In Defense of Thomas Jefferson: The Sally Hemings Sex Scandal

by William G. Hyland Jr.

The belief that Thomas Jefferson had an affair and fathered a child (or children) with slave Sally Hemings---and that such an allegation was proven by DNA testing―has become so pervasive in American popular culture that it is not only widely accepted but taught to students as historical fact . But as William G. Hyland Jr. demonstrates, this "fact" is nothing more than the accumulation of salacious rumors and irresponsible scholarship over the years, much of it inspired by political grudges, academic opportunism, and the trend of historical revisionism that seeks to drag the reputation of the Founding Fathers through the mud. In this startling and revelatory argument, Hyland shows not only that the evidence against Jefferson is lacking, but that in fact he is entirely innocent of the charge of having sexual relations with Hemings.

Historians have the wrong Jefferson. Hyland, an experienced trial lawyer, presents the most reliable historical evidence while dissecting the unreliable, and in doing so he cuts through centuries of unsubstantiated charges. The author reminds us that the DNA tests identified Eston Hemings, Sally's youngest child, as being merely the descendant of a "Jefferson male." Randolph Jefferson, the president's wayward, younger brother with a reputation for socializing among the Monticello slaves, emerges as the most likely of several possible candidates. Meanwhile, the author traces the evolution of this rumor about Thomas Jefferson back to the allegation made by one James Callendar, a "drunken ruffian" who carried a grudge after unsuccessfully lobbying the president for a postmaster appointment---and who then openly bragged of ruining Jefferson's reputation. Hyland also delves into Hemings family oral histories that go against the popular rumor, as well as the ways in which the Jefferson rumors were advanced by less-than-historical dramas and by flawed scholarly research often shaped by political agendas.

Reflecting both a layperson's curiosity and a lawyer's precision, Hyland definitively puts to rest the allegation of the thirty-eight-year liaison between Jefferson and Hemings. In doing so, he reclaims the nation's third president from the arena of Hollywood-style myth and melodrama and gives his readers a unique opportunity to serve as jurors on this enduringly fascinating episode in American history.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Presidents, American History

320 pages, Hardcover

First published June 9, 2009

About the author

William G. Hyland Jr., a native of Virginia, received his B.A. from the University of Alabama and a J.D. from Samford University’s Cumberland School of Law. Before law school, he worked with a Top Secret security clearance for the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency in Washington, D. C. Hyland is a member of the Virginia and New York Historical Societies. He now lives and writes in Tampa Bay, Florida.

Son of author William G. Hyland

Reviews

[Nathan · Rating 1 out of 5]

I'm not used to reading history this polemical. Hyland's a lawyer by trade, and it shows throughout his pugnacious little book. Coming out swinging, he posits that Thomas Jefferson did not have an affair with his slave Sally Hemings, which matter has been the subject of some debate. He bases his case on several points, including DNA evidence, historical accounts and inferences made from historical accounts. The case, as it turns out, is hurt more by Hyland's advocacy of it than any shortcomings in itself.

Hyland briskly corrals the background, the available information and his informed opinion and quickly exonerates Jefferson. In his rush to do so, however, he neglects to give the other side much of a say. This gives the somewhat unfair impression that the other side is short on facts. He works like a lawyer, and not always a friendly one: emphasizing the personal shortcomings of Jefferson's accusers, affecting histrionic incredulity at some of the more scurrilous attacks. He takes the case almost personally and that made for some weird reading in a history book.

Two important components are missing from his case: a thorough and evenhanded summation of the opposing arguments, and a historian's concern for why this matters, what it meant for American history as a whole. Those omissions don't hamper our understanding of Hyland's position, but they weaken it a bit by introducing an element of one-sidedness.

I enjoyed very much the premise of this book. I love to see a legal mind engaging passionately with issues of history, bringing contemporary academics and science to bear on the story of the past. But I thought the execution did the premise a disservice; at best, this is one very narrow perspective of a larger picture.

[Doug · Rating 5 out of 5]

Of the three books I've read specifically about the Jefferson-Hemings story, this is the best written. Hyland, a lawyer, reviews the evidence thoroughly.
- Some is clearly accurate: Jefferson and Eston Hemings share a male ancestor. DNA proves it.
- Some is clearly wrong: Jefferson shares no ancestors with the Woodson family.
- Some evidence is debatable: Was Edmond Bacon defending an icon or was Madison Hemings wrong when he said Jefferson didn't like farming?

I would like to see a book as well written on the pro-paternity side but I'm not hold my breathe. I'm currently of the opinion that it is unlikely that Thomas Jefferson fathered children with his slave Sally Hemings.

[William · Rating 5 out of 5]

In celebration of the 4th of July, I offer this essay in defense of our greatest founding father, Thomas Jefferson. I feel Mr. Jefferson’s reputation has been unfairly eviscerated by a misrepresentation of the DNA results in the Hemings controversy. The exhumation of discredited, prurient embellishments has not only deluded readers, but impoverished a fair debate. In fact, with the possible exception of the Kennedy assassination, I am unaware of any major historical controversy riddled with so much misinformation and outright inaccuracies as the sex-oriented Sally Hemings libel.
The “Sally” story is pure fiction, possibly politics, but certainly not historical fact or science. It reflects a recycled inaccuracy that has metastasized from book to book, over two hundred years. In contrast to the blizzard of recent books spinning the controversy as a mini-series version of history, I found that layer upon layer of direct and circumstantial evidence points to a mosaic distinctly away from Jefferson. My research, evaluation, and personal interviews led me to one inevitable conclusion: the revisionist grip of historians have the wrong Jefferson--the DNA, as well as other historical evidence, matches perfectly to his younger brother, Randolph and his teen-age sons, as the true candidates for a sexual relationship with Sally.
A monopoly of books (all paternity believers) written since the DNA results have gone far beyond the evidence and transmuted conjecture into apparent fact, and in most instances, engaged in a careless misreading of the record. My new book, IN DEFENSE OF THOMAS JEFFERSON (Thomas Dunne Books, 2009), definitively destroys this myth, separating revisionist ideology from accuracy. It is historical hygiene by pen, an attempt to marshal facts, rationally dissect the evidence and prove beyond reasonable doubt that Jefferson is completely innocent of this sordid charge:
• the virulent rumor was first started by the scandal-mongering journalist James Callender, who burned for political revenge against Jefferson. Callender was described as “an alcoholic thug with a foul mind, obsessed with race and sex,” who intended to defame the public career of Jefferson.
• the one eyewitness to this sexual allegation was Edmund Bacon, Jefferson’s overseer at Monticello, who saw another man (not Jefferson) leaving Sally’s room ‘many a morning.’ Bacon wrote: “…I have seen him come out of her mother’s room many a morning when I went up to Monticello very early.”
• Jefferson’s deteriorating health would have prevented any such sexual relationship. He was 64 at the time of the alleged affair and suffered debilitating migraine headaches which incapacitated him for weeks, as well as severe intestinal infections and rheumatoid arthritis. He complained to John Adams: “My health is entirely broken down within the last eight months.”
• Jefferson owned three different slaves named Sally, adding to the historical confusion. Yet, he never freed his supposed lover and companion of 37 years, ‘Sally Hemings’ from her enslavement, nor mentioned her in his will.
• Randolph Jefferson, his younger brother, would have the identical Jefferson Y chromosome as his older brother, Thomas, that matched the DNA. Randolph had a reputation for socializing with Jefferson's slaves and was expected at Monticello approximately nine months before the birth of Eston Hemings, Sally’s son who was the DNA match for a “male Jefferson.”
• The DNA match was to a male son of Sally’s. Randolph had six male sons. Thomas Jefferson had all female children with his beloved wife, Martha, except for a male who died in infancy.
• Until 1976, the oral history of Eston’s family held that they descended from a Jefferson "uncle." Randolph was known at Monticello as "Uncle Randolph."
• Unlike his brother, by taste and training Jefferson was raised as the perfect Virginia gentleman, a man of refinement and intellect. The personality of the man who figures in the Hemings soap opera cannot be attributed to the known nature of Jefferson, and would be preposterously out of character for him.

William G. Hyland Jr.
Attorney at Law
Tampa, FL.

[Jeffrey West · Rating 4 out of 5]

In August of 2010 I had the privilege of visiting Monticello. During the tour we were told, as if it were indisputable fact, that Thomas Jefferson fathered several slave children. Luckily for me, and for Thomas, the visitor's center at the bottom of the hill had this book. The book is written by a trial lawyer who wrote it to be a sort of "Trial" for Thomas Jefferson as the defendant and the Hemmings family as the plaintiff. It should be said that I read this book with the goal of proving to myself the falsehood of those allegations. I have always considered it a moral impossibility that a man such as Jefferson could lead such an honorable life and have a stain on his character such as the willingness to bed a 14 year-old slave girl. Thus, I would not consider myself an impartial "Juror." That being said I was thrown back and forth during the reading because of the authors willingness to present both sides of the argument. Here are some of the facts. DNA evidence was presented that proved that "NO Jefferson" fathered Sally Hemmings' first child Tom. That one fact proves that any story of an affair started between the two in Paris, and while Sally was 14 years old, is pure fiction. DNA evidence also proved that "A Jefferson male", meaning any descendant of Thomas' grandfather, was the father of Sally's son Eston. There where 25 Jefferson males living in Virginia at the time of Eston's conception. The book goes on to show that there is evidence that 8 of those 25 are better candidates for being Eston's father than Thomas himself. This is done with eyewitness accounts, Thomas' medical history showing that it was very unlikely that Thomas fathered any children in his fifties and sixties, Thomas' personal letters and records, and thorough rebuttal of the "prosecution's" evidence. After reading this book I can say that any impartial jury would find Thomas Jefferson "Not Guilty" in the matter and that there would even be grounds for a libel suit against the man who originated the lies, James Callender. Personally I am more convinced than ever of not only Jefferson's inocence, but also of the fact that the enemies of Liberty are attacking our Founding Fathers and their history as a way of destroying what God, through them, gave to us.

[Rachel · Rating 2 out of 5]

Critics billed this book as "an irrefutable case" against the Hemingses' claim that T. Jefferson was their father, but it failed to convince me. Key quotes were parcially quoted and interpretted out of context. I also think the author, William Hyland Jr., was arrogant from the outset, and though I tried to see the "defens's" point of view, his attitude towards the topic in general turned me off to him in particular. Why does Jefferson need defending? He's not accused of any great crime. His paternity of the Hemings children in no way diminishes his contributions to our country, nor his reputation as a southern gentleman and founding father.

[Grace · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the first defense of Jefferson I’ve read as related to the Hemings scandal. I’ve never looked into the facts surrounding the tale before, and after reading this I will definitely be doing more digging. I do know that what is presented as 100% certain (“TJ DID father Sally Hemings’s child(ren)) is far from it, and I tend to agree with the author’s hypothesis that it was most likely a brother or close relative of Thomas Jefferson who fathered Sally Hemings’s children. Overall the book was well-written for a digestible yet heavy-hitting read, and there’s enough material in the sources/notes to do your own investigation. I look forward to teaching a lesson where my students can look at sources and context from each “side” and determine for themselves what they think is most true.

[Scott · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thomas Jefferson has been on trial in the court of public opinion since 1802 regarding his alleged affair with Sally Hemings. In a democratic society, the defendant does not have to prove innocence. The defense only has to raise reasonable doubt. [i]In Defense of Thomas Jefferson[/i] is a resounding success in that light.

Hyland’s thesis relies on several key points. Most notably, the famous DNA test in 1998 [i]does not[/i] prove that Thomas Jefferson was the father of one, let alone six, of Sally Hemings’s children. The test proved only that one of at least seven possible Jefferson descendents (including Thomas) fathered one of the children. Hyland contradicts several other “facts” that have led to the conventional wisdom of Jefferson’s guilt. He borrows heavily from previous Jefferson biographies and from original documents such as Jefferson farm records and travel logs to present more than enough evidence to cast reasonable doubt. And, Hyland presents a strong, circumstantial case that Jefferson’s brother, Randolph, may have actually been the father of one or more Hemings children. Whether or not the theory holds water, one can safely surmise that the odds are not significantly worse – and perhaps better – that Randolph was the father.

Not all of the evidence is completely in Jefferson’s favor. Hyland acknowledges that Jefferson likely was present at Monticello during all six conceptions of Hemings’s children. Although in some instances, the timing would have been quite fortuitous (especially for a 64 year old man in frail health) because the overlap between Jefferson’s presence and the projected conception window was just a few days. Hyland (and other pro-Jefferson historians) have been criticized for the character defense. This defense states, in essence, that Jefferson’s refined status and his open hostility to miscegenation (mixing of the races) made an affair with Hemings a “moral impossibility.” This is a relatively minor point in the overall defense argument, however. Finally, Hyland asserts that Jefferson most likely could not have fathered Heming’s’ male children because Jefferson’s “legitimate” children all were girls (except for one nonviable male). This is flatly false, barring some unknown genetic abnormality.

Hyland’s writing style is direct; and it sometimes borders on hostile. One may forgive this, however, on several counts. First, an attorney’s job (Hyland is an attorney for his “real job”) is to make a direct case with much force. Also, Jefferson opponents, including Annette Gordon-Reed and Dianne Swann-Wright, have been so openly vitriolic to Jefferson in their pursuits that one may be forgiven for being, well, defensive. Hyland unfortunately resorts to ad hominem attacks in isolated sections. The only other criticism of the book, as many have pointed out, is that the book is repetitive. Hyland raises the same points sometimes three and four times. This may be a quality tactic in the courtroom. In a book, however, it just seems monotonous.

Overall, Hyland presents a very compelling case. It is not conclusive. But, it does not have to be if Jefferson is the figure on trial. Unfortunately, I think Hyland is largely preaching to choir. The issue is so divisive that most have already decided on Jefferson’s guilt or innocence. If this is the first Jefferson read, one should read several other accounts, including Gordon-Reed’s, and draw one’s own conclusions.

[Nick West · Rating 4 out of 5]

William Hyland is not a historian. He makes that clear right up front. Rather he is a trial lawyer with more than 30 years of experience both as a prosecutor and as a defense attorney. This makes "In Defense of Thomas Jefferson" a particularly interesting read, because he approaches the Sally Hemings question with an eye toward burden of proof and reasonable doubt.

The book does an outstanding job at laying out the evidence (mostly ignored by the Monticello-endorsed report that implicated Jefferson in 2000) against Thomas Jefferson as the father of all (or any) of Hemings' children and pokes numerous, sometimes gaping holes in the arguments of "paternalists."

Perhaps most importantly, Hyland acknowledges that the evidence does not prove Jefferson fathered Eston Hemings, the youngest of Sally's children who's DNA was tested against a descendant of the Jefferson line, but Hyland also points out that the evidence does not prove that the 3rd President of the United States is not the father. Rather, Hyland stresses that the DNA evidence shows only that Eston shared a Y chromosome with a member of the Jeffersonian line. This means that any of about two dozen men living at or near Monticello at the time could have been the father. Mr. Jefferson was 64 years old at the time. Even in the modern era of Viagra and fertility treatments, 64-year old men still have a difficult time siring children.

While the Monticello report immediately pointed a finger at Thomas Jefferson based on incomplete and entirely circumstantial evidence, Hyland responds with a pile of other evidence (some circumstantial and some not) that clearly implicates Jefferson's younger brother as the likely father of Eston Hemings.

Many so-called historians have rushed to judgment in the Hemings question, making up best-selling stories about forbidden love or sexual abuse or even "Sally the temptress." Hyland sticks to just the facts. In fact, my main criticism of the book is that it is rather repetitive -- the same testimony will be referenced five times and each time is treated as if this is new information to the reader. My short-term memory isn't great, as my wife will attest, but it isn't that bad either.

In conclusion, Hyland does an excellent job at presenting all the facts surrounding the Jefferson/Hemings debate. Of course he focuses more on the facts that refute the notion that Thomas Jefferson fathered children by one of his slaves, but overall I think the presentation is much more even-handed and fair than some of the pro-paternity Jefferson books I have read. By the end of the book I was pretty thoroughly convinced that Randolph, not Thomas, Jefferson fathered Eston Hemings and possibly Sally's earlier children as well.

[Sara Goldenberg · Rating 1 out of 5]

Save yourself 270 pages. The brother did it. End of story.

[Debbie]

awful

[Art · Rating 4 out of 5]

Although he doesn't completely close the case, Hyland does succeed in casting serious doubt on the Sally Hemings sex scandal (where Jefferson was accused of fathering a child/children by one of his slaves). Hyland believes Jefferson's younger brother was the more likely father of Eston Hemings. I'd definitely recommend to U.S. History buffs.

[Helen Azar]

Although, despite all the protests from certain factions, I do believe that Jefferson was romantically and sexually involved with Sally Hemings and had children with her, I would like to give this book a shot.

[Jimmie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not guilty. Interesting.

[Julie Ellis · Rating 3 out of 5]

A bit repetitive, but a good defense of Thomas Jefferson.