Note the words changed. The statement in red cannot stand. That's what makes the Jefferson hater's position untenable, because Jeff. definitely took a position on the issue of the institution.
Noting that Thomas Jefferson was not an abolitionist does not express Jefferson hate. It merely acknowledges the truth about Jefferson by his words and deeds. It is very doubtful that the slaves on Jefferson's plantation, or his runaways; for whom Jefferson offered a reward, thought of him as an abolitionist.
Can you identify one instance in which Jefferson actually advocated for the abolition of slavery in Virginia? Quote with citation please.
Anything not about Virginia did not advocate for the abolition of slavery in Virginia. Anything said about restricting the importation of new slaves was not about abolition.
Jefferson's plan for gradual emancipation included removing the freed slaves from the United States when they reached adulthood. Jefferson's plan was to get rid of the black population.
- Emancipation: Free all people born into slavery after a certain date
- Education: Provide education for the newly freed slaves
- Migration: Send the freed slaves outside of the United States when they reached adulthood
- Labor: Import white agricultural laborers to replace the freed slaves
A far more emphatic expression deriding slavers and slavery would be the following.
In closing arguments, the famous defense counsel who is not particularly known as an abolitionist, argued:
There is no law that forbids us to speak of slavery as we think of it. Any man has a right to publish his opinions on that subject whenever he pleases. It is a subject of national concern, and may at all times be freely discussed. Mr. Gruber did quote the language of our great act of national independence, and insisted on the principles contained in that venerated instrument. He did rebuke those masters, who, in the exercise of power, are deaf to the calls of humanity; and he warned them of the evils they might bring upon themselves. He did speak with abhorrence of those reptiles, who live by trading in human flesh, and enrich themselves by tearing the husband from the wife — the infant from the bosom of the mother: and this I am instructed was the head and front of his offending.
- - - - -
I have never seen anybody produce at any time any instance where Thomas Jefferson placed himself on the side of defending and even worse, promoting the goodness of the institution of slavery. But conversely, time and again he works - however futilely - against it throughout his entire life.And let the record show, Woodpusher had no such evidence to the contrary to provide either.
As for Mr. Lemen:
When, therefore, the French masters appealed to Gen. St. Clair, in 1787, to protect them against the loss of the principal part of their wealth, represented by their slaves, he had to face the alternative of the loss of these substantial citizens by migration with their slaves to the Spanish side of the river. And, in order to pacify these petitioners, St. Clair gave it as his opinion that the prohibition of slavery in the Ordinance was not retroactive, and hence did not affect the rights of the French masters in their previously acquired slave property. As this view accorded with the "compact" contained in the Virginia deed of cession, it was sanctioned by the old Congress, and was later upheld by the new Federal Government; and this construction of the Ordinance of 1787 continued to prevail in Illinois until 1845, when the State Supreme Court decreed that the prohibition was absolute, and that, consequently, slavery in any form had never had any legal sanction in Illinois since 1787.It does not appear that Mr. Lemen took any active measures against this construction of the antislavery ordinance at the time. He was, indeed, himself a petitioner, with other American settlers on the "Congress lands" in Illinois, for the recognition of their claims, which were menaced by the general prohibition of settlement then in effect.
When faced with the possibility of rich slave owners leaving Illinois to protect their slave property, Mr. Lemen got a new religion and joined the petition to protect the rights of the slave owners.
Your source material states the following disclaimers:
NOTEThe materials here presented were collected in connection with the preparation of a history of the first generation of Illinois Baptists. The narrative introduction is printed substantially as delivered at a special meeting of the Chicago Historical Society, and, with the collection of documents, is published in response to inquiries concerning the so-called "Lemen Family Notes," and in compliance with the request for a contribution to the publications of this Society. It is hoped that the publication may serve to elicit further information concerning the alleged "Notes," the existence of which has become a subject of more or less interest to historians. The compiler merely presents the materials at their face value, without assuming to pass critical judgment upon them.
[...]
How much of the current tradition is fact and how much fiction is hard to determine, as so little of the original documentary material is now available. The collection of materials herewith presented consists of what purport to be authentic copies of the original documents in question. They are put in this form in the belief that their significance warrants it, and in the hope that their publication may elicit further light on the subject.
Your source presents the so-called compact in air quotes thusly,
Such was the origin and nature of the so-called "Jefferson-Lemen Secret Anti-Slavery Compact," the available evidence concerning which will be given at the conclusion of this paper.
Your source states that it presents unreliable information from unverifiable purported copies of original documents, and they cannot tell how much is fact and how much is fiction.
Do you have any RELIABLE source?