How many Americans know that the first slave owner in America was a black tobacco farmer? How many Americans are aware that thousands of free blacks in the South were, themselves, slave owners? How many know there were 440,000 free American Negros

in 1860, more than half of whom chose to live in the South?

Answer: Very few.

Embedded in the minds of Americans is a grand distortion of black history.

Our perception depends largely on activists in Hollywood and revisionists in academia. Add those who parrot Hollywood and academia and you have a broad swath of ignorance

prevailing in America.

DailyKenn.com is here to set the record straight; at least in part.

Did you know the following about black history in America?

• The first slave owner in American history was black.

Anthony Johnson came to the American colonies in August, 1619 as an indentured servant. In 1623 Johnson had completed his indenture and was recognized as a free

negro. In 1651 he acquired 250 acres of land in Virginia, later adding another 250 acres; a sizable holding at the time.

John Casor, a black indentured servant employed by Johnson, became what historians have long considered to be America's first slave. His enslavement resulted from a legal

dispute between Johnson and Robert Parker. Parker was a white colonist who employed Casor while Casor was still indentured to Johnson. Johnson sued Parker in Northampton

Court in 1654. The court upheld Johnson's right to hold Casor as a slave on March 8, 1655. The court found:

The court seriously consideringe and maturely weighing the premisses, doe fynde that the saide Mr.

Robert Parker most unjustly keepeth the said Negro from Anthony Johnson his master ... It is therefore the Judgement of the Court and ordered That the said John Casor Negro forthwith returne unto the service of the said master Anthony Johnson, And that Mr. Robert Parker make payment of

all charges in the suit.

Five years later, in 1670, the colonial assembly passed legislation permitting blacks and Indians the right to own slaves of their own race, but prohibiting them from owning

White slaves. [Source]

(In July, 2012, supporters of Barack Obama considered it politically advantageous to advance the notion that John Punch was the first slave of African descent in the American colonies. Obama is suspected of being a descendant of Punch through Obama's maternal

lineage.)

• Free blacks commonly owned black slaves in the antebellum South.

Black historian Henry Louis Gates, Jr. (L) at the infamous 2009 "Beer Summit"

with Barack Obama and Sgt. James Crowley

Henry Louis Gates of the White House 'Beer Summit' fame said, "This is the dirtiest

secret in African American history. A surprisingly high percentage of free Negros in the South owned slaves themselves." [Source]

There were thousands of black slave owners in the South.

"In 1830 there were 3,775 such slaveholders in the South who owned 12,740 black slaves, with

80% of them located in Louisiana, South Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland. There were economic differences between free blacks of the Upper South and Deep South, with the latter fewer in number, but wealthier and typically of mixed race. Half of the black slaveholders lived in cities rather than

the countryside, with most in New Orleans and Charleston."

Historians John Hope Franklin and Loren Schweninger wrote:

"A large majority of profit-oriented free black slaveholders resided in the Lower South. For the most part, they were persons of mixed racial origin, often women who cohabited or were mistresses of

white men, or mulatto men ... . Provided land and slaves by whites, they owned farms and plantations, worked their hands in the rice, cotton, and sugar fields, and like their white

contemporaries were troubled with runaways." Historian Ira Berlin wrote:

"In slave societies, nearly everyone – free and slave – aspired to enter the slave holding class, and upon occasion some former slaves rose into slaveholders’ ranks. Their acceptance was grudging, as they carried the stigma of bondage in their lineage and, in the case of American slavery, color in

their skin."

To write extensively about blacks who owned slaves in the antebellum South would require a library of full volumes. Black slave owners: free Black slave masters in South Carolina,

1790-1860 By Larry Koger is one such volume.

Koger tells of Richard Holloway, Sr., a black carpenter who purchased his African cousins as slave labor. Cato was the name of one of his slaves. Cato remained in

Holloway's possession throughout the 1830s and '40s, according to Koger, until he was sold to his son, Richard Holloway, Jr., in 1845. Cato died in 1851 and the younger

Holloway replaced him with the purchase of a 16 -year-old black male.

Koger says there were ten black slave owners in Charleston City, SC in 1830.

In 1860 the largest slave owner in South Carolina was William Ellison, a black plantation owner.

Again, to account for all black-owned slave in the South would require a volume of

books.

[Source] [Source] [Source]

The ratio of free blacks owning black slaves in 1830 was 25 to 1, expressed as 25:1. In other words there was about one black-owned black slave for every 25 free blacks living

in the United States in 1830.

In 1830 there were about 319,599 free blacks living in the United States. That same year there were 12,740 slaves owned by blacks

The ratio of free blacks owning slaves, then, is 319,599:12,740. That is reduced to 25:1.

The ratio for whites was about 6:1. Whites were about four times more likely to own

slaves than blacks. Though the proportionate number of whites owning slaves was greater than blacks owning slaves, the fact that any blacks owned slaves, let alone a 25:1

ratio, is problematic to revisionists.

Widespread black-on-black slavery is, quite frankly, an embarrassment to revisionists and multiculturalists. They prefer a false narrative in which a culture of whip-snapping white plantation owners damned their hordes of slaves to long hours of picking cotton in the

hot Dixie sun.

Black Property Owners in the South, 1790-1915, by Loren Schweninger is available, in part, on Google books [source].

• In 1860 about half of all free Negros chose to live in the South.

The 1860 census reveals there were 440,000 free blacks living in America. About half of those resided in the South, even though they were free to move to the North. [Source]

• Blacks owning black slaves was even common in the pre-war North.

Black-on-black slavery was not unique to Southern states.

Koger informs us that in 1830 New York City recorded eight black slave holders who owned a total of 17 black slaves. The total number of slaves owned by blacks in 1830 was

more than 10,000 according to the federal census of 1830; and that includes only four states: Louisiana, Maryland, South Carolina and Virginia. In addition there were "black

master in every state where slavery existed," Koger says.

There is no record, to my knowledge, of a slave ship disembarking in a Southern port. All blacks slaves from Africa were delivered to ports in the North and transported to the

South.

• Without black African slave owners there would have been no slavery in America.

Henry Louis Gates of the White House 'Beer Summit' fame enraged his base in 2010 by strongly opposing reparations to blacks. According to Gates the slave trade was almost

wholly the result of black slave owners selling their human wares to Europeans.

He wrote:

"While we are all familiar with the role played by the United States and the European colonial powers like Britain, France, Holland, Portugal and Spain, there is very little discussion of the role Africans themselves played. And that role, it turns out, was a considerable one, especially for the

slave-trading kingdoms of western and central Africa. These included the Akan of the kingdom of Asante in what is now Ghana, the Fon of Dahomey (now Benin), the Mbundu of Ndongo in modern

Angola and the Kongo of today’s Congo, among several others."

"The historians John Thornton and Linda Heywood of Boston University estimate that 90 percent of those shipped to the New World were enslaved by Africans and then sold to

European traders. The sad truth is that without complex business partnerships between African elites and European traders and commercial agents, the slave trade to the New World would have been

impossible, at least on the scale it occurred." [Emphasis added]

The notion of White European raiding parties descending on unsuspecting African villages is a gross distortion of reality. Not only does the historical record argue against White raiding parties, but such parties would have been costly and inefficient compared to purchasing Africans already held in slavery. White slave traders would not endure the risk related to such incursions. Furthermore, Africans already held as slaves would be less willing to resist, particularly among those whose African owners were brutal and abusive

enemies.

[Source: Ending the Slavery Blame-Game, Henry Louis Gates, The New York Times April 22, 2010]

Gates noted on another occasion that the importance of David Livingstone's

disappearance into black Africa was significant because White people never ventured beyond the coasts. The prospect of disease and other unanticipated dangers compelled

them not to embark on slave-hunting expeditions.

According to the report of Joseph Cinque's testimony in court, New York Journal of Commerce (10th January, 1840), the leader of the famed Amistad slave ship rebellion

was originally taken captive by Africans, not Europeans.

It is widely rumored that Cinque, himself, became a slave trader after his return to Africa. [source]

• Beating black slaves in the South was extremely uncommon.

In 1838 Harriet Martineau visited New Orleans where she heard tales of a particularly abusive slave owner. Here interest focused on Delphine LaLaurie who resided in a

mansion at 1140 Royal Street. "Martineau reported that public rumors about LaLaurie's mistreatment of her slaves were sufficiently widespread that a local lawyer was

dispatched to Royal Street to remind LaLaurie of the laws relevant to the upkeep of slaves." The attorney found no evidence of wrong doing.

Nonetheless, LaLaurie was forced to forfeit nine slaves after a subsequent investigation

found her guilty of slave abuse.

It was later rumored that one of LaLaurie slaves intentionally set fire to the mansion to draw attention to ongoing abuse. Bystanders forced entry to squelch the fire and

discovered "seven slaves, more or less horribly mutilated ... suspended by the neck, with their limbs apparently stretched and torn from one extremity to the other."

Tales of the abuse quickly spread throughout New Orleans. An angry mob of White residents descended on the mansion and "demolished and destroyed everything upon

which they could lay their hands."

LaLaurie fled the mob violence, escaping to Mobile, Alabama and then to Paris.

What we learn from the historical LaLaurie episode is that:

1. Laws protecting slaves from abuse were enforced. 2. White residents did not tolerate owners who abused their slaves.

[Sources: Wikipedia | NOLA | cogitz ]

• The legacy of runaway slaves is overstated

When discussing the Underground Railroad, Black historian Henry Louis Gates affirms that there were not millions of black slaves who escaped to the North. Over multiple generations he suspects there were fewer than 50,000 runaway slaves, including those

who left for a night out and then returned home.

For generations there were thousands of black slaves who lived on properties adjacent to free states. Few bothered to hop the farm fence or cross the river to freedom. The Ohio

River, for example, was a shallow river prior to the extensive construction of damns. The Indiana Dept. of Natural Resources notes that the river was shallow enough during

hot summer months to be be traversed by wading across [source]. It was never a dangerous impediment to slaves serious about escaping to the North.

There were no border fences built to retain hordes of runaway slaves. They simply

weren't needed.

Runaway slaves who managed to find freedom in the North were immediately challenged with prospects of employment. White Northerners, including many abolitionists who

vigorously opposed slavery, were adverse to runaway slaves -- or any free blacks -- living among them; let alone employing them. Perhaps most notable was an association of Quakers and other Christians popularly called The American Colonization Society. The group was dedicated to a two-fold plan for American blacks: First, free them from

slavery and, second, repatriate them to Africa through colonization.

The organization's proper name was The Society for the Colonization of Free People of Color of America. It is ironic that one of the earliest uses of the popular phrase, 'people of color,'

was incorporated in the name of an organization dedicated to expelling blacks from American soil. [source]

• Slaves were allowed to own, earn and save money

Black slaves frequently purchased their own freedom. Seldom asked is, "Where did they get the money?"

Historians ignore the fact that black slaves had the freedom to earn money and save it as

private property.

The May 3, 1861 edition of the Vindicator and reprinted from the Richmond Dispatch reported that a black slave wished to donate his savings to help equip black

Confederate volunteers. "In our neighboring city of Petersburg, two hundred free negroes offered for any work that might be assigned to them, either to fight under white officers, dig ditches, or any

thing that could show their desire to serve Old Virginia. In the same city, a negro hackman came to his master, and with tears in his eyes, insisted that he should accept all

his savings, $100, to help equip the volunteers. The free negroes of Chesterfield have made a similar proposition. Such is the spirit among bond and free, throughout the whole

of the State. Those who calculate on a different state of things, will soon discover their mistake."

$100 in 1860 would be worth almost $2,500 in 2012.

• Blacks, including slaves, were allowed to own property in the antebellum South

The 'rent-a-slave' concept may grate against our contemporary moral sensitivities, but owners of black slaves often found it economically reasonable to earn extra income by

renting idle slaves. We also may find it surreal to learn that slaves often rented themselves. This allowed them to live autonomous lives to varying degrees, depending

on the rental agreement arranged with their owners. [source]

Mary Ann Wyatt is a quintessential example of a self-rented slave. She was a Virginian slave who rented herself (and her five children) for $45 per year for ten years. During

this time Wyatt established an oyster retail business. Each week she would travel sixteen miles to the Rappahannock River and buy two baskets of oysters which she sold on the town square to local residents in King and Queen County. Wyatt earned enough profit

to purchase properties including a rental house. [ibid]

Southern states enacted laws to regulate the activities of self-rented or otherwise autonomous slaves. This was due to concern that autonomous slaves would outbid

freemen, including whites, for freelance work, such as construction. There was also concern that autonomous slaves would resell untraceable stolen property. This prompted free Southerners to press for limitations on what autonomous slaves were allowed to sell.

Many whites favored the concept of autonomous slaves, believing it encouraged personal responsibility among blacks.

• Some blacks became wealthy in the antebellum South

Hidden from familiar history by revisionists are blacks who became wealthy in the antebellum South. The notion of rich black people in the South simply doesn't fit the

nonsensical revisionist narrative that all blacks lived in brutal conditions on white-owned plantations.

One of the first women in America to effectively become a self-made millionairess

was Eulalie d' Mandeville. Mandeville was a free-born black woman in New Orleans. By the mid-1840s she had amassed a fortune valued at about $4.2 million in today's (2013)

dollars. Mandeville purchased dry goods abroad, warehoused them, and resold them through a network of retailers. Revisionists don't want us to know that the success of this

brilliant black woman was dependent, in part, on the utilization of slave labor. That would undermine the precedent for reparations and other absurdities. Nor do they want us to know that Southern white retailers had no qualms about creating business ties with

black people. [source]

As mentioned earlier, the largest slave owner in South Carolina was William Ellison, a black plantation owner who had, himself, been a slave.

• Black crime and gang attacks were common in the 19th century

In 1828 19-year-old Abraham Lincoln and a friend were "attacked by seven Negroes with intent to kill and rob them. They were hurt some in the melee, but succeeded in

driving the Negroes from the boat, and then 'cut cable' 'weighed anchor' and left." [Source]

19th century newspaper editors, unencumbered with the burden of political correctness, were often candid in their description of black crime and lifestyles. Commenting in the

Franklin County, Virginia Valley Spirit an editor wrote, "Observe their actions and listen to their conversation. What disgusting obscenity! What horrid implications! Their licentious and blasphemous orgies would put to the blush the imps of pandemonium. Drinking whisky and inhaling tobacco smoke you would hardly suppose would keep soul and body together; yet you perceive no indications here that

would lead you to suppose they subsist on anything else. You seem impatient to get out of the atmosphere of this room; mount that ladder and take a look in the room above.

One look will be sufficient. Here huddled promiscuously together, on beds--no, not on beds; there is an idea of ease and comfort attached to a bed, that would never enter your mind on looking at these heaps of filthy rags--are men, women and children; arms, heads and legs, in a state of nudity, protrude through the tattered covering in wild confusion.

Poverty, drunkenness, sickness and crime, are here in all their most miserable and appalling aspects. But, come, we have twenty rooms of this description to visit in this building, and we cannot devote any more time to this set. What! twenty rooms filled

with beings of this kind?"

The article was published in the March 30, 1859 edition. [Source]

• Blacks voluntarily fought for the Confederacy

Black Confederate troops were featured are the cover of Harper's Weekly in 1863 and numerous photographs of blacks in Confederate uniforms are accessible on the Internet.

The first military conscription (draft) in American history was enacted on April 16, 1862

by the Confederacy to boost the army's shortage of manpower. Even though Negros were not drafted except as noncombatants until March 1865, many volunteered. Blacks

voluntarily formed a regiment in North Carolina, for example.

The May 10, 1862 edition of Harper's Weekly is one of numerous historical records. It provides this account: "The correspondent of the New York Herald, in one of its late numbers, reports that the rebels had a regiment of mounted negroes, armed with

sabres, at Manassas, and that some five hundred Union prisoners taken at Bull Run were escorted to their filthy prison by a regiment of

black men.” 83% of Richmond's male slave population

volunteered for duty. Frederick Douglas famously noted, “There are at the present moment many Colored

men in the Confederate Army doing duty not only as cooks, servants and laborers, but real soldiers, having musket on their shoulders, and bullets in their pockets, ready to shoot down any loyal troops and do all that soldiers may

do to destroy the Federal government and build up that of the… rebels.” [Source]

Douglas was frustrated that black Confederate soldiers were treated with more dignity than their black counterparts serving in the Union army. Specifically, Douglas seemed

concerned that black Confederate soldiers were allowed to carry fire arms as combatants while black Union soldiers were consigned to menial, non-combatant tasks.

• The last Confederate general to surrender was a Cherokee Indian

The revisionist imagery of a White Southern army is further dismissed by Brigadier General Stand Watie, a Cherokee Indian and principle chief of the Cherokee nation. After the Cherokee Nation voted to support the Confederacy, Watie was placed in

command of the First Indian Brigade of the Army of the Trans-Mississippi that included Cherokee, Seminole, and Osage infantry. Some find it ironic that the Watie, a Cherokee Indian, was the last Confederate general to surrender to the North. [Source]

Harper's Weekly January 10, 1863 Picture Title: Rebel Negro Pickets

as Seen Through a Field Glass

• America's first black military officers served for the Confederacy

In 1861 about 1,500 free blacks in New Orleans answered Gov. Thomas Overton Moore's call to serve the Confederate army. The new enlistees were garnered at a meeting called by ten prominent black residents. About 2,000 blacks attended the

meeting on April 22, located at the Catholic Institute. The new regiment was formed May 2.

Considering there were about 10,000 free blacks of both genders and all ages living in

the Louisiana in 1861, the large number of black enlistees speaks to the loyalty of blacks to the Confederacy. It can be estimated that as many as half of all free black males

between the ages of 15 and 50 enlisted.

The governor appointed three white officers to oversee the regiment. They were accompanied by three black officers appointed from the regiment. These became the first

black military officers in American history.

The regiment saw no action and, as was common in the Confederacy, the soldiers necessarily procured their own firearms and uniforms. It is apparent that free blacks

living in the South were permitted to own and carry firearms.

Historians claim that about ten percent of the regiment defected to the North after the regiment was disbanded.

• The Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves in the Confederacy

It is commonly known, but seldom acknowledged, that the Emancipation Proclamation only applied to slaves living in most of the Confederacy. From the Union's perspective,

therefore, slavery was legal in parts of the North but not in most of the South. The concept of a slavery-free Union fighting a slave-legal South is an inversion of reality from

the North's perspective. The Union considered the South legally free while the North was not.

The Union slave states of Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware were not affected by the proclamation. Slavery remained legal in Tennessee, that state being under Union control at the time the proclamation was enacted. New Orleans and thirteen Louisiana

parishes were likewise exempted.

The Emancipation Proclamation actually freed about 20,000 slaves when it went into effect on January 1, 1863. Those were slaves living in certain Confederate regions

controlled by the North.

From the Union's perspective 500,000 slaves in Union states and 300,000 slaves in

exempted Southern areas were legally unaffected by the Emancipation Proclamation at the time it was enacted.

• Mutiny by black soldiers occurred in the U.S. military.

The two most notorious black mutinies were in Houston (1917) and Townsville,

Australia (1942).

The latter mutiny was marred by black soldiers turning machine guns on their commanding officers. Australian troops were summoned to quash the rebellion. When serving in the U.S. Congress, Lyndon Johnson was sent to Townsville to investigate the uprising. The Townsville mutiny remained censored from American history until early

2012 when papers of the late president were reviewed.

[Source] [Source] [Source]

• About one-third of lynching victims were white.

There were 4,743 victims of lynching between 1882 and 1968. Of those 1,297 were white and 3,446 were black.

Lynchings occurred in 44 states. There were more whites than blacks lynched in 25 of

those 44 states.

The Department of Justice informs us that each year there are an estimated 8,000 to 9,000 black-on-black homicides. Using 8,500 as a mean, there are as many black-on-

black homicides every five months as there were blacks killed during the 86-year lynching era. [source]

• Rosa Parks was not arrested for violating Jim Crow rules

Rosa Parks was arrested and fined for defying the authority of a bus driver, not for violating a Jim Crow rule.

Montgomery, Alabama's Jim Crow rule designated the first ten seats on each bus as 'whites only.' Parks was seated in the eleventh row. She was ordered to move by the

driver who was acting on his own legal authority unrelated to Montgomery's prevailing Jim Crow rules that allowed black passengers to remain seated when no other seats were

available.

Drivers were endowed with authority similar to that currently held by commercial airline personnel.