Jump to content

Talk:David Levy Yulee

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yulee's religion

[edit]

Didn't Yulee deny he was Jewish during his political career, claiming his background as "Moroccan"?

Yes, he did downplay his history as a Jewish person during his career. Moreover, he stopped being Jewish in 1846 and was baptized an Anglican. I have changed the article 65.28.2.218 15:29, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yulee was never baptized. "Although never baptized, he [Yulee] became estranged from Judaism and married a devout Presbyterian." C.S. Monaco Moses Levy of Florida: Jewish Utopian and Antebellum Reformer (LSU Press, 2005), p.4. Also, David L. Yulee's (aka, "David Levy") first political campaign was noted for a degree of anti-Semitism. Thus, the statement "although never admitting publicly that he had been Jewish until the end of his political career" becomes rather absurd. His very Jewishness was a prime factor in the campaign.
What about "Levy changed his name to Yulee and renounced Judaism, converted to Christianity after his marriage to the daughter of the Governor of Kentucky, and claimed he was not Jewish at all but descended from a Moroccan prince." from Judah P. Benjamin, the Jewish Confederate, by Eli N. Evans, p. 48? Poldy Bloom (talk) 01:55, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yulee was a Christian. The conclusion was affirmed after a site visit to Yulee's gravesite in Washington, D.C.'s Oak Hill Cemetery. There are a number of arguments about Yulee's Jewish or Christian identity. His parents having been Jewish is documented. When and if Yulee converted is unclear and partially anecdotal. What is certain is that he was buried as a religious Christian in Oak Hill. The story that his wife forced him to convert on his death bed is not true. His wife Nancy Christian Wickliffe pre-deceased Yulee. Yulee would have selected his burial site and the funerary memorial that would mark his resting place either before or just after his wife's death. The funerary memorial is very elaborate and expensive. It is unusually inscribed with extensive Christian theological beliefs and values on three sides of the base. The inscriptions would have been preselected by Yulee and would have been very costly to have been included. Last, the issue of was Yulee the first Jew to be seated in the U.S. Senate is also unclear. The question goes to when did he become a Christian. If he converted before his marriage and seating in the U.S. Senate in 1846, then he was not the first Jew to be seated in the Senate. He, more accurately, should be recognized as the first U.S. Senator of Jewish heritage. The first openly professing Jew to be seated in the U.S. Senate was Judah P. Benjamin. An interesting article that touches upon Yulee's religious identity is http://www.jewish-american-society-for-historic-preservation.org/images/David_Levy_Yulee.pdf.

black descent

[edit]

"black descent"? 132.241.246.111 21:01, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yulee wasn't of black descent. I've changed this accordingly. 65.64.100.44 21:07, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Confederate Congress

[edit]

Article appears to be contradictory. Intro para states that Yulee was a Confederate Congress member. A later section states that he was not. Relbats (talk) 17:06, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on David Levy Yulee. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:27, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

End of Terms of Office

[edit]

Yulee's term of office as a Delegate from the Territory of Florida ended on March 3, 1845, not because that was the end of the congressional term, but because that was the date on which Florida was admitted as the 27th state of the Union. Prior to the 20th Amendment (which provides, inter alia, that congressional terms begin and end on January 3), the date on which a congressional term began and ended was March 4. In particular, the 31st United States Congress ended on March 4, 1851. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/31st_United_States_Congress Given that Yulee served as Senator until the end of such term, his first Senate service ended on March 4 (not March 3), 1851.

@Billmckern, you explained, when you reverted my change to the conclusion of Yulee's first Senate term, that "[s]everal contributors had a long discussion about this last year and came to consensus" that congressional terms ended on March 3. Please let me know where this discussion took place, because it seems odd to me that they would have come to a "conclusion" that has been rejected by almost the entirety of the Wikipedia articles in which the end of a congressional term is given.

AuH2ORepublican (talk) 17:35, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@AuH2ORepublican:
  • United States Congress. "David Levy Yulee (id: Y000061)". Biographical Directory of the United States Congress. - I believe Yulee's Congressional biography is a good place to start. The historian of the US House indicates that his term as a delegate ended on March 3, 1845. I have to believe the historians of the House and Senate are authorities on their terms of office and the associated rules and regulations.
"elected as a Whig-Democrat, a Territorial delegate to the Twenty-seventh and Twenty-eighth Congresses (March 4, 1841-March 3, 1845); did not seek renomination, having become a candidate for the Senate; upon the admission of Florida as a State into the Union was elected as a Democrat to the United States Senate and served from July 1, 1845, to March 3, 1851."
US Congressional term end dates. If you go to section 17 of this archive, US Congressional term end dates, you'll see how this rather lengthy discussion concluded after it was opened in 2015. It includes information on how terms for president and vice president began and ended on March 4, but not Congressional terms, which began on March 4 and ended on March 3. Congressional leaders even went so far as to stop the clock on March 3 so they could transact business by pretending March 4 had not happened yet. They also created the fiction of the "legislative day" in which they claimed that March 3 ended at noon on March 4 for the purposes of acting on bills before Congress.
It seems pretty clear to me that Congressional leaders would not have had to pretend it was still March 3 if they thought their terms ended on March 4.
Please let me know what you think.
Thanks,
Billmckern (talk) 17:50, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Billmckern, wow. After reading all of those comments (and, in many instances, unfair accusations against you and your colleague), I'm sorry I asked. : ) I really don't want to get into that fight, and won't edit any March 3 or March 4 dates again.
But, since you asked what I think, here goes: Any House or Senate that continued to do business after midnight on March 4 would be acting ultra vires if their term really did end at 24:00 on March 3. A legislative session cannot extend past the end of the term for the legislative body, and I find the explanation of "legislative day that lasts until noon the following day" to be wholly unpersuasive. Given the fact that the House and Senate not only understood that they could act, but did act, past midnight and all the way until noon on March 4 (and, at times, declaring that the session had to end because it was noon on March 4), one of two, mutually exclusive, things must be true: (i) the pre-20A House and Senate terms actually ended at noon on March 4, the same time as presidential terms, but some people used "March 3" as a lazy shorthand and this was followed by the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress, or (ii) numerous U.S. Congresses legislated or voted unconstitutionally on March 4 of odd-numbered years between 1791 and 1933, and no one objected to persons who were not members of the House or Senate voting on legislation or appointments. I believe that the former possibility is the likeliest.
Please keep in mind that the Senate Historical Office and the Office of the House of Representatives Historian and so on are not infallible, and that the information that they provide many times is GIGO; for example, the United States Senate website currently asserts that John Tyler's time as VP ended on April 6, 1841 (the date on which he took the oath of office as President of the United States), even though President W.H. Harrison died on April 4, 1841, which could only be true if either Tyler was simultaneously President and VP for 2 days or else there was a vacancy in the presidency for 2 days. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 19:43, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@AuH2ORepublican: Members of Congress CLEARLY thought their terms ended on March 3 and they they could not act on March 4. Otherwise, why would they pretend that March 4 was still March 3? Common sense says that it they believed they could act on March 4, they would have. If they thought they could act on March 3, then why resort to clock stopping at midnight or the "legislative day" of March 3 that didn't end until noon on March 4? The ONLY reason I can think of to pretend it was still March 3 was that they know they couldn't act on March 4.
Senate, 1789-1989: Historical Statistics, 1789-1992. Volume 4. Page 449. Senator Robert Byrd and editor Wendy Wolff also indicate in Byrd's comprehensive history of the Senate that terms ended on March 3. I forget whether this reference was included in the original list of sources we checked during the original discussion I referenced earlier.
Billmckern (talk) 20:14, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Billmckern, you wrote "Senate, 1789-1989: Historical Statistics, 1789-1992. Volume 4. Page 449. Senator Robert Byrd and editor Wendy Wolff also indicate in Byrd's comprehensive history of the Senate that terms ended on March 3."
I would like to point out that, at page 449, Byrd states that the Senate's "second session" (not the "term") would end on March 3. Certainly the Senate could have sessions that ended on a date prior to March 4. Maybe the Senate would do that "legislative day" gimmick because their session was supposed to end on March 3, even though their term ran until noon on March 4? Again, if the term ended at 24:00 on March 3, then everything that the outgoing House or Senate purported to do prior to noon on March 4 was ultra vires.
But, as I stated before, I'm not going to edit any end-of-term dates that are give as March 3. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 21:07, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Amazigh Jewish?

[edit]

"Before their immigration to Israel, Europe and North America, many Jewish communities called Morroco their home. In the cities these communities lived in "reserved" neighborhoods called mellahs. There were, however, numerous communities that lived amongst the Amazigh tribes. These communities spoke Amazigh and borrowed from their neighbors (Berber muslims) some forms of social organization as well as certain rites.

The report we make available on line deals with the many problems inherent to communities who are still considered as the step child in the area of Morrocan Judaism studies. We address the arguments of their origins (Palestine, Spain or simply Amazighs converted to Judaism ?), as well as the place which Berber holds in their speech and the things which diffenciate them from the Arabic speaking Jewish groups."

https://web.archive.org/web/20051027062825/http://www.mondeberbere.com/juifs/index-en.htmSo...was Yulee a Sephardic Jew or an Sephardic Jew who was descended from Sephardim who adopted Amazigh mores or an Amazigh Jew through and through?

SpicyMemes123 (talk) 00:25, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Without a reliable source that explicitly identifies which community his family came from, we don't know, and can't say in the article. - Donald Albury 01:11, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for responding. I, personally, think he was a Sephardic Jew but that's just my opinion.
SpicyMemes123 (talk) 02:38, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:David_Levy_Yulee&oldid=1211031891"