REMEMBERING BROWN'S RAIDERS; A POEM BY GWEN GUNN; THE JOHN BROWN PARDON

Brown's Raiders Honored

CHARLES TOWN, W.Va. — “ ... that scaffold has little dread for me ... by the taking of my life and the lives of my comrades, Virginia is but hastening on that glorious day when the slave shall rejoice in his freedom. When he can say, ‘I too am a man and am groaning no more under the yoke of oppression.’”

Those words were found in a letter written to Joshua Coppoc by his nephew, Edwin Coppoc, one of four members of abolitionist John Brown’s Harpers Ferry raiding party who was hanged in Charles Town on Dec. 16, 1859.

On Wednesday, the local NAACP branch sponsored a sesquicentennial commemoration of the executions of Coppoc, Shields Green, John Copeland and John Cook.

Coppoc wrote the letter to his uncle shortly before he and his fellow raiders were taken to the same gallows where Brown was hanged two weeks earlier in what was then a field, now the front lawn of an elegant brick home owned by Gene and Jo Ann Perkins at 515 S. Samuel St.

Two weeks ago, the 150th anniversary of Brown’s execution was witnessed by more than 200 people. Brown, portrayed by Greg Artzner, was led, arms bound in ropes, from the Jefferson County Courthouse by uniformed re-enactors and taken to the gallows by horse and wagon. Artzner stood in front of the scaffold and spoke some of the fiery abolitionist’s last words.

Wednesday’s re-enactment of the execution of his four followers drew a smaller crowd of about 60 onlookers. There were no actors standing in for the four and no wagon ride through town. The audience walked the five blocks to the hanging ground.

Copeland and Coppoc had descendants standing in for them — Judy Ashelman of Ranson, W.Va., whose great-great-grandfather on her mother’s side was Joshua Coppoc, and Brian Beatty, 37, of Stafford, Va., a descendant of Copeland.

Proxy stand-ins for Green and Cook were James Tolbert, a member of Marshall-Holly-Mason Post 102 American Legion in Charles Town, and Emily Gilbert, 14, a Harpers Ferry Middle School student.

Each stand-in placed a wreath beneath the gallows in memory of the four men hanged that day.

Cook, 27, came from a wealthy Connecticut family, attended Yale University and studied law. He was with Brown in Kansas, married a local girl and befriended many area residents.

He escaped during the raid and was captured later at Emmanuel Chapel on what is now Penn State University’s branch campus in Mont Alto, Pa.

Coppoc, 24, and his younger brother, Barclay, were Quakers from Iowa who joined Brown in 1858. Edwin was captured in the engine house in Harpers Ferry. Barclay escaped and went home.

Green, 23, an escaped slave from Charleston, S.C., and friend of Frederick Douglass, also was captured in the engine house.

Copeland, 25, was a free black born in Raleigh, N.C. His family moved to Ohio, where he attended Oberlin College. He joined Brown the night before the raid and was captured trying to escape across the Shenandoah River.

All four men were tried and convicted in the Jefferson County Courthouse.

Green and Copeland were hanged on the morning of the 16th, and Coppoc and Cook were hanged in the afternoon. The same wagon hauled all four from the jail, now site of the Charles Town Post Office, to the execution ground.

According to a report of the hangings in the Virginia Free Press newspaper, read Wednesday by Bob O’Connor, local historian and author, “Copeland stood with head erect and eyes closed ... Green stood with his hands clasped in front and rocked to and fro ... he appeared deeply affected and evidently realized the situation in which he was placed ... ”

The newspaper, reporting the afternoon hangings of Coppoc and Cook, said they shook hands on the gallows “and bid each other goodbye.” When the caps were placed over their heads Cook said, “Wait a minute. Where is Edwin’s hand?” Coppoc said, “Be quick as possible,” and the two men dropped together.

Marshall-Holly-Mason Post 102 was originally named Green-Copeland Post 63 in honor of the two condemned raiders.

Source: Richard Belisle, "Brown's Raiders Honored, 150 Years After Their Hanging," The Herald-Mail on line [Hagerstown, Md.], Dec. 16, 2009

Tribute to John Copeland, Edwin Coppock, Shields Green and John E. Cook, Brown's Hanged Raiders

CHARLES TOWN, WEST VA. - A small, somber crowd made its way to the gallows Wednesday morning to remember four of the men who died following their participation in John Brown's historic raid in Harpers Ferry.

Wednesday marked the 150th anniversary of the hanging of John Copeland, Edwin Coppock, Shields Green and John E. Cook, who joined forces with John Brown in 1859 to raid an arsenal in Harpers Ferry.

The men joined Brown for their own unique reasons.

Cook, 27 at the time of the raid, grew up in a wealthy Northern family and studied law at Yale, said local historian Bob O'Connor. Coppock, meanwhile, was a 24-year-old Quaker. Green, 23, was an escaped slave from Charleston, S.C., and Copeland was a free African American who had attended Oberland College.

Those who were on hand Wednesday to remember the men said the day was an important one for them. Kathi Donatucci had traveled from her home in Point of Rocks, Md., to attend. Dressed in period garb, she said she had a special interest in Coppock, who like herself was a Quaker.

"It had to be a conscience struggle for him to choose violence," she said.

Donatucci and others listened as O'Connor stood in front of the Jefferson County Courthouse and read a narration of the events that led up to the execution of the four men. Then the group marched to the site of a set of gallows that had been reconstructed where the raiders were executed.

When Cook and Coppock walked to the top of the actual gallows 150 years ago, O'Connor said they were reported to have shaken hands and bid one another farewell.

Copeland and Green were hung that same day, but at a different time. They were placed in coffins and buried not far away, although O'Connor noted that their bodies were later taken by students from a Winchester, Va., medical school who hoped to use them for research. The bodies were never recovered, and the school was destroyed by Union forces who entered the city in 1862.

During his own remarks that day, the Rev. Ernest Lyles asked the crowd to tell him what words came to mind when they thought about the men they had gathered to remember. Responses ranged from "conviction" to "strength" and "bravery."

Lyles chose another word.

"The one word I would use to describe these gentlemen is courageous," he said.

From his perspective, he said the men exemplified the definition of courageous, coming together despite racial boundaries to fight for a common cause.

"These gentlemen had the courage to challenge the unjust system of slavery. They had the courage to fight for what they believed in regardless of the consequences."

He called on those in attendance to work together in the community to exemplify courage as well, and to come together to fight poverty and ensure a racially diverse future for local government.

Nearby, Judy Ashelman, a descendant of Coppock, stood with her husband Peter near a series of wreaths that would be placed under the gallows in honor of her ancestor and the others who had died 150 years ago that day.

"It's turned out to be a really important day to me," the Jefferson County resident said shortly after the ceremony came to an end.

She said that as she prepared for the day's event, she attempted to learn more about her ancestor, and how he, as a Quaker, had chosen to take the path that he did.

"I have to believe there was a very spiritual force behind this," she said.

Coppock and the other men were just that, men, she said. Still, Ashelman said she believed in spiritual principles that are universal in nature and are still important today.

The commemoration was held through the cooperation of the Jefferson County Chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Harpers Ferry National Historical Park and the Jefferson County Black History Preservation Society.

A commemoration event took place Dec. 2 in Charles Town to mark the 150th anniversary of the day Brown was hanged.

Source: Naomi Smoot, "A Tribute to John Brown," The Journal on line [Martinsburg, West Va.], Dec. 17, 2009

After Harper’s Ferry

by Gwen Gunn

snow began to fall on Adirondack rocks

as wreaths were laid to decorate the Old Man’s grave

where for one hundred fifty years

he has lain since being hanged

Roy Innis was first co-founder of CORE

shaky underneath a black umbrella

followed by a line of younger activists

locals from Lake Placid travelers from afar

like Maria who told of rape and bondage in Texas

slavery still exists but at least it’s now illegal

the horrors of John Brown’s days are fewer

his violence is becoming seen as justified

black folks have always understood that slavery

maintained by force of torture of loss of family

indeed of all identity required force to end it

as slaves were sent farther south after the cotton gin

this peculiar institution grew more profitable

while the fugitive slave law made no free black safe

laws had to be broken to help them

abolitionists were terrorized and killed

passive resistance freed India from Britain

and improved civil rights in the Sixties

by facing detainment dogs even death

resistors risked their lives for their cause

but is it fair for an outsider to ask that of the victims?

moral suasion wasn’t winning after our revolution

John Brown couldn’t stand to see more ruined lives

believed he had to fight for those enslaved

American patriots fought to oust the British

the U.S. and Europe fought against the fascists

feeling there was no other way but force

now again we’re in a “just war” to free others

the Old Man in this grave farmed these hills with Africans

when most white people thought them lesser beings

his war against terror was personal profound

seems in retrospect less mad than many others

(c) 2009 by Gwen Gunn

A Pardon for John Brown: My Letter to Biographer David Reynolds and His Response

Dec 3, 2009

Dear David:

Thanks for sharing your Op-Ed and appeal in pursuit of a pardon for John Brown the abolitionist. Please be assured that I am very sympathetic and emotionally attracted to any cause that will, as you put it, rescue him from the loony bin of history.

Despite my admiration for you and your effort, I differ with the idea of seeking a pardon for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that I do not think that John Brown himself would want to be pardoned until there was a clear and definitive statement--at the very least--coming from the United States government and the former slave states (and I would include northern states of course) expressing regret and admitting to the wrongs committed against African people in the USA--officially apologizing in clear and uncertain terms.

In one of the last letters (Nov. 30) that John Brown penned to his family, he wrote: "It is ground of the utmost comfort to my mind; to know that so many of you as have had the opportunity; have given full proof of your fidelity to the great family of man. Be faithful until death."

The popular criminalization of Brown in the minds of many (white) citizens is not based upon a lack of a pardon but upon the fact that our society (and implicitly) our government treat slavery like a grandiose but unpleasant mistake rather than as a crime and an injustice. Citing some remarks by Lincoln does not count as an official apology. In the name of Brown, we ought to be demanding an official apology for slavery in the name of the myriad victims of

this "slave nation," as Brown called it.

Secondly, by asking for the State of Virginia to pardon Brown, we are going to the representative entity that killed him and asking for it to officially legitimate him. If Virginia pardons Brown

without admitting its own guilt and apologizing to African Americans, the pardon will be an empty victory. Besides, even if we get him pardoned and put on a postage stamp too, until we get the final victory over slavery's stylized legacy in this nation, I doubt it would do much to change the mind of the public at large (i.e., white people).

Third, given the lack of acknowledgment of its wrongs and injustices, the government and state governments with legacies of slavery need to pardoned by African Americans, and if any symbolic gesture would have weight, it would be for a nationwide black vote as to whether or not to forgive the USA for its crimes.

Finally, pardoning John Brown might even "sanitize" him. He might end up another "American hero," one representing the mythical "true America" instead of being the one who opposed the real USA as a slave nation steeped in racism and injustice. Richard Nixon made some reference in a 1971 speech in which he used Brown to beautify the nation, rather than see the nation as Brown saw it; if we don’t get our history right as a nation, pardoning Brown will pervert his

memory and give opportunities for politicians to do more of the same.

I'm sorry that I cannot support your position, however eloquent and admirable, and however much I deeply appreciate your monumental contribution to our work. I would not willingly hold back anything good from the Old Man's legacy, but I believe we can best serve his memory by finishing up the necessary historical paper-work by advocating for a state apology and a serious consideration of reparations by our leaders.

Receive my warm regards and best wishes for a joyous holiday season.

Yours truly,

Louis A. DeCaro Jr.

A Fellow Biographer of John Brown

Dec. 3, 2009

Lou,

Thanks for a very thoughtful response. I appreciate your point of view and acknowledge the potential unintended signals of a pardon. But I think the potential benefits and the simple justice of the act more than offset the risks. Coming to terms with the past is a process, not a one-time event. Our society has a tendency to personify everything, to need to make the abstract concrete by enacting it in the story of a specific human being. More than others, we build up and tear down heroes. John Brown was a man way ahead of his time, more valiant and morally driven than the acknowledged heroes of his day. I feel it important to make that truth known. The pardon is the most tangible way to make that happen, to force the kind of tough introspection and national debate required to get to the place you envision.

It’s possible that John Brown himself might indeed reject this idea. But, again, I feel he has a larger national purpose to deliver. With this president at this time in history, his time has come yet again to help take us to a better, truer democracy.

Warmly,

David

David Reynolds to David Blight, Yale University, and other scholars, in defense of a John Brown Pardon

David, you say that the pardon idea is “very wrong.” You argue that “John Brown should trouble us” and that’s all. But he’s been troubling us for 150 years, with few people standing up publicly and going beyond straddling to take a clear stance. I try to take such a stance in my op ed. Also, if we should be troubled about Brown, shouldn’t we also be troubled by Columbus’s indiscriminate torture and slaughter of thousands of natives? How about Washington’s and Jefferson’s holding of slaves, along with Jefferson’s statements about the inferiority of blacks in “Notes”? Or Jackson’s slave-holding and his cruel treatment of Native Americans? Or Lincoln’s view that blacks must be shipped out of the country because there were racial differences the prevented them from living on equal terms in America?

Well, some people are troubled these figures, but I think most Americans are right in celebrating them, even though in some cases they held views that were far more “un-American” (in the egalitarian sense) John Brown did. These figures all come with big “buts”—some of them with much bigger buts than Brown’s—and yet, rightly I think, most of us aren’t so troubled by their buts that we exile them from the pantheon of American heroes. So, why should we be troubled by Brown’s, especially since, unlike them, he was fighting for a totally integrated America in which all people would have equal rights, regardless of ethnicity, religion, or gender?

But, critics say, how about John Brown’s violence? It should be noted that of the 36 record political murders committed in Bleeding Kansas from 1855 to 1858, over 75% of them were committed by the proslavery side. As my op ed says, Brown in Kansas was part of a cycle of preemptive and retaliatory violence. Newspapers of the time noted that Brown was bringing Southern tactics to the Northern side. John Brown never killed women, children, or other innocents. He would not have, say, used jet planes or bombed a building in Oklahoma City, because such incidents involved the random killing of innocents. At Pottawatomie he targeted five known members of the proslavery party who had threatened to wipe out his family. He left unscathed the women and children who were in those cabins. His anger was spurred by the drunken border ruffians who had just destroyed the free-state capital of Lawrence and by Preston Brooks’s brutal beating of the antislavery senator Charles Sumner on the Senate floor.

Unlike a recent administration that condoned the torture of prisoners, Brown bent over backward to be kind to his hostages. He even refused friends’ offers to break him out of jail, since he didn’t want his proslavery captors to be hurt in the process.

Besides, throughout our history, much greater violence than Brown’s has been committed by people who hold the respect of many Americans. Lincoln, for instance, was at first reluctant to wage war but resorted to “total war” when he saw that it was necessary for uprooting so deeply an entrenched evil as slavery. The Hammer-and-Anvil campaigns of Grant and Sherman included many acts of what could be called terrorism. Sherman wrote that in order to gain victory “we will remove and destroy every obstacle, if need be, take every life, every acre of land, every particle or property.” He said his goal was “extermination, not of soldiers alone, that is the least of the trouble, but of the people also.” Sherman’s scorched-earth campaign resulted in the widespread destruction of property and in thousands of civilian casualties.

John Brown saw slavery as an unprovoked war against an entire race. In Kansas and in Virginia, he was a soldier in the war for freedom. It’s easy for those sitting in the comfort of freedom to criticize someone who would take up arms to try to end slavery—a system of oppression, murder, torture, and rape. This institution was coercive and violent to the core. While we might prefer the Ghandi approach, there is nothing terroristic about defending the slaves against the horrific condition inflicted on them.

Time proved, sadly, that Brown was right in saying that slavery would be abolished only after “very much bloodshed.” 620,000 Americans gave their lives in the war over slavery. A good number of them were so inspired bv John Brown that they sang about him as they marched to their deaths.

Yes, John Brown should be pardoned.

David [Reynolds]

[Dec. 3, 2009]

JOHN BROWN NEWS

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Martha Swan, Director, John Brown Lives!

518-962-4758 518-582-3341 mswan@capital.net

Naj Wikoff, Coordinator, John Brown Coming Home

518-523-2445, ext. 108 johnbrowncominghome@lakeplacid.com

ANTI-SLAVERY CALL HONORS BLACK RAIDERS IN HARPERS FERRY

December 16, 2009. Lake Placid, NY. As the sun rises over New York’s highest snow-capped mountains where abolitionist John Brown is buried, the sacrifice made by fellow Harpers Ferry raiders John A. Copeland and Shields Green will be remembered on Wednesday, December 16, with a call for 100 Anti-Slavery Conventions around New York State.

Copeland and Green were executed by the state of Virginia 150 years ago on this date for their role in John Brown’s raid on the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry. Copeland, who was born a free black, was a twenty-five year-old student at Oberlin College in Ohio when he decided to join Brown’s small band of men. In a letter to his family penned the morning he gave his life to free the slave, he regrets not his death so much as “such an unjust institution [as slavery] should exist as the one which demands my life.”

Shields Green, born in slavery in South Carolina, first met Brown in the Rochester, NY, home of Frederick Douglass and voluntarily went to help Brown execute his Harpers Ferry plan. Described by Douglass as a man whose “courage and self respect made him quite a dignified character”, Green reportedly could have escaped capture in the October 1859 raid.

Instead, Green returned to the fray, was captured and, along with Copeland, was indicted, tried and convicted along with Brown for treason against the State of Virginia. Green and Copeland hanged from the gallows two weeks after Brown was executed on December 2, 1859.

Borrowing a chapter from their 19^th century abolitionist forebears, the freedom education project John Brown Lives! and organizers of the recently completed John Brown Coming Home 150^th Commemoration in Lake Placid, NY are issuing a call for 100 Anti-Slavery Conventions to be held throughout New York to combat global slavery and human trafficking that still exists in the 21^st century.

More than 27 million people are held in slavery today, in nearly every country of the planet, including the United States. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, roughly 55,000 cases of slavery have been reported in the U.S. New York State numbers among the top 4 states where slavery is a reality today.

Remembering John Copeland and Shields Green: A Note from Jean Libby

Dear friends, I am happy to forward the idea of many Antislavery Conventions for commemoration on this day by John Brown Lives!

Brenda Pitts and I have prepared biographies of John Copeland and Shields Green for the Jefferson County Black Heritage Committee who are holding a walk and vigil in Charles Town on December 16. Many local organizations are participating.

We are glad to share these with everyone for your commemorations.

Jean Libby, editor
Allies for Freedom
www.alliesforfreedom.org

John Brown Theme on Sirius Satellite Radio Program, Dec. 17

The Folk Duo Magpie - Greg Artzer and Terry Leonino
Comedian and Activist - Dick Gregory
National Congress of Black Women National Chair - Dr E. Faye Williams
Direct Descendant of John Brown - Alice Keesey Mecoy

Join us as we discuss the history of John Brown, the Harpers Ferry raid, the December 2, 1859 hanging, the 150th anniversary events in West Virginia and New York, as well as highlight the modern-day battles of abolitionists.

Show: Make it Plain with Mark Thompson
Network: Sirius XM Satellite Radio
Channels: Sirius Left 146 & XM America Left 167
Date: Thursday, December 17, 2009
Time: 6:15pm EST (5:15CST)
Length: 30-45 minutes
Type: Live by phone with callers

Harper's Ferry Reunion: Veteran JB Scholar, Jean Libby (center), poses with Ian Barford, actor, filmmaker, and JB student (right) and your blogger on Oct. 17th

Scholar Jean Libby to Brown Descendant: John Brown's War in Virginia was a Just War

Following an insulting, undoubtedly racist e-mail having been sent to Alice Keesey Mecoy, John Brown's great-great-great-granddaughter, Jean Libby--the veteran scholar and expert on Brown--wrote the following thoughtful and insightful reflection concerning the theme of Brown's use of violence. Considering that the ongoing academic discussion on this theme often tends toward a kind of tired, self-righteous discourse, I find Libby's reasoning quite refreshing. Perhaps you will also. Libby writes:

Dear Alice -- you are doing wonderful, inspiring work at bringing John and Mary Brown back to life through their descendants.

I think that President Barack Obama's speech at acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize has much relevance to John Brown's plans and ideas. He spoke about the right to self-defense as a reason for war.

In the case of Kansas, the five victims at the Pottawatomie Creek had made death threats, in writing, against the Brown settlement. Their political party in Kansas and Missouri had murdered six freestate settlers in ambush. John Brown's retaliation was to include one of the Sherman brothers who had attacked the freestate settlement and threatened the women with rape. When he was not home, there was no substitution.

In the case of Harpers Ferry we must consider that John Brown was -- from his perspective -- at war to liberate slaves. He followed those rules of war as he announced and understood them. Victims were not random civilians, they were people who were actively defending the town of Harpers Ferry against invasion.

Therefore, those five deaths on October 17 and 18, 1859, are more problematic for me. Again, I return to the speech of President Obama in Norway yesterday. Is there a time when war is just? There will be people killed, troops and civilians, in any war.

I believe that John Brown's war against slavery, in defense of people captive through the legal systems of the slave states and the federal government by the Dred Scott decision, was a just war. One of the people killed by his army was George Turner, who had murdered a young slave by drowning him in a well. He got away with it because of the system of slavery. The owner of the Turner farm near Charles Town told me of this murder when I showed up at his door one day asking to take pictures of the barn.

The mayor of Harpers Ferry, Fontaine Beckham, was certainly defending slavery in his daily life. He "held papers" for many freed slaves and was head of a graft system that paid workers in script instead of money for their labor at the federal arsenal. They were required to spend this script for food & supplies in his store. During the fight, he climbed the water tower to get a better view. Stupid?! John Brown later expressed regret that he had ordered his shooting by Edwin Coppoc because Beckham was unarmed. There was no way that they could have known that.

Private Luke Quinn was doing his duty as a U.S. Marine. Other marines who entered the enginehouse bayonetted Dauphin Thompson (engaged to Annie) in brutal death and killed and mutilated Jeremiah Anderson. They were doing their duty, too. I saw the Marine re-enactment in Harpers Ferry when the descendants' group was on the hill that I couldn't climb. They admitted they came in to kill the men, not capture them. Col. Robert E. Lee removed their guns so no hostages would be shot at close quarters. We all know the destiny that Lieutenant Green's sword bent instead of killed John Brown.

The most problematic of all is the death of Hayward Shepherd, night baggage master at the railroad. He was shot in the back when he turned and ran when ordered to "Halt" (a military term). In the new handbook published by the National Park Service there is a suggestion that guns may have been fired by the railroad party following Shepherd. I am not recommending that anyone buy this handbook because John Brown is presented as insane. I don't know who is responsible for this, as the publication is very adept at covering up who wrote and edited it. I expect the decisions were higher up than the people we met.

Jeffrey Dahmer (I forgot who he was) or another mass murderer Timothy McVeigh who is often invoked by the ilk of your Southern National Congress correspondant, did not inspire people to continue their work. Their motives are not clear. John Brown's motives were just and clear. And he inspired the end of slavery in our nation which was accomplished with a just war. His children Ruth and Jason asked him to pursue peace. He replied, "How can you say 'Peace, Peace' when there is no peace" for the enslaved people.

I am very proud of my President Barack Obama today. And I am proud of your ancestor John Brown 150 years ago.

Jean Libby, editor

Allies for Freedom

www.alliesforfreedom.org

The so-called "Southern National Congress" Speaks (Barely)

It was probably inevitable. All the coverage of John Brown sesquicentennial events was hardly a major theme in the media this year, but there was evidently enough information to seep down through the cracks, into that low-lying realm of Redneckdom and neo-Confederate pride to irritate one angry Southern man, whom we'll call Ronnie, a self-identified "delegate" of the so-called Southern National Congress. It seems that Delegate Ronnie was irritated by the wonderful blog of our friend and sister, Alice Keesey Mecoy, the direct descendant of John Brown, and thus sent the following "inspirational" lines to her:

It does not surprise me as crazies like you do the absurd to promote their agenda. Realhistory teaches you nothing and the so-called history you profess encourages you to promote this tommyrot. This is what we can expect in subsequent generations if we do not act now to stop absurd promotion of historical villians like John Brown as in the future people like Jeffrey Dahmer will stand beside George Washington as heroes of equal standing.

Well, perhaps he should have asked someone at the "SNC" to help him with his writing, although it is also possible that he may be the best writer in the group. Perhaps someone of his own "race" can help Delegate Ronnie with his spelling. I don't quite know what a "villian" is, but I'm pretty sure that John Brown was not one of them. Now, there's a word similar to "villian," Delegate Ronnie, and that's "villain." You may know some of them, or very likely are descended from a few yourself. Certainly there were a lot of villains running around Kansas in John Brown's day, terrorizing free state settlers and carrying banners that proclaimed "the supremacy of the white race"--just the kind of folk who inspire the Southern National Congress to do such good work today. Bottom line, Delegate Ronnie: get an editor; better yet, get an editor who is also a psychologist.

As far as "Realhistory" is concerned, perhaps we have finally located the bastion of historical truth--and it's in the possession of the "SNC," apparently the true guardians of history. Take heart, we can all rest peacefully tonight because the Southern National Congress is standing guard over "Realhistory." With the help of Delegate Ronnie, we finally know where to place John Brown the abolitionist on the spectrum of "Realhistory" biography: somewhere between George Washington and Jeffrey Dahmer. Stunning.

I'd like to close my little comments with an inside joke, but first you have to close your eyes and pretend that Delegate Ronnie of the Southern National Congress lives in a little cabin along the Pottawatomie Creek, and it's May 1856.

Knock-knock.

Ronnie: "Who's there?"

Unidentified man: "Northern."

Ronnie: "Northern who?"

Unidentified man: "Northern Army."

LOL

The Return of John Brown's Body to Essex County Reenacted

LAKE PLACID - A procession of Essex County supervisors brought John Brown's coffin out of the Board of Supervisors' chambers, where it had lain overnight, to a waiting horse-drawn wagon Monday morning, which brought the coffin to Brown's farm in North Elba.

After the wagon left, county Historian Margaret Gibbs dedicated an Underground Railroad Heritage Trail sign outside the building.

A graveside memorial service will be held for Brown at 11 a.m. today, followed by church bells ringing throughout the region.

Source: Nathan Brown, "Carrying John Brown," Adirondack Enterprise on line (Dec. 8, 2009)

Pictured (top to bottom): John Brown program organizer, Bob Bullock speaks (note LouMike, the youngest John Brown celebrant standing nearby); the musical duo Magpie (Greg Artzner & Terry Leonino) with gospel vocalist Michele Sweeting; and Roy Innis of CORE

Graveside Ceremony at John Brown Farm, Lake Placid, N.Y.

LAKE PLACID - It was snowing. Most of the several dozen spectators were wearing coats, hats, scarves or gloves. A few even held umbrellas, as they paid their respects to "a man who was willing to die so that others could live unshackled," in the words of Robert Bullock.

Bullock, president of the New York State Archives Partnership Trust, has been heavily involved in the commemoration of the 150th anniversary of radical abolitionist John Brown's raid on the federal arsenal at Harper's Ferry, (now W.) Va. and subsequent trial and hanging. Bullock was one of the speakers Saturday afternoon at a ceremony at the John Brown Farm, where wreaths and carnations were lain on the grave containing Brown and a number of other men who died in the raid or were hanged for their participation.

"At many times throughout our nation's history, this sacred soil was Mecca," Bullock said.

Natalie Ross, a young woman who spoke representing future generations, said she learned about Brown's violent acts in school, but also that "the violence was a catalyst that led to freedom for many people was not mentioned."

Roy Innis, national president of the Congress on Racial Equality, said Brown "broke the logjam" on slavery, forcing the issue to the national forefront by his actions in Kansas and his raid on the federal arsenal.

"The way to free a slave is to free a slave, not to talk about it," Innis said.

As people filed out of the gated grave site after laying wreaths and carnations, the crowd sang the first verses of "John Brown's Body" and "The Battle Hymn of the Republic."

The ceremony ended with the folk band Magpie singing "Amazing Grace."

Bullock said Brown's "indominable spirit" is alive in people in the Adirondacks today. If Brown were alive, Bullock said, he would be glad that these values still exist and that "increasingly, we live in a world where freedom is a right, not a privilege."

Source: Nathan Brown, "Graveside Ceremony Celebrates John Brown," Adirondack Daily Enterprise on line, Dec. 7, 2009

THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKIN' ABOUT

Dear Louis--

Just a piece of information--the Commonwealth of Virginia under Governor Tim Kaine DID officially apologize for the crime of slavery, recognizing its complicity in that crime.

I agree with you that John Brown would be uncomfortable with a pardon--whether from Governor Henry Wise or Governor Tim Kaine.

All the Best,

Rich Gillespie

Director of Education

Mosby Heritage Area Association

Post Office Box 1497

Middleburg VA 20118

CHECK OUT OUR WEBSITE-- www.mosbyheritagearea.org

Office Phone: (540) 687-5578

Home Phone: (540) 822-4351

MHAA---"PRESERVATION Through EDUCATION" in Loudoun, Fauquier, Clarke,

Warren, and western Prince William Counties

Side Note: Disappointed in R.C.

This may be off the beaten path for most John Brown students and enthusiasts, but I recently read the blog of LigonierMinistries, the teaching ministry of R. C. Sproul, in my estimation one of the great contemporary religious scholars. I first heard R.C. speak at Geneva College when I was an undergrad there in the 1970s. I was quite taken by his teaching and I still find him to be one of the best resources for understanding theology and philosophy from a Reformed Christian world and life view.

In his blog's November 29 entry, he addressed the theme, "Looking Up to Heroes," reflecting on the fact that throughout our lives, people need heroes. We may change our heroes as we mature, but we always look to men and women of the past and present who inspire and encourage us by their lives. In his article, R.C. mentions some of his current heroes, writing:

"Enter into my home today and it will not take long for you to see who my heroes are now. You can't miss the portraits of Martin Luther, Stonewall Jackson, and Robert E. Lee. "

I'm not surprised that Dr. Sproul's hero is Martin Luther. To be sure, Luther manifested some very wrong-minded attitudes reflecting anti-Jewish prejudice and favoring his wealthy, powerful allies over against the peasants. Luther would never be my own personal hero for these reasons, but I agree with his work on the bondage of the will and his view of Scripture and his high christology. I have no doubt that John Brown himself would have agreed as well. In these matters, Luther is simply consistent with textual Christian authority, which is the grounding for historic Protestantism across the Reformed spectrum.

What I find truly disappointing, however, is that a thoughtful, indeed masterful Christian thinker at the dawn of the 21st century would have Confederate rebels as heroes--even have their images hanging on his wall. It is my understanding that both of these men were "godly," orthodox representatives of the old Southern Protestant tradition. Theologically they were believers in the Bible, yet no more than old John Brown, who was reared (under the Plan of Union between Congregationalists and Presbyterians) and schooled under the Westminster Shorter Catechism. Pound for pound, John Brown was as much a "Calvinist" as was Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson. Yet Lee and Jackson, like John Brown, were not theologians or clergymen. They were militant soldiers, and their alleged heroism must be judged according to the consistency of their militancy with the Bible they claimed to embrace as God's word.

Lee and Jackson served this nation proudly until their southern homeland rebelled against the federal union and seceded. Then both men proudly fought against their nation and countrymen in the name of "states' rights." I am well aware that the argument is made that such noble men were "statesmen," and that they fought for Virginia and the South and that, whether they personally valued slavery or not, they felt a higher call to affirm the Confederacy than to remain loyal to their nation. This excuse is used to redeem them, to somehow present them as heroic figures, as men of character and greatness, because they chose for their "homeland" against the big, bad federal government's "invasion."

I find such rationale vain and empty. Lee and Jackson may have fought for their homeland but as soldiers and officers they had pledged their loyalty to the U.S.A., a pledge they violated. John Brown, though hanged as a "traitor" to Virginia, was never a Virginian. He was likely indicted on this charge because Virginia law at the time would not allow his death sentence to be commuted. Brown was never indicted by the federal government on this charge. Nor was Brown politically determined to betray the union. The evidence of his love for the nation and his refusal to invoke any outright war against the U.S.A. on principle is in clear in his words and writings. Despite his militant confrontation with slavery, his political goal was to excise slavery from the union, not to tear the union apart. When it was suggested to him that he wait to launch his campaign until the U.S. went to war against another nation, Brown refused saying he would not betray his country by taking advantage of its weakness. In forming his own Provisional Constitution, he insisted on flying a U.S. flag and declaring loyalty to the U.S.A., nor would he permit black Canadian expatriates to fly the Canadian flag under his leadership. Accept it or not, John Brown was a principled patriot.

Lee and Jackson were neither principled nor patriotic. They broke their pledge to the U.S.A. and turned against the government that had trained and educated them in the skills of war for the nation's defense. They fell in line with the rich and powerful slave holders driving the southern secession and became their lackeys in a war, ostensibly for Southern rights and against Northern aggression. But in reality it was the selfish, stubborn, and wicked lusts of rich and powerful Southerners to sustain and extend African slavery that underlay the Confederacy and which drove hundreds of thousands of southern men to their deaths in vain. That Lee and Jackson fell in with such a cause, good men though they may have been in some respects, suggests either they were naively loyal (and therefore fools) or they were united with such a wicked political agenda and thus anything but good men and heroes.

Lee and Jackson were losers of the first order. They not only lost their "war," but they took their place on the side of the "war" that, if triumphant, would have condemned successive generations to enslavement, theft of labor, rape, and racial degradation. The fact is proven by the behavior of the South after the demise of Reconstruction; former Confederates snatched victory from the jaws of defeat by reclaiming power and once more suppressing and oppressing African Americans for another century.

It means nothing when Calvinist romancers of the Confederacy today speak of the South's evangelical character over against the liberal, Transcendentalist mind of the anti-slavery North. John Brown likewise disagreed with the religious liberalism and heterodoxy of many anti-slavery people, which is probably one of the reasons he never joined an abolitionist group. Yet being a Christian, neither would Brown align himself with the Pharisees in keeping an "orthodoxy" that sanctioned the systematic debasement and exploitation of African people as did the Southern Presbyterian church and other evangelical denominations in the South.

As far as R.C. is concerned, I have no idea what his arguments would be for embracing such traitors and pro-slavery Christian hypocrites to his bosom, when he has at his fingertips a long history of notable Christian heroes who are truly heroic. Robert E. Lee betrayed his nation and used his great powers to lead myriads of his countrymen to their deaths. Providence, as Old Brown would say, brought him to his knees in defeat. He was allowed a season of great victory, perhaps so that both North and South could pay for their racist arrogance in blood. As Old Brown said to his Virginia captors quoting an ancient poet: "Whom the gods would destroy they first make mad, and you are mad." Confederate victories reflected that madness. It is fashionable for historians to argue "counterfactuals" these days. They can argue the viability of the South's efforts and the near possibility of victory "if only." I do likewise in regard to Harper's Ferry. But alas, Providence had for Brown to fall and for Lee his captor to fall afterward. But Brown fell in glory. Lee fell in disgrace, or so it will increasingly appear as we are rescued from the illusion of Confederate nobility.

Jackson, who presumed that John Brown went to hell (he witnessed Brown's hanging), took a bullet in "friendly fire" and perished. Another Providence of the Civil War. I would not presume, as Jackson so arrogantly did of Brown, that either he or Lee broke hell wide open. Perhaps they were of the Elect (as Brown would see it) and thus they repented of their wickedness before dying. Still, I would hardly hang either men's picture on my wall as heroes; one might admire aspects of their lives and character, but I weary of having to "redeem" the Jeffersons, Lincolns, Lees, and Jacksons of history by propping up their personal nobility despite their racism and failure to practice justice by their fellow human.

Claiming slave holders and slave holders' generals as my personal heroes seems to carry far greater weight. It suggests one would emulate and follow them. I am disappointed that R.C. Sproul, one of the brightest lights of contemporary Reformed theology, would wish to emulate and follow deluded, slave-holding traitors while probably also disdaining John Brown. Still, I would not presume to judge R.C. Sproul. I will continue to listen and learn from him where I am able. However until or unless he takes down those pictures of Lee and Jackson, he'll be something less than a hero to me.

Magpie's Greg Artzner as John Brown

John Brown's Final Day Reenacted

A crowd of school children, office workers and others gathered under gray skies Wednesday morning as the verdict was read, and John Brown's fate was once again sealed.

"It's amazing," said Alice Keesey Mecoy, the great-great-great-granddaughter of the Harpers Ferry raider. "I don't have words for it."

Wednesday marked the 150th anniversary of Brown's death at the gallows, a sentence he received following his October 1859 raid on a local federal arsenal.

After the raid concluded, the famed abolitionist was arrested and transported to Charles Town, where he was tried for treason.

Brown was found guilty by a jury that reportedly deliberated for 45 minutes before coming back with its decision, said Bob O'Connor, a local author and historian who was among the many participants in Wednesday's commemoration.

O'Connor said the tone of those who were on hand for the reading of the initial verdict was somber. So too was the tone of the crowd that gathered 150 years later to remember the event. As O'Connor and others re-enacted the verdict's reading, a woman in the audience wiped a hand across her eyes. Nearby, a horse-drawn carriage waited for a re-enactor who played the part of Brown, who would ride atop a coffin to the site of the gallows, just as Brown himself had done before.

Once the re-enactor arrived, the carriage made its way slowly down the streets of Charles Town. Drummers in period garb beat out a mournful tune as they followed behind him, flanked by the nearly 300 onlookers who had gathered for the remembrance.

As residents young and old followed along on the march toward the lot on Samuel Street where Brown was hung, families and workers peered out of their windows to catch a glimpse of the historic procession.

The day was one that was filled with mixed emotions. Brown had believed strongly that slavery needed to be brought to an end, a cause that prompted his historic actions in nearby Harpers Ferry. His raid served as the spark for a war that brought freedom to people of all races.

Some said they were happy to get the chance to participate in the commemoration of the event.

"I am putting this down as one of the happiest days of my life," said Dick Gregory, a renowned stand-up comedian who made an unexpected appearance at the event.

Mecoy agreed that the day was filled with strong feelings.

"It's just been an emotional morning for me," the Texas resident said following the ceremony.

Moments earlier, she had stood under the mock gallows for a wreath laying in honor of her ancestor.

"I'm very overwhelmed by the response to this," she said as she addressed those who had gathered.

She said Brown had lived his life as a loving father and husband who was committed to a utopian ideal. He longed for equality and the abolition of slavery, she said.

"To own another person was not something you can do," she said of her great-great-great grandfather's beliefs.

Mecoy said those goals have not quite been reached yet.

"But we're getting there," she said.

Slavery was ended in the United States as a result of the Civil War, a conflict that Brown's raid helped to launch. Even so, Mecoy noted that slavery does continue in some parts of the world. She urged those in attendance to join in the effort to make sure the practice is finally brought to a complete end.

The event, which was sponsored by the Jefferson County NAACP and others, came to an end as the horse-drawn carriage made its exit, carrying with it Brown's casket. As it slipped out of sight, audience members raised their voices to sing "John Brown's Body," and jazz musician Joe Wilder paid a final tribute through a trumpet solo.

Source: Naomi Smoot, "John Brown's Final Day Remembered," The Journal on line [Martinsburg, West Va.], Dec. 3, 2009

Why I Don't Think John Brown Should be Pardoned

I have recently read on a blog called Sweet Muse, an article discussing the new effort to get John Brown pardoned by the President of the United States. According to the blog Sweet Muse, my brother biographer of Brown, David S. Reynolds, the author of the notable work, John Brown, Abolitionist: The Man Who Killed Slavery, Sparked the Civil War, and Seeded Civil Rights (Knopf), is urging people to petition President Obama to pardon our man Brown posthumously. I understand that Dr. Reynolds is also calling for the Governor of Virginia to do the same.

According to Sweet Muse, Dr. Reynolds expressed his views at a recent presentation in Springfield, Massachusetts, saying: "There are compelling reasons for the pardon. Far from the actions of a misled fanatic, his plan made sense. He knew that in the West Indies mountain-based groups of blacks had driven major European powers from their islands. Similarly, he wanted to use Appalachian hideouts as attack bases for destabilizing Southern slavery."

Dr. Reynolds has added his name and comments to a sprouting list of petitioners who agree. The petition, "Pardon Abolitionist John Brown," is on-line with under fifty signatures as of this writing. "I urgereaders to Google ‘Pardon John Brown' and add their names to the on line petition demanding a pardon of the man who willingly gave his life for the emancipation of four million enslaved blacks," he concluded.

Although I respect David Reynolds immensely and applaud his positive and powerful contribution to the literature on John Brown, I find myself inclined now--almost on the eve of the sesquicentennial of his execution--to disagree. I do not think that Brown should be pardoned for a number of reasons.

First, the reason and purpose for which Brown died was the struggle for black freedom and justice for the disenfranchised, oppressed slave. Those who would seek a pardon for John Brown are putting the cart before the horse, as the saying goes. John Brown would not want to be pardoned if the African people of the United States were still owed both an apology and/or some form of reparations from both the federal government as well as individual states that sustained slavery, and then the descendants of slave holders whose family estates were enriched by stolen black labor.

It would be a mere and feeble gesture of sentimentalism to pardon John Brown when the United States government has never even issued an apology to the black people of this nation, whose ancestors were treated like animals and property by law of the land. As long as black people are fundamentally insulted by this nation, as long as the majority population pretends that slavery was an unfortunate parenthesis of ill-mannered behavior in an otherwise praiseworthy democracy, I doubt John Brown would want that government or its people to "pardon" him. Like Daniel the ancient Hebrew prophet and seer, Brown would say to the President, "Keep your pardon or give it to someone else."

This nation owes black people, if nothing else, a flagrant, official, and definitive apology. Until the U.S. government acknowledges its terrible guilt and crime against humanity in terms of the so-called "peculiar institution" as well as the suppression and extermination of Native Americans and other territorial abuses based on the lust of slave holder expansionism, then I say John Brown can wait. His soul is marching on and he's never asked for a pardon.

Secondly, there is something inherently problematic about looking to the federal or state government of Virginia to pardon John Brown when both are historically complicit in crimes against humanity. Who are Uncle Sam and the Old Dominion to be dispensing pardons to freedom-fighters like John Brown anyway? Given the fact that slavery was part of the U.S. constitution and that this government and its supreme court passed repressive, fascist laws pertaining to fugitive slaves and the Dred Scott Decision, asking federal and state governments to pardon Brown actually seems ludicrous. Indeed, the U.S. government and the State of Virginia should be petitioning to be pardoned by popular vote of African Americans. It would only be symbolic, but it would be more meaningful than if John Brown were pardoned by these governments.

Thirdly, I would not put President Obama on the spot by asking him to pardon John Brown. The man is deeply hated and despised by ultra-conservatives, some of whom are the descendants of slave masters, and some of whom are doubtless racists who loathe the idea of having a black man in the "White" House. President Obama had enough trouble running for the presidency without being badgered because of associations he had with so-called radical folks, black and white. Why do this to the poor man? I don't think anyone doubts that Barack Obama probably holds John Brown, privately speaking, in high regard. But asking him to take such a step would unnecessarily draw him under fire, and he's got enough challenges dealing with the inherent racism of so much (not all!) of the anti-Obama movement in this country without getting bogged down in a battle over a symbolic and fairly meaningless effort on behalf of John Brown. The poor guy couldn't even address the problem of constabulary racism this year without having white conservatives jumping up and down in a rage. This is our first black president. Be nice to him.

Lastly, to pardon John Brown would rob him of the moral-historical context of his self-sacrifice. To put it by way of illustration, I would no more want John Brown to be pardoned by Uncle Sam or the State of Virginia than I would have wanted Constantine to pardon St. Paul, who was beheaded by that pig Nero. The force and integrity of St. Paul's martyrdom was his quintessential innocence over against the guilt and perversion of the emperor who ordered his execution. The same applies to John Brown and 19th century U.S. politics. To pardon him today would be like cutting him away from the moral-historical fabric in which his life and death had meaning. There is a sense in which John Brown is only John Brown as a man found guilty and condemned by what he called "this slave nation."

John Brown was not bothered by the fact of dying at the hands of a guilty government. He did not care for the judgment of the nation or Virginia, only the judgment of God. As a believer in the atoning work of Jesus Christ and the evangelical and Reformed faith, John Brown had all the pardon he wanted from the Great Judgment Seat of Eternity. John Brown's legacy is bigger than the U.S. government's legacy, which is only political and self-serving to the rich and powerful of this land, something that Brown himself declared in his final statement to the court. Brown's legacy is likewise bigger than that of the Old Dominion, which is filled with the bones of slaves and the fools who would rather have their sons die to keep slavery than set their slaves free. John Brown is an internationally loved and regarded revolutionary freedom figure. John Brown is loved today and has been loved down through the years, and he will be embraced by oppressed people and freedom fighters as long as this fallen world continues to produce oppressors and oppression.

John Brown does not need a pardon. He is more than pardoned by the people who love freedom and hate oppression. What activist Yuri Kochiyama once wrote about Malcolm X can likewise be said of John Brown: he is both epic and epoch in person. His single life and sacrifice defies stone monuments and memorials; if he had a postage stamp or a great stone temple in Washington, D.C., it would likely mean he was little more than a political compromiser and creature of the wealthy (by the way, Malcolm X's postage stamp was not only poorly done, but it illustrates the very point I'm making here: he would hardly have cared if the U.S. Post Office put him on a stamp anyway, and in putting him on a stamp, he was "mainstreamed" and deprived of his revolutionary political identity). The fact that Brown's greatest memorial is a humble farmhouse nearly on the northern border of the U.S.A. (Lake Placid, N.Y.], overlooked and disregarded by most, marks him as an authentically epic figure in human history. The fact that he lived and died fighting slavery in the context of a nation that was flagrantly racist and unjust makes him the standard-bearer of slavery's antithesis in his era.

Leave him to live and die in that era. Let him hang, despised and condemned, on that Virginia gallows. Pardon him and you will strip him of his victory. Take away his "guilt" by means of a governmental pardon and you will make him no better, no more valid, no more appreciated. The bigots, racists, and snobs who hate him will not suddenly embrace him. We who love him will not love him any more for Uncle Sam's pardon.

Do not pardon John Brown, nor seek to have him pardoned. Let him be, ever and always, a martyr--a witness for the oppressed! His Soul Goes Marching On!

Notable Response, Greg Artzner, Nov. 30, 2009

Lou, I absolutely agree with you.

The way I see it, if the larger truth were told Brown was convicted
and condemned not for treason and murder but for interference. If he
had actually done something for which he should have been convicted
and executed, a pardon would seem appropriate. But since what he did
was, in my humble opinion, the only thing he COULD do and something
that desperately needed doing–as he said, "not wrong, but right,"–a
pardon is the wrong thing to do.

I would be surprised given his political savvy and the current
political climate if Obama would do it or even consider it. He needs
those southern Democrats too much, the ones who use John Brown as a
cuss word.

But for the larger moral and philosophical reasons I hope he doesn't.

I'm with you.

Get Your History Straight: A Reply to Coach Thompson of Fort Thomas, Kentucky

I do not usually post responses to letters published in newspapers about Brown, but I read one today on the website, Cincinnati.com, that merits a firm rejoinder. The letter, written by Mr. Keith Thompson, apparently a gymnastic coach in Fort Thompson, Kentucky, was intended to argue against President Obama's determination to hold the "9/11" trials in a civilian court in New York City. Thompson wishes to argue that such legal proceedings will actually give the alleged murderers a "world stage" to justify their crimes.

While I do not necessarily agree with Coach Thompson, what drew my attention to his letter was the shabby connection he makes to the case of John Brown in Virginia as an illustration to prove his "point." The Kentucky coach thus writes:

"In 1859, a similar show trial took place in Virginia because southerners were convinced the trial would reveal John Brown as the murderous religious fanatic he, in fact, was. The South didn’t seem to understand that there were a lot of people outside the South who, though they may have deplored Brown’s violent tactics, nonetheless felt sympathy for his abolitionist cause. The trial gave a voice to anti-Southern sentiment in the North and was one of the main causes of the Civil War."

If my memory serves me correctly, high school coaches usually made the worst social studies and U.S. history teachers, so I suppose Coach Thompson's "history lesson" is confirmation of the fact. Perhaps he needs to learn a few things, as follows:

1. First, despite the North's general sympathy for Brown once he fell into the hands of the South, the truth is that most northerners DID NOT feel sympathy for the abolitionist cause. Mr. Thompson does not understand U.S. history or culture in the 19th century. Most northerners disliked abolitionists and viewed them as trouble-makers. Most northerners were for free labor and disliked slavery, but they disdained black people as inferiors and did not want to live near them or have them take jobs from white laborers. Abolitionists were a hated minority because their views were considered radical, especially in major cities like New York and Philadelphia, but certainly in most places in the North, with some exceptions (northeastern Ohio, for one).

Secondly, Coach Thompson, what Brown's trial triggered was a kind of "last straw" effect with the North because they were tired of the extent to which southern politicians had bullied the North, while northern politicians like the moderate Lincoln bent over backwards to beg the South not to secede. I recommend Mr. Thompson to read the diary of New Yorker George Templeton Strong, who was no admirer of Brown; but he expressed the opinion that northerners were tired of begging the South on their knees. People like Mr. Thompson have forgotten that the South really dominated and bullied this nation throughout most of the first half of the 19th century and pretty much got their way (Missouri Compromise, then Fugitive Slave Law, then Dred Scott, then Popular Sovereignty), and most of the presidents prior to Lincoln were slaveholders. How do you think northerners felt when a southern politician had the audacity to literally beat a northern politician nearly to death in the Senate chamber? The South was out of control and determined to have its way, and despite the North's genuine mediocrity toward racial justice, and Lincoln's willingness even to let the South keep its slaves if they stayed in the Union, southerners still imagined that the North was an entire region of John Browns--something far from the truth. Basically the South's leadership and propagandists were paranoid and beyond compromising. They had secession fever and John Brown gave them good enough reason to jump out of the Union window and be done with it.

There are two reasons for northern sympathy for Brown. The first, as I've suggested, was based on the way Brown's treatment by Virginia fairly reflected the way the South dealt with any political effort that disagreed with their agenda: they cried murder, threw a fit, and then did whatever they pleased, like some spoiled child. After the way the State of Virginia rushed Brown to the gallows, no wonder the North wanted to stick it to the South. Secondly, Brown's court room testimony and the publication of his letters revealed him as a man of exceptional character, a loving husband and father, a witness of great religious substance, and one with an authentic witness, even to the point of dying for his anti-slavery convictions. Neither Muslim terrorist nor "home-grown" U.S. terrorists have ever manifested such an expansive range of moral, spiritual, social, and political wisdom in the body of their words and writings, nor have they been able to adequately demonstrate, as did John Brown, how one's life and death may link the Christian religion at its best with the anti-slavery cause. Muslims as a rule have no significant anti-slavery movement to speak of; their most extreme and aberrant fanatics, turning to terrorism as "witness," do so with the intention of earning a bloody ticket to paradise. Some darkened minds might find them equally inspiring, but clearly their ruthless actions have not had the same depth and breadth of positive influence in their world or our own. In contrast, Brown's letters shut the mouths of pro-slavery northerners and overwhelmed moderate Republicans. The flock of freedom around the world heard the shepherd's voice in John Brown's words and they saluted him as a result. Back in the U.S.A., all of candidate Abraham Lincoln's eloquent force in 1860 could not hold back the tidal wave of John Brown's holistic witness from overwhelming the North and washing over the South like acid truth. Neither the North nor the South heard the voice of God in John Brown's words the way a child "hears" the sound of the ocean by pressing a seashell to her ear. To the contrary: John Brown brought northerners and southerners to the very coastline where every nation's moral landscape must inevitably lead--and like a prophet he showed them the coming storm. That the selfish leadership of the South preferred the storm's deadly outcome to surrendering their slaves is a reflection of their own selfish and hard-hearted nature, not that of John Brown.

John Brown was not a murderer nor a religious fanatic. To be sure, he led in the killing of five pro-slavery thugs in Kansas in May 1856, and the reason he did so was because they were conspiring with pro-slavery terrorists to kill or drive out the Browns and other anti-slavery neighbors with violence. What Brown did was arguably counter-terrorism. Besides, the Kansas territory was already inflamed by pro-slavery thugs and there was no territorial or federal police to protect free state people who were being terrorized by pro-slavery thugs. Most of the free state settlers welcomed Brown's bloody strike because he was the only one with enough courage to stand up to terrorism and "give it" as hard as free state people were "getting it."

It amazes me that some people insist on seeing Brown as a terrorist, when living in this era, one might rather expect sensible people to make the logical connection with Brown as a counter-terrorist. He and the others who supported him were men simply protecting their families and freedoms in the absence of real democracy and the actual injustice or impotency of lawmen. Besides, the entire system of slavery itself was based on terror--imagine a system that allowed slave masters even to kill their "property" without any penalty; imagine a system that declared human beings sub-standard because of their "race." Imagine a society whose courts sanctioned hunting human beings down, tearing them from their loved ones, forcing them to work for free, and even controlling their bodies. What kind of a barbaric society was that? Not Nazi Germany. No, it was called the good old U.S.A. in the antebellum era, for the entire nation supported this wickedness by its laws, and it was practiced with lust and passion by the slave holders of the South. In light of the fact that these atrocities were committed in Coach Thompson's own state of Kentucky, perhaps by some of his own ancestors, or the ancestors of some of his countrymen, it strikes me somewhat empty to hear him calling John Brown a "murderer."

Finally, Coach Thompson, John Brown was not a "religious fanatic." In fact, his theology and biblical understanding were pretty much the same as that famously glorified traitor, Thomas "Stonewall"Jackson, who was an evangelical Calvinist like Brown. Brown and Jackson were pretty similar in their theological outlook, yet I doubt the Kentucky Coach would call General Jackson a religious fanatic, even though he used his Bible to justify betraying his government, defend a system of rape and stolen labor, and lead vast numbers of men to their deaths in a war for flesh disguised as a war for freedom. "States' rights"? Gimme a break. That's about as impressive as Jefferson Davis in a dress (which is how he was attired when he was apprehended when his "independence movement" was finally put down by Mr. Lincoln's army).

John Brown was a heroic figure and to compare him to serial-killing, anti-Christian "religious" fanatics who have no conception of the Golden Rule, nor any regard for democracy is outrageously ill-studied. Maybe the Kentucky Coach needs a little coaching in the history section of the local library.

John Brown 150 Years Later: A Voice from Nigeria

by Owei Lakemfa

“Where liberty draws not the blood out of slavery, slavery draws the blood out of liberty”--Walt Whitman

THERE were lots of revolts to free black slaves in the United States. There was Denmark Vesey who in 1822 with 37 of his followers was hanged for planning a revolt. As he went before the hangman Vesey told the other convicts: “Do not open your lips! Die silent as you see me do”. Another famous revolt was on August 21, 1830. Led by Nat Turner, 61 Whites were killed while the Whites killed over 120 slaves in retaliation and arrested hundreds.Turner and 16 Blacks were hanged but they had spread terror.

John Brown, a White abolitionist saw Turner as a hero. Born in Torrington, Connecticut in 1800, Brown was a deeply religious man who felt all human beings are God’s children, so none should be enslaved. In 1853, the indigenous Indians were forced out of what became Nebraska and Kansas. Slave owners fought to make Kansas a slave territory while the abolitionist “Free Soilers” wanted it free of the evil. The next year, pro and anti-slavery Americans poured into Kansas to contest the territory. Amongst them were Brown and his five sons. Armed clashes occurred and on May 21,1856, a pro-slavery force sacked Lawrence, an anti-slavery strong hold burning, looting and killing. Three days later, Brown and his sons retaliated, wiping out pro-slavers at Dutch Henry Crossing. The Kansas civil war was on. Kansas had two constitutions, two governors and two governments as both sides battled for the soul of the state.

But Brown did not think the battles in Kansas would win the war against slavery. He set his sight on a major plan to liberate slaves. In 1847 he had told the famous former slave, Frederick Douglas that “he had no better use of his life than to lay it down in the cause of the slave”. His plan was to set up a guerilla-type movement of armed men in the Blue Ridge Mountains which he said God had “placed here for the emancipation of the Negro race”. From this strong hold he planned to make forays into the South liberating slaves or encouraging them to take refuge in the mountain sanctuary. He hoped that by making slaves “insecure property”, slavery will ultimately become worthless property.

In January 1857, the United States Supreme Court in the case of Dred Scott, a Black man, ruled by a 7-2 decision that Scot is not a citizen but a slave and that Blacks are inferior beings who were enslaved in their own interest. That slaves are not and cannot become part of the American people and that they “had no rights which a White man was bound to respect”. This judgment further fired Brown’s resolve to end slavery. That year, he began to recruit fighters for his guerrilla movement.

In 1859, Brown rented a farm near Harpers Ferry, Virginia having decided to attack and seize the federal arsenal in the city which usually stored 100,000 to 200,000 rifles. He believed that seizing the town and the rifles would draw the slaves to his side and a general struggle against slavery would ensue. On the night of Sunday October 16, 1859, Brown and 21followers, including five Black men captured both the arsenal the town. But rather than move out immediately, he decided to dialogue with the town inhabitants. In process, 1,500 pro-slavery militia men from the town and adjoining towns surrounded Brown and his men. The 23 liberators fought heroically all night and could not be defeated by so large a militia.

It was no surprise as Brown had a reputation of defeating larger groups such as leading 30 men to subdue a militia of 400 from Missouri led by General Read.

Next morning, a 100 strong contingent of marines led by Robert Lee, later a famous General, attacked and Brown was defeated. Nine of his followers, including two of his sons were killed, seven escaped while seven were captured; three of them, including Brown were injured.

Brown’s trial was legal lynching. It took place within one week of his capture giving him no time to organise a strong legal team. The jury was made up of farmers, including slave owners. Brown’s injuries were so serious that he had to be brought to court in a stretcher. He told the court that “one man and God can overturn the universe”.

On being sentenced to death, Brown told the jury: “I see a book kissed here which is the Bible, and which teaches me all things; that I would have men do unto me, so must I do unto them. I endeavored to act up to that instruction. I fought for the poor; and I say I was right”.

While awaiting execution, Brown said :“I am quite cheerful in view of my approaching end, being fully persuaded that I am worth inconceivably more to hang than for any other person”. On December 2, 1859 the day of Brown’s hanging, the famous American poet and essayist Ralph Waldo Emerson said Brown would “make the gallows glorious like the cross”.

As he was being led to the gallows, Brown slipped a note into the hands of a fellow prisoner which read: “I, John Brown, am now quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away but with blood, I had, as now think, vainly flattered myself that without much bloodshed it might be done”. John Brown had struck severe blows against slavery, he had shamed his accusers and persecutors who might have thought he would beg for his life. He went to the gallows head held high and walked into martyrdom. His adversaries are forgotten in history but John Brown’s saintly accomplishments will never die.

Source: Owei Lakemfa, "John Brown: 150 Years Later," Vanguard on-line [Nigeria], Nov. 27, 2009

Paul Finkelman Returns to Akron for John Brown Sesquicentennial

On the day of his execution, bells rang and flags flew at half-staff in Akron, the courts adjourned and stores closed, according to city officials. That night “a great indignation meeting” took place in Empire Hall, and speeches were made by Akron’s leading citizens.

Historian Paul Finkelman will deliver remarks at the 11 a.m. service. Finkelman, the William McKinley Distinguished Professor of Law at Albany Law School is the author of Terrible Swift Sword: The Legacy of John Brown (Ohio University Press, 2005) and His Soul Goes Marching On — Responses to John Brown and the Harpers Ferry Raid (University Press of Virginia, 1995). Finkelman is an expert on the legal history of slavery and constitutional law, according to city officials. This marks a return to Akron for Finkelman, who held the John F. Seiberling endowed chair at The University of Akron School of Law in 1998 and 1999.

Akron’s First Presbyterian Church, organized in 1831, was divided by the issue of slavery in 1859, and the present-day congregation descends from the anti-slavery faction of the church, according to city officials. Pastor the Rev. Mark Ruppert will deliver an invocation, and the history of the church will be offered by the church’s historian, Edie English. The ensemble Exalting Him will perform “Lift Every Voice and Sing,” also known as the “Negro National Anthem,” and “Blow Ye the Trumpet, Blow,” reportedly Brown’s favorite hymn. Area vocalist Carla Davis will close the ceremony with the song first created in memory of Brown — “Battle Hymn of the Republic.” Accompaniment will be provided by church organist Heidi Guttermuth.

During this 150th anniversary year of Harpers Ferry, the community has collaborated in many ways to mark the events that led to what many believe was the starting point for the U.S. Civil War — the failed raid, which Brown thought might inspire African slaves to ignite an uprising against their slave-owners.

Presentations will include the Akron-Summit County Public Library’s exhibit, continuing through Dec. 31, of historical artifacts at the Special Collections Division of the Main Library, 60 S. High St. The Akron Art Museum, located at 1 S. High St., also is presenting selections from Jacob Lawrence’s The Legend of John Brown through Feb. 14. This series of screen prints presents specific incidents in Brown’s life.

The Summit County Historical Society will open the John Brown Home at the corner of Copley and Diagonal roads in West Akron Dec. 2 from 3 to 6 p.m. Admission is free. Exhibits describe the life of Brown and his family in Akron.

“John Brown is Akron’s nationally known link to the movement to end slavery,” Plusquellic said. “All of these events, performances and exhibits recall a rich era in our history. I hope many families will use this opportunity to enrich their children’s knowledge of Akron’s role in the great cause against African slavery and to learn more about a man who even today remains controversial.”

Brown was born in Connecticut in 1800, raised in Hudson and apprenticed in Kent (then called Franklin Mills). He lived in Akron during the decade preceding the Civil War. A breeder of sheep and an authority on wool, Brown accepted the offer of Col. Simon Perkins — the son of Akron’s founder — to reside in the cottage that sits today on Diagonal Road.

Brown’s religious convictions led him to oppose slavery. While working with Perkins, he remained an active abolitionist and regularly housed in his home slaves moving through the Underground Railroad. Brown believed that militant actions were the only way to end slavery. In the mid-1850s, he organized covert attacks in an attempt to liberate slaves and bring down the pro-slavery establishment. In 1859, with a company of 21 men, white and black, he led a raid on the federal armory at Harpers Ferry, Va. (now West Virginia). He was captured by Col. Robert E. Lee, of the U.S. Army, and hanged for treason Dec. 2, 1859.

Source: "Akron commemorates John Brown, Harpers Ferry Sesquicentennial," Akron.com (Nov. 26, 2009)