Title: Property Manager: Fill & Download for Free

You had to ask (also see Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, 542 U.S. 177 (2004)STATES STATUTE TEXT NOTESAlabamaAla. Code § 15-5-30A sheriff or other officer acting as sheriff, his deputy or any constable, acting within their respective counties, any marshal, deputy marshal or policeman of any incorporated city or town within the limits of the county or any highway patrolman or state trooper may stop any person abroad in a public place whom he reasonably suspects is committing, has committed or is about to commit a felony or other public offense and may demand of him his name, address and an explanation of his actions.Appears on lists of “Stop and Identify” StatesAlaskaHowever, Alaska Statutes 12.50.201 allows officers to detain people who were near the scene of certain felonies and may have material information, and if they fail to identify themselves, to serve subpoenas to appear before a grand jury unless they provide ID prior to the return date, and failure to appear before the grand jury can be punished as criminal contempt.ArizonaAriz. Code § 13-241213-2412. Refusing to provide truthful name when lawfully detained; classificationA. It is unlawful for a person, after being advised that the person's refusal to answer is unlawful, to fail or refuse to state the person's true full name on request of a peace officer who has lawfully detained the person based on reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing or is about to commit a crime. A person detained under this section shall state the person's true full name, but shall not be compelled to answer any other inquiry of a peace officer.B. A person who violates this section is guilty of a class 2 misdemeanor.Appears on lists of “Stop and Identify” StatesArkansasArk. Code § 5-71-213(a) A person commits the offense of loitering if he or she:(1) Lingers, remains, or prowls in a public place or the premises of another without apparent reason and under circumstances that warrant alarm or concern for the safety of persons or property in the vicinity and, upon inquiry by a law enforcement officer, refuses to identify himself or herself and give a reasonably credible account of his or her presence and purpose;Appears on lists of “Stop and Identify” StatesCaliforniaCertain police unions have claimed that Hiibel combined with the general obstruction statute creates a duty to identify. There is no support for this in California statutes or case law.ColoradoColo. Rev. Stat. § 16- 3-10316-3-103. Stopping of suspect(1) A peace officer may stop any person who he reasonably suspects is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a crime and may require him to give his name and address, identification if available, and an explanation of his actions. A peace officer shall not require any person who is stopped pursuant to this section to produce or divulge such person's social security number. The stopping shall not constitute an arrest.(2) When a peace officer has stopped a person for questioning pursuant to this section and reasonably suspects that his personal safety requires it, he may conduct a pat-down search of that person for weapons.Appears on lists of “Stop and Identify” StatesConnecticutDelaware19 Del. C. § 1902(a) A peace officer may stop any person abroad, or in a public place, who the officer has reasonable ground to suspect is committing, has committed or is about to commit a crime, and may demand the person's name, address, business abroad and destination.(b) Any person so questioned who fails to give identification or explain the person's actions to the satisfaction of the officer may be detained and further questioned and investigated.(c) The total period of detention provided for by this section shall not exceed 2 hours. The detention is not an arrest and shall not be recorded as an arrest in any official record. At the end of the detention the person so detained shall be released or be arrested and charged with a crime.Appears on lists of “Stop and Identify” StatesDCNo statute. https://go.mpdconline.com/GO/CIR -04-10.pdfFloridaFla. Stat. § 901.151(2) Whenever any law enforcement officer of this state encounters any person under circumstances which reasonably indicate that such person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a violation of the criminal laws of this state or the criminal ordinances of any municipality or county, the officer may temporarily detain such person for the purpose of ascertaining the identity of the person temporarily detained and the circumstances surrounding the person’s presence abroad which led the officer to believe that the person had committed, wasAppears on lists of “Stop and Identify” Statescommitting, or was about to commit a criminal offense.GeorgiaGA. CODE ANN. § 16-11-36(a) A person commits the offense of loitering or prowling when he is in a place at a time or in a manner not usual for law-abiding individuals under circumstances that warrant a justifiable and reasonable alarm or immediate concern for the safety of persons or property in the vicinity.(b) Among the circumstances which may be considered in determining whether alarm is warranted is the fact that the person takes flight upon the appearance of a law enforcement officer, refuses to identify himself, or manifestly endeavors to conceal himself or any object. Unless flight by the person or other circumstances make it impracticable, a law enforcement officer shall, prior to any arrest for an offense under this Code section, afford the person an opportunity to dispel any alarm or immediate concern which would otherwise be warranted by requesting the person to identify himself and explain his presence and conduct. No person shall be convicted of an offense under this Code section if the law enforcement officer failed to comply with the foregoing procedure or if it appears at trial that the explanation given by the person was true and would have dispelled the alarm or immediate concern.(c) A person committing the offense of loitering or prowling shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.(d) This Code section shall not be deemed or construed to affect or limit the powers of counties or municipal corporations to adopt ordinances or resolutions prohibiting loitering or prowling within their respective limitsAppears on lists of “Stop and Identify” StatesHawaii IdahoIllinois725 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/107–14Sec. 107-14. Temporary questioning without arrest.(a) A peace officer, after having identified himself as a peace officer, may stop any person in a public place for a reasonable period of time when the officer reasonably infers from the circumstances that the person is committing, is about to commit or has committed an offense as defined in Section 102-15 of this Code, and may demand the name and address of the person and an explanation of his actions. Such detention and temporary questioning will be conducted in the vicinity of where the person was stopped.(b) Upon completion of any stop under subsection (a) involving a frisk or search, and unless impractical, impossible, or under exigent circumstances, the officer shall provide the person with a stop receipt which provides the reason for the stop and contains the officer's name and badge number. This subsection (b) does not apply to searches or inspections for compliance with the Fish and Aquatic Life Code, the Wildlife Code, the Herptiles-Herps Act, or searches or inspections for routine security screenings at facilities or events. For the purposes of this subsection (b), “badge” means an officer's department issued identification number associated with his or her position as a police officer with that department.Appears on lists of “Stop and Identify” StatesIndianaInd. Code § 34-28-5- 3.5Sec. 3.5. A person who knowingly or intentionally refuses to provide either the person's:(1) name, address, and date of birth; or(2) driver's license, if in the person's possession;to a law enforcement officer who has stopped the person for an infraction or ordinance violation commits a Class C misdemeanor.Appears on lists of “Stop and Identify” StatesIowaKansasKAN. STAT. ANN. § 22-240222-2402. Stopping of suspect. (1) Without making an arrest, a law enforcement officer may stop any person in a public place whom such officer reasonably suspects is committing, has committed or is about to commit a crime and may demand of the name, address of such suspect and an explanation of such suspect's actions.(2) When a law enforcement officer has stopped a person for questioning pursuant to this section and reasonably suspects that such officer's personal safety requires it, such officer may frisk such person for firearms or other dangerous weapons. If the law enforcement officer finds a firearm or weapon, or other thing, the possession of which may be a crime or evidence of crime, such officer may take and keep it until the completion of the questioning, at which time such officer shall either return it, if lawfully possessed, or arrest such person.Appears on lists of “Stop and Identify” StatesKentuckyLouisianaLa. Code Crim. Proc. Ann., Art. 215.1(A)Art. 215.1. Temporary questioning of persons in public places; frisk and search for weaponsA. A law enforcement officer may stop a person in a public place whom he reasonably suspects is committing, has committed, or is about to commit an offense and may demand of him his name, address, and an explanation of his actions.Requires reasonable suspicion.La. Rev.Stat. 14:108(B)(1)(c)§108. Resisting an officer.B.(1) The phrase “obstruction of” as used herein shall, in addition to its common meaning, signification, and connotation mean the following:(c) Refusal by the arrested or detained party to give his name and make his identity known to the arresting or detaining officer or providing false information regarding the identity of such party to the officer.Maine17-A M.R.S.A. § 15- A§ 15-A. Issuance of summons for criminal offense2. Any person who a law enforcement officer has probable cause to believe has committed or is committing a crime other than one listed under section 15, subsection 1, paragraph A, and to whom a law enforcement officer is authorized to deliver a summons pursuant to subsection 1, who intentionally fails or refuses to provide to that officer reasonably credible evidence of that person's correct name, address or date of birth commits a Class E crime, if the person persists in the failure or refusal after having been informed by the officer of the provisions of this subsection. If that person furnishes the officer evidence of the person's correct name, address and date of birth and the evidence does not appear to be reasonably credible, the officer shall attempt to verify the evidence as quickly as is reasonably possible. During the period the verification is being attempted, the officer may require the person to remain in the officer's presence for a period not to exceed 2 hours. During this period, if the officer reasonably believes that the officer's safety or the safety of others present requires, the officer may search for any dangerous weapon by an external patting of that person's outer clothing. If in the course of the search the officer feels an object that the officer reasonably believes to be a dangerous weapon, the officer may take such action as is necessary to examine the object, but may take permanent possession of the object only if it is subject to forfeiture. The requirement that the person remain in the presence of the officer does not constitute an arrest. After informing that person of the provisions of this subsection, the officer may arrest the person either if the person intentionally refuses to furnish any evidence of that person's correct name, address or date of birth or if, after attempting to verify the evidence as provided for in this subsection, the officer has probable cause to believe that the person has intentionally failed to provide reasonably credible evidence of the person's correct name, address or date of birth.Officer needs probable cause that suspect is committing or has committed a crime before it triggers.MarylandMD Code, Criminal Law, § 4-206§ 4-206. Limited search, seizure, and arrest.(a)(1) A law enforcement officer may make an inquiry and conduct a limited search of a person under paragraph (2) of this subsection if the officer, in light of the officer's observations, information, and experience, reasonably believes that:(i) the person may be wearing, carrying, or transporting a handgun in violation of § 4-203 of this subtitle; (ii) because the person possesses a handgun, the person is or presently may be dangerous to the officer or to others; (iii) under the circumstances, it is impracticable to obtain a search warrant; and (iv) to protect the officer or others, swift measures are necessary to discover whether the person is wearing, carrying, or transporting a handgun.(2) If the circumstances specified under paragraph (1) of this subsection exist, a law enforcement officer: (i) may approach the person and announce the officer's status as a law enforcement officer; (ii) may request the name and address of the person; (iii) if the person is in a vehicle, may request the person's license to operate the vehicle and the registration of the vehicle; (iv) may ask any question and request any explanation that may be reasonably calculated to determine whether the person is unlawfully wearing, carrying, or transporting a handgun in violation of § 4-203 of this subtitle; and (v) if the person does not offer an explanation that dispels the officer's reasonable beliefs described in paragraph (1) of this subsection, may conduct a search of the person limited to a patting or frisking of the person's clothing in search of a handgun.Only triggers when the officer reasonably believes the person is “wearing, carrying or transporting” a handgun.MassachusettsMass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 41, § 98§ 98. Powers and Duties.“The chief and other police officers of all cities and towns . . . may examine all persons abroad whom they have reason to suspect of unlawful design, and may demand of them their business abroad and whither they are going; may disperse any assembly of three or more persons, and may enter any building to suppress a riot or breach of peace therein. Persons so suspected who do not give a satisfactory account of themselves, persons so assembled and who do not disperse when ordered, and persons making, aiding and abetting in a riot or disturbance may be arrested by the police, and may thereafter be safely kept by imprisonment or otherwise unless released in the manner provided by law, and taken before a district court to be examined and prosecuted.”M.G.L.A. Ch. 90 § 25 proscribes a fine for any person “operating or in charge of a motor vehicle” that refuses to give his name or address or the name and address of the owner of the vehicle.M.G.L.A. Ch. 268 § 34A prohibits furnishing a false name to law enforcement.Michigan No statuteMinnesotaNo statuteMinn. Stat. Ann. § 624.714 requires a person permitted to carry a weapon to display their permit card and identification documents upon lawful demand by a peace officer.Mississippi No statuteMissouriMo. Rev.Stat. §84.710(2)Police force--officers of state--powers to arrest. 84.710.2. They shall have power within the city or on public property of the city beyond the corporate limits thereof to arrest, on view, any person they see violating or whom they have reason to suspect of having violated any law of the state or ordinance of the city. They shall have power to arrest and hold, without warrant, for a period of time not exceeding twenty-four hours, persons found within the city or on public property of the city beyond the corporate limits thereof charged with having committed felonies in other states, and who are reported to be fugitives from justice. They shall also have the power to stop any person abroad whenever there is reasonable ground to suspect that he is committing, has committed or is about to commit a crime and demand of him his name, address, business abroad and whither he is going. When stopping or detaining a suspect, they may search him for a dangerous weapon whenever they have reasonable ground to believe they are in danger from the possession of such dangerous weapon by the suspect. No unreasonable force shall be used in detaining or arresting any person, but such force as may be necessary may be used when there is no other apparent means of making an arrest or preventing an escape and only after the peace officer has made every reasonable effort to advise the person that he is the peace officer engaged in making arrest.Requires reasonable suspicion.MontanaMont. Code Ann. §46-5-40146-5-401. Investigative stop and frisk.(1) In order to obtain or verify an account of the person's presence or conduct or to determine whether to arrest the person, a peace officer may stop any person or vehicle that is observed in circumstances that create a particularized suspicionRequires “particularized” suspicion.that the person or occupant of the vehicle has committed, is committing, or is about to commit an offense. If the stop is for a violation under Title 61, unless emergency circumstances exist or the officer has reasonable cause to fear for the officer's own safety or for the public's safety, the officer shall as promptly as possible inform the person of the reason for the stop.(2) A peace officer who has lawfully stopped a person or vehicle under this section may: (a) request the person's name and present address and an explanation of the person's actions and, if the person is the driver of a vehicle, demand the person's driver's license and the vehicle's registration and proof of insurance; and (b) frisk the person and take other reasonably necessary steps for protection if the officer has reasonable cause to suspect that the person is armed and presently dangerous to the officer or another person present. The officer may take possession of any object that is discovered during the course of the frisk if the officer has probable cause to believe that the object is a deadly weapon until the completion of the stop, at which time the officer shall either immediately return the object, if legally possessed, or arrest the person.NebraskaNeb. Rev. Stat. §29- 82929-829. Stop and search of person for dangerous weapon; when authorized; peace officer, defined.A peace officer may stop any person in a public place whom he reasonably suspects of committing,Requires reasonable suspicion.who has committed, or who is about to commit a crime and may demand of him his name, address and an explanation of his actions. When a peace officer has stopped a person for questioning pursuant to this section and reasonably suspects he is in danger of life or limb, he may search such person for a dangerous weapon.NevadaNev. Rev. Stat. §171.123NRS 171.123(3) Temporary detention by peace officer of person suspected of criminal behavior or of violating conditions of parole or probation: Limitations.1. Any peace officer may detain any person whom the officer encounters under circumstances which reasonably indicate that the person has committed, is committing or is about to commit a crime.2. Any peace officer may detain any person the officer encounters under circumstances which reasonably indicate that the person has violated or is violating the conditions of the person’s parole or probation.3. The officer may detain the person pursuant to this section only to ascertain the person’s identity and the suspicious circumstances surrounding the person’s presence abroad. Any person so detained shall identify himself or herself, but may not be compelled to answer any other inquiry of any peace officer.4. A person must not be detained longer than is reasonably necessary to effect the purposes of this section, and in no event longer than 60 minutes. The detention must not extend beyond the place or the immediate vicinity of the place where the detention was first effected, unless the person is arrested.Requires reasonable suspicion.New HampshireN.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. §594:2594:2 Questioning and Detaining Suspects.A peace officer may stop any person abroad whom he has reason to suspect is committing, has committed or is about to commit a crime, and may demand of him his name, address, business abroad and where he is going.Requires reasonable suspicion.N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 644.6644:6 Loitering or Prowling. –I. A person commits a violation if he knowingly appears at a place, or at a time, under circumstances that warrant alarm for the safety of persons or property in the vicinity. Circumstances which may be considered in determining whether such alarm is warranted include, but are not limited to, when the actor: (a) Takes flight upon appearance of a law enforcement official or upon questioning by such an official. (b) Manifestly endeavors to conceal himself or any object. (c) Has in his possession tools or other property which would lead a reasonable person to believe a crime was about to be perpetrated. (d) Examines entrances to a structure which the actor has no authority or legitimate purpose to enter.II. Prior to any arrest under this section, unless flight or other circumstances make it impossible, a law enforcement official shall afford the actor the opportunity to dispel any alarm which would otherwise be warranted, by requesting him to identify himself and give an account for his presence and conduct. Failure to identify oraccount for oneself, absent other circumstances, however, shall not be grounds for arrest.New Jersey No statuteNew MexicoNo statuteN.M. Stat. Ann. §30-22-3 states that a person can be guilty of a petty misdemeanor for concealing their identity, i.e., “concealing one's true name or identity, or disguising oneself with intent to obstruct the due execution of the law or with intent to intimidate, hinder or interrupt any public officer or any other person in a legal performance of his duty....”New YorkN.Y. Crim. Proc. Law §140.50New York Criminal Procedure Law § 140.50 Temporary questioning of persons in public places; search for weapons1. In addition to the authority provided by this article for making an arrest without a warrant, a police officer may stop a person in a public place located within the geographical area of such officer's employment when he reasonably suspects that such person is committing, has committed or is about to commit either (a) a felony or (b) a misdemeanor defined in the penal law, and may demand of him his name, address and an explanation of his conduct.2. Any person who is a peace officer and who provides security services for any court of the unified court system may stop a person in or about the courthouse to which he is assigned when he reasonably suspects that such person is committing, has committed or is about to commit either (a) a felony or (b) a misdemeanor defined in the penal law, and may demand of him his name, address and an explanation of his conduct. . . .4. In cities with a population of one million or more, information that establishes the personal identity of an individual who has been stopped, questioned and/or frisked by a police officer or peace officer, such as the name, address or social security number of such person, shall not be recorded in a computerized or electronic database if that individual is released without further legal action; provided, however, that this subdivision shall not prohibit police officers or peace officers from including in a computerized or electronic database generic characteristics of an individual, such as race and gender, who has been stopped, questioned and/or frisked by a police officer or peace officer.Requires reasonable suspicion.Possibly Relevant - Trespass Affidavit Program. Officers can request information if person is located in TAP building restricted by signage and a lock.People v. Roque, 99 N.Y.2d 50, 52 (2002) (“Often a building owner or manager files a ‘trespass affidavit’ with police stating that the building has been plagued by illegal drug trade and asks police to patrol the building for trespassers. Police then stop people they encounter in the halls to ask for identification and to inquire if they are residents or otherwise lawfully in the building.”)People v. Barksdale, 26 N.Y.3d 139, 143–44 (2015). (“Here the record reflects that the encounter occurred in a private space restricted by signage and a lock, and that police assistance in combating trespassing had been sought through enrollment in the [Tresspass Affidavit Program]. Put simply, the coupling of defendant's presence in the subject building with the private and protected nature of that location supports the intrusion giving rise to what became the seizure in question. We conclude that there is record support for the determination that the police had an objective credible reason to request information from defendant.”)North CarolinaNo statuteN.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 14-415.11 requires anyone permitted to carry a a concealed handgun to display both the permit and identification upon request of a law enforcement officer.North DakotaN.D. Cent. Code §29- 29-2129-29-21. Temporary questioning of persons in public places - Search for weapons.A peace officer may stop any person abroad in a public place whom the officer reasonably suspects is committing, has committed, or is about to commit:1. Any felony.2. A misdemeanor relating to the possession of a concealed or dangerous weapon or weapons.3. Burglary or unlawful entry.4. A violation of any provision relating to possession of marijuana or of narcotic, hallucinogenic, depressant, or stimulant drugs. The peace officer may demand of such person the person's name, address, and an explanation of the person's actions.When a peace officer has stopped a person for questioning pursuant to this section and reasonably suspects that the officer is in danger of life or limb, the officer may search such person for a dangerous weapon. If the peace officer finds such a weapon or any other thing, the possession of which may constitute a crime, the officer may take and keep it until the completion of the questioning, at which time the officer shall either return it, if lawfully possessed, or arrest such person.Requires reasonable suspicion.OhioOhio Rev. Code § 2921.292921.29 Failure to disclose personal information.(A) No person who is in a public place shall refuse to disclose the person's name, address, or date of birth, when requested by a law enforcement officerwho reasonably suspects either of the following:(1) The person is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a criminal offense.(2) The person witnessed any of the following:(a) An offense of violence that would constitute a felony under the laws of this state;(b) A felony offense that causes or results in, or creates a substantial risk of, serious physical harm to another person or to property;(c) Any attempt or conspiracy to commit, or complicity in committing, any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section;(d) Any conduct reasonably indicating that any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section or any attempt, conspiracy, or complicity described in division (A)(2)(c) of this section has been, is being, or is about to be committed.(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of failure to disclose one's personal information, a misdemeanor of the fourth degree.(C) Nothing in this section requires a person to answer any questions beyond that person's name, address, or date of birth. Nothing in this section authorizes a law enforcement officer to arrest a person for not providing any information beyond that person's name, address, or date of birth or for refusing to describe the offense observed.(D) It is not a violation of this section to refuse to answer a question that would reveal a person's age or date of birth if age is an element of the crime that the person is suspected of committing.Ohio Rev. Code § 2901.012901.01 General provisions definitions.(11) “Law enforcement officer” means any of the following:(a) A sheriff, deputy sheriff, constable, police officer of a township or joint police district, marshal, deputy marshal, municipal police officer, member of a police force employed by a metropolitan housing authority under division (D) of section 3735.31 of the Revised Code, or state highway patrol trooper;(b) An officer, agent, or employee of the state or any of its agencies, instrumentalities, or political subdivisions, upon whom, by statute, a duty to conserve the peace or to enforce all or certain laws is imposed and the authority to arrest violators is conferred, within the limits of that statutory duty and authority;(c) A mayor, in the mayor's capacity as chief conservator of the peace within the mayor's municipal corporation;(d) A member of an auxiliary police force organized by county, township, or municipal law enforcement authorities, within the scope of the member's appointment or commission;(e) A person lawfully called pursuant to section 311.07 of the Revised Code to aid a sheriff in keeping the peace, for the purposes and during the time when the person is called;(f) A person appointed by a mayor pursuant to section 737.01 of the Revised Code as a special patrolling officer during riot or emergency, for the purposes and during the time when the person is appointed;(g) A member of the organized militia of this state or the armed forces of the United States, lawfully called to duty to aid civil authorities in keeping the peace or protect against domestic violence;(h) A prosecuting attorney, assistant prosecuting attorney, secret service officer, or municipal prosecutor;(i) A veterans' home police officer appointed under section 5907.02 of the Revised Code;(j) A member of a police force employed by a regional transit authority under division (Y) of section 306.35 of the Revised Code;(k) A special police officer employed by a port authority under section 4582.04 or 4582.28 of the Revised Code;(l) The house of representatives sergeant at arms if the house of representatives sergeant at arms has arrest authority pursuant to division (E)(1) of section 101.311 of the Revised Code and an assistant house of representatives sergeant at arms;(m) The senate sergeant at arms and an assistant senate sergeant at arms;(n) A special police officer employed by a municipal corporation at a municipal airport, orDefinition of law enforcement is likely not broad enough to cover ICE agents.other municipal air navigation facility, that has scheduled operations, as defined in section 119.3 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 14 C.F.R. 119.3, as amended, and that is required to be under a security program and is governed by aviation security rules of the transportation security administration of the United States department of transportation as provided in Parts 1542. and 1544. of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as amended.Oklahoma No statuteOregonNo statuteORS 131.615 does not explicitly allow officers to ask for identification if stopping someone.PennsylvaniaNo statuteThe court in Commonwealth v. Campbell, 862 A.2d 659 (Pa.Super. 2004) determined that asking a passenger in a vehicle for identification is reasonable; however, the court explicitly refrained from assessing whether an individual must respond to such inquiries.Rhode IslandR.I. Gen. Laws §12-7- 1§12-7-1 Temporary detention of suspects.A peace officer may detain any person abroad whom he or she has reason to suspect is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a crime, and may demand of the person his or her name, address, business abroad, and destination; and any person who fails to identify himself or herself and explain his or her actions to the satisfaction of the peace officer may be further detained and further questioned and investigated by any peace officer; provided, in no case shall the total period of the detention exceed two (2) hours, and the detention shall not be recorded as an arrest in any official record. At the end of the detention period the person so detained shall be released unless arrested and charged with a crime.R.I. Gen. Laws §12-7- 21§12-7-21 “Peace officer” defined. “Peace officer”, as used within this chapter, means the following individuals or members of:(1) Rhode Island state police;(2) Any member of a municipal or local police department;(3) Rhode Island airport corporation police; (4) Rhode Island park police;(5) Rhode Island capitol police;(6) Rhode Island conservation officers;(7) Rhode Island department of environmental management officers;(8) Rhode Island fire marshals;(9) Brown University police officers;(10) University of Rhode Island campus police officers;(11) Rhode Island College campus security;(12) Campus security at the Community College of Rhode Island;(13) Rhode Island sheriff's department;(14) The investigators of the department of attorney general appointed pursuant to § 42-9-8.1;(15) Any federal law enforcement officer;(16) Correctional investigators and correctional officers of the Rhode Island department of corrections;(17) The witness protection coordinator of the department of attorney general;(18) The warden, associate wardens, majors, captains, lieutenants, sergeants, correctional officers and investigators employed by a project operated by a municipal detention facility corporation, including, but not limited to, the Donald W. Wyatt Detention Facility; provided, such parties listed in this subsection (18) herein shall be deemed to be peace officers while in performance of their duties for the municipal detention facility only, and shall not be deemed toIncludes federal law enforcement officers.be peace officers at any time when they are not in performance of said duties;(19) Retired non-permanent sworn members of any municipal police department shall be deemed to be peace officers only while in the performance of their duties for any municipal police department, and shall be permitted to carry their firearm while in the performance of their duties for the municipal police department, and shall be subject to in-service training requirements of title 42, chapter 28;(20) Workers' Compensation investigators of the department of public safety appointed pursuant to § 42-7.3-3.1;(21) Auto theft investigators appointed pursuant to § 31-50-1;(22) Providence fire department arson investigators; provided, that the arson investigator is a graduate of a police-training academy; and(23) Rhode Island School of Design police officers.South CarolinaNo statuteS.C. Code §17-30-170 allows a law enforcement officer of the state or political subdivision of the state to make a reasonable effort, when practicable, to determine whether a person is lawfully present in the United States if the officer lawfully stops, detains, investigates, or arrests that person for a criminal offense, and during the commission of the stop, detention, investigation, or arrest has a resonable suspicion to believe that the person is unlawfully in the United States.Some municipal ordinances have considered adopting “stop and identify” statutes.South Dakota Tennessee TexasNo statuteNo statuteNo statute Tex. Penal Code Section §38.02 makes it a crime to falsely identifyyourself to an officer.UtahUtah Code Ann. §77- 7-15§77-7-15 Authority of peace officer to stop and question suspect.A peace officer may stop any person in a public place when he has a reasonable suspicion to believe he has committed or is in the act of committing or is attempting to commit a public offense and may demand his name, address and an explanation of his actions.Requires reasonable suspicion.Utah Code Ann. §53- 13-10253-13-102. Peace officer classifications.The following officers may exercise peace officer authority only as specifically authorized by law:(1) law enforcement officers; (2) correctional officers;(3) special function officers; and (4) federal officers.Utah Code Ann. §53- 13-10653-13-106. Federal officers -- State law enforcement authority.(c) “Federal officer” includes:(i) a special agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation;(ii) a special agent of the United States Secret Service;(iii) a special agent of the United States Department of Homeland Security, excluding a customs inspector or detention removal officer;(iv) a special agent of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms;(v) a special agent of the Drug Enforcement Administration;(vi) a United States marshal, deputy marshal, and special deputy United States marshal; and(vii) a U.S. postal inspector of the United States Postal Inspection Service.ICE detention removal agents are exlcuded from the defintion of peace officers.VermontVt. Stat. Ann., Tit. 24, §1983Tit. 24, §1983 Identification to law enforcement officers required. (a) A law enforcement officer is authorized to detain a person if:(1) the officer has reasonable grounds to believe the person has violated a municipal ordinance; and(2) the person refuses to identify himself or herself satisfactorily to the officer when requested by the officer.(b) The person may be detained only until the person identifies himself or herself satisfactorily to the officer or is properly identified. If the officer is unable to obtain the identification information, the person shall forthwith be brought before a Criminal Division of the Superior Court judge for that purpose. A person who refuses to identify himself or herself to the court on request shall immediately and without service of an order on the person be subject to civil contempt proceedings pursuant to 12 V.S.A. § 122. (Added 1997, No. 122 (Adj. Sess.), § 2; amended 2009, No. 154 (Adj. Sess.), § 238; 2013, No. 194 (Adj. Sess.),§ 14, eff. June 17, 2014.)Virginia Washington West VirginiaNo statute Ssome localities may require individuals to identify themselves.No statute Some counties appear to have “stop and identify” ordinances.No statuteWisconsinWis. Stat. §968.24§968.24 Temporary questioning without arrest.After having identified himself or herself as a law enforcement officer, a law enforcement officer may stop a person in a public place for a reasonable period of time when the officer reasonably suspects that such person is committing, is about to commit or has committed a crime, and may demand the name and address of the person and an explanation of the person's conduct. Such detention and temporary questioning shall be conducted in the vicinity where the person was stopped.Statute does not authorize officer to make an arrest.Wis. Stat. §967.02§967.02 “Law enforcement officer” means any person who by virtue of the person's office or public employment is vested by law with the duty to maintain public order or to make arrests for crimes while acting within the scope of the person's authority.Likely broad enough to cover ICEWyoming No statute

Review and Critique of Randy E. Barnett'sOUR REPUBLICAN CONSTITUTION:Securing the Liberty and Sovereignty of We the PeopleREVIEWRandy E. Barnett's Our Republican Constitution (Broadside Books, 2016) is both an informative history of how the United States has been transformed from a republic that secured the liberty and sovereignty of the people to a democracy that threatens that liberty and sovereignty of individual Americans, and a polemic on progressives as the culprits in this hijacking.In his Foreword to Our Republican Constitution, George F. Will states:All American political arguments involve, at bottom, interpretations of the Declaration of Independence and of the Constitution. . . . The Constitution, which Barnett calls “the law that governs those who govern us,” is, he argues, properly read in the bright light cast by the great document that preceded it, the Declaration of Independence (that is prefaced by) . . . what Barnett calls Jefferson’s “fifty-five compelling words”:We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed (pp. xi-xii).We the PeopleThe Constitution of the United States starts with three words — We the People:We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.Barnett lays out two visions of “We the People” that distinguish his democratic* Constitution from his republican Constitution._______________* Throughout this review and critique, I italicize a lower case republican or democratic Constitution even where Barnett does not since Barnett is inconsistent in his use of italics versus capitalization of these terms. _______________________________________________________________________________________At its core, (the) debate (in American politics) is about the meaning of the first three words of the Constitution: “We the People.” Those who favor the democratic Constitution view We the People as a group, as a body, as a collective entity. Those who favor the republican Constitution view We the People as individuals. . . .Each vision of We the People yields a different conception of what is called “popular sovereignty.” . . . (T)he democratic Constitution:• starts with a collective vision of We the People;• which leads to a conception of popular sovereignty based on the “will of the people” as a group;• which, in practice, can only be the will of the majority.What separates a republican Constitution from a democratic Constitution is its conception of “popular sovereignty.” Where a democratic Constitution views sovereignty as residing in the people collectively or as a group, a republican Constitution views sovereignty as residing in the people as individuals (pp 19-22).Individual rights retained by the peopleBarnett argues that:The idea of individual popular sovereignty helps us to better understand just what rights and powers, privileges and immunities are retained by the sovereign people as individuals. Indeed, under a republican Constitution, the rights and powers retained by the people closely resemble those enjoyed by sovereign monarchs, (jurisdiction over private property; the use of force in defense of themselves and their possessions; the right to freely alter their legal relations with their fellow citizens and joint sovereigns).. . . (A) republican Constitution is established, in part, so that these liberties of the individual may be regulated by law. But the proper purpose of such regulation must be limited to the equal protection of the rights of each and every person. Any law that does not have this as its purpose is beyond the just powers of a republican legislature to impose on the citizenry (pp 24-25).The first seven chapters of Our Republican Constitution provide the details of how this all came about, culminating in a revised republican Constitution improved by a Republican Party that amended the Constitution following the War Between the States, and how those improvements were subsequently undermined by progressives who, eventually, changed it into a democratic Constitution designed to “control the people” by imposing “the will of the people” as a majoritarian mandate, undermining the sovereignty of individuals by redefining We the People from a collection of sovereign individuals to a collective of majorities with power over individuals.In the critique that follows, I will suggest in what ways Barnett's analysis is incomplete and the Founders' intentions of securing life, liberty, and freedom to pursue happiness are better carried out by a combination of the republican and the democratic Constitutions that Barnett wants to abandon.CRITIQUEThe Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are each declarations of liberties and plans to secure and protect them. The Declaration invoked the liberty of one people to separate from another and announced the intention of 13 colonies in America to separate from the British Empire to secure that liberty. The Constitution created a republic of those same, now sovereign, States and a federal government restricted to a specific set of enumerated powers to ensure the sovereignty of the States and of the people.Each document contains explicit statements of its purpose.The Declaration of IndependenceWe hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.The Constitution of the United States of AmericaWe the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.The communality between these documents is to protect “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” of We the People and to “secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.” While the Declaration’s emphasis is on “a people” as a collective standing against a henceforth to be a foreign government, the Constitution’s emphasis is on enumerating and restricting the duties and powers of the federal government vis-à-vis the States and individuals residing in them, the first eight Amendments to the Constitution explicating restrictions of the federal government vis-à-vis individuals; the 9th and 10th Amendments emphasizing that rights not explicitly enumerated in the Constitution were reserved to the States and to the people.I have no disagreement with any of the above and appreciate and admire Barnett’s description of the function of each document. What I disagree with is how Barnett distinguishes his republican Constitution as a protector of liberty from his democratic Constitution as a threat to that liberty.A Chronology of Change1789 to 1865. A republican Constitution interpreted and implemented as applying exclusively to free men. Some women and even some enslaved men enjoyed some of the “blessings of liberty (secured) for ourselves and our posterity,” but not all. Barnett’s republican Constitution existed in spirit, even though it was restricted to “free men” by the terms of 1789 and did not apply, yet, to We the People as a whole.1865 to 1948. Abolitionists tried to abolish slavery before 1865, and Republicans succeeded in 1865 through winning the War Between the States and passing the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution before accepting the rebellious states back into the union subject to the acceptance of the amended Constitution.Slavery was gone, but liberty was hardly universal. Post-war, Republicans watched as the KKK organized and re-established white supremacy over blacks throughout the South. Sending troops back south, this time not to defeat the Confederacy but to reconstruct an orderly society of free and recently freed men, all local and state government was suspended for Reconstruction, and federal troops administered and enforced the law. During this period, blacks were at liberty to run for public office, and many were elected.Barnett describes what happened:The reaction of the South to . . . measures to restrict its power over the freed blacks was a campaign of terrorism unwitnessed in this country before or since, from lynchings up to and including mass murders. . . . (T)he Supreme Court used the Due Process Clause to place some limits on the police powers of states. But its efforts were bitterly opposed by progressives (in the north) who favored the rights of states to enact progressive economic legislation, and by their coalition partners, the southern Democrats, who favored the rights of states to enact the economic system of Jim Crow (p 197).By 1876—ironically exactly 100 years after the Declaration—“the (Republican) North grew tired of the occupation (of Reconstruction) and left the Southerners, white and black, to their own devices (and) Democrats in the South got busy reestablishing their old order of racial subordination” (pp 123-124). This became possible when Democrats offered and Republicans accepted the Compromise of 1877 in which Democrats offered to withdraw their Electoral College votes and validate the Electoral College votes Republicans presented from three formerly Confederate states even though Republican Rutherford B. Hays had clearly received fewer popular votes than Democrat Samuel J. Tilden in the three disputed states as well as in the rest of the country Compromise of 1877 Ended Reconstruction, Ushered In Jim Crow Era. The price of Republican Hays becoming president instead of Democrat Tilden? Withdrawal of federal troops from the South and the end of Reconstruction Was President Tilden Robbed? The Great Stolen Election of 1876.The rest, as we say, is history: White Democrats ruled the South for the next 79 years, while Republicans respected the southern states’ rights to deny liberty to blacks throughout the period. The Jim Crow laws established under states’ rights denied human, civil, and voting rights to blacks by both law and custom, enforced by the KKK and other now legitimated terrorist groups, didn’t begin to break down until the north/south coalition of Democrats broke up in 1948 when southern delegates to the Democratic National Convention walked out and ran their own nominee for president—Strom Thurmond of South Carolina—over the civil rights plank in the party platform.Southern Democrats had become increasingly disturbed over President Truman's support of civil rights, particularly following his executive order racially integrating the U.S. armed forces and a civil rights message he sent to Congress in February 1948. At the Southern Governor's Conference in Wakulla Springs, Florida, on February 6, Mississippi Governor Fielding Wright proposed the formation of a new third party to protect racial segregation in the South. On May 10, 1948, the governors of the eleven states of the former Confederacy, along with other high-ranking Southern officials, met in Jackson, Mississippi, to discuss their concerns about the growing civil rights movement within the Democratic Party. At the meeting, South Carolina Governor Strom Thurmond criticized President Truman for his civil rights agenda, and the governors discussed ways to oppose it.The Southern Democrats who had walked out of the Democratic National Convention to protest the civil rights platform approved by the convention, and supported by Truman, promptly met at Municipal Auditorium in Birmingham, Alabama, on July 17, 1948, and formed yet another political party, which they named the States' Rights Democratic Party. More commonly known as the "Dixiecrats," the party's main goal was continuing the policy of racial segregation in the South and the Jim Crow laws that sustained it. Governor Thurmond, who had led the walkout, became the party's presidential nominee after the convention's initial favorite, Arkansas Governor Benjamin Laney withdrew his name from consideration. United - Wikipedia States presidential election, 1948.America's Civil Rights Timeline (from America's Civil Rights Timeline)1857MARCH 6, 1857The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the Dred Scott decision to deny citizenship and constitutional rights to all black people, legally establishing the race as "subordinate, inferior beings -- whether slave or freedmen."1863JAN. 1, 1863Emancipation Proclamation issued by President Lincoln freed slaves in the Confederacy.1865DEC. 6, 1865The 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution abolished slavery. However, Southern states managed to revive slavery era codes creating unattainable prerequisites for blacks to live, work or participate in society. The following year, the First Civil Rights Act invalidated these "Black Codes," conferring the "rights of citizenship" on all black people.1868JULY 9, 1868The 14th Amendment granted due process and equal protection under the law to African Americans.1870FEB. 3, 1870The 15th Amendment granted blacks the right to vote, including former slaves.1875MARCH 1, 1875Congress passed a third Civil Rights Act in response to many white business owners and merchants who refused to make their facilities and establishments equally available to black people. The Civil Rights Act of 1875 prohibited such cases of racial discrimination and guaranteed equal access to public accommodations regardless of race or color. White supremacist groups, however, embarked upon a campaign against blacks and their white supporters.1896MAY 18, 1896The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Plessy v. Ferguson upheld an 1890 Louisiana statute mandating racially segregated but equal railroad cars. The ruling stated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution dealt with political and not social equality. Plessy v. Ferguson gave a broad interpretation of "equal but separate" accommodations with reference to "white and colored people" legitimizing "Jim Crow" practices throughout the South.1909FEB. 12, 1909The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) was founded by a multi-racial group of activists in New York, N.Y. Initially, the group called themselves the National Negro Committee. Founders Ida Wells-Barnett, W.E.B. DuBois, Henry Moscowitz, Mary White Ovington, Oswald Garrison Villiard and William English Walling led the call to renew the struggle for civil and political liberty.1954MAY 17, 1954The U.S. Supreme Court's unanimously ruled in the landmark case Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas that public school segregation was unconstitutional and paved the way for desegregation. The decision overturned the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson ruling that said "separate educational facilities were inherently unequal." It was a victory for NAACP attorney Thurgood Marshall, who argued the case and later returned to the Supreme Court as the nation's first African-American Supreme Court justice.1955AUG. 27, 1955While visiting family in Mississippi, fourteen-year-old Chicagoan Emmett Till was kidnapped, brutally beaten, shot and dumped in the Tallahatchie River for allegedly whistling at a white woman. Two white men, J. W. Milam and Roy Bryant, were arrested for the murder and acquitted by an all-white jury. They later boasted about committing the murder in a Look magazine interview. The case became a cause célèbre of the civil rights movement.DEC. 1, 1955Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat at the front of the "colored section" of a bus in Montgomery, Ala., to a white passenger, defying a southern custom of the time. In response to her arrest, the Montgomery black community launched a bus boycott that lasted over a year until the buses desegregated on Dec. 21, 1956. Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., the newly elected president of the Montgomery Improvement Association (MIA), was instrumental in leading the boycott.1957FEB. 14, 1957The Southern Christian Leadership Conference, comprised of Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., Charles K. Steele and Fred L. Shuttlesworth, was established. King was the organization's first president. The SCLC proved to be a major force in organizing the civil rights movement with a principle base of nonviolence and civil disobedience. King believed it was essential for the civil rights movement not sink to the level of the racists and hate mongers who opposed them. "We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline," he urged.1957SUMMER 1957NAACP Branch President Robert F. Williams successfully led an armed self-defense of the home of the branch vice president and Monroe, N.C.'s black community from an armed attack by a Ku Klux Klan motorcade. At a time of high racial tension, massive Klan presence and official rampant abuses of the black citizenry, Williams was recognized as a dynamic leader and key figure in the American South where he promoted a combination of nonviolence with armed self-defense, authoring the widely read "Negroes With Guns" in 1962.SEPT. 2, 1957Integration was easier said than done at the formerly all-white Central High School in Little Rock, Ark. Nine black students, who became known as the "Little Rock Nine," were blocked from entering the school on the orders of Arkansas Governor Orval Fabus. President Eisenhower sent federal troops and the National Guard to intervene on behalf of the students, but a federal judge granted an injunction against the governor's use of National Guard troops to prevent integration. They were withdrawn on Sept. 20, 1957.On Monday, Sept. 23, when school resumed, Little Rock policemen surrounded Central High where more than 1,000 people gathered in front of the school. The police escorted the nine black students to a side door where they quietly entered the building to begin classes. When the mob learned the blacks were inside, they began to challenge the police with shouts and threats. Fearful the police would be unable to control the crowd, the school administration moved the black students out a side door before noon.1960FEB. 1, 1960Four black university students from N.C. A&T University began a sit-in at a segregated F.W. Woolworth's lunch counter in Greensboro, N.C. Although they were refused service, they were allowed to stay at the counter. The event triggered similar nonviolent protests throughout the South. Six months later, the original four protesters are served lunch at the same Woolworth's counter. Student sit-ins would be an effective tactic throughout the South in integrating parks, swimming pools, theaters, libraries and other public facilities.1961MARCH 6, 1961President Kennedy issued Executive Order 10925, prohibiting discrimination in federal government hiring on the basis of race, religion or national origin and establishing The President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity , the EEOC. They were immediately directed to scrutinize and study employment practices of the United States government and to consider and recommend additional affirmative steps for executive departments and agencies.APRIL 1961The Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) was founded at Shaw University in Raleigh, N.C., providing young blacks with a more prominent place in the civil rights movement. The SNCC later grew into a more radical organization under the leadership of Stokely Carmichael (1966-1967) and H. Rap Brown (1967-1998). The organization changed its name to the Student National Coordinating Committee.1962OCT. 1, 1962James Meredith became the first black student to enroll at the University of Mississippi. President Kennedy sent 5,000 federal troops to contain the violence and riots surrounding the incident.1963JUNE 12, 1963Mississippi's NAACP field secretary, 37-year-old Medgar Evers, was murdered outside his home in Jackson, Miss. Byron De La Beckwith was tried twice in 1964, both trials resulting in hung juries. Thirty years later, he was convicted of murdering Evers.AUG. 28, 1963More than 250,000 people join in the March on Washington. Congregating at the Lincoln Memorial, participants listened as Martin Luther King delivered his famous "I Have a Dream" speech.SEPT. 15, 1963Four young girls, Denise McNair, Cynthia Wesley, Carole Robertson and Addie Mae Collins, attending Sunday school were killed when a bomb exploded at the Sixteenth Street Baptist Church, a popular location for civil rights meetings. Riots erupted in Birmingham, Ala., leading to the deaths of two more black youth.1964JAN. 23, 1964The 24th Amendment abolished the poll tax, which had originally been instituted in 11 southern states. The poll tax made it difficult for blacks to vote.MAY 4, 1964 (FREEDOM SUMMER)The Mississippi Freedom Summer Project was organized in 1964 by the Council of Federated Organizations (COFO), a coalition of four civil rights organizations: the Student NonViolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC); the Congress on Racial Equality (CORE); the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC). The project was to carry out a unified voter registration program in the state of Mississippi. Both COFO and the Summer Project were the result of the "Sit-In" and "Freedom Ride" movements of 1960 and 1961, and of SNCC's earlier efforts to organize voter registration drives throughout Mississippi.The Council of Federated Organizations (COFO) launched a massive effort to register black voters during what becomes known as the Freedom Summer. The Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) began sending student volunteers on bus trips to test the implementation of new laws prohibiting segregation in interstate travel facilities. One of the first two groups of "Freedom Riders," as they are called, encountered its first problem two weeks later when a mob in Alabama sets the riders' bus on fire. The program continued and by the end of the summer, more than 1,000 volunteers, black and white, participated.CORE also sent delegates to the Democratic National Convention as the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party to protest - and attempt to unseat - the official all-white Mississippi contingent.JULY 2, 1964President Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The most sweeping civil rights legislation since Reconstruction, the Civil Rights Act prohibited discrimination of all kinds based on race, color, religion or national origin and transform American society. The law allowed the federal government to enforce desegregation and prohibits discrimination in public facilities, in government and in employment. The "Jim Crow" laws in the South were abolished, and it became illegal to compel segregation of the races in schools, housing or hiring. Enforcement powers were initially weak, but they grew over the years, and later programs, such as affirmative action, were made possible by the Act. Title VII of the Act established the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).AUG. 4, 1964The bodies of three civil-rights workers - two white, one black - were found in an earthen dam. James E. Chaney, 21; Andrew Goodman, 21; and Michael Schwerner, 24, had been working to register black voters in Mississippi, and on June 21, went to investigate the burning of a black church. They were arrested by the police on speeding charges, incarcerated for several hours, and released after dark into the hands of the Ku Klux Klan, who murdered them.1965FEB. 21, 1965 - MALCOLM X AssassinatedBorn Malcolm Little in Omaha, Neb., on May 19, 1925, this world-renowned black nationalist leader was assassinated at the Audubon Ballroom in Manhattan on the first day of National Brotherhood Week. A Black Muslim Minister, revolutionary black freedom fighter, civil rights activist and for a time the national spokesperson for the Nation of Islam, he famously spoke of the need for black freedom "by any means necessary." Disillusioned with Elijah Muhammad's teachings, Malcolm formed his own organization, the Organization of Afro-American Unity and the Muslim Mosque Inc. In 1964, he made a pilgrimage to Islam's holy city, Mecca, and adopted the name El-Hajj Malik El Shabazz.MARCH 1965Selma to Montgomery MarchesThe Selma to Montgomery marches, which included Bloody Sunday, were actually three marches that marked the political and emotional peak of the American civil rights movement.MARCH 7, 1965Bloody SundayBlacks began a march to Montgomery in support of voting rights, but were stopped at the Edmund Pettus Bridge by a police blockade in Selma, Ala. State troopers and the Dallas County Sheriff's Department, some mounted on horseback, awaited them. In the presence of the news media, the lawmen attacked the peaceful demonstrators with billy clubs, tear gas and bull whips, driving them back into Selma.The incident was dubbed "Bloody Sunday" by the national media, with each of the three networks interrupting telecasts to broadcast footage from the horrific incident. The march was considered the catalyst for pushing through the Voting Rights Act five months later.MARCH 9, 1965Ceremonial Action within 48 hours, demonstrations in support of the marchers, were held in 80 cities and thousands of religious and lay leaders, including Dr. Martin Luther King, flew to Selma. He called for people across the country to join him. Hundreds responded to his call, shocked by what they had seen on television.However, to prevent another outbreak of violence, marchers attempted to gain a court order that would prohibit the police from interfering. Instead of issuing the court order, Federal District Court Judge Frank Minis Johnson issued a restraining order, preventing the march from taking place until he could hold additional hearings later in the week. On March 9, Dr. King led a group again to the Edmund Pettus Bridge where they knelt, prayed and to the consternation of some, returned to Brown Chapel. That night, a Northern minister who was in Selma to march, was killed by white vigilantes.MARCH 21-25 1965 (Selma to Montgomery March)Under protection of a federalized National Guard, voting rights advocates left Selma on March 21, and stood 25,000 strong on March 25 before the state capitol in Montgomery. As a direct consequence of these events, the U.S. Congress passed the Voting Rights Act of 1965, guaranteeing every American 21 years old and over the right to register to vote.AUG. 10, 1965Congress passed the Voting Rights Act of 1965, making it easier for Southern blacks to register to vote. Literacy tests, poll taxes and other such requirements that were used to restrict black voting were made illegal.SEPT. 24, 1965President Lyndon Johnson issued Executive Order 11246 to enforce affirmative action for the first time because he believed asserting civil rights laws were not enough to remedy discrimination. It required government contractors to "take affirmative action" toward prospective minority employees in all aspects of hiring and employment. This represented the first time "affirmative action" entered the federal contracting lexicon and sought to ensure equality of employment. (Presidential Executive Order 11375 extends this language to include women on October 13, 1968.)1967JUNE 12, 1967In Loving v. Virginia, the Supreme Court ruled that prohibiting interracial marriage was unconstitutional. Sixteen states that still banned interracial marriage at the time were forced to revise their laws.AUG. 30, 1967Senate confirmed President Lyndon Johnson's appointment of Thurgood Marshall as the first African American Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court after he served for two years as a Solicitor General of the United States.1968APRIL 4, 1968Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., at age 39, was shot as he was standing on the balcony outside his hotel room at the Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Tenn. Escaped convict and committed racist James Earl Ray was convicted of the crime. The networks then broadcast President Johnson's statement in which he called for Americans to "reject the blind violence," yet cities were ignited from coast to coast.APRIL 11, 1968President Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1968, prohibiting discrimination in the sale, rental and financing of housing.1969President Nixon's "Philadelphia Order" presented "goals and timetables" for reaching equal employment opportunity in construction trades. It was extended in 1970 to non-construction federal contractors.1971APRIL 20, 1971The Supreme Court, in Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education upheld busing as a legitimate means for achieving integration of public schools. Although largely unwelcome (and sometimes violently opposed) in local school districts, court-ordered busing plans in cities such as Charlotte, Boston, and Denver continued until the late 1990s.1988MARCH 22, 1988Overriding President Ronald Reagan's veto, Congress passed the Civil Rights Restoration Act, which expanded the reach of nondiscrimination laws within private institutions receiving federal funds.1992JUNE 23, 1992In the most important affirmative action decision since the 1978 Bakke case, the Supreme Court upheld the University of Michigan Law School's policy, which ruled race could be one of factors colleges consider when selecting students because it furthered "a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body."The Involvement of Republicans in the Liberation of Blacks in AmericaAfter a really good start by abolitionists to liberate blacks from slavery, establish the Republican Party, elect Abraham Lincoln president, prosecute the resulting War Between the States, pass the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution, and Reconstruct the Union, Republicans for all practical purposes disappeared from the liberation of blacks from prejudice and discrimination in America. Yet Randy E. Barnett in Our Republican Constitution: Securing the Liberty and Sovereignty of We the People appears not to have noticed this fact. Instead of following up a quite proper defense of We the People being reference to individuals in the United States’ Constitution and following it to its logical conclusion that it is individuals — “each and every one of them” — that the Constitution is referring to, Barnett takes a distinct turn in his last two chapters to argue that the federalist structure of the American republic, controlled primarily by the “police powers” of the separate states, has been supplanted by an “administrative state” controlled primarily by the federal government, and the culprits who have done this dastardly deed are progressives bent on using the majoritarian “will of the people” of the country as a whole to thwart the interests and intentions of the peoples of the separate states to continue to take liberties with the rights of minority residents of their respective states.Rights verses Liberties — An Important DistinctionPhilosophers, political scientists, and the legal profession make a distinction between negative or liberty rights and positive or claim rights. A positive or claim right is a right that entails responsibilities, duties, or obligations on other parties regarding the right-holder, while a negative or liberty right is a right that does not entail obligations on other parties except to refrain from interfering with the freedom of the right-holder (Wesley Newcomb Hohfeld, Fundamental Legal Conceptions, As Applied in Judicial Reasoning and Other Legal Essays, 1920).Civil rights are the rights recognized by a government for the protection of its citizens in respect to guaranteeing fairness and checking discrimination. Civil liberties are the basic, broader rights guaranteed in the Constitution to all citizens and legal residents in the country. Unlike civil rights which may oblige specific actions of others, civil liberties are protective, negative rights that oblige only inaction (Civil Rights vs. Civil Liberties - FindLaw.Barnett’s book and this critique are exclusively about negative or liberty rights and civil liberties.The Purposes and Functions of GovernmentBarnett draws directly from John Locke in stating the purposes or functions of government.According to Locke, the social compact establishes a government that addresses the inconveniences in the state of nature, primarily the inconvenience of executing or enforcing the laws of nature that protect one’s natural rights. . . . (T)hough in the state of nature a person has the natural rights to his life, liberty, and possessions, the enjoyment of such rights is “very uncertain, and constantly exposed to the invasion of others.” Without a government, the enjoyment of one’s property “is very unsafe, very unsecure.” Because the state of nature “is full of fears and continual dangers,” it is reasonable for a person “to join in society with others . . . for the mutual preservations of their lives, liberties, and estates.” (pp. 205-206)Barnett summarizes: “No one of us is strong enough to enforce our rights against everyone else, especially against a group of persons allied against us” (p. 207). Which establishes why Barnett states definitively in his Introduction:Under a republican Constitution, . . . the first duty of government is to equally protect these personal and individual rights from being violated by (either) domestic or foreign transgression (and again later in the his Introduction that) the Declaration stipulates that the ultimate end or purpose of republican governments is “to secure these” . . . preexisting natural rights (which was) the measure against which all government . . . will be judged. This language identifies what is perhaps the central underlying “republican” assumption of the Constitution: that governments are instituted to secure the preexisting natural rights that are retained by the people. In short, that first comes rights and then comes government (pp 23 & 41, respectively).Problems of Factionalism and Majoritarian RuleJames Madison was concerned about factionalism and majoritarian rule.All civilized societies, (Madison) explained, “are divided into different interests and factions, as they happen to be creditors or debtors—Rich or poor—husbandmen, merchants or manufacturers—members of different religious sects—followers of different political leaders—inhabitants of different districts—owners of different kinds of property.”In a democracy, the debtors outnumber the creditors and the poor outnumber the rich. The larger group can simply outvote the smaller. The “majority however composed, ultimately give the law. Whenever therefore an apparent interest or common passion unites a majority what is to restrain them from unjust violation of the rights and interests of the minority, or the individual?” (p 54).(T)he problem Madison identified with “republican Government” as it had been implemented (under the Articles of Confederation) was that it was simply too democratic or majoritarian (p 55).“By a faction,” (Madison) wrote in Federalist 10, “I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community. . . .” (p 56, italics in the original).Madison believed that “to secure the public good and private rights against the danger of such a faction and at the same time to preserve the spirit and the form of popular government, is the great object to which our inquiries (in the Continental Congress) are directed” (pp 56-57).Federalism as a Solution to the “Problem of Faction” and the “Majoritarian Difficulty”Barnett tells us:Madison observed, where the greatest power resides lies the greatest danger to the rights of the people. In a republic, that power resides in a majority of the electorate. . . .The U.S. Constitution is primarily a structure that was intended to protect the individual sovereignty of the people. . . .The majoritarian difficulty is the problematic claim that a subset of the people, whether amounting to a majority or minority of the whole, gets to rule the others. It is problematic because each and every one of the people has certain fundamental rights, and it is only “to secure these rights that governments are instituted among men.” . . . (T)he republican Constitution is supposed to secure the sovereignty of the people, each and every one.Federalism is the term used to describe the division of powers between the national and state governments. . . . (F)ederalism has yielded some enormous advantages for protecting the rights retained by the people. If the federal government has only power to provide for the common defense as well as to protect the free flow of commerce between states, along with a few other specific tasks, most of the laws affecting the liberties of the people will be made at the state level. This would include the regulation of most economic activity as well as what are today called “social issues” (pp 162-163, 167-168, 170, 172-173).A substantive constraint takes the form of “thou shalt not do X,” and must be enforced by the courts. A structural constraint is “self-enforcing” and therefore potentially more effective (p 170).Federalism is a structural constraint.Why Federalism MattersBarnett argues four reasons federalism matters.Federalism makes diversity possible. When it comes to economic regulation, so long as they remain within the proper scope of their power to protect the rights, health, and safety of the public, fifty states can experiment with different regimes of legal regulation so the results can be witnessed and judged rather than endlessly speculated about. . . .As important, if not more so, businesses small and large can decide to relocate if they deem a particular scheme of regulation to be too onerous (p 175).Foot voting empowers the sovereign individual. Ilya Somin has explained how the competition of federalism empowers the sovereign individual. Because one’s vote in an election is swamped by the ballots of millions of others, it is simply irrational for most persons to invest too heavily the time and resources to learn what it takes to vote wisely. Unless one is voting on a referendum, voters can only choose between candidates from one of two (or three) parties, each of which presents a complex package of economic and social policies that voters are not allowed to disaggregate. You must vote for one of the packages, or not vote at all.In sum, a system of voting does not allow the sovereign people to “rule,” and it is a pernicious myth to claim that they do. . . .By contrast, Somin explains, when voting with one’s feet by moving to another city or state, one has far greater control over the results. Each person can individually control the state in which they live be selecting from among fifty choices . . . (a)nd they can personally experience the economic opportunities that result from different state policies. In a federal system, people are then free to move to another state for a better job, or for a cleaner and safer environment (p 177).It’s important to keep social issues local. When it comes to social policy, the preferences of individuals loom even larger. Not only is it difficult to identify the objectively “correct” social policy; it is not clear that such policies even exist. Different people subjectively prefer to live in different types of communities, not only because of differing opinions about morality, but simply as a matter of taste. . . .A rich diversity of preferred lifestyles can only be achieved at the local level. . . . From the perspective of diversity, it is preferable to have the variety of options provided by fifty state governments than a one-size-fits-all national policy. . . .With fifty states to choose from, it is far more likely that a person can find a state or municipality with a social environment in which he or she is more comfortable than if one social policy is imposed on the United States as a whole. . . .By their nature, communities must have one character or another. Given that communities must be one type or another, it is best to have as many different communities as possible from which to choose to satisfy the range of individual tastes, preferences, and moral commitments. The3refore, these are the sorts of zero-sum, or all-or-nothing, decisions that are best decided as locally as is legally feasible (p 178-179).Federalism avoids a political war of all against all. There is another, and potentially even more powerful way that federalism protects the individual sovereignty of the people. When one issue is moved to the national level, it creates a set of winners and a set of losers. Consequently, the more issues that are elevated to the national level, the more contentious , bitterness, and “gridlock” develops as people fight even harder not to lose. The result is a political version of what Thomas Hobbes called a “war of all against all.” . . .As with religious liberty, we avoid a political, and sometimes physical, Hobbesian war of all against all by ensuring that as many issues as possible are handled at the personal level of individual sovereigns, which is why individual liberty is the ultimate means to the pursuit of happiness for people living in society with others. Because of the competitive processes I have already described, reinforced by federal checks on state power, such individual liberty is far better protected at the more local level than at the national.To repeat . . . it is not that the social and economic policy issues protected by a diversity of state regulations are less important than those handled at the national. To the contrary, the more important the issue, the more likely it will engender a political war of all against all to avoid having another’s social policy imposed on you. So, the more important the issue, the less it is fit to be decided at the national level (p 182-183, italics in the original).In other words, Barnett likes federalism. But is that because federalism helps protect the rights and liberties of all or is it because it protects or at least enables some to be at liberty to take liberties with the liberties of others?• Barnett tells us that federalism makes diversity possible in that businesses and individuals can move among states, cities, towns, and rural areas to where the richer and more powerful can use their money, positions, and powers to dominate and control the less rich with less status, and less powerful.• Barnett tells us that voting with one’s feet empowers the sovereignty of individuals because the “Big Fish in the small pond” don’t need to compete or compromise with the “Little Fish”; they can just devour them.• Barnett tells us that it’s important to keep social issues local where they are zero/sum games where they can be won by those same Big Fish.• Barnett tells us, in other words, that federalism avoids political war, allowing the powerful to win most battles without much of a fightThat sounds to me a lot more like racial segregation in the Jim Crow south and residential covenants and redlining in the north than it does like “liberty and justice for all.” Where is the constitutionally guaranteed “security” and “protection” for all? Where is the “liberation” of the individual from factions as well as governments that liberals talk about when attacking progressives who they claim don’t care about liberty?Letting the Courts Decide, Lacking the Will to Enforce the LawBarnett’s book is a dissertation of legal decisions. He resolves the legal issues by defining We the People as a collection of free individuals when it is convenient to do so before the mid 19th century, switching to a collectives of individuals—i.e., “factions—residing in states governed by majority rule that can win state elections and rewrite the Black Codes of Jim Crow days if they desire. For Barnett, states’ rights prevail by majority rule when it is convenient to do so.I’m certain that Ronald Reagan agreed with the republican Constitution and would have been pleased with Barnett’s book. Throughout the 1980 presidential election and again in his inauguration, Reagan boldly stated: “Government isn’t the solution; government is the problem” when he clearly meant “Government is the problem when it gets in MY way of using MY position, power, and resources to secure and protect MY liberties to take liberties with others’.” MY, MY, MY!Barnett’s (and Wills’) Polemic on Progressives and Why They Are WrongAs Barnett insists, the great divide in America today is between those who do believe, as the founders did, that “first come rights and then comes government,” and those who believe, as progressives do, that “first comes government, then come rights.” The former are adherents of the republican Constitution. The latter have given us the democratic Constitution. (George Will, p xii)Barnett has become a leader of those who are reasserting the natural rights tradition that was overthrown during progressivism’s long success in defining the nature of the democratic Constitution and the judiciaries permissive role in construing the government’s powers under it. (George Will, p xiv)While progressivism is today remembered for its advocacy of economic legislation, it also favored legal coercion to achieve other types of social improvements. (Barnett, p 124)When it became clear that (Theodore Roosevelt) would be denied the Republican nomination, . . . (he) bolted the party to create his own “Progressive Party.” In an address to its national convention in Chicago on August 6, 1912, he congratulated them on forming a new party. “The time is ripe, and overripe, for a genuine Progressive movement,” and the “first essential in the Progressive programme is the right of the people to rule.” With respect to the judiciary, Roosevelt said, “our prime concern is that in dealing with the fundamental law of the land, in assuming finally to interpret it, and therefore finally to make it, the acts of the courts should be subject to and not above the final control of the people as a whole.” He then succinctly summarized the central tenet of the democratic Constitution: “Political parties exist to secure responsible government and to execute the will of the people,” which in operation Roosevelt frankly affirmed means the majority of the people, or a majority of legislative bodies. (Barnett, p 134)In other words, progressives were responsible for:• asserting the will of the people as the purpose of government in place of securing the inalienable rights of individuals,• using legal coercion to achieve social improvements,• overthrowing the natural rights tradition, and• instituting the democratic Constitution’s premise that “first comes government, then come rights” for the republican Constitution’s premise “first come rights and then comes government.”I have no disagreement that progressives did all these things. What I disagree with is the pejorative characterization Barnett gives each of these things, especially given that each was likely an essential ingredient in the effort to diminish white supremacy in America after Republicans abandoned the south to the Democrats and, for the most part, did not participate in the Civil Rights Movement that, finally, eliminated de jure racial discrimination and began the process of diminishing de facto discrimination.A recent discussion by Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson (“Making America Great Again: The Case for the Mixed Economy,” Foreign Affairs, May/June 2016, pp 69-90) describes how this came about.FROM THE FOUNDERS TO THE PROGRESSIVES*Government has unique capacities — to enforce compliance, constrain or encourage action, and protect citizens from private predation — that allow it to solve problems that markets can’t solve on their own. These problems are both economic and political; they concern areas in which markets tend to fall short and areas where market actors tend to distort democratic processes in pursuit of private advantage. . . .Because governments have chosen to intervene to . . . counter negative externalities and do some benign nudging, hundreds of millions of lives are now healthier, safer, and better protected. . . . In the United States . . . the majority of regulation involves protection of the public from the operations of unscrupulous private actors. These programs are overwhelmingly popular even though they are also, as a rule, coercive. That is not a paradox; it’s the point — because government is doing things that people need to get done but can’t or won’t do themselves. . . .This trajectory was a reflection of the Constitution’s purpose and design, not (as many charge today) a betrayal of them. The leading statesmen who gathered in Philadelphia in 1787 were keenly aware of the need for effective government authority. Indeed, they had become convinced that its absence was a mortal threat to the fledgling nation. Perhaps the most influential of them all, James Madison, put the point bluntly at the Virginia ratifying convention: “There never was a government without force. What is the meaning of government? An institution to make people do their duty. A government leaving it to a man to do his duty, or not, as he pleases, would be a new species of government, or rather no government at all.” . . .So long as government sat on the sidelines, the harms (of private predation) just kept multiplying. It was only a matter of time before a reaction set in, and eventually it did, in the form of the Progressive movement. . . .It makes sense to think of the two Roosevelts (Theodore and Franklin) as bookending a long Progressive era. It was progressive because at crucial moments, nearly everyone in a position of high public leadership came to believe that the U.S. social contract needed updating. It was long because challenging entrenched elites proved difficult, and only persistent agitation and huge disruptions to the U.S. political order allowed the translation of these new beliefs into new governing arrangements. (From Making America Great Again.)My Conclusions Regarding Barnett’s Desire to Redeem the Republican ConstitutionContrary to Barnett’s polemic on progressives, the Progressive movement was a necessary adjunct to the efforts of Republicans to gain and then ensure liberty for blacks and other minorities in America. Barnett’s republican Constitution took America only so far. To get over the hump and free blacks from the white supremacy of the Jim Crow south, coercive action, legitimized by a national majority against a minority of individuals and their representatives in Congress, proved necessary in the end to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to end de jure discrimination in America and continue the process of diminishing de facto discrimination.In this respect, Randy Barnett's analysis in Our Republican Constitution is incomplete in that, contrary to Barnett’s advocacy of “Redeeming Our Republican Constitution” in his concluding chapter, the Founders' intentions of securing life, liberty, and freedom to pursue happiness are better carried out by a combination of the republican and the democratic Constitutions than by a redemption of the republican Constitution and the abandonment of the democratic.____________*In this extract from the Hacker and Pierson article I have removed references to the impact of progressives on the economic welfare of the United States to focus on the nature of progressivism that allowed it to enhance the liberty of blacks oppressed under the white supremacist Jim Crow south.

The Pious Cause Narrative claims the North’s anti-slavery was motivated by a moral humanitarian concern for the black race. Hear the words of the movers and shakers in the antebellum North:“By God, sir, men born and nursed of white women are not going to be ruled by men who were brought up on the milk of some damn Negro wench!” Congressman David Wilmont of Pennsylvania. Famous for the Wilmont Proviso.“The dark man, the black man declines, it will happen by and by that the black man will only be destined for museums like the DoDo.” Ralph Waldo Emerson, Northern writer, abolitionist, and humanitarian. Expressing his desire that blacks “die out.”“Southerners have retarded progress because of the direct influence of so large a population of half barbarous Africans interspersed among them, GT and who had instructed them in the structures and principles of African despotism.” Thomas Goodwin, Northern author and abolitionist.“I’ve heard you have abolitionists here, we have a few in Illinois and we shot one the other day.” Abraham Lincoln, 9/1848. Spoken in a jocular tone revealing his disdain for abolitionists.“Canada is just to our North, and offers a fine market for wool.” Gov of Conn. William Alfred Buckingham. His response to the need to take in black war contrabands.“There is in the great masses of the people a natural and proper loathing of the negro, which forbids contact with him as with a leper.” Chicago Times.“Confine the negro to the smallest possible area, hem him in, coup him up, sloth him off, preserve just so much of North America as it possible for the white man and to free institutions.“ The Atlantic Monthly.“I went through the State of Illinois for the purpose of getting signers to a petition, asking the Legislature to repeal the Testimony Law, so as to permit colored men to testify against white men. I went to prominent Republicans, and among others to Abraham Lincoln and Lyman Trumbull, and neither of them dared to sign that petition to give me the right to testify in a court of justice! If we sent our children to school, Abraham Lincoln would kick them out, in the name of Republicanism and anti-slavery!… I care nothing about that anti-slavery which wants to make the Territories free, while it is unwilling to extend to me, as a man, in the free States, all the rights of a man.” H. Ford Douglas, free negro abolitionist in Chicago, Illinois.“The white man needs this continent to labor upon. His head is clear, his arm is strong, and his necessities are fixed. He must and will have it. To secure it, he will oblige the Government of the United States to abandon intervention in favor of slave labor and slave States, and go backward forty years, and resume the original policy of intervention in favor of free labor and free States...Mr. President, this expansion of the empire of free white men is to be conducted through the process of admitting new States, and not other- wise. The white man, whether you consent or not, will make the States to be admitted, and he will make them all free States. Sec of State William Seward, Speech before the US Senate 3/3/1858.“The negro is a foreign and feeble element like the Indians, incapable of assimilation, a pitiful exotic unnecessarily and unwisely transplanted into our field, and which it is unprofitable to cultivate at the cost of the desolation of the native vineyard.” William Seward, in a speech at an 1860 political rally.“In the State where I live we do not like Negroes. We do not disguise our dislike. As my friend from Indiana (Mr. Wright) said yesterday, ‘The whole people of the Northwestern States are, for reasons, whether correct or not, opposed to having man among them, and that principle or prejudice has been engraved in the legislation of nearly all the Northwestern States.’ “ Ohio Senator John Sherman, on April 2, 1862. “Keeping slaves out of the West will confine the negro to the South.” Abolitionist Charles Elliot of Massachusetts.This is just a sampling of Northern quotes, revealing that “anti-slavery” in the North meant “anti-black.” A neutral anti-slavery Englishman you may have heard of had this to say about Northern “anti-slavery” -“I take the facts of the American quarrel to stand thus. Slavery has in reality nothing on earth to do with it…that the North hates the negro, and until it was convenient to make a pretense that sympathy with him was the cause of the war, it hated the Abolitionists and derided them up hill and down dale.” Charles Dickens, 1862.Forgotten Connections to Slavery: the North’s Dirty Little Secret.Several years ago the Hartford Connecticut Courant published a story titled “Aetna Regrets Insuring Slaves”. Courant’s reporters began to investigate the newspapers role in slavery. The Sunday magazine staff investigated slavery roots in the northern states and found “ what appeared to be unshakable proof of Connecticuts complicity in slavery. What’s more, it quickly became obvious that our economic links to slavery were deeply entwined with our religious, political and educational institutions. Slavery was a part of the social contract in Connecticut. It was the air that we breathed”.“For most Northern whites in the 1850’s, the desire to end slave labor did not equate with a belief in racial equality. Thus blacks might be freed, eventually, but they would not be welcome to remain.” In Connecticut and New York state laws enlarged the male electorate while reducing the black male voters by property requirements and harsh residency laws. Scholar David Roediger revealed that Northern free blacks stood alienated both literally and figuratively with white workers who violently chased them from public parks. It is worth remembering that In the Supreme Court in the Civil Rights Cases of 1883 brought charges of national, not just southern discrimination, suing establishments in NY, San Francisco, Kansas and Tennessee. In the 1940’s thru the 1960’s the fight to end Jim Crow and disenfranchisement would be fought not only in Southern cities but also in northern cities.“Somehow In popular perception, slavery has been cut out of the trade triangle transferred forward to the Civil War, where it became a moral problem confined to the south. Just as Connecticut was thought not to have had slavery because it did not have many slaves or Southern style plantations, it was thought not to profit from slavery as much as the south did. The truth, however, which out to have been plain, is that Connecticut derived a great part, maybe greatest part of its early surplus wealth from slavery.” Hartford Courant.“The truth is that slavery was a national phenomenon. The North shared in the wealth it created and the oppression it required.” The nations financial institutions and manufacturing centers like New York and Massachusetts spun gold from them slave fields in of the south.In 1775 Connecticut held 5,000 Africans as slaves. In 1790 most prosperous merchants owned at least one slave and 50% of the clergy owned at least one slave according to census records. While in the south a few people owned a lot of slaves, in the North a lot of people owned a few slaves.“The effects of the New England slave trade were momentous. It was one of the foundations of New England’s economic structure, it created a wealthy class of slave trading merchants, while profits derived from this commerce stimulated cultural development and philanthropy.” ..The Negro in Colonial New England, page 3“Horses and barrels, fish and flour-the Norths earliest traffic in slavery commerce ran from Plymouth Rock to the West Indies.” ....Connecticut CourantNew England gained their economic rise because regions grew and shipped food to help feed millions of slaves in the West Indies. What’s more, Northern merchants, shippers and financial institutions were crucial players in every phase of the national and international cotton trade. Land all over New England were crowded With textile mills. Well before the Civil War, the economy of the entire North relied heavily on cotton grown by slaves. Starting before the Civil War and lasting until the 20th century two Connecticut towns were international centers for the production of ivory milling hundreds of thousands of tons of elephant tusks procured through enslavement of Africans and caused the death of as many as 2 million people in Africa.Harriet Beecher Stowe said this was the way the northerners liked it...all of the benefits and none of the screams.In America’s infancy it was discovered that the West Indies and Caribbean were perfect for growing sugar. Island were stripped of forests and all land was used to grow sugar cane.Between 1640 and 1650 19,000 Africans were brought to the West Indies. By 1700 there were 134,000 in Barbados alone.In 1645 the son of John Winthrop, governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony saw riches in the slave trade. That year a Boston ship made the first known slave voyage to Africa, picking up slaves and delivering them to Barbados. This began what’s known as the Triangle Slave Trade. Northern colonies sent food, livestock and wood to West Indian sugar plantations where slaves harvested sugar cane that fed the refining mills. Sugar, molasses and slaves were shipped north. Northern distilleries turned molasses into rum to trade for Africans who were then shipped to sugar plantations. The triangle trade was complete.The scale of trade from New England was astonishing. In 1775 80% of New England exports went to the West Indies. Flour, corn, potatoes, dried fish, onions, cattle and horses were all exported because the West Indies only grew sugar, they grew little food. When ships could not get through during the Revolution a famine swept across the Caribbean starving tens of thousands.The Narragansett areas of Rhode Island developed its own plantation system using slave labor to keep up demand of supplying the West Indies. Both in acreage and in number of slaves they matched the plantations of Virginia in the 19th century. Connecticut also had plantations. In New London archaeologists are surveying one plantation that was 4,000 acres in size. The owners of small farms in New Jersey, New York including Westchester, Long Island, Staten Island all used slaves to grow crops to supply sugar plantations in the West Indies. West Indian sugar was distilled into rum in New England and traded for Africans who were then dropped off in the West Indies and America. The survival of a slave on a sugar plantation in the West Indies was less than a year. But Africans sold into slavery were plentiful and New England ships were bringing in a constant supply of replacements.By the Revolution there were at least 41,000 slaves in New York and Pennsylvania and Delaware. It soon became accepted that slavery was benign, loosely defined like a mutually agreed upon indenture, the attitude was that slavery was as beneficial to the slave as the owner. Slaves of the North served at the whims of their masters and could be sold or traded. They lived in unheated attics, basements, outbuildings and barns. They often slept on floors and were subject to a harsh system of black codes that controlled their movements, prohibited them from being educated and limited their social contracts.Lining the New England Coast were 40 “slave castles” or “slave factories” that were warehouses where traders could select and buy captive human beings.John Atkins was a British surgeon on a slave ship. He describes the captives of Cape Coast Castle....”In the areas of the Quadrangle are large vaults with an iron grate at the surface to let light and air on these poor wretches, the slaves who are chained and confined there til a demand comes. They are all marked with a burning iron on their breast.”Among the 13 colonies only one plunged into the slave trade in a huge way...Rhode Island. In sheer volume US participation in the slave trade may have seemed insignificant. European ships transported 11.5 million Africans sold over 3 centuries into New World Slavery with only a small percentage sent to the colonies. On this side of the Atlantic, however Rhode Island was the leader. In 1775 it controlled two thirds or more of the colonies slave trade with Africa. After the Revolutionary War Rhode Island had a monopoly in the slave trade.While Rhode Island and its neighbors found ways to profit by trading with slave plantations in the West Indies, Rhode Island went further, competing with European powers in the slave trade itself. Rhode Island shipped more slaves than any of the 13 other colonies combined. In 1772 merchants who owned slaving vessels occupied 8 of the top 10 positions on Newport’s tax rolls. Newport launched 70 percent of all American slave voyages.In the last years the slave trade was legal, John Brown and Captain James DeWolf joined forces to protect the slave trade. Brown entered Congress in 1799. But DeWolf had a reputation as especially cruel on his ships. He once threw a slave tied to a chair overboard then complained about losing a good chair. One of his captains cut off the hands if two slaves clinging to the railing. But it was Brown who would become famous in New England for starting Brown University.“After Congress outlawed the importation of slaves, ship captains began to hide their boxes of shackles but little else about the slave trade changed except that it’s center shifted to Manhattan and it’s conditions became even more horrific. “ Connecticut CourantBy the eve of the war hundreds of businesses in New York and countless more businesses throughout the North were connected to or dependent on cotton. As New York became the center of the US cotton trade, merchants , shippers, auctioneers, bankers, brokers, insurers and thousands of others made their living off the backs of southern slaves growing cotton. New York City became the center of the cotton trade for thee world. The Lehman brothers, Junius Morgan (father of J Pierpont Morgan), John Jacob Astor, Charles Tiffany all had their wealth begin in the cotton trade.On the eve of secession New York City Mayor declared that his city should also secede, for the most part because New York’s economy depended on the cotton trade. Before the election of 1860 Boston area manufacturers were desperately currying favor with southern politicians and planters. Their financial survival depended on slavery.New England was home to almost 500 textile mills scattered through New York State, New Jersey, Connecticut and Massachusetts. The powerful group of Massachusetts businessmen historians call the Boston Associates established Americans own industrial revolution. By the 1850’s their enormous profits had been poured into a complex network of banks, insurance companies, and railroads. Their wealth was anchored to the mammoth textile mills in Massachusetts, Maine, and New Hampshire.In the 1850’s 10 major cotton states were producing 66 percent of the world’s cotton. Raw cotton accounted for more than half of all US exports, all exports that benefitted New York brokers, New York banks, northern ship builders, exporters, ship crews. All business involved in the export of cotton ran through the north. In 1860 the US produced 2.3 billion pounds of cotton. Of that amount, half was exported. The other half fed northern textile mills.On the eve of secession New York City Mayor declared that his city should also secede, for the most part because New York’s economy depended on the cotton trade. Before the election of 1860 Boston area manufacturers were desperately currying favor with southern politicians and planters. Their financial survival depended on slavery.At the same time the Union Committee called a meeting for 200 people to discuss what could be done to stop the south. Two thousand people showed up. The office building across the street was commandeered to hold the overflow, but merchants and bankers, politicians and shipping magnates spilled into the street. This was not the first time a worried business community had met, but this meeting was the most panicky by far. The south had to be persuaded to stay. They very spine of 19th century business, money and power attended the meeting includingAT Stewart, owner of the nations first department store and the wealthiest man in New YorkMoses Taylor, sugar importer, bankers and coal and railroad magnate and for nearly half a century, the most influential businessman in New York.Ariel Abbot Low, whose A.A. Low and Brothers was the most important firm in the China trade.William B Astor, son of John Jacob Astor, the nation’s first millionaire.August Belmont, American agent for the Rothchilds of Germany, and creator of the Belmont Stakes.Wlilliam H. Aspinwall and his partners Robert Minturn and Henry Grinnell, editors of the Journal of Commerce and the New York Herald.Also in attendance were politicians who included two former mayors, presidential candidate Samuel J Tilden, and former president Millard Fillmore.For half a century before the war cotton was the backbone of the economy of America. Cotton was king and the North ruled cotton. From seed to cloth Northern business was involved. Only large banks, located mostly in New York could extend credit to plantation owners needed between planting and selling their crops. Any plantation owners wishing to expand depended on Northern Banks to lend him money for additional equipment and additional labor. Slaves were usually bought on credit. Other Northerners made up the long chain between planter and manufacturer.the “factor” helped the planter get the best price, advised him, and often took care of his finances. Ships that carried cotton to market were Northern owned, northern built, captained and crewed by northerners.But that was not the only use of northern ships. By 1860 New York was notorious as the hub of an international illegal slave trade. It was too lucrative and too corrupt to stop. Ships to carry slaves were built and sold in New York complete with crates of shackles and supersized water tanks. During its peak in 1859 and 1860 at least 2 slave ships left from New York harbor every month , able to hold 600- 1,000 slaves each. At this point most slaves were sold to Bermuda and Cuba. In the summer of 1860 the traffic from Africa was so heavy that the US Navy seized The Storm King, carrying 620 Africans, half of which were children and the Cora loaded with 700 Africans along with the Erie with a hold filled with 900 Africans. All three ships were New York ships.By 1861 the illegal trade had grown so daring that anyone who read a NY paper knew how it worked. NY ships sailed to Rio or Later, Havana where they might take aboard a second captain or crew. For the crossing to Africa the US ship would list foreigners as passengers. On the African Coast came a switch in nationality. Just before slaves were loaded the foreigners would declare themselves owners of what had been only moments before a US vessel. The American captain and crew made the return voyage as working passengers on the now foreign slave ship. In its final years as abolition threatened national economies dependent on slave labor, the illegal slave trade became more profitable and more horrific. Ships grew larger, able to hold 1,000 Africans chained in pairs to its decks. Slave ships were insured to lose 10% of their slaves but the actual rate was much higher, usually topping 20% or more.After the Revolution white prejudice against blacks began to harden into an aggressive racist ideology. Shortly before the Civil War the science of the “American School of Ethnology “. It’s reining geniuses enjoyed the prestige rained upon them by elite Northern scholars and colleges. Nineteenth century race scientists made the slavery circle more vicious by equating blacks with subhuman biology. Their cutting ideas of racial purity supported the self image of the nations white supremacist majority. Samuel Morton was a leading race scientist who used measurements from his famous skull collection to show that black people had the smallest “cranial capacity” of all humans and were therefore doomed to inferiority.By this death on 1851, Philadelphia physician Samuel Morton Hans achieved international fame for his reserach on skulls that seemed to prove that blacks were mentally inferior to whites and not even of the same species as whites. In 1854 Types of Mankind, a book based on his work the respected Putnam’s monthly Magazine noted that Morton’s investigations “evinced a scientific sagacity of the most extraordinary research and penetration, coupled with a judicial severity of judgement”...Ewell Sale Library, The Academy of Natural Sciences Of Philadelphia.Close behind Morton were Josiah Mott, a University of Pennsylvania graduate and Louis Agassiz, a professor at a Harvard. In the 1850’s they collaborated on “Types of Mankind”. All three were considered among the brightest minds of their times.. “Seeing their black faces with their fat lips and their grimacing teeth, the wool on the heads, their bent knees, their elongated hands, their large, curved fingernails and above all the livid color of their palms, I could not turn my eyes from their face in order to tell them to keep their distance” wrote Agassiz upon first encountering Africans.The federal government sought the advice of Agassiz during the Civil War on the best way to deal with millions of freed slaves, he said the first priority should be to avoid the catastrophe of increased mixing with blacks, “Beware of any policy which may bring about our own race to their level” he wrote. Nearly a century earlier Dr Benjamin Rush of Philadelphia, a leading abolitionist believed that Africans were effected with a mild strain of leprosy that made their noses flat and their skin black. He also thought it made blacks less sensitive to pain. When a sideshow sensation named Henry Moss became a sensation by exhibiting himself as a black man turning white, Rush held out hope that a cure could be found for blackness. He recommended as treatment the juice of unripe peaches, tight fitting clothing and bleeding, purging and abstinence.Morton published a sequel to his first book called “Crania Aegyptiaca” in 1844. In it Morton added that data from the embalmed heads of Egyptians that, according to home, proved racial differences. Morton was achieving international fame. Among scientists who praised Morton was a Swede who wrote that Morton did “more for ethnography than any other living physiologist.”By this death on 1851, Philadelphia physician Samuel Morton Hans achieved international fame for his reserach on skull that seemed to prove that blacks were mentally inferior to whites. In 1854 Tyoes of Mankind, a book based on his work the respected Putnam’s monthly Magazine noted that Morton’s investigations “evinced a scientific sagacity of the most extraordinary research and penetration, coupled with a judicial severity of judgement”...Ewell Sale Library, The Academy of Natural Sciences Of Philadelphia. Dr Samuel Morton’s collection of 600 skulls provided what may be the Norths most insidious contribution to slavery...the “proof of black inferiority”In 1831 the only kind of abolitionism that had popular support was the American Colonization Society with chapters in the north and the south. The society’s goal was to send freed blacks to Africa. Few white people in America thought blacks and whites could coexist in the same society. Prudence Crandall wanted to educate young black women in rural Connecticut. The violence she encountered was life threatening. White parents withdrew their daughters from her school. In Canterbury, nearly everyone opposed Mrs Crandall and her belief that education would prove blacks equal to whites. Andrew Harris, a doctor who lived nearby refused to treat her black students. Gubernatorial candidate Andrew Judson spoke at a town meeting . No school for “nigger girls” would ever be across the street from his house, he promised that if black students showed up he would, use the law to have them arrested. When abolitionist Samuel May asked to speak he was confronted with fists and driven from the meeting. Through the next year and a half Crandall and her students increasinglybecame targets of community anger, local merchants refused to do business with the school and the stage driver refused to transport its students, boys threw manure in the schools while neighbors refused requests for pails of fresh water, Rotten eggs and rocks were thrown at the school building. Prudence Crandell was forced to give up her school.Northern hostility to black education was not limited to Connecticut. Noyes Academy in Canaan was not only shut down, but a demolition crew hitched a train of oxen to the school and pulled it off its foundation. In New Haven residents voted 700-4 against allowing a school for young black men to open near Yale. One of the rationales was that the education would do blacks more harm than good. “ What benefit can it be to a waiter or coachman to read Horace, or be a profound mathematician.” Read a local editorial.In May 1833 the Connecticut legislature passed black law making it illegal for out of state students of color to attend school without local permission. A phrenologist testified that Negroes could not be educated beyond a certain level and could never be fit citizens.New England slave trading went on to supply slaves to Bermuda and Cuba until almost 1890. But transporting slaves between countries was hardly the only connection New Englanders has to slavery.“. Two little Connecticut river towns helped produce music for the middle class, at a cost of as many as 2 million African lives, sacrificed to harvest elephant ivory”. Hartford CourantIvorytown, Connecticut, situated between two Connecticut river towns shaped, refined and turned ivory into the stuff and substance of everyday life. Starting with piano keys, baubles, combs, ivory refinement also made billiard balls, hair combs, shaving kits. New England merchants sailed to Africa then traveled inland to Zanzibar where “it is custom to buy a tooth of ivory and slave to carry it to the seashore” wrote Michael W Shepard, a merchant who visited Zanzibar and communicated with Connecticut’s ivory merchants. “Then the ivory and slaves are carried to to Zanzibar and sold”. The ivory going to America and the slave were usually sold to Arab slavery traders or slave traders headed for Cuba or Bermuda. During the second half of the 19th century and well into the 20th 75% of the ivory exported from Zanzibar on the backs of slaves went to only two piano key manufacturing centers in Connecticut. (Deep River Historical Society)Alfred J Swan, a English missionary described the horrors if the ivory caravans he saw in 1880’s. He describes “the feet and shoulders of ivory’s black porters were a mass of open sores, made more painful by the swarms of flies that followed the march and lived on the flowing blood”.. Swan said the porters were “a picture of utter misery” and were covered in scars left by the chipotle, a leather whip made of rhinoceros hide.In 1843 a New England buyer describes seeing “several gangs of slaves just as they came in from the interior of Africa “thin almost as skeletons. They had an iron ring around the neck and a chain went through it, thus connecting 50 or 50 in a line.”Explorer David Livingstone describes what he saw while exploring the Zambesi River in Southeast Africa. “A long line of manacled men, women and children came winding their way round the hill and into the valley, on the side where the village stood. The black drivers, armed with muskets, and bedecked with various articles of finery marched jauntily in the front, middle and rear of the line; some blowing exultantnotes out of long tin horns”.Joseph Conrad worked as a steamboat captain in the Belgian Congo and invented his plot line for “Heart of Darkness”, his classic novel of the search for a doomed ivory trader up river. He insisted that his description of what he saw in the Congo were accurate. “Black shapes crouched, lay, sat between trees leaning against the trunks, clinging to the earth, half coming out, half e faced within the dim light, in all attitudes of pain, abandonment and despair....They were dying very slowly-it was very clear. They were not enemies, they were not criminals, they were nothing earthly now-nothing but black shadows of disease and starvation, lying confusedly in the greenish gloom”.The suffering that accompanied ivory fills more than half a century of eyewitness accounts for the 1830’s to the 1890’s. The Civil War ended slave labor in the US but not the notion that black people were inherently suited only to hard labor. In his address to the New Haven Historical Society in 1875, scholar William C Fowler discussed the status of black people on Connecticut since their introduction into the colony in the 17th century. Fowler said that blacks “being an imitative race readily adopted the customs of the whites” and that the New World slavery was an improvement over the “moral degradation” of their African homeland. Fowler’s views were not regarded as racism but common sense. The America these men knew was in the process of freeing itself from the system of slavery , but the reality of involuntary labor was familiar to them, particularly the involuntary labor of black people.Hard work was what one historian calls “the bifurcated mind” of the 19th century commerce. Human rights were good, but a successful business always rested on somebody’s back and even abolitionists like Read and Pratt understood that. An inferior people, living in untamed wilds were part of ivory’s African supply system and was instrumental in maintaining the flow of high quality ivory.Enslaved Africans who managed to survive the trek carrying 100 pound ivory tusks on their shoulders for New England ivory merchants up the Ivory Coast ended up in the slave marketplace in Zanzibar. They were then sold into forced labor on plantations in Indian Ocean Islands or on huge sugar plantations in Brazil where the life expectancy was less than a year. Or they were sold into agricultural slavery in Arabia and North Africa.Abolitionists like Julius Pratt and George Read went to Zanzibar to promote slave trade to help build a market that would make his fellow New Englanders rich. As elephant populations dwindled, ivory had to be harvested farther from coastal Africa and the trek for enslaved Africans became longer. Under the weight of the tusks they were forced to carry men and women taken from their villages by force walked hundreds of miles to the coast.Ernst D Moore, native New Englanders and ivory merchant lived in luxury for years in Africa. Moore wrote that at the height of the ivory trade the ships that lay at anchor off the town were packed with slave awaiting transport to Arabia and Persia after New England merchants had bought them and forced them to walk 700 plus miles with 100 pound ivory tusks on their backs. This only stopped when the demand for ivory stopped.The south’s connection to slavery ended with the Civil War. The north’s connection to slavery and the money made off the backs of slaves continued for at least another 40 years. This article list only a minute portion of the severity and size of the Northern United States connections to profiting on the backs of enslaved Africans, nor does it delve into the horrors those enslaved in the North suffered.“Slavery has long been identified in the national consciousnesses a Southern institution. The time to bury that myth is long overdue. Slavery is a story about America, all of America. The nations wealth, from the very beginning depended upon the exploitation of black peoples on three continents. Together, over the lives of the millions of enslaved men and women, Northerners and Southerners shook hands and made a country. “ Hartford Courant.Here is an article I wrote for an online history community. Hope you’ll learn a little history from it.Forgotten Connections to Slavery: the North’s Dirty Little Secret.Several years ago the Hartford Connecticut Courant published a story titled “Aetna Regrets Insuring Slaves”. Courant’s reporters began to investigate the newspapers role in slavery. The Sunday magazine staff investigated slavery roots in the northern states and found “ what appeared to be unshakable proof of Connecticuts complicity in slavery. What’s more, it quickly became obvious that our economic links to slavery were deeply entwined with our religious, political and educational institutions. Slavery was a part of the social contract in Connecticut. It was the air that we breathed”.“For most Northern whites in the 1850’s, the desire to end slave labor did not equate with a belief in racial equality. Thus blacks might be freed, eventually, but they would not be welcome to remain.” In Connecticut and New York state laws enlarged the male electorate while reducing the black male voters by property requirements and harsh residency laws. Scholar David Roediger revealed that Northern free blacks stood alienated both literally and figuratively with white workers who violently chased them from public parks. It is worth remembering that In the Supreme Court in the Civil Rights Cases of 1883 brought charges of national, not just southern discrimination, suing establishments in NY, San Francisco, Kansas and Tennessee. In the 1940’s thru the 1960’s the fight to end Jim Crow and disenfranchisement would be fought not only in Southern cities but also in northern cities.“Somehow In popular perception, slavery has been cut out of the trade triangle transferred forward to the Civil War, where it became a moral problem confined to the south. Just as Connecticut was thought not to have had slavery because it did not have many slaves or Southern style plantations, it was thought not to profit from slavery as much as the south did. The truth, however, which out to have been plain, is that Connecticut derived a great part, maybe greatest part of its early surplus wealth from slavery.” Hartford Courant.“The truth is that slavery was a national phenomenon. The North shared in the wealth it created and the oppression it required.” The nations financial institutions and manufacturing centers like New York and Massachusetts spun gold from them slave fields in of the south.In 1775 Connecticut held 5,000 Africans as slaves. In 1790 most prosperous merchants owned at least one slave and 50% of the clergy owned at least one slave according to census records. While in the south a few people owned a lot of slaves, in the North a lot of people owned a few slaves.“The effects of the New England slave trade were momentous. It was one of the foundations of New England’s economic structure, it created a wealthy class of slave trading merchants, while profits derived from this commerce stimulated cultural development and philanthropy.” ..The Negro in Colonial New England, page 3“Horses and barrels, fish and flour-the Norths earliest traffic in slavery commerce ran from Plymouth Rock to the West Indies.” ....Connecticut CourantNew England gained their economic rise because regions grew and shipped food to help feed millions of slaves in the West Indies. What’s more, Northern merchants, shippers and financial institutions were crucial players in every phase of the national and international cotton trade. Land all over New England were crowded With textile mills. Well before the Civil War, the economy of the entire North relied heavily on cotton grown by slaves. Starting before the Civil War and lasting until the 20th century two Connecticut towns were international centers for the production of ivory milling hundreds of thousands of tons of elephant tusks procured through enslavement of Africans and caused the death of as many as 2 million people in Africa.Harriet Beecher Stowe said this was the way the northerners liked it...all of the benefits and none of the screams.In America’s infancy it was discovered that the West Indies and Caribbean were perfect for growing sugar. Island were stripped of forests and all land was used to grow sugar cane.Between 1640 and 1650 19,000 Africans were brought to the West Indies. By 1700 there were 134,000 in Barbados alone.In 1645 the son of John Winthrop, governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony saw riches in the slave trade. That year a Boston ship made the first known slave voyage to Africa, picking up slaves and delivering them to Barbados. This began what’s known as the Triangle Slave Trade. Northern colonies sent food, livestock and wood to West Indian sugar plantations where slaves harvested sugar cane that fed the refining mills. Sugar, molasses and slaves were shipped north. Northern distilleries turned molasses into rum to trade for Africans who were then shipped to sugar plantations. The triangle trade was complete.The scale of trade from New England was astonishing. In 1775 80% of New England exports went to the West Indies. Flour, corn, potatoes, dried fish, onions, cattle and horses were all exported because the West Indies only grew sugar, they grew little food. When ships could not get through during the Revolution a famine swept across the Caribbean starving tens of thousands.The Narragansett areas of Rhode Island developed its own plantation system using slave labor to keep up demand of supplying the West Indies. Both in acreage and in number of slaves they matched the plantations of Virginia in the 19th century. Connecticut also had plantations. In New London archaeologists are surveying one plantation that was 4,000 acres in size. The owners of small farms in New Jersey, New York including Westchester, Long Island, Staten Island all used slaves to grow crops to supply sugar plantations in the West Indies. West Indian sugar was distilled into rum in New England and traded for Africans who were then dropped off in the West Indies and America. The survival of a slave on a sugar plantation in the West Indies was less than a year. But Africans sold into slavery were plentiful and New England ships were bringing in a constant supply of replacements.By the Revolution there were at least 41,000 slaves in New York and Pennsylvania and Delaware. It soon became accepted that slavery was benign, loosely defined like a mutually agreed upon indenture, the attitude was that slavery was as beneficial to the slave as the owner. Slaves of the North served at the whims of their masters and could be sold or traded. They lived in unheated attics, basements, outbuildings and barns. They often slept on floors and were subject to a harsh system of black codes that controlled their movements, prohibited them from being educated and limited their social contracts.Lining the New England Coast were 40 “slave castles” or “slave factories” that were warehouses where traders could select and buy captive human beings.John Atkins was a British surgeon on a slave ship. He describes the captives of Cape Coast Castle....”In the areas of the Quadrangle are large vaults with an iron grate at the surface to let light and air on these poor wretches, the slaves who are chained and confined there til a demand comes. They are all marked with a burning iron on their breast.”Among the 13 colonies only one plunged into the slave trade in a huge way...Rhode Island. In sheer volume US participation in the slave trade may have seemed insignificant. European ships transported 11.5 million Africans sold over 3 centuries into New World Slavery with only a small percentage sent to the colonies. On this side of the Atlantic, however Rhode Island was the leader. In 1775 it controlled two thirds or more of the colonies slave trade with Africa. After the Revolutionary War Rhode Island had a monopoly in the slave trade.While Rhode Island and its neighbors found ways to profit by trading with slave plantations in the West Indies, Rhode Island went further, competing with European powers in the slave trade itself. Rhode Island shipped more slaves than any of the 13 other colonies combined. In 1772 merchants who owned slaving vessels occupied 8 of the top 10 positions on Newport’s tax rolls. Newport launched 70 percent of all American slave voyages.In the last years the slave trade was legal, John Brown and Captain James DeWolf joined forces to protect the slave trade. Brown entered Congress in 1799. But DeWolf had a reputation as especially cruel on his ships. He once threw a slave tied to a chair overboard then complained about losing a good chair. One of his captains cut off the hands if two slaves clinging to the railing. But it was Brown who would become famous in New England for starting Brown University.“After Congress outlawed the importation of slaves, ship captains began to hide their boxes of shackles but little else about the slave trade changed except that it’s center shifted to Manhattan and it’s conditions became even more horrific. “ Connecticut CourantBy the eve of the war hundreds of businesses in New York and countless more businesses throughout the North were connected to or dependent on cotton. As New York became the center of the US cotton trade, merchants , shippers, auctioneers, bankers, brokers, insurers and thousands of others made their living off the backs of southern slaves growing cotton. New York City became the center of the cotton trade for thee world. The Lehman brothers, Junius Morgan (father of J Pierpont Morgan), John Jacob Astor, Charles Tiffany all had their wealth begin in the cotton trade.On the eve of secession New York City Mayor declared that his city should also secede, for the most part because New York’s economy depended on the cotton trade. Before the election of 1860 Boston area manufacturers were desperately currying favor with southern politicians and planters. Their financial survival depended on slavery.New England was home to almost 500 textile mills scattered through New York State, New Jersey, Connecticut and Massachusetts. The powerful group of Massachusetts businessmen historians call the Boston Associates established Americans own industrial revolution. By the 1850’s their enormous profits had been poured into a complex network of banks, insurance companies, and railroads. Their wealth was anchored to the mammoth textile mills in Massachusetts, Maine, and New Hampshire.In the 1850’s 10 major cotton states were producing 66 percent of the world’s cotton. Raw cotton accounted for more than half of all US exports, all exports that benefitted New York brokers, New York banks, northern ship builders, exporters, ship crews. All business involved in the export of cotton ran through the north. In 1860 the US produced 2.3 billion pounds of cotton. Of that amount, half was exported. The other half fed northern textile mills.On the eve of secession New York City Mayor declared that his city should also secede, for the most part because New York’s economy depended on the cotton trade. Before the election of 1860 Boston area manufacturers were desperately currying favor with southern politicians and planters. Their financial survival depended on slavery.At the same time the Union Committee called a meeting for 200 people to discuss what could be done to stop the south. Two thousand people showed up. The office building across the street was commandeered to hold the overflow, but merchants and bankers, politicians and shipping magnates spilled into the street. This was not the first time a worried business community had met, but this meeting was the most panicky by far. The south had to be persuaded to stay. They very spine of 19th century business, money and power attended the meeting includingAT Stewart, owner of the nations first department store and the wealthiest man in New YorkMoses Taylor, sugar importer, bankers and coal and railroad magnate and for nearly half a century, the most influential businessman in New York.Ariel Abbot Low, whose A.A. Low and Brothers was the most important firm in the China trade.William B Astor, son of John Jacob Astor, the nation’s first millionaire.August Belmont, American agent for the Rothchilds of Germany, and creator of the Belmont Stakes.Wlilliam H. Aspinwall and his partners Robert Minturn and Henry Grinnell, editors of the Journal of Commerce and the New York Herald.Also in attendance were politicians who included two former mayors, presidential candidate Samuel J Tilden, and former president Millard Fillmore.For half a century before the war cotton was the backbone of the economy of America. Cotton was king and the North ruled cotton. From seed to cloth Northern business was involved. Only large banks, located mostly in New York could extend credit to plantation owners needed between planting and selling their crops. Any plantation owners wishing to expand depended on Northern Banks to lend him money for additional equipment and additional labor. Slaves were usually bought on credit. Other Northerners made up the long chain between planter and manufacturer.the “factor” helped the planter get the best price, advised him, and often took care of his finances. Ships that carried cotton to market were Northern owned, northern built, captained and crewed by northerners.But that was not the only use of northern ships. By 1860 New York was notorious as the hub of an international illegal slave trade. It was too lucrative and too corrupt to stop. Ships to carry slaves were built and sold in New York complete with crates of shackles and supersized water tanks. During its peak in 1859 and 1860 at least 2 slave ships left from New York harbor every month , able to hold 600- 1,000 slaves each. At this point most slaves were sold to Bermuda and Cuba. In the summer of 1860 the traffic from Africa was so heavy that the US Navy seized The Storm King, carrying 620 Africans, half of which were children and the Cora loaded with 700 Africans along with the Erie with a hold filled with 900 Africans. All three ships were New York ships.By 1861 the illegal trade had grown so daring that anyone who read a NY paper knew how it worked. NY ships sailed to Rio or Later, Havana where they might take aboard a second captain or crew. For the crossing to Africa the US ship would list foreigners as passengers. On the African Coast came a switch in nationality. Just before slaves were loaded the foreigners would declare themselves owners of what had been only moments before a US vessel. The American captain and crew made the return voyage as working passengers on the now foreign slave ship. In its final years as abolition threatened national economies dependent on slave labor, the illegal slave trade became more profitable and more horrific. Ships grew larger, able to hold 1,000 Africans chained in pairs to its decks. Slave ships were insured to lose 10% of their slaves but the actual rate was much higher, usually topping 20% or more.After the Revolution white prejudice against blacks began to harden into an aggressive racist ideology. Shortly before the Civil War the science of the “American School of Ethnology “. It’s reining geniuses enjoyed the prestige rained upon them by elite Northern scholars and colleges. Nineteenth century race scientists made the slavery circle more vicious by equating blacks with subhuman biology. Their cutting ideas of racial purity supported the self image of the nations white supremacist majority. Samuel Morton was a leading race scientist who used measurements from his famous skull collection to show that black people had the smallest “cranial capacity” of all humans and were therefore doomed to inferiority.By this death on 1851, Philadelphia physician Samuel Morton Hans achieved international fame for his reserach on skulls that seemed to prove that blacks were mentally inferior to whites and not even of the same species as whites. In 1854 Types of Mankind, a book based on his work the respected Putnam’s monthly Magazine noted that Morton’s investigations “evinced a scientific sagacity of the most extraordinary research and penetration, coupled with a judicial severity of judgement”...Ewell Sale Library, The Academy of Natural Sciences Of Philadelphia.Close behind Morton were Josiah Mott, a University of Pennsylvania graduate and Louis Agassiz, a professor at a Harvard. In the 1850’s they collaborated on “Types of Mankind”. All three were considered among the brightest minds of their times.. “Seeing their black faces with their fat lips and their grimacing teeth, the wool on the heads, their bent knees, their elongated hands, their large, curved fingernails and above all the livid color of their palms, I could not turn my eyes from their face in order to tell them to keep their distance” wrote Agassiz upon first encountering Africans.The federal government sought the advice of Agassiz during the Civil War on the best way to deal with millions of freed slaves, he said the first priority should be to avoid the catastrophe of increased mixing with blacks, “Beware of any policy which may bring about our own race to their level” he wrote. Nearly a century earlier Dr Benjamin Rush of Philadelphia, a leading abolitionist believed that Africans were effected with a mild strain of leprosy that made their noses flat and their skin black. He also thought it made blacks less sensitive to pain. When a sideshow sensation named Henry Moss became a sensation by exhibiting himself as a black man turning white, Rush held out hope that a cure could be found for blackness. He recommended as treatment the juice of unripe peaches, tight fitting clothing and bleeding, purging and abstinence.Morton published a sequel to his first book called “Crania Aegyptiaca” in 1844. In it Morton added that data from the embalmed heads of Egyptians that, according to home, proved racial differences. Morton was achieving international fame. Among scientists who praised Morton was a Swede who wrote that Morton did “more for ethnography than any other living physiologist.”By this death on 1851, Philadelphia physician Samuel Morton Hans achieved international fame for his reserach on skull that seemed to prove that blacks were mentally inferior to whites. In 1854 Tyoes of Mankind, a book based on his work the respected Putnam’s monthly Magazine noted that Morton’s investigations “evinced a scientific sagacity of the most extraordinary research and penetration, coupled with a judicial severity of judgement”...Ewell Sale Library, The Academy of Natural Sciences Of Philadelphia. Dr Samuel Morton’s collection of 600 skulls provided what may be the Norths most insidious contribution to slavery...the “proof of black inferiority”In 1831 the only kind of abolitionism that had popular support was the American Colonization Society with chapters in the north and the south. The society’s goal was to send freed blacks to Africa. Few white people in America thought blacks and whites could coexist in the same society. Prudence Crandall wanted to educate young black women in rural Connecticut. The violence she encountered was life threatening. White parents withdrew their daughters from her school. In Canterbury, nearly everyone opposed Mrs Crandall and her belief that education would prove blacks equal to whites. Andrew Harris, a doctor who lived nearby refused to treat her black students. Gubernatorial candidate Andrew Judson spoke at a town meeting . No school for “nigger girls” would ever be across the street from his house, he promised that if black students showed up he would, use the law to have them arrested. When abolitionist Samuel May asked to speak he was confronted with fists and driven from the meeting. Through the next year and a half Crandall and her students increasinglybecame targets of community anger, local merchants refused to do business with the school and the stage driver refused to transport its students, boys threw manure in the schools while neighbors refused requests for pails of fresh water, Rotten eggs and rocks were thrown at the school building. Prudence Crandell was forced to give up her school.Northern hostility to black education was not limited to Connecticut. Noyes Academy in Canaan was not only shut down, but a demolition crew hitched a train of oxen to the school and pulled it off its foundation. In New Haven residents voted 700-4 against allowing a school for young black men to open near Yale. One of the rationales was that the education would do blacks more harm than good. “ What benefit can it be to a waiter or coachman to read Horace, or be a profound mathematician.” Read a local editorial.In May 1833 the Connecticut legislature passed black law making it illegal for out of state students of color to attend school without local permission. A phrenologist testified that Negroes could not be educated beyond a certain level and could never be fit citizens.New England slave trading went on to supply slaves to Bermuda and Cuba until almost 1890. But transporting slaves between countries was hardly the only connection New Englanders has to slavery.“. Two little Connecticut river towns helped produce music for the middle class, at a cost of as many as 2 million African lives, sacrificed to harvest elephant ivory”. Hartford CourantIvorytown, Connecticut, situated between two Connecticut river towns shaped, refined and turned ivory into the stuff and substance of everyday life. Starting with piano keys, baubles, combs, ivory refinement also made billiard balls, hair combs, shaving kits. New England merchants sailed to Africa then traveled inland to Zanzibar where “it is custom to buy a tooth of ivory and slave to carry it to the seashore” wrote Michael W Shepard, a merchant who visited Zanzibar and communicated with Connecticut’s ivory merchants. “Then the ivory and slaves are carried to to Zanzibar and sold”. The ivory going to America and the slave were usually sold to Arab slavery traders or slave traders headed for Cuba or Bermuda. During the second half of the 19th century and well into the 20th