederate monument or flag because of some supposed connection with slavery? Yet, even though Faneuil was a Yankee slave trader, he is given official sanction. Faneuil Hall has become an icon of what America is supposed to be about, yet the man for whom it is named was a slave trader! Men such as Josiah Franklin, stepbrother of Benjamin Franklin, and John Hancoc
k of Massachusetts were involved with the slave trade. Even though the Confederate flag never flew over a slave ship, and even though the United States flag did fly over slave ships, it is the Confederate flag that the left-of-center wordsmith refers to as the “flag of slavery.” What kind of justice is this?

  Never let it be forgotten that the means of Northern industrial growth had its origin in the slave trade. Every nickel of profit that Northerners have made from that time to this day is tainted by the blood money of the slave trade.

  We all have seen, heard, or read the Yankee propaganda about the horrors of the taskmaster’s whip down in Dixie. But how often will we see on television or read in a magazine about the horrors of the “middle passage”? Most people have never heard about the middle passage, no doubt because it did not occur down South!

  The movement of slaves from Africa to America began with the capture of Negroes by stronger black tribes in the interior of the African continent.41 These Negroes were brought to the coast and sold (traded) for rum and guns. Note that the first step in the slave trade was taken by Africans preying upon their fellow Africans! It was seldom necessary for white men to go into the “jungle” to capture Negroes in this first passage. The middle passage was the movement of the slaves from the African coast to market. During the middle passage the sick slaves, who were near death with a contagious disease, and the dead were sorted out and thrown overboard. The rigors of living for up to one year in the unsanitary “tween deck” of the slave ship took its toll on human life.42

  It has been estimated that more than thirty-three percent of the Africans taken from their homes died by the end of the middle passage. Cruel as it was, this was still a very effective method of providing merchandise for the Yankee slave merchants. The Northern slave peddlers brought to the slave trade their customary Yankee gift for efficiency in commerce. The combination of the holding areas and the horrors of the middle passage greatly increased the human cost of the slave trade. Yet the efficient Yankee peddler was still able to turn a handsome profit!43

  The Yankee myth of history conveniently chooses to ignore Northern crimes against blacks while concentrating upon the supposed crimes of the evil and vile Southern slave owners. Yet, can anyone imagine a Southern slave owner treating his slaves as cruelly as the Yankee merchants treated their captives? Any good farmer knows that he cannot stay in business if he allows half of his stock to die each year. If not for humanitarian reasons, then for simple economic reasons, the Southern slave owner treated the Negro better than the Yankee did. After all, Southerners had to pay hard cash to the Yankee for their slaves. Southern slave owners could not buy Negroes with cheap rum the way the Yankee slave traders did.

  Regardless of how we feel about the subject today, the system of slavery was a legal and accepted system. While we were still colonies, Great Britain passed laws protecting slave property. Some American colonies were so zealous to protect their slave property that they passed additional laws. The first colony to pass such a law was our good ole Yankee neighbor of Massachusetts, which stands out as the first colony in America to legalize slavery, by enacting its own law to protect slavery. This was accomplished in the Code of the Massachusetts Colony in New England,44 said statute adopted in 1641—a mere twenty-one years after the founding of this Yankee colony.

  The people of Massachusetts were so eager to get into the slave business that they began to enslave Native Americans before they entered into the African slave business!45 When the Indian Wars began, the colony of Massachusetts began to capture and enslave the Indian population within its domain. In 1646, the colony passed a law by which Indians could be seized, held as slaves, and exported for sale. Major Richard Waldron (acting on behalf of the general court of the territory, which now is part of the state of Maine) in the winter of 1676 issued an order for the enslavement and export of any Indian “known to be a manslayer, traitor, or conspirator.”46 Now who do you supposed would decide if an accused Native American met these criteria? We can only speculate, but we are sure that these poor, hapless Indians received no better treatment at the hands of their Yankee conquerors than the Southern people received some two hundred years later!

  These Yankees enslaved not only Indians who went to war against them, but also those who came voluntarily to them under their offer of amnesty.47 So many Native Americans were enslaved that the thrifty, righteous men of Yankeedom shipped Indian slaves to Bermuda, Barbados, and other islands of the Caribbean for a neat little profit.48 The trading of Native Americans was the beginning of the Yankee slave trade. This Yankee slave commerce was to continue legally until 1808 and illegally until the War for Southern Independence.

  The contrast between the way the New England Yankee colony of Massachusetts dealt with its native population and the way the Southern colony of Virginia dealt with its native population is worthy of note. Virginia passed a law that made it illegal to enslave or deport a Native American under any circumstances.49 While Massachusetts was still busy kidnapping and enslaving the American Indian, Virginia was busy passing laws to protect its Native American population. Yet, Virginia and the rest of the South are held up for ridicule, scorn, and derision by the self-righteous Yankee. At the same time the liberal media eagerly awaits another opportunity to spread the gospel of South-bashing, it totally ignores the fact that the Yankee colony of Massachusetts was the first to engage in the slave trade. Also hidden from public view is the fact that the industrial and commercial strength of the North is based upon the profits made by kidnapping, enslaving, and selling human beings—both Native Americans and Africans. The Yankee myth of history has made the Southerner the villain, the Yankee the hero, and the truth the victim.

  QUESTION NUMBER ONE

  Who First Legalized Slavery in America?

  ANSWER

  The Northern Colony of Massachusetts

  If the Yankee state of Massachusetts was the first to use the force of its government to protect slavery, then the second question to ask is:

  Who First Attempted to Prohibit the Importation of Slaves?

  The answer to this second question will be as astonishing to most people as is the answer to the first.

  When the abolition of slavery is mentioned, most people think of Lincoln, radical Republicans, and the terrorist John Brown. But long before these extremists spoke, the state of Virginia had already gone on record as opposing the African slave trade. By an act of the General Assembly of the state of Virginia, while Patrick Henry was governor, the state outlawed the slave trade in Virginia.50 This was done on October 5, 1778, ten years before Massachusetts and thirty years before the British parliament acted on the vile trade. The law was entitled “An act for preventing the further importation of slaves.” This law not only prevented the importation of slaves, but also stipulated that any slave brought into the state contrary to the law would be then and forevermore free.51

  This action of Virginia was the first taken in the civilized world prohibiting the slave trade. But even this was not the first time Virginia had attempted to stop the slave trade. Notice that the law was passed after Virginia had declared itself independent (i.e., had seceded) from Great Britain. The House of Burgesses had many times before attempted to stop the slave trade only to have its laws overruled by the royal governor.52 The royal governor, who was appointed by the king, was acting on behalf of the king and parliament. In the months before he wrote the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, a Southerner from Virginia, stated that one of the reasons the people of Virginia felt compelled to secede from the established British government was that the British had forced the state to endure the slave trade.53 Jefferson stated that the king had “refused us permission to exclude by law” the slave trade. James Madison of Virginia spoke of the slave trade: “The British Government constantly checked the attempts of Virginia to put a stop to this infernal traffick.”54

  Virginia led the way for the entire South on the subject of this “infernal traffick.” Throughout the South
the move was on to end the trade, but the commercial interest of first England and then New England put a stop to this movement. After the American War for Independence was won, it would be the commercial interest of the North, allied with two Southern states, that would take the lead in protecting the slave trade. Years later, blue-clad soldiers from the North would march down South to free the slaves that they had sold into bondage. It has been said that while the invaders from the North sang glory, glory hallelujah, the very money they had made from the sale of slaves was jingling in their pockets. What a warped sense of morality to claim that it is wrong to own a slave but not to kidnap and sell a man into slavery. By now the people of the South should be very accustomed to such Yankee logic.

  It should be clear why the United States Constitution protected this infernal traffic for twenty years after the adoption of the Constitution. The commercial interest of the North led the fight to include the provision for the protection of the slave trade in the Constitution. This provision was inserted into the new constitution over the objections of Virginia and other Southern states.55 With the help of a few Southern representatives, the North won its first constitutional battle with the South. It was only after the South had seceded from the union with the North that a clear and unqualified prohibition was written into the Constitution outlawing the slave trade as Article 1, Section 9, of the Constitution of the Confederate States of America. That’s right; it was not the United States Constitution that made the first clear and unqualified prohibition against the slave trade, but the Confederate States Constitution. When was the last time you saw a television program or read a history book which explained that little bit of history?