How Bad Is This For Georgetown?

[Tugg Speedman]

Long article, small excerpt below

272 Slaves Were Sold to Save Georgetown. What Does It Owe Their Descendants?
In 1838, the Jesuit priests who ran the country’s top Catholic university needed money to keep it alive. Now comes the task of making amends.
April 17, 2016

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/17/us/georgetown-university-search-for-slave-descendants.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share&_r=0

The human cargo was loaded on ships at a bustling wharf in the nation’s capital, destined for the plantations of the Deep South. Some slaves pleaded for rosaries as they were rounded up, praying for deliverance.

But on this day, in the fall of 1838, no one was spared: not the 2-month-old baby and her mother, not the field hands, not the shoemaker and not Cornelius Hawkins, who was about 13 years old when he was forced onboard.

Their panic and desperation would be mostly forgotten for more than a century. But this was no ordinary slave sale. The enslaved African-Americans had belonged to the nation’s most prominent Jesuit priests. And they were sold, along with scores of others, to help secure the future of the premier Catholic institution of higher learning at the time, known today as Georgetown University.

Now, with racial protests roiling college campuses, an unusual collection of Georgetown professors, students, alumni and genealogists is trying to find out what happened to those 272 men, women and children. And they are confronting a particularly wrenching question: What, if anything, is owed to the descendants of slaves who were sold to help ensure the college’s survival?

More than a dozen universities — including Brown, Columbia, Harvard and the University of Virginia — have publicly recognized their ties to slavery and the slave trade. But the 1838 slave sale organized by the Jesuits, who founded and ran Georgetown, stands out for its sheer size, historians say.

At Georgetown, slavery and scholarship were inextricably linked. The college relied on Jesuit plantations in Maryland to help finance its operations, university officials say. (Slaves were often donated by prosperous parishioners.) And the 1838 sale — worth about $3.3 million in today’s dollars — was organized by two of Georgetown’s early presidents, both Jesuit priests.

The students organized a protest and a sit-in, using the hashtag #GU272 for the slaves who were sold. In November, the university agreed to remove the names of the Rev. Thomas F. Mulledy and the Rev. William McSherry, the college presidents involved in the sale, from two campus buildings.

[keefe]

Long article, small excerpt below

272 Slaves Were Sold to Save Georgetown. What Does It Owe Their Descendants?
In 1838, the Jesuit priests who ran the country’s top Catholic university needed money to keep it alive. Now comes the task of making amends.
April 17, 2016

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/17/us/georgetown-university-search-for-slave-descendants.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share&_r=0

The human cargo was loaded on ships at a bustling wharf in the nation’s capital, destined for the plantations of the Deep South. Some slaves pleaded for rosaries as they were rounded up, praying for deliverance.

But on this day, in the fall of 1838, no one was spared: not the 2-month-old baby and her mother, not the field hands, not the shoemaker and not Cornelius Hawkins, who was about 13 years old when he was forced onboard.

Their panic and desperation would be mostly forgotten for more than a century. But this was no ordinary slave sale. The enslaved African-Americans had belonged to the nation’s most prominent Jesuit priests. And they were sold, along with scores of others, to help secure the future of the premier Catholic institution of higher learning at the time, known today as Georgetown University.

Now, with racial protests roiling college campuses, an unusual collection of Georgetown professors, students, alumni and genealogists is trying to find out what happened to those 272 men, women and children. And they are confronting a particularly wrenching question: What, if anything, is owed to the descendants of slaves who were sold to help ensure the college’s survival?

More than a dozen universities — including Brown, Columbia, Harvard and the University of Virginia — have publicly recognized their ties to slavery and the slave trade. But the 1838 slave sale organized by the Jesuits, who founded and ran Georgetown, stands out for its sheer size, historians say.

At Georgetown, slavery and scholarship were inextricably linked. The college relied on Jesuit plantations in Maryland to help finance its operations, university officials say. (Slaves were often donated by prosperous parishioners.) And the 1838 sale — worth about $3.3 million in today’s dollars — was organized by two of Georgetown’s early presidents, both Jesuit priests.

The students organized a protest and a sit-in, using the hashtag #GU272 for the slaves who were sold. In November, the university agreed to remove the names of the Rev. Thomas F. Mulledy and the Rev. William McSherry, the college presidents involved in the sale, from two campus buildings.

I blame Pilarz....

"Get that man a sonnet!"

[GGGG]

Fascinating story.  Interesting to see how Georgetown reacts to this.

[keefe]

Fascinating story.  Interesting to see how Georgetown reacts to this.

I don't see any reason for GU to say anything. It is a part of their history.

Should Marquette change its name? After all, Fr Marquette was an instrument in France's Mission Civilisatrice. Some believe, with reason, that European colonization employed conversion to Christianity as a mechanism for subjugating native populations.

One of my colleagues is a Tulalip who had served in the Obama Administration as the Senior Policy Advisor to the Sec of Interior for Natural Resource Management. She is a sophisticated, discerning individual. She knows I am active in my Anglican parish but has said that, like most of the leadership of Indian Country, she has an inherent distrust of all religion because of history.

Fr Marquette was an instrument in the expansion of New France. The French policy of Mission Civilisatrice was effectively cultural genocide. Should Marquette change its name because of that legacy? 

[Badgerhater]

Can always rename ourselves as The Non-Public University of Wisconsin, if The Marquette name and Catholicism become too politically correct.

[rocket surgeon]

so who is responsible for the $$ for amends?   the students?  what good do $$amends do at this point anyway-i know, stupid question, but really?  what kinds of suffering have today's african-americans gone thru as a result of some people's actions over 100 years ago?  it was a wrong that has been righted...sorry, it won't happen again.  end of story. the AA's are desperately trying to exploit the $$ angle-surprise?  and who will be in charge of this?  are sharpton and jackson going to arm wrestle for it?  oh, and what is the price tag? 

[keefe]

Can always rename ourselves as The Non-Public University of Wisconsin, if The Marquette name and Catholicism become too politically correct.

Army

Don't get me wrong - I love the Marquette name and embrace honoring a good man who dedicated his life to the earnest service of his faith.

Some people think that the Christian missionaries were evil, corrupt, or just unwitting pawns in a grand political game.

My point is that we cannot erase history and there is no need for contemporary anguish over events from the distant past.

George Washington owned slaves. Should we eliminate him from the history of this nation for that fact?

[warriorchick]

I don't see any reason for GU to say anything. It is a part of their history.

Should Marquette change its name? After all, Fr Marquette was an instrument in France's Mission Civilisatrice. Some believe, with reason, that European colonization employed conversion to Christianity as a mechanism for subjugating native populations.

One of my colleagues is a Tulalip who had served in the Obama Administration as the Senior Policy Advisor to the Sec of Interior for Natural Resource Management. She is a sophisticated, discerning individual. She knows I am active in my Anglican parish but has said that, like most of the leadership of Indian Country, she has an inherent distrust of all religion because of history.

Fr Marquette was an instrument in the expansion of New France. The French policy of Mission Civilisatrice was effectively cultural genocide. Should Marquette change its name because of that legacy?

If you have read any scholarly biographies of Father Marquette, you would know that he did not give a rat's ass about politics, and actually saved many Native American lives by protecting peaceful tribes from the warrior tribes (now there is some irony for you) and convinced many of these aggressive groups to give up their murderous and even cannibalistic ways. If France used his actions to further their own less-than-honorable goals, that does not diminish Father Marquette's accomplishments as a peacemaker and spreader of Christian Faith.

[drewm88]

Army

Don't get me wrong - I love the Marquette name and embrace honoring a good man who dedicated his life to the earnest service of his faith.

Some people think that the Christian missionaries were evil, corrupt, or just unwitting pawns in a grand political game.

My point is that we cannot erase history and there is no need for contemporary anguish over events from the distant past.

George Washington owned slaves. Should we eliminate him from the history of this nation for that fact?

I don't think anyone's proposing erasing history. If anything, this is recognizing history more in the Georgetown situation. They took the names of the two priests off a building. I think that's a good step. Why continue to honor them?

The student movement this fall that got the buildings renamed also called for GTown to use the NPV of the slave sale to establish an endowment for recruiting and retaining black students and faculty.

[ChicosBailBonds]

This is beyond lame.....this entire story.   It's a giant whatever.


Part of their history, in a time when slavery was legal and a different world.  I have no doubt there will be ones that want to start the apology tour, and no doubt there actually will be people that do it.   On the flip side, maybe they should do an examination of some of the descendants of these slaves and see how their world turned out coming to America.  The slaves had it terrible, but one wonders if they had never been brought to the new world what would their descendants have become?   

Someone said fascinating story.....there are several very good books by historians about this very topic, about how the incredible journey and terrible circumstances of the slaves led to the betterment of their descendants as a result.  Before someone goes off half cocked like I'm supporting slavery, I most certainly am not.  I'm pointing out that some (yes some) positive impacts came of it for some people down the line.

Remember when Michael Johnson said this?   http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/05/nation/la-na-nn-michael-johnson-slave-descendants-make-better-athletes-20120705

Of course when he said it, immediately folks were looking for "repercussions", when all he said was something that quite frankly should not be ignored.

Pile on gents.....can't wait to hear the attacks.

[Badgerhater]

If you have read any scholarly biographies of Father Marquette, you would know that he did not give a rat's ass about politics, and actually saved many Native American lives by protecting peaceful tribes from the warrior tribes (now there is some irony for you) and convinced many of these aggressive groups to give up their murderous and even cannibalistic ways. If France used his actions to further their own less-than-honorable goals, that does not diminish Father Marquette's accomplishments as a peacemaker and spreader of Christian Faith.

I should have used teal. 

One thing people today get wrong when looking at history is to look at it with today's morality.  Societies and the thoughts behind it evolve.  Good people operated within the framework of their day, we should sugarcoat what they did but we can't lose sight of the rest of the person, especially when today's view of them is to feed an agenda.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I should have used teal. 

One thing people today get wrong when looking at history is to look at it with today's morality.  Societies and the thoughts behind it evolve.  Good people operated within the framework of their day, we should sugarcoat what they did but we can't lose sight of the rest of the person, especially when today's view of them is to feed an agenda.

DING DING DING

[Badgerhater]

Should NOT sugarcoat!!  I hate when I forget a word and am typing on the phone

[keefe]

If you have read any scholarly biographies of Father Marquette, you would know that he did not give a rat's ass about politics, and actually saved many Native American lives by protecting peaceful tribes from the warrior tribes (now there is some irony for you) and convinced many of these aggressive groups to give up their murderous and even cannibalistic ways. If France used his actions to further their own less-than-honorable goals, that does not diminish Father Marquette's accomplishments as a peacemaker and spreader of Christian Faith.

Chick

Did you actually read and understand what I wrote?

"I love the Marquette name and embrace honoring a good man who dedicated his life to the earnest service of his faith."

[rocket surgeon]

I should have used teal. 

One thing people today get wrong when looking at history is to look at it with today's morality.  Societies and the thoughts behind it evolve.  Good people operated within the framework of their day, we should sugarcoat what they did but we can't lose sight of the rest of the person, especially when today's view of them is to feed an agenda.

you da man!!

[ChicosBailBonds]

I don't think anyone's proposing erasing history. If anything, this is recognizing history more in the Georgetown situation. They took the names of the two priests off a building. I think that's a good step. Why continue to honor them?

The student movement this fall that got the buildings renamed also called for GTown to use the NPV of the slave sale to establish an endowment for recruiting and retaining black students and faculty.

Here's where I'd like to see some consistency.  If it is a good idea to take their names off the buildings, then when do we take LBJ's name, Truman's name, etc, off Federal buildings?   They'll all a part of history, and quite frankly their names should remain. 

[Pakuni]

Here's where I'd like to see some consistency.  If it is a good idea to take their names off the buildings, then when do we take LBJ's name, Truman's name, etc, off Federal buildings?   They'll all a part of history, and quite frankly their names should remain.

Some might suggest Truman and LBJ's occasional racist remarks aren't quite the equivalent of profiting from the slave trade, and trying to draw parallels between the two is inane.

Some might also suggest that, if one looks at the totality of those two men's lives, what they did to promote the cause of racial equality far, far outweighs incidental cases of verbal diarrhea.

For what it's worth, I'm not advocating removing anyone's name from anything here. Better to leave the name/statue/whatever in place and make it an educational tool.
Except JoePa's statue. F--- that child rape apologist.

[StillAWarrior]

From a historical perspective this is an interesting story and this is the first I've heard of it.  From a personal perspective, I hope the "controversy" blows over before my daughter starts there in fall 2017.  I suspect that it will.  From an outsider's point of view, I've always had an impression (maybe wrongly) that Georgetown embraces the African-American culture more than a lot of other schools (at least in the athletics department).  I'll be interested to see whether my impressions on that issue (both in athletics and the university as a whole) evolve in the coming years.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Some might suggest Truman and LBJ's occasional racist remarks aren't quite the equivalent of profiting from the slave trade, and trying to draw parallels between the two is inane.

Some might also suggest that, if one looks at the totality of those two men's lives, what they did to promote the cause of racial equality far, far outweighs incidental cases of verbal diarrhea.

For what it's worth, I'm not advocating removing anyone's name from anything here. Better to leave the name/statue/whatever in place and make it an educational tool.
Except JoePa's statue. F--- that child rape apologist.

Some might also say it depends who said it.  Dem says it....whistling through the wind.  If a GOP politician said it, well HBO will get the "documentary" going along with all the outrage.

Besides, haven't you been paying attention to the latest outrages on campuses, Pakuni?  It's all about safe spaces and hurtful "words", which is what LBJ and Truman used...oh, and Truman was also a member of the KKK so there's that.

[Pakuni]

Some might also say it depends who said it.  Dem says it....whistling through the wind.  If a GOP politician said it, well HBO will get the "documentary" going along with all the outrage.

Besides, haven't you been paying attention to the latest outrages on campuses, Pakuni?  It's all about safe spaces and hurtful "words", which is what LBJ and Truman used...oh, and Truman was also a member of the KKK so there's that.

So, you're needlessly outraged over others' needless outrage.

[ChicosBailBonds]

So, you're needlessly outraged over others' needless outrage.

I mock their outrage, as do many other Anericans.  I don't embrace it, like so many of you do.

[Pakuni]

I mock their outrage, as do many other Anericans.  I don't embrace it, like so many of you do.

People might think better of you if you didn't make things up so often.

[GGGG]

I don't see any reason for GU to say anything. It is a part of their history.

They don't have to say anything at all.  They will have to say something if it goes beyond the NYT article and grows into something more significant.

[GooooMarquette]

If schools are supposed to take names off buildings for this, maybe we should also blast Washington and Jefferson's heads off Mount Rushmore.

[Tugg Speedman]

If schools are supposed to take names off buildings for this, maybe we should also blast Washington and Jefferson's heads off Mount Rushmore.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/04/04/472985937/princeton-will-keep-woodrow-wilsons-name-on-school-buildings

Princeton University's board of trustees has decided that it will not remove Woodrow Wilson's name from its School of Public and International Affairs and from a residential college, despite student protests over the former president's segregationist views.

Wilson also was an avowed segregationist. He once said that "the whole temper and tradition of the place are such that no negro has ever applied for admission," according to the committee report. It added that when a black student in 1909 asked about applying, Wilson said "that it is altogether inadvisable for a colored man to enter Princeton."

Although the board of trustees decided not to remove Wilson's name from the institutions, it "called for an expanded and more vigorous commitment to diversity and inclusion at Princeton." That includes introducing a new program aimed to bring more minority students into the university's doctoral programs and diversifying campus art.

The board also agreed to change Princeton's informal motto from "Princeton in the nation's service and the service of all nations" to "Princeton in the nation's service and the service of humanity."