In a message dated 3/29/2002 5:25:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, [log in to unmask] writes: > Why are you directing this comment to me? > Professor Hardwick: Perhaps the thread has been lost. My focus was intended to be the assumptions, possibilities and the maybes that have, to my amazement, constituted the "proof" of the paternity claim against Jefferson, accepted and argued by the academic community in the same way they might the winter at Valley Forge, or Jackson's victory at New Orleans. Slavery is the inevitable backdrop of any discussion of Jefferson, and my comment was to deny the inclusion of slavery as part of the evolutionary thought that culminated in the concepts of the Founding Fathers. Obviously, slavery was a part of the culture of America, and a critical issue at the Convention in 1787. However, a study of constitutional thought in England as it translated to the colonies does not include slavery of Africans as a consideration in the relationship of the people to the monarchy, nor was it necessary to include them in the "people" that entered into the contract to form the United States. ____________________________________________________________________ Richard E. Dixon Attorney at Law 4122 Leonard Drive Fairfax, VA 22030 703-691-0770 fax 703-691-0978 ____________________________________________________________________ To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html