Geo. Washington - So Help Me God - A&E Network

[jim alison]

Geo. Washington - So Help Me God - A&E Network

I had sent the following email to The History Channel (A&E Network it
turns out)

The following was my email and their reply to date


Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 13:49:00 -0400
To: [deleted]
From: "viewer relations (EXCHANGE)" <thc.viewerrelations@aetn.com>
Subject: Re: AE Help Desk

At 10:42 AM 9/4/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>The request below was made from the help desk:
>First Name: [delete]
>Last Name: [detete]
>Request Type: comment
>Request: The following program aired on Sunday September 3, 2006 at
> 5:00 PM [on the history Channel]
>The Revolution: 12 - Road to the Presidency.
>
>It contained inaccurate information near the end
>(This is also being sold ad a DVD which contains the same inaccurate
>information
>
>The information I refer to is that Geo Washington added So Help Me
God to
>his swearing in.
>That is a myth. The actual facts are that never happened.
>There is absolutely no contemporary evidence that supports that myth.
>The first mention of that myth appears in the 1840s in two books
published
>at that time.
>
>There is no evidence that any President ever uttered those words until
>approx the 1880s
>
>Dr. Mike Newdow and a group of others researching this with him have all
>the evidence that shows beyond any doubt that Washington and the So Help
>Me God addition is a myth and not factual at all.
>
>
>ja
>

Dear Mr. [delete]

Thank you for your recent e-mail pointing out a possible error in our
program THE REVOLUTION: A PRESIDENT AND HIS REVOLUTION.

We have forwarded your e-mail to our programming department for review.


Cordially,
Viewer Relations
*************************

[EverLastingGodStopper]

Good work. You might want to send an edited version of the above to the editor of your local newspaper.

[Mathew Goldstein]

Good work. You might want to send an edited version of the above to the editor of your local newspaper.

Here is a correspondance with American Celebration on Parade web site. My request was forwarded to the Smithsonian Institute National Musuem of American History where the Exhibition curator Larry Bird cited PBS to confirm the truth of GW saying shmG. Breaking this big circle of misinformation may prove to be difficult as some people will refuse to not believe what they want to believe. How do little unknown people like us compete with PBS and ABC etc. regarding which version of history is true? It is better to hold off publishing anything in the general public newspapers if we can attach Dr. Newdow's name to the initial publication for better exposure. There are many organizations, web sites, and individuals that are perpetuating the shmG myths. When the details are published maybe we will collect a list of misinformation sources to contact.

From: Goldstein Mathew
Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 1:52 PM
To: 'Marvin Bond'
Cc: Joe Proctor;
Subject: RE: "So help me God" question

Thank you for responding. PBS is not an authoritative source. I
suggest you contact Philander D. Chase, Senior Editor, The Papers of
George Washington, University of Virginia and/or Charlene Bickford,
Director, First Federal Congress Project, George Washington University.
They will confirm that neither George Washington, John Adams, Thomas
Jefferson, nor James Madison appended that phrase to their presidential
oath of office recitation(s).

The only first hand account of exactly what was recited during George
Washington first inauguration is a letter of the French consul, Comte de
Moustier http://www.nonbeliever.org/PDF/ComtedeMoustier17890430.pdf

The Maryland Gazette, Thursday March 14, 1793, page 2
http://www.nonbeliever.org/PDF/MarylandGazette17930314.pdf
provides a detailed account of the swearing in of George Washington
during his second inauguration, including a quote of the oath recited
without appending shmG. A similarly detailed account of the swearing in
of John Adams, which also quotes the oath as being recited without
appending shmG, can be found in the Alexandria Gazette, Saturday, March
11, 1797, page 2
http://www.nonbeliever.org/PDF/AlexandriaGazette17970311.pdf

The NY Times presidential inauguration oath articles from 1853 to 1901
http://www.nonbeliever.org/commentary/NYTimes.html
report only one shmG (Chester Arthur). Similar, The Washington Post presidential inauguration oath articles from 1881 to 1905
http://www.nonbeliever.org/commentary/WashingtonPost.html
report only one shmG (Chester Arthur).

The first claims that GW appended shmG were made in the late 1840's and
the sources for that are unreliable second hand accounts. Everyone
mentioned in those second hand accounts as first hand witnesses were
dead by 1830. It appears that Herbert Hoover was the last president to respect the long tradition of not appending shmG that began with George Washington and continued until Chester Arthur.

________________________________

From: Marvin Bond
Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 12:19 PM
To: Goldstein Mathew
Cc: Joe Proctor
Subject: "So help me God" question


Thank you for your interest in Shenandoah Caverns & American Celebration
on Parade. We appreciated your comment on the origin of the phrase "So
help me God" in the inaugural oath. We had used numerous resources in
preparing the material on our web site, but I put the question to Larry
Bird of the Smithsonian's Museum of American History, which has the
largest inaugural collection outside of the American Celebration on
Parade. I've pasted his response below. Thanks again for your interest
and I hope you'll come to visit us.



Marvin Bond

Director of Marketing

Shenandoah Caverns & American Celebration on Parade



-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Bird
Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 12:14 PM
To: Marvin Bond
Cc: Harry R. Rubenstein
Subject: Re: FW: George Washington did not say So help me God



Marvin,



Washington said it,



refer your visitor to this site if you wish,



http://www.pbs.org/newshour/inauguration/history.html



all the best,



Larry



>>> "Marvin Bond" 09/06/06 09:37AM >>>

Larry,



This came in to our American Celebration on Parade web site. I've

looked through numerous biographies of Chester Arthur and other

resources and can find no mention of him adding "so help me God" to the

Presidential oath. Can you shed any light on this? Thanks.

Marvin

[MadPhatCat]

What the... since when is citing a TV network's web page a good historical source.

[Mathew Goldstein]

What the... since when is citing a TV network's web page a good historical source.

They "know" he used that phrase because they have many second hand accounts written 60 or more years after the event. Why require first hand accounts when there are dozens of second accounts and those second accounts say what they want to hear? It is just a matter of maybe a few years before these 200 year plus old historical documents appear on the web en masse. What are they going to do when those first hand documents all fail to support this myth of theirs that the early presidents appended shmG?

Marvin Bond promised me he would look into this so I am hopeful they will drop this mythical claim from their web site.

[Majestyk]

Does this mean that if, I publish a web page that declares, without any corroborating evidence, Larry Bird of the Smithsonian engaged in the ritual sacrifice of puppies the claim can then be cited as fact?

Historical accounts are held to standards of corroboration by chronology and topology. Accounts of Washington's alleged addendum do not meet those standards.

Its disturbing that an individual associated with the Smithsonian's American History department would make such an assertion without providing more than an unreferenced claim on a unaccredited website.

[Padre Bear]

Does this mean that if, I publish a web page that declares, without any corroborating evidence, Larry Bird of the Smithsonian engaged in the ritual sacrifice of puppies the claim can then be cited as fact?

Historical accounts are held to standards of corroboration by chronology and topology. Accounts of Washington's alleged addendum do not meet those standards.

Its disturbing that an individual associated with the Smithsonian's American History department would make such an assertion without providing more than an unreferenced claim on a unaccredited website.

Nah, but put a question mark next to it and it will fly, ask Fox.

[Mathew Goldstein]

Does this mean that if, I publish a web page that declares, without any corroborating evidence, Larry Bird of the Smithsonian engaged in the ritual sacrifice of puppies the claim can then be cited as fact?

Historical accounts are held to standards of corroboration by chronology and topology. Accounts of Washington's alleged addendum do not meet those standards.

Its disturbing that an individual associated with the Smithsonian's American History department would make such an assertion without providing more than an unreferenced claim on a unaccredited website.

They are arguably just inheriting this misinformation and taking it for granted that it is true. So now that contradictory first hand accounts and statements of several experts that there are no supporting first hand accounts have been brought to their attention, lets give them some time to either confirm the mistake and correct it or show us at least equally credible supporting first hand accounts. It took me some months of study to become confident that it isn't true. If they don't respond one way or the other then we should go on the offensive.

[Toto]

Nah, but put a question mark next to it and it will fly, ask Fox.

:thumbs:

(You need to have seen the Daily Show last night - Sept 13 - to get the reference.

[Majestyk]

Mathew, you are correct in pointing out that the prudent and effective course of action is to show patience. It allows A&E the grace of proactive correction and lessens the likelihood of their entrenching into a defensive posture.

Still, Bird's response as, a representative of the Smithsonian, struck me as too dismissive. I view "Washington said it", as no better than, "God did it", as an authoritative response. I was under the impression that the Smithsonian had higher standards than that.

[EverLastingGodStopper]

I was under the impression that the Smithsonian had higher standards than that.
I wonder if, like other government agencies, the Smithsonian might be overrun with evangelical-type Christians. I went to the NJ DMV recently and there was such an overt display of Christian paraphernalia, I almost asked the clerk if they hired Jews or not. I'm talking crucifix jewelry on computer workstations, religious calendars over desks, desktop plaques with inspirational prayers, and each and every employee wearing some form of Christian jewelry. I also know (from complaints received by the groups I work with) that such government agencies as the Welfare department and Social Services are staffed by mostly overtly religious people. Could the Smithsonian have suffered the same fate? Remember a few years ago when they almost hosted a viewing of a film that promoted intelligent design? They sent the check back to the Discover Institute (http://www.volokh.com/posts/1119464138.shtml) only after receiving a public backlash.

[Mathew Goldstein]

I wonder if, like other government agencies, the Smithsonian might be overrun with evangelical-type Christians. I went to the NJ DMV recently and there was such an overt display of Christian paraphernalia, I almost asked the clerk if they hired Jews or not. I'm talking crucifix jewelry on computer workstations, religious calendars over desks, desktop plaques with inspirational prayers, and each and every employee wearing some form of Christian jewelry. I also know (from complaints received by the groups I work with) that such government agencies as the Welfare department and Social Services are staffed by mostly overtly religious people. Could the Smithsonian have suffered the same fate? Remember a few years ago when they almost hosted a viewing of a film that promoted intelligent design? They sent the check back to the Discover Institute (http://www.volokh.com/posts/1119464138.shtml) only after receiving a public backlash.

Larry Bird has been a Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of American History Curator since the late 1980's. He may receive lots of nonsense commentary from the general public so his initial reaction will be to dismiss them. If the web page doesn't change and I don't hear from them in a couple of months I will try to contact them again.

[jim alison]

Here is a correspondance with American Celebration on Parade web site. My request was forwarded to the Smithsonian Institute National Musuem of American History where the Exhibition curator Larry Bird cited PBS to confirm the truth of GW saying shmG. Breaking this big circle of misinformation may prove to be difficult as some people will refuse to not believe what they want to believe. How do little unknown people like us compete with PBS and ABC etc. regarding which version of history is true?

First of all some aren't so little known

Mike newdow is very well known these days. Our Con Principle web site is fairly well known, having been cited in articles and books. S. Batte and myself have ben cited and quoted in articles and books as well as in a series on PBS

It is better to hold off publishing anything in the general public newspapers if we can attach Dr. Newdow's name to the initial publication for better exposure. There are many organizations, web sites, and individuals that are perpetuating the shmG myths. When the details are published maybe we will collect a list of misinformation sources to contact.

This was the position that I held when we had our go around on this topic in the past. My position was to let Mike do the article that he wanted and planned on doing. The reason being it was going to be a very in depth article as I understood it. In depth with all the gathered documentation,
evidence etc.

Mike was going to write it in the way he has to write briefs for the courts, i.e. facts, little or no speculation, etc Let the merits of the information establish itself

Your position at that time was to get out there with letters, etc get in their face and so on.

I suggest that probably would not work that it might actually backfire causing those folks to dig in their heels

It appears that those discussions we had then led to some serious consequences. It also apparently led to two articles that I seem to recall you wrote or put together which, nothing personal, in my humble opinion weren't all that good and didn't appear to accomplish a lot.

The purpose of putting together a really in depth article is that while those who want to reject it still can and probably will, it will be so packed with the actual factual evidence that it becomes very difficult to be totally ignored It becomes overwhelming in favor of the evidence

That appears to be the philosophy that Chris Rodda employed in her book "Liars for Jesus." (my copy finally arrived yesterday)

Here is a outline that Mike developed. You should already know all about it from your buddy R.S.

From: <Mike Newdow>
To: <Jim Alison> ; <Ray S.>
Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 8:58 PM
Subject: SHMG


Jim & Ray,

Here's a first draft of an outline:

Let me know your thoughts, so we can all work to alter/improve upon it.

*******************

I. Introduction

I figure I should explain how the issue of SHMG came up as I was doing the various EC cases. Mention here how the LOC, Capitol Historical Society, CBS, CNN, USSC Justices, etc., all have repeated and perpetuated the myth

II. Brief background

Explanation of Article II of the Constitution, and how the inauguration came to be.

III. The actual events leading to the inauguration.

IV. The contemporaneous accounts.

Here we should talk about the similarities and differences between the accounts.

V. SHMG

Note that the first claim that GW said SHMG was in 1854. Note the other claims that followed, and how they're all related.

VI. Note corroborating evidence.

Note that Washington Irving was six, that Rufus W. Griswold was a known forgerer, that none of the other inaugurations - up until 1881 - have any suggestion of SHMG, etc.

VII. Conclusion

Talk about the bogus quotations that have circulated, and give the moral of the story: Just because they said it, doesn't make it so.

**********************

When I sent Mike a copy of my reply to the Producers that did the show on the History Channel that A&E apparently owns he added an additional thought
_____________________
Excellent!

Why don't you suggest that they do a story - focusing not so much on the fact that he didn't say it, but on the fact that myths can reach - and be
perpetuated in - the highest levels of society.

- M
________________________
(That fits in with the introduction above but could probably be a entire section all by itself.)

If the above was followed and all the evidence was included that has been gathered, and there is a ton of it. (it may require a book rather than just an article. However, that was Mike's original plan. An article focusing mostly on Washington and his first swearing in to be followed by a book covering all the presidents and the entire time period from April 1789 to the present ). It would be very hard for many "just people" and honest people in positrons to make a difference to remained uninformed or to keep their heads buried in the sands of this myth.

We can never expect total success, after all most people still believe that Jefferson fathered children with his slave Sally Hemings in spite of the actual facts, including the DNA evidence, which doesn't prove that at all.
(it was just as likely or more likely it was his brother and/or a nephew of his)

Piece meal articles with only small snippets of the evidence or letters with only small portions of the facts will probably not accomplish much and will in fact give the other side time to create their elaborate counter positions and propaganda.

The above, of course, is all just in my opinion.

[jim alison]

Here is a correspondance with American Celebration on Parade web site. My request was forwarded to the Smithsonian Institute National Musuem of American History where the Exhibition curator Larry Bird cited PBS to confirm the truth of GW saying shmG. Breaking this big circle of misinformation may prove to be difficult as some people will refuse to not believe what they want to believe. How do little unknown people like us compete with PBS and ABC etc. regarding which version of history is true? It is better to hold off publishing anything in the general public newspapers if we can attach Dr. Newdow's name to the initial publication for better exposure. There are many organizations, web sites, and individuals that are perpetuating the shmG myths. When the details are published maybe we will collect a list of misinformation sources to contact.

From: Goldstein Mathew
Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 1:52 PM
To: 'Marvin Bond'
Cc: Joe Proctor; <email>
Subject: RE: "So help me God" question

Thank you for responding. PBS is not an authoritative source. I
suggest you contact Philander D. Chase, Senior Editor, The Papers of
George Washington, University of Virginia and/or Charlene Bickford,
Director, First Federal Congress Project, George Washington University.
They will confirm that neither George Washington, John Adams, Thomas
Jefferson, nor James Madison appended that phrase to their presidential
oath of office recitation(s).

The only first hand account of exactly what was recited during George
Washington first inauguration is a letter of the French consul, Comte de
Moustier http://www.nonbeliever.org/PDF/ComtedeMoustier17890430.pdf


What I personally found, verfied and made copies of in the very beginning of this research when it was only Mike Newdow, Glen Goffin and myself involved was this:

March

CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER
( rough draft - subject to change as new info is found)

APRIL 30, 1789 The actual event

Gazette of the United States (NY) April 29 - May 2, 1789
Gazette of the United States (NY) May 8 - May 13, 1789, p: 3,
Connecicut Courant (Hartford) May 4, 1789
The Massschusetts Centinel (Boston) May 6, 1789
The Pennsylvania Gazette (Phildelphia) May 6, 1789
( No Mention of SHMG in any of them)
*************************************************************************
1789 French Minister of State Moustier to the Comte de Montmorin, June 5, 1789
(Mike Newdow had this No Mention of SHMG)

1791 The Journal of Senator MaClay 1791
( No Mention of SHMG)

1807 The Life of George Washington, John Marshall, 5 Volumes
( No Mention of SHMG)

1807 The Life of George Washington By David Ramsay
1807
http://www.earlyamerica.com/lives/gwlife/chapt11/index.html
( No Mention of SHMG)

1848 The Life of George Washington
( No Mention of SHMG)

1854 Works of Fisher Ames (original 1854)
First hand account of event
( No Mention of SHMG)

1857...Volume IV of Washington Irving's "Life of Washington"
is completed.
( mentions SHMG)

1861 Eliza Susan (nee)Morton QUINCY 1861
Eliza Susan (nee)Morton QUINCY (F: 1773 - 1850 Memoir Of The Life Of Eliza S M Quincy (ed E S QUINCY) [a|1861] pp. 51-52
( No Mention of SHMG)

1882
"• I [ John Randolph of Roanoke ] ,was at Federal Hall," said he once in a speech to his constituents; " I saw Washington, but could not hear him take the oath to support the federal Constitution. The Constitution was in its
chrysalis state. I saw what Washington did not see, but two other
men in Virginia saw it, - George Mason and Patrick Henry, - the secret
sting which lurked beneath the gaudy pinions of the butterfly."
SOURCE: American Statesman, John Randolph, By Henry Adams, Houghton, Mifflin and Company (1882) pp. 17-18


1899 Lodge, Henry Cabot (1850-1924)
Title George Washington, Volume II Published originally in 1899
GEORGE WASHINGTON vol. II
... the Bible, bowed, and said solemnly when the oath was concluded, "I swear, so help me God," and, bending ... hand cried, "Long live George Washington, President of ...
http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/1/2/6/5/12653/12653-h/12653-h.htm -
( mentions SHMG as you can see)

"After John Randolph left Virginia, as I have stated," he says, "I have no
recollection of seeing or hearing of him until the year 1788. He then paid
me a visit and spent some weeks with me at my father's house, during my
college vacation. While we were then together, he informed me that, upon
his return from Bermuda, he had been placed by his guardian at college in
New York, and that he should soon proceed thither to resume his studies. I
remember well that in his first letter, written after his arrival in New
York, he stated that alien duties had been exacted by the custom-house
there not only upon the vessel in which he had taken his passage, which was
owned in Virginia, but upon the passengers on board of her, all of whom
were natives of Virginia. This statement was accompanied by many reflexions
designed to shew the impolicy of such exactions on the part of New York and
the ill effects that would result from persisting in such a course. This
incident must have occur'd before the adoption of the present Constitution
of the United States. I have mention'd it merely to shew the precocious
proclivity of John Randolph to the investigation of political subjects. He
was not 16 years old at this time, I am very confident. I recollect also
that another letter of his was confined to an account of the first
inauguration of General Washington as President of the United States. This
ceremony took place on the fourth of March, 1789, in the City of New York,
where John Randolph then was, a witness of the scene. I regret the loss of
this letter more than of any other. It contained a narrative of many minute
but very interesting incidents that do not appear in any of our public
records or histories. This narrative, being written at the moment such
incidents occur'd by an ingenuous youth, an eye witness of the events, had
an air of freshness and truthfulness about it which was most captivating.
SOURCE: John Randolph of Roanoke, 1773-1833 A biography based largely on
New material, by William Cabell, Bruce In Two Volumes, Volume I G.P.
Putnam's Sons (1922) pp. 74; 94-95
*******************************************************
1926 A republication of the original 5 volume set of The life of George Washington, by John Marshall . by the Citizen'sGuild of Washington's Boyhood Home, Fredericksburg, Va. There are pictures contained in this volume, Pictures that didn't exist in the original 5 volumes or th 1848 2 Volume abridged 2nd edition. Between pages 276 and 277 one will find the following:

Between pages 276 and 277 of Volume 4 of the 1926 re-publication of the original 5 volume set there was a picture of a painting added with these words on the page opposite the picture
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Washington Taking the Oath of office ice
From the Painting by Alonto Chappell

On the balcony of the old City Hall; Broad and Wall Streets, New
York, Washington was sworn in as first President of the United
States, April 30, 1789. The artist here accurately depicts him
wearing a suit of dark brown, at his side a dress sword, and his
hair powdered in, the fashion of the period. While siilk Stockings
and shoes with simple silver buckles completed his attire. On one
side of him stood Chancellor Livingstone, who administered the,
oath. On the other side was Vice-President John Adams. Washington solemnly repeated the words of the oath , clearly enunciating,
"I swear" : adding in a whisper, with eyes closed, "So help me God."
********************************************************************************
in the text section where the inauguration is described, it is the same as previous edictions and no mention of SHMG)

BTW
Alonzo Chappell (1829-1887).
and u can find a poster of that pic that is in the book right here
http://www.artybits.com/home/artybits/index.php?node=7777&category=8118

1930 A republication of the 1848 2 Volume abridged and corrected 2nd Edition of The Life of George Washington, by John Marshall.
(WE HAVE THIS no mention of SHMG )

1954, Freeman, Douglas Southhall. George Washington, a biography. New York, Scribner, 1948- [57] 7 v. illus. [Volume 6, (1954) pp 185-198 ]
(WE HAVE THIS Mentions SHMG)


AND WE HAVE THE MAP (grin)
######################################################

[benjdm]

bump....any response ?

[Mathew Goldstein]

bump....any response ?

Jim can answer regarding A&E Network.

The American Celebration on Parade web site corrected their presidential inauguration web page. PBS did not respond.

[PopeInTheWoods]

They "know" he used that phrase because they have many second hand accounts written 60 or more years after the event.

The Washington Gospels? :eek: :D :p :Cheeky: