Founding Myths (52 page)

52
.
  
Allen Bowman,
The Morale of the American Revolutionary Army
(Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press, 1943), 30; Broadus Mitchell,
The Price of Independence: A Realistic View of the American Revolution
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1974), 117–118.

6: Jefferson's Declaration

  
1
.
  
Thomas Fleming,
Liberty! The American Revolution
(New York: Viking, 1997), 170–171.

  
2
.
  
Joseph Ellis,
American Sphinx: The Character of Thomas Jefferson
(New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1997), 56–59.

  
3
.
  
Locke was read by the more educated classes. Copies of the
Second Treatise on Government
, which patriots called “Liberty Books,” circulated particularly among preachers, who contributed to the spread of Lockean ideas.

  
4
.
  
Woody Holton,
Forced Founders: Indians, Debtors, Slaves, and the Making of the American Revolution in Virginia
(Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1999), 106–129, 191–205.

  
5
.
  
Michael A. McDonnell,
The Politics of War: Race, Class, and Conflict in Revolutionary Virginia
(Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2007), 203; Holton,
Forced
Founders
, 200–205. The turnover in the fifth Virginia Convention was 38 percent, compared with only 4 percent for the third and fourth Virginia Conventions.

  
6
.
  
Charles Lee to Patrick Henry, May 7, 1776, in Holton,
Forced Founders
, 199.

  
7
.
  
Jefferson to Thomas Nelson, May 16, 1776, in Julian P. Boyd, ed.,
Papers of Thomas Jefferson
(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1950), 1: 292.

  
8
.
  
Mason's draft from
Pennsylvania Gazette
, June 12, 1776; Jefferson's draft from Pauline Maier,
American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence
(New York: Vintage, 1998; first published 1997), 236–241, with the ungrammatical “it's” for “its” left intact. Jefferson would certainly have scrutinized all the reports emanating from the Virginia Convention, particularly any matter relating to the issue of independence. At the time, Jefferson thought the work of the Virginia Convention in setting up a constitution for the newly independent state of Virginia was more important than the work of the Continental Congress, and he suggested Virginia recall its delegates so they could help with that state constitution. (Jefferson to Thomas Nelson, May 16, 1776, in Lyman H. Butterfield and Mina R. Bryan, eds.,
Papers of Thomas Jefferson
[Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1950], 1: 292.)

  
9
.
  
A list of these documents appears in Maier,
American Scripture
, 217–223.

10
.
  
Peter Force, ed.,
American Archives, Fourth Series: A Documentary History of the English Colonies in North America from the King's Message to Parliament of March 7, 1774, to the Declaration of Independence by the United States
(New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1972; first published 1833–1846), 6: 933. For the practice of issuing instructions, see Ray Raphael, “Instructions: The People's Voice in Revolutionary America,” Common-Place 9:1 (October 2008),
http://www.common-place.org/vol-09/no-01/raphael/
.

11
.
  
From the Congress of North Carolina, April 12, 1776, in Force,
American Archives
,
Fourth Series
, 5: 860.

12
.
  
Ibid., 6: 933.

13
.
  
Ibid., 5: 1208–1209.

14
.
  
Here, for instance, is a list of grievances from the “Declaration of the Delegates of Maryland”: “The Parliament of Great Britain has of late claimed an uncontrollable right of binding these Colonies in all cases whatsoever. To enforce an unconditional submission to this claim, the Legislative and Executive powers of that state have invariably pursued for these ten years past a studied system of oppression, by passing many impolitick, severe, and cruel acts for raising a revenue from the Colonists; by depriving them in many cases of the trial by Jury; by altering the chartered Constitution of one Colony, and the entire stoppage of the trade of its Capital; by cutting off all intercourse between the Colonies; by restraining them from fishing on their own coasts; by extending the limits of, and erecting an arbitrary Government in the Province of Quebeck; by confiscating the property of the Colonists taken on the seas, and compelling the crews of their vessels, under the pain of death, to act against their native country and dearest friends; by declaring all seizures, detention, or destruction, of the persons or property of the Colonists, to be legal and just.” (Force,
American Archives
,
Fourth Series
, 6: 1506.)

15
.
  
Ibid., 6: 557, 603. Although the other declarations varied in style and length, they were similar in their intent: the time had come for the United States to make a clean break. One example will stand for the rest:

                   
To the Honourable Representatives of the Province of New-York, in Provincial Congress convened. The humble Address of the General Committee of Mechanicks in union, of the City and County of New-York, in behalf of themselves and their constituents:

                   
GENTLEMEN: We, as a part of your constituents, and devoted friends to our bleeding country, beg leave, in a dutiful manner, at this time to approach unto you, our Representatives, and request your kind attention to this our humble address.

                   
When we cast a glance upon our beloved continent, where fair freedom, civil and religious, we have long enjoyed, whose fruitful fields have made the world glad, and whose trade has filled with plenty of all things, sorrow fills our hearts to behold her now struggling under the heavy load of oppression, tyranny, and death. But when we extend our sight a little farther, and view the iron hand that is lifted up against us, behold it is our King; he who by his oath and station, is bound to support and defend us in the quiet enjoyment of all our glorious rights as freemen, and whose dominions have been supported and made rich by our commerce. Shall we any longer sit silent, and contentedly continue the subjects of such a Prince, who is deaf to our petitions for interposing his Royal authority in our behalf, and for redressing our grievances, but, on the contrary, seems to take pleasure in our destruction? When we see that one whole year is not enough to satisfy the rage of a cruel Ministry, in burning our towns, seizing our vessels, and murdering our precious sons of liberty; making weeping widows for the loss of those who were dearer to them than life, and helpless orphans to bemoan the death of an affectionate father; but who are still carrying on the same bloody pursuit; and for no other reason than this, that we will not become their slaves, and be taxed by them without our consent,—therefore, as we would rather choose to be separate from, than to continue any longer in connection with such oppressors, We, the Committee of Mechanicks in union, do, for ourselves and our constituents, hereby publickly declare that, should you, gentlemen of the honourable Provincial Congress, think proper to instruct our most honourable Delegates in Continental Congress to use their utmost endeavors in that august assembly to cause these United Colonies to become independent of Great Britain, it would give us the highest satisfaction; and we hereby sincerely promise to endeavour to support the same with our lives and fortunes.

                   
Signed by order of the Committee,

Lewis Thibou, Chairman.

              
Mechanick-Hall, New York, May 29, 1776.

              
(Force,
American Archives
,
Fourth Series,
6: 614–615.)

16
.
  
Philip F. Detweiler, “The Changing Reputation of the Declaration of Independence: The First Fifty Years,”
William and Mary Quarterly
, Third Series, 19 (1962): 559–561.

17
.
  
Maier,
American Scripture
, 165–167; Detweiler, “Changing Reputation,” 561.

18
.
  
Lincoln-Douglas debate, Ottawa, IL, August 21, 1858, in Abraham Lincoln,
Political Writings and Speeches
, Terence Ball, ed. (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013), xxvii.

19
.
  
Detweiler, “Changing Reputation,” 562. Henry's speech on June 16, 1788, is most readily accessible at University of Chicago Press,
The Founders' Constitution
, Major Themes, chapter 14, document 39:
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch14s39.html
.

20
.
  
David Ramsay,
The History of the American Revolution
(Philadelphia: R. Aitken & Son, 1789; reprinted by Liberty Classics in 1990), 1: 340–346; William Gordon,
The History of the Rise, Progress, and Establishment, of the Independence of the United State of America
(Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries Press, 1969; first published in 1788), 2: 274–297.

21
.
  
Charles Warren, “Fourth of July Myths,”
William and Mary Quarterly
, Third Series, 2 (1945): 263.

22
.
  
John Marshall,
The Life of George Washington
(New York, AMS Press, 1969; first published 1804–1807), 2: 405.

23
.
  
Ironically, Marshall, a leading Federalist, described the declaring of independence with a populist slant, highlighting “the people” rather than Jefferson. “American independence became the general theme of conversation, and, more and more, the general wish,” he wrote. “The measures in Congress took their complexion from the temper of the people.” Marshall,
Life of George Washington
, 2: 396–404.

24
.
  
Mercy Otis Warren,
History of the Rise, Progress and Termination of the American Revolution, interspersed with Biographical, Political and Moral Observations
(Boston: E. Larkin, 1805; reprinted by Liberty Classics in 1988), 3: 307–308. This appears in her concluding remarks. Earlier in the text, Warren wrote that the Declaration was “drawn by the ingenious and philosophic pen of Thomas Jefferson, Esquire.” (1: 309.)

25
.
  
Irma B. Jaffe,
Trumbull: The Declaration of Independence
(New York: Viking, 1976), 69.

26
.
  
Maier,
American Scripture
, 175–176; Detweiler, “Changing Reputation,” 572.

27
.
  
Jaffe,
Trumbull
, 62–66.

28
.
  
Maier,
American Scripture
, 186.

29
.
  
Jefferson to Dr. James Mease, September 26, 1825, in Paul Leicester Ford, ed.,
Writings of Thomas Jefferson
(New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1899), 10: 346.

30
.
  
John Adams to Benjamin Rush, June 21, 1811, in John A. Schutz and Douglass Adair, eds.,
The Spur of Fame: Dialogues of John Adams and Benjamin Rush, 1805–1813
(San Marino, CA: Huntington Library, 1966), 182.

31
.
  
For Adams's most forceful statements of this argument, see his
Autobiography
and the accompanying letter to Timothy Pickering, August 6, 1822, in Charles Francis Adams, ed.,
The Works of John Adams
(Boston: Charles Little and James Brown, 1850), 2: 510–515. Although Adams's memory of the committee was indeed flawed, the fact that the committee met, and that individual members made revisions, is suggested by Jefferson's own correspondence at the time. (See Robert E. McGlone, “Deciphering Memory: John
Adams and the Authorship of the Declaration of Independence,”
Journal of American History
85 [1998]: 411–438; and Maier,
American Scripture
, 101–102.) Here is the key piece of contemporary evidence: “Th. J. to Doctr. Franklyn. Friday morn. The inclosed paper has been read and with some small alterations approved of by the committee. Will Doctr. Franklyn be so good as to peruse it and suggest such alterations as his more enlarged view of the subject will dictate? The paper having been returned to me to change a particular sentiment or two, I propose laying it again before the committee tomorrow morning, if Doctr. Franklyn can think of it before that time.” (Boyd,
Papers of Jefferson
, 1: 404.) There is no definitive proof that Jefferson's note to Franklin refers to the Declaration of Independence, but according to Julian Boyd, the editor, other possibilities are implausible, while all circumstantial and corroborating evidence points to the Declaration.

32
.
  
Jefferson to James Madison, August 30, 1823, in Ford,
Writings of Thomas Jefferson
, 10: 267. Jefferson further contended that the changes proffered by Franklin and Adams “were two or three only, and purely verbal.” Even so, Jefferson laid no claim to the originality of his ideas. When Timothy Pickering, taking Adams's side, wrote that the Declaration “contained no new ideas, that it is a common-place compilation, its sentiments hacknied in Congress for two years before,” Jefferson admitted that “may all be true,” noting only, “I know only that I turned to neither book nor pamphlet in writing it.”