Current Affairs The Landmarks of Slavery;

Status
Not open for further replies.
No... It's available out there but pretty sure it isn't on Hansard.View attachment 90837
Thanks. Is he (Bramley Moore) not just saying there that blockading African ports that export slaves makes the lives of those who would be enslaved worse because local chiefs (who were in the chain selling to European slavers) would bring down an even greater 'evil' upon them?

It looks that way.

I think that book is quoting from Hansard. The annotation suggests so (or maybe a Royal Commission).
 
Thanks. Is he (Bramley Moore) not just saying there that blockading African ports that export slaves makes the lives of those who would be enslaved worse because local chiefs (who were in the chain selling to European slavers) would bring down an even greater 'evil' upon them?

It looks that way.

I think that book is quoting from Hansard. The annotation suggests so (or maybe a Royal Commission).

Probably. This is the document it is from... https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/008431104
 
Just been doing a quick googling and there is a mention in a book about Victorian Lincoln (where Bramley-Moore was MP in the 1860s) that he was then alleged to have actually owned slaves in Brazil (where he had long standing business interests):


(scroll up to the middle of page 33 for the start of the story)
 
Just been doing a quick googling and there is a mention in a book about Victorian Lincoln (where Bramley-Moore was MP in the 1860s) that he was then alleged to have actually owned slaves in Brazil (where he had long standing business interests):


(scroll up to the middle of page 33 for the start of the story)
Screen Shot 2020-06-14 at 23.08.55.png



That's pretty strong circumstantial evidence, taken in conjunction with his involvement lobbying for the removal of duties on coffee and sugar (and the Select Committee report brought by @NeilA1878 concerning Bramley Moores' testimony...which appears to be stating that slaves faced a worse fate staying in Africa than if they'd been allowed to be exported to Brazil or the Caribbean).

I've seen enough. Bramley Moore was a scumbag and we need to distance ourselves from his name.
 
I would not worry, what has he got to do with Everton? Nothing.

We buy/lease the dock that bore his name, and build a stadium on it. I do not see the problem.
The problem is that the club are still using his name in media updates on the proposed stadium - and it's plastered all over the official webpage for the stadium.

We have it in our power to alter that and expunge his name.
 
The problem is that the club are still using his name in media updates on the proposed stadium - and it's plastered all over the official webpage for the stadium.

We have it in our power to alter that and expunge his name.

I have no problem with this. It will certainly make it easier for me to call the stadium by its sponsors name rather than the name of the dock.

They certainly have a duty to tell a proper detailed story about it at the new stadium... about his history and who he was.
 
Turns out that prince Rupert was a sponsor of a company that engaged in slave trading, suggestions for a new crest please, and I'm assuming those on here that are pro monument to slavery distraction will be down to the tower later with a JCB to tear it down? I think people would be very surprised by how many things around Britain would have links to slavery.
 
Turns out that prince Rupert was a sponsor of a company that engaged in slave trading, suggestions for a new crest please, and I'm assuming those on here that are pro monument to slavery distraction will be down to the tower later with a JCB to tear it down? I think people would be very surprised by how many things around Britain would have links to slavery.
The tower isn't a statue of Prince Rupert, nor is the name anything other than a nickname. The club crest doesn't mention Prince Rupert. Not the same thing at all.
 
The tower isn't a statue of Prince Rupert, nor is the name anything other than a nickname. The club crest doesn't mention Prince Rupert. Not the same thing at all.
Doesn't need to be a statue, the penny lane street signs were vandalized. People can be militantly against something to the point where they destroy things or support the destruction of things.. until it's something that's important to them and they'll come up with a reason why it's not the same thing...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top