Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 03:59:33 -0800 (PST)
From: Pete Brown <petebrownuk@yahoo.com>
Subect: The Willing Slave, Part 30

THE WILLING SLAVE, Part 30

By Pete Brown     petebrownuk @ yahoo.com

Read all of Pete's stories at
groups.yahoo.com/group/petebrownseroticstories


HOUSE JOURNAL, 155th CONGRESS, 1st Session, Part 2
From the U.S. Government Printing Office

SLAVERY (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) BILL

The SPEAKER recognised Mr JOHNSON of Alabama.

"Mr Speaker, the house has been good enough to listen
to the gentleman from Pennsylvania whilst he has read
into the proceedings of this house the story with
which many of us are familiar, the so-called 'Story Of
Steve'.  I do not understand what the reading of this
material has to do with the matter under debate in
this chamber, and would ask you to ask the gentleman
from Pennsylvania to explain, or to yield the floor
for further debate."

The SPEAKER recognised Mr HARLEY of Pennsylvania.

"Mr Speaker, and honourable members of this house.  I
submit that the 'Story of Steve' is highly relevant to
our debate on this important bill.  Those of us who
own slaves probably do not take the time to understand
what motivates them, and the 'Story Of  Steve' is an
important document in this regard.  Throughout the
past three hundred years there have been works of
literature that have influenced the course of nations
- the words of Charles Dickens caused such an outcry
with the Victorian public that the first child labour
laws were enacted by the British Parliament. Closer to
home, 'Uncle Tom's Cabin' was a seminal influence at
the time of this country's first venture into slavery,
and was an important element in influencing the North
to begin those actions that ultimately led to our most
divisive war."

"As a factual document, the 'Story Of Steve' should be
a more powerful influence on the decisions of this
house than all these great works of fiction.  In case
any honourable members of this house are in doubt as
to the veracity of this journal, let me remind the
house of the circumstances in which the 'Story Of
Steve' came to light."

"Steve was indeed made to run his owner, the
veterinarian, through the streets of Scarsdale
entirely nude.  We can only imagine how he felt and it
is possible that this humiliation influenced his
judgement.  However the Scarsdale Police Department,
who conducted a most through investigation, could lay
no blame on Steve:  the transcontinental bus was
running the lights when it impacted on the trap
carrying the veterinarian.  Both Steve and his owner
were taken to the County Hospital in Scarsdale,  Steve
to the slave ward and the veterinarian to the
emergency room.  Steve's injuries were not severe and
were recoverable - a broken leg and a broken arm.  But
the veterinarian's injuries were internal and severe,
and he was taken immediately to the ICU."

"The veterinarian was in desperate need of blood, and
his son, Jamie, rushed to the hospital and donated.
The genetic records of both father and son were
available in the hospital's systems, and there was no
time to cross-match the actual donated blood, which
was therefore infused directly into the veterinarian.
He went immediately into anaphylactic shock, and
died."

"The widow, backed by her father, of course sued the
hospital for gross negligence.  As the blood had come
from the veterinarian's son, their lawyers argued,
there must have been some mix-up between donation and
infusion, some crass dereliction of the hospital's
duty of care."

"Lawyers acting for the hospital were at first
inclined to settle, but a relatively new and
enthusiastic intern at the law firm  ploughed through
the hospital records, looking at the data for all
blood used that day.  He discovered that there were
gross inconsistencies between the tests carried out at
the autopsy, and the data stored in the hospital's
data bank.  More remarkably, he noted, there was a
matching set of blood used in the hospital that day,
but in the slave ward."

"The court ordered tests to be carried out on the
veterinarian's remains, the slave Steve, and Jamie,
and the veterinarian's deception all those years
before when he had taken the slave's blood to the
registration centre, was ultimately uncovered.  The
case against the hospital collapsed."

"All might still have passed off relatively quietly,
except that the question of the disposal of the
veterinarian's life insurance arose, together with the
very substantial damages from the bus company's
insurers.  The insurers refused to pay out to his
heir, who was named in his will as  Jamie, on the
basis that under US law a slave could not own property
and thus was ineligible to inherit."

"This case became a cause celebre, as the family now
needed to establish that Jamie was in fact a free man,
and not a slave, even though he was fathered by a
slave. It took the Supreme Court of the State Of New
York to rule finally that there was only one way that
a man could be a slave in this country - by being
selected in the lottery.  This was the sole, exclusive
test of slavery, and every other man was therefore, by
definition, a 'free man'.  Jamie was thus eligible to
collect the considerable insurance money and damages
from the bus operator."

"However the sensational nature of the case, with the
knowledge that a fertile slave had impregnated a free
woman, was making national headlines.  The widow sold
the house and moved to her family's apartment in New
York and estate on Long Island, but this only
compounded the problem for her:  Unfortunately the
house was bought by a senior editor from a New York
publisher, and when he moved in and was clearing out
the carriage house he found the exercise books in
which Steve had written his story.  He recognised it
as a potential best-seller, and when the widow was
asked to comment, she instead got her lawyers to place
a gagging injunction on the publishers."

"Another major, sensational case was played through
the courts, and, unfortunately for her, the widow had
sold the house and its contents to the publisher's
editor.  He, the court ruled, therefore owned the
copyright in the books, as these were part of the
house contents, and publication went ahead."

"As I'm sure we are all aware, it has become a
classic.  The TV series, and subsequent movie of
Steve's life continue to attract huge audiences."

"Steve, of course, knew none of this.  On her
husband's death, and with the prospect of everything
becoming known, the widow sold him to the organ banks.
 We know from their records that he lived for a
further six months after the accident until his heart
and lungs were harvested, and that before that his
eyes and kidneys had been used for other patients.
Regrettably his skin was too damaged by the tattoos
and whip lashes to be of any use for burns victims.
Never the less, I'm sure that Steve would be glad to
know that he was still serving faithfully at his end,
as a slave should."
"The widow, following all the notoriety, is now a
virtual recluse.  The son, Jamie, 'dropped out' and
refused to accept money from  the veterinarian's
estate, or any help from his mother's family. Although
he was legally a free man, he was publicly reviled as
a 'pseudo slave'.  His excellent schooling however had
taught him to be resilient, and he moved to
California, applied to change his name, and set up in
business on his own account.  He is now, I think I can
say without fear of revealing too many details that
might cause him to be recognised, one of our leading
slave trainers specialising in the breaking of
reluctant slaves."

The Speaker recognised MR JOHNSON of  Alabama

"Mr Speaker, whilst the honourable gentleman from
Pennsylvania has continued to recite this history,
with which the house is almost certainly familiar, I
still do not understand the relevance to the debate on
the current bill."

The Speaker recognised MR HARLEY of Pennsylvania

"Mr Speaker, fellow members.  We are proposing to make
far-reaching changes to our slavery laws.  The
experiences of Steve are highly relevant and germane.
If the house will indulge me, I will explain."

"Firstly, the current bill proposes to raise the
percentage of men selected by the lottery from ten to
twenty.  I am sure we are all - on both sides of the
house - in agreement with this measure and it is
completely non-controversial.  Our economy cannot
continue to grow and provide the prosperity this
country deserves with only ten percent of men used as
slaves."

"It is the other measures that have caused wide
debate, both in the public at large, and here in
Congress."

"The main provision is of course that slaves should
continue to be selected at one year old, but that at
age four they should receive a penectomy.  No slave
would therefore ever reach sixteen knowing the
pleasures to be had from manipulation of the penis.
Steve's story is thus very relevant - many of Steve's
moral uncertainties arose because of his desire for
sex with Matt, and, later, with other ponies.  He
needed to dissemble and hide these liaisons from his
owner, and we know that he was tortured by his desire
for sex on the one part,  and his wish to be the
perfect slave and not lie to his owner on the other."

"It is not right that we should place slaves in this
position, and we need to remove from them the need to
make these choices:  Steve's story shows us how he was
constantly worried by this, and we owe it to our
slaves to make their lives as easy as possible.  The
penectomy operation is relatively simple, and
completely effective in removing the slave's knowledge
of, and desire for, sex.  The slave's testicles are
not affected, so that the slave will grow to maturity
properly and can be trained and toned to have full
musculature development.  No expensive drugs would be
needed, as they would be if we instead opted for an
early castration."

"The second controversial provision of the bill is
that free men should be forbidden to use slave for the
purposes of sexual gratification.  Owners would not in
future be able to use slave to masturbate them, or  be
allowed to perform acts of sexual intercourse in any
of the slave's orifices.  Again, we see in Steve's
story all the sordid details of the way in which free
men use slaves, and this is morally reprehensible.
There is too much sentimentality about the
relationships between free men and slaves and it
undermines the system on which our country runs  - a
slave is a tool, something to be used in his owner's
business, and not something that should be used for
idle and dissolute pleasure by his owner.  Free men
should be encouraged to make relationships with their
peers, and it is too easy for them to shirk this by
simply using a slave as a convenient and uncomplaining
receptacle for their penises."

"Now I know from our previous debates in this chamber
that this provision is considered by some to be
unworkable.  It has been argued that it is impossible
to police, without very invasive monitoring of the
residences and clubs of free men.  However I would
draw the house's attention to the provisions that have
for many years been in our laws that prevent men from
having intercourse with animals."

"Of course there will be isolated instances where
owners continue to use slaves sexually, just as there
continue to be remote ranches where the ranch hands
use a sheep or a goat for sexual relief.  But the
climate of public opinion makes such acts abhorrent to
the majority of men, and, in time, with a firm law and
a government campaign to mould public opinion, it will
be just as unthinkable to use a slave for sex.
Steve's story will be a constant, powerful reminder of
the immorality of using slaves as he was used."

"Mr Speaker, fellow honourable members, I am conscious
that as the proposer of this bill I have taken much of
the house's time.  But these are important and very
far reaching measures for the way that we continue to
operate our system of slavery, the system that
provides continuing comfort and prosperity to our
citizens.  I commend it to you as the next step in the
ongoing fight to maintain our American way of life and
the freedom we all enjoy."

The Speaker recognised Mr MODE of California.

Mr MODE demanded that the vote be taken by the yeas
and nays, which demand was supported by at least
one-fifth of the Members present, so the yeas and nays
were ordered.  The vote was taken by electronic
device. Yeas 395 it was decided in the Nays 28.

THE END.
Pete Brown, London, September to December, 2003.