THE TRUE HISTORY OF
THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
BY SYDNEY GEORGE FISHER
X
THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS
IN spite of the disturbed and dangerous position in which
they found themselves, the patriot leaders seem to have
thought that the wisest course was to place complete
confidence
in the Congress and declare that it would strike a
compromise and settle the whole difficulty. It is not probable,
however, that those who talked so profusely about
this hope had any confidence in it. Certainly men of the
Samuel Adams type had no intention of compromising.
The Congress held its sessions in Philadelphia
in a neat
brick building used by a sort of guild
called the Carpenters Company, and both the building and the guild
are
still preserved. The session lasted from September 5 until
October 26, a delightful time of year
to be in the metropolis
of the colonies and discuss great questions of state.
Forty-four delegates
at first assembled, and within a few
weeks the number increased to fifty-two. Most of them
were capable, and some of them became very conspicuous
men. Among the striking
characters were Samuel Adams
and his cousin, John Adams, accompanied by the lesser
lights, Gushing and Paine, who made up
the Massachusetts
delegation. These delegates, coming from poor, crippled
Boston, supported by charity under the exactions of the
Port Bill, were the most violent of all the members. They
were known to be so hot for extreme measures that some
of the patriot party
rode out to meet them before they
reached the town, warned them to be careful, and not to
utter the word independence.*
*
Hosmer,
"
Life of Samuel Adams," p. 313.
From Virginia came Randolph, Washington, Henry,
Bland, Harrison, and Pendleton,
the best delegates of all,
fully as much in earnest as the Boston men, but with a
broader range of ability, and more calm and judicious.
From South Carolina came Middleton, John Eutledge,
Gadsden, Lynch, and Edward Rutledge, who were almost
if not quite the equals of the Virginians. Pennsylvania
sent a very conservative but not very strong delegation.
Galloway was the only eminent man in it. A few weeks
later Dickinson was added. A year or two later the addition
of Eobert Morris, Franklin, and Dr. Eush made a
considerable change
in this delegation's conservatism. The
little community of Delaware sent three good men,
McKean, Eodney, and Eead. From New York John
Jay was the only delegate who afterwards attained much
prominence.
The delegates and the townsfolk seem to have enjoyed
most thoroughly the excitement of that session of nearly
two months. The early steps of a rebellion are easy and
fascinating. The golden October days and the bracing
change to the cool air of autumn were a delightful medium
in which to discuss great questions of absorbing
interest
;
see and hear the ablest and most attractive men from the
colonies
;
and dine at country places and the best inns. It
was a mental enlargement and an experience which must
have been long remembered by every one.
Every form of festivity and pleasure going
increased.
Many who afterwards were loyalists, or neutrals, could as
yet be on friendly terms with patriots ;
for was not the
avowed intention merely
to accomplish
redress of grievances.
No one had ever seen the streets so crowded with
the bright and gay colors of the time. We read in Adams's
diary that one of the delegates from New Jersey was very
much condemned because he
"
wore black clothes and his own hair." Everybody saw all the delegates, and there
were few who could not boast of having had a word with
some of them in the streets, shops, or market-place.
Philadelphia was at that time a pretty place on the
water side. The houses, wharves
; warehouses, and inns
were scattered in picturesque confusion along
the river
front from Vine Street to South Street, a distance of exactly
one mile. Westward,
the town reached back from the
river about half a mile to the present Fifth Street. The
chime of bells in the steeple of Christ Church was an object
of great interest. These bells played
tunes on market
days, as well as Sundays, for the edification of the country
people, who had come in with their great wagon-loads
of
poultry and vegetables.
John Adams relates how he arid some of the delegates
climbed up into the steeple of Christ Church and looked
over all the roofs of the town, and saw the country with
its villas and woods beyond.
It was their first bird's-eye
view of the metropolis of the colonies of which they had
so often heard
;
and they thought
it a wonderful sight.
The Philadelphia Library, founded by Franklin and
James Logan, had its rooms in the Carpenters' Hall. The
directors of the library passed a vote giving
the Congress
free use of all the books. No doubt some of them worked
hard among the volumes, burying themselves in G-rotius,
Pufiendorf, Burlamaqui, and Locke. It was their duty to
understand the state of nature and the natural rights of
man; those arguments which showed that rebellion was
sometimes not treason. They must have read with hard,
uneasy faces the recent heroic struggles, but sad fate, of
Corsica, of Poland, and of Sweden.
Both John and Samuel Adams and all of the Massachusetts
delegates pressed hard for resolutions which would
commit all the colonies to the cause of Boston,
as Boston had chosen to make her cause. She would not yield, would
not pay for the tea, nor would she pay damages of any
sort. The British troops must be withdrawn, the Boston
Port Bill must be repealed, the act altering the government
of Massachusetts must be repealed, and also the
ten or twelve other acts which were not acceptable
in
America. The Congress
sat with closed doors, and nothing,
as a rule, was known of their proceedings except the
results which took the shape of certain documents, which
shall be discussed in their place. There was, however,
one act of the Congress known as the approval of the
Suffolk resolutions, which became known at the time of
its occurrence, which committed the Congress irrevocably
to the cause of Boston and marked a turning-point
in the Revolution.
Paul Revere, deserting
his silversmith shop and his
engraving tools, rode to and fro from Boston to Philadelphia
on horseback, carrying documents and letters in his
saddle-bags. He had already,
it appears, on several
occasions during the Massachusetts disturbances, voluntarily
acted as messenger
in this way. He was evidently
fond of horses. He had been shut up for so many years
hammering out silly
little tea-pots and sugar-bowls and
wearing out his eyesight with engraving-tools
that he no
doubt found himself delighted with this excuse for riding
over the wild woodland roads of the colonies.
Within a week or two after the Congress met he started
from Boston with a copy of the famous Suffolk resolutions,
which had been passed
that day by Suffolk County, in
which Boston was situated, and within a few days
the Suffolk
firebrands were laid before the Congress.
The purpose of these resolutions, which were passed by
a meeting of delegates from all the towns of Suffolk
County, was to create a new government for Massachusetts independent of the government
under the charter
as modified by Parliament and now administered by General
Gage. To that end the Suffolk resolutions declared
that no obedience was due from the people
to either
the Boston Port Bill or to the act altering the charter;
that no regard should be paid
to the present judges
of the courts, and that sheriffs, deputies, constables, and
jurors must refuse to carry
into execution any orders of
the courts. Creditors, debtors, and litigants were advised
to settle their disputes amicably
or by arbitration. This
had the effect desired and abolished the administration of
the law for a long period
in Massachusetts, a period
extremely interesting
to political students for the ease
with which the people, by tacit consent, got on without
the aid of those essential instrumentalities.
The resolutions further recommended that collectors of
taxes and other officials having public money in their
hands should retain those funds and not pay them over
to the government
under Gage
until all disputes were
settled.
The persons who had accepted
seats on the council board
under the Gage government
were bluntly
told that they
were wicked persons and enemies of the country, which
was in effect to turn the mob upon them at the first opportunity.
The patriot inhabitants of each town were
instructed to form a militia, to learn the art of war as
speedily as possible, but for the present
to act only on the
defensive. If any patriots were seized or were arrested,
officials of the Gage government must be seized and held
as hostages. All this was rather vigorous rebellion, which
could not be leniently regarded
in England ; and, finally,
it
was recommended that all the towns of the colony should
choose delegates to a provincial congress
to act in place of
the assembly under the Gage government.
This provincial congress was elected, and the government
thus suggested by the Suffolk resolutions became the
government of Massachusetts for a long period during
the
Revolution. It is quite obvious that the resolutions
were in effect a declaration of independence by the patriots
of Massachusetts, although
the word independence was not
used. If Congress approved
of them, approved
of a government
set up by the patriots in hostility to the British
government, it was certainly committing
the rest of the
colonies to an open rebellion and war unless England was
willing to back down completely,
as she had done in the
case of the Stamp Act and the paint, paper, and glass act,
and be ordered about by the colonies.
Besides creating a new government
for Massachusetts
the Suffolk resolutions contained some strong expressions
not likely to assist the cause of peace. England was described
as a parricide aiming
a dagger
at
"
our bosoms."
The continent was described as
"
swarming
with millions"
who would not yield
to slavery
or robbery or allow the
streets of Boston to be
"
thronged
with military executioners."
The people were described as originally driven
from England by persecution and injustice, and they would
never allow the desert they had redeemed and cultivated
to be transmitted to their innocent offspring, clogged with
shackles and fettered with power.
Violent as were the Suffolk resolutions, the Congress
approved of them in a resolution justifying the Massachusetts
patriots in all they had done. If it had ever been a
Congress for mere redress of grievances,
it was now certainly
changed and had become a Congress
for making a
new nation. The veil, as the loyalists said, was now
drawn aside and independence
stood revealed. From that
moment the numbers of the loyalists rapidly
increased.
This new step separated them more and more from the patriots with whom many of them had heretofore been
acting.*
* " A Friendly Address to all Seasonable Americans,
"
p. 32,
York, 1774; "The Congress canvassed," p. 5, New York, 1774;
"An Alarm to the Legislature of the Province of New York," New
York, 1775 j
"
Free Thoughts on the Proceedings
of the Congress,"
York, 1774.
There was an important and far-reaching measure of
conservatism proposed
in the Congress, but it utterly
failed. Galloway
offered a plan which would in effect
have been a constitutional union between the colonies and
the mother-country. There was to be a Parliament or
Congress elected by
all the colonies and to hold its sessions
at Philadelphia. It should be a branch of the Parliament
in England;
and no act relating to the colonies should be
valid unless it was accepted by both the Parliament in
Philadelphia and the Parliament in England.
This would,
it was said, settle all difficulties in the future
;
for it would
be a practical method of obtaining
the
"
consent of America,"
which the patriots were saying was necessary
to the
validity of an act of Parliament which was to be applied
to the colonies.
The plan represented
the loyalist opinion, and would in
their view have prevented
all taxation or internal regulation,
and have amply safeguarded
all the liberties for
which the patriots professed
to be contending. There was
sufficient conservatism in the Congress
to approve
of it so
far as to refer it under their rule for further consideration.
But soon all proceedings connected with it were ordered to
be expunged from the minutes so that they could never be
read. As the meetings were secret,
it may have been supposed
that no news of it would get abroad. But the loyalists
took pains to spread
the history of it. They charged
that the Congress had expunged
the proceedings because they feared that the mass of the people might hear of the
plan and be willing
to have a reconciliation effected on such
a basis without an attempt
at independence. They circulated
printed copies of the plan and declared that the
attempt to suppress
it by expunging showed a clear intention
to secretly kill all efforts at reconciliation.
The Congress closed its session, and Wednesday, October
26, was the last day. Many of the members appear
to have lingered
for a day or two longer. But on
Friday there was a general exodus. It was raining hard,
John Adams tells us in his diary, as he took his departure
from Philadelphia, which he described as
"
the happy,
the
peaceful, the elegant, the hospitable, and the polite."
There was perhaps a covert sneer in the words. He had
found it too peaceful, too elegant, too polite and happy
to
be as forward as he wished in rebellion and revolution.
However, he professed
to believe that he would never have
to see Philadelphia again, because the British lion would
surrender.
And what, pray, was to be the cause of this surrender?
The Suffolk resolutions ? Yes, and several documents or
state papers which the Congress had prepared and which
were soon made public
in newspapers and pamphlets.
The first of these documents,
called
"
The Declaration
of Rights," merely
recited again
the arguments
for freedom
from parliamentary control, which we have already
discussed, and gave
a list of a dozen or more acts of Parliament
which should be repealed.
The next document, the "Association,"
as it was called,
was quite remarkable and curious. It was signed by all
the delegates on behalf of themselves and of those whom
they represented, and was intended to be the most complete
non-importation, non-exportation, and non-consumption
agreement that had yet been attempted. The previous measures of this sort which had been so effective
had been voluntary and tacit understandings
carried out in
a general way But this association of the Congress was
intended to be systematic, thorough, and compulsory. The
whole British trade was interdicted, and punishments were
most ingeniously provided
for those merchants who would
not obey.
Although it was in form only an agreement, yet it was worded as if it were a law passed by a legislative body. In some paragraphs we find it speaking as a mere agreement, as, for example, " we will use our utmost endeavors to improve the breed of sheep ;" or " we will, in our several States, encourage frugality, economy," etc. In other paragraphs it speaks in the language of a legislature :
"That a committee "be chosen in every county, city, and town by those who are qualified to vote for representatives in the legislature, whose business it shall be attentively to observe the conduct of all persons touching this association."
A large part of the document is taken up with these
positive commands, directing the committees of correspondence
to inspect the entries in
"their custom-houses" directing
owners of vessels to give positive orders to their
captains, and directing that all manufactures be sold at
reasonable prices.
The Congress, it must be remembered, had no lawmaking power. It was a mere convention, without any authority of law. Yet here it was adroitly arrogating to itself legislative functions. From our point of view, it was a most interesting beginning of the instinctive feeling of nationality and union, the determination, consciously or unconsciously, to form a nation out of a convention that had been called only for " a redress of grievances." The phrase by which the rebel committees of correspondence were directed to inspect "their custom-houses" was beautiful in its ingenuousness.
But the loyalists were unable to see it in this light. They attacked it at once as a usurpation ; and they called on all the legislative assemblies of the colonies to protect themselves against this monster of a Congress, which would soon take away from them all of their power. From a legal point of view the loyalist position was unquestionably sound, for the assemblies in each colony were the only bodies that had any law-making power. The Congress seemed to the loyalists to threaten an American republic, and their premonition was certainly justified by events :
"Are you sure," asks a loyalist, "that while you are supporting the authority of the Congress, and exalting it over your own legislature, that you are not nourishing and bringing to maturity a grand American Republic, which shall after a while rise to power and grandeur, upon the ruins of our present constitution. To me the danger appears more than possible. The outlines of it seem already to be drawn. We have had a grand Continental Congress at Philadelphia. Another is to meet in May next. There has been a Provincial Congress held in Boston government. And as all the colonies seem fond of imitating Boston politics, it is very probable that the scheme will spread and increase ; and in a little time the Commonwealth be completely formed.'"The Congress canvassed, " p. 24, New York, 1774.
There was a considerable body of people at that time who assumed, as a matter of course, that an American republic would be anything but a blessing. With the tar and feathers and other persecutions of loyalists before their eyes, they took for granted that such a republic would be even worse than what we now derisively call a South American republic, a Dominica or a Haiti.
They were still more shocked when they read in the association how the Congress intended to have its attempted laws and commands enforced. Those who would not obey the rules of the association against importing and exporting were to have their names published as enemies of the country, and no one was to buy from them or sell to them ; they were to be cut off from intercourse with their fellows ; to be ostracized and outlawed. In short, they were to be boycotted, as we would now say, and turned over to the mob.
In this arrangement and in the committees that were to pry about and act as informers, the loyalists easily saw a most atrocious violation of personal liberty. These county committees, who were given the judicial power to publish, denounce, and ruin people merely of their own motion, without any of the usual safeguards of courts, evidence, proof, or trial, would, they said, be worse than the inquisition. How could the patriots, they said, consistently object to admiralty courts when they were setting up these extraordinary tribunals that could condemn men unseen and unheard? They looked forward to a long reign of anarchy ; and their expectations were largely fulfilled. Men like John Adams admitted the injustice and cruelty of the patriot committees, and dreaded the effect of them on American morals and character.*
* " The Congress canvassed, ' ' pp. 14-20, tfew York, 1774 ; Adams, Works, vol. iii. p. 34. For the injustice and unfairness of the measures for forcing the paper money upon the people at its par value, see Phillips, "Sketches of American Paper Currency," vol. ii. pp. 63, 65, 67, 70, 154, 158.
The tenth article of the association provided that if any goods arrived for a merchant they were to be seized ; if he would not reship them, they were to be sold, his necessary charges repaid, and the profits to go to the poor of Boston. In other words, said the loyalists, a man's private property is to be taken from him, without his consent, by the "recommendation" of a Congress that has no legal power ; and the same Congress is sending petitions to England arguing that Parliament cannot tax us because it would be taking our property without our consent.
It would be easy to multiply these inconsistencies ; and the more the loyalists called attention to them the more the patriots felt compelled to violate personal liberty in suppressing the loyalists, until free speech was extinguished and thousands of loyalists driven from the country. On a smaller scale, and with less wholesale atrocity, it was like the French Revolution, in which we are told that "the revolutionary party felt themselves obliged to take stringent measures ; that is, the party which asserted the rights of man felt themselves obliged to refuse to those who opposed them the exercise of those rights."*
* Rope, "Napoleon," p. 8
Every provision in the association shows a people who were uniting in a struggle for nationality, and therefore cared little for their inconsistencies or violation of rights. Struggles for independence are not apt to be tame or necessarily moral. There is nothing so elementary and natural as the nation-forming instinct ; its efforts are always violent ; and in such a contest the laws are thrust aside.
For the milder forms of this struggle as shown in the association,, we find them agreeing to kill as few lambs as possible, to start domestic manufactures, and to encourage agriculture, especially wool, so as to be independent of England in the matter of clothing. And they were trying to be economical, to discourage horse-racing, gaming, cockfighting, shows, and plays, and to give up the extravagant mourning-garments and funerals which were so excessive and expensive at that time.
Another document put forth by the Congress was "The Address to the People of Great Britain." It claimed for the Americans all the privileges of British subjects, the right of disposing of their own property and of ruling themselves. Why should "English subjects, who live three thousand miles from the royal palace, enjoy less liberty than those who are three hundred miles distant from it" Like all the other documents, it had much to say about the wickedness of the Quebec Act, which had established Roman Catholicism in Canada ; and it argued over again all this old ground.
The only striking part of it was an argument that if the ministry were allowed to tax and rule America as they pleased, the enormous streams of wealth to be gathered from such a vast continent, together with the Roman Catholic inhabitants of Canada, would be used to inflict some terrible and vague persecution and tyranny on the masses of the people in England. This attempt to excite the English masses against Parliament and the ministry was very much resented in England, and was not likely to bring a favorable compromise any more than was a similar attempt to arouse rebellion in Ireland, which was tried the next year.
Another document, called "An. Address to the Inhabitants of Canada" was much ridiculed by both the loyalists and the English, because it was so absurdly inconsistent with "The Address to the People of Great Britain." In addressing the people of England the Congress had vilified and abused the religion of the Canadians as despotism, murder, persecution, and rebellion. Yet they asked those same Canadians to join the rebellious colonies against England; and they sent to them a long document patronizing and instructing them in their rights, and quoting Montesquieu and other Frenchmen, to show what a mistake they were making by submitting to the tyranny of Great Britain.
The Canadians would, of course, see both documents and laugh at the Congress.*
* Codman, " Arnold's Expedition to Quebec," p. 9
The last paper put forth by the Congress was "The Petition to the King" drawn by Dickinson and intended to show conservative loyalty and save appearances. It was merely a well-worded restatement of the old argument against control by Parliament, and of the wish to be under the king alone, to whom, according to this petition, the patriot colonists were most extravagantly devoted.
These documents having been sent forth and the Congress adjourned, the people settled down to comparative quietude for the whole of the following winter. There was nothing more to be said, because what had been done had been done, and there was no help for it. The result must be calmly awaited during four or five months while the vessels that communicated with England should beat their way over and back against the winter gales of the Atlantic.
Although it was in form only an agreement, yet it was worded as if it were a law passed by a legislative body. In some paragraphs we find it speaking as a mere agreement, as, for example, " we will use our utmost endeavors to improve the breed of sheep ;" or " we will, in our several States, encourage frugality, economy," etc. In other paragraphs it speaks in the language of a legislature :
"That a committee "be chosen in every county, city, and town by those who are qualified to vote for representatives in the legislature, whose business it shall be attentively to observe the conduct of all persons touching this association."
The Congress, it must be remembered, had no lawmaking power. It was a mere convention, without any authority of law. Yet here it was adroitly arrogating to itself legislative functions. From our point of view, it was a most interesting beginning of the instinctive feeling of nationality and union, the determination, consciously or unconsciously, to form a nation out of a convention that had been called only for " a redress of grievances." The phrase by which the rebel committees of correspondence were directed to inspect "their custom-houses" was beautiful in its ingenuousness.
But the loyalists were unable to see it in this light. They attacked it at once as a usurpation ; and they called on all the legislative assemblies of the colonies to protect themselves against this monster of a Congress, which would soon take away from them all of their power. From a legal point of view the loyalist position was unquestionably sound, for the assemblies in each colony were the only bodies that had any law-making power. The Congress seemed to the loyalists to threaten an American republic, and their premonition was certainly justified by events :
"Are you sure," asks a loyalist, "that while you are supporting the authority of the Congress, and exalting it over your own legislature, that you are not nourishing and bringing to maturity a grand American Republic, which shall after a while rise to power and grandeur, upon the ruins of our present constitution. To me the danger appears more than possible. The outlines of it seem already to be drawn. We have had a grand Continental Congress at Philadelphia. Another is to meet in May next. There has been a Provincial Congress held in Boston government. And as all the colonies seem fond of imitating Boston politics, it is very probable that the scheme will spread and increase ; and in a little time the Commonwealth be completely formed.'"The Congress canvassed, " p. 24, New York, 1774.
There was a considerable body of people at that time who assumed, as a matter of course, that an American republic would be anything but a blessing. With the tar and feathers and other persecutions of loyalists before their eyes, they took for granted that such a republic would be even worse than what we now derisively call a South American republic, a Dominica or a Haiti.
They were still more shocked when they read in the association how the Congress intended to have its attempted laws and commands enforced. Those who would not obey the rules of the association against importing and exporting were to have their names published as enemies of the country, and no one was to buy from them or sell to them ; they were to be cut off from intercourse with their fellows ; to be ostracized and outlawed. In short, they were to be boycotted, as we would now say, and turned over to the mob.
In this arrangement and in the committees that were to pry about and act as informers, the loyalists easily saw a most atrocious violation of personal liberty. These county committees, who were given the judicial power to publish, denounce, and ruin people merely of their own motion, without any of the usual safeguards of courts, evidence, proof, or trial, would, they said, be worse than the inquisition. How could the patriots, they said, consistently object to admiralty courts when they were setting up these extraordinary tribunals that could condemn men unseen and unheard? They looked forward to a long reign of anarchy ; and their expectations were largely fulfilled. Men like John Adams admitted the injustice and cruelty of the patriot committees, and dreaded the effect of them on American morals and character.*
* " The Congress canvassed, ' ' pp. 14-20, tfew York, 1774 ; Adams, Works, vol. iii. p. 34. For the injustice and unfairness of the measures for forcing the paper money upon the people at its par value, see Phillips, "Sketches of American Paper Currency," vol. ii. pp. 63, 65, 67, 70, 154, 158.
The tenth article of the association provided that if any goods arrived for a merchant they were to be seized ; if he would not reship them, they were to be sold, his necessary charges repaid, and the profits to go to the poor of Boston. In other words, said the loyalists, a man's private property is to be taken from him, without his consent, by the "recommendation" of a Congress that has no legal power ; and the same Congress is sending petitions to England arguing that Parliament cannot tax us because it would be taking our property without our consent.
It would be easy to multiply these inconsistencies ; and the more the loyalists called attention to them the more the patriots felt compelled to violate personal liberty in suppressing the loyalists, until free speech was extinguished and thousands of loyalists driven from the country. On a smaller scale, and with less wholesale atrocity, it was like the French Revolution, in which we are told that "the revolutionary party felt themselves obliged to take stringent measures ; that is, the party which asserted the rights of man felt themselves obliged to refuse to those who opposed them the exercise of those rights."*
* Rope, "Napoleon," p. 8
Every provision in the association shows a people who were uniting in a struggle for nationality, and therefore cared little for their inconsistencies or violation of rights. Struggles for independence are not apt to be tame or necessarily moral. There is nothing so elementary and natural as the nation-forming instinct ; its efforts are always violent ; and in such a contest the laws are thrust aside.
For the milder forms of this struggle as shown in the association,, we find them agreeing to kill as few lambs as possible, to start domestic manufactures, and to encourage agriculture, especially wool, so as to be independent of England in the matter of clothing. And they were trying to be economical, to discourage horse-racing, gaming, cockfighting, shows, and plays, and to give up the extravagant mourning-garments and funerals which were so excessive and expensive at that time.
Another document put forth by the Congress was "The Address to the People of Great Britain." It claimed for the Americans all the privileges of British subjects, the right of disposing of their own property and of ruling themselves. Why should "English subjects, who live three thousand miles from the royal palace, enjoy less liberty than those who are three hundred miles distant from it" Like all the other documents, it had much to say about the wickedness of the Quebec Act, which had established Roman Catholicism in Canada ; and it argued over again all this old ground.
The only striking part of it was an argument that if the ministry were allowed to tax and rule America as they pleased, the enormous streams of wealth to be gathered from such a vast continent, together with the Roman Catholic inhabitants of Canada, would be used to inflict some terrible and vague persecution and tyranny on the masses of the people in England. This attempt to excite the English masses against Parliament and the ministry was very much resented in England, and was not likely to bring a favorable compromise any more than was a similar attempt to arouse rebellion in Ireland, which was tried the next year.
Another document, called "An. Address to the Inhabitants of Canada" was much ridiculed by both the loyalists and the English, because it was so absurdly inconsistent with "The Address to the People of Great Britain." In addressing the people of England the Congress had vilified and abused the religion of the Canadians as despotism, murder, persecution, and rebellion. Yet they asked those same Canadians to join the rebellious colonies against England; and they sent to them a long document patronizing and instructing them in their rights, and quoting Montesquieu and other Frenchmen, to show what a mistake they were making by submitting to the tyranny of Great Britain.
The Canadians would, of course, see both documents and laugh at the Congress.*
* Codman, " Arnold's Expedition to Quebec," p. 9
The last paper put forth by the Congress was "The Petition to the King" drawn by Dickinson and intended to show conservative loyalty and save appearances. It was merely a well-worded restatement of the old argument against control by Parliament, and of the wish to be under the king alone, to whom, according to this petition, the patriot colonists were most extravagantly devoted.
These documents having been sent forth and the Congress adjourned, the people settled down to comparative quietude for the whole of the following winter. There was nothing more to be said, because what had been done had been done, and there was no help for it. The result must be calmly awaited during four or five months while the vessels that communicated with England should beat their way over and back against the winter gales of the Atlantic.
No comments:
Post a Comment