the assembling of congress, may 10th, 1776, and transactions until the declaration of independence, the 4th of july.
it was under the circumstances stated in the preceding chapter, the general congress, according to adjournment the previous october, reassembled in philadelphia the 10th of may, 1776. the colonies were profoundly convulsed by the transactions which had taken place in massachusetts, virginia, north and south carolina, by the intelligence from england, that parliament had, the previous december, passed an act to increase the army, that the british government had largely increased both the army and navy, and on failure of obtaining sufficient recruits in england, scotland, and ireland, had negotiated with german princes, who traded in the blood of their down-trodden subjects, for seventeen thousand hanoverian and hessian mercenaries, to aid in reducing the american colonies to absolute submission to the will of the king and parliament of great britain. it was supposed in england that the decisive act of parliament, the unbending and hostile attitude of the british ministry, the formidable amount of naval and land forces, would awe the colonies into unresisting and immediate submission; but the effect of all these formidable preparations on the part of the british government was to unite rather than divide the colonies, and render them more determined and resolute than ever to defend and maintain their sacred and inherited rights and liberties as british subjects.
the thirteen colonies were a unit as to what they understood and contended for in regard to their british constitutional rights and liberties—namely, the rights which they had enjoyed for[pg 480] more than a century—the right of taxation by their own elected representatives alone, the right of providing for the support of their own civil government and its officers—rights far less extensive than those which are and have long been enjoyed by the loyal provinces of the canadian dominion. there were, indeed, the governors and their officers, sent from england—the favourites and needy dependents of the british ministry and parliament, sent out to subsist upon the colonists, but were not of them, had no sympathy with them, nor any influence over them except what they had over their dependents and the families with whom they had formed connections. they were noisy and troublesome as a faction, but not sufficient in numbers or influence to constitute a party, properly speaking.
there was like unity among the colonies in regard to the defence and support of the rights and liberties which they claimed. there was, indeed, doubt on the part of a few, and but a few, comparatively, as to the wisdom and expediency of taking arms and meeting the king's officers and troops in the field of battle in support of their rights; but all agreed that they should defend themselves and their property when attacked by the king's troops, whether attacked by the king's orders or not; for they held that their title to their property and constitutional rights was as sacred and divine as that of the king to his throne.[386]
[pg 481]
the question of questions with the general congress on its assembling in may, 1776, was what measures should be adopted for the defence of their violated and invaded rights, and upon what grounds should that defence be conducted? for the first time in the general congress was it proposed to abandon the ground on which they had vindicated and maintained their rights as british subjects in their several legislatures and conventions for eleven years, and successfully defended them by force of arms for more than one year, or to avow entire separation from the mother country, and declare absolute independence as the ground of maintaining their rights and liberties?
there had long been some prominent men who held republican sentiments, and some newspapers had in 1775 mooted the idea of separation from the mother country. such views prevailed widely in massachusetts; there had always been a clique of congregational republicans and separationists in boston, from the days of cromwell. they looked back upon the halcyon days when none but congregationalists could hold office—civil, judicial, or military—or even exercise the elective franchise, and the disclaimers of any earthly king; and though the separation from the mother country and renunciation of monarchical government was carefully avoided in the official documents of massachusetts, as it was disclaimed in the strongest terms in the official papers of other colonies, yet the sentiment of hostility to monarchy and of separation from england was artfully inculcated in resolutions, addresses, etc., prepared by samuel adams, and sent forth from the massachusetts convention.[388][pg 482] he was a man of blameless life (no relation to john adams)—a rigid religionist of the old massachusetts puritan stamp—a hater of england and of british institutions, able and indefatigable in everything that might tend to sever america from england, in regard to which his writings exerted a powerful influence. he was the corypheus of the separatist party in boston, the chairman of the committee of correspondence, and wrote the massachusetts circulars to other colonies.
it was only early in may, 1776, that the question of independence was discussed in the general congress. the congress recommended those colonies whose governors had left their governments, or were declared disqualified on account of their oppressive and cruel conduct, to form governments for themselves. this, however, was not understood as a declaration of independence, but a temporary measure of necessity, to prevent anarchy and confusion in the colonies concerned. this proceeding was immediately followed by a more comprehensive measure intended to feel the pulse of the colonies on the subject of independence.
the congress had waited with considerable patience, and some anxiety, the result of the late session of parliament; they had forborne to do anything which might not be justified upon the fair principles of self-defence, until it appeared that the ministry was resolved that nothing short of the most abject submission should be the price of accommodation. early in may, therefore, the congress adopted a measure intended to sound the sentiments of the colonies on the subject of independence. they stated the rejection of their petitions, and the employment of foreign mercenaries to reduce them to obedience, and concluded by declaring it expedient that all the colonies should proceed to the establishment of such a form of government as[pg 483] their representatives might think most conducive to the peace and happiness of the people. this preamble and resolution were immediately forwarded; and in a few days afterwards richard henry lee, of virginia, gave notice to the congress that he should, on an appointed day, move for a declaration of independence. this was accordingly done, but the consideration of the question was postponed until the 1st of july—so timid, so wavering, so unwilling to break the maternal connection were most of the members.[389]
it is clear that, so far from the declaration of independence being the spontaneous uprising of the colonies, as represented by so many american historians, that when it was first mooted in congress the majority of the general congress itself were startled at it, and were opposed to it. "on the 15th day of may, only four of the colonies had acted definitely on the question of independence. north carolina had authorized her delegates to concur with the delegates from the other colonies 'in declaring independency;' rhode island had commissioned hers 'to join in any measures to secure american rights;' in massachusetts, various towns had pledged themselves to maintain any declaration on which congress might agree; and virginia had given positive instructions to her delegates that congress should make a declaration of independence. these proceedings were accompanied with declarations respecting a reservation to each colony of the right to form its own government, in the adjustment of the power universally felt to be necessary, and which[pg 484] was to be lodged in a new political unit, designated by the terms, 'confederation,' 'continental constitution,' and 'american republic.'"[390]
"on the 7th of june, richard henry lee, in behalf of the virginia delegates, submitted in congress resolves on independence, a confederation, and foreign alliances. his biographer says that 'tradition relates that he prefaced his motion with a speech,' portraying the resources of the colonies and their capacity for defence, dwelling especially on the bearing which an independent position might have on foreign powers, and concluded by urging the members so to act, that the day might give birth to an american republic. the motion was:—
"'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.'
"'that it is expedient forthwith to take the most effectual measures for forming foreign alliances.'
"'that a plan of confederation be prepared and transmitted to the respective colonies for their consideration and approbation.'
"john adams seconded the motion. the journal of congress says, 'that certain resolutions respecting independency being moved and seconded, they were postponed till to-morrow morning,' and that 'the members were enjoined to attend punctually at ten o'clock in order to take the same into their consideration. jefferson says the reason of postponement was that the house were obliged to attend to other business. the record indicates that no speech was made on that day.
"the next day was saturday. john hancock, the president, was in the chair; and charles thompson was the secretary. the resolves were immediately referred to a committee of the whole, in which benjamin harrison presided—the confidential correspondent of washington, and subsequently governor of virginia. they were debated with animation until seven o'clock in the evening, when the president resumed the chair, and reported that the committee had considered the matter referred[pg 485] to them, but, not having come to any decision, directed him to move for leave to sit again on monday.
"in congress, on monday, edward rutledge moved that the question be postponed three weeks. the debate on this day continued until seven o'clock in the evening. not a single speech of any member is known to be extant. jefferson at the time summed up the arguments used by the speakers during both days. the result may be given in his words: 'it appearing, in the course of the debates, that the colonies of new york, new jersey, pennsylvania, delaware, maryland, and south carolina were not yet matured for falling from the parent stem, but that they were fast advancing to that state, it was thought most prudent to wait awhile for them. it was agreed in committee of the whole to report to congress a resolution, which was adopted by a vote of seven colonies to five, and this postponed the resolution on independence to the 1st day of july; and 'in meanwhile, that no time be lost, a committee be appointed to prepare a declaration in conformity to it.' on the next day a committee was chosen for this purpose by ballot: thomas jefferson, of virginia; john adams, of massachusetts; benjamin franklin, of pennsylvania; roger sherman, of connecticut; and robert r. livingstone, of new york. [such was the committee that prepared the declaration of independence.] on the 12th a committee of one from each colony was appointed to report the form of confederation, and a committee of five to prepare a plan of treaties to be proposed to foreign powers.
"when congress postponed the vote on independence, the popular movement in its favour was in full activity. some of the members left this body to engage in it. others promoted it by their counsel."[391]
"on the day agreed upon for the consideration of mr. lee's motion, the 1st of july, congress resolved itself into a committee of the whole; the debates on the question were continued with great warmth for three days. it had been determined to take the vote by colonies; and as a master-stroke of policy, the author of which is not known to history, it had been proposed and agreed, that the decision on the question, whatever might be the state of the votes, should appear to the world as the unanimous voice of the congress.[pg 486] on the first question [of independence], six colonies were in the affirmative, and six in the negative—pennsylvania being without a vote by the equal division of her delegates. in this state of the business, it appears, on the authority of evidence afterwards adduced before parliament, that mr. samuel adams once more successfully exerted his influence; and that one of the delegates of pennsylvania was brought over to the side of independence. it is more probable, however, that the influence of mr. adams extended no further than to procure that one of the dissenting members withdraw from the house; and that the vote of pennsylvania was thus obtained."[392]
it is thus seen that the declaration of independence, so far[pg 487] from being the spontaneous uprising of the american colonies, was the result of months of agitation by scarcely a dozen leaders in the movement, by canvassing at public meetings, and of delegates elected by them, not excelled by any political and nearly balanced parties in england or canada in a life and death struggle for victory. in this case, the important question was to be decided by some fifty members of congress; and when the first vote was given, after many weeks of popular agitation, and three days of warm discussion in congress, there was a tie—six colonies for and six against the declaration of independence—after which a majority of one was obtained for the declaration, by inducing the absence of certain members opposed to it; and then, when a majority of votes was thus obtained, others were persuaded to vote for the measure "for the sake of unanimity," though they were opposed to the measure itself.
it has indeed been represented by some american historians,[pg 488] that the vote of congress for independence was unanimous; but the fact is far otherwise. as the vote was taken by colonies, and not by the majority of the individual members present, as in ordinary legislative proceedings, the majority of the delegates from each colony determined the vote of that colony; and by a previous and very adroit proposal, an agreement was entered into that the vote of congress should be published to the world as unanimous, however divided the votes of members on the question of independence might be; and on this ground the signatures of those who had opposed it, as well as of those who voted in favour of it, were ultimately affixed to the declaration, though it was published and authenticated by the signatures of the president, john hancock, of massachusetts, and charles thompson, of philadelphia, as secretary.
the declaration of independence, as thus adopted, is as follows:
"a declaration by the representatives of the united states of america, in congress assembled:
"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 nature's god entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to such separation.
"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; and whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute a 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, would dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly, all experience hath shown that mankind are more inclined 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 [pg 489]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 exhibited to a candid world.
"he has refused his assent to laws the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
"he has forbidden his governours to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operations till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
"he has refused to pass other laws, for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the rights of representation in the legislature; a right inestimable to them, and formidable to tyrants only.
"he has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depositories of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
"he has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing, with manly firmness, his invasion on the rights of the people.
"he has refused, for a long time after such dissolution, 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 meantime, exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
"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.
"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.
"he has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers, to harass our people and eat out their substance.
"he has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies, without the consent of our legislatures.
"he has affected to render the military independent of, and superior to, the civil power.
"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 pretended acts of legislation.
"for quartering large bodies of armed troops among us.
"for protecting them, by a mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states.
"for cutting off our trade with all parts of the world.
"for imposing taxes on us without our consent.
"for depriving us, in many cases, of the benefit of trial by jury.
[pg 490]
"for transporting us beyond seas, to be tried for pretended offences.
"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.
"for taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments.
"for suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
"he has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection, and waging war against us.
"he has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
"he is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the work of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.
"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.
"he has excited domestick insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers the merciless indian savages, whose known rule of warfare is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes, and conditions.
"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.
"nor have we been wanting in attention 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 connection and correspondence. they too have been deaf to the voice of justice and 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.
"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 the 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; and that they are absolved from 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 [pg 491]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 honour."
note.—this declaration will be discussed in the next chapter.
