American Revolution Podcast

Sunday, June 9, 2019

Episode 100 The Declaration of Independence

Over the last two weeks I’ve discussed the vote for independence and the creation of the Declaration itself. This really is the key document to the American Revolution and one that fundamentally changed the the world. So I’m devoting a third week to this important topic. This week, I want to go through the Declaration line by line and explain the significance of each part. With that, let’s begin:

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

The July 4 date is the date Congress approved the final wording of the Declaration, although Congress added the very next line calling it unanimous a couple of weeks later after the New York delegation changed its vote so that all 13 colonies supported the Declaration.

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

Declaration of Independence (from Wikimedia)

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

Ok, so this introduction summarizes quite well the idea of social contract theory. Radical ideas first espoused by people like Thomas Hobbes, and later expanded by thinkers like John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. As the age of reason replaced medieval superstition, theorists could not simply rely on the idea that leaders were leaders because God ordained it, the so-called divine right of kings.

John Locke (from Wikimedia)

Under social contract theory, governments came into being because people needed rules and enforcement of those rules to bring order to society. The people collectively give this power to a government, but when a government proves unwilling to serve the people in this goal, the people can dissolve it and create a new one. Locke listed fundamental rights which government should protect: life, liberty, and property. If government did not protect people’s lives, let them live freely and protect their property, it was not doing its job and needed to be replaced.

Jefferson famously replaced “property” with “pursuit of happiness” a term Locke used elsewhere, as did other political philosophers. It is also a shortened version of what George Mason wrote in his Virginia Declaration of Rights, published a month earlier. Jefferson never explained this alteration. Some have theorized this was he did not want property to be seen as code words for protecting slavery. It could also simply be that Jefferson was thinking more about the right of taxation, which does take property and is acceptable if the people consent to it through elected representatives.

The phrase seemed to work. Jefferson then proceeds to explain that any government attempt to undermine these rights is justification for its replacement.

The next section goes through the list of reasons why the King had violated the social contract with the colonists:

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

These are general objections to restrictions colonial legislatures had to face more often in recent years as London attempted to reign in colonial legislatures. Although the King’s Privy Council had never rejected a bill of Parliament since before George I took power, George III’s Council had rejected colonial legislation on several occasions. It also emphasizes the futility of attempting to govern from such a distance, where it could take months for messages to pass back and forth across the Atlantic Ocean.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

This seems to be a dig at attempts to suspend colonial law making authority in colonies that objected to Parliamentary laws. The colonies had no representation in Parliament and could not relinquish legislative authority to that body. Some have also said it is a criticism of the royal government’s failure to redistrict legislatures as populations move into western lands without representation in the colonial legislatures.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

Signing the Declaration (from Wikimedia)

This appears to be a direct attack at royal directives that forced the Massachusetts legislature to meet in locations other than Boston. Virginia and South Carolina also had to meet in other locations as well.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

In the years leading up to war, royal governors repeatedly suspended legislative sessions and elections when it was clear those legislatures would vote on things with which the leadership in London disagreed. This effectively left some colonies without representative government, sometimes for years.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

This criticized attempts by the crown to limit immigrants from outside of the British Empire from settling in the colonies, and also attempts to restrict settlements in western lands. Colonists wanted to settle more lands and expand westward. London did not want large numbers of people with traditional allegiances to other European powers settling in large numbers. It also did not want westward expansion to provoke new was with Indian tribes.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

For nearly a decade, London had attempted to have judges be appointed by royal governors and to have London pay their salaries. Colonists saw this as an attempt to bias judges in favor of London. This was one reason Massachusetts began Committees of correspondence, to see if London was undermining judicial control in other colonies as well. It was one of those sneaky behind the scenes power grabs that put patriot leaders on high alert.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

This is most likely a reference to the many tax collectors, customs officials, and other trade regulators that often cost more than the taxes they created. Colonists also saw how British office holders often sucked up wealth in other colonies around the world. This included Bishops for the Anglican Church. These created comfortable lives for well connected members of the British establishment, but left the colonies poorer overall.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

The most famous of these incidents was the British occupation of Boston beginning in 1768. New York also had a fight over having to pay for soldiers they did not want. Armies were necessary when there was an external threat. Using them as law enforcement against the people was an act of tyranny.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

This fight went back at least as far as the French and Indian war, when British commanders simply did whatever they wanted, without feeling constrained to explain themselves to colonial legislatures, or even royal governors. Civilian control, meaning local control of soldiers in their midst, was considered an absolute necessity.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

This seems to be a dig at the king for supporting the authority of the Parliament in London to legislate on behalf of the colonies.

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

Again, this is a reference to putting regulars in colonies that did not want them and which colonists had to support financially. This was not just an issue of putting soldiers in individual homes. Colonists did not was to support regular soldiers within their colonies, wherever the regulars slept.

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

This is a jab at one of the Coercive Acts, which ordered that colonial courts could not try soldiers for murder. Such trials would be held back in London.

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

Britain had always barred direct trade between colonies and other countries outside the empire. But with the outbreak of war, it has banned all colonial trade anywhere. Such a blockade is generally considered an act of war.

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

This, of course, had been the rallying cry of protest since the Stamp Act of 1765.

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

Britain, of course, had moved many hearings to admiralty courts without juries.

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

Britain had threatened to send colonists to London for trial of certain crimes, though I’m not sure they ever actually did this until the war began.

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

This referenced the Quebec Act. Britain had maintained many French laws and refused to introduce basic English principles of government, like juries and elected legislatures. It then gave Quebec control over all western lands. This expanded the size of a colony that had no basic liberties, thus preventing other colonies from settling those lands without giving up their rights as Englishmen.

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

This is a pretty direct reference to the Massachusetts Government Act, the 1774 coercive act which revoked the colonial charter and took away most power of self-government.

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

Again, this references the suspension of colonial legislatures when a royal governor did not like what they were doing. This seems to be a direct reference to the Declaratory Act which held that Parliament had the right to legislate for the colonies in all cases whatsoever. Also, of course, London seemed to bypass colonial legislatures and imposing its own rules on colonists on an ever expanding range of issues.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

In late 1775, following news of Lexington and Concord, the King declared the colonies in rebellion and outside his protection. This effectively called on Parliament to go to war with the colonies. The King’s decision to take Parliament’s side rather than broker a compromise was what led many moderates in the colonies to join the move for independence.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

Since the war began, the army and navy had of course engaged in open warfare, burning towns like Falmouth, Charlestown, and Norfolk.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

Although they had not been in battle yet, delegates were well aware that the King had paid German mercenaries to supplement the army that Britain was sending to America. The idea that leader would hire foreigners to kill his own people was seen as an act of tyranny.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

Britain regularly captured merchant vessels and forced colonist sailors either to join the British Navy or be killed.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

Domestic insurrections is generally considered to be a reference to Virginia Governor Dunmore’s attempts to get slaves to oppose the rebellion in defense of the Crown. This also references attempts by British Indian agents to get various tribes to support British efforts in the war. The phrase “merciless Indian Savages” has been tagged as racist in recent years. However, it does reflect the fear at the time that native tribes engaged in warfare tended to commit horrific acts against civilians and prisoners. Yes, colonists often visited the same level of cruelty against natives. But for the colonists at this time, this was a particularly scary element of warfare that they wished to avoid.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Colonies had been sending petition for many years, but of course made no progress with these. This was Congress’ way of saying that we tried to settle this by appealing to the government, but got nowhere. The refusal of leaders even to consider petitions and debate the problems was a sign that the government was not interested in the support of the people, but rather relied on the tyrannical use of force to control them.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

Colonies also made direct appeals to the English people. They sometimes got results when the English, concerned about trade boycotts, encouraged Parliament to back down. But in recent years, the British public did not seem terribly sympathetic. As a result, they seemed to hold different interests and could not remain as a single people anymore. Someday, they might be allies again, but never again one people.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

This final paragraph states very directly that for the above reasons, the colonies are now sovereign States with no political ties to Britain. They would continue a war against what they now regarded as the foreign nation of Great Britain, and would seek the assistance of other countries to win that war.

In pledging their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor, the delegates recognized they were putting everything on the line. After this open challenge to who would be the sovereigns of North American settlements, there was no turning back.

With that the Continental Congress and America awaited Britain’s response.

Next week: the British begin landing the largest military force ever seen in America at Staten Island, New York.

- - -

Next Episode 101: British Land at Staten Island

Previous Episode 99: Declaring Independence

Click here to donate

American Revolution Podcast is distributed 100% free of charge. If you can chip in to help defray my costs, I'd appreciate whatever you can give. Make a one time donation through my PayPal account.
Thanks,
Mike Troy

Click here to see my Patreon Page

Jefferson’s first draft of the Declaration of Independence: https://jeffersonpapers.princeton.edu/selected-documents/jefferson%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Coriginal-rough-draught%E2%80%9D-declaration-independence-0

Happy Independence Day: Which Day Is It? http://unlearnedhistory.blogspot.com/2015/07/happy-independence-day-which-day-is-it.html

Locke, John Two Treatises of Civil Government, 1689: https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/locke-the-two-treatises-of-civil-government-hollis-ed

Rousseau, Jean-Jaques The Social Contract, 1762:
https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/economics/rousseau/social-contract

Wolverton, Joe II In Pursuit of the "Pursuit of Happiness
https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/history/item/21192-in-pursuit-of-the-pursuit-of-happiness

Declaration of Independence, Lesson Plan
http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/lessonplan/lesson0.html

Free eBooks
(from archive.org unless noted)

Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789, Vol. 5, June 5 - Oct. 8, 1776, Gov’t Printing Office, 1904.

Becker, Carl L. Declaration of Independence: A Study in the History of Political Ideas, Harcourt, Brace & Co. 1922.

Dwight, Nathaniel The Lives of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence, Harper & brothers, 1840.

Force, Peter American Archives, Fifth Series, Vol 1, M. St. Claire Clarks, 1837.

Goodrich, Charles A. Lives of the Signers to the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Mather, 1840.

Linn, William The Life of Thomas Jefferson: Author of the Declaration of Independence, and Third President of the United States, Andrus, Woodruff, & Gauntlett, 1843

Lossing, Benson J. Lives of the Signers of the Declaration of American Independence. The Declaration Historically Considered, Evans, Stoddart & Co. 1870.

Tyler, Moses, C. The Literary History of the American Revolution, 1763-1783, Vol. 2, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1897.

Books Worth Buying
(links to Amazon.com unless otherwise noted)*

Beeman, Richard R. Our Lives, Our Fortunes and Our Sacred Honor: The Forging of American Independence, 1774-1776, Basic Books, 2013.

De Bolla, Peter The Fourth of July: And the Founding of America, Harry N. Abrams, 2008.

Hogeland, William Declaration: The Nine Tumultuous Weeks When America Became Independent, May 1-July 4, 1776 Simon & Schuster, 2010.

Maier, Pauline American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence, Knopf, 1997 (Book recommendation of the week).

* As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Sunday, June 2, 2019

Episode 099: Declaring Independence

Last week we looked at the politics and voting for independence. Today I want to take a closer look at drafting the document itself. Most people regard the Declaration of Independence, along with the US Constitution as probably the most important documents from the founding of the United States. The Declaration is America’s birth certificate, marking not only the date our country was founded, but providing an explanation as to why it should be founded. The radical language of the document was so controversial, that the US State Department at one time banned its distribution at certain embassies, lest it encourage other countries to revolt against their leaders.

The Committee

As I said last week, in June 1776, after Richard Henry Lee introduced the resolution from Virginia that:

These United colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved.

Congress put off a debate on that question so delegates could work with their local governments to get approval. While some were trying to build the political consensus, Congress created a committee to begin drafting the actual declaration, so that they would be ready if and when the colony’s gave their approval.

Franklin, Adams, and Jefferson review a draft
of the declaration (from Wikimedia)

The Declaration Committee consisted of John Adams of Massachusetts, Benjamin Franklin, who supported independence but who came from Pennsylvania which still instructed delegates to oppose it, Roger Sherman of Connecticut who supported independence, Robert Livingston, of New York, who opposed independence, and Thomas Jefferson of Virginia who also supported independence. Jefferson had just returned to Philadelphia a few weeks earlier following the death of his mother. He was one of the younger and quieter members of Congress, but also had a good reputation as an effective writer.

The committee discussed the matter and decided to have Jefferson put together a first draft. At the time, no one really thought that drafting the declaration itself would be a big deal. That is probably why they dumped the job on Jefferson as a junior member. The big deal was voting for independence, not the actual wording on the piece of paper. It would only be decades later when Jefferson used it to his political advantage that the drafting of the document took on more importance. Also, to be fair, Jefferson’s ability to lay out the cause for independence in such an articulate and elegant way lent itself to raising the importance of the document.

Many years later, John Adams reminisced about circumstances of drafting the declaration. You have to remember that by the time of this writing, Adams and Jefferson had been political rivals for many years and Adams had always seemed to resent how much credit Jefferson had received for his contribution to the declaration. So Adams may have had cause to make himself sound more gracious and involved in the draft than he may actually have been. In a letter from Adams, to Timothy Pickering, dated Aug. 6, 1822, Adams wrote:

You inquire why so young a man as Mr. Jefferson was placed at the head of the committee for preparing a Declaration of Independence? I answer: It was the Frankfort advice, to place Virginia at the head of everything. Mr. Richard Henry Lee might be gone to Virginia, to his sick family, for aught I know, but that was not the reason of Mr. Jefferson's appointment. There were three committees appointed at the same time, one for the Declaration of Independence, another for preparing articles of confederation, and another for preparing a treaty to be proposed to France. Mr. Lee was chosen for the Committee of Confederation, and it was not thought convenient that the same person should be upon both. Mr. Jefferson came into Congress in June, 1775, and brought with him a reputation for literature, science, and a happy talent of composition. Writings of his were handed about, remarkable for the peculiar felicity of expression. Though a silent member in Congress, he was so prompt, frank, explicit, and decisive upon committees and in conversation - not even Samuel Adams was more so - that he soon seized upon my heart; and upon this occasion I gave him my vote, and did all in my power to procure the votes of others. I think he had one more vote than any other, and that placed him at the head of the committee. I had the next highest number, and that placed me the second. The committee met, discussed the subject, and then appointed Mr. Jefferson and me to make the draft, I suppose because we were the two first on the list.

Thomas Jefferson
(from Wikimedia)

The subcommittee met. Jefferson proposed to me to make the draft. I said, 'I will not,' 'You should do it.' 'Oh! no.' 'Why will you not? You ought to do it.' 'I will not.' 'Why?' 'Reasons enough.' 'What can be your reasons?' 'Reason first, you are a Virginian, and a Virginian ought to appear at the head of this business. Reason second, I am obnoxious, suspected, and unpopular. You are very much otherwise. Reason third, you can write ten times better than I can.' 'Well,' said Jefferson, 'if you are decided, I will do as well as I can.' 'Very well. When you have drawn it up, we will have a meeting.'

A meeting we accordingly had, and conned the paper over. I was delighted with its high tone and the flights of oratory with which it abounded, especially that concerning Negro slavery, which, though I knew his Southern brethren would never suffer to pass in Congress, I certainly never would oppose. There were other expressions which I would not have inserted if I had drawn it up, particularly that which called the King tyrant. I thought this too personal, for I never believed George to be a tyrant in disposition and in nature; I always believed him to be deceived by his courtiers on both sides of the Atlantic, and in his official capacity, only, cruel. I thought the expression too passionate, and too much like scolding, for so grave and solemn a document; but as Franklin and Sherman were to inspect it afterwards, I thought it would not become me to strike it out. I consented to report it, and do not now remember that I made or suggested a single alteration.

We reported it to the committee of five. It was read, and I do not remember that Franklin or Sherman criticized anything. We were all in haste. Congress was impatient, and the instrument was reported, as I believe, in Jefferson's handwriting, as he first drew it. Congress cut off about a quarter of it, as I expected they would; but they obliterated some of the best of it, and left all that was exceptionable, if anything in it was. I have long wondered that the original draft had not been published. I suppose the reason is the vehement philippic against Negro slavery.

As you justly observe, there is not an idea in it but what had been hackneyed in Congress for two years before. The substance of it is contained in the declaration of rights and the violation of those rights in the Journals of Congress in 1774. Indeed, the essence of it is contained in a pamphlet, voted and printed by the town of Boston, before the first Congress met, composed by James Otis, as I suppose, in one of his lucid intervals, and pruned and polished by Samuel Adams.

Notice that last paragraph where Adams adds a jab at Jefferson about how unoriginal the declaration was. Many of Jefferson's opponents had criticized Jefferson's lack of originality and the fact that he borrowed heavily from other contemporary writings. Jefferson addresses this criticism by agreeing with it in a letter from Thomas Jefferson to Henry Lee dated May 8, 1825:

This was the object of the Declaration of Independence. Not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of, not merely to say things which had never been said before; but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm as to command their assent, and to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take. Neither aiming at originality of principle or sentiment, nor yet copied from any particular and previous writing, it was intended to be an expression of the American mind, and to give to that expression the proper tone and spirit called for by the occasion.

Jefferson claimed he did not rely on any particular documents while working on his first draft in June 1776. But he was in regular correspondence with colleagues in Virginia who were working on the Virginia Constitution and Bill of rights. In fact, Jefferson was rather upset that many of the more senior members of the delegation had returned to Virginia for the important work on the State Constitution, while Jefferson was stuck in Philadelphia doing this side work. As a result, we see a great many similarities between these documents.

According the Adams’ later account, Jefferson finished his first draft in just a day or two. He had Adams and Franklin look at it before introducing it to the full Committee. The Committee made a few changes to Jefferson’s draft, but largely sent it to Congress as written. Congress, however, would want to make more changes.

Congress Makes Changes

On June 28, the Committee submitted the Declaration to Congress for review. Congress made quite a number of edits. One of the most famous, or infamous, was the removal of a section condemning the King for the institution of slavery:

He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. This piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the Christian King of Great Britain. Determined to keep open a market where Men should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or restrain this execrable commerce. And that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, by murdering the people on whom he has obtruded them: thus paying off former crimes committed against the Liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another.

In the end, Congress removed this section. Sure, some colonies had attempted to end or limit the slave trade, and the Privy Council in London did not allow it. But many colonies happily supported slavery. Many have pointed to the removal of this paragraph as the height of hypocrisy. A document proclaiming the inalienable rights of man should not remove a passage condemning slavery. But the reality was that the King had never forced slavery on the colonists. The colonists had willingly participated. Condemning the King for making them have slaves just seemed a little too far fetched. Beyond that, there certainly was a hypocrisy among many delegates who supported the principles of equality and inalienable rights but who had no interest in extending those rights to the slaves who worked for them.

Congress made many other changes to wording, some to make other delegates happy, others to improve the flow of the document. Jefferson was not happy about all the changes to his work. He sent letters to many friends with his original draft, asking whether they preferred his version or the final version.

Congress continued to make a few minor alterations and deletions on July 2, 3, and the morning of the 4th. Late in the morning of July 4, Congress approved the final wording of the declaration.

Distributing the Document

At the end of the day on July 4, the draft committee took the manuscript copy to John Dunlap, official printer to the Congress. Keep in mind that what went to the printer was still a draft copy. The final engrossed copy did not exist yet.

Dunlap Declaration (from Wikimedia)

Mr. Dunlap apparently worked through the night making an estimated 150-200 copies of the declaration for distribution. On the morning of July 5, Congress began distributing copies to various committees, assemblies, and to the commanders of the Continental troops.

The first public announcement came on Friday, July 5, when a German language paper in Philadelphia apparently scooped everyone to announce that Congress had adopted the Declaration. The next day, July 6, the Philadelphia Evening Post published the full text of the Declaration.

The first known public reading did not come until Monday July 8, when Col. John Nixon of the Philadelphia Committee of Safety read the Declaration to a crowd in front of Independence Hall. According to local lore, with questionable authenticity, the State House Bell rang all day in celebration. That bell later became known as the Liberty Bell. That same day, public readings took place in Easton, Pennsylvania and Trenton, New Jersey.

On July 9, George Washington assembled his army in New York and read the Declaration of Independence to the soldiers and assembled civilians. It provoked such excitement that a mob formed to tear down a statue of King George III. Later they melted the lead from the statue to make bullets to fire back at the British Army.

About two weeks after its famous vote, Congress received word that New York, finally authorized its delegates to support independence, Congress made one final change, adding the line at the beginning of the Declaration, “The unanimous declaration of the thirteen United States of America.” It was only then, that the Congress ordered a formal engrossed copy that all the delegates could sign.

There is some question as to who actually wrote the words on the parchment that we today consider the original Declaration of Independence. But based on handwriting analysis, most historians believe the draftsman was Timothy Matlack , of Pennsylvania. Matlack was, at the time, a clerk to the secretary of the Second Continental Congress, Charles Thomson.

Signing the Declaration by J. Trumbull (from Wikimedia)

With the engrossed version complete, Congress laid out the copy for signing on August 2. John Hancock famously signed his name the largest and in the top center. Several members who had approved the Declaration were absent. George Wythe signed on August 27. On September 4, Richard Henry Lee, Elbridge Gerry, and Oliver Wolcott signed. Matthew Thornton signed on November 19. Delaware Delegate Thomas McKean did not sign at all in 1776. It is not clear exactly when he got around to signing, but possibly not until 1781. He had a good excuse for some delay. After voting for independence McKean took up command of a militia to march off to defend New York against the British invasion. But he was back in Congress by 1777. It is unclear why he did not get around to signing for another four years.

Two delegates, John Dickinson and Robert Livingston (who was on the committee to draft the document) never signed the Declaration at all. Another delegate, Robert Morris, who had opposed independence in debate signed anyway saying "I am not one of those politicians that run testy when my own plans are not adopted. I think it is the duty of a good citizen to follow when he cannot lead." Several other delegates who were not present for the voting on independence, nevertheless signed it at a later date.

No one from the Continental Congress, nor anyone else, every bothered to send a copy to the King nor anyone else in London. Admiral Howe and General Howe, at the time with the British fleets off the coast of New York, sent two copies of the original Dunlap version back to London. One was with a letter dated July 28 and the other dated August 11. The letters don’t say how exactly the British Army received them, but it does say they fell into their hands by accident. The Declaration was not a petition, nor was it specifically directed to any officials. It was a declaration to the world that the former British colonies in North America were now free and independent states. As such, they had no duty to inform anyone in London about their activities.

The Declaration

I will go into more detail next week on the details in the Declaration itself. Congress made all sorts of declarations that have not been so memorable and repeated. While the significance of independence was a big leap, Many delegates to the Congress did not consider the document itself to be that big a deal. They considered the vote for independence to be a big deal, but the exact wording in the document itself, not so much.

It was, of course, Jefferson’s brilliant wording that made it such a memorable document. When I quoted Jefferson a few minutes ago, he himself admitted that he was not putting down new ideas on paper. These were ideas almost everyone in Congress already believed. It was this widely held consensus that Jefferson sought to articulate in summary fashion.

As widely accepted as the principles were in America, however, these ideas were shocking to those in Europe. Sure, many social contract theorists had spoken about these ideas in abstract. But no one in Europe had seriously considered removing their monarchy and replacing it with a republic that would better implement the will of the people.

What made the document such a milestone in world history was the combination of being an articulate explanation of these ideals that were so radical to European ears, along with the fact that the Americans were actually in the process of implementing those ideas into a real government. This was the concept that made the Revolution so revolutionary.

It seems though, that no one at the time seemed even to dream of its future impact on the world. For the moment, they saw it as an important document that formally announced the goal of independence and which would hopefully assist in the war effort.

Next week: We will take a closer look at the actual words in the Declaration, and what they mean.

- - -

Next Episode 100: The Declaration of Independence

Previous Episode 98: Voting for Independence

Click here to donate

Click here to see my Patreon Page

You can support the American Revolution Podcast as a Patreon subscriber. This is an option for people who want to make monthly pledges. Patreon support will give you access to Podcast extras and help make the podcast a sustainable project. Thanks again!

Further Reading

Websites:

Declaration of Independence (full text): http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document

Jefferson’s first draft of the Declaration of Independence: https://jeffersonpapers.princeton.edu/selected-documents/jefferson%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Coriginal-rough-draught%E2%80%9D-declaration-independence-0

Happy Independence Day: Which Day Is It? http://unlearnedhistory.blogspot.com/2015/07/happy-independence-day-which-day-is-it.html

Heintze, James The Declaration of Independence: First Public Readings: http://gurukul.american.edu/heintze/declar.htm

George Washington Reads the Declaration of Independence:
http://www.mountvernon.org/digital-encyclopedia/article/declaration-of-independence

9 Things You May Not Know About the Declaration of Independence:
http://www.history.com/news/9-things-you-may-not-know-about-the-declaration-of-independence

Declaration Fact Sheet: http://www.classbrain.com/artteensb/publish/article_228.shtml

PODCAST Covart, Liz “Episode 141, A Declaration in Draft” Ben Franklin’s World (online recommendation of the week) https://www.benfranklinsworld.com/episode-141-declaration-draft

Free eBooks
(from archive.org unless noted)

Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789, Vol. 5, June 5 - Oct. 8, 1776, Gov’t Printing Office, 1904.

Becker, Carl L. Declaration of Independence: A Study in the History of Political Ideas, Harcourt, Brace & Co. 1922.

Dwight, Nathaniel The Lives of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence, Harper & brothers, 1840.

Force, Peter American Archives, Fifth Series, Vol 1, M. St. Claire Clarks, 1837.

Goodrich, Charles A. Lives of the Signers to the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Mather, 1840.

Linn, William The Life of Thomas Jefferson: Author of the Declaration of Independence, and Third President of the United States, Andrus, Woodruff, & Gauntlett, 1843

Lossing, Benson J. Lives of the Signers of the Declaration of American Independence. The Declaration Historically Considered, Evans, Stoddart & Co. 1870.

Stillé, Charles The Life and Times of John Dickinson, 1732-1808, Historical Society of Pennsylvania, 1891.

Tyler, Moses, C. The Literary History of the American Revolution, 1763-1783, Vol. 2, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1897.

Books Worth Buying
(links to Amazon.com unless otherwise noted)*

Beeman, Richard R. Our Lives, Our Fortunes and Our Sacred Honor: The Forging of American Independence, 1774-1776, Basic Books, 2013.

De Bolla, Peter The Fourth of July: And the Founding of America, Harry N. Abrams, 2008.
(Book recommendation of the week).

Ellis, Joseph What did the Declaration Declare? St. Martin's Press, 1999 (Book recommendation of the week).

Fleming, Thomas 1776: Year of Illusions, New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1975.

Hogeland, William Declaration: The Nine Tumultuous Weeks When America Became Independent, May 1-July 4, 1776 Simon & Schuster, 2010.

Maier, Pauline American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence, Knopf, 1997

McCullough, David John Adams, Simon & Schuster, 2001.

Ryerson, Richard Alan The Revolution Is Now Begun: The Radical Committees of Philadelphia, 1765-1776, Univ. of Pennsylvania Press, 1978.

* As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Sunday, May 26, 2019

Episode 098: Voting for Independence

Over the spring and early summer of 1776, momentum grew for Independence. Britain and The American colonies had been at war for a year by then. The colonies had done pretty well militarily. colonists had inflicted serious British casualties during the raid on Concord and at Bunker Hill. They had forced the regulars to evacuate Boston and were, for the moment pretty, much in control of the 13 colonies. Sure, British took back most of Canada in May and June, but overall, the colonists were looking pretty good.

Many people credit Thomas Paine’s Common Sense for helping move the population in favor of independence. Certainly, Paine and other pamphleteers had an influence. When someone asked John Adams decades later who he thought was most instrumental in furthering the independence movement, he had an interesting answer: King George III. The King announced at the opening of Parliament in the fall of 1775 that there would be no compromise and that he supported the use of military force to compel obedience. This, along with his rejection of the Olive Branch Petition made clear there would be no politically negotiated solution. Either the British would win by force of arms and the colonists would end up like Ireland, forced to accept whatever London did to them, or the Colonists would win and be independent. There was no longer a middle ground. It was time to pick a side. Most people picked independence.

John Adams (from Wikimedia)

Getting that through the Continental Congress, though, was going to be a fight. Many delegates still wanted a negotiated solution, no matter how unlikely that looked. Histories of the Continental Congress usually portray John Adams of Massachusetts as the leader of the independence movement. Congressional debates were secret. No one outside of Congress knew exactly what was happening. Members were forbidden even to write letters to friends about what they were doing. Of course, Congress published final declarations and orders, but the internal debates remained private.

So, looking back we may see John Adams as the central leader, because John Adams wrote much of the history about what happened. Decades later, long after he was president, Adams wrote his autobiography and other documents and letters describing the debate. I’m not saying he lied. There were dozens of other delegates who generally corroborated his story. But he did have every incentive to focus on, and perhaps exaggerate, his own role and probably did so.

John Dickinson of Pennsylvania, typically gets credited or blamed for leading the opposition to independence. He clearly did oppose independence. He was also one of the few delegates who never signed the Declaration.

But calling Adams the leader of the independence movement and Dickinson the leader of the opposition may be an oversimplification. There were about fifty delegates present for most of the debates, and a great many of them fought hard for and against independence. Most delegations were divided on the issue, with many opponents eventually agreeing to support independence despite their better judgement, only because they thought the colonies needed to appear united against Britain.

The May Resolution

At the beginning of the Second Continental Congress in 1775, almost everyone at least publicly opposed independence. The only people talking about it were loyalists who accused radical patriots of secretly plotting independence. Even after Lexington, most people seemed to think Britain and the colonies could negotiate some settlement. It was really only by late 1775 after London made clear it was going to fight, not talk, that independence began to gain real momentum.

Independence Hall (from Wikimedia)

Adams was an early advocate and a leader for the cause, but was circumspect about advocating for independence too early. His big concern was dividing the colonies and leaving New England on its own to fight the war. He wanted a consensus before moving to open debate.

In May 1776, Adams wrote a letter to James Warren, President of the Massachusetts Provincial Congress, assessing where each of the colonies stood. He thought that New England, that is Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Connecticut, and Rhode Island, would support independence. The southern colonies, Virginia, North and South Carolina, and Georgia were also all likely supporters. The middle colonies, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland were all still pretty resistant.

Even so, Adams decided it was time to test the waters. The way they moved into the debate was pretty sneaky. On May 10 Congress passed a resolution calling on the colonies that no longer had an effective government to create one for themselves that would protect the “happiness and safety” of the people. That seemed pretty reasonable. If a colony did not have a working government, it should create one that worked. The resolution did not mandate anything. Most colonies had already created their own provincial congresses to run things. The resolution essentially said great job guys, keep doing what you are doing. It passed unanimously and without much debate.

Then, a few days later, a committee made up of John Adams, Edward Rutledge of South Carolina and Richard Henry Lee of Virginia added a preamble to the resolution. The preamble was longer than the resolution itself. It attacked the King for waging war on the colonies and for hiring foreign mercenaries to destroy them. The preamble aid it was absolutely “irreconcileable [sic] to reason and good Conscience,” for people to swear loyalty to a royal government in light of these horrific acts of war. Therefore, the colonies needed to create new governments.

With that preamble, the resolution now sounded much more like a declaration of independence. Congress would be supporting the colonies creating new governments because they could no longer live under the authority of a tyrannical king. The notes we have only say that Congress agreed to the preamble, but don’t list any sort of vote. We know that the debate was contentious and that many delegates objected to it.

The Independence Resolution

Over the next few weeks, this put front and center the debate over independence both in congress and in the various colonies. On May 15, the same day the Continental Congress was voting on the preamble, the Virginia Convention in Williamsburg voted on a resolution proposed by Patrick Henry to send to congress. The resolution read:

These United colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved.

On June 7, Richard Henry Lee introduced this resolution into Congress. Delegates began formal debate on the issue the following week. Not surprisingly, much of the opposition came from New York and Pennsylvania, Robert Livingston, James Wilson and John Dickinson all argued strenuously against its adoption. Edward Rutledge of South Carolina also opposed it.

Assembly room where debate took place (from Wikimedia)

The main argument of the opponents was not the independence should never happen. They were concerned that it would divide the colonies, and that division would make them look like idiots to foreign governments with whom they were trying to create treaties and military alliances. Congress needed to be in a position where the colonies could actually operate as independent States before declaring themselves independent.

They should at least get formal directives from each colony before embarking on such a drastic declaration. This was a really big step. Shouldn’t we make sure the people are really on board with all this? Others were concerned about foreign alliances. Are we really sure countries like France and Spain would back us? What if they decided simply to use this dispute to recapture some of their own lost colonies and perhaps take a little more from a divided Britain?

Congress agreed to put off further debate for a few weeks so that delegations could communicate with their home colonies and see if they could get approval to support independence. In the meantime, just in case they got approval, Congress would appoint a committee to work on drafting a declaration. They also created a committee to work on a plan for confederation and another committee to work on treaties with foreign countries.

New England Support

Some colonies were clearly ready for Independence, New England especially. Rhode Island had essentially declared its own independence on May 4 when its legislature passed resolutions terminating British authority over the colony. The Connecticut Assembly voted on June 14 to instruct its delegates to support independence. New Hampshire’s House of Representatives did the same on June 15.

It was Massachusetts of all places, that was most divided on independence in New England. Of the five delegates, only two, John and Samuel Adams solidly backed Independence. Two others, Robert Treat Paine and Thomas Cushing opposed it. The fifth, John Hancock seemed to support it, but he was still fighting with the Adamses over other issues. They were still upset because Hancock had not relinquished the presidency of Congress to Peyton Randolph of Virginia when he returned to Congress. Hancock was still miffed at the Adamses for them backing Washington rather than him for command of the Continental Army. In December 1775, Adams got the Massachusetts Provincial Congress to replace Cushing with Elbridge Gerry, who backed independence, thus making Hancock’s vote less important and avoiding a potentially embarrassing fight over whether the Massachusetts delegation would support independence.

Southern Support

In the south, Virginia, which had instructed its delegates to support it in May, was clearly on board. North Carolina, home of the Mecklenburg Resolves and where patriots had already fought in open combat in the battle of Moore’s Creek Bridge, had voted to support independence in April, even before Virginia.

South Carolina had created a new independent government in April, but still expressed hope for an accommodation with Great Britain. It also faced a potential British invasion in June in what became the battle of Sullivan’s Island. South Carolina had essentially punted and told its delegates to support whatever they thought was right. A majority of the delegates supported independence, but the delegation’s leader, Edward Rutledge remained opposed. Georgia, the smallest and probably most loyalist colony in the south also simply told their delegates to use their best judgment, but those delegates seemed to be on board with independence.

Middle Colonies

That left the middle colonies, where independence seemed to have its weakest support. Delaware appeared to be most in favor of independence in this group. Delaware’s status as its own colony was under question since they were still technically considered part of Pennsylvania. Even so, the Delaware assembly refused to authorize independence. It left instructions to its delegates vague, essentially letting the delegates decide for themselves.

Edward Rutledge
(from Wikimedia)

The Maryland delegation walked out of Congress on May 15 when Congress debated the controversial preamble that had smacked of supporting independence. The Maryland Convention received Congress’ resolution. It then unanimously voted not to create a new government and reaffirmed its loyalty to the King. One June 21, the Provincial Convention in Maryland recalled its delegates to discuss the matter, but wanted an assurance that Congress would not vote on independence while they were away. Since Congress planned to begin debate on July 1, this was a problem.

New Jersey was in a period of transition. The colony had a strong loyalist population and could really go either way. Royal Governor William Franklin attempted to call the Assembly into session in May 1776, even though he was under house arrest. The Provincial Congress finally reacted by replacing the royal government in June and supporting independence. But this was a power play by the patriots. It was not clear that the colony’s population would go along.

That leaves us with two of the largest and most important middle colonies, New York and Pennsylvania. Even if the other eleven went along with independence, it’s hard to see how it would work without these two key colonies on board.

New York would prove to be the most intractable. The New York Assembly remained in power until June 1776. Unlike most other colonies, loyalists had also participated in the Provincial Congress as well. This gave them more influence in selecting delegates to the Continental Congress who opposed independence, as well as keeping the Provincial Congress itself from going too far. New York was also facing an imminent invasion. A leader even open to the idea of independence might have second thoughts if he believed that the British army would reassert control over the colony a month later and begin looking for leading traitors to arrest and hang.

Conservatives in New York tried to slow the momentum toward independence. After receiving word that the Continental Congress would debate the matter. The Provincial Congress voted that it could not support independence until it took a vote of the people in its colony, and that it could not take a vote, because, well that British invasion that is about to happen. So New York’s delegation would be stuck with instructions not to support independence, at least until New Yorkers could vote on the question.

Also, of course, Pennsylvania was still going through a radical change that spring and summer. I discussed this in detail last week, so I won’t go through it again now.

Congress Debates Independence

On July 1, 1776, the Continental Congress finally sat down to debate independence. That morning, supporters of Independence got a boost when an express rider arrived from Annapolis to say the Maryland delegates could support independence.

The debate took place under a parliamentary procedure known as the committee of the whole. Basically, the entire Congress sat in committee so that they could discuss things more informally than they would in a session of Congress. As a result, Benjamin Harrison sat as the committee chair rather than Hancock as President of Congress.

John Dickinson
(from Wikimedia)

John Dickinson spoke for most of the day, arguing against independence. He raised all the familiar arguments, that America needed to get European allies on board first, that Britain would unleash hell on the colonies by destroying trade, burning towns and stirring up Indians on the frontiers against the colonies.

Adams commented to another delegate that the whole debate was a waste of time, making the same arguments everyone had heard for the last six months. After Dickinson finished speaking, no one else rose to speak. Finally Adams stood and outlined the case for independence without having a planned speech in hand. No one recorded what he said, but Adams later said they were the same arguments he had made twenty times before. By some accounts, other delegates spoke as well, but again we have no record of the debates.

The debate went late that day, ending at around 7:00 PM. At the end of the day, the delegates took an informal poll to see where everyone stood. Nine States seemed ready to support independence. New York still had instructions to vote no. Pennsylvania and South Carolina both voted no. Delaware had only two delegates present, one for and one opposed. At that point, Congress decided to put off a formal vote until the next day.

Overnight, informal discussions tried to get the opponents on board. Most of South Carolina’s delegation seemed to be in favor of independence, but had voted no out of respect for their delegation leader, Edward Rutledge. The New York delegation actually supported Independence but had to remain loyal to their instructions not to vote yes, and abstained.

Pennsylvania, which had seven delegates, had voted 4-3 against Independence. Benjamin Franklin, John Morton and James Wilson supported independence, even though Wilson had been a critic of the move for some time. The other delegates, John Dickinson, Robert Morris, Thomas Willing, and Charles Humphreys voted against. The Pennsylvania delegates knew though that the more radical Pennsylvania Provincial Congress supported independence and was getting ready to elect new delegates in about three weeks.

Delaware had a third delegate who would likely support independence. Caesar Rodney was down in Dover at the time, putting down a potential loyalist uprising there. He could possibly put Delaware in the yes column if he returned in time.

Voting for Independence

The next day, July 2, Congress finally held the vote. The nine states expected to vote yes did so. Apparently overnight, the pressure on the "no" voters seemed to have an impact. Rutledge of South Carolina decided to let the delegation vote yes, mostly for the sake of unanimity. He realized the colonies could not be divided on this issue if they expected to have any chance of winning the war.

Caesar Rodney
(from Wikimedia)

Overnight, Delaware delegate Caesar Rodney made a famous ride through a thunderstorm to reach Congress that morning. His vote tipped the Delaware delegation in favor of independence. Rodney’s ride is celebrated in the musical 1776. If you grew up in Delaware, like I did, you learn all about Rodney’s famous ride. The main square in Wilmington is named Rodney Square and has a statue of Rodney on his horse making his famous ride to Congress.

The Pennsylvania delegates also decided to make a change in favor of unanimity. As much as the opponents thought it a mistake, they also agreed that unanimity was important, and that a "no" vote now would only delay things a few weeks until the Provincial Congress replaced them. When Congress got ready to vote, Dickinson and Morris got up and walked out. They did this deliberately, knowing it would allow the Pennsylvania delegation to vote 3-2 in favor of independence. They did not want to change their personal votes, but again agreed that unanimity was most important.

In the end, only New York abstained, leaving twelve colonies for independence and none opposed. New York, once it realized it remained the one holdout, finally voted to allow its delegates to vote yes on July 9th. Congress got word the following week, making the vote unanimous.

For Adams this vote was the victory he had sought, not the wording of the Declaration itself. The day following the vote, July 3, he wrote to his wife Abigail saying:

The second day of July, 1776, will be the most memorable epoch in the history of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival. It ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward forever more.

Next Week: We take a closer look at drafting the actual Declaration of Independence.

- - -

Next Episode 99: Declaring Independence

Previous Episode 97: A Coup in Philadelphia

Click here to donate

Click here to see my Patreon Page

Books Worth Buying
(links to Amazon.com unless otherwise noted)*

Beeman, Richard R. Our Lives, Our Fortunes and Our Sacred Honor: The Forging of American Independence, 1774-1776, Basic Books, 2013.

De Bolla, Peter The Fourth of July: And the Founding of America, Harry N. Abrams, 2008.

Hogeland, William Declaration: The Nine Tumultuous Weeks When America Became Independent, May 1-July 4, 1776 Simon & Schuster, 2010.

Fleming, Thomas 1776: Year of Illusions, New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1975.

Maier, Pauline American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence, Knopf, 1997

McCullough, David John Adams, Simon & Schuster, 2001.

Ryerson, Richard Alan The Revolution Is Now Begun: The Radical Committees of Philadelphia, 1765-1776, Univ. of Pennsylvania Press, 1978.

* As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.