JEFFERSON NOTES Jefferson Notes is a publication of the Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society Richard Dixon Editor jeffersonnotes@verizon.net Spring 2013 No. 13
F
awn Brodie began her research for Thomas Jefferson, An Intimate History, with the thesis that she would uncover a “life of the heart.” Hidden from the biographer by nature, she would employ certain ahistorical techniques to reveal Jefferson’s “inner life.” It was not her aim to create a work of idealization, but to penetrate the secret Jefferson and validate the rumors. However, she found nothing from any contemporary account that indicated a relationship between Jefferson and Sally Hemings. In the absence of any direct witness or document, Brodie decided to rely on a long forgotten newspaper interview with Madison Hemings. This had occurred in 1873, about forty-five years after Hemings left Monticello and migrated to Ohio. The third oldest of the four surviving children of Sally Hemings, he told the interviewer that Thomas Jefferson was his father and the father of his siblings. His description of Jefferson’s personality and habits did not include any observations that would indicate Jefferson was his father. His description of his mother is spare, and
BOOK NOTES
other than the simple declaration of paternity, he provides nothing from his own knowledge that would demonstrate an intimate relationship between his mother and Jefferson. The interviewer also related an anecdote that Hemings’ mother became pregnant with Jefferson’s child in Paris, but the child died shortly after her return to Monticello. According to Madison Hemings, she was free under French law, and refused to return to the United States until Jefferson promised that he would free all of her future children when they became twenty-one years of age. These events would have occurred sixteen or seventeen years before Madison’s birth, and he does not relate the source of this information. No other witness or document has ever supported his claim of a Paris child, or the socalled “treaty.” Brodie’s jumble of imagination and hearsay brought her inIt became the task of Annette tense criticism Gordon-Reed in Thomas Jefferand rejection by son and Sally Hemings: An most Jefferson American Controversy to historians. validate the Hemings interview She had failed to breathe life into the person of Sally Hemings who remained a name without character, or personality, or the slightest quotidian history. Of the hundreds who would have interacted with Jefferson and Sally Hemings during the thirty-five years after she returned from Paris, only Madison Hemings claimed a sexual relationship. Cont’d on page 2
Framing a Legend: Exposing the Distorted History of Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings M. Andrew Holowchak, Prometheus Books, 2013
M. Andrew Holowchak, a professor of philosophy at Rutgers University, examines the epistemology used by Fawn Brodie, Annette Gordon-Reed, and Andrew Burstein, in their studies of the Jefferson-Hemings paternity claim. Dr. Holowchak’s approach is a needed addition to the debate which has largely been waged in arguments over the quality and reliability of the available evidence. He is uniquely qualified to analyze the techniques used by these three authors who are the most vigorous in promoting a paternity version using psychology, imagination, and a unique syllogistic process. Brodie’s approach, outlined in her 1974 book Thomas Jefferson: An Intimate History, was based on a special expertise in the application of Freudian psychology to find the hidden meaning in Jefferson’s words. Gordon-Reed, in her Cont’d on page 2
Annual Birthday Party For Mr. Jefferson
CULT OF THE PATERNITY BELIEVER Cont’d from page 1
The Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society held its annual birthday celebration for Thomas Jefferson in the Jefferson Room of the Virginia Capitol on April 12, 2013. Under the chairmanship of Edward Leake and Gayle Randol, the program featured two distinguished speakers. The first was Mark D McGarvie, a Professor of History at the University of Richmond and Director of Pre-Law Advising. Dr. McGarvie is the author of numerous works of early American history, including One Nation Under Law: America’s Early National Struggles to Separate Church and State, and Charity, Philanthropy, and Civility in American History. The title of his address was “Jefferson and Religious Freedom: Securing Freedom of Conscience as an Essential Right.” The second speaker was John Works, the former president of both the Monticello Association and the Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society. Mr. Works gave a highly informative review of the process which was followed by the Monticello Association when it considered the application of certain Hemings descendents who sought to be buried in the Jefferson graveyard at Monticello. The group adjourned to Meriwether’s at the Capitol for cake and ice cream in honor of Mr. Jefferson’s birthday. FRAMING A LEGEND CONT’D FROM PAGE 1
two books, Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings: An American Controversy, and The Hemings of Monticello: An American Family, never does come to grips with the probative evidence. She employs an inductive technique where she can assume a premise of thought or action for Jefferson and then proceed to imagine a predetermined outcome. Dr. Holowchak describes their technique as follows: “Many, like Fawn Brodie and Annette Gordon-Reed seem to think a tendentious approach to history is acceptable – that it is appropriate to begin with the conclusion from which one wishes to argue and then seek out evidence in support of it. Inconsistent evidence, gleaned along the way, is merely ignored.” Andrew Burstein is a unique example of one who first considered this unknown relationship between Jefferson and Hemings and concluded that the paternity claim was unfounded. However, when the DNA evidence came out, which failed to prove that Jefferson was the father of any
It became the task of Annette Gordon-Reed in Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings: An American Controversy to validate the Hemings interview. Just as Brodie, she was stymied by the absence of any evidence to support Hemings’ claim of a Paris baby. Her solution was to minimize the role of the interviewer, so she characterized the interview as “memoirs” and made her test for historical truth whether you believe Madison Hemings. This meets no legal standard, nor is it logical reasoning. The fallacy is apparent on its face in that Hemings would not know if his story were true or not. It is not Hemings, but the unknown source of his information whose credibility must be judged. Without proof of the Paris baby, there is no basis on which his mother could have negotiated a treaty. Gordon-Reed argues that there were other statements by Hemings in the memoirs that could be shown to be true, attesting to his credibility. Perhaps so, but this argument does not permit Hemings to be a witness to an event that took place before he was born. * Madison Heming’s story has not been verified by traditional scholarship, but Gordon-Reed’s plea to believe the “memoirs” has been answered by a cult of paternity believers. The “memoirs,” which may be false, are relied on by these believers as “proof” that Jefferson had a relationship with Sally Hemings. Satisfied that the relationship has been established, they may imagine the unknown life of Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings at Monticello, and Jefferson’s legacy slides into made-up history. See the interview * Jeffersondocuments.html)
http://tjheritage.org/
of the Hemings children, it somehow convinced Burstein to change his mind. In Jefferson’s Secrets, Burstein refers to the “mounting circumstantial evidence,” but there is no circumstantial evidence which was unknown prior to the DNA tests. The paternity issue should be framed on the premise that Jefferson had no involvement with Sally Hemings. Indeed, there is no evidence of any physical contact or a relationship of any kind between the two by any contemporary witness during the years she was at Monticello. Unfortunately, Brodie, Gordon- Reed and Burstein assume the opposite and craft their arguments to support their desired conclusion. This is why Dr. Holowchak’s contribution to this literature is important, because he looks behind the conclusions of these writers to subject their etiological causes to recognized patterns of historical scholarship. When assertions of fact are based on psychological arguments or inductive reasoning, the writers invite increased scrutiny on the reliability of their methodology.
Jefferson Notes page 2
The Batture on the Mississippi River
L
awyers, no less than others, do not want to be sued. Thomas Jefferson was greatly upset when this occurred to him and tested his legal expertise. What became a stressful ordeal for him resulted from the claim by one Edward Livingston that he owned a batture, a stretch of beach along the Mississippi River. Jefferson, as president, on recommendation of the Attorney General, had ordered Livingston removed from the property. He retaliated by filing suit against Jefferson in the circuit court in Richmond. It added to Jefferson’s concern that John Marshall, in addition to his duties on the Supreme Court, was sitting in Richmond as the Circuit Court judge. Shocked at this unprecedented suit, Jefferson sprang into action. He hired three expert attorneys, George Hay, Littleton Waller Tazewell, and William Wirt. Jefferson had by then left the presidency, but he did not leave the matter to his lawyers. Jefferson proceeded to research and brief the legal issues, which Wirt praised as a “masterpiece of legal erudition.” Livingston had been the US attorney in New York but while he was ill, a clerk appropriated funds from the office. Livingston accepted responsibility to repay these funds, but Jefferson would not give him time and demanded his resignation. Livingston surrendered his appointment and his property and moved to New Orleans, now in the new Louisiana Territory, to recoup his fortune. Livingston was a formidable lawyer in his own right, and Jefferson
Jefferson Papers On-Line The University of Virginia Press through its Founders Online website has provided free access to the papers of George Washington, James Madison, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. Developed in cooperation with the National Archives, the Rotunda website ( http:// founders.archives.gov/ ) will provide thousands of original historical records to the general public. Although many of these papers and historic documents have been available online through a variety of sites, there has been no way to systematically study or access these papers within a single site. Now, these monumental works, such as The Papers of Thomas Jefferson are available to every student and researcher around the world. Founders Online will post online over the next three years all the existing print documents. As new documents are printed, they will be added to the database. The site will also make available for the researcher to view transcribed and unpublished letters as the project editors and staff research and annotate them for publication.
sensed that animosity was behind Livingston’s claim against Jefferson personally, so Jefferson did not hesitate to use whatever defenses were available to him. It actually ended well with Livingston obtaining some portion of the land and reviving his career. John Tyler, the District Court judge, wrote an opinion with Marshall concurring that Jefferson could not be sued in Virginia for a cause of action arising out of land situated in the Louisiana Territory. However, Jefferson was upset that the case did not go to trial. Still in a combative mood, he arranged for his brief to be published under the title, “The Proceedings of the Government of the United States, in maintaining the Public Right to the beach of the Mississippi adjacent to New Orleans, Against the Intrusion of Edward Livingston.” A number of historians who have examined this case have faulted Jefferson for his treatment of Livingston. Indeed, legal maneuver- The Jefferson‐Hemings Controversy: ings are always open to post hoc Report of the Scholars Commission debate, but Jefferson had acted in ed. Robert F Turner his official capacity as president, and was being sued personally for damages in the amount of $100,000. Moreover, Livingston may have received the batture as a legal fee, so he would have been aware that the title was in dispute. Jefferson was by now in his 70s and his legal career was four decades in the past, but his instincts Thirteen independent scholars spent remained. He approached the legal one year researching the evidence issues just as methodically as he did whether Thomas Jefferson fathered when a young lawyer in the General children by Sally Hemings and produced the most complete report to date. Court. Order at http://tjheritage.org/books.html or at Amazon.com
Jefferson Notes page 3
THOMAS JEFFERSON HERITAGE SOCIETY 12106 Beaver Creek Road Clifton, Virginia 20124
PRSRT STD US POSTAGE
PAID MERRIFIELD VA NO. 206
RETURN SERVICE REQUESTED
We welcome your support for the work of the Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society Please make donations to TJHS and forward to Box 4482, Charlottesville, VA 22905 Little Mountain $ 25.00 Rotunda 100.00 Memorial 250.00
All contributors will receive a copy of The Jefferson-Hemings Myth: An American Travesty. Rotunda and Memorial contributors will also receive Jefferson Vindicated.
BOOK NOTES IN DEFENSE OF JEFFERSON By William D. Hyland Jr JEFFERSON VINDICATED By Cynthia H. Burton FRAMING A LEGEND By M. Andrew Holowchak Available now from Amazon.com
Is Encyclopedia Virginia Pursuing Historical Truth in the Paternity Issue? One of the most contentious entries in the Encyclopedia Virginia promised to be the one on Sally Hemings (http://www.encyclopediavirginia.org/Hemings_Sally_1773-1835). Bolstered by Monticello’s willingness to weigh all the evidence in favor of paternity, the media and a number of historians have assumed the issue is settled. However, there remains unproven facts which are critical to historical truth, which include: the silence surrounding Sally Hemings years at Monticello; no contemporaneous witness has ever claimed a relationship between Jefferson and Hemings; the insistence that Jefferson must have been the father of all of the Hemings children; absence of any verification for the treaty claim in the Madison Hemings interview; the uncorroborated pregnancy in Paris; and Sally’s so-called freedom under French law. Encyclopedia Virginia picked Virginia Scharff to write the entry on Sally Hemings. While Scharff could properly include all information that might indicate paternity, she had an equal obligation to discuss the defects in that information or why it might be unreliable. Unfortunately, Scharff had just written a book, “The Women Jefferson Loved,” and she was fully vested in the paternity belief. The most detailed account of the issue is The Jefferson-Hemings Controversy: Report of the Scholars Commission. This work is not included in the “Further Reading” suggested by Encyclopedia Virginia, nor is Jefferson Vindicated, or In Defense of Jefferson, while the books by Fawn Brodie, Annette Gordon Reed, and Scharff are included. Surprisingly, so is Master of the Mountain, which has nothing to contribute to the issue. Of course, the Monticello staff report is hyperlinked.
Visit the Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society at www.TJHeritage.org . Jefferson Notes page 4