Most assuredly North. :up:

Since Charles Mason and Jeremiah Dixon were hired to survey the border between Pennsylvania and Maryland, I would have to concur that Pennsylvania is definitely north of the Mason-Dixon line.

I believe the line is the southern border of Pa.

My uncle was in the KKK when I was a kid, but dead now. The KKK has a rally in our small town once a year.

When I was a teen I remember the shootout between the KKK and a civil rights movement in Greensboro. It was clear the KKK got a pass, they certainly wouldn't get by with it today. It's on youtube if you want to watch the gun battle.

#1) The first legally recognized slave owner in what is now the US was not one of us "honkies". He was a black man by the name of Anthony Johnson.

#2) While the first slave (John Casor) was black, historical documents show that the same Anthony Johnson also bought 5 whites in 1651.

#3) John Johnson (Anthony Johnson's eldest son) purchased 11 white men and women in 1652.

#4) Not all slavery was in the south. Do some research on Nat Butler - a Maryland (that's in the North, btw) farmer who was black and was notorious for his activities in the business of selling blacks into slavery.

#5) Free blacks are documented in Boston, Mass that owned slaves in 1724 and in Connecticut by 1783. Note - 1783 is AFTER the formation of the US as an independent nation - and both locations are again "in the North".

#6) Research John Stanley - who in the early 1820's owned 3 plantations and 163 slaves. He even hired white overseers to run his interests and property....

#7) Or try the story of William Ellison - who was born a slave, bought his freedom, and became richer than 9 out of 10 whites in South Carolina. When he passed away, he owned 900 acres of land and 63 slaves - none of which did he allow to purchase their own freedom.

#8)1830 in Louisiana alone - here are just a few black folks that owned numerous slaves:
Sophie Delhonde owned 38 slaves.
Lefroix Decuire owned 59 slaves
Antoine Decuire owned 70 slaves
Leandre Severin owned 60 slaves
Victor Duperon owned 10
Victoire Deslondes owned 52 slaves
Martin Donatto owned 75 slaves
Jean B. Muillion owned 52 slaves
Martin Lenormand owned 44 slaves
Verret Polen owned 69 slaves
Francis Jerod owned 33 slaves
Cecee McCarty owned 32 slaves.
The 13 members of the Metoyer family in Natchitoches Parish, LA collectively owned 215 slaves.
Madame Antoine Dublucet owned 44 slaves
Madame Ciprien Ricard owned 35 slaves
Louise Divivier owned 17 slaves
Genevieve Rigobert owned 16 slaves
Rose Lanoix and Caroline Miller both owned 13 slaves each

#9) In 1860 - in Charleston, SC alone:
Marie Weston owned 14 slaves and had a net worth of over $40,000 - when the average white man would make $100 dollars a year.
Justus Angel owned 84 slaves .
Mistress L. Horry owned 84 slaves as well.
The two above were the largest black slave-owners in the city at the time.

#10)According to economic historian Stanley Engerman, "In Charleston, South Carolina about 42 percent of free blacks owned slaves in 1850."

I could go on - but there really isn't any point. Most people adhere to the politically correct "the south was all evil white men wanting to own black slave men to work in the fields and black women to work in the kitchen and "serve the masta" in other ways in the home".

Factually history shows that the issue of slavery is a whole lot more complex than just race or geography.....

I though most people adhere to the correct. "the south was run by white men wanting to own black slave men to work in the fields and black women to work in the kitchen and "serve the masta" in other ways in the home".

Shoudn't this read "black overseers" or was the owner black? Doesn't sound special otherwise. :hmmm:

His point was the owner was black.

T'warnt civil neither!:up:

I already asked Soopa, so now I'm asking you - can we please leave that for the three Civil War threads we already have? This has absolutely zero to do with the Klan wanting to have a rally at Gettysburg.

Free blacks certainly could own and trade slaves, but small in comparison to large planters. In certain cities some wealthy blacks were more integrated in the white community, Charleston, NO, etc, but were never seen equal to whites.

Steve - it also has nothing to do with the Civil War. Not once did I mention the War of Northern Aggression in my post.

My response was only to correct the obvious erroneous statement regarding "honkies" - aka whites being the only ones who owned slaves or for whom "Live, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" applied. Given that there is documentation that shows whites were bought by blacks, such misinformation just continues a politically correct but historically inaccurate picture of slavery.

It was not only whites that owned slaves and it was not only in the "south". Which is why I ended the post as I did.

That's true, but you also didn't address his main point, which was that the people who cried the loudest about their own freedom also owned other human beings.

And you responded to his post, which I considered a derailment, so that applied double to yours, and I guess now applies triple to mine. :dead:

And here's me, just watching a film...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTcaRk0ZRJ4

Can we all stay on topic please.

TIA

is that the war that began when the northerners started shooting at people in fort sumter?