Jefferson Descendants Nix Hemings Kin

AP/via Newsday ^ | May 5, 2002 | Michael Buettner

[Bonaparte]

CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. -- An organization for descendants of Thomas Jefferson voted Sunday not to extend membership to descendants of one of Jefferson's slaves reputed to have borne several of his children.

The Monticello Association in a closed meeting decided to continue to restrict membership to Jefferson's descendants through his daughters Martha and Maria.

The group will continue to exclude descendants of Sally Hemings, a slave at Monticello with whom Jefferson has long been rumored to have had a sexual relationship.

[Bonaparte]

Re your quotations, as War Governor of Virginia, Jefferson had a hard time getting enough recruits to resist the British invasion, and one of the British goals in that colony was to capture Jefferson himself. In view of these facts, and since he saw no sense in handing himself over to his enemies, Jefferson withdrew from Monticello so that he could govern from a safe remove. He also concluded that the only way to impress upon Virginians the necessity of fighting the British was to let them run rampant through the countryside, burning, looting and killing. He was right, and it wasn't long before those who were formerly reluctant to fight enlisted eagerly. All they really needed was a reason to fight and now they had one.

[CaptIsaacDavis]

They are descendants of a RELATIVE of Thomas Jefferson. The Foundation is supposed to honor his direct heirs and legacy not some Marxist scheme to destroy an icon.

[southern rock]

Works responded: "I am not a racist."

You know, I really can't stand white people who feel the need to defend themselves or qualify their positions in this manner. How whipped can you get?!

[Ohioan]

During Sunday's meeting, Lucian Truscott IV, a supporter of the Hemings claims, displayed a photograph of a black man with a zipper across his mouth, which he said Works e-mailed to him.

For my correspondence with Truscott over his contemptible posturing for the news media over this matter, see Correspondence. For a Conservative take on what this "issue" is all about, see Creating Hate In America Today.

Beyond that, I would have to make an additional comment on some of the posted remarks by contributors to this thread, who seem to think that the fact that someone in the Jefferson family might have been involved in the Hemmings descent, should entitle them to membership in the family association. Even if such descent were true, which is by no means certain, it would hardly be an argument for the legitimate heirs to treat such descent from an illicit liaison with indifference, even apart from any racial consideration.

There are sound social reasons for social taboos. It is the way Society directs people to behave in a better fashion. Just look at the horrendous mess that the New Deal set in motion, by taking the stigma out of being born out of wedlock in the late 1930s. For every unahppy child, they claimed to be helping, there are now ten or more. It is one of the most compelling examples of the mess that "Liberal" theorists make when they try to tell people how they should think.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

[iconoclast]

If blacks loot and burn their own neighborhoods, where is your precedent for danger to whites?

Apparently, in addition to not reading your daily newspaper, you missed the famous "let's tear a white driver from his truck and beat and kick him senseless show" a few years ago.

BTW, congratulations, I have been reading this forum for a good many years now and yours takes the prize for the most nutty, unsupportable assertions in a single post.

[Pharmboy]

From the Encyclopedia of the American Revolution by Boatner:

"[Jefferson] got by the first year, but when the British were able to make a serious military effort in Va. in 1781, Jefferson's miserable failure as a leader was a vivid illustration of what happens to a society guided by a philosopher when it needs a 'man on horseback.'"

Not everyone is as kind to TJ as you guys are. We'll have to agree to disagree. And, I was wrong: it was not a court martial but a legislative inquiry.

[Bonaparte]

"We'll have to agree to disagree."

For most of the war, Virginia was not a significant theatre of operation. During Jefferson's term as Governor, he did succeed in raising units that distinguished themselves where they were needed, mostly outside of Virgina. But they were put out of action in Charlston before the major action in his state. Jefferson did not hold a military commission. He was a civilian whose duties did not include being a "man on a white horse," as you put it -- that job was already held by three men in Virginia, namely, LaFayette, Rochambeau and von Steuben -- who all suffered numerous reversals, screw-ups and stalemates during much of 1781, in spite of the thousands of French and Americans at their command. In addition, there was Destouches who had similar misadventures on the water. Jefferson's term as Governor expired, in fact, in early June of 1781, and he was succeeded by Thomas Nelson. Most of the failures I alluded to above occured on his watch, not Jefferson's -- not that either of them had much control over military decision-making. You read all about it right here

[monkey]

I probably have a more charitable view of J. than you do; however, I understand your perspective. He was not a practical man, not a visionary, and he could be petty.

Over the past few years, I've read most of his letters, to Adams and the 3 volume Madison set. Jefferson had only a fair intellect, in the pantheon of historical figures. His best qualities were his curiosity and his breadth of interest.

[iconoclast]

The man survived and is now leading a productive life. On the other hand, how about that other one that was dragged to death in chains? How is it that kind of thing slips you memory so readily?

You are truly a piece of work! You take an isolated black on white instance of violence (so abhorent as to be as absolutely repugnant as it was rare) and attempt to trump the daily black perpetrated violence with it. And, of course, I grant that this violence is much more common against their black brothers and sisters than on whites.

This is the kind a thing I was attempting to point to with my comment about your failure to keep up with the news. Even in our town, with one of the most liberal fish-wrapper rags in the nation, we have had reported in the last year at least two instances of black men raping and robbing 80 year-old- plus white women.

How is it that kind of thing slips by you in the news?