Common Sense (January 10, 1776) (Redux)

Belongs here.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Declaration Of The Second Continental Congress (July 6, 1775)

John Hancock.  In the beginning, our ancestors moved to America seeking to establish a new life for themselves, securing in the most radical way possible their own liberty.  The system worked for a long, long time, to the enormous benefit of those on both sides of the ocean.  And the benefit was never more obvious than during the recent French and Indian War, when the contributions of the colonists won the day for the Empire.  But since that moment, and the transfer of power to the new regime, we have struggled beneath a more and more oppressive yoke.

Long list of grievances:

• Monetary manipulation
• Foreign courts and deprivation of trial by jury
• Suspending local governments
• Restrictive trade rules
• Encouraging an enemy state in Canada [heh]
• Worst of all, for passing a a statue giving parliament the right to "make laws to bind us in all cases whatsoever," an unlimited assertion of power that cannot stand.

Our petitions have gone unheeded byt he Crown.  When we resisted, the Empire responded with military coercion and force.  The aggression has come to a head at the recent battles at Lexington and Concord, where the British soldiers were ultimately "compelled to retreat by the country people suddenly assembled to repel this cruel aggression." [Hells yeah]

Confiscation of arms and the establishment of martial law in Boston hasn't helped matters.

Our choice is stark: slavery, or resistance by force.

Our cause is just.  Our union is perfect.  Our internal resources are great, and, if necessary, foreign assistance is undoubtably attainable.  We gratefully acknowledge, as signal instances of the Divine favour towards us, that his Providence would not permit us to be called into this severe controversy, until we were grown up to our present streangth, had been previously exercised in warlike operation, and possessed of the means of defending ourselves.  With hearts fortified with these animating reflections, we most solemnly, before God and the world, declare, that exerting the utmost energy of those powers, which our beneficent Creator hath graciously bestowed upon us, the arms we have been compelled by our enemies to assume, we will, in defiance of every hazard, with unabating firmness and perseverence, employ for the preservation of our liberties; being with one mind resolved to die freemen rather than to live slaves.

Note: we still pledge our allegiance to the Crown, if the current difficulty can be overcome.  We only fight for our rights as free men.

Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death (March 23, 1775)

Patrick Henry.  Basically a response to the members of the Virginia Convention who urged restraint, patience, and prudence in dealing with the English.  Henry claimed that the English continually offered platitudes of concession while strenghening their grip on the colonies more and more.  Worse, this pattern had continued for ten years now, with no end in sight.  Worse yet, it was now obvious that the English were preparing militarily to put a stop to any colonial uprising once and for all.  With any delay, English subjugation of the colonies would be permanent.

Essentially, Patrick Henry is the hawk to end all hawks, and he's had it with the doves.

Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace.  The war is actually begun!  The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms!  Our brethren are already in the field!  Why stand we here idle?  What is it that gentlemen wish?  What would they have?  Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?  Forbid it, Almighty God!  I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

 Of course, he had practiced that line before.

Speech On The Stamp Act (January 14, 1766)

A rebuttal against the imposition of the Stamp Act on the American colonies, by member of Parliament William Pitt.  I'm reading it out of order with the others because this jerk from Georgia Tech told me it happened in 1775.

Standard boilerplate arguments at this point, focusing on the injustice of imposing taxes on colonial subjects without representation, and on the economic benefits of the trade relationship on its own.

I'd skip over it completely, except this passage is amazing:

I maintain, that the parliament has a right to bind, to restrain America.  Our legislative power over the colonies is sovereign and supreme.  when it ceases to be sovereign and supreme, I would advise every gentleman to seel his lands, if he can, and embark for that country.  When two countries are connected together, like England and her colonies, without being incorporated, the one must necessarily govern; the greater must rule the less; but so rule it, as not to contradict the fundamental principles that are common to both.  If the gentleman does not understand the difference between external and internal taxes, I cannot help it; but there is a plain distinction between taxes levied for the purpose of raising a revenue, and duties imposed for the regulation of trade, for the accomodation of the subject; although, in the consequences, some revenue might incidentally arise from the latter.

It's confusing because his audience already knows what he's talking about, and I can't tell the difference between the internal and external taxes, and the difference between the revenue tax and the regulation tax, and which one he's supporting.  But he seems to be saying that Parliament's power to regulate commerce in the colonies is unlimited, while its power to tax is restricted by constitutional restraints.  And he's encouraging Parliament, if they must get there hands dirty in the affairs of the Americans, to do it through the legitimate regulation channels instead of the illegitimate taxation channels.

My mind is reeling.

The takeaway is that power will find whatever justification is at hand for the aggrandizement of that power.  And those of us who think there are rules by which we can trust to avoid imposed mandates from our political representatives are mistaken.  The game is rigged.  There's always room for more.