You might search “excited domestic insurrections”; I think you'll find something.
Or, if you look at the text of Jefferson's draft DOI you will find: “He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. This piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the Christian King of Great Britain. Determined to keep open a market where Men should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or restrain this execrable commerce. And that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, by murdering the people on whom he has obtruded them: thus paying off former crimes committed again the Liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another.”
Note well the words “he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us.” In the context of this paragraph it is too clear to deny he is speaking of slaves and slave revolts.
Jefferson's long paragraph was edited by his colleagues to remove the stinging references to the slave trade;to shorten “he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us” to simply “excited domestic insurrections”; and to raise the specter of “merciless Indian Savages” which Jefferson did not originally include.
You may not like the fact that the signers all agreed to include stopping slave rebellions as a cause of separation from England, but its in the DOI. And of course, later all the states would vote - 13 of the 13 states - to incorporate slavery into the constitution itself.
And please explain to your rapt audience what Thomas Jefferson meant by, “Determined to keep open a market where Men should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or restrain this execrable commerce.”
My statement that Jefferson did not include the reference to “merciless Indian savages” in the draft DOI is wrong. Jefferson DID include it in the draft but a couple of paragraphs away from the paragraph starting, “He has waged cruel war against human nature itself . . .”
I did not initially see it in my search. I regret the error.
jeffersondem post#323: "My statement that Jefferson did not include the reference to “merciless Indian savages” in the draft DOI is wrong."
I noticed that, but so is the point you were hoping to drive home with it also wrong.
The question on the table today is: did Jefferson's expression 'excited domestic insurrections' refer to slave revolts?
And the answer is "no".
As explained at length in post #276 above, among other places, 'excited domestic insurrections' cannot refer to Dunmore's Proclamation of 1775 because that's not what Dunmore called for.
What Dunmore did call for was 'all indented Servants, Negroes, or others' to join the British army.
Further, there were no slave rebellions -- none, zero, nada -- during the Revolutionary War, so Jefferson's words 'excited domestic insurrections' can only refer to actual domestic insurrections which were even then going on: loyalists insurrections against patriots, several battles as spelled out in post #276 above.
So I'd say the evidence here is conclusive and you need to back away from your claim that our Founders went to war in 1776 to protect slavery.
They did not.
Indeed by Revolutionary War's end it was reported one fourth of Washington's army at Yorktown were African Americans, soldiers who were promised their freedom in exchange for service.
Also, by war's end abolition had already begun in several former colonies, now states.
So it was not about protecting slavery.
Jefferson's colleagues DID NOT EDIT the "long paragraph". Jefferson's colleagues DID NOT SHORTEN “he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us” to simply “excited domestic insurrections”. In fact, the "long paragraph" and the “excited domestic insurrections” clause were completely separate and distinct freestanding clauses in the first draft. The "long paragraph" was stricken in its entirety. There was no editing. There was no shortening. The "excited domestic insurrections” remained and had absolutely no relationship to the "long passage". The "long passage", which obviously dealt with the slave trade, was jettisoned (for the benefit of certain delegates) due to its references to slavery and the slave trade. BroJoeK and DoodleDawg have been absolutely correct. The "domestic insurrections" clause absolutely does not in any way, shape or form have anything to do with slaves or slavery. Therefore, that leaves no reference to Slavery in the final draft of the Declaration of Independence.
Jeffersondem, you are wrong. You have made a mistake. I had wondered why you kept repeating that the "long passage" was "wrecked" when you know as well as any of us it wasn't wrecked, it was entirely stricken. You put forth that this, "he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us” was shortened to this “excited domestic insurrections”. That goes beyond pure rubbish.