George Washington's Proclamation of Neutrality, April 22 1793

  

The Proclamation of Neutrality
By THE PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES of America,A PROCLAMATION

Whereas it appears that a state of war exists between Austria, Prussia, Sardinia, Great Britain, and the United Netherlands, of the one part, and France on the other; and the duty and interest of the United States require, that they should with sincerity and good faith adopt and pursue a conduct friendly and impartial toward the belligerant Powers;

I have therefore thought fit by these presents to declare the disposition of the United States to observe the conduct aforesaid towards those Powers respectfully; and to exhort and warn the citizens of the United States carefully to avoid all acts and proceedings whatsoever, which may in any manner tend to contravene such disposition.

And I do hereby also make known, that whatsoever of the citizens of the United States shall render himself liable to punishment or forfeiture under the law of nations, by committing, aiding, or abetting hostilities against any of the said Powers, or by carrying to any of them those articles which are deemed contraband by the modern usage of nations, will not receive the protection of the United States, against such punishment or forfeiture; and further, that I have given instructions to those officers, to whom it belongs, to cause prosecutions to be instituted against all persons, who shall, within the cognizance of the courts of the United States, violate the law of nations, with respect to the Powers at war, or any of them.

In testimony whereof, I have caused the seal of the United States of America to be affixed to these presents, and signed the same with my hand. Done at the city of Philadelphia, the twenty-second day of April, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-three, and of the Independence of the United States of America the seventeenth.

GEORGE WASHINGTON
April 22, 1793

Source: The Columbian Centinel, May 4, 1793.
________________________
EarlyAmerica.com

Image Link

Text Link

Diversity and the Myth of White Privilege by James Webb July 22 2010

Diversity and the Myth of White Privilege By JAMES WEBB JULY 22, 2010 Wall Street Journal [Annotations by Asderathos in Yellow]

America still owes a debt to its black citizens, [No America Does Not; ESPECIALLY NOT TO THE MASSIVE NUMBER OF AMERICAN BLACKS NOT DISSENTED FROM SLAVES!!!] but government programs to help all 'people of color' are unfair. They should end.
   
The NAACP believes the tea party is racist. The tea party believes the NAACP is racist.[and only one outdatedly has a race's advocacy described by their name: The "National Association for the Advancement of Colored People"] And Pat Buchanan got into trouble recently by pointing out that if Elena Kagan is confirmed to the Supreme Court, there will not be a single Protestant Justice, although Protestants make up half the U.S. population and dominated the court for generations.

Forty years ago, as the United States experienced the civil rights movement, the supposed monolith of White Anglo-Saxon Protestant dominance served as the whipping post for almost every debate about power and status in America. After a full generation of such debate, WASP elites have fallen by the wayside and a plethora of government-enforced diversity policies have marginalized many white workers. The time has come to cease the false arguments and allow every American the benefit of a fair chance at the future.

I have dedicated my political career to bringing fairness to America's economic system and to our work force, regardless of what people look like or where they may worship. Unfortunately, present-day diversity programs work against that notion, having expanded so far beyond their original purpose that they now favor anyone who does not happen to be "white".

In an odd historical twist that all Americans see but few can understand, many programs allow recently arrived immigrants to move ahead of similarly situated whites whose families have been in the country for generations. These programs have damaged racial harmony. And the more they have grown, the less they have actually helped African-Americans, the intended beneficiaries of affirmative action as it was originally conceived.

How so?
   

Art by Martin Kozlowski

Lyndon Johnson's initial program for affirmative action was based on the 13th Amendment and on the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which authorized the federal government to take actions in order to eliminate "the badges of slavery." Affirmative action was designed to recognize the uniquely difficult journey of African-Americans. This policy was justifiable and understandable, even to those who came from white cultural groups that had also suffered in socio-economic terms from the Civil War and its aftermath.

The injustices endured by black Americans at the hands of their own government have no parallel in our history [not even indentured chinese rail road workers], not only during the period of slavery but also in the Jim Crow era that followed. But the extrapolation of this logic to all "people of color"—especially since 1965, when new immigration laws dramatically altered the demographic makeup of the U.S.—moved affirmative action away from remediation and toward discrimination, this time against whites!. It has also lessened the focus on assisting African-Americans, who despite a veneer of successful people at the very top still experience high rates of poverty, drug abuse, incarceration and family breakup. [Due largely to near universal allegiance to the Democratic party, subsequent culture of entitlement, and racist counter culture goaled with not being "white"]

Those who came to this country in recent decades from Asia, Latin America and Africa did not suffer discrimination from our government, and in fact have frequently been the beneficiaries of special government programs. The same cannot be said of many hard-working white Americans, including those whose roots in America go back more than 200 years.

Contrary to assumptions in the law, white America is hardly a monolith!. And the journey of white American cultures is so diverse (yes) [damn straight] that one strains to find the logic that could lump them together for the purpose of public policy.

The clearest example of today's misguided policies comes from examining the history of the American South.

The old South was a three-tiered society, with blacks and hard-put whites both dominated by white elites who manipulated racial tensions in order to retain power. At the height of slavery, in 1860, less than 5% of whites in the South owned slaves. The eminent black historian John Hope Franklin wrote that "fully three-fourths of the white people in the South had neither slaves nor an immediate economic interest in the maintenance of slavery."

The Civil War devastated the South, in human and economic terms. And from post-Civil War Reconstruction to the beginning of World War II, the region was a ravaged place, affecting black and white alike.

In 1938, President Franklin Roosevelt created a national commission to study what he termed "the long and ironic history of the despoiling of this truly American section." At that time, most industries in the South were owned by companies outside the region. Of the South's 1.8 million sharecroppers, 1.2 million were white (a mirror of the population, which was 71% white). The illiteracy rate was five times that of the North-Central states and more than twice that of New England and the Middle Atlantic (despite the waves of European immigrants then flowing to those regions). The total endowments of all the colleges and universities in the South were less than the endowments of Harvard and Yale alone. The average schoolchild in the South had $25 a year spent on his or her education, compared to $141 for children in New York.

Generations of such deficiencies do not disappear overnight, and they affect the momentum of a culture. In 1974, a National Opinion Research Center (NORC) study of white ethnic groups showed that white Baptists nationwide averaged only 10.7 years of education, a level almost identical to blacks' average of 10.6 years, and well below that of most other white groups. A recent NORC Social Survey of white adults born after World War II showed that in the years 1980-2000, only 18.4% of white Baptists and 21.8% of Irish Protestants—the principal ethnic group that settled the South—had obtained college degrees, compared to a national average of 30.1%, a Jewish average of 73.3%, and an average among those of Chinese and Indian descent of 61.9%.

Policy makers ignored such disparities within America's white cultures when, in advancing minority diversity programs, they treated whites as a fungible monolith. Also lost on these policy makers were the differences in economic and educational attainment among nonwhite cultures. Thus nonwhite groups received special consideration in a wide variety of areas including business startups, academic admissions, job promotions and lucrative government contracts.

Where should we go from here? Beyond our continuing obligation to assist those African-Americans still in need [Welfare begets slaves to the dole purchased with votes regardless of color, sounding the death knell of democracy in haunting similarity to democracies throughout history], government-directed diversity programs should end.

Nondiscrimination laws should be applied equally among all citizens, including those who happen to be white. [At this point A FREE Market would flush the Racists out of business by necessity, its a tragedy that  the unthoughtful ignorant persecuted Rand Paul for being inarticulate on this point] The need for inclusiveness in our society is undeniable and irreversible, both in our markets and in our communities. Our government should be in the business of enabling opportunity for all [by staying out of the market? and refraining from planned economics and Keynesianism?], not in picking winners [Hell Yeah!]. It can do so by ensuring that artificial distinctions such as race do not determine outcomes [I trust the people to render that Governance unnecessary if not the moment it is removed, then soon enough].

Memo to my fellow politicians: Drop the Procrustean[1.] policies and allow harmony to invade the public mindset. Fairness will happen, and bitterness will fade away. [Amen!~] 

Mr. Webb, a Democrat, is a U.S. senator from Virginia.

[1.] A Procrustean bed is an arbitrary standard to which exact conformity is forced illustrated In Edgar Allan Poe's The Purloined Letter

Benjamin Franklin's Request For Prayer July 28 1787

Benjamin Franklin's Request for Prayers at the Constitutional Convention, Philadelphia, PA July 28, 1787 

The Constitutional Convention had been meeting for five weeks, and had hit a perilous deadlock. The large states were insisting that congressional representation be based on population; the smaller states wanted a one-state-one-vote rule. The entire effort to create a stronger union was in jeopardy. Eighty-one-year-old Benjamin Franklin, quiet during most of the deliberations, then addressed the group. According to James Madison's notes, here is what happened next.
_____________________________________________________
[Dr. Franklin]12
Mr. President:

The small progress we have made after 4 or five weeks close attendance and continual reasonings with each other -- our different sentiments on almost every question, several of the last producing as many noes as ays, is methinks a melancholy proof of the imperfection of the Human Understanding. We indeed seem to feel13 our own wont of political wisdom, since we have been running about in search of it. We have gone back to ancient history for models of government, and examined the different forms of those Republics which having been formed with the seeds of their own dissolution now no longer exist. And we have viewed Modern States all round Europe, but find none of their  Constitutions suitable to our circumstances.

In this situation of this Assembly groping as it were in the dark to find political truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when to us, how has it happened, Sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Father of lights to illuminate our understandings? In the beginning of the contest with G. Britain, when we were sensible of danger we had daily prayer in this room for the Divine Protection. -- Our prayers, Sir, were heard, and they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a Superintending providence in our favor. To that kind providence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of establishing our future national felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful friend? or do we imagine that we no longer need His assistance.

I have lived, Sir, a long time and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth -- that God14 governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings that "except the Lord build they labor in vain that build it." I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without his concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our little partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall be become a reproach and a bye word down to future age. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing Governments by Human Wisdom, and leave it to chance, war, and conquest.

I therefore beg leave to move -- that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the Clergy of this City be requested to officiate in that service----
  
______________________________
  
Mr. SHARMAN seconded the motion.
Mr. HAMILTON and several others expressed their apprehensions that however proper such a resolution might have been at the beginning of the convention, it might at this late day, I. bring on it some disagreeable animadversions. and 2. lead the public to believe that the embarrassments and dissensions within the Convention, had suggested this measure. It was answered by Docr. F. Mr. SHERMAN and others, that the past omission of a duty could not justify a further omission-that the rejection of such a proposition would expose the Convention to more unpleasant animadversions than the adoption of it: and that the alarm out of doors that might be excited for the state of things within, would at least be as likely to do good as ill.

Mr. WILLIAMSON, observed that the true cause of the omission could not be mistaken. The Convention had no funds.

Mr. RANDOLPH proposed in order to give a favorable aspect to ye. measure, that a sermon be preached at the request of the convention on 4th of July, the anniversary of Independence; and thenceforward prayers be used in ye. Convention every morning. Dr. FRANKn. 2ded. this motion After several unsuccessful attempts for silently postponing the matter by adjourng. the adjournment was at length carried, without any vote on the motion.15
  

     _____________________________________________________________________________

    

Records of the Federal Convention Page 450

Records of the Federal Convention Page 451

       

Records of the Federal Convention Page 452

       

__________________________________________________________________________________

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/benfranklin.htm

http://www.beliefnet.com/resourcelib/docs/21/Benjamin_Franklins_Request_for_Prayers_at_the_Constitutional__1.html

Thomas Jefferson's Letter to Sister Marie Theresa Farjon 1804

Sister Marie Theresa Farjon de St. Xavier's letter To Jefferson

To Thomas Jefferson President of the United States of America

Dear Sir:

The Ursuline Religious of New Orleans, encouraged by the honorable mention which you so kindly made of their order, take the liberty of having recourse to you in regard to some business which is of great concern to their Institute.

Although no' express mention has been made of it, they think that the Treaty of Cession and still more the spirit of justice which characterizes the United States of America, will certainly guarantee to those seeking your help the continued enjoyment of their present property. But, keeping to them, they believe that they would certainly fail in one of their principal oblications were they to neglect to see to it that this right ot their property be put officially in writing, confirming their rights to this property not only for themselves but also for those of their Sisters who will succeed them; an, for this reason, to beg you, dear sir, to present our etition to the congress in the manner and form which you will judge the most suitable.

This request of the Ursulines of New Orleans is not dictated by personal interest nor ambitious aims. Separated from the world and its pomps and vanities, and, in a word, from allthat is called its advantages, they have scarcely any ambition for earthly goods; but, bound by the solemn vot to use their time in the formation of youth, they cannot help but be anxious to know if they will be able to certainty to count on the continued enjoyment of their revenues which will enable them to fulfill their oblications. It is, then, less their own interests which they plead than it is that of the public good. In reality, it is the cause of the orphan and tha abandoned child, of unfortunates brought up in the midst of the horrors of vice and infamy who come to be reared by us in the ways of Religion and virtue, and be given a formation which will enable them one day to become happy and useful citizens. Finally, it is in the interest of this country which can but reap for itself honor and glory in encouraging and protecting an establishment as useful, and, we migh even say, as necessary as ours. Dear sir, we who seek your help dare to believe that these considerations will make an impression on you. Even more, we dare to 'count in advance on your protection.

With the most profound respect, "Monsieur le President", we have the honor of being

Your very humble and very obedient servants

The Ursulines of New Orleans

Sr. Marie Therese Farjon of St. Xavier
Superior
March 21, 1804

__________________________________________________________________________________

President Thomas Jefferson's Letter To Sister Marie Theresa Farjon de St. Xavier 

Washington, May 15, 1804

To the Soeur Therede de St. Xavier farjon Superior and the nuns of the order of St. Ursula at New Orleans

I have received, holy sisters, the letter you have written me wherein you express anxiety for the property vested in your institution by the former governments of Louisiana. The principles of the constitution and government of the United States are a guarantee to you that it will be preserved to you, sacred and inviolate, and that your institution will be permitted to govern itself according to its own voluntary rules, without interference from the civil authority. Whatever diversity of shade may appear in the religious opinions of our fellow citizens, the charitable objects of your institution cannot be indifferent to any; and its furtherance of the wholesome purposes of society, by training up its younger members in the way they should go, cannot fail to ensure it the patronage of the government it is under [i.e. the state of Louisiana]. Be assured it will meet all the protection which my office can give it. I salute you, holy sisters, with friendship & respect."

-Thomas Jefferson
_______________________________________________

http://www.churchstatelaw.com/historicalmaterials/8_8_12.asp

http://www.churchstatelaw.com/historicalmaterials/

http://www.thepastwhispers.com/NO_SisterXavier.html

http://70.85.195.205/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=21582

______________________________________________