The language here is interesting as it avoids using the word "slave". It instead describes the people who would work on the university as "officers, servants, and others". In other words, it tiptoes around the word in order to avoid the harsh reality of the situation. In fact, in this entire document, the word "slave" is only used once. And even here it is describing the property of someone else, rather than the university. I think that even though it was generally accepted at the time that slaves would be building this university, these writers still had to be careful with their language in order to get their proposal approved.

https://www.whitehousehistory.org/questions/did-slaves-build-the-white-house

This reminds me of the rhetoric used when building the White House. It was originally planned that Europeans would come to the U.S to build the White House, however this plan and talk quickly changed, and slaves were forced construct this landmark.

This particular statement seems somewhat hypocritical. They wanted the students to improve "morally" but this very document describes how the university would be built in the heart of the white population, basically to promote segregation. It seems that improving morally did not include the ideologies of accepting others that were different. I would argue that it is difficult to improve in such a way without recognizing and learning about differences. I realize that this was a different time, but it still seems incorrect that someone could be considered in good "moral" standing while still believing they were superior to others. I believe the fact that the white students and slaves were often separated contributed to this ideology. Students were able to learn in an environment where they were separated from the realities of the world.

http://www.vahistorical.org/collections-and-resources/garden-club-virginia/colleges-and-universities/university-virginia

Here is an article that shows how the serpentine garden walls created a separate space. This space is where many slaves worked and kept students somewhat separated, contributing to the division that was students "growing morally" and still playing a part in a society where inequality thrived.

We have learned that UVA was originally a location to educate whites, specifically those who came from plantations and places of slavery (according to UVA professor Kirt Von Daacke). Thomas Jefferson had the idea to create a fence around the slave gardens to protect students from seeing the institution of slavery, when in reality most the students grew up as a major part embracing this institution. Therefore, it makes sense that the creators of the Rockfish Gap Report would want the university close to its main demographic- being white students- especially because later they claim that they want parents to be within a day's travel from their students.

http://uvamagazine.org/articles/unearthing_slavery_at_the_university_of_virginia

This separation of students from slavery as an institution (while fairly unsuccessful) is evidenced by Thomas Jefferson's ban on students bringing their own slaves from home. The link above leads to an article from the UVA magazine where it explains, "Jefferson would not allow slaves to come with students.."

UVA has evolved heavily from this previous stance that students should be close to their parents at all times. Now, college is a place where students go to learn and practice independence. UVA currently has an out of state program because students from all over the world should have the opportunity to study and learn on their own. It no longer makes sense for the university to limit themselves to the surrounding area of students who are eligible to attend just because their parents are within a day's travel to help them. The studiousness and reputation of the university has only grown with the extension of geographically eligible students and the encouragement of independence. https://vpsa.virginia.edu/communications/2017/important-message-parents-second-year-students Here is a link from the UVA website showing a letter written from President Teresa Sullivan to second year students where she states that the university (and specifically in the second year) is a place of "intellectual growth, social maturation, and independence".