Every July 4 we celebrate
Independence Day, the anniversary of the promulgation of our famed Declaration
of Independence on July 4, 1776. Most of us have heard the famous opening lines
of the document:
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.
However, few have ever read the
entire Declaration and even fewer have any understanding of the nature of the
actual grievances that led the colonists to sever their ties with England and
seek independence. Most readers don’t get past the following words.
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.
Even though King George III of
England was one of the nicest, most benevolent rulers that England ever had,
the colonists portrayed him as a tyrannical despot. No one was a more
determined supporter of representative government than this young King, who
though descended from German ancestors prided himself on being an Englishman.
The real conflict between England
and her American colonies was not between Monarchy and Democracy but between
the rights of the British people represented as they were by their own
Parliament, and the rights of the American colonists represented as they were
by their own colonial assemblies. In this conflict no one was a greater
supporter of the rights and authority of the British Parliament than the King.
For the most part the Declaration
of Independence does not complain about violations of individual human rights
but concentrates on what it claims has been a systematic attempt on the part of
the government in England to violate the rights and privileges of colonial
representative assemblies.
The founding fathers believed that
these assemblies that represented the leading citizens and property owners in
the various colonies were the sole bulwark against monarchical tyranny on the
one hand, and democratic anarchy on the other. They claimed that the King and
his colonial governors have repeatedly refused to put into operation laws
passed by these assemblies.
•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
operations till his assent should be obtained;•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,…•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.
In some cases the English government has even gone so far as to
dissolve some of these representative assemblies and leave particular colonies
without any form of self-government. The legal system, military defense, and
tax collection have been taken out of the hands of the colonial
representatives.
•He has dissolved
representative houses repeatedly for opposing with manly firmness his invasions
of the rights of the people.•He has refused for a longtime,
after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected…•He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent
to laws for establishing judiciary powers.
•He has made the 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.
In the end the Declaration claimed
that it came down to a contest between their own local representative
assemblies and a faraway legislature that did not represent them. Because they
had come to deny the authority of the British Parliament, they never used the
word Parliament in the document but the following words are unmistakable.
•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.
These acts included
the following:
•For quartering large bodies of troops among us:•For protecting them, by a mock trial, from punishment•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 benefits of trial by jury:•For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offences:
There are elements in the
Declaration that might seem offensive to modern ears. Jefferson and others in
America opposed the efforts of a reforming British government to permit
religious toleration of the large Catholic population in newly conquered
Canada. For them Catholicism went hand in hand with despotism.
The Declaration also complained
about attempts on the part of the British government to prevent colonization of
Indian territory. Indeed, it claimed that England was encouraging the native
tribes.
•And has endeavored 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.
Nevertheless, the leaders
assembled in Congress insisted on their rights as Englishmen to govern
themselves. They wanted government to be as close to home as possible. They
would make their own laws, vote their own taxes when necessary, and be
responsible for their own legal and military systems. They did not want to be
governed by a faraway government that had little concern for their interests or
welfare.
It was true that the founders were
men of property and status. Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Madison, and Franklin
were not common men. Democracy would come later. For the present they wanted to
protect their right to self-government. The British government had declared
itself “invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.” To
resist, they were prepared to risk all that they held dear.
•“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.”
###
