Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 2 months
Re: We've Been Suffering ... What Took You So L [Re: Xlea321]
    #1459867 - 04/15/03 10:00 AM (20 years, 11 months ago)

You are a glutton for punishment, Alex. Does your appetite for public humiliation know no bounds? I would have thought you'd be willing to let this rest, but I am certainly willing to continue if you are.

My original statement was "England outlawed slavery in 1850". When you pointed out that this was incorrect, I amended the date to 1833/34, and have so far provided supporting evidence from ten different links. Today I will add an eleventh -- your own precious Encyclopedia Britannica.

You claimed that "Slavery was formally abolished in England in 1772. It was abolished in the colonies in 1807." You have so far provided supporting evidence from a single link: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/aaworld/reference/articles/slavery.html --

"By the end of the Middle Ages slavery no longer existed in England, and the famous Cartwright decision of the reign of Elizabeth I (1569) held that ?England was too pure an air for slaves to breathe in.?

You then made a leap of some two hundred years from the date mentioned (1569) and claimed "Slavery was formally abolished in England in 1772. It was abolished in the colonies in 1807. " Alex, if you were going to quote a passage from that link, why quote a passage that had nothing to do with either 1772 or 1807 (let alone 1833/34, when the Abolition of Slavery Act was passed)? Could it possibly be that you were afraid to provide us with the Encyclopedia Britannica's report of the Somerset decision?

Some brief questions before we get back to the Encyclopedia Britannica -- If slavery no longer existed in England "by the end of the Middle Ages", why were there an estimated 15,000 slaves in England at the time of the Somerset case in 1772? Why was it necessary for justice Mansfield to even hear the Somerset case? Why was it necessary for England to abolish the slave trade in 1807, then pass the Abolition of Slavery Act in 1833/34?

Curious to see what your source had to say about 1772, I went to your link, and guess what I found? Why, the Encyclopedia Britannica article says:

"The reexportation of slaves from England was challenged by a group of humanitarians led by Granville Sharpe. Chief Justice Mansfield ruled in 1772 that James Somerset, a fugitive slave from Virginia, could not be forcibly returned to the colonies by his master."

So even the single link you provided agrees with all the links I provided. The Somerset case did not "formally abolish" slavery in England, it merely placed a limit on what an English master could do with his slaves.

You make much of my not including this sentence in one of my posts: "Though the legal status of the case was far from clear, in practice it put an end to slavery in England . "

First of all, the sentence states that "the legal status of the case was far from clear..." Indeed it was, which is why the Mansfield ruling didn't "formally abolish" slavery in England. It did however provide the impetus for the extended campaign which resulted in the formal abolition of slavery in 1833/34 when the Abolition of Slavery Act was passed. I don't dispute it was a landmark decision, I merely pointed out correctly that it didn't "formally abolish" slavery in England.

The second part of the sentence "...in practice it put an end to slavery in England," is disputed by every other link I provided, but even assuming that one writer is correct and all the others are wrong, and that Mansfield's ruling put an end "in practice" to slavery in England, that is not the same as "formally abolishing" slavery in England.

Your second link is simply a tourist brochure from Bristol city council!!

Incorrect. It is not a "tourist brochure". It is a comprehensive site giving the history of the slave trade in Bristol from the fifteenth century on. And, as you are aware, Bristol was the major English port for the English slave industry. Who is more qualified to comment on slavery than Bristol?

Your last link is to an 18 year olds students essay!!

And this means it is to be disregarded? Does that mean that your conviction (learned as a student) that the English Empire covered 3/4 of the globe may be similarly disregarded? If you have read the essay, then you certainly noticed he supports his statement by citing Ron Ramdin's book, The Making of the Black Working Class in Britain, 1987 as the source.

Can you find a single serious historical link to support your position?

Well, let's see here -- so far I have provided links from:

-- two universities - msu.edu and eiu.edu
-- an article by a professor with a PhD in history - Marjie Bloy
-- commentary from the famous English jurist Sir William Blackstone (1723-1780), who was appointed the first Vinerian Professor of English Law at Oxford in 1758
-- the proceedings of Old Bailey, the most famous court in England
-- CASBAH, - "a project funded by the Research Support Libraries Programme (RSLP) with the aim of identifying and mapping national research resources relating to Caribbean Studies and the history of Black and Asian people in the UK."
-- The Victoria County History (founded in 1899) website. "All the information in the VCH is compiled by professional historians who systematically check original historical documents."
-- an essay listing Ron Ramdin's 1987 book, "The Making of the Black Working Class in Britain" as a source. Some of Ramdin's other books include "Arising from Bondage: A History of the Indo-Caribbean People", " Reimaging Britain: Five Hundred Years of Black and Asian History", " From chattel slave to wage earner : a history of trade unionism in Trinidad and Tobago".
-- a website detailing the history of Bristol, the city that was the hub of the English slaving industry
-- a website detailing the history of St. Kitt's and Nevis, a Caribbean nation composed mostly of descendants of English slaves

And with my quote from your link that I provided earlier in this post -- "The reexportation of slaves from England was challenged by a group of humanitarians led by Granville Sharpe. Chief Justice Mansfield ruled in 1772 that James Somerset, a fugitive slave from Virginia, could not be forcibly returned to the colonies by his master." -- I have now added the Encyclopedia Britannica as a source. That makes a total of eleven links, Alex.

Let's make it an even dozen, shall we? Why don't we take a look at the words of Mansfield himself. I found this at the UCLA law school website:

http://www.law.ucla.edu/students/academicinfo/coursepages/s2001/337/somerset.htm --

"Somerset v. Stewart, Lofft 1, 98 Eng. Rep. 499 (K.B. 1772), is one of the briefest judicial opinions you will read in this or any other course. Yet, as mentioned on p. 88 of the excerpt from the book by Hyman & Wiecek, this short opinion by a British court "molded American constitutional development for ninety years" and "passed into the mainstream of American law, where it influenced the workings of the federal system and left slavery vulnerable to legal challenge."

"Somerset, which has attracted the attention of numerous historians, was reported in several versions. Here follows the version of Mansfield's opinion most commonly relied on by historians:?
?
"The only question before us is, whether the cause on the return [to the writ] is sufficient? If it is, the negro must be remanded; if it is not, he must be discharged. Accordingly, the return states, that the slave departed and refused to serve; whereupon he was kept, to be sold abroad. So high an act of dominion must be recognized by the law of the country where it is used. The power of a master over his slave has been extremely different, in different countries. The state of slavery is of such a nature, that it is incapable of being introduced on any reasons, moral or political; but only positive law, which preserves its force long after the reasons, occasion, and time itself from whence it was created, is erased from memory: It's so odious, that nothing can be suffered to support it but positive law. Whatever inconveniences, therefore, may follow from a decision, I cannot say this case is allowed or approved by the law of England; and therefore the black must be discharged."

Well, Alex, isn't that interesting! Mansfield says that in order for him to rule that Somerset may legally be returned from England to Virginia, there must be an English law that specifically states so. This is the legal meaning of "positive" law - it is not enough for Somerset's master (a Virginian named Stewart) to argue that there is no English law preventing him from shipping Somerset back to Virginia, there must be an actual English law that specifically states that such a practice is permitted.

Mansfield correctly notes that the laws of Virginia are irrelevant to the case, since both parties are physically in England, and the case is being tried before an English magistrate in an English court, therefore English law must apply. Since he was unable to find an English law that met the necessary criteria, he had no choice but to rule as he did.

Note that this decision created no new law, and did nothing to alter the legal status of slaves in England. It was a narrow ruling on a specific point of the existing body (or in this case, non-existing) of English law -- whether or not English slave owners had the legal right to force their slaves to leave England against their will.

pinky


--------------------

Edited by Rono (04/15/03 04:12 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: &#8216;We&#8217;ve Been Suffering ... What Took You So L [Re: Phred]
    #1459907 - 04/15/03 10:28 AM (20 years, 11 months ago)

*** clap, clap, clap, clap ***

Ladies and gentlemen of The Shroomery, we await the comic relief of a reply, please enjoy. Things to look for, dodges, tangents, equivocations, straw men, insults, an ego that refuses to admit a mistake...


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 19 years, 2 months
Re: &#8216;We&#8217;ve Been Suffering ... What Took You So L [Re: Evolving]
    #1460414 - 04/15/03 01:11 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

/me puts my seat in an upright position, secures the tray table, and hold on for teh rebutle...


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineflow
outlaw immortal
Registered: 11/20/02
Posts: 496
Last seen: 9 years, 2 months
Re: &#8216;We&#8217;ve Been Suffering ... What Took You So L [Re: Azmodeus]
    #1460462 - 04/15/03 01:25 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

...which will consist of one or two sentences claiming it's all nonsense

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: &#8216;We&#8217;ve Been Suffering ... What Took You So L [Re: Phred]
    #1460737 - 04/15/03 02:43 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

The second part of the sentence "...in practice it put an end to slavery in England," is disputed by every other link I provided, but even assuming that one writer is correct and all the others are wrong, and that Mansfield's ruling put an end "in practice" to slavery in England, that is not the same as "formally abolishing" slavery in England.

So why did you feel the need to misrepresent the quote by cutting this line from it? If your case is as watertight as you pretend, why did you feel the need to lie?



--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: &#8216;We&#8217;ve Been Suffering ... What Took You So L [Re: Xlea321]
    #1460806 - 04/15/03 03:08 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

In the words of the illustrious Rono in another thread,
Quote:

To tell the truth, I'm pretty sure that nobody really cares about this anymore...it has nothing whatsoever to do with the topic of the thread. If you like I'll start a "when was slavery abolished thread" and you and Pinky can have it out there, or take it to PM's...thanks.




--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 19 years, 2 months
Re: &#8216;We&#8217;ve Been Suffering ... What Took You So L [Re: Evolving]
    #1460831 - 04/15/03 03:17 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

I bet NO-ONE debates with each other via pm's....lol....

exept mabye fadedpinkwings.....hey where'd he go?  he never did tell us all why he supported the patriot act!? :grin:


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: &#8216;We&#8217;ve Been Suffering ... What Took You So L [Re: Evolving]
    #1460833 - 04/15/03 03:18 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

*** clap, clap, clap, clap ***

Ladies and gentlemen of The Shroomery, we await the comic relief of a reply, please enjoy. Things to look for, dodges, tangents, equivocations, straw men, insults, an ego that refuses to admit a mistake...



No surprise to see you nailed that one.

For awhile I wondered why anyone would bother replying to a **pre-edited for Rono**, pile of **pre-edited for Rono**, who **pre-edited for Rono**, and then **pre-edited for Rono**.

Then I realized that if for no other reason than comic relief, it's well worth it.

Thanks pinky.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Edited by luvdemshrooms (04/15/03 03:31 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 19 years, 2 months
Re: &#8216;We&#8217;ve Been Suffering ... What Took You So L [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1460853 - 04/15/03 03:23 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

say what?!?!?!? :shocked: :confused: :confused: :frown: :tongue:


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: &#8216;We&#8217;ve Been Suffering ... What Took You So L [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1460886 - 04/15/03 03:33 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

Then I realized that if for no other reason than comic relief, it's well worth it.

Believe me, the comic relief of someone desperately editing lines to misrepresent quotes is exquisite.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblez@z.com
Libertarian
Registered: 10/13/02
Posts: 2,876
Loc: ATL
Re: &#8216;We&#8217;ve Been Suffering ... What Took You So L [Re: Xlea321]
    #1460893 - 04/15/03 03:37 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

Alex, sometimes it is better to just let things go.


--------------------
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: &#8216;We&#8217;ve Been Suffering ... What Took You So L [Re: Xlea321]
    #1460900 - 04/15/03 03:39 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

Give it a rest Alpo. Nobody here misrepresents things nearly as much as you do. As he said, it didn't affect the meaning. Not even a little bit.

Now you on the other hand, are probably the most dishonest poster on this site..... bar none.

Admit you were wrong and move on. Be a man.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 19 years, 2 months
Re: &#8216;We&#8217;ve Been Suffering ... What Took You So L [Re: Xlea321]
    #1460903 - 04/15/03 03:40 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

Ok so he "misrepresented" a quote...what about all his other points? or does the quote misrepresentation ruin it for you? :frown:


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: &#8216;We&#8217;ve Been Suffering ... What Took You So L [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1460947 - 04/15/03 03:53 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

As he said, it didn't affect the meaning. Not even a little bit.

Even pink realised that it completly destroyed his argument. Which is why he saw fit to edit that line out. Why else would he feel the need to edit it?


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: &#8216;We&#8217;ve Been Suffering ... What Took You So L [Re: Xlea321]
    #1461002 - 04/15/03 04:11 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

It didn't change anything Alpo. Stop being deliberately dishonest and admit it. Be a man. Gain a modicum of respect. Get over it.

In practice does not mean the same as outlawed. You know it and so does everyone (as far as I can tell) else here.

Grow up.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]

Shop: North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* On Capitolism, Poverty, and Suffering Eightball 2,570 18 07/07/02 10:07 AM
by luvdemshrooms
* Arafat has suffered heart attack, admits aide wingnutx 599 2 10/08/03 02:40 PM
by wingnutx
* Iraqs epic suffering made invisible
( 1 2 3 all )
Xlea321 2,339 54 09/16/03 11:43 AM
by shakta
* There is enormous suffering in America...
( 1 2 all )
carbonhoots 2,135 24 12/30/03 12:17 AM
by Metaxas
* US forces suffer casualties
( 1 2 all )
angryshroom 1,345 21 03/23/03 04:09 PM
by Angry Mycologist
* Names of Suffering Countrys?
( 1 2 all )
barfightlard 1,761 27 12/15/03 04:35 PM
by luvdemshrooms
* 9/11 families say Bush is exploiting their suffering Ellis Dee 884 14 04/08/03 02:00 PM
by pattern
* Oh my God! I've become a conservative!
( 1 2 all )
silversoul7 1,894 38 04/03/03 08:16 AM
by Anonymous

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
4,329 topic views. 4 members, 4 guests and 12 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.024 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 15 queries.