BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Leadfingers
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 09:10 AM

200 !!

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: dianavan
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 02:20 AM

I actually agree with you when you say,

"The Prime Minister's apology or statement of regret is therefore superfluous."

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Paul from Hull
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 05:59 PM

Yes, that seems to be the problem across much of Africa, doesnt it, Liberia suffering from exactly the problem you state, & other artificially drawn borders in the Colonial period paying no attention to traditional tribal areas.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Les from Hull
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 04:45 PM

Well. Paul, Africa has got plenty of such spots and Freetown has been up there with them! Perhaps one problem was of Britain's making, returning slaves from different areas and leaving them in one spot. They've had freed slaves from Nova Scotia, repatriated creoles from Jamaica and groups of freed slaves from the Atlantic Slave Trade, released by the Royal Navy. Sierra Leone, in common with many of the 'nations' of Africa was given borders that did not necessarily relate to existing tribal groups.

Freetown's other 'sister city' is New Haven, Connecticut.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Paul from Hull
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 04:00 PM

Don't forget, our Les, that Freetown has been described as 'a septic spot on the arse of Africa', though I can't remember by who. Perhaps thats another reason for the twinning, in light of some of the opinions on Hull in various media! *G*

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Les from Hull
Date: 07 Dec 06 - 04:39 PM

CEASE, Wilberforce, to urge thy generous aim!
Thy Country knows the sin, and stands the shame!
The Preacher, Poet, Senator in vain
Has rattled in her sight the Negro's chain

There lines were written by Anna Letitia Barbauld in her 'Epistle to William Wilberforce, Esq. On the Rejection of the Bill for Abolishing the Slave Trade' (this was the 1791 Bill, which was rejected by Parliament). That was a more appropriate time to be talking about shame, and perhaps compensation to those enslaved. In fact compensation was paid - to the slave owners! This, of course, was 1834 when the slaves were supposed to be freed, but in fact they were not free until 1838 when the owners had been paid off.

When Britain was suppressing the Slave Trade, recaptured slaves and some repatriated ones were taken to Freetown, Sierra Leone to be given their freedom. The first Governor (1808) was Thomas Perronet Thompson, another Hull man and a friend of Wilberforce. Thompson was later MP for Hull and a strong campaigner for reform.

Freetown is another of Hull's Twin Towns.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Dec 06 - 02:02 PM

Why single out one counry? Because that country was singled out by itself - the anniversary involved is the date at which a British Government outlawed the slave trade.

That anniversary is indeed something to be proud of - but it only happened because it was recognised that the slave trade was something to be ashamed of, and that Britain had up to that tiem palyed a major role in it.

Insofar as it is possible for people to be proud of Britain for its role in the abolition of the slave trade and the fight against slavery, it is right for them to be ashamed of what Britain did in developing and carrying out the Atlantic Slave Trade.

I do not think that the people who fought to end the slave trade would disagree with that.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Teribus
Date: 07 Dec 06 - 11:32 AM

Bunnahabhain, stated that -"The (thread) title was due to it being a British politician making statements, concerning an anniversery of a British law, so Britian in the title was entirely reasonable."

MGOH's "Shame at"/"Shame of" matters neither here nor there. Specifically looking at Britain's role in the slave trade it would appear that the social conscience of the United Kingdom relating to the revulsion of the slave trade was aroused long before any of the other participants in that trade. Acting on a popular movement calling for the universal abolition of the slave trade successive British Governments of the day enacted legislation to erradicate the trade and tasked the nation's armed forces, predominantly the Royal Navy, to enforce that legislation. The Prime Minister's apology or statement of regret is therefore superfluous.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Dec 06 - 09:43 AM

Newton was a reformed slave trader.
Most britons were not slave traders.
Britain was one of many nations with merchants who traded.
Why single out one country?
If anyone wanted to start a thread about the abolition of slavery however, Britain should indeed be singled out for glory as a nation that did more than any other.
I will not hold my breath for an anonymous guest to do that though.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Dec 06 - 04:52 PM

I don't think anyone was denying that the British did a good job trying to close down the trade. That's something to be grateful for - but it doesnm't wipe out the centuries of slave trading and slave driving tat preceded and helped motivate it. Hence Tony Blair's statement.

John Newton got it right:

Amazing grace! How sweet the sound
That saved a wretch like me!
I once was lost, but now am found;
Was blind, but now I see.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Paul from Hull
Date: 06 Dec 06 - 03:19 PM

Did anyone watch 'Amistad' on BBC1 last night? I'm sure most here have seen it, & if not I heartily recommend it. I can watch it time & time again...had it on Video at one time, dunno what happened to it.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Dec 06 - 02:36 PM

It is not "petulent hypersensitivity" to say that, yes , British merchants traded slaves but on the plus side...
The argument was well put that Britain has much to take pride in over the abolition of the Atlantic trade.
The thread title invited such a response.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame at slave trade.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Dec 06 - 02:10 PM

"Shame at" rather than "shame of" would have been clearer, and less likely to provoke kneejerk responses. "Tony Blair expresses shame at Britain's role in the slave trade" would have been even clearer, but a bit long.

But this rather petulant hypersensitivity to imagined or real insult is the very thing "the British" have traditionally prided themselves for disdaining, and with some justice.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Dec 06 - 02:00 PM

OK but those who do not consider that britain has a shameful history in relation to slavery will be bound to dispute it; and those who are anti british anyway will seize on it as a new club to beat us with.
That is what seems to have happened.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 06 Dec 06 - 01:51 PM

The title was due to it being a British politician making statements, concerning an anniversery of a British law, so Britian in the title was entirely reasonable.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Dec 06 - 01:33 PM

The anti British chosen thread title caused this polarised debate.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Dec 06 - 12:55 PM

The preoccupation in this thread some people seem to have with pointing fingers of accusation at various countries seems to miss the point badly. It fels like a historical equivalent of football hooliganism.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Teribus
Date: 06 Dec 06 - 11:18 AM

Oh well it now sems as though Ard has accepted that Barbary Corsairs used Irish ports to store and reprovision, examples having been furnished by Barnacle Bill and others. Doesn't matter a toss who they were colluding with ashore, my original statement was that they used Irish ports, nothing more, nothing less. But fret not Ard when I get back to the UK I will provide you with chapter and verse on it from "Sovereign of the Seas". It would also appear that you now do believe that an Irishman by the name of O'Driscoll did in fact lead the Corsairs into Baltimore, or at least that you can find no fault in him having done so. But just to set the matter straight Ard - I certainly never mentioned anything about it - Did I?

With regard to attempts made to free those taken off as slaves, lets give a big round of applause to one Oliver Cromwell, the Lord Protector, who sent Admiral Blake south in 1655 to "negotiate" release of captives. Blake pressed home his attack on ships belonging to the Corsairs off one port so successfully and persistantly that when he arrived off Algiers they immediately released over 3000 prisoners without a fight.

Such punitive expeditions were occasionally mounted but became more common during the early 19th Century. Those expeditions were mounted by the US Navy and by the Royal Navy.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Dec 06 - 03:31 AM

Nice to know that the PIRA boys would have saved the settlers Divis.
Those poor women and girls taken for sexual slavery.
The value of the men slaves about that of an onion, they would be chained to an oar as long as they could row and then disposed of.
Little boys commanded the best price. They would be buggered through their childhood and then the galley oar awaited.
But fair play to anyone who had a hand in it as Ard said.
They were only English after all.

Subject: Lyr Add: The Slave Chase
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Dec 06 - 06:15 PM

Here's a song that seems relevant in this thread:

The Slave Chase" (circa 1845+)

"Set ev'ry stitch of canvas to woo the fresh'ning wind,
Our bowsprit points to Cuba, the coast lies far behind;
Fill'd to the hatches full, my boys, across the seas we go,
There's twice five hundred Niggers in the stifling hold below,
A Sail! what say you boys? well, let him give us chase!
A British Man-of-War, you say­­ well, let his try the race.
There's not a swifter vessel ever floated on the waves,
Than our tidy little Schooner, well ballasted with slaves."

Now stronger yet, and stronger still, came down the fiery breeze,
And even fast and faster sped the strange ship on the seas;
Flinging each rude and bursting surge in glitt'ring haloes back,
And bearing high to heav'n aloft, the English Union Jack.
"Now curses on that Ensign," the Slaving Captain said,
"There's little luck for Slavers when the English bunting's spread.
But pack on sail, and trim the ship, before we'll captur'd be,
We'll have the Niggers up, my boys, and heave them in the sea."

Hoarse was the Slaving Captain's voice, and deep the oath he swore,
"Haul down the flag, that shot's enough, we don't want any more."
Along side dash'd a cruiser's boat, to board and seize the prize;
Hark! to that rattling British cheer, 'tis ringing to the skies.
"Up, up, with the Negroes speed'ly, up, up, and give them breath.
Clear out the hold from stem to stern, that noisome den is death.
And run aloft St. George's Cross, all wanton let it wave,
The token proud that under it there never treads a slave.

Words by Angus B. Reach, Esq. Composed by Henry Russell [1812-1900]
for his new extravaganza "Negro Life"

And here is the tune that goes with it. This comes from this site of Henry Russell's music. (And I've adjusted the text a little, in line with The Common Muse (Penguin 1965) where I found this first, to make it scan better.

One interesting thing about this song is that it rather undermines the common assertion that the idea that the word "nigger" is offensive is a modern one, and nobody took offence if it in the old days. Here we have the slavers using the word freely, but the anti-slavers are shown avoiding its use. And that's around 1845.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Dec 06 - 03:52 PM

Never rated the corsairs much anyway - They were only a posh cortina. The pointed from was pretty ugly as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: greg stephens
Date: 05 Dec 06 - 03:22 PM

There has been a lot of discussion and speculation about what happened in Baltimore. Now, let me bring you the latest facts(from one who has played many gigs in Baltimore, and the adjoining islands Shirkin and Cape Clear). Firstly, there still an inordinate number of O'Driscolls around. Secondly, there are still an inordinate number of Brit settlers about. But I have to say I have seen no sign of corsairs from the Barbary coast.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 05 Dec 06 - 03:19 PM

If the Provo's had been about then they wouldn't have got away with stealing our fine young and women with good child bearing hips.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Dec 06 - 01:58 PM

The Corsairs took defenceless people from their coastal settlements on the ccoast of England and other European countries too. Were they all complacent?

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: ard mhacha
Date: 05 Dec 06 - 01:10 PM

Keith, They had the Irish subdued and complacency by the English led to the Corsairs easy pickings.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Les from Hull
Date: 05 Dec 06 - 10:45 AM

But wouldn't that mean there's nothing but corners. That means there's no point in calling them corners. I've never heard of anyone talking about the corners of an orange, or of a football. Mind you, they do have corner kicks, don't they? Hmm! Anyway, you said every corner and there's not an infinite number of people yet!

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Dec 06 - 10:34 AM

Surprising that the corsairs carried them off so easily with their army to protect them.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Dec 06 - 10:32 AM

Every polyhedron has vertices Les.
A tetrahedron has 4, a cuboid 8.
A sphere has an infinite number.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: ard mhacha
Date: 05 Dec 06 - 10:31 AM

Keith whereever the Irish settled they did not bring an army along, to Europe, Africa, Aisa, America or Australia.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Les from Hull
Date: 05 Dec 06 - 10:27 AM

The globe has got 'corners'?

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Dec 06 - 10:26 AM

There are Irish and english settlers in every corner of the globe.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: ard mhacha
Date: 05 Dec 06 - 10:02 AM

Keih how much sympathy had those "settlers" for the original inhabitants, when they came in behind their armies and banished the native Irish to their fate.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Snuffy
Date: 05 Dec 06 - 09:07 AM

How is sending Irish into slavery in the Caribbean any different from sending English into slavery in North Africa?

Neither can be justified

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Dec 06 - 07:46 AM

They were just settlers Ard.
Surely they did not deserve that.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: ard mhacha
Date: 05 Dec 06 - 04:45 AM

The English were in sole control of Ireland and whatever went on around the Irish coast was England`s responsibility, fair play to the O`Driscolls if they had a hand in whatever went on, after all they were no different from the people of any country in the world that resisted the usurper.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Dec 06 - 03:41 AM

Subject: RE: Songs for white slaves?
From: McGrath of Harlow - PM
Date: 15 Sep 03 - 05:36 PM

And here's what a Baltimore (Cork) website says about it: "The allegation is sometimes made that the raid may even have been organised by the O'Driscolls, who did not care to see their lands being taken over by English settlers - You'd never know!"

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 01:06 PM

At last - two bits of common sense. Thanks girls:-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: dianavan
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 01:03 PM

Good link, les.

Thats exactly the point. If Blair is such a bleeding heart, Britain should actively support Fair Trade that does not use children as slave labour. Instead he covers his inaction by apologizing for something that happened in the past. Big deal!

Empty words from an empty politician.

If he is truly sorry, then the apology should be backed with meaningful action.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: jacqui.c
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 11:25 AM

Thanks Les - I would agree with you. That site makes for interesting reading.

Empty words from a political leader who, IMHO, has been shown to be a sham, really are a nothing. Maybe he should be apologising for what seems to be a do nothing attitude by the Government in respect of what is happening TODAY. Mind you, that would mean admitting that his own government was falling down on the job, wouldn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 11:11 AM

I think I am either reading a completely different thread or I have lost my marbles.

Who said, quite correctly, Thanks very much for the correction you are right the Port "raided" was Baltimore, not Skibereen. ?

And who said, completely incorrectly, ... and also your statement that an Irishman guided the Corsairs into Baltimore. ?

Or did I just dream them both?

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Les from Hull
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 10:27 AM

jacqui - you can read the reports about human trafficking, forced labour, domestic 'servants' etc prepared for Anti-Slavery International here

This is the best resource I know for such information. If you look through the website there are campaigns to support if you feel so inclined. In my opinion this would be a much better way of using one's time than carping on about who were the worst slavers in history and whether we should be apologising for them now.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: ard mhacha
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 08:53 AM

Dave, Teribus didn`t hesitate when he stated that Irish ports were used by the Corsairs, he catigated McGrath for his lack of knowledge of naval history, he T having studied the subject.
Well Dave he was looking for 17 minutes to correct that lie that was a couple of days ago, no word yet from the man.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: jacqui.c
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 08:45 AM

I'm interested, Mohammed, in details of any slaves still in Britain. I am aware that there have neen instances of Middle Eastern families being found to have Sub-Saharan people working for them in a way that suggests slavery and that there have been cases of Asian and East European girls being brought into the country under false pretences and then forced to work as sex slaves - mostly, it seems, by their own countrymen. Is this what you are talking about?

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: GUEST,Mohammed Smith
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 08:32 AM

One thing is for certain Mohammed, neither England, nor Britain was solely responsible for the trans-Atlantic Slave Trade
(Not the point... This is about 'Britain')

Doesn't matter how much you twist and turn the following remains true:
"..the greatest slavers in Africa were, and still are, the Arabs/Muslims"
(You keep on saying this, but you have produced no direct reference to anywhere to support your contention)

And you think there are no slaves, still, in Britain, Teribus?

Back in Camberwick Green again, are you, Teribus?

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 06:38 AM

I think there may be more word when you answer the questions that were posed to you, Ard. What is the problem? You were jumping up and down when Teribus made a mistake, for which he later apologised and corrected his error. Yet you appear to have posted things that were untrue with no retraction, let alone apology. Why is perfectly OK to raise issues about any facet of British imperialism, for which you have the support of most people, yet if anyone suggests that the Irish are less than perfect you go ballistic?

Not that this has any relevence to the point in question. Anyone attempting to win political points from this evil trade, including Blair and many here, is beneath contempt in my view.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: ard mhacha
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 06:10 AM

Any word on the Irish ports?, I see the English gentry had a nice little earner going, trading with the Corsairs, surely this can be true.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Teribus
Date: 02 Dec 06 - 04:21 AM

I see how this has now translated from "Britain's Shame" to "England's Shame" in the mind of Mohammed Smith. How did that come about Mohammed? And in his interpretation of the figures supplied Mohammed seems to think that England was the only country involved in the trans-Atlantic trade. Where did that idea come into your head Mohammed? because that is not strictly true is it Mohammed? The Spaniards, Portuguese, French, Dutch and the Americans were also involved in the trade.

From the song "Blow, Boys, Blow"

Was you ever on the Congo River
Blow, boys, blow
Black fever makes the white man shiver
Blow, me bully boys, blow

A Yankee Ship Came down the river
Blow, boys, blow
Her masts and yards they shone like silver
Blow me bully boys blow

Now what do you think she had for cargo
Blow, boys, blow
Loaded with black sheep to run the embargo
Blow me bully boys blow"

One thing is for certain Mohammed, neither England, nor Britain was solely responsible for the trans-Atlantic Slave Trade - Fact, learn to live with it. My view is that Britains sole efforts to erradicate the trade and to outlaw slavery internationally against some pretty stiff opposition wipes our slate clean.

Doesn't matter how much you twist and turn the following remains true:

"..the greatest slavers in Africa were, and still are, the Arabs/Muslims"

They did it for longer, they captured and sold more slaves than anyone else, and they are still doing it today, now how about us reading something by yourself where we see you demanding that this trade be stopped by those who are actually still practicing it. One things for certain Mohammed - It ain't England.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: dianavan
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 09:03 PM

Teribus - You don't get it.

Regardless of how many slavers there are in the Arab world, Blair is speaking for Brits. The figures regarding the Arab slave trade have nothing to do with an apology for the British slave trade.

If Blair really cared, he would do something about the Brits who are still actively involved in human trafficing and slave wages being paid for British consumption. The Arabs have nothing to do with that.

Blair cannot and should not meddle in the affairs of other nations. He is, however, responsible for the affairs of his own country. He may influence other countries through trade and diplomacy but you point to others as culprits when Britain contributes to human suffering.

I think you have a little problem with accountability.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: GUEST,Mohammed Smith
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 08:05 PM

Nobody knows whose figures they are, Teribus; you keep on neglecting to tell us.
In a source list, yes I would agree. Why would you only type it that way for one author, and not for the rest?

To compare Arab and English Slave trading, surely one must have the perameters equal.
Your accounting for an extra seven hundred and eighty-three (and three quarters) years is not making comparison possible, except in 'Slaves/Year' terms.
You, yourself pushed that proposition forward, so maybe your auntie does have balls, after all.

Damn sight more than you have, by the sounds of it.

Documented evidence, please Teribus.
So far what we have gleaned from our excursions down the statistics road is, that England mechanised the Slave trade, with a whopping 11.6 million units processed in 360 years.

No wonder Blair nearly said sorry.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain's shame of slave trade.
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Dec 06 - 06:58 PM

Only thing is Mohammed Smith - they are not MY figures - Are they, they were compiled by authors, scholars, and government agencies who apparently made far more extensive studies and researches into this trade than either you or I.

Oh! In listing Authors of works Mohammed if you were looking for something by Charles Dickens, in a bookshop or library would you look under "D" or "C". It is quite normal for names of authors to be inverted in source lists.