Harriet Hemings/Pearl N Graham
jal...@cox.net
Alleged descendants of Harriet Hemings oral traditions
(Pearl M. Graham)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1940-1950s,
Pearl Graham, a writer from California, claims to have talked to
the Harriet Heming's (born 1801) descendants in the 1940's who were living
in New Jersey and Massachusetts. Her letters to the curator at Monticello
are in Mr. Bear's papers and at the Alderman Library. However, there is
some doubt as to whether they were the great grandchildren of John Hemings,
Harriet Hemings, or any Hemings relation at all. Since the Virginia census
does not list family members names until 1850, and are not indexed after
1880, it takes an immense volume of time to look for someone, county by
county, page by page, frame by frame, year by year, and even then you have
to have some inkling of the females' married names.
The ladies Ms. Graham spoke to said they did not know their
grandmother's name, but that she was married to a man named "Captain" at
Keswick, near Charlottesville, and later to a man named Reuben Coles. The
marriage certificate for Reuben Coles in Albemarle County says he married a
Suzy Bowles on January 7, 1819. There is a Reuben Coles on the 1840 census
in Virginia listed as a mulatto. (Davey Bowles worked on the Monticello
plantation and his wife, Fanny, was a cook for Jefferson when he lived in
Washington.) The ladies told Ms. Graham that their "Gramma" married a Mr.
Coles in Canada. ("Canada" was also a nickname for a black community in
Charlottesville.) The women said their mother, born in 1837, was Mary
Frances Captain Coles. These relatives were: Mrs. Lucy C. Williams (1876);
Mrs. Anna Ezell (1864); and Mrs. Minnie Arbuckle (1888). These ladies were
born in Charlottesville and had been members of the black community.
The Coles families and their progeny were large slave owners and
personal friends of the Jefferson family. Family members intermarried.
Isaac Coles was Jefferson's secretary during his third term in office. The
family may have had a slave named Reuben, who took his surname from the
Coles. More evidence is needed to evaluate the material in order to make a
proper decision on this oral history.
Down From The Mountain, The oral History of the Hemings Family, Are They
the Black Descendants of Thomas Jefferson? By Judith P. Justus. Herald
Printing Company (1990) pp 129 - 130
--------- -------- --------- -------
One of the most interesting discussions of Randolph's possible
paternity is found in a 1958 letter from Pearl Graham to Professor Julian
Boyd, the editor of The Papers of .Thomas Jefferson being published at
Princeton University. Long before Professor Fawn Brodie's book was
published, Ms. Graham was convinced that Thomas Jefferson was the father of
Sally Hemings' children; and she had clearly done some serious research on
the issue-including, allegedly, interviewing two granddaughters of Harriet
Hemings. (Ms. Graham was instrumental in getting the Hernings family to
donate a bell to Howard University that was allegedly given by Martha Wales
Jefferson, on her deathbed, to Sally or one of the other Herrings
girls.(79) Noting the reported physical resemblance of Herrings' children
to Thomas Jefferson, she discussed alternative theories that might explain
this result:
"Among his paternal relatives, the possibilities could be narrowed
down to three, --his brother, Randolph, and two nephews, Samuel and Dabney
Carl. A study of the known facts about these three convinced me that, while
some one of them might have fathered one of Sally's children, a liaison
advering well over ten years was not in the realm of possibility,--and
Jefferson's staunchest defenders have never charged that Sally was
promiscuous. A further item would seem to eliminate Randolph Jefferson: one
of Harriet's granddaughters had told me that Jefferson's younger
brother "also" had colored children. Had it been the younger, instead of
the elder, brother, who was her own ancestor, she would probably have known
of some tradition to that effect. Moreover, if `Tom' was not a figment of
Callender's imagination, no one save Jefferson could possibly have been the
father." (80)
I don't know how reliable this information is. At minimum, it
clearly shows that Randolph Jefferson was being discussed as a serious
alternative to Thomas Jefferson for the paternity of Sally Hemings'
children even by a source who was clearly convinced that the President was
the father. It may be noteworthy that Randolph Jefferson was mentioned
before two of the three Carr brothers (for some reason Peter Carr was not
mentioned), and given a more extensive consideration in the process.
It is unclear also to me whether her "source" for the allegation
that Randolph Jefferson had "colored children" (a woman named "Kenney" who
claimed to be a descendant of Sally's daughter Harriet), was who she
claimed to be; but Lucia Stanton of the Thomas Jefferson Foundation informs
me that she finds Ms. Graham's "work on the Hemings descendants in the
1940s to be "very very interesting," and concludes that "there seems no
reason to doubt the Kenny sisters' connection somehow with Monticello, and
probably to the Herrings family."(81) The charge-attributed to Herrings
family descendants-that Randolph Jefferson had "colored children" of his
own is noteworthy, as Ms. Graham and the Kenny sisters did seem to have a
great deal of information about the matter, and one of their goals was
apparently to convince people that Thomas Jefferson was the father of
Sally Hemings' children. While certainly not "proven," the allegation
that Randolph had "colored children" seems as strong as much if not most
of the "evidence" being relied upon by the revisionists.
(79). E-mail from Cinder Stanton to Bob Turner, Mar. 2(, 2001, 4:09 PM, RE:
Pearl Graham.
(80). Pearl M. Graham W Julian P. Boyd, Jan. 11, 1958, a copy of which is
on file with the writer.
(81).E-mail from Cinder Stanton to Bob Turner, Mar. 26, 2001, 4:09 PM, RE:
Pearl Graham. Ms. Stanton notes that the Kennys "were raised as part of
the Charlottesville African-American community," and since Madison Hemings
alleged that Harriet had settled into a white community, Ms. Graham may
have erred in her conclusions about their ancestory. Her bottom line was
"my view is that Pearl Graham did some very good work, but sometimes got
carried away by her enthusiasms. Her papers at Howard and at Alderman have
been of great use to us in our work at Monticello."
Scholars Commission Report, Chapter 10 Evidence too Lightly Dismissed pp
215-217
http://www.tjheritage.org/scholars.html
---------------------------------------------------------------
While Madison Herrings stated that he and his siblings "were the
only children of [Jefferson's] by a slave woman," Israel Jefferson did not
refer to the nature of the relationship.14 The other two full-length
accounts by former Monticello slaves are completely silent on the subject
of Jefferson's relations with enslaved women, and no further comments on
Jefferson's sexual habits have been found until the collection of some
stories in the mid-twentieth century, passed down in branches of the
Herrings family. In 1948 and 1949, Pearl Graham conducted interviews with
several descendants of Elizabeth (Betty) Herrings. A descendant of Betty
Hemings's oldest daughter, Mary, told her that Mary Hemings was "one of the
three colored women by whom Jefferson had children." In a 1954 article in
Ebony magazine and in interviews in the 1960s, descendants of two of Mary
Hemings's children have continued to relate the family tradition that
Jefferson was their ancestor. Graham also interviewed three daughters of
Mary Cole Kenney, descendant of an unidentified Hemings family member. The
three sisters, who grew up in Charlottesville, spoke of Jefferson's
"promiscuity" and mentioned "a tradition among descendants of Jefferson's
servants, that he was wont to accost one of his mistresses-a plantation
washerwoman-on the paths taken by her in returning laundry to the mansion,
and there compel her to submit to him." Another Charlottesville resident,
who had known many of the Monticello descendants, told Graham that it was
"handed down in his family traditions" that Jefferson was "unscrupulous in
his sexual demands upon colored women."15
In contrast to the neutrality of Madison Hemings's account and the
veiled criticism of Israel Jefferson's portrait, Peter Fossett presented a
Jefferson fondly remembered. The eleven-year-old grandson of Betty Herrings
and his mother and siblings were sold as part of the Jefferson estate in
1827; Peter's father, Joseph Fossett, was freed in Jefferson's will. Peter
Fossett lived a further twenty-five years in bondage and twice failed in
attempts to run to freedom. When he was interviewed by the New York World
in 1898, he was a prominent Baptist minister and successful caterer in
Cincinnati. He described Jefferson as "a master we all loved," "an ideal
master" who was "kind and indulgent" and rarely punished his slaves. He
commented on Jefferson's opposition to the slave trade, made much of his
role in the antislavery proviso of the Northwest Ordinance, and then,
startlingly, stated that Jefferson "had made all arrangements to free his
slaves at his death."16
This claim is in no way supported by the record. Nothing suggests
Jefferson intended to free more than a handful of the almost two hundred
slaves he owned in his last years. When Fossett explained the financial
conditions that prevented carrying out these "arrangements," he did not
cite, as do some scholars today, Jefferson's improvident lifestyle or the
nation's agricultural depression. Fossett told a Cincinnati newspaper in
1900, "The estate was so encumbered by [Jefferson's] generous gifts to his
cherished pet, the University at Charlottesville, that all the slaves had
to [be] sold." It is striking that one of the most notable achievements of
Jefferson's career was remembered as the main stumbling block to freedom.
Jefferson's financial commitment to the University of Virginia was actually
a subscription of $1,000, paid in installments between 1818 and 1822, a
major expenditure for a man with no outside income, but insignificant
alongside Jefferson's debts of over $100,000. Fossett's recollection might
seem one man's effort to make sense of the catastrophes of 1826 and 1827,
which resulted in the sale of 130 slaves appraised for almost $30,000. A
similar tale, more harshly expressed, was told in another branch of the
Herrings family. In 1948, Louie Bullock, whose mother had been raised by a
Herrings descendant in Charlottesville, said she was told that Jefferson
had "misused large sums of money entrusted to him for the benefit of the
Negroes, by applying it to the building of the University of Virginia."(l7)
(14). Memoirs of Madison Hemings," 247.
(15). Pearl M. Graham, interviews with Anna Ezell, Lucy Williams, Minnie
Arbuckle, and Charles Bullock, July 28, 1948, and [December?] 1949,
typescript copy in UVALib.; Graham to Julian P. Boyd, Jan. it, 1958, copy
in Getting Word project files; Lerone Bennett, "Thomas Jefferson's Negro
Grandchildren," Ebony, to (Nov. 1954), 78-80. Recent interviews with Mary
Hemings's descendants are in the Getting Word project files.
(16). Fossett 1900; Fossett 1898.
(17). Fossett 1900; Bear and Stanton, eds., Thomas Jefferson's Memorandum
Books, 2 vols. (Princeton, 1997), 2:1343, 1389; Albemarle County Will Book,
8: 281-282, 9: 20-21; Graham, interview with Charles and Lottie Bullock,
[December?] 1949, UVALib.
The Other End of the Telescope: Jefferson through the Eyes of His Slaves,
Lucia Stanton, W& M Quarterly, 3rd Series, Vol. LVII, Number 1, Jan 2000,
at 144-146.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1961,
In 1961 Pearl N. Graham, writing in the Journal of Negro History declared,
"Four descendants of Harriet Hemings said Harriet had been married in
Canada, " which Ms. Graham described as "a section of Charlottesville.."
"We are now agreed," she went on, "that Harriet Hemings spent her lifetime
in or near Albermarle County, Virginia."
Pearl M. Graham, "Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings," Journal of Negro
History, XLVI (1961), 89-103. The Jefferson Scandals, A Rebutal, By
Virginius Dabney, Dodd, Mead &
Company (1981) p 18-20
raymond o'hara
<jal...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:sne3buc885cmc4d7k...@4ax.com...
>
> Alleged descendants of Harriet Hemings oral traditions
> (Pearl M. Graham)
>
do you have a point other than purient curiousity ?
it's ot for this group and you can neither prove nor disprove anything .
what next a quote from tj's schoolmarm saying he was a nice boy in class.
Cary Osborne
> > (Pearl M. Graham)
> >
> will you take this boring bullshit elsewhere .
> do you have a point other than purient curiousity ?
> it's ot for this group and you can neither prove nor disprove anything .
> what next a quote from tj's schoolmarm saying he was a nice boy in class.
I find it hard to believe that this is still an issue for debate in
anyone's mind. If it weren't for "political correctness", I doubt
that it would be. The DNA evidence is in, folks. And this subject
has little to do with the history of this country.
Cary
jal...@cox.net
>:|> > Alleged descendants of Harriet Hemings oral traditions
And what does the DNA evidence prove to you?
Cary Osborne
> And what does the DNA evidence prove to you?
We discussed this to death in another on-line group. One of those who
posted was a researcher on the DNA. He said (and there have been
several articles stating the same thing in smaller publications) that
none of the children were sired by a Jefferson, except possibly Eston.
And even in his case, it was a remote possibility the father was a
Jefferson. No link to TJ could possibly be established.
Frankly, it's a tempest in a teapot. The original accusations, during
TJ's life, were politically motivated. That in itself gives the
accusations less chance of being true. In my own mind, there is
simply very little reason to believe the accusations were true,
especially given TJ's personality.
In the end, it does not seem to me to be one of the most important
issues in American history. It has lifted its ugly head now simply
because of the political correctness that is prevalent today, which
includes strong elements of "dead white man bashing." And I, for one,
am desperately tired of it.
Cary
jal...@cox.net
>:|>
>:|> And what does the DNA evidence prove to you?
>:|
>:|We discussed this to death in another on-line group. One of those who
>:|posted was a researcher on the DNA. He said (and there have been
>:|several articles stating the same thing in smaller publications) that
>:|none of the children were sired by a Jefferson, except possibly Eston.
Inconclusive is the word, I believe.
The DNA doesn't address the issue of any child except Eston.
All the DNA establishes there is that some direct line male descendant of
Thomas Jefferson's grandfather (via TJ's uncle's line of descendants)
fathered Eston Hemings. There were at least 25 white males in Virginia that
were DNA qualified, at least 8 white males (counting Jefferson) within 20
miles of Monticello (assuming Sally Hemings was at Monticello at that time)
who were DNA qualified during her probable window of conception. There were
anywhere from 2 to as many as 6 (counting Jefferson) at Monticello during
some portion of her probably window of conception who were DNA qualified.
There were unknown numbers of blk DNA qualified males, free or slaves, at
and around Monticello during that same probable window of conception.
>:| And even in his case, it was a remote possibility the father was a
>:|Jefferson. No link to TJ could possibly be established.
The only link to Jefferson was the (1) same link that fit any and all other
DNA qualified males, blk and white, (2) Jefferson was definitely present
during part of the probable window of conception. However, so was one of
his TJ's brother's sons.(He delivered a letter to T J.) There is a
potential that at some point during that probable window of conception his
T J's brother was at Monticello along with several of Randolph's other
sons.
>:|Frankly, it's a tempest in a teapot. The original accusations, during
>:|TJ's life, were politically motivated. That in itself gives the
>:|accusations less chance of being true. In my own mind, there is
>:|simply very little reason to believe the accusations were true,
>:|especially given TJ's personality.
My point from the beginning of this debate in this Newsgroup was it is
inconclusive. That didn't set well with approx three others, two of which
appear to be some sort of regulars in this newsgroup.
My posting here was:
(1) gathering all the evidence I could locate from a variety of sources,
rumor "evidence," gossip "evidence," hearsay "evidence," attack journalism
"evidence," actual first hand direct testimony evidence, scientific
evidence and other direct and indirect evidence, collect it and post it in
one thread
(2) pointing out the flaws in the posts and replies when one or more of
those that were convinced that he did it and seemed to be upset that anyone
could even remotely think he didn't do it posted or replied to me or some
others who didn't think the evidence established he did it.
>:|In the end, it does not seem to me to be one of the most important
>:|issues in American history. It has lifted its ugly head now simply
>:|because of the political correctness that is prevalent today, which
>:|includes strong elements of "dead white man bashing." And I, for one,
>:|am desperately tired of it.
It's never really gone away. While there has been peaks and valleys to how
prominent it was in any given time period, it has been with us, basically
non stop, since 1802.
Pete Lamb
>My point from the beginning of this debate in this Newsgroup was it is
>inconclusive.
AT THE BEGINNING, your point was that the evidence is inconclusive. SINCE
THE BEGINNING, your point has been to numb us to the issue with your
incessant spam.
Nobody questions your right to continue blathering about Jefferson
-Hemings. We just wish you'd excercise more restraint.
Alexander Browne
to read it .....one man's "spam" may be another man's information.
jal...@cox.net
>:|In <jc9lbukjji3umlq9i...@4ax.com> jal...@cox.net wrote:
>:|
>:|>My point from the beginning of this debate in this Newsgroup was it is
>:|>inconclusive.
>:|
>:|AT THE BEGINNING, your point was that the evidence is inconclusive. SINCE
>:|THE BEGINNING, your point has been to numb us to the issue with your
>:|incessant spam.
Don't read it. Nobody forces you to read it, pay attention to it,
acknowledge it. I bet your news/mail reader is perfectly capable of
blocking it.
>:|Nobody questions your right to continue blathering about Jefferson
>:|-Hemings. We just wish you'd excercise more restraint.
See above.
Anyone ever notice that I don't intrude on any of the few threads that
actually get posted here non related to anything I may post on?
I have no interest in them, so I don't read them, I block them. I don't
get offended by other posting the things they wish to post here, I don't
constantly butt in bitching about their posting threads that I have no
interest in.
I live and let live, something that some of the regulars here seem
incapable of doing. A concept that seems totally alien to some here.
How very interesting, don't you think?
Sam Sloan
wrote:
Mr. J. Alison has done some excellent work for the benefit of this
group. The posting above is just one of many examples.
I am surprised at your comment.
Sam Sloan
Sam Sloan
This and similar contents are amazing.
Mr. Jalison never says the same thing twice. Every time he posts he
gives us new information.
By the way, I am on the opposite side of the fence from Mr. Jalison
but I realize all the work and research, not to mention plain typing,
he did to find these references and make them available to us.
Sam Sloan
Alexander Browne
frequently.
In todays paper a news release from Associate Press pointed out that the
Thomas Jefferson heirs are proposing the creation of a separate cemetery
at Monticello for descendants of Slaves, including those of Sally
Hemings.
A 24 page report by the family committee
concluded there is not sufficient evidence to prove Eston Hemings'
lineal
descent from Jefferson, a strict requirement for admission and for
burial in the family plot at Monticello.
While the committee said it could not recommend the Hemings inclusion in
the Monticello Association, it suggest the the family create an umbrella
organization for the slaves and others who help build Monticello.
This Group which the committee suggest calling Families of Jefferson"s
Monticello would be open to anyone who could prove descent from one of
the slaves or artisans who worked at the plantation during Jefferson's
life time.
I think you all know that the family owns
the Jefferson grave yard at Monticello and has complete control over who
is buried there.So their decision on who is buried there is not subject
to be over-ruled by anyone.
GSHATTERHAND
>From: sl...@ishipress.com (Sam Sloan)
>Date: 4/21/02 12:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time
>I am on the opposite side of the fence from Mr. Jalison>but I realize all the
work and research, not to mention plain typing,>he did to find these references
and make them available to us.
Though I only participated in the Hemings debate in a narrow way I really
appreciate this fair-minded comment from you, Mr. Sloan. I've also found some
of the attacks on the whole debate to be "amazing."
(Mr. O'Hara even believes my involvement in the debate makes me one of two
people responsible for "killing" this newsgroup.)
You've probably seen the other posts from myself and Alex Browne in
appreciation of Jalison's work. Nice to know - if I'm not assuming too much
here - we are in agreement the debate was appropriate and had value no matter
where one stood on it.
As Alex points out in this same string the "thing about the Jefferson-Hemings
story is that it seems to reappear frequently" referring to a current newspaper
story once again bringing the story to prominence.
jal...@cox.net
>:|The thing about the Jefferson-Hemings story is that it seems to reappear
>:|frequently.
>:|
>:|In todays paper a news release from Associate Press pointed out that the
>:|Thomas Jefferson heirs are proposing the creation of a separate cemetery
>:|at Monticello for descendants of Slaves, including those of Sally
>:|Hemings.
>:|
There was at least one slave cemetery at Monticello during the days
Jefferson owned it and lived there. However, to date it has not been
located.
>:|A 24 page report by the family committee
>:|concluded there is not sufficient evidence to prove Eston Hemings'
>:|lineal
>:|descent from Jefferson, a strict requirement for admission and for
>:|burial in the family plot at Monticello.
Good. I agree with the report about the evidence not being sufficient.
>:|While the committee said it could not recommend the Hemings inclusion in
>:|the Monticello Association, it suggest the the family create an umbrella
>:|organization for the slaves and others who help build Monticello.
I would agree with that as well, especially since the precedence was set by
the fact there was at least one slave cemetery there from the time
Jefferson began building there and thus brought slaves there till the
family had to give Monticello up, and the slaves from there were sold or
set free.
>:|This Group which the committee suggest calling Families of Jefferson"s
>:|Monticello would be open to anyone who could prove descent from one of
>:|the slaves or artisans who worked at the plantation during Jefferson's
>:|life time.
Sounds like a perfect solution to me, but I suspect that it won't be done
that way.
>:|I think you all know that the family owns
>:|the Jefferson grave yard at Monticello and has complete control over who
>:|is buried there.So their decision on who is buried there is not subject
>:|to be over-ruled by anyone.
That is true, but if they wait long enough the hard liners will die off and
the younger generations won't be so "strict" regarding proof.
jal...@cox.net
>:|
>:|<jal...@cox.net> wrote in message
>:|news:sne3buc885cmc4d7k...@4ax.com...
>:|>
>:|> Alleged descendants of Harriet Hemings oral traditions
>:|> (Pearl M. Graham)
>:|will you take this boring bullshit elsewhere .
No.
>:|do you have a point other than purient curiousity ?
Actually I had several points, and I believe I made them, each and everyone
of them. Thank you just the same.
>:|it's ot for this group and you can neither prove nor disprove anything .
Inconclusive, I think I did a very good job of showing it was inconclusive.
BTW, OT, in your opinion, the overall topic does fit the time from of pre,
during and post Rev War period
>:|what next a quote from tj's schoolmarm saying he was a nice boy in class.
If I find it I will post it.
jal...@cox.net
>:|On Mon, 15 Apr 2002 16:56:33 GMT, Pete Lamb <pl...@hroads.net> wrote:
>:|
>:|>In <jc9lbukjji3umlq9i...@4ax.com> jal...@cox.net wrote:
>:|>
>:|>>My point from the beginning of this debate in this Newsgroup was it is
>:|>>inconclusive.
>:|>
>:|>AT THE BEGINNING, your point was that the evidence is inconclusive. SINCE
>:|>THE BEGINNING, your point has been to numb us to the issue with your
>:|>incessant spam.
>:|>
>:|>Nobody questions your right to continue blathering about Jefferson
>:|>-Hemings. We just wish you'd excercise more restraint.
>:|
>:|This and similar contents are amazing.
>:|
>:|Mr. Jalison never says the same thing twice. Every time he posts he
>:|gives us new information.
>:|
Not quite, whenever I was replying to someone, I did frequently repeat
information, though if I had found something new, I would include it as
well.
I repeated information because frequently they were making the same claims
that I had relied to at some point previously.
However, with the oral traditions threads and with the Evidence thread it
was frequently "new" material.
I know full well I posted information in there that "Drew" didn't know or
Bell didn't know previously to my posting it there.
In at least one instance I gave Bell a cite for information he said he had
been looking for for some time and hadn't been able to locate.
But from neither was there ever a kind word publicly. Bell (the jerk) did
say thanks in a pvt email.
>:|By the way, I am on the opposite side of the fence from Mr. Jalison
>:|but I realize all the work and research, not to mention plain typing,
>:|he did to find these references and make them available to us.
You have no idea what a chore typing is for me. First and foremost, I don't
type, I hunt and peck. Secondly I am blind in one eye, thus no depth
perception. Hence, I frequently go to hit one key and instead hit a key
beside, above or below it. Bottom line, lots and lots and lots of typos. It
sometimes takes me as long to spell check something as it did to "type" it
in the first place.
Thank you for your kind words and stated publicly as well.