But Jefferson took out the phrase "treasonable insurrections." It doesn't appear in the final draft. No more than the long, strange passage on slavery.
It stands to reason that "domestic insurrections" replaces both those passages. Otherwise, where did his opposition to the "treasonable insurrections of our fellow citizens" go?
See Stephen Lucas's article in American Rhetoric: Context and Criticism, edited by Thomas W. Benson, available on Google Books, and search for "domestic insurrections".
I'm not sure why you bring this book forward. It supports my position.
An excerpt: “The third of Jefferson's grievances was even more troublesome. For years scholars have read it as an attack on the slave trade and on George III for not using his royal power to eliminate it. In fact the real force of this grievance is in its last sentence, which indicts the king for exciting the slaves to “rise in arms” against their American masters - a reference to Governor Dunmore’s proclamation of November 7, 1775, freeing Virginia slaves who joined the king's troops.”
This has been the point I've made while some of my good friends have said otherwise.
I would have copied and pasted pages 105, 106, and 107 in their entirety but the source blocks that (or I don't know how to copy and paste, a possibility.)
For the tally book, author Benson says that Gary Wills says that the term domestic insurrection refers to both slave and loyalist insurrections.
I don't think that is right for reasons I will explain - rather I'll ask Thomas Jefferson to explain - in a separate post.
Your bringing forward this additional documentation will, hopefully, help some people see the historical record in a way that I have not been able.
“Your argument is pretty bizarre. You’re saying, if I understand you, that Jefferson would have referred to Tory activities as “treasonable insurrections,” rather than “domestic insurrections.”
Let’s cut out the middle man and let you read the words Jefferson recommended to Congress in his early draft:
“He has incited treasonable insurrections of our fellow citizens, with the allurements of forfeiture & confiscation of property.”
Now, you tell me: did Jefferson recommend the words “treasonable insurrections” or not?
And if he did recommend the term “treasonable insurrections”, was his reference to “fellow citizens” pointed at the merciless Indian savages, slaves, or loyalists?”
It is more likely that Congress, in their three days of discussions, took it out.
Jefferson, in his writings, referred to the changes by others as “depredations.”
In 1818 Jefferson wrote about the changes stating, “I was sitting by Dr. Franklin, who perceived that I was not insensible to these mutilations.”
Jefferson then went on the write about the humorous story Franklin told about the Hatter and his signboard.
“It stands to reason that “domestic insurrections” replaces both those passages.”
Now I see the basis of your argument against Jefferson’s writings and the writings of the Virginia Congress: “it stands to reason.”
By that, you mean it stands to your reasoning. Nothing more.
“Otherwise, where did his opposition to the “treasonable insurrections of our fellow citizens” go?”
Out. Meaning this and other passages were struck out.
For example, the passage “these facts have given the last stab to agonizing affection; and manly spirit bids us to renounce forever these unfeeling brethren.”
And this: “. . . a communication of grandeur and of freedom, it seems, is below their dignity.”
You’ll want me to explain. Let Jefferson explain in his own words:
“The pusillanimous idea that we had friends in England worth keeping terms with, still haunted the minds of many. For this reason those passages which conveyed censures on the people of England were struck out, lest they should give offense.”