Posts Tagged John Creighton

John Creighton discusses politics of formation of Harriet Tubman National Historic Site in Maryland [Lost Tapes of Choptank Regional History Discussion Group, February 2010]


“It started with there going to be a national park up there [Auburn, New York] because they have the buildings. And it’s all under the control of the AME Zion Church. And the hope was there would be a partnership worked out between the AME Zion Church and the National Park Service.

And for political reasons, you’d almost have to say, Maryland was necessary to help them to do what they wanted, at the same time the tourism office here want to do something from a state level and before long, like top seed, it grew into something that no one had quite envisioned.

How there would be a national historical park in two totally different spots 500 miles away from each other

So we don’t want to dwell on all that, we’re just saying that’s part of the history of this bill.

It was a coup for the Maryland Tourism Office to get Maryland to have an equal status without any building at all related to Harriet Tubman.

Nobody knows any building she walked in here, there is no artifact that’s known to be linked to her here. So it was a coup for them to do that. Yeah, that’s a good point.”


 

Editor’s Note:

As Talbot County readies for the public meeting process to discuss, plan, organize and coordinate the formation of the Frederick Douglass Park on the Tuckahoe I would encourage folks to study up, specifically the work of Dr. Creighton.

If you don’t know, ask somebody. Specifically, ask the duplicitous New Englander Kate Clifford Larson who not only “stole” Dr. Creighton’s research, according to a variety of sources on the ground, but engendered near universal indignation within the entire indigenous community of black folk and white folk.

I would encourage officials at the national, state and local level to heed the advice and counsel of Dr. Creighton.

, , , , ,

Leave a comment

Frederick Douglass Family Matters: “A COLORED BROTHER OF THE M. E. CHURCH ROBBED OF AN ADOPTED CHILD WITH IMPUNITY BY A RICH WHITE BROTHER OF THE SAME CHURCH.”

Image result for john dixon longIn recent weeks we’ve learned of the legend of John Creighton.

For and in his name and the community of street historians he organized and gathered we will continue to rush the speculative revisionist historians with the facts.

And if folks such as Yale Professor David Blight continue in their blatant thievery of our sources, citations and information without attribution there will be further fury in the complete dismantling of “professional historians” who have less personal integrity than the lowest low-life dirty rotten scoundrel.

What differentiates Prof. Blight and the below described “rich Methodist” in their personal pursuit of profit through immorality?

Blight’s immorality is the profiteering of his speculative and revisionist scholarship, against the doctrine of Douglassonianism. The immorality of the “rich Methodist” is the profiteering of slavery, against the doctrine of Methodism.

David Blight told an audience gathered in Washington College in Kent County that the extended family of Dr. Frederick (Bailey) Douglass was “dysfunctional.”

No language can describe the disgrace that David Blight is to the uplifting of Douglassonian scholarship.

Out of the Ivory Towers, out of the Ivy Leagues comes David Blight’s speculative garbage.

Out of enslavement came Dr. Douglass and his entire tribe.

JM


 

The facts in the case are substantially these. A free colored man, and cousin of Frederick Douglass, who was liberated by Capt. Thomas Auld, of Talbot County (and I will just here say, without the knowledge or consent of Capt. Auld, that he has manumitted some six or eight young colored men and women since 1844), married a woman who was also free.

They had no children of their own; but a free colored woman, on her decease, had left them her little daughter to bring up. This man was sober and industrious, and a good painter. The little girl was old enough to be of great service to his wife, who was afflicted with partial blindness.

According to the laws of Maryland a white man can seize a free colored man’s children, take them before a magistrate, and have them bound to service against the consent of the parents. On the holy Sabbath, a rich Methodist, accompanied by a constable, went to the house of the colored man while he was absent, carried off the girl, and on Monday morning took her before a magistrate and had her bound to service.

A Methodist of standing took the part of the poor colored man, and appealed to the Orphans’ Court of Talbot County; but the Court decided that the oppressor had violated no law, and the counsel of the latter stated to the Court that the laws of Maryland did not recognize the parental relation among negroes any more than they recognized that which exists among brutes.

I then urged the preacher in charge to have the delinquent brought before the church. A committee was appointed; but the man was acquitted. And this moral and religious kidnapper is still in the church, and, I suppose, contributes his mite towards sending missionaries to convert the heathen.


 

SOURCE:

Research that research assistants for David Blight or David Blight himself has been shown to take without attribution.

 

, , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment