Notes — The Revolutionary Words that Forged America: The Definitive Guide to the Declaration of Independence

Author’s Note

and looked beyond the advantages herself could receive: Paine, Thomas. The Rights of Man, Part Two (1792), in Paine, Collected Writings, Foner, Eric, ed. (New York: 1955), pp. 547-548.

Introduction

years before a drop of blood was drawn at Lexington: Adams, John. “John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, August 24, 1815,” National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/03-08-02-0560. [Original source: The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Retirement Series, vol. 8, 1 October 1814 to 31 August 1815, ed. J. Jefferson Looney. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2011, pp. 682–684.]

dedicates a single three-sentence paragraph to the Declaration: The Princeton Review. AP US Government & Politics Premium Prep 2021 (New York: 2020), p. 95.

Book One: Text of the Declaration

This text is taken verbatim from the National Archives. The National Archives provides this explanation: “The following text is a transcription of the Stone Engraving of the parchment Declaration of Independence (the document on display in the Rotunda at the National Archives Museum.) The spelling and punctuation reflects the original.” “Declaration of Independence: A Transcription.” National Archives, America’s Founding Documents https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-trasncript, accessed St. Patrick’s Day (March 17), 2025.

In addition, the National Archives transcription adds paragraph breaks and indents the grievances. Further, the National Archives have added the names of the States (the signers signed in groups by States, but the actual State names are not listed) and have listed the signatures into four columns instead of six. For ease of readability, this work follows the National Archives format.

Book Two: Reading & Understanding the Declaration

I would rather be assassinated on this spot than surrender it. (Applause.): Lincoln, Abraham. Speech at Independence Hall (February 22, 1861), in Lincoln, Speeches and Writings 1859–1865 (New York: 1989), p. 213.

in North-America, choose deputies, as soon as possible, to attend such Congress: First Continental Congress. Declaration and Resolves (October 14, 1774), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. 1 1774 (Washington: 1904), p. 67.

but a fundamental premise of the governing reality on July 4, 1776: For additional sources on this passage, review Warren, Joseph. An Oration Delivered March 6th, 1775. At the Request of the Inhabitants of the Town of Boston; to Commemorate the Bloody Tragedy of the Fifth of March, 1770 (Boston: 1775), in Forman, Samuel. Dr. Joseph Warren, The Boston Tea Party, Bunker Hill, and the Birth of American Liberty (Gretna, Louisiana: 2012), p. 230; Massachusetts House of Representatives. Resolutions of the House of Representatives of Massachusetts, Vol. 50, 1773–1774, p. 288; Archer, Richard. As If an Enemy’s Country, The British Occupation of Boston and the Origins of the Revolution (New York: 2010), p. 3.

has not happened since the days of Noah until now: Paine, Thomas. Common Sense (Philadelphia: February 14, 1776), in Paine, Collected Writings, Foner, Eric, ed. (New York: 1955), pp. 36, 52. As the citation reveals, there is substantial material between the two quotes, but despite the distance, together they certainly make the point.

absolved from all allegiance to, or dependence upon, the Crown or Parliament of Great Britain: Virginia Convention (May 15, 1776), in Force, Peter. American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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, Vol. VI (Washington, D.C.: 1846), p. 1523.

be prepared and transmitted to the respective colonies for their consideration and approbation: Lee, Richard Henry, Motion (June 7, 1776). Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. V June 5–October 8, 1776, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1906), p. 425.

in a day or two produced to me his draft: Adams, John, in Diary and Autobiography of John Adams Vol. 3, Butterfield, L. H., Leonard C. Faber, and Wendell Garrett, eds. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: 1962), p. 336.

Reason third: You can write ten times better than I can: “From John Adams to Timothy Pickering, August 6, 1822.” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/99-02-02-7674. Accessed St. Patrick’s Day (March 17), 2025.

the other four members “unanimously pressed on myself alone to undertake the draft”: “From Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, August 30, 1823.” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/98-01-02-3728. Accessed St. Patrick’s Day (March 17), 2025.

through twenty-two specific tyrannical actions: Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 336.

its essence contained in [James] Otis’s pamphlet: “From Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, August 30, 1823.” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/98-01-02-3728. Accessed St. Patrick’s Day (March 17), 2025.

charged it as copied from [John] Locke’s treatise on government: Ibid. This comment evidently identifies Locke’s Second Treatise on Government (1690) as Jefferson’s source.

no sentiment which had ever been expressed before: Ibid.

after the fact, when he was eighty years old: Ibid.

Jefferson dubs him the “Colossus” of independence: Jefferson, Thomas, in “Notes on a Conversation with Thomas Jefferson,” in The Papers of Daniel Webster: Correspondence, Wiltse, Charles M., ed. (Hanover, New Hampshire: 1974), 1:375.

defender against the multifarious assaults it encountered: Jefferson, Thomas. “Thomas Jefferson to William P. Garnder, 19 February 1813.” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/03-05-02-0536. [Original source: The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Retirement Series, vol. 5, 1 May 1812 to 10 March 1813, ed. J. Jefferson Looney. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008, pp. 643–644]. Accessed September 24, 2025.

from this time forward, forever more: Admas, John. “John Adams to Abigail Adams, July 3, 1776.” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/04-02-02-0016. Accessed St. Patrick’s Day (March 17), 2025.

hence the creation of “Patriot Week”: You can learn more about this relatively new commemorative tradition by visiting PatriotWeek.org.

when engrossed, be signed by every member of Congress: Resolution (July 19, 1776). Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. V June 5–October 8, 1776, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1906), pp. 590–591.

which explains why we chose to become a new nation completely unique in human history: For additional sources regarding this passage, review Jefferson, Thomas. “Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, August 30, 1823.” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/98-01-02-3728. Accessed St. Patrick’s Day (March 17), 2025; Maier, Pauline, American Scripture, Making the Declaration of Independence (New York, 1997), pp. 97–153; Burkett, Christoper and Lloyd, Gordon. “The Signing of the Declaration of Independence.” The Ashbrook Center, https://americanfounding.org/entries/the-signing-of-the-declaration-of-independence/. Accessed St. Patrick’s Day (March 17), 2025.

We must all hang together: Hancock, John, in Isaacson, Walter. “Benjamin Franklin Joins the Revolution, Returning to Philadelphia from England in 1775, the ‘wisest American’ kept his political leanings to himself. But not for long.” Smithsonian Magazine, July 31, 2003.

or most assuredly we shall all hang separately: Ibid.

Issacson cites Jared Sparks. There is a raging debate about whether Jared Sparks fabricated this quote. See, e.g., Coohill, Joseph. “We Must All Hang Together or Hang Separately” Quote or No Quote?” Professor Buzzkill History Podcast, April 5, 2022. https://professorbuzzkill.com/ben-franklin-we-must-all-hang-together-or-all-hang-separately-quote-or-no-quote/. Accessed St. Patrick’s Day (March 17), 2025. Whether this account is apocryphal or genuine, it certainly captures the spirit of those days.

Congress Assembled: Second Continental Congress. Declaration of Independence (July 4, 1776), in Journals of Congress Containing the Proceedings from January 1, 1776, to January 1, 1777, Vol. II (Yorktown, Pennsylvania: 1778), p. 241.

governments which have no model on the face of the globe: Madison, James. Federalist No. 14, in Madison, James, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay. The Federalist Papers (1788), Kramnick, Issac, ed. (New York: 1987), pp. 144–145.

we must fight!: Henry, Patrick. “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death!” March 23, 1775, in Tyler, Moses Coit. American Statesmen, Patrick Henry, Morse, Jr., John T., ed. (Boston: 1894), p. 143.

the cause of justice, liberty, and of human nature: Witherspoon, John. The Dominion of Providence over the Passions of Men, A Sermon Preached at Princeton, on the 17th of May, 1776, Being the General Fast appointed by the Congress through the United Colonies. To Which is Added, An Address to the Natives of Scotland residing America (London: 1776), pp. 36–37.

It is a world-breaking notion that they take seriously—and so will the world: For more on this passage, review Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), p. 95; Lucas, Stephen E. “The Stylistic Artistry of the Declaration of Independence.” National Archives, https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/stylistic-artistry-of-the-declaration. [Original source in Prologue: Quarterly of the National Archives and Records Administration (Spring, 1990).] Accessed St. Patrick’s Day (March 17), 2025.

the kingdom from which they derived their origin: Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), pp. 91–92.

and not of the British public: Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 106.

will one day cause great changes in the world: C Crèvecœur, J. Hector St. John de. Letters from an American Farmer and Sketches of Eighteenth-Century America, Stone, Albert E., ed. (New York: 1986 (originally published 1782)), pp. 68-69.

The American People: For more sources on this passage, review Burke, Edmund. Reflections, A New Edition (London: 1814 [originally published 1790]), p. 33; Adams, Samuel. Rights of the Colonists, The Report of the Committee of Correspondence to the Boston Town Meeting (November 20, 1772), in Old South Leaflets no. 173 (Boston: 1906) 7: 419.

was never the design of heaven: Paine, Thomas. Common Sense (Philadelphia: February 14, 1776), in Paine, Collected Writings, Foner, Eric, ed. (New York: 1955), p. 25.

where wounds of deadly hate have pierced so deep: Ibid., p. 27.

Neither can you reconcile Britain and America: Ibid., p. 35.

under the violated unmeaning names of parent and child: Ibid, p. 27.

is, and ought to be, totally dissolved: Second Continental Congress. Resolution (July 2, 1776), in Journals of Congress Containing the Proceedings from January 1, 1776, to January 1, 1777, Vol. II (Yorktown, Pennsylvania: 1778), p. 239.

uniting in one federal republic: Wilson, James. Lectures on Law, Chapter VIII, Of Man, as a Member of a Confederation (Philadelphia: 1790-1791), in Collected Works of James Wilson Vol. I, Hall, Kermit L. and Hall, Mark David, eds. (Carmel, Indiana: 2007), p. 663.

derived from the Latin word for “stand”: Allen, Danielle. Our Declaration, A Reading of the Declaration of Independence in Defense of Equality (New York: 2014), p. 119.

This will of his Maker is called the law of nature: Blackstone, Sir William. Of the Nature of Laws in General (1753), in Commentaries on the Laws of England in Four Books, Vol. I, Introduction, Section I (Philadelphia: 1893), p. 38.

could only spring from a greater intelligence and power: Paley, William. Natural Theology or, Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity, Collected from the Appearances of Nature (London: 1802), pp. 1–4. Paley also wrote:

In crossing a heath, suppose I pitched my foot against a stone, and were asked how the stone came to be there; I might possibly answer, that, for anything I knew to the contrary, it had lain there forever: nor would it perhaps be very easy to show the absurdity of this answer. But suppose I had found a watch upon the ground, and it should be inquired how the watch happened to be in that place; I should hardly think of the answer I had before given, that for anything I knew, the watch might have always been there […] There must have existed, at some time, and at some place or other, an artificer or artificers, who formed [the watch] for the purpose which we find it actually to answer; who comprehended its construction, and designed its use […] Every indication of contrivance, every manifestation of design, which existed in the watch, exists in the works of nature; with the difference, on the side of nature, of being greater or more, and that in a degree which exceeds all computation.

Ibid., pp. 1, 19.

and which the inferior is bound to obey: Blackstone, Sir William. Commentaries on the Laws of England Adopted to the Present State of the Law by Robert Malcom Kerr, Vol. I, Fourth Edition (London: 1876), p. 21.

divine and human: Wilson, James. Lectures on Law, Chapter II, Of the General Principles of Law (Philadelphia: 1790-1791), in Collected Works of James Wilson Vol. I, Hall, Kermit L. and Mark David Hall, eds. (Carmel, Indiana: 2007, pp. 497–498).

Wilson elaborates:

The laws of God may [be] divided into the following species.

That law, the book of which we are neither able nor worthy to open. Of this law, the author and observer is God. He is a law to himself, as well as to all created things. This law we may name the “law eternal.”

That law, which is made for angels and spirits of the just made perfect. This may be called the “law celestial.” This law, and the glorious state for which it is adapted, we see, at present, but darkly and as through a glass: but hereafter we shall see even as we are seen; and shall know even as we are known. From the wisdom and goodness of the adorable Author and Preserver of the universe, we are justified in concluding, that the celestial and perfect safeties governed, as all other things are, by his established laws. What those laws are, it is not yet given us to know; but one truth we may rely with sure and certain confidence—those laws are wise and good. For another truth we have infallible authority—those laws are strictly obeyed: “In heaven his will is done.”

That law, by which the irrational and inanimate parts of the creation are governed. The great Creator of all things has established general and fixed rules, according to which all the phenomena of the material universe are produced and regulated. The rules are usually denominated laws of nature. The science, which as those laws for its object, is distinguished by the name of natural philosophy. It is sometimes called, the philosophy of body. Of this science, there are numerous branches.

That law, which God has made for man in his present state, that law, which is communicated to us by reason and conscience, the divine monitors within us, and by the sacred oracles, the divine monitors without us. This law has undergone several subdivisions, and has been known by distinct appellations, according to the different ways in which it has been promulgated, and the different objects which it respects.

As promulgated by reason, it has been denominated the law of nature; as addressed to political societies, it has been denominated the law of nations.

But it should always be remembered, that this law, natural or revealed, made for men or for nations, flows from the same divine source: It is the law of God.

Ibid.

because they are “the best”: Montesquieu, Charles Secondat, Baron de. The Spirit of the Laws Vol. II, Nugent, Thomas, translator (New York: 1965 [originally published 1748]), p. 59.

the eternal, immutable laws of good and evil: Blackstone, Sir William. Commentaries on the Laws of England Adopted to the Present State of the Law by Robert Malcom Kerr, Vol. I, Fourth Edition (London: 1876), p. 22.

is always the sole master and sovereign of mankind: Wilson, James. Lectures on Law, Chapter III, Of the Law of Nature (Philadelphia: 1790-1791), in Collected Works of James Wilson Vol. I, Hall, Kermit L. and Mark David Hall, eds. (Carmel, Indiana: 2007), p. 523.

the same effects, from generation to generation: Otis, James. The Rights of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved (1764), in Pamphlets of the American Revolution, 1750–1776, Bailyn, Bernard, ed. (Cambridge, MA: 1965), p. 554.

prior to any human institution whatsoever: Hamilton, Alexander. The Farmer Refuted: Or, A More Impartial and Comprehensive View of the Dispute Between Great-Britain and the Colonies, Intended as a Further Vindication of the Congress: in Answer to a Letter from A.W. Farmer, Intitled A View of the Controversy Between Great-Britain and Her Colonies: Including a Mode of Determining the Present Disputes Finally and Effectually, &c. (New York: 1775), p. 6.

whenever there is a conflict between man and God: Wilson, James. Lectures on Law, Chapter II, Of the General Principles of Law (Philadelphia: 1790–1791), in Collected Works of James Wilson Vol. I, Hall, Kermit L. and Mark David Hall, eds. (Carmel, Indiana: 2007), p. 471.

to govern the flowing and ebbing of the ocean: Goodrich, Elizur. The Principles of Civil Union and Happiness considered and recommended. A Sermon Preached Before this Excellency Samuel Huntington, Esq. L.L.D. Governor and Commander in Chief, and the Honorable The General Assembly of the State of Connecticut Convened at Hartford, on the Day of the Anniversary Election, May 10th, 1787 (Hartford: 1787), p. 10.

and Non-Resistance to the Higher Powers: Mullins, J. Patrick. Father of Liberty, Jonathan Mayhew and Principles of the American Revolution (Lawrence, Kansas: 2017), p. 4.

“read by everybody”: Adams, John. From John Adams to Hezekiah Niles, February 13, 1818. Adams Papers, Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/99-02-02-6854. Accessed March 18, 2025. See also Beneke, Chris. The Critical Turn: Jonathan Mayhew, the British Empire, and the Idea of Resistance in Mid-Eighteenth-Century Boston. Massachusetts Historical Review, vol. 10, Massachusetts Historical Society, 2008, pp. 23–56, p. 23.

disobedience to them is a duty, not a crime: Mayhew, Jonathan. A Discourse Concerning Unlimited Submission and Non-Resistance to the Higher Powers: With some Reflections on the Resistance Made to King Charles I. And on the Anniversary of his Death: In which the Mysterious Doctrine of that Prince’s Saintship and Martyrdom is Unriddled (1750).

ought to be, totally dissolved: Second Continental Congress. Resolution (June 10, 1776), in Journals of Congress Containing the Proceedings from January 1, 1776, to January 1, 1777, Vol. II (Yorktown, Pennsylvania: 1778) p. 206.

a formal statement justifying their revolution: History.com succinctly summarizes scholarship regarding the revolutionary nature of the Declaration of Independence:

The Declaration of Independence was the first formal statement by a nation’s people asserting their right to choose their own government.

History.com, eds. “Declaration of Independence.” June 25, 2024. https://www.history.com/topics/american-revolution/declaration-of-independence accessed March 18, 2025.

See also David Armitage. “Book Discussion on Final Exam, Virginia Festival of the Book.” Book TV, C-SPAN2, March 22, 2007. https://www.c-span.org/video/?197427-9/the-declaration-independence-global-history. Accessed March 18, 2025. (“[Armitage:] It is in many ways an act of genius to have provided for the first time the template or the document which other people could use to declare their own independence”; “[Question:] Were there declarations of independence before ours? [Armitage: ] Not that I could find. I was very surprised, again researching the book I thought that there must be very long heritage of these that Jefferson and his fellow authors of the Declaration had drawn upon but I am absolutely convinced that this is the first declaration of independence”).

an appeal to the tribunal of the world: Jefferson, Thomas. “Thomas Jefferson to Henry Lee, May 8, 1825,” in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 1501.

deserves to be treated with respect and dignity: Washington, George. The Rules of Civility and Decent Behavior in Company and Conversation (circa 1746), in George Washington, A Collection, Allen, W. B., ed. (Indianapolis: 1988), p. 13.

the proper tone and spirit called for by the occasion: Jefferson, Thomas. “Thomas Jefferson to Henry Lee, May 8, 1825.” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/98-01-02-5212. Accessed March 18, 2025.

and forward a “manifesto” to foreign countries to ensure peace and obtain trade support: Paine, Thomas. Common Sense (Philadelphia: February 14, 1776), in The Essential Thomas Paine, Hook, Sydney, introduction (New York: 1969), p. 59.

We should know the contrary: Adams, John. “John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, September 14, 1813.” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/03-06-02-0389. Accessed March 18, 2025.

they cannot be refuted: Locke, John. An Essay Concerning Humane Understanding in Three Volumes, (Glasgow: 1823 [originally published 1690]), p. 131.

this being the highest of all human certainty: Ibid.

an arch of a circle is less than the whole circle: Ibid.

a triangle is not a circle: Ibid., p. 42.

and needs no other proof but its own evidence: Ibid., p. 151.

commands the assent of the mind: Hamilton, Alexander. Federalist Paper No. 31 (January 1, 1788), in Madison, James, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay. The Federalist Papers, Kramnick, Issac, ed. (New York: 1987), p. 216.

that can’t be discovered or proven by reasoning: Wilson, James. Lectures on Law, Vol. I, Chapter III, On the Law of Nature (Philadelphia: 1790-1791), in Collected Works of James Wilson Vol. I, Hall, Kermit L. and Hall, Mark David, eds. (Carmel, Indiana: 2007), p. 508.

one who was born and has continued blind: Ibid., p. 509.

that does not negate the reality of self-evident moral truths: Ibid., p. 510. Furthermore, “there is, in human nature, such a moral principle, [that] has been felt and acknowledged in all ages and nations.” Ibid.

found them engraved on our hearts: Jefferson, Thomas. “Thomas Jefferson to Major John Cartwright, June 5, 1824,” in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 1491.

reason perceives them alike in all times and places: Adams, John. Diary, With Passages from an Autobiography (May 11, 1756), in The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States with a Life of the Author, Notes and Illustrations by His Grandson Charles Francis Adams, Vol. II (Boston: 1850), p. 17

Pilate, presiding over the trial of Jesus, asks, “What is truth?”: John 18:38, Holy Bible, King James Version, Red Letter Edition, Dictionary/Concordance (Nashville, Tennessee: 1971), p. 475.

and of every good to man: Plato. The Dialogues of Plato, Vol. V, Jowett, B., ed. and translator (Oxford, United Kingdom: 1871), p. 249.

but they infect the soul with evil: Socrates, in Plato. The Dialogues of Plato, Phædo, Vol. II, Jowett, B., ed. and translator (New York: 1911), p. 445.

as you will find out either in this or in any future enquiry: Socrates, in Plato. The Dialogues Volume I, Jowett, B., ed. and translator (New York: 1911), p. 321.

No one is more hated than he who speaks the truth: Nair Sharika S. “Quotes from Plato, the Father of Western Philosophy.” Yourstory, March 2, 2017 (“No one is more hated than he who speaks the truth”), https://yourstory.com/2017/03/29-quotes-by-plato/amp. Accessed All Saints Day, 2024; Good Reads, Plato, Quotes, Notable Quotes (“No one is more hated than he who speaks the truth—Plato”), https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7584407-no-one-is-more-hated-than-he-who-speaks-the. Accessed All Saints Day, 2024; Quora (“No one is more hated than be [sic] who speaks the truth? What does it mean?”), https://www.quora.com/No-one-is-more-hated-than-be-who-speaks-the-truth-What-does-it-means. Accessed All Saints’ Day, 2024; Quotefancy (“No one is more hated than he who speaks the truth. Plato”), https://quotefancy.com/quote/888459/Plato-No-one-is-more-hated-than-he-who-speaks-the-truth. Accessed All Saints  Day, 2024.

when he thinks what he feels, he thinks what is […]: Plato. The Dialogues of Plato, Vol. III, Jowett, B., ed. and translator (New York: 1878), p. 393. See a slightly different formulation in Fernández-Armesto, Felipe. Truth, A History and a Guide for the Perplexed (New York: 1997), p. 204 (“man is the measure of all things, of the existence of the things that are and the non-existence of things that are not”).

and for you such as they appear to you?: Fernández-Armesto, Felipe. Truth, A History and a Guide for the Perplexed (New York: 1997), p. 204.

every man did that which was right in his own eyes: Judges 21:25, Holy Bible, King James Version, Red Letter Edition, Dictionary/Concordance (Nashville, Tennessee: 1971), p. 131. See also Judges 17:6, Holy Bible, King James Version, Red Letter Edition, Dictionary/Concordance (Nashville, Tennessee: 1971) (“In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes”), p. 128.

all that exists consists of interpretations: Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Will to Power, An Attempted Transvaluation of All Values (1901), in The Complete Works of Friedrich Nietzsche, Vol. Fifteen The Will to Power, An Attempted Transvaluation of All Values Vol. I, Books I and II, Levy, Oscar ed. and Ludovici, Anthony M., translator (Edinburgh and London: 1913), p. 12.

a set of human rights that all people in the world should enjoy: United Nations, General Assembly. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (New York: December 10, 1948).

part of the culture into which we are born: The Executive Board, American Anthropological Association. Statement on Human Rights. American Anthropologist, vol. 49, no. 4, 1947, pp. 539–543, p. 542.

except the republics of the West: Younkins, Edward W. “Multiculturalism: The Rejection of Truth and Reason.” Le Qubecois Libre (August 4, 2001).

We should know the contrary: Adams, John. “John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, September 14, 1813.” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/03-06-02-0389. Accessed March 19, 2025.

you can’t not believe in it: Peterson, Jordan B. “Lecture 01 Maps of Meaning: Introduction and Overview.” YouTube, 2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjnvtRgpg6g&t=5785. Accessed March 19, 2025.

And let us not forget thirst. And hunger: Ibid.

the real design of my existence here […]: Adams, John. “John Adams to Richard Cranch, August 29, 1756,” in Papers of John Adams, Vol. 1, September 1755–October 1773, Taylor, Robert J., Mary-Jo Kline and Gregg L. Lint, eds. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: 1977), pp. 15-16.

to follow the truth as the only safe guide: Jefferson, Thomas. “Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, December 10, 1819.” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/03-15-02-0240. Accessed March 19, 2025.

but truth is as old as the universe: Douglass, Frederick. Popular Error and Unpopular Truth, quoted in Barron, Bishop Robert. “The Most Important Decision in Life.” Imprimis, vol. 52, no. 6, June 2023, p. 2.

ignorance may deride it, malice may distort, but there it is: Churchill, Winston. Royal Assent, House of Commons, May 17, 1916, 82: cc. 1572–1618, 1578, in Churchill’s Wit, The Definitive Collection, Langworth, Richard M., ed. (Great Britain: 2009), p. 51.

stronger than evil triumphant: King, Jr., Martin Luther. Acceptance Speech, The Nobel Prize (Oslo, Norway: December 10, 1964).

is asking you not to believe him. So don’t: Scruton, Roger. Modern Philosophy: An Introduction and Survey (New York: 1994), p. 6.

[A[ll men are by nature equally free and independent: This phrase is specifically used in the Declaration of Rights, Section I, Virginia Constitution (1776).

dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal: Lincoln, Abraham. Address at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania (November 19, 1863), in Lincoln, Speeches and Writings 1859–1865 (New York: 1989), p. 536.

slavery was a nearly universal institution: Patterson, Orlando. Freedom, Freedom in the Making of Western Culture, Vol. I (New York: 1990), p. 20.

Slavery is a fact of life in pre-Islamic Arabia and the Middle East: Freamon, Bernard K. Possessed by the Right Hand, The Problem of Slavery in Islamic Law and Muslim Cultures (Leiden, The Netherlands: 2019), pp. 21–22. (“When the Prophet Muhammad received the first revelations that ultimately led to the promulgation of the Qur’an and the emergency of the new religion of Islam, slavery and slave trading were central features of human life and society. The practice of slavery flourished at that time in practically all of the communities on the Arabian Peninsula, in the larger Middle Eastern region, and indeed, throughout most of the known world”) (footnotes omitted).

Native Americans had enslaved each other for millennia: Reséndez, Andrés. The Other Slavery, The Undiscovered Story of Indian Enslavement in America (New York: 2017), p. 3. See also Reséndez, Andrés. “Native Americans Were Kept as Slaves, Too.” Newsweek, April 30, 2016.

sex slaves for the imperial troops: Watanabe, Kazuko. “Trafficking in Women’s Bodies, Then and Now: The Issue of Military ‘Comfort Women.’” Women’s Studies Quarterly, vol. 27, no. 1/2, 1999, pp. 19–31.

and those not immediately exterminated are enslaved: Spoerer, Mark and Jochen Fleischhacker. “Forced Laborers in Nazi Germany: Categories, Numbers, and Survivors.” The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, vol. 33, no. 2, 2002, pp. 169–204.

some challenge whether it has really been abolished there: Free the Slaves. Slavery in History, A Comprehensive Look at Slavery from 6800 B.C. to Now (Washington, D.C.: 2024), p. 39, 42; BBC. “Slavery in Islam,” updated September 7, 2009, https://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/history/slavery_1.shtml. Accessed March 19, 2025; Sutter, John D. “Slavery’s last stronghold.” CNN (March 2012), https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2012/03/world/mauritania.slaverys.last.stronghold/index.html. Accessed March 19, 2025.

(otherwise known as ISIS and Daesh) in the mid-2010s: Stakelbeck, Erick. ISIS Exposed, Beheadings, Slavery, and the Hellish Reality of Radical Islam (Washington, D.C.: 2015).

by the Islamic terrorist group Boko Haram: Pearson, Elizabeth. Boko Haram Beyond the Headlines: Analyses of Africa’s Enduring Insurgency, Zenn, Jacob, ed. (2018), pp. 33–52; MacEachern, Scott. “Locals call Boko Harmam ‘Slave Raiders.  Here’s what that means, and why it matters.” The Washington Post, February 20, 2018.

Caste is the basis of Hindu society: O’Malley, L. S. S. Indian Caste Customs (Cambridge, United Kingdom: 1932), p. 2.

According to the sacred R̥gveda Saṃhitā: Otherwise known as the Rig Veda or Ṛgveda, this ancient work is composed of ten books of 1,028 hymns with 10,522 verses. See, e.g., Dandekar, R. N. “THE ṚGVEDA-SAṀHITĀ: A QUICK OVERVIEW.” Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, vol. 80, no. 1/4, 1999, pp. 1–13.

to ensure adherence to the naturally ordained order of things: Kositsky, Sasha Riser. “The Political Intensification of Caste: India Under the Raj.” Penn History Review, vol. 17, no. 1, Dec. 2009, p. 32.

marry only fellow-members of the sub-caste: O’Malley, L. S. S. Indian Caste Customs (Cambridge, United Kingdom: 1932), pp. 1–4.

soul’s behavior and piety in previous births: Olcott, Mason. “The Caste System of India.” American Sociological Review, vol. 9, no. 6, 1944, pp. 648–57, p. 648.

and equality in the judgment of God: Kirk, Russell. The Roots of the American Order 3rd Edition, (Washington, D.C.: 1991), p. 408.

all men are by nature equally free and independent: See, e.g., Bill of Rights, Section 1, Virginia Constitution (1776); Bill of Rights, Article I, New Hampshire Constitution (1784). Nearly identical pronouncements exist in the constitutions of Pennsylvania, Vermont, and Massachusetts.

their virtues, their talents, their dispositions, or their acquirements: Of Man, as a Member of Society, Lectures on the Law, in Wilson, James. Collected Works of James Wilson, Vol. 1, Hall, Kermit L. and Mark David Hall, eds. (Carmel, Indiana: 2007) p. 638.

All men are born equal: Adams, John. The Earl of Clarendon to William Pym. 1, No. III, in The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States: with a Life of the Author, Notes and Illustrations, by his Grandson Charles Francis Adams, Vol. 3 (Boston: 1856), p. 480.

[a]ll men are, by nature, equal and free: Wilson, James. Originally written as a pamphlet in 1768 and later published as Considerations on the Nature and Extent of the Legislative Authority of the British Parliament (1774), in Collected Works of James Wilson, Vol. 1, Hall, Kermit L. and Mark David Hall, eds. (Carmel, Indiana: 2007), p. 4.

eradicated, from so many minds in so short a time: Adams, John. “John Adams to Richard Cranch,” August 2, 1776, in The Adams Papers, Adams Family Correspondence, Vol. 2, June 1776 – March 1778, Butterfield, L. H., ed. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: 1963), pp. 73–74.

a mass of free people, who, collectively, possess sovereignty: Ramsay, David. A Dissertation on the Manner of Acquiring the Character and Privilege of a Citizen of the United States (Charleston: 1789), p. 3, in Wood, Gordon S. The Radicalism of the American Revolution (New York, 1993), p. 169.

opening of the aristocracy of virtue and talent: Jefferson, Thomas. Autobiography (1821), in The Writings of Thomas Jefferson: Being His Autobiography, Correspondence, Reports, Messages, Addresses, and other Writings, Official and Private Vol. 1, Riker, John C., ed. (New York: 1853), p. 36.

becomes the “life and soul” of America: Ramsay, David. David Ramsay, 1749–1815. Selections from His Writings, Brunhouse, Robert L., ed., American Philosophical Society (vol. 55, part 4) (Philadelphia: 1965), p. 183.

one can succeed on his or her merits: Ibid.

equality is […] the leading feature of the United States: Pinckney, Charles Cotesworth. “Remarks at Constitutional Convention,” June 25, 1787, in Madison, James. Journal of the Federal Convention, Scott, E. H., ed. (Chicago: 1894), p. 232.

who looked forward to this happy consummation: Douglass, Frederick. The Anti-Slavery Movement: A Lecture by Frederick Douglass Before the Rochester Ladies’ Anti-Slavery Society (Rochester, New York: 1855), pp. 10–11.

enslaved in Massachusetts are petitioning and demanding emancipation: Fischer, David Hackett. African Founders, How Enslaved People Expanded American Ideals (New York: 2022), p. 77.

even sue for their liberty and obtain it: Ibid.

to support the cause of such zealous African Americans: This work generally uses the term “African American” when referring to American individuals of African ancestry. This usage is consistent with the revolutionary and post-revolutionary usage of the terms “African” and “African American” used by former slaves. As historian Craig Steven Wilder observes, “[b]y the end of the Revolution, black New Yorkers were publicly describing themselves and their institutions as African. That act was the signage of a nationalist culture forged in the early years of bondage.” Wilder, Craig Steven. In the Company of Black Men, The African Influence on African American Culture in New York City (New York: 2001), p. 73. Moreover, “[g]iven the hostility that greeted them, black people treated Africa as the physical source of their humanity and equality […] Africa was the leveler between black and white New Yorkers and it subordinated cultural divisions between black people […] Africa was a unifying symbol for black people with very different ethnic and cultural backgrounds.” Ibid., pp. 76–77. As David Hacket Fisher further explains, “[a]t the same time, freed slaves in North America also coined another phrase for themselves. As early as 1782, they began to call themselves ‘African American.’ […] The timing was not an accident. This new phrase began to be heard in the late eighteenth century while the American Revolution was still in progress.” Fischer, David Hackett. African Founders, How Enslaved People Expanded American Ideals (New York: 2022), p. 200.

Fischer observes that “[i]n its original context this early example had a special meaning. It referred to an African author who celebrated the American and French victory at Yorktown, and the ‘capture of Cornwallis.’ In that instance, ‘African-America’ meant a person of African origin who supported the American War of Independence. In the new republic the expression quickly acquired the broad meaning that it has possessed ever since […].” Ibid. at 201. Scholars agree that this phraseology is the first use of “hyphenated Americans”—predating by a generation the use of German-American, Irish-American, etc. Ibid. See also ibid. at 724 (“This new phrase at first referred explicitly to an African writer who celebrated the American victory at Yorktown. ‘African American’ originally meant a person of African origin who supported the American Revolution. In the new republic it increasingly became hyphenated and acquired another larger meaning that combined a dual ethnic and national identity. That combination appeared in many related words: ‘Africo-American’ by 1788, ‘Black American’ by 1818, ‘Afro-American’ by 1830, and ‘Afric-American’ by 1831” [footnote omitted]).

who have as good a right to freedom as we have: Adams, Abigail. “Abigail Adams to John Adams, September 22, 1774,” in Adams Papers, Massachusetts Historical Society, in Butterfield, ed., Adams Family Correspondence, p. 162, quoted in Fischer, David Hackett. African Founders, How Enslaved People Expanded American Ideals (New York: 2022), p. 78.

Among these were […] Daniel Tompkins […].: Fischer, David Hackett. African Founders, How Enslaved People Expanded American Ideals (New York: 2022), p. 179.

through various parliamentary procedures and political posturing: Ibid.

the New York Manumission Society: The full name is the “New York Society for Promoting the Manumission of Slaves, and Protecting Such of Them as Have Been, or May Be Liberated.” Ibid., p. 191.

Alexander Hamilton and United States Senator Rufus King: Ibid., p. 192.

And the slaves often took the initiative: Fischer, David Hackett. African Founders, How Enslaved People Expanded American Ideals (New York: 2022), p. 86.

and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power: Hamilton, Alexander. The Farmer Refuted: Or, A More Impartial and Comprehensive View of the Dispute Between Great-Britain and the Colonies, Intended as a Further Vindication of the Congress: in Answer to a Letter from A.W. Farmer, Intitled A View of the Controversy Between Great-Britain and Her Colonies: Including a Mode of Determining the Present Disputes Finally and Effectually, &c. (New York: 1775), p. 38.

means a person has the authority to sell or give something away: Samuel Johnson’s 1768 Dictionary defines “alienable” as “[t]hat of which the property may be transferred.” The first definition of “alienate” means “[t]o transfer the property of any thing to another.”

sold, transferred, given up, or taken away by the government: The one caveat to unalienability is that persons can forfeit their unalienable rights if they engage in criminal behavior. For example, if you are convicted of an armed robbery, you can be imprisoned without violating your unalienable rights—you have forfeited the right to liberty.

enjoys the same unalienable rights: John Locke explains that “all men by nature are equal […] equal right that every man hath to his natural freedom, without being subjected to the will or authority of any other man.” Locke, John. Second Treatise of Civil Government (Chicago: 1971 [originally published 1689]), pp. 42–43.

the floor of freedom is as level as water: Paine, Thomas. “A Serious Address to the People of Pennsylvania on the present situation of their affairs.” Pennsylvania Packet, December 1, 1778.

were vested in them by the immutable laws of nature: Blackstone, Sir William. Commentaries on the Laws of England Adopted to the Present State of the Law by Robert Malcom Kerr, Vol. I, Fourth Edition (London: 1876), p. 93.

Their rights, the natural rights of mankind: Adams, John Quincy. The Jubilee of the Constitution: A Discourse Delivered at the Request of the New York Historical Society, in the City of New York, on Tuesday, the 30th of April, 1839; Being the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Inauguration of George Washington as President of the United States, on Thursday, the 30th of April, 1789 (New York: 1899), p. 9.

not as a gift from their chief magistrate: Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 121.

any human power, without taking our lives: Dickinson, John. Address to the Committee of Correspondence in Barbados (1766), in The Life and Writings of John Dickinson: The Writings of John Dickinson Vol. I, Political Writings, 1764-1774, Ford, Paul Leicester, ed. (Philadelphia:1895), p. 262.

Legislator of the universe: Adams, John. A Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law (1765), in The Political Writings of John Adams, Representative Selections, Peek, Jr., George A., ed. (New York: 1954), pp. 4–5.

and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety: Virginia Declaration of Rights (June 12, 1776), Section 1.

about natural rights in early Chinese history: Cao, Deborah. “On the Universality of ‘Rights’: Absence and Presence of ‘Rights’ in the Chinese Language.” Intercultural Pragmatics, vol. 14, no. 2, 2017, pp. 277–292, p. 277.

let alone aspired to see it realized: Li, Frank. “East Is East and West Is West: Did the Twain Ever Meet? The Declaration of Independence in China.” The Journal of American History, vol. 85, no. 4, 1999, pp. 1432–48, p. 1432.

is sometimes equally convenient: Darwin, Charles On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, Fifith Edition (1869), p. 72.

this must be highly injurious to the race of man: Darwin, Charles. The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex, Vol. 1 (London: 1871), p. 168.

helps save the weaker members of the species: Ibid.

exterminate beasts of prey and herds of useless ruminants: Spencer, Herbert. Social Statics: Or, the Conditions Essential to Human Happiness Specified, and the First of Them Developed (London: 1851), p. 416.

continental Europe, Latin America, and even the United States: Largent, Mark A. “‘The Greatest Curse of the Race’: Eugenic Sterilization in Oregon, 1909-1983.” Oregon Historical Quarterly, vol. 103, no. 2, 2002, pp. 188–209, pp. 188–189.

leading to the sterilization of 3.5 million persons: Suter, Sonia M. “A Brave New World of Designer Babies?” Berkeley Technology Law Journal, vol. 22, no. 2, 2007, pp. 897–969, pp. 901–902.

through mass murder and the Holocaust: See, e.g., Ibid., p. 902; Hitler, Adolf. Mein Kampf, Manheim, Ralph, translator (Boston: 1971 [originally published 1927]), pp. 284–287.

surrounded by the darkness of prior and subsequent history: For more sources regarding this First Principle, review North, John. “Politics and Aristocracy in the Roman Republic.” Classical Philology, vol. 85, no. 4, 1990, pp. 277–87; Millar, Fergus. “The Political Character of the Classical Roman Republic, 200-151 B.C.” The Journal of Roman Studies, vol. 74, 1984, pp. 1–19; Hall, Ursula. “Voting Procedure in Roman Assemblies.” Historia: Zeitschrift Für Alte Geschichte, vol. 13, no. 3, 1964, pp. 267–306; Moore, Clifford Herschel. “Individualism and Religion in the Early Roman Empire.” The Harvard Theological Review, vol. 2, no. 2, 1909, pp. 221–34; Lind, L. R. “Concept, Action, and Character: The Reasons for Rome’s Greatness.” Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, vol. 103, 1972, pp. 235–83; Syme, Ronald. “Human Rights and Social Status in Ancient Rome.” The Classical Outlook, vol. 64, no. 2, 1986, pp. 37–41; Kia, Mehrdad. The Persian Empire: A Historical Encyclopedia [2 Volumes,] (Santa Barbara: 2016), pp. 47, 56, 63, 114, 133; Schmitt, R. “Achaemenid Dynasty.” Encyclopædia Iranica, vol. I, fasc. 4, pp. 414–426; The Cambridge Ancient History Vol. IV: The Persian Empire and the West, Bury, J. B., S. A. Cook and F. E. Adcock, eds. (New York: 1926); Kia, Mehrdad. The Persian Empire: A Historical Encyclopedia [2 Volumes,] (Santa Barbara: 2016); Olmstead, A. T., History of the Persian Empire (Chicago: 2022).

acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety: Pennsylvania Declaration of Rights, Section 1 (August 16, 1776).

Ancient archeological research proves this beyond a doubt: See, e.g., Walker, Phillip L. “A Bioarchaeological Perspective on the History of Violence.” Annual Review of Anthropology, vol. 30, 2001, pp. 573–96, p. 573 (“Traumatic injuries in ancient human skeletal remains are a direct source of evidence for testing theorizers of warfare and violence that are not subject to the interpretative difficulties posed by literal creations such as historical records and ethnographic reports. Bioarchaeological research shows that throughout the history of our species, interpersonal violence, especially among men, has been prevalent. Cannibalism seems to have been widespread, and mass killings, homicides, and assault injuries are also well documented in both the Old and New Worlds. No form of social organization, mode of production, or environmental setting appears to have remained free from interpersonal violence for long”); Meyer, Christian, et al. “The Massacre Mass Grave of Schöneck-Kilianstädten Reveals New Insights into Collective Violence in Early Neolithic Central Europe.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 112, no. 36, 2015, pp. 11217–11222, p. 11217 (“The new evidence presented here for unequivocal lethal violence on a large scale is put into perspective for the Early Neolithic of Central Europe and, in conjunction with previous results, indicates that massacres of entire communities were not isolated occurrences but rather were frequent features of the last phases of the” Early Neolithic Linearbandkeramik Culture); Bingham, Paul M. “Human Uniqueness: A General Theory.” The Quarterly Review of Biology, vol. 74, no. 2, 1999, pp. 133–69 (reviewing human on human violence as a means to coordinate societal efforts); Knauft, Bruce M., et al. “Violence and Sociality in Human Evolution [and Comments and Replies].” Current Anthropology, vol. 32, no. 4, 1991, pp. 391–428, p. 391 (evaluating, among other things, “[p]atterns of violence and sociality found among simple human societies” and “the causes of severe violence commonly educed for middle-range societies—political status competition, resource or population pressure, territorial disputes, and the existence of fraternal interest groups”).

genocide, politicide [politically motivated killing], and mass murder: Rummel, R. J. Death by Government (New Brunswick: New Jersey: 1994). Online update: https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/DBG.CHAP2.HTM. Accessed March 20, 2025.

over seventy-six million exterminated by Communist China: Ibid.

corpses rolled past them down the pyramid steps as they climbed toward their fate: Pennock, Caroline Dodds. “Mass Murder or Religious Homicide? Rethinking Human Sacrifice and Interpersonal Violence in Aztec Society.” Historical Social Research/Historische Sozialforschung, vol. 37, no. 3 (141), 2012, pp. 276–302, p. 288.

National Institute of Anthropology and History confirm the reports of the conquistadors: Wade, Lizzie. “Feeding the Gods: Hundreds of skulls reveal massive scale of human sacrifice in Aztec capital.” Science Magazine, June 21, 2018.

just perhaps the most robust and vivid in their practices: Harner, Michael. “The Ecological Basis for Aztec Sacrifice.” American Ethnologist, vol. 4, no. 1, 1977, pp. 117–35, p. 119; Graulich, Michel. “Miccailhuitl: The Aztec Festivals of the Deceased.” Numen, vol. 36, no. 1, 1989, pp. 43–71; Carrasco, Davíd. “Cosmic Jaws: We Eat the Gods and the Gods Eat Us.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion, vol. 63, no. 3, 1995, pp. 429–463; Carrasco, Davíd. “Give Me Some Skin: The Charisma of the Aztec Warrior.” History of Religions, vol. 35, no. 1, 1995, pp. 1–26; Moser, Christopher L. “Human Decapitation in Ancient Mesomerica.” Studies in Pre-Columbian Art and Archaeology, no. 11, 1973, pp. 1–72.

Parents who resisted cannibalism died before their children did: Synder, Timothy. Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin (New York: 2010), pp. 50–51.

for the preservation of his own nature; that is to say, of his own life: Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan: Or the Matter, Forme and Power of a Commonwealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil, Oakeshott, Michael, ed. (New York: 1962 [originally published 1651]), p. 103.

by murdering one of His creations: Locke, John. Second Treatise of Civil Government (Chicago: 1971 [originally published 1689]), p. 6. Locke more fully explains his understanding:

For man being all the workmanship of one omnipotent and infinitely wise Maker —all the servants of one sovereign Master, sent into the world by His order and about His business—they are His property, whose workmanship they are, made to last during His, not one another’s pleasure; and being furnished with like faculties, sharing all in one community of nature, there cannot be supposed any subordination among us, that may authorize us to destroy one another, as if we were made for one another’s uses, as the inferior ranks of creatures for ours. Everyone, as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his station willfully, so, by the like reason, when his own preservation comes not in competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of mankind, and not, unless it be to do justice of an offender, take away or impart the life, the liberty, health, limb, or goods of another.

Ibid., p. 6.

impair the life, […] the liberty, health, limb, or goods of another: Ibid.

vested by the laws of Nature and Nature’s God: Locke expands:

This freedom from absolute arbitrary power is so necessary to, and closely joined with, a man’s preservation, that he cannot part with it but by what forgets his preservation and life together. For a man not having the power of his own life cannot by compact, or his own consent, enslave himself to anyone, nor put himself under the absolute arbitrary power of another to take away his life when he pleases. Nobody can give more power than he has himself; and he that cannot take away his own life, cannot give another power over it.

Ibid.

preservation of their lives, liberties, and […] property: Locke, John. Second Treatise of Civil Government (Chicago: 1955 (originally published 1689)), p. 102; Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan: Or the Matter, Forme and Power of a Commonwealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil, Oakeshott, Michael, ed. (New York: 1962 [first published 1651]), p. 105 (“the motive, and end, for which this renouncing [of the unalienable right of self-defense] is introduced, is nothing else but the security of a man’s person, in his life, and in the means of so preserving his life, as not be weary of it”).

duty bound and accountable to God to protect the people under its care: Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan: Or the Matter, Forme and Power of a Commonwealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil, Oakeshott, Michael, ed. (New York: 1962 [originally published 1651]), p. 247 (“The procuration of the good of the people. The office of the sovereign, be it a monarch or an assembly, consistent in the need, for which it was trusted with the sovereign power, namely the procuration of the safety of the people; to which he is obliged by the law of nature, and to render an account thereof to God, the author of that law, and to none by him” [emphasis in original]).

violence to one another’s person, by private revenges: Ibid., p. 252.

a right inherent by nature in every individual: Blackstone, Sir William. Commentaries on the Laws of England in Four Books, Vol. I (Philadelphia: 1893), p. 126.

enjoying and defending of life and liberty: Declaration of Rights, Section 1, Pennsylvania Constitution (1776).

every degree of actual violence, and in some cases, from every degree of danger: Wilson, James. Lectures on Law, Chapter XII, On the Natural Rights of Individuals (Philadelphia: 1790–1791), in The Works of James Wilson, Being His Public Discourses upon Jurisprudence and the Political Science, Including Lectures as Professor of Law 1790-92 Vol. II, Andrews, James Dewitte, ed. (Chicago: 1896), pp. 315, 216.

Give me liberty or give me death!: Henry, Patrick. “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death!” March 23, 1775, in Wirt, William. Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry Ninth Edition (Philadelphia: 1836), p. 138.

did not even possess a word for the concept before contact with the West: Patterson, Orlando. Freedom, Freedom in the Making of Western Culture, Vol. I (New York: 1990), p. 10.

the king controls all: Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (Princeton: 1969), Pritchard, J. B., ed., texts 160–180, cited in Fischer, David Hackett. Liberty and Freedom, A Visual History of America’s Founding Ideals (New York: 2005), p. 4.

whatever the majority approve must be the end and the just: Aristotle. Aristotle’s Politics (circa 350 B.C.), in Jowett, Benjamin, translator, and Davis, H. W. C., introduction, analysis and index (Oxford, United Kingdom: 1908), p. 239.

no groups (political parties, associations, trade unions, social classes) outside the state: Mussolini, Benito (in collaboration with Giovanni Gentile). Foundations and Doctrine of Fascism (originally published in Enciclopedia italiana [1932]), quoted in A Primer of Italian Fascism, Schnapp, Jeffrey T. Ed., ed. and introduction and Schnapp, Jeffrey T., Olivia E. Sears, and Maria G. Stampino, translators (Lincoln, Nebraska: 2000), pp. 48–49 (footnotes omitted).

This is so compelling that the Nazis borrow it: Prior to World War II, Americans use a very similar salute, dubbed the Bellamy Salute, during the Pledge of Allegiance. The salute switches to a hand over your heart during World War II to distance America from our Axis enemies. See, e.g., Ellis, Richard J. To the Flag, The Unlikely History of the Pledge of Allegiance (Lawrence, Kansas: 2004).

live one day as a lion than 100 years as a sheep: Brittanica. “History of Italy.” https://www.britannica.com/place/Italy/The-end-of-constitutional-rule. Accessed March 21, 2025. For more on Mussolini’s regime, see Melograni, Piero. “The Cult of the Duce in Mussolini’s Italy.” Journal of Contemporary History, vol. 11, no. 4, 1976, pp. 221–237, p. 224.

terror, indoctrination, and the provision of services to those who obey: United Nations. Rule of Terror: Living under ISIS in Syria, Report of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic. Human Rights Council, Twenty-Seventh Session, Agenda Item 4 (New York: 2014), A/HRC/27/CRP.3.

all religions who agree with democracy have to die: Jürgen Todenhöfer, in Withall, Adam. Isis: “The first Western journalist ever to be given access to the ‘Islamic State’ has just returned – and this is what he discovered.” The Guardian, December 21, 2014, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/inside-isis-the-first-western-journalist-ever-given-access-to-the-islamic-state-has-just-returned-and-this-is-what-he-discovered-9938438.html. Accessed September 16, 2025.

including killing “all religions who agree with democracy have to die” of people: Todenhöfer, Jürgen. My Journey into the Heart of Terror, Ten Days in the Islamic State, May, A. O., translator (Vancouver: 2016), p. 199.

they set a marker for liberty that eventually expands for all: Parliament. Magna Carta of 1215, in Sources of Our Liberties, Documentary Origins of Individual Liberties in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, Perry, Richard L., ed. (Rahway, New Jersey: 1960), pp. 1–22.

stop any future violations of those rights: Parliament. Petition of Right of 1628, in Sources of Our Liberties, Documentary Origins of Individual Liberties in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, Perry, Richard L., ed. (Rahway, New Jersey: 1960), pp. 62-75.

nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted: Parliament. Bill of Rights of 1689, in Sources of Our Liberties, Documentary Origins of Individual Liberties in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, Perry, Richard L., ed. (Rahway, New Jersey: 1960), pp. 222–250.

but slightly felt the inconveniences of subordination: Ramsay, David. The History of the American Revolution, In Two Volumes, Vol. I (Dublin: 1793), p. 17.

Among these natural rights is liberty: Thomas Hobbes explains (elaborating on a passage previously quoted):

The right of nature, which writers commonly call jus naturale [Natural Law], is the liberty each man hath, to use his own power, as he will himself, for the preservation of his own nature; that is to say, of his own life; and consequently, of doing anything, which in his own judgment, and reason, he shall conceive to be the aptest means thereunto.

Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan: Or the Matter, Forme and Power of a Commonwealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil, Oakeshott, Michael, ed. (New York: 1962 (first published 1651)), p. 103.

and reason shall dictate to him: Ibid.

do unto others as you would have them do unto you: This ethic is promulgated by Jesus: “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.” Matthew 7:12, Holy Bible, King James Version, Red Letter Edition, Dictionary/Concordance (Nashville, Tennessee: 1971), p. 421. Shabbat 31a of the Jewish Talmud has a parallel teaching: “What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. This is the whole Torah; all the rest is commentary.” The William Davidson Talmud, Teinsaltz, Rabbi, translator Adin Even-Israel S. translation, Babylonian Talmud. https://www.sefaria.org/Shabbat.31a.1?lang=bi. Accessed March 21, 2025. Similar sentiments are expressed in many of the world’s religions.

so long as you do not interfere with the rights of others: Hobbes elaborates on the second law of Nature:

that man be willing, when others are so too, as far-forth, as for peace, and defense of himself he shall it necessary, to lay down this right to do all things; and be contented with so much liberty against other men, as he would allow other men against himself. For so long as every man hold this right, of doing anything he lives; so long are all men in the condition of war. But if other men will not lay down right, as well as he; then there is no reason for anyone, to divest himself of his: for that were to expose himself to prey, which no man is bound to, rather to dispose himself to peace. This is that law of the Gospel; whatsoever you require that others should do to you that do ye to them. And that law of all men, quod tiki fire non vis, alter ne feceri [“Do not do to others what you would not have them do to you.”]

Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan: Or the Matter, Forme and Power of a Commonwealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil, Oakeshott, Michael, ed. (New York: 1962 [first published 1651]), p. 104.

is not hindered to do what he has a will to: Ibid., p. 159.

Natural Law vests in each person the right to liberty: “To understand political power aright, and derive it from its original, we must consider what state of all men are naturally in, and that is a state of perfect freedom in order their actions and dispose of their possessions and persons as they think fit, within bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave, or depending upon the will of any other man.” Locke, John. Second Treatise of Civil Government (Chicago: 1971 [originally published 1689]), p. 4.

so long as the exercise of that liberty does not harm another: Locke elaborates:

The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges everyone; and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind who will but consult it, that, being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions. For men being all the workmanship of one omnipotent and infinitely wise Maker— all servants of one sovereign Master, sent into the world by His order, and about His business—they are His property, whose workmanship they are made to last during His, not one another’s pleasure; and being furnished with his faculties, sharing in one community of nature, there cannot be supposed any such subordination among us, that may authorize us to destroy one another, as if we were made for one another’s uses, as the inferior ranks of creatures are for ours. Everyone, as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his station willfully, so, by the like reason, when his own preservation comes not in competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of mankind, and not, ones it be to do justice on an offender, take away or impart the life, or what tends to the preservation of the life, the liberty, health, limb or goods of another.

Ibid., p. 6.

However, this is not to say that the Founding Fathers are all libertarians as we understand that term today. Although Jefferson and Paine have libertarian streaks, no Founder advocates for the legalization of all controlled substances, gambling, fornication (out-of-wedlock sexual relations), abortion, prostitution, or same-sex marriage (to use just a few obvious examples). At the time of the Founding, the regulation of such behavior is universal. Because such behaviors are considered immoral and undermine the common good and the general welfare, their regulation is unchallenged.

the right of personal freedom: Jefferson, Thomas. “Thomas Jefferson to David Humphreys, March 18, 1789,” in The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 14, 8 October 1788 – 26 March 1789, Boyd, Julian P., ed. (Princeton: 1958), pp. 676–679.

they braved all dangers and all hardships: Baldwin, Simeon. “Oration at New Haven, July 4, 1788,” in The Debate on the Constitution, Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles and Letters During the Struggle Over Ratification, Part Two, Bailyn, Bernard, ed. (New York: 1993), p. 514.

but what that legislative shall enact, according to the trust put in it: Locke, John. Second Treatise of Civil Government (Chicago: 1971 [originally published 1689]), p. 18.

which I call by the general name, property: Locke, John. Second Treatise of Civil Government (Chicago: 1971 [originally published 1689]), p. 102. For Hobbes, see Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan: Or the Matter, Forme and Power of a Commonwealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil, Oakeshott, Michael, ed. (New York: 1962 [first published 1651]), p. 105 (“the motive, and end, for which this renouncing [of the unalienable right of self-defense] is introduced, is nothing else but the security of a man’s person, in his life, and in the means of so preserving his life, as not be weary of it”).

when it violates the right of an individual: Jefferson, Thomas. “Thomas Jefferson to Isaac H. Tiffany, 4 April 1819,” in The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Retirement Series, Vol. 14, 1 February to 31 August 1819, Looney, J. Jefferson, ed. (Princeton: 2017), pp. 201–202.

public liberty must be preserved though at the expense of many lives: Adams, Samuel. “Samuel Adams to Arthur Lee, March 4, 1775,” in The Writings of Samuel Adams Vol. III, 1773–1777, Cushing, Harry A., ed. (New York: 1907), p. 195.

Remember that a Warren: Dr. Joseph Warren is slain at the Battle of Bunker Hill. He is a critical Son of Liberty in Boston agitating and organizing resistance to British oppression. His orations are unmatched for passion and inspiration. Among other things, he writes the Suffolk Resolves which are later adopted by the Continental Congress, attacking British oppression as tyrannical and justifying stiff opposition to the same. On April 18, 1775, he dispatches Paul Revere and William Dawes on their famous midnight ride to warn the countryside (and particularly John Hancock and Samuel Adams) that the British are coming. The next day he coordinates militia fighting in the Battles of Concord and Lexington—where he is almost slain. He serves as the President of the revolutionary Massachusetts Provincial Congress and is made a major general a few days before the Battle of Bunker Hill. He refuses command and takes his place as an infantryman, meeting his fate and glory. See, e.g., Forman, Samuel A. Dr. Joseph Warren, The Boston Tea Party, Bunker Hill, and the Birth of American Liberty (Gretna, Louisiana: 2012); Frothingham, Richard. The Life and Times of Joseph Warren (Boston: 1865).

and Montgomery: Major General Richard Montgomery is slain at the Battle of Quebec on New Year’s Eve, 1776 while leading (literally at the front) American forces during an ill-fated attempt to capture Quebec City. An Irishman, he serves in the British Royal Army during the French and Indian War in several diverse theaters, including Canada, New York, Cuba, and Martinique. He becomes alienated from the British because of increasing British oppression and the failure of the British Royal Army to consider him for a promotion. He leaves the British Royal Army in 1772 and settles on a farm north of New York City. Although he does not run for the office, he is elected to the revolutionary New York Provincial Congress and appointed a brigadier general of the Continental Army on June 25, 1775. See, e.g., Montgomery, Janet. Biographical Notes Concerning General Richard Montgomery together with hitherto Unpublished Letters and Manuscripts (Poughkeepsie, New York: 1876).

may posterity forget that you were our countrymen: Adams, Samuel. An Oration Delivered at the State-House in Philadelphia to A Very Numerous Audience on Thursday the 1st of August 1776 (Philadelphia: 1776), pp. 21–22.

but as for me…give me liberty or give me death!: Henry, Patrick. “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death!” March 23, 1775, in Wirt, William. Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry Ninth Edition (Philadelphia: 1836), pp. 141–142.

the auditory of which I was one: Tucker, St. George, in Tyler, Moses Coit. American Statesmen, Patrick Henry, Morse, Jr., John T., ed. (Boston: 1894), p. 144.

shout of the leader which turns back the rout of battle: Randall, Henry Stephens, in Tyler, Moses Coit. American Statesmen, Patrick Henry, Morse, Jr., John T., ed. (Boston: 1894), p. 146.

give us that precious jewel, and you may take every thing [sic] else!: Henry, Patrick. “Speech to the Virginia Convention, Richmond, Virginia,” June 5, 1788, in The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution Vol. 3, Elliot, Jonathan, ed. (New York: 1836, reprinted 1937), p. 45.

were often American soldiers of African ancestry: Fischer, David Hackett. African Founders, How Enslaved People Expanded American Ideals (New York: 2022), pp. 80-81.

To remedy this evil will be a work of time.—God be thanks it is already begun: Baldwin, Simeon. “Oration at New Haven,” July 4, 1788, in The Debate on the Constitution, Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles and Letters During the Struggle Over Ratification, Part Two, Bailyn, Bernard, ed. (New York: 1993), pp. 524–525.

I have adventured my life in endeavouring to obtain the liberty of my countrymen, and am willing to sacrifice to their cause: Sutcliff, Robert. Travels Through Some Parts of North America, in the Years 1804, 1805, and 1806 (Philadelphia: 1812), p. 50.

may appear necessary to promote their safety and happiness: Preamble, Constitution of Vermont (July 8, 1777).

the truth of this observation will become unassailable: For more sources on this First Principle, review Fischer, David Hackett. Liberty and Freedom, A Visual History of America’s Founding Ideals (New York: 2005), pp. 19–20 and p. 4 citing Wirszubski, C. H. Libertas as a Political Idea at Rome During the Late Republic and Early Principate (Cambridge, United Kingdom: 1950), pp. 1–20; Bosworth, R. J. B. Mussolini’s Italy: Life Under the Fascist Dictatorship, 1915–1945 (New York: 2005), pp. 212–246; Hausheer, Herman. “Fascism in Italy.” Social Science, vol. 8, no. 4, 1933, pp. 391–411; Kallis, Aristotle. “Roma Rediviva: The Uses of Romanità in Fascist-Era Urbanism,” in Rome and the Colonial City: Rethinking the Grid, Greaves, Sofia and Andrew Wallace-Hadrill, eds. (Barnsley, United Kingdom: 2022), pp. 389–412; Melograni, Piero. “The Cult of the Duce in Mussolini’s Italy.” Journal of Contemporary History, vol. 11, no. 4, 1976, pp. 221–237, pp. 229–231; Haanæs, Øystein Rygg. “Using language as a weapon: How Mussolini used Latin to link fascism to the mighty Roman Empire.” University of Oslo (July 3, 2019), https://www.hf.uio.no/ifikk/english/research/news-and-events/news/2019/using-language-as-a-weapon-how-mussolini-used-lati.html. Accessed November 5, 2024; Giardina, Andrea. “The Fascist Myth of Romanity.” Estudos Avançados 22 (62) (2008), p. 5876, https://www.scielo.br/j/ea/a/hbxLPbBs8gz5PGWcprsCY8d/?format=pdf&lang=en. Accessed November 5, 2024; Liberati, Paola. “How Fascism Changed the Italian Language.” Babbel Magazine, July 8, 2022, https://www.babbel.com/en/magazine/italian-language-and-fascism. Accessed November 5, 2024; Flavia Marcello, and Paul Gwynne. “Speaking from the Walls: Militarism, Education, and Romanità in Rome’s Città Universitaria (1932–35).” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, vol. 74, no. 3, 2015, pp. 323–43, p. 338; Courtois, Stéphane, Nicolas Werth, Jean-Louis Panné, Andrzej Paczkowski, Karel Bartošek, and Jean-Louis Margonin. The Black Book of Communism, Crimes, Terror, Repression, Murphy, Jonathan and Mark Kramer, translators, and Kramer, Mark, ed. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: 1999), pp. 583–635; United Nations. Rule of Terror: Living under ISIS in Syria, Report of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic. Human Rights Council, Twenty-Seventh Session, Agenda Item 4 (New York: 2014), A/HRC/27/CRP.3; Hamid, Shadi. “Order from Chaos, What America Never Understood About ISIS.” The Brookings Institute, November 1, 2019. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-america-never-understood-about-isis/. Accessed March 21, 2025; Fischer, David Hackett. African Founders, How Enslaved People Expanded American Ideals (New York: 2022), pp. 79–81, 793.

and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety: Virginia Declaration of Rights (June 12, 1776), Section 1.

Jefferson swapped out the word “property” with the phrase “pursuit of happiness”: See, e.g., Brook, Daniel. “The Pursuit of Happiness.” The Huffington Post, July 4, 2007. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-pursuit-of-happiness_b_54827. Accessed March 21, 2025 (“The eighteenth-century British political philosopher John Locke wrote that governments are instituted to secure people’s rights to ‘life, liberty, and property.’ And in 1776, Thomas Jefferson begged to differ. When he penned the Declaration of Independence, ratified on the Fourth of July, he edited out Locke’s right to ‘property’ and substituted his own more broad-minded, distinctly American concept: the right to ‘the pursuit of happiness’); “The Declaration of Independence and Natural Rights, Thomas Jefferson, drawing on the current thinking of his time, used natural rights ideas to justify declaring independence from England.” Teach Democracy. https://teachdemocracy.org/online-lessons/foundations-of-our-constitution/natural-rights. Accessed March 21, 2025. (“Most scholars today believe that Jefferson derived the most famous ideas in the Declaration of Independence from the writings of English philosopher John Locke. Locke wrote his Second Treatise of Government in 1689 at the time of England’s Glorious Revolution, which overthrew the rule of James II”); Hamilton, Carol V. “Why Did Jefferson Change ‘Property’ to the ‘Pursuit of Happiness’?” History News Network, January 27, 2008, https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/why-did-jefferson-change-property-to-the-pursuit-o. Accessed March 21, 2025 (“Conventional history and popular wisdom attribute the phrase to the genius of Thomas Jefferson when in an imaginative leap, he replaced the third term of John Locke’s trinity, ‘life, liberty, and property.’ It was a felicitous, even thrilling, substitution. Yet the true history and philosophical meaning of the famous phrase are apparently unknown”).

the resulting product or service is also property that should be protected: Locke, John. Second Treatise of Civil Government (Chicago: 1971 [originally published 1689]), p. 68.

the “chief end” of government “is the preservation of property.”: Ibid., p. 67 (“society, the chief end whereof is the preservation of property”). See also ibid. at 102 (“The great and chief end, therefore, of men’s uniting into commonwealths, and putting themselves under government, is the preservation of their property; to which in the state of nature there are many things wanting”).

government has no other end but the preservation of property: Ibid., p. 76.

“A constant determination to a pursuit of happiness, no abridgment of liberty”: Locke, John. An Essay Concerning Humane Understanding in Four Books, Fourth Edition, with Large Additions (London: 1700 (originally published 1690)), p. 142 (emphasis in original).

is the necessary foundation of our liberty: Ibid.

is our greatest good: Ibid.

you bend self-love into the social direction: Home, Henry. Essays on the Principles of Morality and Natural Religion in Two Parts (Edinburgh: 1751), p. 390.

Jefferson borrows Kames’s phrase for the Declaration of Independence: See, e.g., Eicholz, Hans. “American Liberty and the ‘Pursuit of Happiness.’” Law & Liberty, February 19, 2014, https://lawliberty.org/american-liberty-and-the-pursuit-of-happiness/. Accessed March 21, 2025.

our desires pursuing happiness and eschewing misery: Hutcheson, Francis. A Short Introduction to Moral Philosophy, In Three Books; Containing the Elements of Ethics, and the Law of Nature (Glasgow, 1747), p. 4 (footnote omitted).

from the ancient Greeks and Romans, as well as those who follow them: Rosen, Jeffrey. The Pursuit of Happiness, How Classical Writers on Virtue Inspired the Lives of the Founders and Defined America (New York: 2024). Rosen’s work is a comprehensive guide to this passage.

Socrates, Epictetus, Epicurus, Marcus Aurelius, Seneca, Plutarch, Cicero, and similar thinkers: Ibid., passim.

other Founders are well stocked with these sources: Ibid., passim.

until the chosen families were brought in safety to these western regions: Warren, Joseph. An Oration; Delivered March Sixth, 1775. At the Request of the Inhabitants of the Town of Boston; to Commemorate the Bloody Tragedy of the Fifth of March, 1770 (Newport, Rhode Island: 1775), pp. 6–7.

under his own vine, and under his own fig tree, and had none to make him afraid: Ibid., p. 10.

certain obligations of mankind therefore follow: Shute, Daniel. “An Election Sermon,” May 26, 1768, in American Political Writing During the Founding Era, 1760–1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis, 1983), pp. 110, 111.

studiously devised, and faithfully urged by them: Ibid., p. 119.

he cannot justly be deprived of it by any civil authority: Bland, Richard. An Inquiry into the Rights of the British Colonies, May 26, 1768, in American Political Writing During the Founding Era, 1760-1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis, 1983), p. 110 (footnote omitted).

happiness[,] to the greatest number of persons and in the greatest degree is the best: Adams, John. Thoughts on Government, Applicable to the Present State of the American Colonies, In a Letter from a Gentleman to His Friend (1776), in The Political Writings of John Adams, Representative Selections, Peek, Jr., George A., ed. (New York: 1954), p. 85.

do whatever they want to with their money, body, and soul: For example, chairman of the Libertarian Party Nicholas Sarwark remarks: “We are the only political party that stands for your right to pursue happiness in any way you choose as long as you don’t hurt anyone else and as long as you don’t take their stuff.” Kamisar, Ben. “5 Things the Libertarian Party Stands For.” The Hill, May 27, 2017. https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/281399-5-things-the-libertarian-party-stands-for/ accessed March 21, 2025.

obliged to suspend the satisfaction of our desire in particular cases: Locke, John. An Essay Concerning Humane Understanding in Four Books, Fourth Edition, with Large Additions (London: 1700 (originally published 1690)), p. 142.

happiness shall be inseparable from the practice of virtue: Jefferson, Thomas. “Thomas Jefferson to José Corrêa da Serra, 19 April 1814,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/03-07-02-0216,. Accessed September 18, 2025. [Original source: The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Retirement Series, Vol. 7, 28 November 1813 to 30 September 1814, Looney, J. Jefferson, ed. (Princeton: 2018), pp. 301–302.]

virtue [is] the foundation of happiness: Jefferson, Thomas. “Thomas Jefferson to William Short, October 31, 1819, in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 1433.

1. Folly. 2. Desire. 3. Fear. 4. Deceit: Ibid.

in comparison with which all sensual pleasures appear despicable: Hutcheson, Francis. A Short Introduction to Moral Philosophy, In Three Books; Containing the Elements of Ethics, and the Law of Nature (Glasgow, 1747), p. 52.

an indissoluble union between virtue and happiness: Washington, George. First Inaugural Address (April 30, 1789), in George Washington, A Collection, Allen, W. B., ed. (Indianapolis: 1988), p. 462.

make him justly deserve to be esteemed the glory of his country: Franklin, Benjamin. “The Busy-Body, No. 3,” The American Weekly Mercury, February 18, 1728/9, in Writings (New York: 1987), p. 97.

truly great man that was not also at the same time truly virtuous: Ibid., p. 98.

in his power to do what is right in his own eyes: Zubley, Joachim. The Law of Liberty. A Sermon on American Affairs Preached at the Opening of the Provincial Congress of Georgia, Addressed to the Right and Honorable The Earl of Dartmouth, with an Appendix, Giving a Concise Account of the Struggles of Switzerland to Recover their Liberty (Philadelphia: 1775), p. 26.

as the most despotic government: Howard, Simeon. “A Sermon Preached to the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company in Boston,” 1773, in American Political Writing during the Founding Era, 1760-1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis: 1983), p. 196.

willpower to band together to repulse an invading force: Ibid.

first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen: Lee, Henry. Funeral Oration on the Death of General Washington, Delivered at the Request of Congress by Major-General Henry Lee, Member of Congress from Virginia (Boston: circa 1800 [delivered December 26, 1799]), p. 15.

the bad government of rulers: Lee, Henry. “Remarks at Virginia Ratifying Convention,” June 9, 1788, in The Debate on the Constitution, Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles and Letters During the Struggle Over Ratification Part Two, Bailyn, Bernard, ed. (New York: 1993), p. 646.

to undermine the very foundations of a free society.: Lincoln, Abraham. “Speech at New Haven, Connecticut,” March 6, 1860, in Lincoln, Speeches and Writings 1859-1865 (New York: 1989), pp. 135.

no fixed condition of labor, for his whole life: Ibid., p. 144.

finally hire men to work for him!: Ibid., p. 144.

steadily enlarged and their severity increased: Hepple, Alex H. South Africa: Workers Under Apartheid, Second Edition, An International Defense and Air Fund Pamphlet (London: July 1971), p. 6.

recreation, politics, sexual relationships): Gradin, Carlos. “Occupational Segregation by Race in South Africa after Apartheid.” Review of Development, September 19, 2018 (citations omitted).

African majority is pegged to poverty and servitude: Hepple, Alex H. South Africa: Workers Under Apartheid, Second Edition, An International Defense and Air Fund Pamphlet (London: July 1971), p. 7.

ascends to power after the death of his father: Aoki, Naoko. “Korea’s Third Kim: Will Anything Change?” World Affairs, vol. 174, no. 6, 2012, pp. 15–20; Kuznar, Lawrence. “The Language of Dynasty: Quantitative Discourse Analysis of Kim Il-Sung, Kim Jong-Il, and Kim Jong-Un, 1930–2020.” North Korean Review, vol. 19, no. 1, 2023, pp. 22–41.

subjected to intensive surveillance for the remainder of their lives: Collins, Robert. Marked for Life: Songbun, North Korea’s Social Classification System (Washington, D.C.: 2012), p. 13. See also pp. 14–15, 117.

all it takes is a political crime as determined by the state: Doom, Kim Kathryn Angstro. “The Government Facilitation of North Korea’s Human Rights Abuses Eclipsed by the Threat of Nuclear War,” Bard, Senior Projects (2015), Senior Projects Fall 2015. 37, p. 72, https://digitalcommons.bard.edu/senproj_f2015/37. Accessed September 18, 2025.

And the pursuit of happiness? Nonexistent: See, e.g., Park, Yeonmi with Maryanne Vollers. In Order to Live, A North Korean Girl’s Journey to Freedom (New York: 2016); Natsios, Andrew S. The Great North Korea Famine, Famine, Politics and Foreign Policy (Washington, D.C.: 2001); Cha, Victor. The Impossible State, North Korea, Past and Future (Ecco, New York: 2013); Kim, Joseph with Stephen Talty. Under the Same Sky: From Starvation in North Korea to Salvation in America (Boston: 2015).

unsuccessful third-term candidate for president: See, e.g., Dalton, Kathleen. Theodore Roosevelt, A Strenuous Life (New York: 2004).

Our only safe motto is “All men up” and not “Some men down.”: Roosevelt, Theodore. “Theodore Roosevelt to Julian La Rose Harris, August 1, 1912,” in Theodore Roosevelt, Letters and Speeches (New York: 2004), p. 661.

between rulers and their subjects, and can be no otherwise: Tucker, John. “An Election Sermon,” May 29, 1771, in American Political Writing During the Founding Era 1760–1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis: 1983), p. 162.

might makes right: See Kapur, A. C. Principles of Political Science (New Delhi: 2006 [originally published 1950]), pp. 107–108.

This expression was first recorded in English in about 1327. “Might Makes Right, Idioms and Phrases.” Dictionary.com. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/might-makes-right. Accessed March 22, 2025.

and that this is the honorable and the just: Plato. The Dialogues of Plato, Vol. III, Jowett, B., ed. and translator (New York: 1878), p. 72.

according to the law of nature: Ibid.

the light of natural justice would shine forth: Ibid., pp. 72–73.

since its decisions rest on the very nature of things: Bernhardi, Friedrich von. Germany and the Next War (New York: 1914 [originally published 1912]), pp. 18–19, 23, quoting Heraclitus of Ephesus.

be vested in that person who rules over it: Catherine II. The Grand Instructions to the Commissioners Appointed to Frame a New Code of Laws for the Russian Empire, Composed by Her Imperial Majesty Catherine II, Empress of All the Russias; to which is Prefixed a Description of the Manner of Opening the Commission, with the Order and Rule for Electing the Commissioners, Tatischeff, Michael, translator (London: 1768), p. 71.

(i.e., “from the grace of God”): Rowen, Herbert H. “‘L’Etat c’est a moi’: Louis XIV and the State.” French Historical Studies, vol. 2, no. 1, 1961, pp. 83–98, p. 83.

“The state is me.”: Ibid.

(kings and queens are actually gods themselves): For an example of the ancient Japanese take on this theory, see Kawai, Kazuo. “The Divinity of the Japanese Emperor.” Political Science, vol. 10 no. 2, pp. 3–14.

(which eventually become nations): Barnes, Harry Elmer. “Theories of the Origin of the State in Classical Political Philosophy.” The Monist, vol. 34, no. 1, 1924, pp. 15–62, pp. 26–36.

(governments arise from long-term customs and traditions): See, e.g., Lottholz, Phillipp and Nicolas Lemay-Hebert. “Re-reading Weber, Re-conceptualizing State-Building: from Neo-Weberian to Post-Weberian Approaches to State, Legitimacy and State-Building.” Cambridge Review of International Affairs, vol. 2, no. 4, 2016, pp. 1467–1485.

(the exceptional rise to power): Ibid.

(the government is created to protect the property of the rich): Engels, Frederick. The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State, Untermann, Ernest, translator (Chicago: 1902 [originally published 1884]), p. 130.

(governments form in the East to control water and irrigation): Wittfogel, Karl A. Oriental Despotism, A Comparative Study of Total Power (New Haven, Connecticut: 1967), p. 19.

(to a competency pecking order embodied in the government): Peterson, Jordan B. 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos (Toronto: 2018); Peterson, Jordan B. Beyond Order, 12 More Rules for Life (New York: 2021). Although Dr. Peterson is undoubtedly a strong proponent of free will, his thesis—applied to the formation of government—is driven by biological and sociological necessity.

(which attacks all government as corrupt and oppressive): Goldman, Emma. Anarchism and Other Essays, Anarchism: What it Really Stands For, 3rd Revised Edition (New York: 1917), p. 57.

Utopia is St. Thomas More’s fantasy: In 1516, St. Thomas More publishes the book Libellus vere aureus, nec minus salutaris quam festivus, de optimo rei publicae statu deque nova insula Utopia (“A little, true book, not less beneficial than enjoyable, about how things should be in a state and about the new island Utopia”) which features the paradisiacal island of Utopia. St. Thomas More happens to be my (adult) confirmation saint. I pray he takes no umbrage with this characterization.

And do not forget evil—there is evil: I have seen evil in my courtroom dozens upon dozens of times. Anyone who questions the presence of evil is purposefully blind or ignorant to the realities of life. Or at least should visit my courtroom.

herself, her family, and her property: Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan: Or the Matter, Forme and Power of a Commonwealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil, Oakeshott, Michael, ed. (New York: 1962 [first published 1651]), p. 103.

the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short: Ibid., p. 100.

upon a man’s person, makes a state of war: Locke, John. Second Treatise of Civil Government (Chicago: 1971 [originally published 1689]), pp. 16–17.

where there is no law: Ibid., p. 44.

If men were angels, no government would be necessary: Madison, James. Federalist Paper No. 51 (February 8, 1788), in Madison, James, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay. The Federalist Papers, Kramnick, Issac, ed. (New York: 1987), p. 329.

the dictates of reason and justice without constraint: Hamilton, Alexander. Federalist Paper No. 15 (December 1, 1787), in Madison, James, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay. The Federalist Papers, Kramnick, Issac, ed. (New York: 1987), p. 149.

murderers of mothers, for manslayers […]: 1 Timothy 1:8–9, Holy Bible, King James Version, Red Letter Edition, Dictionary/Concordance (Nashville, Tennessee: 1971), p. 522.

the aggregate of liberty is more in society, than it is in a state of Nature: Wilson, James. “Opening Address to the Pennsylvania Ratifying Convention,” November 26, 1787, in The Debate on the Constitution, Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles and Letters During the Struggle Over Ratification Part One, Bailyn, Bernard, ed. (New York: 1993), p. 797.

must give up a share of liberty to preserve the rest: Washington, George. “From George Washington to the President of Congress, 17 September 1787,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/04-05-02-0306. [Original source: The Papers of George Washington, Confederation Series, Vol. 5, 1 February 1787 – 31 December 1787, Abbot, W. W., ed. (Charlottesville: 1997), pp. 330–333.]

a living experiment of societies created through a compact of the governed: For a modern authority’s analysis of how America became a refuge from political persecution and formed new Social Compacts, see Baseler, Marilyn C. “Asylum for Mankind”: America, 1607–1800 (Ithaca, New York: 1998).

we promise all due submission and obedience: Mayflower Compact (1620), in Sources of Our Liberties, Documentary Origins of Individual Liberties in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, Perry, Richard L., ed. (Rahway, New Jersey: 1960), p. 60.

Man is not immediately corrupted, but power without limitation, or amenability, may endanger the brightest virtue: Warren, Mercy Otis (as “Columbian Patriot”). Observations on the Constitution (Boston: 1788), in The Debate on the Constitution, Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles and Letters During the Struggle Over Ratification, Bailyn, Bernard, ed. (New York: 1993), p. 289.

increase the happiness of the governed above what they could enjoy in an independent and unconnected state of nature: Wilson, James. Considerations on the Legislative Authority of the British Parliament (unpublished draft manuscript, Philadelphia: 1774). Quill Project at Pembroke College (Oxford), https://www.quillproject.net/resources/resource_collections/19. Accessed March 16, 2025.

Nothing done to a man by his own consent can be injury: Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan: Or the Matter, Forme and Power of a Commonwealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil, Oakeshott, Michael, ed. (New York: 1962 [first published 1651]), p. 117.

The community lived and flourished vicariously, through the king: See, e.g., Mumford, Lewis. The Myth of the Machine (Vol. I): Technics and Human Development (New York: 1967), p. 171.

Power is not a means; it is an end: Orwell, George. 1984 (New York: 1961 (originally published 1949)), p. 217.

At bottom, every royal reign was a reign of terror: Mumford, Lewis. The Myth of the Machine (Vol. I): Technics and Human Development (New York: 1967), p. 185.

will as readily produce a Caesar, Caligula, Nero, and Domitian in America, as the same causes did in the Roman empire: Cato. “Cato V.” New York Journal, November 22, 1787, in The Debate on the Constitution, Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles and Letters During the Struggle Over Ratification Part One, Bailyn, Bernard, ed. (New York: 1993), pp. 400–401.

Each of Caesar, Caligula, Nero, and Domitian are infamous Roman tyrants—the latter three engage in notorious bloody reigns of terror.

in which the people govern through majority rule: For an overview of Athens and its government, see Kitto, H. D. F. The Greeks (Harmondsworth, United Kingdom: 1957); Robertson, H. Grant. “Democracy and Oligarchy under the Athenian Empire.” Classical Philology, vol. 28, no. 1, 1933, pp. 50–53; Papachrysostomou, Athina. “Mapping the Athenian Democracy Plutarch on the Political History of Athens.” Classics Ireland, vol. 23–24, 2016, pp. 50–101.

The word democracy—in Greek dēmokratia—is generally understood to be derived from dēmos—which means the village or the entire body of citizens—and kratos—which means rule. Hence, rule of the people. See, e.g., Larsen, J. A. O. “Demokratia.” Classical Philology, vol. 68, no. 1, 1973, pp. 45–46. For an exhaustive and much more nuanced view of the word, see Sealey, Raphael. “The Origins of ‘Demokratia.’” California Studies in Classical Antiquity, vol. 6, 1973, pp. 253–95.

by bringing in new and different divine things (daimonia); he commits an injustice also by corrupting the young: Xenophon. Memorabilia, in Bonnette, Amy L., translator and annotations, and Bruell, Christopher, introduction (Ithaca, New York: 1994), p. 1 (footnotes omitted).

I will not cease from philosophy, and from exhorting you, and declaring the truth: Plato. The Apology, The Trial and Death of Socrates, Being the Euthyphron, Apology, Crito, and Phædo of Plato, translated by Church, F.J. (London: 1886), pp. 59–50.

if he firmly opposes the wishes of the people: Ibid., p. 61.

becomes separated from representation, and the candidates are candidates for despotism: Paine, Thomas. The Rights of Man, Part II (1792), in Paine, Collected Writings, Foner, Eric, ed. (New York: 1955), p. 580.

whatever form the nation wills, it is sufficient that it does will: all forms are good, and its will is always the supreme law: Sieyès, Abbe. What is the third estate? (1789), in Sydenham, M. J. The French Revolution (New York: 1965), p. 33.

enemies of the people: Connelly, Owen. French Revolution/Napoleonic Era (New York: 1979), p. 133.

Government of Terror: Ibid., pp. 135–136.

terror is the order of the day: Palmer, R. R. Twelve Who Ruled, The Year of the Terror in the French Revolution (Princeton: 1969), pp. 52–53.

invests some of these revolutionary agents with “unlimited powers”: Ibid., p. 181.

the dawn of universal felicity gleam before us!: Robespierre, Maximilien. Report on the Principles of Public Morality (February 5, 1794), in Sydenham, M. J. The French Revolution (New York: 1965), pp. 207–208.

“temples of reason”: Herrick, James A. The Making of the New Spirituality (Downers Grove, Illinois: 2004), pp. 75–76 .

an all-powerful king is replaced by the all-powerful National Convention, which in turn is replaced by an all-powerful emperor: For several excellent resources on the French Revolution and Napoleon’s rise to power, see Caryle, Thomas. The French Revolution, A History, Revised Edition (London: 1900); Palmer, R. R. The World of the French Revolution (New York: 1971); Palmer, R. R. Twelve Who Ruled, The Year of the Terror in the French Revolution (Princeton: 1969); Connelly, Owen. French Revolution/Napoleonic Era (New York: 1979); Sydenham, M. J. The French Revolution (New York: 1965); Lawday, David. The Giant of the French Revolution, Danton, A Life (New York: 2009); Schama, Simon. Citizens (New York: 1989); Saint Bris, Gonzague. Lafayette, Hero of the American Revolution, Holoch, George, translator (New York: 2010); McPhee, Peter. Liberty or Death: The French Revolution (New Haven, CT and London: 2016).

as well as individuals, are susceptible of the spirit of tyranny: Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 108.

It is to secure our just rights that we resort to government at all: Jefferson, Thomas. “Thomas Jefferson to François D’Ivernois, February 6, 1795, in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 1024.

here too is the design and end of government, [namely] freedom and security: Paine, Thomas. Common Sense (February 14, 1776), in Paine, Collected Writings, Foner, Eric, ed. (New York: 1955), p. 6–7, 8–9.

[T]he rights of the whole can be no more than the sum of the rights of individuals: Jefferson, Thomas. “Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, September 6, 1789, in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 960.

that they are removed from the reach of fear, the only restraining motive which may hold the hand of a tyrant: Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 108.

they are morally obligated as conducive to their happiness: Shute, Daniel. “An Election Sermon,” May 26, 1768, in American Political Writing During the Founding Era, 1760–1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis, 1983), p. 117.

no rightful power to act beside or counter to this purpose: Ibid, pp. 118.

such natural rights only as we have submitted to them: Jefferson, Thomas. Notes on the State of Virginia (1787), in Jefferson, Thomas. Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 285.

To form a civil constitution otherwise would be to establish inequity by law: Shute, Daniel. “An Election Sermon,” May 26, 1768, in American Political Writing During the Founding Era, 1760-1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis, 1983), p. 118.

and to subject the People to a state of slavery: Tucker, John. “An Election Sermon,” May 29, 1771, in American Political Writing During the Founding Era 1760-1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis: 1983), pp. 162–163.

or do anything contrary to equity and goodness: West, Samuel. “An Election Sermon,” May 29, 1776, in American Political Writing During the Founding Era 1760–1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis: 1983), p. 416.

is the gratification of a brutal appetite: Parsons, Theophilus. The Essex Result (1778), in American Political Writing During the Founding Era 1760–1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis: 1983), p. 484.

against violence actually offered, we have taken up arms: Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10–September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), pp. 153, 157.

to compel me by force to that which is against the right of my freedom, i.e., make me a slave: Locke, John. Second Treatise of Civil Government (Chicago: 1971 [originally published 1689]), pp. 14–15.

place it anew where they shall link best for their safety and security: Ibid., pp. 124–125.

as it must ever be right to obey God rather than men: Shute, Daniel. “An Election Sermon,” May 26, 1768, in American Political Writing During the Founding Era, 1760–1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis, 1983), p. 126.

than by those powers that are ordained of God for the good of mankind. [Italics are in the original]: Ibid.

the most intolerable persecutions and oppressions imaginable: Hitchcock, Gad. “An Election Sermon,” May 25, 1774, in American Political Writing During the Founding Era, 1760–1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis: 1983), p. 290 (cleaned up).

representing him under the horrid character of tyrant: West, Samuel. “An Election Sermon,” May 29, 1776, in American Political Writing During the Founding Era 1760-1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis: 1983), p. 422.

one of the ablest men New England ever produced: American Political Writing during the Founding Era, 1760–1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis: 1983), p. 185.

universally allowed that I need not attempt to prove it: Howard, Simeon. “A Sermon Preached to the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company in Boston,” 1773, in American Political Writing during the Founding Era, 1760–1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis: 1983), p. 185.

to the happiness of others makes this a duty: Ibid., pp. 201–202.

the greatest incendiary in all America: Rawdon, Lord. “Francis, Lord Rawdon to his Uncle, Francis, tenth Earl of Huntingdon, June 20, 1775,” in The Spirit of ‘Seventy-Six: The Story of the American Revolution as Told by Participants, Commager, Henry Steele and Richard B. Morris, eds. (New York: 1975), pp. 130–131.

when the streams of time shall be absorbed in the abyss of eternity: County of Suffolk. The Suffolk Resolves (September 9, 1774), in Supplement to the Massachusetts-Gazette, September 15, 1774.

and assume to themselves all the powers of a free state: West, Samuel. “An Election Sermon,” May 29, 1776, in American Political Writing During the Founding Era 1760–1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis: 1983), p. 420.

the colonies must either submit or triumph: George III. “King George III to Prime Minister Lord North September 11, 1774,” in The Correspondence of King George the Third from 1760 to December 1783, Vol. III, Fortescue, Sir John, ed. (London: 1927–1928), no. 1508, p.131 (original refers to “dye”).

blows must decide whether they are to be subject to this country or independent: George III. “King George III to Lord North, November 18, 1774,” in The Correspondence of King George the Third from 1760 to December 1783, Vol. III, Fortescue, Sir John, ed. (London: 1927–1928), no. 1556, p. 153.

we will not tamely submit; appealing to heaven for the justice of our cause, we determine to die or be free: Warren, Dr. Joseph. Massachusetts Provincial Congress To the Inhabitants of Great Britain (April 26, 1775), in American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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, Vol. II (Washington, D.C.: 1833), p. 488.

necessary for us to close with their last appeal from reason to arms: Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-\–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10–September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), p. 141.

being with one mind resolved to die freemen rather than to live like slaves: Ibid., p. 154.

we bid a final adieu to Britain: Town of Malden. Instructions (May 27, 1776), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), p. 97.

to the last drop of their blood, and the last farthing of their treasure: Ibid., p. 98.

in the course of fifteen years before a drop of blood was drawn at Lexington: Adams, John. “John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, 24 August 1815,” in The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Retirement Series, Vol. 8, 1 October 1814 to 31 August 1815, Looney, J. Jefferson, ed. (Princeton: 2011), pp. 682–684.

destructive of the good and happiness of mankind: Bill of Rights, Article X, New Hampshire Constitution (1784).

when their protection, safety, prosperity and happiness, require it: Preamble and Declaration of Rights, Article VII, Massachusetts Constitution (1780).

Alabama: Alabama Constitution (1819) (original), Article I, Section 2 (“That the general, great, and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and established, We Declare: […] Sec. 2 All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit; and, therefore, they have, at all times an unalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform, or abolish their form of government, in such manner as they may think expedient”); Alabama Constitution (1901) (current), Article 1, Section 2 (“That all political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit; and that, therefore, they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to change their form of government in such manner as they may deem expedient”); Article 1, Section 35 (“Objective of government. That the sole object and only legitimate end of government is to protect the citizen in the enjoyment of life, liberty, and property, and when the government assumes other functions it is usurpation and oppression”).

Arkansas: Arkansas Constitution (1836) (original), Art II, Section 2 (“That the great and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and unalterably established, we declare: […] That all power is inherent in the people; and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness. For the advancement of these ends, they have, at all times an unqualified right to alter reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think proper”).

California: California Constitution (1849) (original), Article I, Section 2 (“All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit of the people; and they have the right to alter or reform the same, whenever the public good may require it”); California Constitution (1879) (current), Article II, Section 20 (same).

Connecticut: Connecticut Constitution (1818) (original), Article 1, Section 2 (“That all political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit; and that they have, at all times, an undeniable and indefeasible right to alter their form of government in such a manner as they may think expedient”); Connecticut Constitution (1965) (current) (same).

Idaho: Idaho Constitution (1890) (original and only), Article 1, Section 2 (Declaration of Rights) (“POLITICAL POWER INHERENT IN THE PEOPLE. All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right to alter, reform or abolish the same whenever they may deem it necessary; and no special privileges or immunities shall ever be granted that may not be altered, revoked, or repealed by the legislature”).

Indiana: Indiana Constitution (1819) (original), Article 1, Section 2 (“That all power is inherent in the people; and all free Governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness. For the advancement of these ends, they have at all times an unalienable and indefeasible right to alter or reform their Government in such manner as they may think proper”); Indiana Constitution (1851) (current), Article 1, Section 1 (“WE DECLARE, That all people are created equal; that they are endowed by their CREATOR with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that all power is inherent in the people; and that all free governments are, and of right ought to be, founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, and well-being. For the advancement of these ends, the people have, at all times, an indefeasible right to alter and reform their government”).

Iowa: Iowa Constitution (1846) (original), Article 1, Section 2 (Bill of Rights) (“All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for the protection, security and benefit of the people; and they have right at all times, to alter or reform the same, whenever the public good require it”); Iowa Constitution (1857) (current) (same).

Kentucky: Kentucky Constitution (1792) (original), Article XII, Section II (“That all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness. For the advancement of these ends, they have at all times an unalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform, or abolish their government, in such manner as they may think proper”); Kentucky Constitution (1799) (same); Kentucky Constitution (1850) (same); Kentucky Constitution (1891) (current) (same).

Maine: Maine Constitution (1820) (original and only), Article 1, Section 2 (“All power is inherent in the people; all free governments are instituted for their benefit; they have therefore an unalienable and indefeasible right to institute government, and to alter, reform, or totally change the same, when their safety and happiness require it”).

Maryland: Maryland Constitution (1864) (third), Declaration of Rights, Article 2 (“That all government of right originates from the people, is founded in compact only, and instituted solely for the good of the whole; and they have at all times, the unalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their form of government, in such manner as they may deem expedient”); Maryland Constitution (1867) (current) (same).

Minnesota: Minnesota Constitution (1857) (original), Article I, Section 1 (“Government is instituted for the security, benefit and protection of the people, in whom all political power is inherent, together with the right to alter, modify or reform Government whenever required by the public good”); Minnesota Constitution (1974) (current) (same).

Mississippi: Mississippi Constitution (1817) (original), Article 1, Section 2 (“That all political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit; and, therefore, they have, at all times, an unalienable and indefeasible right to alter or abolish their form of government, in such manner as they may think expedient”); Mississippi Constitution (1832) (same); Mississippi Constitution (1890) (current) (same).

Missouri: Missouri Constitution (1820) (original), Article XIII, Section 2 (“That the general, great, and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and established, we declare, […] That the people of this state have the inherent, sole, and exclusive right of regulating the internal government and police thereof, and of altering and abolishing their constitution and form of government, whenever it may be necessary to their safety and happiness”); Missouri Constitution (1865) (same); Missouri Constitution (1875) (same); Missouri Constitution (1945) (current) (same).

Montana: Montana Constitution (1889) (original), Article II, Section II (“The people of the state have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves, as a free, sovereign and independent state, and to alter and abolish their constitution and form of government, whenever they may deem it necessary to their safety and happiness, provided such change be not repugnant of the constitution of the United States”); Montana Constitution (1972) (current), Article II, Section II (same).

New Jersey: New Jersey Constitution (1776) (original), Whereas Clause (“Whereas all the constitutional Authority, ever possessed by the Kings of Great Britain over these Colonies, or their other Dominions, was, by Compact, derived from the People, and held of them for the common Interest of the whole Society, Allegiance and Protection are, in the Nature of Things, reciprocal Ties, each equally depending upon the other, and liable to be dissolved by the other’s being refused or withdrawn. And whereas George the third, King of Great Britain, has refused Protection to the good People of these Colonies; and, by assenting to sundry Acts of the British Parliament, attempted to subject them to the absolute Dominion of that Body; and has also made War upon them in the most cruel and unnatural Manner, for no other Cause than asserting their just Rights, all civil Authority under him is necessarily at an End, and a Dissolution of Government in each Colony has consequently taken Place. And whereas in the present deplorable Situation of these Colonies, exposed to the Fury of a cruel and relentless Enemy, some Form of Government is absolutely necessary, not only for the Preservation of good Order, but also the more effectually to unite the People, and enable them to exert their whole Force in their own necessary Defense; and as the Honorable the Continental Congress, the Supreme Council of the American Colonies, has advised such of the Colonies, as have not yet gone into the Measure, to adopt for themselves respectively such Government, as shall best conduce to their own Happiness & Safety, and the Well-Being of America in general; We the Representatives of the Colony of New Jersey, having been elected by all the Counties, in the freest Manner, and in Congress assembled, have, after mature Deliberations, agreed upon a Set of Charter Rights, and the Form of a Constitution, in Manner following, viz.”); New Jersey Constitution (1844), Article 1, Section 2 (“All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit of the people, and they have the right at all times to alter or reform the same, whenever the public good may require it”); New Jersey Constitution (1947) (current) (same).

New York: New York Constitution (1777) (original), Whereas Clause (“Whereas the many tyrannical and oppressive usurpations of the King and Parliament of Great Britain on the rights and liberties of the people of the American colonies had reduced them to the necessity of introducing a government by congresses and committees, as temporary expedients, and to exist no longer than the grievances of the people should remain without redress; And whereas the congress of the colony of New York did, on the thirty-first day of May now last past, resolve as follows, viz: ‘Whereas the present government of this colony, by congress and committees, was instituted while the former government, under the Crown of Great Britain, existed in full force, and was established for the sole purpose of opposing the usurpation of the British Parliament, and was intended to expire on a reconciliation with Great Britain, which it was then apprehended would soon take place, but is now considered as remote and uncertain; ‘And whereas many and great inconveniences attend the said mode of government by congress and committees, as of necessity, in many instances, legislative, judicial, and executive popovers have been vested therein, especially since the dissolution of the former government by the abdication of the late governor and the exclusion of this colony from the protection of the King of Great Britain; […] And whereas the Delegates of the United American States, in general Congress convened, did, on the fourth day of July now last past, solemnly publish and declare, in the words following; viz: […] ‘that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute 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’”).

North Carolina: North Carolina Constitution (1776) (original), Whereas Clause (“WHEREAS allegiance and protection are, in their nature, reciprocal, and the one should of right be refused when the other is withdrawn: And whereas George the Third, King of Great Britain, and late Sovereign of the British American Colonies, hath not only withdrawn from them his protection, but, by an act of the British Legislature, declared the inhabitants of these States out of the protection of the British crown, and all their property, found upon the high seas, liable to be seized and confiscated to the uses mentioned in the said act; and the said George the Third has also sent fleets and armies to prosecute a cruel war against them, for the purposed reducing the inhabitants of the said Colonies to a state of abject slavery; in consequence whereof, all government under the said King, within the said Colonies, hath ceased, and a total dissolution of government in many of them hath taken place. And whereas the Continental Congress, having considered the premises, and other previous violation of the rights of the good people of America, have therefore declared, that the Thirteen United Colonies are, of right, wholly absolved from all allegiance to the British crown or any other foreign jurisdiction whatsoever: and that the said Colonies now are, and forever shall be, free and independent States. Wherefore, in our present state, in order to prevent anarchy and confusion, it becomes necessary that government should be established in this State; North Carolina Constitution (1868), Article 1, Section 3 (“That the People of this State have the inherent, sole, and exclusive right of regulating the internal government and police thereof, and of altering and abolishing their Constitution and form of government, whenever it may be necessary to their safety and happiness; but every such right should be exercised in pursuance of law, and consistently with the Constitution of the United States”); North Carolina Constitution (1971) (current) (same).

North Dakota: North Dakota, Constitution (1899) (original and only), Article 1, Section 2 (Declaration of Rights): (“All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for the protection, security and benefit of the people, and they have a right to alter or reform the same whenever the public good may require”).

Ohio: Ohio Constitution (1803) (original), Article VIII, Section 1 (“That all men born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and unalienable rights; amongst which are the enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety; and every free republican government, being founded on their sole authority, and organized for the great purpose of protecting their rights and liberties, and securing their independence; to effect these ends, they have at all times a complete power to alter, reform or abolish their government, whenever they may deem it necessary”); Ohio Constitution (1851) (same).

Oklahoma: Oklahoma Constitution 1907 (original and only), Article 2, Section 2 (Bill of Rights) (“All political power is inherent in the people; and government is instituted for their protection, security, and benefit, and to promote their general welfare; and they have the right to alter or reform the same whenever the public good may require it: Provided, such change be not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States”).

Oregon: Oregon Constitution 1857 (original and only), Article 1, Section 1 (“We declare that all men, when they form a social compact are equal in right: that all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness; and they have at all times a right to alter, reform, or abolish the government in such manner as they may think proper”).

Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania Constitution (1776) (original), Preamble (“WHEREAS all government ought to be instituted and supported for the security and protection of the community as such, and to enable the individuals who compose it to enjoy their natural rights, and the other blessings which the Author of existence has bestowed upon man; and whenever these great ends of government are not obtained, the people have a right, by common consent to change it, and take such measures as to them may appear necessary to promote their safety and happiness. AND WHEREAS the inhabitants of this commonwealth have in consideration of protection only, heretofore acknowledged allegiance to the king of Great Britain; and the said king has not only withdrawn that protection, but commenced, and still continues to carry on, with unabated vengeance, a most cruel and unjust war against them, employing therein, not only the troops of Great Britain, but foreign mercenaries, savages and slaves, for the avowed purpose of reducing them to a total and abject submission to the despotic domination of the British parliament, with many other acts of tyranny, (more fully set forth in the declaration of Congress) whereby all allegiance and fealty to the said king and his successors, are dissolved and at an end, and all power and authority derived from him ceased in these colonies. AND WHEREAS it is absolutely necessary for the welfare and safety of the inhabitants of said colonies, that they be henceforth free and independent States, and that just, permanent, and proper forms of government exist in every part of them, derived from and founded on the authority of the people only, agreeable to the directions of the honorable American Congress. We, the representatives of the freemen of Pennsylvania, in general convention met, for the express purpose of framing such a government, confessing the goodness of the great Governor of the universe (who alone knows to what degree of earthly happiness mankind may attain, by perfecting the arts of government) in permitting the people of this State, by common consent, and without violence, deliberately to form for themselves such just rules as they shall think best, for governing their future society, and being fully convinced, that it is our indispensable duty to establish such original principles of government, as will best promote the general happiness of the people of this State, and their posterity, and provide for future improvements, without partiality for, or prejudice against any particular class, sect, or denomination of men whatever, do, by virtue of the authority vested in use by our constituents, ordain, declare, and establish, the following Declaration of Rights and Frame of Government, to be the CONSTITUTION of this commonwealth, and to remain in force therein for ever, unaltered, except in such articles as shall hereafter on experience be found to require improvement, and which shall by the same authority of the people, fairly delegated as this frame of government directs, be amended or improved for the more effectual obtaining and securing the great end and design of all government, herein before mentioned”) and Article 1, Section V (“That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection and security of the people, nation or community; and not for the particular emolument or advantage of any single man, family, or soft of men, who are a part only of that community, And that the community hath an indubitable, unalienable and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish government in such manner as shall be by that community judged most conducive to the public weal”); Pennsylvania Constitution (1790) (same); Pennsylvania Constitution (1838) (same); Pennsylvania Constitution (1874) (same); Pennsylvania Constitution (1968) (current) (same).

Rhode Island: Rhode Island and Providence Plantations Constitution (1842) (original) Article I, Section 3 (“All political power and sovereignty are originally invested in, and of right belong to the PEOPLE. All free governments are founded in their authority, and are established for the greatest good of the whole number. The PEOPLE have therefore an inalienable and indefeasible right, in their original, sovereign and unlimited capacity, to alter, reform, or totally change the same, whenever their safety or happiness requires”); Rhode Island (1987) (current) Introduction to Declaration of Certain Constitutional Rights and Principles and Section 1 (“In order effectually to secure the religious and political freedom established by our venerated ancestors, and to preserve the same for our posterity, we do declare that the essential and unquestionable rights and principles hereinafter mentioned shall be established, maintained, and preserved, and shall be of paramount obligation in all legislative, judicial and executive proceedings. Sec. 1. In the words of the Father of his Country, we declare that ‘the basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and alter their constitutions of government; but the constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all’”).

South Carolina: South Carolina Constitution (1776) (original), Whereas clause (“Whereas the British Parliament, claiming of late years a right to bind the North American colonies by law in all cases whatsoever, have enacted statutes for raising a revenue in those colonies and disposing of such revenue as they thought proper, without the consent and against the will of the colonists. And whereas it appearing to them that (they not being represented in Parliament) such claim was altogether unconstitutional, and, if admitted, would at once reduce them from the rank of freemen to a state of the most abject slavery; the said colonies, therefore, severally remonstrated against the passing, and petitioned for the repeal, of those acts, but in vain, and whereas the said claim being persisted in, other unconstitutional anal oppressive statutes have been since enacted [ …] And whereas the delegates of all the colonies on this continent, from Nova Scotia to Georgia, assembled in a general Congress at Philadelphia, in the most dutiful manner laid their complaints at the foot of the throne, and humbly implored their sovereign that his royal authority and interposition might be used for their relief from the grievances occasioned by those statutes […] And whereas these complaints being Only disregarded, statutes still more cruel than those above mentioned have been enacted […] And whereas large fleets and armies having been sent to America in order to enforce the execution of those laws, and to compel an absolute and implicit submission to the will of a corrupt and despotic administration, and in consequence thereof, hostilities having been commenced in the Massachusetts Bay […] The colonists were therefore driven to the necessity of taking up arms, to repel force by force, and to defend themselves and their properties against lawless invasions and depredations. Nevertheless, the delegates of the said colonies assembled in another Congress at Philadelphia, anxious to procure a reconciliation with Great Britain upon just and constitutional principles, supplicated His Majesty to direct some mode by which the united applications of his faithful colonists might be improved into a happy and permanent reconciliation, that in the mean time measures might be taken for preventing the further destruction of their lives, and that such statutes as immediately distressed any of the colonists might be repealed. And whereas, instead of obtaining that justice, to which the colonists were and are of right entitled, the unnatural civil war into which they were thus precipitated and are involved, hath been prosecuted with unremitted violence, and the governors and others bearing the royal commission in the colonies having broken the most solemn promises and engagements, and violated every obligation of honor, Justice, and humanity, have caused the persons of divers good people to be seized and imprisoned, and their properties to be forcibly taken and detained or destroyed […] so that it is become indispensably necessary that during the present situation of American affairs, and until an accommodation of the unhappy differences between Great Britain and America can be obtained, (an event which, though traduced and treated as rebels, we still earnestly desire,) some mode should be established by common consent, and for the good of the people, the origin and end of all governments, for regulating the internal polity of this colony”); South Carolina Constitution (1778), Whereas Clause (“Whereas the constitution or form of government agreed to and resolved upon by the freemen of this country, met in congress, the twenty-sixth day of March, one thousand seven hundred and: seventy-six, was temporary only, and suited to the situation of their public affairs at that period, looking forward to an accommodation with Great Britain, an event then desired; and whereas the United Colonies of America have been since constituted independent States, and the political connection heretofore subsisting between them and Great Britain entirely dissolved by the declaration of the honorable the Continental Congress, dated the fourth day of July, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-six, for the many great and weighty reasons therein particularly set forth: It therefore becomes absolutely necessary to frame a constitution suitable to that great event.); South Carolina Constitution (1868) Article 1, Sections 3-5 (“Section 3. All political power is vested in and derived from the people only; therefore they have the right, at all times, to modify their form of government in such manner as they may deem expedient, when the public good demands. Section 4. Every citizen of this State owes paramount allegiance to the Constitution and Government of the United States, and no law or ordinance of this State in contravention or subversion thereof can have any binding force. Section 5. This State shall ever remain a member of the American Union, and all attempts, from whatever source, or upon whatever pretext, to dissolve the said Union, shall be resisted with the whole power of the State”); South Carolina Constitution (1895), Article 1, Section 1 (“Political power in people. All political power is vested in and derived from the people only, therefore, they have the right at all times to modify their form of government”).

South Dakota: South Dakota Constitution (1889) (original and only), Article VI, Section 26 (Bill of Rights) (“Power inherent in people—Alteration in form of government—Inseparable part of Union. All political power is inherent in the people, and all free government is founded on their authority, and is instituted for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right in lawful and constituted methods to alter or reform their forms of government in such manner as they may think proper. And the state of South Dakota is an inseparable part of the American Union and the Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land”).

Tennessee: Tennessee Constitution (1796) (original), Article XI, Section I (“That all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness; for the advancement of those ends, they have, at all times, an unalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish the government in such manner as they may think proper”), Article XI, Section II (“That government being instituted for the common benefit, the doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power and oppression, is absurd, slavish and destructive to the good and happiness of mankind”); Tennessee Constitution (1834), Article I, Section 1 (“That all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness; for the advancement of those ends they have at all times, an unalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform, or abolish the government in such manner as they may think proper”); Section 2 (“That government being instituted for the common benefit, the doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power and oppression is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of Mankind”); Tennessee Constitution (1870) (current), Article I, Section 1 (same), Section 2 (“That government being instituted for the common benefit, the doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power and oppression is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind”).

Texas: Texas Constitution (1845) (original), Article I, Section 1 (“All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit; and they have at all times the unalienable right to alter, reform, or abolish their form of government, in such manner as they may think expedient”); Texas Constitution (1861), Article I, Section 1 (“All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit and they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their form of government, in such manner as they may think expedient; and, therefore, no government or authority can exist or exercise power within the State of Texas, without the consent of the people thereof previously given; nor after that consent be withdrawn”); Texas Constitution (1866), Article I, Section 1 (“All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit; and they have at all times the unalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their form of government, in such manner as they may think expedient”); Texas Constitution (1876) (current), Article 1, Section 2 (“All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit. The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation only, they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient”).

Utah: Utah Constitution (1896) (original and only), Article I, Section 2 (“All political power is inherent in the people; and all free governments are founded on their authority for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right to alter or reform their government as the public welfare may require”).

Vermont: Vermont Constitution (1777) (original), Whereas Clause (“WHEREAS, all government ought to be instituted and supported, for the security and protection of the community, as such, and to enable the individuals who compose it, to enjoy their natural rights, and the other blessings which the Author of existence has bestowed upon man; and whenever those great ends of government are not obtained, the people have a right, by common consent, to change it, and take such measures as to them may appear necessary to promote their safety and happiness”), Chapter I, VII (Declaration of Rights) (“That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation or community; and not for the particular emolument or advantage of any single man, family or set of men, who are a part only of that community; and that the community hath an indubitable, unalienable and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish, government, in such manner as shall be, by that community, judged most conducive to the public weal”); Vermont Constitution (1786) (same); Vermont Constitution (1793) (current), Chapter I, Article 7 (“That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community, and not for the particular emolument or advantage of any single person, family, or set of persons, who are a part only of that community; and that the community hath an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right, to reform or alter government, in such manner as shall be, by that community, judged most conducive to the public weal”).

Virginia: Virginia Constitution (1776) (original), Declaration of Rights, Section 3 (“That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community; of all the various modes and forms of government, that is best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety, and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration; and that, when any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal”); Virginia Constitution (1830) (same); Virginia Constitution (1850) Bill of Rights, Section III (“That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community; of all the various modes and forms of government, that is best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety, and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration; and that, when any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal”); Virginia Constitution (1864) (same); Virginia Constitution (1870) (same); Virginia Constitution (1902) (same); Virginia Constitution (1971) (current) (same).

Washington: Washington Constitution (1878) (original), Declaration of Right [sic], Article V, Section 2 (“The people of this State have the sole power to alter or abolish this Constitution and form of government, whenever they deem it necessary to their safety and happiness; provided, such change be not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States”).

West Virginia: West Virginia Constitution (1872) (original), Article III, Section 3 (“Government is instituted for the common benefit, protection and security of the people, nation or community. Of all its various forms that is the best, which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety, and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration; and when any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community has an indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter or abolish it in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal”).

Wyoming: Wyoming Constitution (1889) (original and only), Article I, Section 1 (“All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness; for the advancement of these ends they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish the government in such manner as they may think proper”).

and to abolish one form of government and establish another, whenever the public good requires it: Michigan Constitution (1835), Article I, Section 2. Subsequent Michigan Constitutions omit this stirring provision.

PEOPLE MAY ALTER OR ABOLISH FORM OF GOVERNMENT: Colorado Constitution (1876), Article II, Section 2.

with a new one in the form and based on such principles they believe will effect their happiness and safety: For additional sources on this First Principle, see Worchester, Massachusetts. Instructions of Town Meeting (October 4, 1774), in Lovell, Albert A. Worchester in the War of the Revolution: Embracing the Acts of the Town From 1765 to 1783 Inclusive (Worchester, Massachusetts: 1876), p. 50; Wood, Gordon S. Creation of the American Republic, 1776-1789 (New York, 1972); Bailyn, Bernard. The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution Enlarged Edition (Cambridge, Massachusetts: 1992); Miller, John. The Glorious Revolution 2nd Edition (London: 2014); Ackyrod, Peter. Rebellion, The History of England from James I to the Glorious Revolution (New York: 2014).

such hands as are most likely to execute them in the manner and for the important ends for which they were first given: Grand Jury of Cherwas District, South Carolina. Presentments (May 20, 1776), in American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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, Vol. VI (Washington, D.C.: 1846), p. 514.

and all the slips of human frailty, will be borne by the people without mutiny or murmur: Locke, John. Second Treatise of Civil Government (Chicago: 1971 [originally published 1689]), pp. 186–187, 188.

throw all things into confusion and anarchy: Mayhew, Jonathan. A Discourse Concerning Unlimited Submission and Non-Resistance to the Higher Powers: With some Reflections on the Resistance Made to King Charles I. And on the Anniversary of his Death: In which the Mysterious Doctrine of that Prince’s Saintship and Martyrdom is Unriddled (1750), p. 38.

secure to them the ends for which government was at first erected […]: Locke, John. Second Treatise of Civil Government (Chicago: 1971 [originally published 1689]), p. 188.

This is so universally allowed that I need not attempt to prove it: Howard, Simeon. “A Sermon Preached to the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company in Boston,” 1773, in American Political Writing during the Founding Era, 1760–1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis: 1983), pp. 190–191.

’tis treason against mankind;—’tis treason against common sense; —’tis treason against God [all italics in original]: Mayhew, Jonathan. A Discourse Concerning Unlimited Submission and Non-Resistance to the Higher Powers: With some Reflections on the Resistance Made to King Charles I. And on the Anniversary of his Death: In which the Mysterious Doctrine of that Prince’s Saintship and Martyrdom is Unriddled (1750), p. 39.

tyranny and oppression that ever any prince was guilty of: Ibid.

The colonists must declare independence: Additional sources for this passage include Downer, Silas. A Discourse at the Dedication of the Tree of Liberty (1768), in American Political Writing During the Founding Era, 1760–1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis: 1983), pp. 107–108; Wangmo, Kalsang. “Middle Path and Universal Responsibility—A Buddhist Perspective.” The Tibet Journal, vol. 36, no. 4, 2011, pp. 3–17.

we should soon catch the contagion on venality and dissipation, which has subjected Britain to lawless domination: Town of Malden. Instructions (May 27, 1776), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), p. 97.

Congress explains to the king that the colonists are not at fault for the “destructive system of colony administration”: First Continental Congress. Petition to the King (October 26, 1774), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. 1 1774 (Washington: 1904), p. 117.

[T]he die is now cast, the colonies must either submit or triumph: George III. “King George III to Lord North, September 11, 1774,” in The Correspondence of King George the Third from 1760 to December 1783, Vol. III, Fortescue, Sir John, ed. (London: 1927–1928), no. 131 (original refers to “dye”).

blows must decide whether they are to be subject to this country or independent: George III. “King George III to Lord North, November 18, 1774,” in The Correspondence of King George the Third from 1760 to December 1783, Vol. III, Fortescue, Sir John, ed. (London: 1927–1928), p. 1556.

that a rebellion at this time actually exists within the said province: Parliament. The Address of the Lords and Commons to his Majesty, on the Present State of America, &c (February 9, 1775), in London Gazette, February 11, 1775 (Philadelphia: 1775).

the only means left of bringing the Americans to a due submission to the mother country, […] the colonies will submit: George III. “King George III to Lord North, February 15, 1775,” in The Correspondence of King George the Third with Lord North, From 1768 to 1783, Vol. I, Donne, W. Bodham, ed. (1867), p. 229.

he is “duty bound” to put down the rebellion: George III. “King George III to Lord North, July 5, 1775, in The Correspondence of King George the Third from 1760 to December 1783, Vol. III, Fortescue, Sir John, ed. (London: 1927–1928), p. 233.

entreat[s] your majesty’s gracious attention to this our humble petition: Second Continental Congress. Petition to the King (July 8, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10-September 20 (Washington, D.C.: 1905), p. 158.

foreign quarrel quickly succeeded by domestic danger, in their judgment, of a more dreadful kind: Ibid., p. 159.

violence […] rendered it necessary for us to close with their last appeal from reason to arms: Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10-September 20 (Washington, D.C.: 1905), p. 141.

Acquired, solely by the honest industry of our forefathers and ourselves, against violence actually offered, we have taken up arms: Ibid., pp. 154, 156.

explains that its rejection will lead to war: Dickinson, John. “John Dickenson to Arthur Lee, July 7, 1775,” in American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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, Vol. I (Washington, D.C.: 1833), p. 1604.

and charges all his subjects to disclose any traitorous activities and persons to the English authorities: George III. A Proclamation by the King, for Suppressing Rebellion and Sedition (London: August 23, 1775), in Force, Peter. American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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, Vol. III (Washington, D.C.: 1837), pp. 240–241.

no answer would be given: Penn, Richard and Arthur Lee. “Letter to Second Continental Congress, September 2, 1775,” in Manuscripts and Archives Division, The New York Public Library. “Petition to George III, King of Great Britain, 1775,” New York Public Library Digital Collections, https://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/ab785280-8a11-0132-a455-58d385a7bbd0. Accessed the Ides of March (March 15), 2025.

proposes a military budget to the House of Commons to fund the war: George III. “His Majesty’s most Gracious Speech to both Houses of Parliament, on Thursday the 26th of October, 1775,” in Eighteenth Century Collection Online Demo., University of Michigan Library Digital Collections, https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eccodemo/K124613.0001.001. Accessed the Ides of March (March 15), 2025.

the softness of the language was purposely adopted to conceal the most traitorous designs: Dartmouth, Lord. “Remarks at Parliament,” November 9, 1775, in Cobbett, Willam, in The Parliamentary History of England, from the Earliest Period to the Year 1803, from which Last-Mentioned Epoch it is Continued Downwards in the Work Entitled, “The Parliamentary Debates,” Vol. XVIII, A.D. 1774-1777 (London: 1813), pp. 919–920.

I know I am doing my duty and therefore can never wish to retract: George III. “George III to Lord North, July 26, 1775,” in The Correspondence of King George the Third from 1760 to December 1783, Vol. III, Fortescue, Sir John, ed. (London: 1927–1928), p. 235.

it must be treated as a foreign war, and that every expedient which would be used in the latter case should be applied in the former: North, Frederick, 2nd Earl of Guilford (Lord North). “Lord North to King George III, July 26, 1775,” in The Correspondence of King George the Third from 1760 to December 1783, Vol. III, Fortescue, Sir John, ed. (London: 1927–1928), p. 234.

and makes us independent in spite of all our supplications and entreaties: Adams, John. “Letter from John Adams to Gen. Gates, March 23, 1776,” in Adams, John Quincy and Charles Francis Adams, Life of John Adams, Vol. I (Philadelphia: 1871), p. 289.

it is very odd that Americans should hesitate at accepting such a gift from them: Ibid., pp. 289–290.

it is as great a folly to pay a Bunker-hill price for law, as for land: Paine, Thomas. Common Sense (Philadelphia: February 14, 1776), in Paine, Collected Writings, Foner, Eric, ed. (New York: 1955), pp. 28–29.

it is the pride of kings which throw mankind into confusion: Ibid., p. 12.

the most prosperous invention the devil ever set on foot for the promotion of idolatry: Ibid.

otherwise she would not so frequently turn it to ridicule by giving mankind an ass for a lion [all italics in original]: Ibid., pp. 15–16.

Over-awed the quiet and defen[s]eless to purchase their safety by frequent contributions: Ibid.

I neither copy their humility, nor disturb their devotion: Ibid., p. 17.

and destroys the very foundation it seems to stand on: Ibid., pp. 18–19.

than all the crowned ruffians that ever lived: Ibid., p. 20.

There is no turning back: Another important word in this famous phrase is States. The word colonies disappears—it is now States. With the dissolution of the ties to the King and Empire, the governments are States. This transformation is exhaustively addressed elsewhere in this work.

Likewise, the establishment of an absolute tyranny is explained in great detail in connection with the grievances and other pertinent passages.

Additional sources for this passage include Watson, J. Steven. The Reign of George III, 1760–1815 (Oxford, United Kingdom: 1960), pp. 203–204; Lord Commissioners of British Admiralty. “Lord Commissioners of the British Admiralty to Vice Admiral Samuel Graves, dated 2 September 1775,” Naval Documents of the American Revolution, Vol. 2, Clark, William B., ed. (Washington D.C.: 1966), p. 701; Ferling, John. Independence, The Struggle to Set America Free (New York: 2011), pp. 164, 178; McCullough, David. 1776 (New York: 2005), pp. 4–12, 18–19, 143–145.

To prove this let facts be submitted to a candid world for the truth of which we pledge a faith yet unsullied by falsehood: Committee of Five. Draft of the Declaration of Independence (1776), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), pp. 19–20.

neither confirming them by his assent, nor annulling them by his negative: Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 116.

his majesty has rejected laws of the most salutary tendency: Ibid., p. 115.

Yet, the king refuses to assent to those laws: Historian Steven Pincus elaborates in a conversation with Emily Sneff:

Another global issue is addressed in the Declaration of Independence: slavery. “Obviously Jefferson intended to have an explicitly anti-slavery clause in the Declaration, though I think there’s also a more subtle one,” suggests [Yale Professor] Pincus. He is referring to the first in the list of grievances: “He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.” Pincus says, “It’s an extremely important clause, and we can only understand it by understanding the historical context.” Many of the colonies (not just the Thirteen, but also the West Indies) had passed either prohibitive duties with the intention of eliminating slavery, or absolute prohibitions on the slave trade, or restrictions that would essentially only allow domestic slavery. The initial tracing of these laws was done by W.E.B. DuBois in his Harvard doctoral dissertation and subsequent book, The Suppression of the African Slave-Trade to the United States of America, 1638-1870. “What DuBois didn’t see,” Pincus explains, “was this pan-imperial notion.” He cites Jamaica, where the local assembly limited the number of enslaved people you could own to two, meaning no sugar plantations. Laws such as this would have had a tremendous impact on the slave trade, but were routinely vetoed by the Board of Trade, the Secretary of State, and King George III. According to Pincus, “That clause [in the Declaration] is clearly in my mind a reference to the slave duties, and I think it also echoes language in some other writings of Thomas Jefferson about George III having veto power.”

“A Conversation with Steven Pincus [with Emily Sneff].” Course of Human Events, Declaration Resources Project Blog, Harvard University (August 22, 2016), https://declaration.fas.harvard.edu/blog/pincus. Accessed the Ides of March (March 15), 2025.

shameful […] abuse of a power trusted with his majesty for other purposes: Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 116.

prohibit the importation of slaves: Fischer, David Hackett. African Founders, How Enslaved People Expanded American Ideals (New York: 2022), p. 241.

An Act for the Gradual Abolition of Slavery, which (as the name states) gradually abolishes slavery: Ibid., p. 252.

emancipation of slaves without government approval by enslavers—leading to many individual acts of emancipation: Ibid., p. 339.

statewide involuntary manumission are defeated in Virginia: Ibid.

addressing the naturalization of aliens: Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), p. 215; Maier, Pauline. American Scripture, Making the Declaration of Independence (New York, 1997), p. 113 n 33.

issuance of bills of credit: Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 215, 217–218; Maier, Pauline. American Scripture, Making the Declaration of Independence (New York, 1997), p. 113 n 33.

compensation of victims of the Stamp Act riots: Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 215, 218.

methods of taxation: Ibid., p. 215.

payment of salaries of government officials: Ibid.

emission of colonial paper currency: Fisher, Sydney George. “The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257–303, pp. 257–303, pp. 264–265.

immigration of convicts to the colonies: Ibid., pp. 265, 275; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 216–217.

colonial representatives to Parliament: Although colonies are composed of three major types (royal, proprietary, and charter), the royal disallowance applies to all. The King directly rules royal colonies, and the King appoints the Governors. Proprietary colonies are owned by a person or family, who govern the colony by appointing Governors. Charter colonies are in essence governed by corporate entities. See, e.g., Osgood, Herbert L. “England and the American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century.” Political Science Quarterly, vol. 17, no. 2, 1902, pp. 206–22; Haffenden, Philip S. “The Crown and the Colonial Charters, 1675-1688: Part I.” The William and Mary Quarterly, vol. 15, no. 3, 1958, pp. 298–311.

Although one could surmise that royal disallowance applies only to royal colonies, such is not the case:

The routine of transmission [of laws for approval] had got fairly well fixed before the end of the seventeenth century. Maryland, Connecticut, and Rhode Island were not required by their charters to transmit their laws, though all did so to a greater or less extent. The Carolinas and the Jerseys likewise sent over no laws, until after they had become royal provinces. Massachusetts was in the same class until 1684, but after 1691 regularly transmitted her laws, while Pennsylvania, though a proprietary colony, was required to do so from the beginning. Before the end of the colonial period was reached, every colony had had one or more laws disallowed; during the eighty-three years of her second charter, Massachusetts had forty-seven public laws and twelve private laws disallowed; while with other colonies the number was much greater.

Andrews, Charles M. “The Royal Disallowance.” American Antiquarian Society, October (1914), pp. 342–362, p. 345.

even divorce: Fisher, Sydney George. “The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257–303, pp. 257–303, p. 264.

he will suffer no law to be made here, but such as suit his purpose: Paine, Thomas. Common Sense (Philadelphia: February 14, 1776), in Paine, Collected Writings, Foner, Eric, ed. (New York: 1955), pp. 29–30.

England to Europe, America to itself: Ibid., p. 28.

which is the smallest number of all the colonies: Andrews, Charles M. “The Royal Disallowance.” American Antiquarian Society, October (1914), pp. 342–362, p. 345.

the foundation for the Revolution is laid: For an additional source and more reading regarding this grievance, see Lossing, Benson John. Our Country: A History of the United States from the Discovery of America to the Present Time, Vol. 8 (New York: 1905), p. iv of supplement; Andrews, Charles M. “The Royal Disallowance.” American Antiquarian Society, October (1914), pp. 342–362; Fisher, Sydney George. The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence. The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257–303, pp. 257–303, p. 263–264.

and, when so suspended, neglecting to attend to them for many years: Jefferson, Thomas. Draft Constitution for Virginia (June 1776), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 336.

harkens back to the English Bill of Rights of 1689: Formally entitled An Act Declaring the Rights and Liberties of the Subject and Settling the Succession of the Crown.

by engaging in fourteen grievances: UK Parliament. Bill of Rights of 1689. https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/parliamentaryauthority/revolution/collections1/collections-glorious-revolution/billofrights/#:~:text=. Accessed Ides of March (March 15), 2025 (original images).

execution of laws without consent of Parliament: Ibid.

the pretended power of suspending the laws or the execution of laws by regal authority without consent of Parliament is illegal: Ibid.

monstrous wrong, an outrageous and unbearable tyranny: Fisher, Sydney George. The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence. The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257–303, p. 272.

Only by revolution can Americans reclaim self-government: For more sources and reading on this grievance, review Fisher, Sydney George. “The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257–303, pp. 257–303, pp. 265–272; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 214, 220–221; Lossing, Benson John. Our Country: A History of the United States from the Discovery of America to the Present Time, Vol. 8 (New York: 1905), p. iv of supplement.

unless the person to be benefited by them would relinquish the inestimable right of representation in the legislature: Jefferson, Thomas. Draft Constitution for Virginia (June 1776), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 336.

and self-government continues in the next set of grievances: At least one eminent scholar suggests that the third grievance addresses Canada. Lossing, Benson John. Our Country: A History of the United States from the Discovery of America to the Present Time, Vol. 8 (New York: 1905), p. iv of supplement. However, this commentary is misplaced. Lossing overlooks the controversies involving the extension of counties. In addition, there is a very specific subsequent grievance that clearly addresses Canada.

comes additional opportunities and the ability to create a new, independent life for the colonists: There is no question that there is an absolutely devastating impact on Native Americans. This dreadful and painful story is for other works.

He is a despotic tyrant: For more sources on this grievance, see Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), pp. 116–177; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), p. 223; Fisher, Sydney George. “The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257-303, pp. 257–303, pp. 272–273; Maier, Pauline. American Scripture, Making the Declaration of Independence (New York: 1997), p. 113 n 33; Bailyn, Bernard. Bailyn, Bernard. The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution Enlarged Edition (Cambridge, Massachusetts: 1992), p. 245.

reduce the inhabitants to slavery, appears more and more to be fixed and determined: Massachusetts House of Representatives. Resolutions (June 17, 1774), in Force, Peter. American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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, Vol. I (Washington, D.C.: 1833), p. 422.

the equivalent of £2.4 million or about $3 million today: Webster, Ian. “Inflation Calculator, US Official Inflation Data.” Alioth Finance, May 15, 2024, https://www.in2013dollars.com/uk/inflation/1769?amount=10500. Accessed October 26, 2025, calculating the current value of pounds); “The Latest on GBP to USD exchange rates.” Travelex Foreign Coin Services Limited, https://www.travelex.co.uk/currency/currency-pairs/gbp-to-usd. Accessed on October 26, 2025 (calculating current exchange rate).

to any place in the colony exigency may require: Dunmore, Lord. “Letter to the House of Burgesses, June 15, 1775,” in Journals of the House of Burgesses of Virginia, 1761–1776, Kennedy, John Pendleton, ed. (Richmond, Virginia: 1907), p. 276.

for the purpose of giving my assent to such acts as I shall approve: Dunmore, Lord. “Letter to the House of Burgesses, June 24, 1775,” in Journals of the House of Burgesses of Virginia, 1761–1776, Kennedy, John Pendleton, ed. (Richmond, Virginia: 1907), p. 280.

a high breach of the rights and privileges of this House: House of Burgesses. Resolution regarding Lord Dunmore (June 24, 1775), in Journals of the House of Burgesses of Virginia, 1761–1776, Kennedy, John Pendleton, ed. (Richmond, Virginia: 1907), p. 281.

Another brick in the wall of British tyranny: For additional sources regarding this grievance, review Wilkes, John. The North Briton, XLV, April 23, 1763, in Wilkes, John. The North Briton, XLV, April 23, 1763, in The North Briton, from No. I to No. XLVI, inclusive, with Several Useful and Explanatory Notes (New York: 1976), pp. 316–317; George III. Memoirs of the Reign of King George the Third, Vol. III, Walpole, Horace, ed. (London: 1845), pp. 25, 27; Green, Jack P. “Bridge to Revolution: The Wilkes Fund Controversy in South Carolina.” The Journal of Southern History, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Feb. 1963), pp. 19-52, quoting Commons Journals, XXXIX, pt. 1, 4–6, 11–12, 20–24 (October 10, 23, 29, 1772); Watson, Alan D. “The Beaufort Removal and the Revolutionary Impulse in South Carolina.” The South Carolina Historical Magazine, vol. 84, no. 3, July 1983, pp. 121–135; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), p. 225; Lossing, Benson John. Our Country: A History of the United States from the Discovery of America to the Present Time, Vol. 8 (New York: 1905), p. v of supplement; Morris, Richard J. “General Gage Comes to Salem: Interests, Ideologies, Identities, and Family Alliances on the Eve of the American Revolution.” Early American Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, vol. 20, no. 2, Spring 2022, pp. 263–304; Lord, Donald C., and Robert M. Calhoon. “The Removal of the Massachusetts General Court from Boston, 1769-1772.” The Journal of American History, vol. 55, no. 4, 1969, pp. 735–55.

dare to deny their assent to any impositions, that shall be directed?: Dickinson, John. “Letter No. I,” 1767, in Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania, To the Inhabitants of the British Colonies (Philadelphia: 1774 [originally published December 2, 1767]), pp. 7, 9.

refusal to abide with the Mutiny Act passed on May 15, 1765: The full title of the act is quite concise: An act to amend and render more effectual, in his Majesty’s dominions in America, an act passed in this present session of Parliament, entitled, An act for punishing mutiny and desertion and for the better payment of the army and their quarters.

approved but never spent years before: For more on the New York Barracks Act, see Varga, Nicholas. “The New York Restraining Act: Its Passage and Some Effects, 1766–1768.” New York History, vol. 37, no. 3, 1956, pp. 233–58.

George III assents to the New York Restraining Act: The full title is quite pithy: An Act for Restraining and Prohibiting the Governor, Council, and House of Representatives of the Province of New York, until Provision Shall Have Been Made for Furnishing the King’s Troops with All the Necessaries Required by Law, from Passing or Assenting to Any Act of Assembly, Vote, or Resolution for Any Other Purpose.

injurious in its principle to the liberties of these colonies: Dickinson, John. “Letter No. I,” 1767, in Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania, To the Inhabitants of the British Colonies (Philadelphia: 1774 [originally published December 2, 1767]), p. 7.

and justly alarming to all the colonies: Ibid., p. 7.

leaving to us only the manner of raising it?: Ibid.

including quartering troops: For more on the Three Thousand Pound Act, see Varga, Nicholas. “The New York Restraining Act: Its Passage and Some Effects, 1766–1768.” New York History, vol. 37, no. 3, 1956, pp. 233–58.

and calls for a convention to meet on September 22 at Boston: Boston Circular Letter (Boston: September 14, 1768).

those governors shut down their legislative assemblies: Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), p. 225; Lossing, Benson John. Our Country: A History of the United States from the Discovery of America to the Present Time, Vol. 8 (New York: 1905), p. v supplement.

They are firmly determined to challenge and oppose this despotic policy: For additional sources regarding this grievance, see Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), pp. 117–118; Massachusetts General Court. Massachusetts Circular Letter (February 11, 1768), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), p. 66; Howard, Simeon. “A Sermon Preached to the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company in Boston,” 1773, in American Political Writing during the Founding Era, 1760–1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis: 1983), p. 201; Hutchinson, Thomas. Strictures upon the Declaration of the Congress at Philadelphia in a Letter to a Noble Lord, &c. (London: October 15, 1776), p. 14; Downer, Silas. A Discourse at the Dedication of the Tree of Liberty (1768), in American Political Writing During the Founding Era, 1760–1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis, 1983), p. 106; Ramsay, David. The History of the American Revolution, In Two Volumes, Vol. I (Dublin: 1793), pp. 70–75, 105; Howison, Robert R. A History of Virginia from its Discovery and Settlement by Europeans to Present Time, Vol. II (Richmond: 1848), pp. 62, 68–70; Dunaway, W. F. “The Virginia Conventions of the Revolution.” The Virginia Law Register, vol. 10, no. 7, 1904, pp. 567–86, p. 568-569; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 225–226; Fisher, Sydney George. “The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257–303, pp. 257–303, p. 274.

thereby leaving the political system without any legislative head: Jefferson, Thomas. Draft Constitution for Virginia (June 1776), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 336.

and “most effectually secure peace and good order” in the colony: Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. III: September, 1775 to December, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), November 3, 1775 (New Hampshire), p. 319; December 3, 1775, p. 327 (South Carolina); December 4, 1775, p. 404 (Virginia).

When these legislatures flower, they are accountable—not to the empire— but to the people: For additional sources regarding this grievance, review Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 118; Hutchinson, Thomas. Strictures upon the Declaration of the Congress at Philadelphia in a Letter to a Noble Lord, &c. (London: October 15, 1776), pp. 14–15; Ramsay, David. The History of the American Revolution, In Two Volumes, Vol. I (Dublin: 1793), pp. 69-76; Howison, Robert R. A History of Virginia from its Discovery and Settlement by Europeans to Present Time, Vol. II (Richmond: 1848), pp. 69–75; Lossing, Benson John. Our Country: A History of the United States from the Discovery of America to the Present Time, Vol. 8 (New York: 1905), pp. 69–76; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), p. 274; Phillips, Kevin. 1775, A Good Year for a Revolution (New York: 2012), pp. 48–49; Varga, Nicholas. “The New York Restraining Act: Its Passage and Some Effects, 1766–1768.” New York History, vol. 37, no. 3 (July, 1956), pp. 233–258.

obstructing the laws for the naturalization of foreigners & raising the condition [lacking appro]priations of land: Jefferson, Thomas. Draft Constitution for Virginia (June 1776), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 336.

this status threatens their own control of this most valuable asset: Paine, Thomas. Common Sense (Philadelphia: February 14, 1776), in Paine, Collected Writings, Foner, Eric, ed. (New York: 1955), p. 36.

a “promised land” imbued with unparalleled natural resources: Downer, Silas. A Discourse at the Dedication of the Tree of Liberty (1768), in American Political Writing During the Founding Era, 1760-1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis, 1983), p. 99.

flowing with milk and honey: Exodus 3:8; Holy Bible, King James Version, Red Letter Edition, Dictionary/Concordance (Nashville, Tennessee: 1971), p. 27; Numbers 14:8, ibid., p. 73; Deuteronomy 31:20, ibid., p. 103.

pursues their descendants still: Paine, Thomas. Common Sense (Philadelphia: February 14, 1776), in Paine, Collected Writings, Foner, Eric, ed. (New York: 1955), pp. 23.

prepare in time an asylum for mankind: Ibid., p. 36.

annihilating any pretense of limited government: For additional resources and more reading regarding this grievance review Jefferson, Thomas. Draft Constitution for Virginia (June, 1776), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 336; Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), pp. 119–120; Downer, Silas. A Discourse at the Dedication of the Tree of Liberty (1768), in American Political Writing During the Founding Era, 1760–1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis, 1983), pp. 98–99; Colden, Cadwallader. “Lieutenant-Governor Caldon to Earl of Dartmouth, April 4, 1775,” in Brodhead, John Romeyn. Documents Relative to the Colonial History of the State of New York Vol. VIII, O’Callagah, E. B., ed. (Albany: 1857), p. 564; Baseler, Marilyn C. “Asylum for Mankind”: America, 1607–1800 (Ithaca, New York: 1998), pp. 124–130; riedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), p. 229; Lossing, Benson John. Our Country: A History of the United States from the Discovery of America to the Present Time, Vol. 8 (New York: 1905), p. vi of supplement; Phillips, Kevin. 1775, A Good Year for a Revolution (New York: 2012), pp. 203-204; Fisher, Sydney George. “The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257–303, pp. 257–303, pp. 278–279.

rather to be without courts of justice, than conform to the direction of that instruction: Martin, Josiah. “Josiah Martin to William Legge, Earl of Dartmouth,” February 26, 1773, in Colonial and State Records of North Carolina, Vol. 9, pp., 373–374.

evidently illegal and void: Iredell, James. “The Essay on the Law Court Controversy.” North Carolina Gazette, September 10, 1773, in The Papers of James Iredell, Vol. I, 1767-1777, Higgenbotham, Don, ed. (Raleigh: 1976), pp. 163-165.

all of which are destroyed by the king’s imperious actions: For additional sources on this grievance, see Hutchinson, Thomas. Strictures upon the Declaration of the Congress at Philadelphia in a Letter to a Noble Lord, &c. (London: October 15, 1776), pp. 16–17; Phillips, Kevin. 1775, A Good Year for a Revolution (New York: 2012), pp. 133–134, 140, 203–204, 268, 462; Fisher, Sydney George. “The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257–303, pp. 257–303, pp. 279–280; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 230–233; Martin, François Xavier. The History of North Carolina from the Earliest Period, Vol. II (New Orleans: 1829), pp. 294–304, 309–326; Taylor, H. Braughn. “The Foreign Attachment Law and the Coming of the Revolution in North Carolina.” The North Carolina Historical Review, vol. 52, no. 1, January 1975, pp. 20–36; Baseler, Marilyn C. “Asylum for Mankind”: America, 1607–1800 (Ithaca, New York: 1998), pp. 125-126; Butler, James Davie. “British Convicts Shipped to American Colonies.” The American Historical Review, vol. 2, no. 1, 1896, pp. 12–33; Ekirch, A Roger. “Bound for America: A Profile of British Convicts Transported to the Colonies, 1718–1775.” The William and Mary Quarterly, vol. 42, no. 2, April 1985, pp. 184-200; Hoyt, Edward A. “Naturalization Under the American Colonies: Signs of a New Community.” Political Science Quarterly, vol. 67, no. 2, 1952, pp. 248–66; Clark, R. J. “The Land of the ‘Free’: Criminal Transportation to America.” The History Press, April 1, 2019, https://thehistorypress.co.uk/article/the-land-of-the-free-criminal-transportation-to-america/. Accessed Ides of March (March 15), 2025.

and every man at the mercy of a few slaves of the governor: Adams, John. Diary and Autobiography of John Adams Vol. 3, Butterfield, L. H., Leonard C. Faber, and Wendell Garrett, eds. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: 1962), p. 298.

impeached by the House of Commons and convicted by the House of Lords: Caird, Jack Simson. “Impeachment.” House of Commons. House of Commons Library Briefing Paper, no. CBP7612, June 6, 2016, https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7612/CBP-7612.pdf. Accessed Ides of March (March 15), 2025.

the impeachment process today applicable to federal judges in the United States: Article I, Sections 2 and 3; Article III, Section I, United States Constitution.

“engine of oppression” in Great Britain: Dickinson, John. “Letter No. IX,” 1768, in Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania, To the Inhabitants of the British Colonies (Philadelphia: 1774 [originally published December 2, 1768]), p. 88.

it must be utterly destructive to liberty here: Ibid., p. 89.

Here he must have it tried before dependent judges, being the men who granted the writ: Ibid.

to render us […] a slave of the servants of a minister of state?: Town of Braintree. Instructions (October 14, 1765), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), p. 57.

where it shall be found necessary: Parliament. The Revenue Act (a/k/a The Townshend Act) (November 20, 1767), in Lillian Goldman Law Library, The Avalon Project, Yale Law School, https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/townsend_act_1767.asp. Accessed Ides of March (March 15), 2025.

if George III prevails: Adams, John, in Diary and Autobiography of John Adams Vol. 3, Butterfield, L. H., Leonard C. Faber, and Wendell Garrett, eds. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: 1962), p. 298.

The colonies oppose this diabolical scheme with great vigor: For additional sources and further reading on this grievance, see George III. “Remarks at Parliament,” March 3, 1761, in Cobbett, William. The Parliamentary History of England, from the Earliest Period to the Year 1803, from which Last-Mentioned Epoch it is Continued Downwards in the Work Entitled, “The Parliamentary Debates,” Vol. XV, A.D. 1753–1765 (London: 1813), p. 1007; Adams, John. Thoughts on Government, Applicable to the Present State of the American Colonies, In a Letter from a Gentleman to His Friend (1776), in The Political Writings of John Adams, Representative Selections, Peek, Jr., George A., ed. (New York: 1954), pp. 128–129; Adams, John. “To The Printers.” February 15, 1773, Boston Gazette, in The Revolutionary Writings of John Adams (Indianapolis: 2000), p. 96; Hancock, John. An Oration; Delivered March 5, 1774, at the Request of the Inhabitants of the Town of Boston: to Commemorate the Bloody Tragedy of the Fifth of March 1770 (Boston: 1774), p. 16; T Town of Braintree. Instructions (October 14, 1765), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), p. 57; dams, John. Diary and Autobiography of John Adams Vol. 3, Butterfield, L. H., Leonard C. Faber, and Wendell Garrett, eds. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: 1962), pp. 297–304; Massachusetts General Court. Articles of Impeachment Against Chief Justice Peter Oliver (February 24, 1774), in Journals of the House of Representatives of Massachusetts 1773–1774, pp. 194–199; Ramsay, David. The History of the American Revolution, In Two Volumes, Vol. I (Dublin: 1793), p. 81; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 233–236, 280–281; Lossing, Benson John. Our Country: A History of the United States from the Discovery of America to the Present Time, Vol. 8 (New York: 1905), p. vi of supplement; Black, Barbara Aronstein. “Massachusetts and the Judges: Judicial Independence in Perspective.” Law and History Review, vol. 3, no. 1, 1985, pp. 101–162.

swarms of officers to harass our people & eat out their substance: Committee of Five. Draft of the Declaration Of Independence Laid Before Congress (1776), in Jefferson, Thomas. The Thomas Jefferson Papers, Donovan, Frank, ed. (New York: 1963), p. 14.

and there remained not any green thing in the trees, or in the herbs of the field, through all the land of Egypt: Exodus 10:12–15, Holy Bible, King James Version, Red Letter Edition, Dictionary/Concordance (Nashville, Tennessee: 1971), p. 31.

those engaged in the illicit trade which had been connived at for years: Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), p. 237 (footnote omitted).

Resistance is the only barrier between the colonies and biblical disaster: For additional sources regarding this grievance, review Town of Boston. The Votes and Proceedings of the Freeholders and other Inhabitants of the Town of Boston, in Town Meeting Assembled, According to Law (a/k/a the “Boston Pamphlet”) (Boston: 1772), pp. 15–16. Hutchinson, Thomas. Strictures upon the Declaration of the Congress at Philadelphia in a Letter to a Noble Lord, &c. (London: October 15, 1776), p. 19; Phillips, Kevin. 1775, A Good Year for a Revolution (New York: 2012), pp. 95, 115; Barrow, Thomas. Trade and Empire: The British Customs Service in Colonial America, 1660-1775 (Cambridge, Massachusetts: 1967), p. 256; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 226–237; Fisher, Sydney George. “The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257–303, pp. 257–303, pp. 280–283; Lossing, Benson John. Our Country: A History of the United States from the Discovery of America to the Present Time, Vol. 8 (New York: 1905), p. vi of supplement; Maier, Pauline. American Scripture, Making the Declaration of Independence (New York, 1997), p. 110.

or are hostile bodies, invading us in defiance of law: Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 120.

there are approximately two million active and reserve American military service personnel: “DoD Personnel, Workforce Reports & Publications, Military Personnel.” DMDC, https://dwp.dmdc.osd.mil/dwp/app/dod-data-reports/workforce-reports. Accessed Ides of March 29, 2025.

A belligerent Communist China, nuclear-armed North Korea, militant Russia: As of the writing of this work in April 2025, although the United States is not in a direct war with Russia, it is heavily engaged in supplying arms to Ukraine against its invader.

entirely lost all sense of liberty, that they grew fond of their chains: Trenchard, John. A Short History of Standing Armies in England (London: 1698), pp. 8–9.

unless it be with consent of Parliament, is against law: UK Parliament. Bill of Rights of 1689. https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/parliamentaryauthority/revolution/collections1/collections-glorious-revolution/billofrights/#:~:text=. Accessed Ides of March (March 15), 2025 (original images).

armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people: Madison, James. “Remarks at Constitutional Convention,” June 29, 1787, in The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787 Vol. I, Farrand, Max, ed. (New Haven: 1911), p. 465.

[A] standing army, [is] the bane of liberty: Gerry, Elbridge. “Remarks at House of Representatives,” August 17, 1789, in The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States with An Appendix, Containing Important State Papers and Public Documents, and All The Laws of a Public Nature, Vol. I, Gales, Sr., Joseph, compiler (Washington, D.C.: 1834), p. 778.

a standing army is “ever to be dreaded as the ready engines of tyranny and oppression.”: Warren, Joseph. An Oration Delivered March 5th, 1772. At the Request of the Inhabitants of the Town of Boston; to Commemorate the Bloody Tragedy of the Fifth of March, 1770 (Boston: 1772), in The American Revolution, Writings from the Pamphlet Debate, 1764-1772, Wood, Gordon S., ed. (New York, New York: 2025), p. 752.

Such a power should be watched with a jealous eye: Adams, Samuel. “Samuel Adams to James Warren, January 7, 1776,” in The Writings of Samuel Adams Vol. III, 1773–1777, Cushing, Harry A., ed. (New York: 1907), p. 250.

to secure the dependence of the colonies on Great Britain: Knox, William. “Hints respecting the Settlement of our American Colonies,” 1763, in William Perry 1st Marquis of Lansdowne, 2nd Earl of Shelburne, Papers, Vol. 48, William L. Clements Library, The University of Michigan.

and marched forward in hand through the principal streets of their city, then in profound peace: Warren, Mercy Otis. History of the Rise, Progress, and Termination of the American Revolution interspersed with Bibliographical, Political and Moral Observations in Three Volumes, Vol. I (Boston: 1805), p. 62.

in which such army is kept, is against the law: First Continental Congress. Declaration and Resolves (October 14, 1774), in Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress Held at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), p. 62.

Only revolution can save the people from military tyranny: For additional sources on this grievance, review Hutchinson, Thomas. Strictures upon the Declaration of the Congress at Philadelphia in a Letter to a Noble Lord, &c. (London: October 15, 1776), p. 19; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 226–239; Fisher, Sydney George. “The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257–303, pp. 257–303, p. 283; Lossing, Benson John. Our Country: A History of the United States from the Discovery of America to the Present Time, Vol. 8 (New York: 1905), p. vii of supplement; Agostini, Thomas. “‘Deserted His Majesty’s Service’: Military Runaways, the British-American Press, and the Problem of Desertion during the Seven Years’ War.” Journal of Social History, vol. 40, no. 4, 2007, pp. 957–85; Conway, Stephen. “‘The Great Mischief Complain’d of’: Reflections on the Misconduct of British Soldiers in the Revolutionary War.” The William and Mary Quarterly, vol. 47, no. 3, July 1990, pp. 370–390; “American Resistance to a Standing Army.” National History Education Clearinghouse, https://teachinghistory.org/history-content/ask-a-historian/24671. Accessed Ides of March (March 15, 2025); Bovee, Griffin. “Standing Armies: The Constitutional Debate.” Journal of the American Revolution, https://allthingsliberty.com/2018/05/standing-armies-the-anti-federalists-and-federalists-constitutional-debate/. Accessed Ides of March (March 15, 2025); Lipscombe, Nick. The English Civil War: An Atlas and Concise History of the Wars of the Three Kingdoms 1639-51 (Oxford, United Kingdom: 2002); Woolrych, Austin. Britain in Revolution (Oxford, United Kingdom: 2002); Rahilly, Alfred. “Democracy, Parliament and Cromwell.” Studies: An Irish Quarterly Review, vol. 7, no. 28, 1918, pp. 564-583; Worden, Blair. “Oliver Cromwell and the Protectorate.” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, vol. 20, 2010, pp. 57–83; Kishlansky, Mark. “Mission Impossible: Charles I, Oliver Cromwell and the Regicide.” The English Historical Review, vol. 125, no. 515, 2010, pp. 844–74; “The Rump Dissolved.” UK Parliament. https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/parliamentaryauthority/civilwar/overview/rump-dissolved/. Accessed March 29, 2025; “Oliver Cromwell: Lord Protector.” National Army Museum. https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/oliver-cromwell-lord-protector. Accessed Ides of March (March 15), 2025.

but let him remember that force cannot give right: Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 120.

sent to Boston are sufficient to prevent any disturbance: George III. “King George III to Lord North (reporting his conversation with Gage),” February 4, 1774, in The Correspondence of King George the Third from 1760 to December 1783, Vol. III, Fortescue, Sir John, ed. (London: 1927–1928), p. 59.

Gage’s despotism justifies colonial “RESISTANCE and REPRISAL”: House of Burgesses. Instructions to the Continental Congress (August 1, 1774), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), p. 80.

restore harmony between Great-Britain and the American colonies: First Continental Congress. Declaration and Resolves (October 14, 1774), in Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress Held at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), p. 71.

and secured by acts of its own legislature solemnly confirmed by the crown: Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10-September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), p. 133.

the proclamation declares martial law throughout Massachusetts: Gage, Thomas. “By his Excellency the Hon. Thomas Gage, Esq., Governor and Commander in Chief in and over His Majesty’s Province of Massachusetts-Bay and Vice Admiral of the same, A proclamation whereas the infatuated multitudes, who have long suffered themselves to be conducted by certain well known incendiaries and traitors, in a fatal progression of crimes, against the constitutional authority of the state, have at length proceeded to avowed rebellion […]” June 12, 1775.

Martial law is untenable and justifies revolution: For additional sources regarding this grievance, see Hutchinson, Thomas. Strictures upon the Declaration of the Congress at Philadelphia in a Letter to a Noble Lord, &c. (London: October 15, 1776), p. 20; Ramsay, David. The History of the American Revolution, In Two Volumes, Vol. I (Dublin: 1793), pp. 94–95, 108-109; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 226–239; Lossing, Benson John. Our Country: A History of the United States from the Discovery of America to the Present Time, Vol. 8 (New York: 1905), p. vii of supplement; Fisher, Sydney George. “The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257–303, pp. 257–303, p. 284; Langguth, A. J., Patriots, The Men Who Started the American Revolution (New York: 1988), pp. 91, 192, 196–199, 201–202, 214, 217, 231, 267.

thereby entailing the endless and numberless curses of slavery upon us, our heirs and their heirs forever: County of Suffolk. The Suffolk Resolves (September 9, 1774), in Supplement to the Massachusetts-Gazette, September 15, 1774.

it clearly addresses Parliament and its lawmaking over the colonies: To explain this grievance, at least one accomplished historian fixates on the creation of a new colonial Board of Trade that was created in 1767 and other British measures to enforce mercantilism. Lossing, Benson John. Our Country: A History of the United States from the Discovery of America to the Present Time, Vol. 8 (New York: 1905), p. vii of supplement. This rather myopic view misses the point. Instead, as is fleshed out, this grievance is a full-frontal assault on Parliament’s claim to rule over the colonies.

a symbolic measure by the empire to save face and expect it will be insignificant: As historian Dr. David Ramsay relates in The History of the American Revolution, In Two Volumes, Vol. I (Dublin: 1793), pp. 65–66:

At the same time that the Stamp Act was repealed, the absolute unlimited supremacy of Parliament, was, in words, asserted. The opposers of the repeal contended for this as essential, the friends of that measure acquiesced in it to strengthen their party, and make sure of their object. Many of both sides thought, that the dignity of Great Britain required something of the kind to counterbalance the loss of authority, that might result from her yielding to the clamors of the colonists. The act for this purpose was called the Declaratory Act, and was in principle more hostile to American rights, than the Stamp Act; for it annulled those resolutions and acts of the provincial assemblies, in which they had asserted their right to exemption from all taxes not imposed by their own representatives; and also enacted, “That the Parliament had, and of right ought to have, power to bind the colonies in all cases whatsoever.”

The bulk of the Americans, intoxicated with the advantage they had gained, overlooked this statute, which in one comprehensive sentence, not only deprived them of liberty and property, but of every right incident to humanity. They considered it as a salvo for the honor of Parliament, in repealing an act which had so lately received their sanction, and flattered themselves it would remain a dead letter, and that although the right of taxation was in words retained, it would never be exercised. Unwilling to contend about paper claims of ideal supremacy, they returned to their habits of good humor with the parent state.

utterly null and void: Parliament. Declaratory Act (March 18, 1766), in Pickering, Danby. The Statutes at Large, from Magna Charta to the End of the Eleventh Parliament of Great Britain, Anno. 1761 [continued to 1806], Vol. XXVII (London: 1767), pp. 19–20.

[n]ot a twentieth part of the people are actually represented: Grenville, George, in The Parliamentary Diaries of Nathan Ryder, 1764–1767, Camden Miscellany Vol. XXIII, Thomas, P.D.G., Camden 4th serv. 7: 229-351, pp. 253-256, quoted in Bullion, John L. A Great and Necessary Measure, George Grenville and the Genesis of the Stamp Act, 1763–1765 (Columbia, Missouri: 1982), p. 157.

yet his life and liberty are things of some importance: Otis, James. Considerations on Behalf of the Colonists in a Letter to a Noble Lord 2nd edition (London: 1765), pp. 5, 6.

virtually represented in the honorable [H]ouse of Commons of Great Britain: Ibid., p. 51.

“Our privileges are all virtual, our sufferings are real”: Lee, Richard Henry. “The Monitor III,” 1769, in Dickinson, John, Arthur Lee, and Richard Henry Lee. The Farmer’s and Monitor’s Letters to the Inhabitants of the British Colonies (Williamsburg: 1769), p. 69.

This my countrymen, would, in the days of superstition, have been called witchcraft: Ibid., pp. 69–70.

whenever this is lost, the constitution must be destroyed: Warren, Joseph. An Oration Delivered March 5th, 1772. At the Request of the Inhabitants of the Town of Boston; to Commemorate the Bloody Tragedy of the Fifth of March, 1770 (Boston: 1772), in The American Revolution, Writings from the Pamphlet Debate, 1764–1772, Wood, Gordon S., ed. (New York, New York: 2025), pp. 749, 751.

being the voters of Great Britain: Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 112.

in all cases of taxation and internal polity: First Continental Congress. Declaration and Resolves (October 14, 1774), in Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress Held at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), pp. 67–68 (cleaned up).

by regal authority, as has been assumed and expertise of late, is illegal: First Continental Congress. Declaration and Resolves (October 14, 1774), in Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress Held at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), pp. 68–69.

freedoms enjoyed by British subjects: UK Parliament. Bill of Rights of 1689. https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/parliamentaryauthority/revolution/collections1/collections-glorious-revolution/billofrights/#:~:text=. Accessed Ides of March (March 15), 2025 (original images).

just the king’s and Parliament’s unfettered authority to lord over the colonists in all cases whatsoever: For more sources on this grievance, see First Continental Congress. Declaration and Resolves (October 14, 1774), in Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress Held at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), pp. 71–73; Phipps, Constantine John. “Remarks at House of Commons,” March 14, 1774, in Force, Peter. American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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, Vol. I (Washington, D.C.: 1833), p. 40; Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10–September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), pp. 146, 148, 149; Hutchinson, Thomas. Strictures upon the Declaration of the Congress at Philadelphia in a Letter to a Noble Lord, &c. (London: October 15, 1776), p. 20; Ridpath, John Clark. James Otis, the Pre-revolutionist: A Brief Interpretation of the Life and Work of a Patriot (Chicago: 1898); Farrell, James M. “The Writs of Assistance and Public Memory: John Adams and the Legacy of James Otis.” The New England Quarterly, vol. 79, no. 4, 2006, pp. 533–556; Lee, Richard Henry. Life of Arthur Lee, LL. D: joint commissioner of the United States to the court of France, and sole commissioner to the courts of Spain and Prussia, during the Revolutionary War. With his political and literary correspondence and his papers on diplomatic and political subjects, and the affairs of the United States during the same period. Vol. I (Boston: 1829); Ramsay, David. The History of the American Revolution, In Two Volumes, Vol. I (Dublin: 1793), pp. 65–66; Howison, Robert R. A History of Virginia from its Discovery and Settlement by Europeans to Present Time, Vol. II (Richmond: 1848), p. 57; Ridpath, John Clark. James Otis, the Pre-revolutionist: A Brief Interpretation of the Life and Work of a Patriot (Chicago: 1898); Farrell, James M. “The Writs of Assistance and Public Memory: John Adams and the Legacy of James Otis.” The New England Quarterly, vol. 79, no. 4, 2006, pp. 533–556; Riggs, A. R. “Arthur Lee, a Radical Virginian in London, 1768–1776.” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 78, no. 3, 1970, pp. 268–80; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 3, 8, 9–10, 15, 226–237, 254; Fisher, Sydney George. “The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257–303, pp. 284–285; Rossiter, Clinton. The American Consensus, 1765–1776, The Causes of the American Revolution, Third Edition (Lexington, Massachusetts: 1973), pp. 143–155; Land, Aubrey C. The Dulanys of Maryland, A Biographical Study of Daniel Dulany, the Elder (1685–1753) and Daniel Dulany, the Younger (1722–1797) (Baltimore: 1955), pp. 263–312; Morgan, Edmund S. Birth of the Republic, 1763–89, Third Edition (Chicago: 1992), p. 25; Latrobe, John H. B. “Biographical Sketch of Daniel Dulany.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 3, no. 1, pp. 1–10; Barker, Charles A. “Maryland Before the Revolution.” The American Historical Review 46, no. 1, 1940), pp. 1–20.

They are wretched conservators of the peace!: Adams, John. “Adams’ Argument for the Defense,” December 4, 1770, in The Adams Papers, Legal Papers of John Adams, Vol. 3 (Cases 63 & 64: The Boston Massacre Cases), Wroth, L. Kinvin and Hiller B. Zobel, eds. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: 1965), p. 266.

fourteenth grievance: Following the thirteenth grievance are nine specific instances of the King and the Parliament’s oppression of the People under pretended legislation. We could designate them 13A, 13B, etc., but that is a bit muddled. More importantly, it is inaccurate. All nine are independent, vital grievances. As such, we continue to number them individually.

lodged in “uninhabited houses, outhouses, barns, or other buildings” as necessary: Parliament. Quartering Act of 1765 (March 24, 1765), in Pickering, Danby. The Statutes at Large, from Magna Charta to the End of the Eleventh Parliament of Great Britain, Anno. 1761 [continued to 1806], Vol. XXVI (London: 1764), p. 306.

such troops are “wretched conservators of the peace!”: Adams, John. “Adams’ Argument for the Defense,” December 4, 1770, in The Adams Papers, Legal Papers of John Adams, Vol. 3 (Cases 63 & 64: The Boston Massacre Cases), Wroth, L. Kinvin and Hiller B. Zobel, eds. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: 1965), p. 266.

if no barracks are available: Parliament. Quartering Act of 1774, in Pickering, Danby. The Statutes at Large, from Magna Charta to the End of the Eleventh Parliament of Great Britain, Anno. 1761 [continued to 1806], Vol. XXX (London: 1773), p. 410.

this is a myth: See, e.g., Wright, Esmond S. Fabric of Freedom 1763–1800 (New York: 1961), p. 68.

The scholarship of Don R. Gerlach in particular exposes the myth. See Gerlach, Don R. “A Note on the Quartering Act of 1774.” The New England Quarterly 39, no. 1, 1966, pp. 80–88.

the quartering troops […] here has proved the occasion of many evils: Adams, John. “Draft Instructions of Boston to its Representatives in the General Court, addressed to John Adams to the Honorable James Otis and Thomas Cushing, Esquires; Mr. Samuel Adams, and John Hancock, Esq.,” May 8, 1769, in The Adams Papers, Papers of John Adams, Vol. 1, September 1755 – October 1773, Taylor, Robert J., ed. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: 1977), pp. 224–230.

It is another grievance warranting revolution: For more sources regarding this grievance, review First Continental Congress. Declaration and Resolves (October 14, 1774), in Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress Held at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), pp. 71–73; Hutchinson, Thomas. Strictures upon the Declaration of the Congress at Philadelphia in a Letter to a Noble Lord, &c. (London: October 15, 1776), p. 21; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 4, 238, 240; Lossing, Benson John. Our Country: A History of the United States from the Discovery of America to the Present Time, Vol. 8 (New York: 1905), p. vii of supplement; Morgan, Edmund S. Birth of the Republic, 1763–89, Third Edition (Chicago: 1992), pp. 33–36; Wright, Esmond S. Fabric of Freedom 1763–1800 (New York: 1961), pp. 59, 68; Ferling, John. Independence, The Struggle to Set America Free (New York: 2011), pp. 44–48; Gerlach, Don R. “A Note on the Quartering Act of 1774.” The New England Quarterly 39, no. 1, 1966, pp. 80–88.

[A] murderous law is framed to shelter villains from the hands of justice: The Suffolk Resolves (September 9, 1774), in Supplement to the Massachusetts-Gazette, September 15, 1774.

in the wake of the Boston Tea Party: One renowned historian mistakenly focuses on a couple of aberrant trials in the pre-revolutionary period in which English defendants are wrongly acquitted. Lossing, Benson John. Our Country: A History of the United States from the Discovery of America to the Present Time, Vol. 8 (New York: 1905), p. vii of supplement. However, all other serious scholars correctly focus on the Administration of Justice Act.

“to shelter villains” from just prosecution: County of Suffolk. The Suffolk Resolves (September 9, 1774), in Supplement to the Massachusetts-Gazette, September 15, 1774.

when they should be guilty of any excesses: B Baldwin, Ebenezer, Stating the heavy Grievances the Colonies labour under from several late Acts of the British Parliament, and shewing what we have just Reason to expect the Consequences of these Measures will be (appendix), in Sherwood, Samuel. A Sermon, Containing Scriptural Instructions to civil rulers, and all free-born subjects […] (New Haven, Connecticut: 1774), p. 65.

would merit that everlasting infamy now fixed on the authors of the act!: Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Thomas. Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 114.

from their circumstances cannot, be there represented: House of Burgesses. Instructions to the Continental Congress (August 1, 1774), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), p. 79.

as one of the causes for taking up arms against Great Britain: Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10–September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), p. 145.

For additional sources on this grievance, review P Parliament. Administration Act of 1774, in Pickering, Danby. The Statutes at Large, from Magna Charta to the End of the Eleventh Parliament of Great Britain, Anno. 1761 [continued to 1806], Vol. XXX (London: 1773), p. 367; Hutchinson, Thomas. Strictures upon the Declaration of the Congress at Philadelphia in a Letter to a Noble Lord, &c. (London: October 15, 1776), pp. 21–22.; First Continental Congress. Declaration and Resolves (October 14, 1774), in Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress Held at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), p. 64; Ramsay, The History of the American Revolution, In Two Volumes, Vol. I (Dublin: 1793), pp. 95–97; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 240-242; Middlekauff, Robert. The Glorious Cause, The American Revolution, 1763–1789 (Oxford, United Kingdom: 1982), pp. 230–231, 239; Ferling, John. Independence, The Struggle to Set America Free (New York: 2011), pp. 46, 59–60; Sosin, Jack M. “The Massachusetts Acts of 1774: Coercive or Preventive?” Huntington Library Quarterly 26, no. 3, 1963, pp. 235–52.

threaten destruction to the lives, liberty, and property of his majesty’s subjects in North America: First Continental Congress. The Association (October 20, 1774), in Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress Held at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), pp. 68–69.

without […] contributing to the emolument of the mother country: Æquus. “Letter to the Author,” The London Magazine or Gentleman’s Monthly Intelligencer, Vol. XXXV, For the Year 1766, By His Majesty’s Authority, January 16, 1766 (London: 1766), pp. 32–36, p. 34.

enforcement of the Navigation Acts in New York: Morgan, Edmund S. Birth of the Republic, 1763-89, Third Edition (Chicago: 1992), p. 11.

to feed on the fat of the land, and annoy, impoverish and perplex us: Anonymous. “Extract from a letter from a Gentleman in Virginia, to his Friend in Boston,” Pennsylvania Gazette, August 18, 1768, in Martin, Alfred S. “The King’s Customs: Philadelphia, 1763-1774.” The William and Mary Quarterly 5, no. 2, 1948, pp. 201–16, p. 207.

This meeting can do nothing more to save the country: Adams, Samuel, in Bancroft, George. History of the United States of America, From the Discovery of the American Continent, Vol. VI (Boston: 1874–1878), p. 486.

too plainly prove a deliberate and systematical plan of reducing us to slavery: Jefferson, Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 110.

Viewed in this broader context, it is a vital reason why we declare independence: For additional sources about this grievance, see First Continental Congress. The Association (October 20, 1774), in Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress Held at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), pp. 68–76; Broadside, in Langguth, A. J., Patriots, The Men Who Started the American Revolution (New York: 1988), pp. 175–176; Adams, Abigail. “Abigail Adams to Mercy Otis Warren, December 5, 1773,” in Letters of Mrs. Adams: The Wife of John Adams, With An Introductory Memoir by Her Grandson, Charles Francis Adams, Fourth Edition (Boston: 1848), p. 10; Pratt, Charles (Lord Camden). Lord Camden’s Speech on the New England Fishery Bill (Newport: 1775); Watson-Wentworth, Charles (Lord Rockingham). The Norwich Packet and the Connecticut, Massachusetts, New-Hampshire, and Rhode-Island Weekly Advertiser, April 7–14, 1776 (emphasis in original), quoted in Magra, Christopher P. “Fisherman, Fish Merchants, and the Origins of the American Navy.” International Journal of Naval History, vol. 8, no. 1, April 2009; Wright, Esmond S. Fabric of Freedom 1763-1800 (New York: 1961), pp. 34–36, 39; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 242–244; Morgan, Edmund S. Birth of the Republic, 1763–89, Third Edition (Chicago: 1992), pp. 9–11; Middlekauff, Robert. The Glorious Cause, The American Revolution, 1763-1789 (Oxford, United Kingdom: 1982), pp. 60, 226; Hacker, Louis Morton. The Triumph of American Capitalism: The Development of Forces in American History to the End of the Nineteenth Century (New York: 1940), pp. 18–19; Allen, Danielle. Our Declaration, A Reading of the Declaration of Independence in Defense of Equality (New York: 2014), p. 225; Phillips, Kevin. 1775, A Good Year for a Revolution (New York: 2012), pp. 30, 95–97, 143–145, 233, 257–259, 318, 324; Lossing, Benson John. Our Country: A History of the United States from the Discovery of America to the Present Time, Vol. 8 (New York: 1905), pp. vii–viii, n 6 of supplement; Hacker, Louis M. Economic and Social Origins of the American Revolution, in The Causes of the American Revolution, 3rd Edition, Wahlke, John C., ed. (Lexington, Massachusetts: 1973), pp. 1–27; Langguth, A. J., Patriots, The Men Who Started the American Revolution (New York: 1988), p. 175; Bancroft, George. History of the United States of America, From the Discovery of the American Continent, Vol. VI (Boston: 1874–1878), pp. 465–489; Gipson, Lawrence Henry, The American Revolution as an Aftermath of the Great War for the Empire, 1754–1763, in The Causes of the American Revolution, 3rd Edition, Wahlke, John C., ed. (Lexington, Massachusetts: 1973), pp. 51–68.

have a manifest tendency to subvert the rights and liberties of the colonists: Stamp Act Congress. Resolutions (October 19, 1765), in Journal of the First Congress of the American Colonies in Opposition to the Tyrannical Acts of the British Parliament Held at New York, October 7, 1763 (New York: 1845), p. 28.

in particular the House of Commons: The House of Lords is hereditary. However, new members may be appointed by the King.

support and obedience on the part of the governed: Grenville, George. “Remarks at Parliament February 6, 1765,” in The Parliamentary Diaries of Nathan Ryder, 1764–1767, Camden Miscellany Vol. XXIII ed. Thomas, P.D.G. Camden 4th serv. 7: 229–351, at pp. 253-256, in Bullion, John L. A Great and Necessary Measure, George Grenville and the Genesis of the Stamp Act, 1763–1765 (Columbia, Missouri: 1982), pp. 157–158.

to destroy British as well as American freedom: House of Burgesses. Virginia Resolves (May 29, 1765). Journal of the House of Burgesses of Virginia, 1761–1765, Pendleton, John, ed. (Richmond, Virginia 1907), p. 360, in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), p. 55.

adapted to the character of free men and subjects, assert this natural and constitutional right: Massachusetts General Court. Massachusetts Circular Letter (February 11, 1768), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), p. 66.

is the most to be dreaded—slavery, and its terrible concomitants: New York Sons of Liberty. Resolutions on Tea (November 26, 1773), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), p. 83.

agreeable to their sovereign wills and pleasure: Downer, Silas. A Discourse at the Dedication of the Tree of Liberty (1768), in American Political Writing During the Founding Era, 1760–1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis, 1983), p. 104.

shall be deemed an enemy to the liberties of America: New York Sons of Liberty. Resolutions on Tea (November 26, 1773), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), p. 83.

in all cases of taxation and internal polity: First Continental Congress. Declaration and Resolves (October 14, 1774), in Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress Held at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), p. 68.

exclusive right to dispose of our own property: Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10–September 20 (Washington, D.C.: 1905), pp. 154, 156.

The time is now to fight to preserve our natural rights: For more regarding this grievance, review Parliament. Parliament. Stamp Act, in Pickering, Danby. The Statutes at Large, from Magna Charta to the End of the Eleventh Parliament of Great Britain, Anno. 1761 [continued to 1806], Vol. XXVI (London: 1764), pp. 179–187; Stamp Act Congress. Journal of the First Congress of the American Colonies in Opposition to the Tyrannical Acts of the British Parliament Held at New-York, October 7, 1763 (New York: 1845), pp. 28–30; Declaratory Act (March 18, 1766), in Pickering, Danby. The Statutes at Large, from Magna Charta to the End of the Eleventh Parliament of Great Britain, Anno. 1761 [continued to 1806], Vol. XXVII (London: 1767), pp. 19–20; London Merchants. Petition of London Merchants Against the Stamp Act (January 17, 1766), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), pp. 59–60; Stamp Act Congress. Journal of the First Congress of the American Colonies in Opposition to the Tyrannical Acts of the British Parliament Held at New York, October 7, 1763 (New York: 1845), pp. 28–30; House of Burgesses. Virginia Resolves (May 29, 1765). Journal of the House of Burgesses of Virginia, 1761-1765, Pendleton, John, ed. (Richmond, Virginia 1907), p. 360, quoted in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), p. 55; Parliament. The Revenue Act of 1767 (June 29, 1767), in Pickering, Danby. The Statutes at Large, from Magna Charta to the End of the Eleventh Parliament of Great Britain, Anno. 1761 [continued to 1806], Vol. XXVII (London: 1767), p. 505; Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10–September 20 (Washington, D.C.: 1905), pp. 154, 156; Grenville, George. “Remarks at Parliament,” February 6, 1765, in The Parliamentary Diaries of Nathan Ryder, 1764–1767, Camden Miscellany Vol. XXIII, Camden 4th serv. 7: 229–351, Thomas, P. D. G., ed., pp. 253–256, in Bullion, John L. A Great and Necessary Measure, George Grenville and the Genesis of the Stamp Act, 1763–1765 (Columbia, Missouri: 1982), pp. 157–158; Hutchinson, Thomas. Strictures upon the Declaration of the Congress at Philadelphia in a Letter to a Noble Lord, &c. (London: October 15, 1776), p. 291; Massachusetts General Court. Massachusetts Circular Letter (February 11, 1768), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), p. 66; Whately, Thomas. “Thomas Whately to John Temple, October 4, 1763,” in Baldwin-Temple Papers, Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society, 6th ser. 9 (Boston: 1897), p. 60, quoted in Bullion, John L. A Great and Necessary Measure, George Grenville and the Genesis of the Stamp Act, 1763–1765 (Columbia, Missouri: 1982), p. 5; New York General Assembly. Petition to the House of Commons (October 18, 1764), in Prologue to Revolution, Sources and Documents on the Stamp Act Crisis, 1764-1766, Morgan, Edmund S., ed. (Chapel Hill, North Carolina: 1959), pp. 9–10; Gipson, Lawrence Henry, The American Revolution as an Aftermath of the Great War for the Empire, 1754–1763, in The Causes of the American Revolution, 3rd Edition, Wahlke, John C., ed. (Lexington, Massachusetts: 1973), pp. 51–68; Wright, Esmond S. Fabric of Freedom 1763-1800 (New York: 1961), pp. 51–54; Middlekauff, Robert. The Glorious Cause, The American Revolution, 1763–1789 (Oxford, United Kingdom: 1982), p. 68.

For more on Patrick Henry, review Wirt, William. Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry Ninth Edition (Philadelphia: 1836); Tyler, Moses Coit. American Statesmen, Patrick Henry, Morse, Jr., John T., ed. (Boston: 1894); Meade, Robert Douthat. Patrick Henry, Practical Revolutionary (Philadelphia: 1969); Kukla, Jon. Patrick Henry, Champion of Liberty (New York: 2017).

To these grievous acts and measures Americans cannot submit: First Continental Congress. Declaration and Resolves (October 14, 1774), in Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress Held at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), p. 80.

a review of its vital importance is justified: Having presided over more than 400 jury trials during more than twenty-two years of judicial service, I have found that quite the opposite is true. Once jurors understand why the right to a jury is important (as opposed to the alternatives), most citizens are willing to suffer it. Once they complete their service, most relish it.

the Norman invasion of England by King William the Conqueror in 1066: The Normans are Vikings who settle in the Duchy of Normandy in modern-day France in the 900s. England’s Anglo-Saxon King Edward the Confessor, whose mother is Norman, dies in 1066 without an heir. His demise unleashes complicated, conniving, and dangerous political machinations. Duke William of Normandy asserts a claim on the English throne and invades. Meanwhile, Edward the Confessor’s brother-in-law, Harold Godwinson, takes the throne. Putting aside more intrigue, the important point is that at the Battle of Hastings, Godwinson is slain and William conquers England. Accounts differ on whether the fatal wound is an arrow in the eye, an arrow in the head, or a sword wound from William’s own hand. No matter the fashion of Godwinson’s death, Duke William captures the throne and becomes known to history as William the Conqueror.

Magna Carta of 1225: UK Parliament. The Maga Carta of 1225. The National Archives, The British Library, The National Library of the UK, https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/magna-carta/british-library-magna-carta-1215-runnymede/. Accessed March 14, 2025. (“No free man shall in future be arrested or imprisoned or disseised of his freehold, liberties or free customs, or outlawed or exiled or victimised in any other way, neither will we attack him or send anyone to attack him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land. To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay right or justice”).

Magna Carta of 1297: UK Parliament. The Maga Carta of 1297. The National Archives, The British Library, The National Library of the UK, https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/magna-carta/magna-carta-1297/. Accessed March 14, 2025 (“No free man shall in future be arrested or imprisoned or disseised of his freehold, liberties or free customs, or outlawed or exiled or victimised in any other way, neither will we attack him or send anyone to attack him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land. To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay right or justice”).

to the disturbance of the peace of […] the king: Penn, William. The Peoples Ancient and Just Liberties Asserted, in the Tryal of William Penn, and William Mead, at the Sessions Held at the Old-Baily in London, the First, Third, Fourth and Fifth of Sept. 70. Against the Most Arbitrary Procedure of that Court (United Kingdom: 1670), p.6.

freedom against unjust and tyrannical government prosecutions and judges: Bushell’s Case, Vaughan, 135 (1670); 1 Charles II, 1670, Howell’s State Trials, Vol. 6, Page 951 (6 How. 951), in Selected Statutes, Cases and Documents to Illustrate English Constitutional History, 1660–1832, with a Supplement from 1832–1894, Robertson, C. Grant, ed. (New York: 1904), pp. 225, 228.

trials for high treason ought to be freeholders: Parliament. Bill of Rights of 1689, in Sources of Our Liberties, Documentary Origins of Individual Liberties in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, Perry, Richard L., ed. (Rahway, New Jersey: 1960), p. 247.

“[u]pon which there were three huzza[h]s” in the courtroom: The Tryal of John Peter Zenger of New York, Printer, Who was lately Try’d and Acquitted for Printing and Publishing a Libel Against the Government, With Pleadings and Arguments on both sides (London: 1738), p. 30.

the sheriff had collects out of the “vulgar herd”: Maury, James. “Rev. James Maury to Rev. John Camm., December 12, 1763,” in Fontaine, James, John Fontaine, and James Maury. Memoirs of a Huguenot Family (New York, 1852), p. 419.

they are all “honest men,” and they are sworn in at once: Ibid., p. 420.

In the language of those who heard him on this occasion, “he made their blood run cold, and their hair to rise on end.”: Wirt, William. Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry (Philadelphia: 1817), pp. 25–26. Wirt explains that this is no fantasy, but well-grounded in eyewitness accounts:

It will not be difficult for anyone, who ever heard this most extraordinary man, to believe the whole account of this transaction which is given by his surviving hearers […]

Ibid. at 26.

cries tears of joy: Wirt elaborates:

They say, that the people, whose countenances had fallen as he arose, had heard but a very few sentences before they began to look up; then to look at each other with surprise, as if doubting the evidence of their own senses; then, attracted by some strong gesture, struck by some majestic attitude, fascinated by the spell of his eye, the charm of his emphasis, and the varied and commanding expression of his countenance, they could look away no more. In less than twenty minutes, they might be seen in every part of the house, on every bench, in every window, stooping forward from their stands, in death-like silence; their features fixed in amazement and awe; all their senses listening and riveted upon the speaker; as if to catch the last strain of some heavenly visitant. The mockery of the clergy was soon turned into alarm; their triumph into confusion and despair; and at one burst of his rapid and overwhelming invective, they fled from the bench in precipitation and terror. As for the father, such was his surprise, such his amazement, such his rapture, that, forgetting where he was, and the character which he was filling, tears of ecstasy streamed down his cheeks, without the power or inclination to repress them.

Ibid., pp. 26–27.

degenerated into a tyrant, and forfeits all right to his subjects’ obedience: Maury, James. “Rev. James Maury to Rev. John Camm.,” December 12, 1763, in Fontaine, James, John Fontaine, and James Maury. Memoirs of a Huguenot Family (New York, 1852), p. 421.

that your worships could hear it without emotion, or any mark of dissatisfaction: Ibid., p. 423.

a kind and benevolent and Patriot governor: Ibid., p. 422.

beyond any other method of trial in the world: Blackstone, William. Commentaries on the Laws of England, Vol. III (Oxford, United Kingdom: 1768), p. 355.

the grand bulwark of his liberties: Blackstone, William. Commentaries on the Laws of England, Vol. IV (Oxford, United Kingdom: 1768), p. 342.

which may sap and undermine it: Ibid., p. 343.

a jury trial as a “great right”: First Continental Congress. Letter to the Inhabitants of Quebec (October 26, 1774), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. I 1774, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1904), p. 107.

directly repugnant to the Great Charter [the Magna Carta] itself: Town of Braintree. Instructions (October 14, 1765), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), pp. 56–57.

subvert the rights and liberties of the colonists: Stamp Act Congress. Journal of the First Congress of the American Colonies in Opposition to the Tyrannical Acts of the British Parliament Held at New York, October 7, 1763 (New York: 1845), pp. 28–29.

admiralty courts as “subversive of American rights”: First Continental Congress. Declaration and Resolves (October 14, 1774), in Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress Held at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), p. 64.

This fundamental oppression warrants revolution: Additional resources for this grievance include Penn, William. The Peoples Ancient and Just Liberties Asserted, in the Tryal of William Penn, and William Mead, at the Sessions Held at the Old-Baily in London, the First, Third, Fourth and Fifth of Sept. 70. Against the Most Arbitrary Procedure of that Court (United Kingdom: 1670); The Report of an action of assault, battery and wounding, tried in the Supreme Court of Judicature for the province of New York, in the term of October 1764, between Thomas Forsey, plaintiff, and Waddel Cunningham, defendant (New York: 1764); Massachusetts. Body of Liberties, Sections 29, 30, 31, 49, 50, and 76, in Sources of Our Liberties, Documentary Origins of Individual Liberties in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, Perry, Richard L., ed. (Rahway, New Jersey: 1960), pp. 151–153, 156; West New Jersey. Concessions and Agreements of West New Jersey, The Charter or Fundamental Laws, of West New Jersey, Agreed Upon, in Sources of Our Liberties, Documentary Origins of Individual Liberties in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, Perry, Richard L., ed. (Rahway, New Jersey: 1960), p. 187; Pennsylvania. Frame of Government of Pennsylvania, Laws Agreed Upon in England, &c., Section VIII, April 25, 1682, in Sources of Our Liberties, Documentary Origins of Individual Liberties in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, Perry, Richard L., ed. (Rahway, New Jersey: 1960), p. 217; Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10–September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), p. 145; Wirt, William. Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry Ninth Edition (Philadelphia: 1836); Rembar, Charles. The Law of the Land, The Evolution of Our Legal System (New York: 1989), pp. 116–141; Kari, Sadakat. The Trial, A History, from Socrates to O. J. Simpson (New York: 2005), pp. 69-105; Deutsch, Eberhard P. “Hugh Latimer’s Candle and the Trial of William Penn.” American Bar Association Journal, vol. 51, no. 7, 1965, pp. 624–31; Johnson, Herbert A. and George Harison. “George Harison’s Protest: New Light On Forsey versus Cunningham.” New York History, vol. 50, no. 1, 1969, pp. 61–82; Helmholz, R. H. “The Early History of the Grand Jury and the Canon Law.” The University of Chicago Law Review, vol. 50, no. 2, 1983, pp. 613–27; Alschuler, Albert W. and Andrew G. Deiss. “A Brief History of the Criminal Jury in the United States.” The University of Chicago Law Review, vol. 61, no. 3, 1994, pp. 867–928.

the strongest reason to apprehend that we shall soon experience the fatal effects of this act: Town of Boston. The Votes and Proceedings of the Freeholders and other Inhabitants of the Town of Boston, in Town Meeting Assembled, According to Law (a/k/a the “Boston Pamphlet”) (Boston: 1772), pp. 25–26.

with jurors drawn from across Oakland County: I have personally presided over more than twenty murder trials in Oakland County, Michigan with such jurors.

It can only stop with revolution: For additional sources involving this grievance, review The Statutes at Large: From the Tenth Year of the Reign of King George III to the Thirteenth Year of the Reign of King George III, Vol. XI (London: 1774), pp. 402–403; House of Burgesses. Resolves (May 16, 1769), in Journals of the House of Burgesses of Virginia, 1766–1769, Kennedy, John Pendleton ed. (Richmond, Virginia: 1906); Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Thomas. Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 114; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 248–250; Ferling, John. Independence, The Struggle to Set America Free (New York: 2011), p. 46; Norton, Mary Beth. 1774, The Long Year of Revolution (New York: 2020), pp. 101–103, 107, 132, 133–134 143, 158, 163, 228, 312; Phillips, Kevin. 1775, A Good Year for a Revolution (New York: 2012), pp. 217, 266, 346, 493, 497; Morgan, Edmund. S. Birth of the Republic, 1763–89, Third Edition (Chicago: 1992), pp. 16, 27, 38, 59; Wright, Esmond S. Fabric of Freedom 1763–1800 (New York: 1961), pp. 39, 68; Messer, Peter C. “A Most Insulting Violation, The Burning of the HMS ‘Gaspee’ and the Delaying of the American Revolution.” The New England Quarterly, vol. 88, no. 4, 2015, pp. 582–622.

be led blindfold into a real and destructive Charybdis [a man-eating whirlpool monster waiting on the other side of the strait]: Hamilton, Alexander. Remarks on the Quebec Bill, No. II (June 22, 1775), in The Works of Alexander Hamilton, Comprising his Correspondence and His Political and Official Writings, Exclusive of the Federalist, Civil and Military, Published from the Original Manuscripts Deposited in the Department of State by Order of the Joint Library Committed of Congress, Vol. II, Hamilton, John C., ed. (New York: 1855), pp. 137–138.

“the worst grievance” against the empire: Holton, Woody. Forced Founders: Indians, Debtors, Slaves, and the Making of the American Revolution in Virginia (Chapel Hill: 1999), p. 36.

as any act that has been passed by the British parliament: Baldwin, Ebenezer. Stating the heavy Grievances the Colonies labour under from several late Acts of the British Parliament, and shewing what we have just Reason to expect the Consequences of these Measures will be (appendix), in Sherwood, Samuel. A Sermon, Containing Scriptural Instructions to civil rulers, and all free-born subjects […] (New Haven, Connecticut: 1774), p. 67.

the universal sense of America, that it has none: Adams, John. “Novanglus Essay No. 6,” March 6, 1775, in Novanglus, and Massachusettensis Political Essays, Published in the Years 1774 and 1775, on the Principal Points of Controversy, between Great Britain and Her Colonies (Boston: 1819), p. 91.

the law considers them all but in one and the same light?: Drayton, William Henry. A letter from Freeman of South-Carolina, to the deputies of North America, assembled in the High Court of Congress at Philadelphia (Charles-Town, South Carolina: 1774), p. 22.

to the civil rights and liberties of all America: County of Suffolk. The Suffolk Resolves (September 9, 1774), in Supplement to the Massachusetts-Gazette, September 15, 1774.

submit to the unlimited claims of parliament?: Adams, John. “Novanglus Essay No. 3,” March 6, 1775, in Novanglus, and Massachusettensis Political Essays, Published in the Years 1774 and 1775, on the Principal Points of Controversy, between Great Britain and Her Colonies (Boston: 1819), p. 35.

been repeatedly and flagrantly violated: First Continental Congress. To the People of Great-Britain, from the Delegates appointed by the several English Colonies of New-Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, the Lower-Counties of Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North-Carolina and South-Carolina, to consider their grievances in General Congress, at Philadelphia (September 5, 1774 and approved October 21, 1774), in Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress Held at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), p. 80.

to the same state of slavery with themselves: Ibid., p. 89.

reduce us to a state of perfect humiliation and slavery: First Continental Congress. To the People of Great-Britain, from the Delegates appointed by the several English Colonies of New-Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, the Lower-Counties of Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North-Carolina and South-Carolina, to consider their grievances in General Congress, at Philadelphia (September 5, 1774 and approved October 21, 1774), in Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress Held at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), pp. 89–90.

most dangerous and destructive of American rights: First Continental Congress. Declaration and Resolves (October 14, 1774), in Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress Held at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), p. 59.

a despotism dangerous to our very existence: Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10-September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), p. 142.

Only revolution will defeat this diabolical plot: Additional sources for this grievance include Hutchinson, Thomas. Strictures upon the Declaration of the Congress at Philadelphia in a Letter to a Noble Lord, &c. (London: October 15, 1776), pp. 25–26; Hamilton, Alexander. Remarks on the Quebec Bill, No. II (June 22, 1775), in The Works of Alexander Hamilton, Comprising his Correspondence and His Political and Official Writings, Exclusive of the Federalist, Civil and Military, Published from the Original Manuscripts Deposited in the Department of State by Order of the Joint Library Committed of Congress, Vol. II, Hamilton, John C., ed. (New York: 1855), p. 136; Ramsay, The History of the American Revolution, In Two Volumes, Vol. I (Dublin: 1793), pp. 97–99; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 250–251; Lossing, Benson John. Our Country: A History of the United States from the Discovery of America to the Present Time, Vol. 8 (New York: 1905), p. viii of supplement; Fisher, Sydney George. “The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257–303, pp. 257–303, pp. 291–292, 303; Ferling, John. Independence, The Struggle to Set America Free (New York: 2011), pp. 47–48, 314; Norton, Mary Beth. 1774, The Long Year of Revolution (New York: 2020), pp. 130, 158, 173, 187, 194, 226, 303; Phillips, Kevin. 1775, A Good Year for a Revolution (New York: 2012), pp. 8, 85, 88–90, 97, 217, 265, 274–276, 278–279, 284–286, 463; Middlekauff, Robert. The Glorious Cause, The American Revolution, 1763-1789 (Oxford, United Kingdom: 1982), pp. 231, 239, 280; Langguth, A. J., Patriots, The Men Who Started the American Revolution (New York: 1988), pp. 315–316, 357; Morgan, Edmund. S. Birth of the Republic, 1763–89, Third Edition (Chicago: 1992), pp. 60, 118; Wright, Esmond S. Fabric of Freedom 1763–1800 (New York: 1961), pp. 69–70; Smock, Geoff. “Blame Canada: The Quebec Act & The American. Revolution.” Journal of the American Revolution, January 12, 2017, https://allthingsliberty.com/2017/01/blame-canada-quebec-act-american-revolution/#_edn20. Accessed March 14; Lilly, William. England (Since the Reformation), The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 5 (New York: 1909); “Anti-Catholic Spirit of the Colonies as Shown in the Passage of the Quebec Bill.” The American Catholic Historical Researches, vol. 7, no. 4, 1911, pp. 384–90; Pious, Richard. “Canada and the Crisis of Quebec,” Journal of International Affairs, vol. 27, no. 1, 1973, pp. 53–65.

by the laws of the British Constitution, and the charter of the province: County of Suffolk. The Suffolk Resolves (September 9, 1774), in Supplement to the Massachusetts-Gazette, September 15, 1774.

by any submissions to the barbarous edict: Adams, Samuel. The Writings of Samuel Adams Vol. III, 1773–1777, Cushing, Harry A., ed. (New York: 1907), p. 151.

Lieut.-Governor Oliver begged I would not send troops there as it would be fatal to him: Gage, Thomas. “Thomas Gage to Lord Dartmouth,” September 2, 1774, in Documents of the American Revolution, Colonial Office Series, Vol. VII, Calendar 1774–30 June 1775, Davies, K. G., ed. (Dublin: 1974), p. 163.

justly entitled by the laws of nature, the British Constitution, and the charter of the province: County of Suffolk. The Suffolk Resolves (September 9, 1774), in Supplement to the Massachusetts-Gazette, September 15, 1774.

violates “the rights of the colonists”: First Continental Congress. Declaration and Resolves (October 14, 1774), in Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress Held at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), p. 63.

altering the charter and government of the Massachusetts-Bay: First Continental Congress. Declaration and Resolves (October 14, 1774), in Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress Held at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), p. 64.

by acts of its own legislature solemnly confirmed by the Crown: Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10-September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), p. 142.

The same fate awaits the rest of the colonists unless they resist: For additional sources regarding this grievance, review Parliament. Massachusetts Government Act (May 20, 1774), Pickering, Danby. The Statutes at Large, from Magna Charta to the End of the Eleventh Parliament of Great Britain, Anno. 1761 [continued to 1806], Vol. XXX (London: 1764), pp. 381–390; Middlekauff, Robert. The Glorious Cause, The American Revolution, 1763–1789 (Oxford, United Kingdom: 1982), pp. 231, 239, 280; Norton, Mary Beth. 1774, The Long Year of Revolution (New York: 2020), pp. 101–103, 107, 132–133, 143–146, 158, 163, 165–166, 169, 186, 216, 289, 303, 306, 311, 326; Wright, Esmond S. Fabric of Freedom 1763–1800 (New York: 1961), pp. 68–69; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 252–254; Osgood, Herbert L. “England and the American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century.” Political Science Quarterly, vol. 17, no. 2, 1902, pp. 206–22; Muldoon, James. “Colonial Charters: Possessory or Regulatory?” Law and History Review, vol. 36, no. 2, 2018, pp. 355–81; Osgood, Herbert L. “The Proprietary Province as a Form of Colonial Government.” The American Historical Review, vol. 2, no. 4, 1897, pp. 644–64; Achenwall, Professor, and J. G. Rosengarten. “Achenwall’s Observations on North America, 1767.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 27, no. 1, 1903, pp. 1–19.

declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever: Jefferson, Thomas. Draft Constitution for Virginia (June 1776), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), pp. 336–337.

quartering the king’s troops posted there for its protection and defense against the French and Indian enemies: Hutchinson, Thomas. Strictures upon the Declaration of the Congress at Philadelphia in a Letter to a Noble Lord, &c. (London: October 15, 1776), p. 25.

subjects of the crown of Great Britain, in all cases whatsoever: Parliament. Declaratory Act (March 18, 1766), in Pickering, Danby. The Statutes at Large, from Magna Charta to the End of the Eleventh Parliament of Great Britain, Anno. 1761 [continued to 1806], Vol. XXVII (London: 1767), p. 20.

utterly null and void to all intents and purposes whatsoever: Ibid.

Do those who disembark freemen in Great Britain, disembark slaves in America?: Wilson, James. Considerations on the Authority of Parliament (Philadelphia: August 1774), in Collected Works of James Wilson Vol. I, Hall, Kermit L. and Hall, Mark David, eds. (Carmel, Indiana: 2007), pp. 15–16.

than to choose an emperor of China!: Town of Boston. The Votes and Proceedings of the Freeholders and other Inhabitants of the Town of Boston, in Town Meeting Assembled, According to Law (a.k.a. the “Boston Pamphlet”) (Boston: 1772), pp. 29–30.

to which such despotism would reduce us: Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10–September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), pp. 146–147.

fully vesting in Parliament unlimited power over the colonies: For additional sources in connection with this grievance, review Bland, Richard. An Inquiry into the Rights of the British Colonies, May 26, 1768, in American Political Writing During the Founding Era, 1760–1805, Vol. I, Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz, eds. (Indianapolis, 1983), p. 70; Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10–September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), pp. 140–141; Howison, Robert R. A History of Virginia from its Discovery and Settlement by Europeans to Present Time, Vol. II (Richmond: 1848), p. 57; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 3, 8, 9–10, 15, 252–254; Howison, Robert R. A History of Virginia from its Discovery and Settlement by Europeans to Present Time, Vol. II (Richmond: 1848), p. 57; Middlekauff, Robert. The Glorious Cause, The American Revolution, 1763–1789 (Oxford, United Kingdom: 1982), p. 117; Rossiter, Clinton. “The American Consensus, 1765–1776,” in The Causes of the American Revolution, Third Edition (Lexington, Massachusetts: 1973), pp. 143–155; Wright, Esmond S. Fabric of Freedom 1763–1800 (New York: 1961), p. 57; Temperley, H. W. V. “Debates on the Declaratory Act and the Repeal of the Stamp Act, 1766.” The American Historical Review, vol. 17, no. 3, 1912, pp. 563–86; Morgan, Edmund S. “Colonial Ideas of Parliamentary Power 1764–1766.” The William and Mary Quarterly, vol. 5, no. 3, 1948, pp. 311–41.

by insult and murder—who called your patience, cowardice; your piety, hypocrisy: Adams, Samuel. An Oration Delivered at the State-House in Philadelphia to A Very Numerous Audience on Thursday the 1st of August 1776 (Philadelphia: 1776), pp. 38–40.

spread destruction and devastation around him: Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10–September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), p. 152.

all treasons and traitorous conspiracies which they shall know to be against us, our crown and dignity: George III. A Proclamation by the King, for Suppressing Rebellion and Sedition (London: August 23, 1775), in Force, Peter. American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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, Vol. III (Washington, D.C.: 1837), p. 241.

greatly augmented my land forces: George III. “Remarks at Parliament,” October 26, 1775, in Force, Peter. American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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, Vol. VI (Washington, D.C.: 1846), p. 1.

rob us of our property, to burn our houses, and to spill our blood: Town of Boston. Instructions of the Town of Boston to their Representatives (May 23, 1776), in Force, Peter. American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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, Vol. VI (Washington, D.C.: 1837), p. 557.

treating Americans as foreign enemies, and runs roughshod over limited government: For more sources regarding this grievance, review Parliament. Prohibitory Act (December 21, 1775), in Pickering, Danby. The Statutes at Large, from Magna Charta to the End of the Eleventh Parliament of Great Britain, Anno. 1761 [continued to 1806], Vol. XXXI (London: 1775), pp. 135–154; Adams, John. “John Adams to Horatio Gates, March 23, 1776, in Adams, John. The Adams Papers, Papers of John Adams, vol. 2, February–August 1776, Taylor, Robert J., ed. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: 1979), pp. 58–60; Ramsay, David. The History of the American Revolution, In Two Volumes, Vol. I (Dublin: 1793), pp. 119–183; Norton, Mary Beth. 1774, The Long Year of Revolution (New York: 2020), pp. 207–340; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 254–256; Maier, Pauline. American Scripture, Making the Declaration of Independence (New York, 1997), pp. 24–25, 78, 151; Fisher, Sydney George. “The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257–303, pp. 257–303, pp. 294–295; Allen, John Richard. General Gage in America, Being Principally A History of His Role in the American Revolution (Baton Rouge: 1948), pp. 218–251.

that the sword of their country should avenge their wrongs: Town of Malden. Instructions (May 27, 1776), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), p. 97.

will ever convince those foolish bad people that England is in earnest: Pitcairn, John. “John Pitcairn to Lord John Montagu, March 4, 1775,” in Naval Documents of the American Revolution Vol. 1, Clark, William B., ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1966), p. 125.

the burning of Charles town [sic] and Roxbury: Graves, Samuel. “Narrative of Vice Admiral Samuel Graves, April 19, 1775,” in Naval Documents of the American Revolution Vol. 1, Clark, William B., ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1966), p. 193.

which continued without intermission, an hour and an half: “Letter from Bristol, Rhode Island, to a New York Correspondent, Bristol Rhode Island, October 12, 1775,” in New York Gazette (October 23, 1775), in Naval Documents of the American Revolution Vol. 2, Clark, William B., ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1966), p. 420.

burn and destroy such seaport towns as are accessible to his majesty’s ships: Graves, Samuel. “Vice Admiral Samuel Graves to Lieutenant Henry Mowat, H. M. Armed Vessel Canceaux, October 6, 1775,” in Naval Documents of the American Revolution Vol. 2, Clark, William B., ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1966), p. 324.

cannot with ease be brought away: Ibid.

by divine Providence marvellously protected: Trumbull, Jonathan. “Jonathan Trumbull to George Washington [extract], September 15, 1776,” in Naval Documents of the American Revolution Vol. 2, Clark, William B., ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1966), p. 109.

a just punishment on the town of Falmouth: Mowat, Henry. “Lieutenant Henry Mowat, R. N., to the People of Falmouth, Canceaux Falmouth, February 16, 1775,” in Naval Documents of the American Revolution Vol. 2, Clark, William B., ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1966), p. 471.

every hostile act practiced among civilized nations: Washington, George. “George Washington to the President of Congress, October 24, 1775,” in George Washington Papers, Series 2, Letterbooks 1754 to 1799, Letterbook 7, June 24, 1775-March 13, 1776. Manuscript/Mixed Materials. Library of Congress, www.loc.gov/item/mgw2.007/ (image 118 of 272). Accessed November March 14, 2025.

[t]he detested town of Norfolk is no more!: “Midshipman on board His Majesty’s Ship Otter, commanded by Capt. Squires [extract], January 9, 1776,” in The London Chronicle, March 5, 1776, p. 222, quoted in Parsons, H. S. “Contemporary English Accounts of the Destruction of Norfolk in 1776.” The William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine, vol. 13, no. 4, 1933, pp. 219–24, p. 220.

spelled out by Admiral Graves and reiterated by Lord George Germain: Phillips, Kevin. 1775, A Good Year for a Revolution (New York: 2012), p. 341

whether they will not be driving to repel injury by injury: Hurtley, David. Lord North’s Prohibitory Bill (London(?): December 21, 1775), p. 1.

he is exerting his utmost power to spread destruction and devastation around him: Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10–September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), p. 149 (“Soon after, the commercial intercourse of whole colonies, with foreign countries, and with each other, was cut off by an act of parliament; by another several of them were entirely prohibited from the fisheries in the seas near their coasts, on which they always depended for their sustenance; and large reinforcements of ships and troops were immediately sent over to general Gage”).

London annihilates the First Principles of a free and just government: For more sources regarding this grievance, review Naval Documents of the American Revolution Vol. 1, Clark, William B., ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1966), pp. i–xxiii, p. 81; Naval Documents of the American Revolution, Vol. 2, Clark, William B., ed. (Washington D.C.: 1966), pp. xv–xvii, xxxix–xliii; “A Letter from a Gentleman [extract], Ship William, off Norfolk, Virginia, December 25, 1775,” in The London Chronicle, March 5, 1776, p. 222, quoted in Parsons, H. S. “Contemporary English Accounts of the Destruction of Norfolk in 1776.” The William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine, vol. 13, no. 4, 1933, pp. 219–24, p. 219; Lewis, Morgan. “Morgan Lewis to Major Samuel Blachley Webb, September 4, 1775, in Naval Documents of the American Revolution, Vol. 2, Clark, William B., ed. (Washington D.C.: 1966), p. 13; Graves, Vice Admiral. “Vice Admiral Graves to Captain Vadeput, HMS Asia, September 10, 1775 [extract],” Naval Documents of the American Revolution, Vol. 2, Clark, William B., ed. (Washington D.C.: 1966), p. 70; Barker, John. Diary of Lieutenant John Barker (February 8, 1775), in Naval Documents of the American Revolution Vol. 1, Clark, William B., ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1966), p. 81; Phillips, Kevin. 1775, A Good Year for a Revolution (New York: 2012), pp. 331–356; Bobrick, Benson. Angel in the Whirlwind, The Triumph of the American Revolution (New York: 1997), p. 183; Dunn, Daniel S. “The Capture of the Margaretta.” American Bar Association Journal, vol. 61, no. 6, 1975, pp. 727–28; “The Lexington of the Sea.” The Aldine, vol. 8, no. 2, 1876, pp. 67–68; Yerxa, Donald A. “The Burning of Falmouth, 1775: A Case Study in British Imperial Pacification.” Maine History 14, 3 (1975): 119–161; Hatch, Charles E. “Jamestown and the Revolution.” The William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine, vol. 22, no. 1, 1942, pp. 30–38; Gara, Donald J. “Loyal Subjects of the Crown: The Queen’s Own Loyal Virginia Regiment and Dunmore’s Ethiopian Regiment, 1775–76.” Journal of the Society for Army Historical Research, vol. 83, no. 333, 2005, pp. 30–42; Parsons, H. S. “Contemporary English Accounts of the Destruction of Norfolk in 1776.” The William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine, vol. 13, no. 4, 1933, pp. 219–24.

from them has procured and transported here considerable numbers of such foreigners: Second Continental Congress. Resolution (August 14, 1776), in Journals of Congress Containing the Proceedings from January 1, 1776, to January 1, 1777, Vol. V (Yorktown, Pennsylvania: 1778), p. 654.

vigorous action was now the only line of conduct to be observed through every department: Warren, Mercy Otis. History of the Rise, Progress, and Termination of the American Revolution interspersed with Bibliographical, Political and Moral Observations in Three Volumes, Vol. I (Boston: 1805), p. 283.

made reconciliation hopeless and the Declaration of Independence inevitable: Lecky, William Edward Hartpole. A History of England in the Eighteenth Century. New Impression. Vol. IV (London: 1913), p. 244.

if not otherwise reduced to unworthy submission: Warren, Mercy Otis. History of the Rise, Progress, and Termination of the American Revolution interspersed with Bibliographical, Political and Moral Observations in Three Volumes, Vol. I (Boston: 1805), pp. 283–284.

a major cause for sparking the American Revolution and of aiding America’s eventual victory: For more sources on this grievance, see George III. “His Majesty’s most Gracious Speech to both Houses of Parliament, on Thursday the 26th of October, 1775,” in Eighteenth Century Collection Online Demo., University of Michigan Library Digital Collections, https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eccodemo/K124613.0001.001. Accessed March 14, 2025; Serle, Ambrose. The American Journal of Ambrose Serle, Secretary to Lord Howe, 1776-1778, Edward H. Tatum, Jr., Editor (San Marino, California: 1940), p. 77; Ramsay, David. The History of the American Revolution, In Two Volumes, Vol. I (Dublin: 1793), pp. 253–256; Phillips, Kevin. 1775, A Good Year for a Revolution (New York: 2012), pp. 378–379, 384–385, 392; Maier, Pauline. American Scripture, Making the Declaration of Independence (New York, 1997), pp. 39, 80; Bobrick, Benson. Angel in the Whirlwind, The Triumph of the American Revolution (New York: 1997), p. 183; Fisher, Sydney George. “The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257–303, p. 296; Lecky, William Edward Hartpole. A History of England in the Eighteenth Century. New Impression. Vol. IV (London: 1913), pp. 240–244; Spall, Eric. “Foreigners in the Highest Trust: American Perceptions of European Mercenary Officers in the Continental Army.” Early American Studies, vol. 12, no. 2, 2014, pp. 338–65; Armstrong, O. K. “He Transformed a Rabble Into an Army.” Prairie Schooner, vol. 21, no. 4, 1947, pp. 380–85; Ingrao, Charles. “‘Barbarous Strangers’: Hessian State and Society during the American Revolution.” The American Historical Review, vol. 87, no. 4, 1982, pp. 954–76.

there being no slavery worse than that sailors are subjected to: Franklin, Benjamin. “Some Remarks written by B. F. with a Pencil on the Margin of a Report of Judge Forster, containing that Judge’s Argument in favour of the Right of Impressing Seamen. Extract from the Report, Page 157. 158. Edition 1762, before September 17, 1781,” in The Papers of Benjamin Franklin, May 1 through October 31, 1781, Vol. 35, Oberg, Barbara B. ed. (New Haven: 1999), pp. 491–502.

September 17: September 17 is “Constitution Day,” the anniversary of the signing of the Constitution in 1787 and the last anchor date of Patriot Week.

an “evil practice” and a “great grievance” to the people of Massachusetts: Shirley, William. “The Speech of His Excellency […] to both Houses of the General Assembly,” in Boston Weekly News-Letter, November 25, 1742, quoted in Feld, Jonathan. “Commerce and Conflict: The Knowles Riot of 1747 and Transatlantic Opposition to Impressment.” Penn History Review, April 5, 2019, pp. 100–135, 100.

with only one in five killed in battle: Phillips, Kevin. 1775, A Good Year for a Revolution (New York: 2012), p. 142.

“trouble” to the government of Massachusetts: Shirley, William. “The Speech of His Excellency […] to both Houses of the General Assembly,” in Boston Weekly News-Letter, November 25, 1742, quoted in Feld, Jonathan. “Commerce and Conflict: The Knowles Riot of 1747 and Transatlantic Opposition to Impressment.” Penn History Review, April 5, 2019, pp. 100–135, 100.

“common liberty” of its victims: Massachusetts House of Representatives. Votes of the House of Representatives in Journals of the House of Representatives of Massachusetts (1720), II:300, quoted in Feld, Jonathan. “Commerce and Conflict: The Knowles Riot of 1747 and Transatlantic Opposition to Impressment.” Penn History Review, April 5, 2019, pp. 100–135, 120.

lawless invaders of our liberty: Adams, Samuel (as “Amicus Patriæ”). An Address to the Inhabitants of the Province of the Massachusetts-Bay in New England, More Especially, To the Inhabitants of Boston; Occasioned by the late Illegal and Unwarrantable Attack Upon their Liberties, and the unhappy Confusion and Disorders consequent thereon (Boston: 1747), pp. 5–7.

their oppressors, as under such circumstances: Ibid, p. 4.

and some shall run before his chariots: Paine, Thomas. Common Sense (Philadelphia: February 14, 1776), in Paine, Collected Writings, Foner, Eric, ed. (New York: 1955), p. 14 (paraphrasing 1 Samuel 8:11).

nothing is left now but to fight it out: Hewes, Joseph. “Joseph Hewes to Samuel Johnston, March 20, 1776,” in Colonial and State Records of North Carolina, Vol. 11, pp. 289–290.

the vote of Joseph Hewes, and was finally determined by him: Adams, John. “John Adams to William Plummer, March 28, 1813,” in Adams, John. The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States with a Life of the Author, Notes and Illustrations by His Grandson Charles Francis Adams, Vol. X (Boston: 1851), p. 35.

It is done! and I will abide by it: Adams, John. “John Adams to William Plummer, March 28, 1813,” in Adams, John. The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States with a Life of the Author, Notes and Illustrations by His Grandson Charles Francis Adams, Vol. X (Boston: 1851), p. 35.

Impressment warrants revolution: For more sources on this grievance, review Magra, Christopher. Poseidon’s Curse, British Naval Impressment and Atlantic Origins of the American Revolution (Cambridge, United Kingdom: 2016); Middlekauff, Robert. The Glorious Cause, The American Revolution, 1763–1789 (Oxford, United Kingdom: 1982), p. 100; Fisher, Sydney George. “The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257–303, pp. 296–297; Phillips, Kevin. 1775, A Good Year for a Revolution (New York: 2012), pp. 229, 265, 398, 432, 440, 544; Brunsman, Denver. “The Knowles Atlantic Impressment Riots of the 1740s.” Early American Studies, vol. 5, no. 2, 2007, pp. 324–66; Feld, Jonathan. “Commerce and Conflict: The Knowles Riot of 1747 and Transatlantic Opposition to Impressment,” Penn History Review, April 5, 2019, pp. 100–135; McCurry, Allan J. “Joseph Hewes and Independence: A Suggestion.” The North Carolina Historical Review, vol. 40, no. 4, 1963, pp. 455–64.

and courted them to assassinate your wives and children: Adams, Samuel. An Oration Delivered at the State-House in Philadelphia to A Very Numerous Audience on Thursday the 1st of August 1776 (Philadelphia: 1776), p. 40.

an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions: An Author’s Note is particularly appropriate here. First, nearly all original and primary sources use the word “Indians” or even “savages.” Today we understand that that these terms are inaccurate, insensitive, and downright derogatory. However, history is history. When quoting primary and secondary sources in this work, the terms reflect their original terminology. To do otherwise would only conceal the truth, which is the exact opposite of this work’s mission.

Today, a wide mix of terms is used. Native Americans, aborigines, Indigenous Peoples, American Indians, First Nations, and First Peoples are some of the more frequently used terms, and some seem to be more appropriate in some contexts than others. Perhaps the most precise way is to refer specifically to each tribal nation—for example, the Cherokee Nation or the Creek Nation. But that is not how the Second Continental Congress or the Founding Generation view or address Native Americans, and as noted at the beginning of this work, this is a Founders-centric work. Thus, to be historically accurate and precise while using modern terminology, this work is more general. In the legal field as well as a general internet search, “Native Americans” appears to be the prevailing phraseology, and at the inevitable risk that this work becomes dated and superseded in the future, that is the phraseology this work generally deploys.

Second, the last clause of the last grievance is likewise burdened with archaic and insensitive terminology involving the African and African American enslaved populations. Again, original, primary sources all nearly use the word “slaves.” In addition, some of the primary and secondary sources use older terminology to identify African Americans, such as “Negro.” Parallel with the treatment of Native Americans, this work does not alter the original terminology used in any quoted primary or secondary sources.

Of course, terminology has substantially changed over the generations. Generally, this work uses “African Americans” when referring to Americans who were either born in Africa and brought to America or their descendants, in accord with more modern parlance, although black/Black is also commonly used today. Interestingly, as noted in an endnote in Chapter 12, African American is in strong usage in the wake of the American Revolution for those who supported the American Revolution.

For those in bondage, some prefer the term “enslaved person” as opposed to “slave.” Since the terminology is clearly “slave” at the time of the American Revolution, for historical accuracy’s sake, this work will generally use that terminology, although more modern enslaved terminology is also used (witness this endnote). This work generally avoids “People of Color” because modern usage generally uses this term to refer to all non-Caucasian races. Because very few non-African American racial minorities are present in America during the colonial and Revolutionary eras, a broader term is generally unnecessary.

who join his majesty’s troops against the rebels: Dunmore, Lord. Proclamation (November 7, 1775), in The Pennsylvania Journal; and the Weekly Advertiser, December 6, 1775. Dunmore’s Proclamation provides in pertinent part:

I do hereby farther declare all indented servants, Negroes, or others (appertaining to rebels) free, that are able and willing to bear arms, they joining his Majesty’s troops, as soon as may be, for the more speedily reducing this colony to a proper sense of their duty, to his Majesty’s crown and dignity.

Ibid.

whether the instrument be a German or a Calmack [Scot], a Russian or a Mohawk: Lind, John. An Answer to the Declaration of the American Congress (London: 1776), p. 108.

that schemes have been formed to excite domestic enemies against us: Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10–September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), p. 153.

for unleashing a treacherous threat: Paine, Thomas. Common Sense (Philadelphia: February 14, 1776), p. 4.

indiscriminately to massacre man, woman, and child: Drayton, Justice William Henry. Charge to the Grand Jury (April 23, 1776), in Force, Peter. American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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, Vol. V (Washington, D.C.: 1837), p. 1027.

reinforced these instruments of class rule in America’s slave system: Aptheker, Herbert. “American Negro Slave Revolts.” Science & Society, vol. 1, no. 4, 1937, pp. 512–38, pp. 512–513.

where under Spanish law, they would be free: Gates, Jr., Henry Louis. “Did African-American Slaves Rebel? 100 Amazing Facts about the Negro.” PBS, https://www.pbs.org/wnet/african-americans-many-rivers-to-cross/history/did-african-american-slaves-rebel/. Accessed March 13, 2025.

was carried out entirely within the law: Szasz, Ferenc M. “The New York Slave Revolt of 1741.” New York History, vol. 48, no. 3, 1967, pp. 215–30, p. 215.

Achilles by the hand of one that knows that secret: Madison, James. “James Madison to William Bradford, June 19, 1775,” in The Papers of James Madison, Vol. 1, 16 March 1751– 16 December 1779, Huthinson, William T. and William M. E. Rachal, eds. (Chicago: 1962), pp. 151–154.

we must avail ourselves of every resource, even to raise negroes in our cause: Gage, Thomas.” From Thomas Gage to Lord Barrington,” 1775, The Correspondence of General Thomas Gage with the Secretaries of State 1763-1775, Vol. II, Carter, Clarence Edwin, ed. (New Haven, Connecticut: 1933), p. 684. See also Kaplan, Sidney. “The ‘Domestic Insurrections’ of the Declaration of Independence.” The Journal of Negro History, vol. 61, no. 3, 1976, pp. 243–55.

to his majesty’s crown and dignity: Dunmore, Lord. Proclamation (November 7, 1775), in The Pennsylvania Journal and the Weekly Advertiser, December 6, 1775.

and upon such principles of unnatural destruction: Drayton, Justice William Henry. Charge to the Grand Jury (April 23, 1776), in Force, Peter. American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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, Vol. V (Washington, D.C.: 1837), p. 1027.

and the most precise in its maneuvers: Closen, Ludwig von. The Revolutionary Journal of Baron Ludwig von Closen, 1780–1783, Acomb, Evelyn M., ed. (Chapel Hill, North Carolina: 1958), pp. 91–92.

in the Revolutionary era are quashed for generations: For more sources and more thorough reading on this grievance, review Horsmanden, Daniel. A journal of the proceedings in the detection of the conspiracy formed by some white people, in conjunction with Negro and other slaves, for burning the city of New York in America, and murdering the inhabitants (New York: 1744); Franklin, Benjamin (as “Americanus”). “Rattle-Snakes for Felons.” The Pennsylvania Gazette, May 9, 1751, in Franklin, Writings (New York: 1987), pp. 359–360; Washington, George. “George Washington to Lieutenant Colonel Joseph Reed, December 15, 1775,” in The Papers of George Washington, Revolutionary War Series, Vol. 2, 16 September 1775–31 December 1775, Chase, Philander D., ed. (Charlottesville, Virginia: 1987), pp. 551–554; Hutchinson, Thomas. Strictures upon the Declaration of the Congress at Philadelphia in a Letter to a Noble Lord, &c. (London: October 15, 1776), p. 28; Paine, Thomas. Common Sense (February 14, 1776), in Collected Writings, Foner, Eric, ed. (New York: 1955), p. 35; Friedenwald, Herbert. The Declaration of Independence, An Interpretation and an Analysis (New York: 1904), pp. 256–258; Lossing, Benson John. Our Country: A History of the United States from the Discovery of America to the Present Time, Vol. 8 (New York: 1905), pp. ix–x, n 6 of supplement; Phillips, Kevin. 1775, A Good Year for a Revolution (New York: 2012), pp. 182, 355–377; Middlekauff, Robert. The Glorious Cause, The American Revolution, 1763–1789 (Oxford, United Kingdom: 1982), pp. 54–56, 556–558; Maier, Pauline. American Scripture, Making the Declaration of Independence (New York, 1997), pp. 79–80, 250 n 42, 259 n 55; Ekirch, A. Roger. Bound for America, The Transportation of British Convicts to the Colonies, 1718–1775 (Oxford: United Kingdom: 1987); Salinger, Sharon V. To Serve Well and Faithfully, Labor and Indentured Servants in Pennsylvania, 1682–1800 (New York: 1987); Jordan, Don and Michael Walsh. White Cargo, The Forgotten History of Britain’s White Slaves in America (New York: 2008); Waldstreicher, David. Runaway America, Benjamin Franklin, Slavery, and the American Revolution, Hill and Wang (New York: 2004); Murray, John. “Lord Dunmore’s Proclamation, 1775.” A Spotlight on a Primary Source, History Resources, The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-resources/spotlight-primary-source/lord-dunmores-proclamation-1775. Accessed November 22, 2024; Ganyard, Robert L. “Threat from the West: North Carolina and the Cherokee, 1776–1778.” The North Carolina Historical Review, vol. 45, no. 1, 1968, pp. 47–66; Inman, Natalie. “‘A Dark and Bloody Ground’American Indian Responses to Expansion during the American Revolution.” Tennessee Historical Quarterly, vol. 70, no. 4, 2011, pp. 258–75; “Cherokee.” Digital Encyclopedia, Center for Digital History, Washington Library, George Washington’s Mount Vernon, https://www.mountvernon.org/library/digitalhistory/digital-encyclopedia/article/cherokee. Accessed November 22, 2024; Moor, Alexander. “Cherokee War, July 1, 1776–May 20, 1777.” South Carolina Encyclopedia, https://www.scencyclopedia.org/sce/entries/cherokee-war-1776/. Accessed November 22, 2024; Dean, Nadia. “A Demand for Blood: The Cherokee War of 1776.” American Indian Magazine of Smithsonian’s National Museum of the American Indian, vol. 14, no. 4, Winter 2013; Anderson, William L. and Ruth Y. Wetmore. “Cherokee, Part iv: The Revolutionary War, Cherokee Defeat, and Additional Land Cessions” (2006, revised November 2022). Encyclopedia of North Carolina NCpedia, https://www.ncpedia.org/cherokee/revolutionarywar. Accessed November 22, 2024; Aptheker, Herbert. American Negro Slave Revolts, Nat Turner, Denmark Vesey Gabriel, and Others New Edition (New York: 1974); Harris, J. William. The Hanging of Thomas Jeremiah, A Free Black Man’s Encounter with Liberty (New Haven, Connecticut: 2009); Aptheker, Herbert. “American Negro Slave Revolts.” Science & Society, vol. 1, no. 4, 1937, pp. 512–38; Beverley, Robert. The History of Virginia in Four Parts (Richmond: 1855), pp. 55-56; Ryan, William Randolph. The World of Thomas Jeremiah: Charles Town on the Eve of the American Revolution (New York: 2010); Thornton, John K. “African Dimensions of the Stono Rebellion.” The American Historical Review, vol. 96, no. 4, 1991, pp. 1101–13; Gates, Jr., Henry Louis. “Did African-American Slaves Rebel? 100 Amazing Facts about the Negro.” PBS, https://www.pbs.org/wnet/african-americans-many-rivers-to-cross/history/did-african-american-slaves-rebel/. Accessed November 22, 2024; “New York Slave Rebellion of 1741.” Brittanica, https://www.britannica.com/event/New York-slave-rebellion-of-1741. Accessed November 22, 2024; Szasz, Ferenc M. “The New York Slave Revolt of 1741.” New York History, vol. 48, no. 3, 1967, pp. 215–30; Taylor, R. H. “Slave Conspiracies in North Carolina.” The North Carolina Historical Review, vol. 5, no. 1, 1928, pp. 20–34; Moffett, Anthony F. “Runaway Slaves and the Making of Georgia, A Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy.” University of Florida, 2015, https://ufdcimages.uflib.ufl.edu/UF/E0/04/78/40/00001/MOFFETT_A.pdf. Accessed November 22, 2024; Schuler, Monica. “Ethnic Slave Rebellions in the Caribbean and the Guianas.” Journal of Social History, vol. 3, no. 4, 1970, pp. 374–85; Clarke, John Henrik. “Slave Revolts in the Caribbean Islands.” Présence Africaine, no. 84, 1972, pp. 117–30; Kilson, Marion D.deB. “Towards Freedom: An Analysis of Slave Revolts in the United States.” Phylon, vol. 25, no. 2, 1964, pp. 175–87; Kaplan, Sidney. “The ‘Domestic Insurrections’ of the Declaration of Independence.” The Journal of Negro History, vol. 61, no. 3, 1976, pp. 243–55.

and the character of integrity to that golden idol: Paine, Thomas. “African Slavery in America.” Postscript to the Pennsylvania Journal and the Weekly Advertiser, March 8, 1775, in The Writings of Thomas Paine, Vol. I, 1774–1779, Conway, Moncore Daniel, ed. (New York: 1894), p. 4 (footnote omitted).

with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another: Jefferson, Thomas. The Thomas Jefferson Papers, Donovan, Frank, ed. (New York: 1963), p. 16.

they stopped our mouths, and ran off with us into the nearest wood: Equiano, Olaudu (a.k.a. Gustavus Vassa). The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano or Gustavus Vassa, The African, Written by Himself, Ninth Edition (London: 1794), p. 32.

I did not eat anything but what they forced into my mouth: Ibid.

for four gallons of rum, and piece of calico: Broteer (a.k.a. Venture Smith). A Narrative of the Life and Adventures of Venture, a Native of Africa: But a Resident Above Sixty Years in the United States of America. Related by Himself. (New London, New Hampshire: 1789), p. 13.

from their leaking, they are scarcely ever dry: Falconbridge, Alexander. An Account of the Slave Trade on the Coast of Africa (London: 1788), p. 19.

they are doomed in future to undergo: Ibid.

beheaded them, in sight of the captain: Ibid., p. 18.

suffered to be out of irons, also followed their example: Equiano, Olaudu (a.k.a. Gustavus Vassa). The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano or Gustavus Vassa, The African, Written by Himself, Ninth Edition (London: 1794), pp. 46–48, 51, 53.

sufferings of those unhappy beings: Falconbridge, Alexander. An Account of the Slave Trade on the Coast of Africa (London: 1788), p. 24.

where several of them died: Ibid., p. 18.

never to see each other again: Equiano, Olaudu (a/k/a Gustavus Vassa). The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano or Gustavus Vassa, The African, Written by Himself, Ninth Edition (London: 1794), pp. 56–57.

adds fresh horrors even to the wretchedness of slavery: Ibid., p. 57.

that it is a heinous crime to buy them: Paine, Thomas. “African Slavery in America.” Postscript to the Pennsylvania Journal and the Weekly Advertiser, March 8, 1775, in The Writings of Thomas Paine, Vol. I, 1774–1779, Conway, Moncore Daniel, ed. (New York: 1894), pp. 5–6.

So take Equiano’s narrative and multiply it by eleven to twelve million!: However, Equanio’s experience is exceedingly uncommon in several material respects. Through a long and tortuous journey, he is one of the few enslaved who is educated and able to purchase his freedom. He publishes his narrative in 1789. Hardly the experience of a common enslaved person.

Unforgivable: For more sources and more thorough reading on this struck grievance, see Equiano, Olaudu (a.k.a. Gustavus Vassa). The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano or Gustavus Vassa, The African, Written by Himself, Ninth Edition (London: 1794); Broteer (a.k.a. Venture Smith). A Narrative of the Life and Adventures of Venture, a Native of Africa: But a Resident Above Sixty Years in the United States of America. Related by Himself. (New London, New Hampshire: 1789); Falconbridge, Alexander. An Account of the Slave Trade on the Coast of Africa (London: 1788); Middlekauff, Robert. The Glorious Cause, The American Revolution, 1763-1789 (Oxford, United Kingdom: 1982), pp. 331–332; Maier, Pauline. American Scripture, Making the Declaration of Independence (New York, 1997), pp. 146–147; Langguth, A. J., Patriots, The Men Who Started the American Revolution (New York: 1988), pp. 357–359, 360; Blassingame, John W. The Slave Community: Plantation Life in the Antebellum South (New York: 1972); Nunn, Nathan. “The Long-Term Effects of Africa’s Slave Trades.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 123, no. 1, 2008, pp. 139–76; Equal Justice Initiative. Slavery in America: The Montgomery Slave Trade (2018); Uzoigwe, G. N. “The Slave Trade and African Societies.” Transactions of the Historical Society of Ghana, vol. 14, no. 2, 1973, pp. 187–212; Richardson, David. “Shipboard Revolts, African Authority, and the Atlantic Slave Trade.” The William and Mary Quarterly, vol. 58, no. 1, 2001, pp. 69–92; Jefferson, Thomas. The Thomas Jefferson Papers, Donovan, Frank, ed. (New York: 1963), pp. 16–20.

huddled into both houses amongst a bundle of American papers, and there neglected: Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10–September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), p. 148.

cease the other twenty-seven grievances are ignored: Most contemporary sources suggest that there are only twenty-seven grievances against the King. In fact, relying on modern sources, I originally drafted this work repeatedly referring to the twenty-seven grievances. However, deeper study revealed my misunderstanding. Upon reflection, this passage is an unambiguous condemnation of the King’s refusal to remedy the prior grievances. As this chapter reveals, this is a free-standing and independent grievance onto itself. For additional support that this is true, see Fisher, Sydney George. “The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257–303, pp. 257–303, pp. 299-300 (emphasis added).

“fountain of justice” and possesses the “royal prerogative of mercy”: Parliament. Select Committee on Constitution, Fifth Report, Appendix, Extract from the Review of Criminal Justice System in Northern Ireland, https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200102/ldselect/ldconst/95/9503.htm. Accessed September 23, 2025 (“The courts in England and Wales and Northern Ireland have traditionally been identified with the symbols of the head of state. The traditional conceptualisation has been of the monarch as the source and fountain of justice, with the Sovereign’s Majesty deemed always to be present in court”); UK Parliament, House of Commons Library, The royal prerogative and ministeral advice, August 1, 2025, accessed September 23, 2025 (“Legal powers used under the royal prerogative are those which do not require parliamentary authority. Historically, these executive, legislative and judicial powers would have been exercised by a monarch directly but, over time, the majority have been abolished, delegated to ministers or replaced by statute. Some, however, remain, for example the dissolution of Parliament or the prerogative of mercy. Most are guided by constitutional conventions and what is known as ministerial advice”), p. 6.

by reason of several late acts of [P]arliament: Stamp Act Congress. Declaration of Rights (October 19, 1765), in Journal of the First Congress of the American Colonies in Opposition to the Tyrannical Acts of the British Parliament Held at New York, October 7, 1763 (New York: 1845), pp. 27–28.

these colonies to petition the king or either house of [P]arliament: Ibid., p. 29.

to lay at your majesty’s feet their humble supplications in behalf of your […] subjects the People of the Province […]: Massachusetts General Court. Petition to the king, tracing the history of the colony and its charters, and affirming the loyalty of the people (Boston: 1768), New York Public Library Digital Collections, https://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/2b30bdb0-0e20-0134-eb9c-00505686d14e?canvasIndex=0. Accessed September 23, 2025.

To prepare a loyal address to his majesty, agreeable to the resolutions already entered into: First Continental Congress. Declaration and Resolves (October 14, 1774), in Journal of the Proceedings of the Congress Held at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), p. 65.

beg leave to lay our grievances before the Throne: First Continental Congress. The Petition of the Grand American Continental Congress to the King’s Most Excellent Majesty (Boston: October 26, 1774), p. 3.

there is a proper time for it to cease: Paine, Thomas. Common Sense (February 14, 1776), in Paine, Collected Writings, Foner, Eric, ed. (New York: 1955), p. 28.

not leave the next generation to be cutting throats, under the violated unmeaning names of parent and child: Ibid.

is to be exerted for the destruction of the good people of these colonies: Second Continental Congress. Resolution (May 15, 1776), in Journals of the Congress Containing the Proceedings from January 1, 1776 to January 1, 1777, Vol. IV (Yorktown, Pennsylvania: 1778), pp. 357–358.

What is this owing to, but our indiscretion?: Duane, John. “Remarks at Second Continental Congress,” May 15, 1776, in Adams, John. Diary 27, Notes on Continental Congress, 13 May–10 September 1776, Adams Family Papers, Massachusetts Historical Society, https://www.masshist.org/digitaladams/archive/doc?id=D27&bc=/digitaladams/archive/browse/diaries_by_number.php. Accessed March 12, 2024.

Myrmidons [soldiers]: Derived from Greek mythology, the Myrmidons soldiers fight under the mythic Achilles. In today’s terminology, such persons unquestionably follow orders.

Why should we support governments under his authority?: Adams, Samuel. “Remarks at Second Continental Congress,” May 15, 1776, in Adams, John. Diary 27, Notes on Continental Congress, 13 May–10 September 1776, Adams Family Papers, Massachusetts Historical Society, https://www.masshist.org/digitaladams/archive/doc?id=D27&bc=/digitaladams/archive/browse/diaries_by_number.php. Accessed March 12, 2025.

Petitions to imperial authorities will only lead to tyranny and doom: For additional sources on this grievance, review Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 105; Drayton, Justice William Henry. Charge to the Grand Jury (April 23, 1776), in Force, Peter. American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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, Vol. V (Washington, D.C.: 1837), p. 1027; Drayton, William Henry. A Charge on the Rise of the American Empire Delivered by the Hon. William-Henry Drayton, Esq.; Chief-Justice of South Carolina: to the Grand Jury for the District of Charlestown (October 15, 1776) (Charleston: 1776), pp. 4–5; Maier, Pauline. American Scripture, Making the Declaration of Independence (New York, 1997), pp. 23–25, 50, 78, 139–140; Fisher, Sydney George. “The Twenty-Eight Charges against the King in the Declaration of Independence.” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 31, no. 3, 1907, pp. 257–303, pp. 257–303, p. 299; Lossing, Benson John. Our Country: A History of the United States from the Discovery of America to the Present Time, Vol. 8 (New York: 1905), p. x of supplement; Middlekauff, Robert. The Glorious Cause, The American Revolution, 1763–1789 (Oxford, United Kingdom: 1982), pp. 323–325; Ferling, John. Independence, The Struggle to Set America Free (New York: 2011), pp. 116–142, 164–168, 208; Jensen, Merrill. The Founding of a Nation, A History of the American Revolution, 1763–1776 (London: 1968), pp. 71, 90-97, 100, 105, 119, 123-125, 239, 249-250, 252, 256, 258-259, 262, 295, 304, 576, 578; Mongin, Alfred. The Stamp Act Congress, Research Report. Statue of Liberty National Monument (March 27, 1963); Guy, J. A. “The Origins of the Petition of Right Reconsidered.” The Historical Journal, vol. 25, no. 2, 1982, pp. 289–312; Foster, Elizabeth Read. “Petitions and the Petition of Right.” Journal of British Studies, vol. 14, no. 1, 1974, pp. 21–45; Flemion, Jess Stoddart. “The Struggle for the Petition of Right in the House of Lords: The Study of an Opposition Party Victory.” The Journal of Modern History, vol. 45, no. 2, 1973, pp. 193–210; Schweppe, Jennifer. “Pardon Me: The Contemporary Application of the Prerogative of Mercy.” Irish Jurist, vol. 49, 2013, pp. 211–27; Hodge, Helen Henry. “The Repeal of the Stamp Act.” Political Science Quarterly, vol. 19, no. 2, 1904, pp. 252–76.

too plainly prove a deliberate and systematical plan of reducing us to slavery: Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 110.

Emperor Augustus Caesar: Of course, summarizing these complicated, sophisticated, and earth-shattering events in a few sentences is quite misleading, omits many volumes of context and details, and is open to scathing criticism. However, this necessarily too brief abstract tracks the general beliefs of the Founding Generation.

If this be treason make the most of it: Henry, Patrick. “Remarks at the House of Burgesses,” May 29, 1765, in Wirt, William. Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry (Philadelphia: 1817), p. 65.

against those who would be glad to enslave them, their power is irresistible: Otis, James. The Rights of the British Colonies, Asserted and Proved (Boston: 1764), p. 22 (footnote omitted).

The king is king no more: For additional sources and on this passage, review Otis, James. The Rights of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved (1764), in Pamphlets of the American Revolution, 1750–1776, Bailyn, Bernard, ed. (Cambridge, MA: 1965), pp. 16–17; Quincy, III. Josiah. Memoir of the Life of Josiah Quincy Jr. of Massachusetts: by his son, Josiah Quincy [III] (Boston: 1825), pp. 405, 420, 435; Adams, Samuel. An Oration Delivered at the State-House in Philadelphia to A Very Numerous Audience on Thursday the 1st of August 1776 (Philadelphia: 1776); Hamilton, Alexander. Federalist Paper No. 21 (December 12, 1787), in Madison, James, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay. The Federalist Papers, Kramnick, Issac, ed. (New York: 1987), p. 173; Brutus (John Yates?). “Brutus No. 10, January 24, 1788,” in The Anti-Federalist, Writings by the Opponents of the Constitution, Storing, Herbert J., ed. and Murray Dry selecting from The Complete Anti-Federalist (Chicago: 1985), pp. 158–159; Wirt, William. Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry (Philadelphia: 1817); Patterson, Orlando. Freedom, Freedom in the Making of Western Culture, Vol. I (New York: 1990); Ragosta, John A. “‘Caesar Had His Brutus’: What Did Patrick Henry Really Say?” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, vol. 126, no. 3, 2018, pp. 282–97; Mullett, Charles F. “Classical Influences on the American Revolution.” The Classical Journal, vol. 35, no. 2, 1939, pp. 92–104; Sirico, Jr., Louis J., “The Trial of Charles I: A Sesquitricentennial Reflection” Constitutional Commentary, vol. 16, p. 51 (1999); Miola, Robert S. “Julius Caesar and the Tyrannicide Debate.” Renaissance Quarterly, vol. 38, no. 2, 1985, pp. 271–89; Howorth, Henry H. “The Rise of Gaius Julius Caesar, with an Account of His Early Friends, Enemies, and Rivals: Part I.” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, vol. 1, 1907, pp. 33–97.

But subsequent events have shown, how vain this hope of finding moderation in our enemies: Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10–September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), p. 147.

it refers to them as “Friends and Fellow-Subjects”: First Continental Congress. Address to the People of Great-Britain, from the Delegates, Appointed by the Several English Colonies of New-Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, The Lower Counties on Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North-Carolina and South-Carolina, to Consider of Their Grievances in General Congress (September 5, 1774 and approved October 21, 1774) in Journal of Proceedings of the Congress, October 21, 1774 (Philadelphia: 1774), p. 78.

take care that you do not fall into the pit that is preparing for us: Ibid., pp. 88–90.

posterity shall never reproach us with having brought slaves into the world: Second Continental Congress. Address of the Continental Congress to the Inhabitants of Canada (May 29, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10–September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), pp. 69–70.

For the time being, they are enemies: For more sources on this passage, review Second Continental Congress. Petition to the Inhabitants of Great-Britain (July 8, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10–September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), pp. 163–171; Second Continental Congress. Address of the Continental Congress to the Inhabitants of Canada (May 29, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10–September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), p. 68; London Merchants. Petition of London Merchants Against the Stamp Act (January 17, 1766), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), pp. 59–60; London Merchants. Petition of London Merchants For Reconciliation With America (January 23, 1775), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), pp. 87–89; Maier, Pauline. American Scripture, Making the Declaration of Independence (New York, 1997), pp. 139–142; Dickinson, H. T. “The Failure of Conciliation: Britain and the American Colonies 1763–1783.” The Kyoto Economic Review, vol. 79, no. 2 (167), 2010, pp. 2–20.

he has no authority over us, and we owe no obedience to him: Drayton, William Henry. Charge to Grand Jury (April 23, 1776), in Force, Peter. American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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 (April 23, 1776), vol. V (Washington, D.C.: 1837), p. 1030.

His will, revealed in His miraculous works in behalf of America, bleeding at the altar of liberty!: Ibid., p. 1027.

let us not look back lest we perish and become a monument of infamy and derision to the world: Adams, Samuel. An Oration Delivered at the State-House in Philadelphia to A Very Numerous Audience on Thursday the 1st of August 1776 (Philadelphia: 1776), p. 25.

an independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency: Washington, George. First Inaugural Address (April 30, 1789), in The Inaugural Addresses of the Presidents, Hunt, John Gabriel, ed. (New York: 1995), pp. 4–5.

is, and ought to be, totally dissolved: Second Continental Congress. Resolution (July 2, 1776), in Journals of Congress Containing the Proceedings from January 1, 1776, to January 1, 1777, Vol. II (Yorktown, Pennsylvania: 1778), p. 239. 1, 1776, to January 1, 1777, Vol. II (Yorktown, Pennsylvania: 1778), p. 239.

dependent upon the imperial crown and parliament of Great Britain: Parliament. Declaratory Act (March 18, 1766), in Pickering, Danby. The Statutes at Large, from Magna Charta to the End of the Eleventh Parliament of Great Britain, Anno. 1761 [continued to 1806], Vol. XXVII (London: 1767), p. 20.

during the continuance of the present dispute between G[reat] Britain and the colonies: Second Continental Congress. Resolution (November 3, 1776), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. III: September, 1775 to December, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), p. 319.

established in the late Congress [of South Carolina], on the 26th of March last: Drayton, William Henry. Charge to Grand Jury (April 23, 1776), in American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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 (April 23, 1776), Vol. V (Washington, D.C.: 1837), p. 1025.

[H]e has no authority over us, and we owe no obedience to him: Ibid., p. 1030.

I trust that in a short time it will be brought forth and in spite of Pharaoh: Adams, John. “John Adams to James Warren, April 16, 1776,” in The Spirit of ‘Seventy-Six: The Story of the American Revolution as Told by Participants, Commager, Henry Steele and Richard B. Morris, eds. (New York: 1975), p. 294.

as the resolution for instituting governments, has done, to all intents and purposes: Adams, John. “John Adams to Abigail Adams, May 17, 1776,” in The Adams Papers, Adams Family Correspondence, Vol. 1, December 1761-May 1776, Butterfield, Lyman H., ed. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: 1963), pp. 410–412.

solemnly engage with their lives and fortunes to support the Congress in the measure: Massachusetts House of Representatives. Resolution (May 9, 1776), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), p. 96.

it is now the ardent wish of our soul that America may become a free and independent state: Town of Malden. Instructions (May 27, 1776), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), p. 97.

to the last drop of their blood, and the last farthing of their treasure: Ibid., pp. 97–98.

under the Crown of Great Britain, is TOTALLY DISSOLVED: Virginia Constitution (1776).

Historian Pauline Maier counts at least ninety documents that could be characterized as declarations of independence adopted between April and July 1776: Maier, Pauline. American Scripture, Making the Declaration of Independence (New York, 1997), p. 48.

The United States of America, in 1776, join: At the time, the “United States of America” was considered a plural term.

than that my ashes may be mingled with those of a Warren and Montgomery: As we learned earlier, leading Son of Liberty and Massachusetts political leader and orator, Dr. Joseph Warren, is slain at the Battle of Bunker Hill on June 17, 1775. General Richard Montgomery is killed leading American forces at the Battle of Quebec in Montreal on New Year’s Eve, 1775.

That these American States may never cease to be free and independent: Adams, Samuel. An Oration Delivered at the State-House in Philadelphia to A Very Numerous Audience on Thursday the 1st of August 1776 (Philadelphia: 1776), pp. 41–42.

The Declaration births new independent States on the international stage: Additional sources for this passage include New Hampshire Constitution (1776), in The Federal and State Constitutions, Colonial Charters, and Other Organic Laws of the States, Territories and Colonies Now Or Heretofore Forming the United States of America, Vol. IV, Michigan to New Hampshire, Thorpe, Francis Newton, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1909), pp. 2451–1252; Pennsylvania General Assembly. Instructions (June 24, 1776), in The Statutes at Large of Pennsylvania from 1682 to 1801, Vol. IX, 1776 to 1779, Mitchell, James T. and Henry Flanders, compilers (Pennsylvania: 1903), pp. 492–493; Charlotte Town, Mecklenburg Court, North Carolina. Resolutions (May 31, 1776), in Documents of American History 5th Edition, Commager, Henry Steele, ed. (New York: 1949), pp. 98–99; Rhode Island General Assembly. Act of Renunciation (May 4, 1776), in Rhode Island State Archives, #0210 – Acts & Resolves of the General Assembly, filed with Misc. Document # 8, Rhode Island State Archives, Primary Source Document Transcription, Rhode Island State Archives, Secretary of State; Fourth Provincial Congress of North Carolina; Fourth Provincial Congress of North Carolina. Halifax Resolves (April 12, 1776), in American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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 (April 23, 1776), vol. V (Washington, D.C.: 1837), p. 860; South Carolina Constitution (1776), in The Federal and State Constitutions, Colonial Charters, and Other Organic Laws of the United States: Compiled Under an Order of the United States Senate, Poore, Ben. Perley, compiler (Washington, D.C.: 1877), pp. 1616–1620; Second Continental Congress. Resolution (November 4, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. III: September, 1775 to December, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), pp. 326–327; Second Continental Congress. Preamble, Resolution for the Formation of Local Governments (May 15, 1776), in Force, Peter. American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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, Vol. VI (Washington, D.C.: 1846), p. 1671; Connecticut Assembly. Connecticut Resolution for Independence (June 14, 1776), in Goodloe, Daniel R. The Birth of the Republic: Compiled from the National and Colonial Histories and Historical Collections, from the American Archives and from Memoirs, and from the Journals and Proceedings of the British Parliament (Chicago: 1889), pp. 158–160; Second Continental Congress. Preamble, Resolution for the Formation of Local Governments (May 15, 1776), in Force, Peter. American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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, Vol. VI (Washington, D.C.: 1846), p. 1671; Virginia Fourth Convention. Instructions for Independence in the Virginia Convention (and Resolutions for an Independent State Government) (May 15, 1776), in Force, Peter. American Archives: Fourth Series Containing 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, Vol. VI (Washington, D.C.: 1846), p. 1524; Lipscomb, Terry W. “The South Carolina Constitution of 1776.” The South Carolina Historical Magazine, vol. 77, No. 2, April 1976, p. 1; Brown, Philip Marshall. “The Theory of the Independence and Equality of States.” The American Journal of International Law, vol. 9, no. 2, 1915, pp. 305–35; Grotenhuis, René. “Nation and State.” Nation-Building as Necessary Effort in Fragile States (Amsterdam: 2016), pp. 25–44; Armitage, David. “The Declaration of Independence and International Law.” The William and Mary Quarterly, vol. 59, no. 1, 2002, pp. 39–64; Dorrell, David, Joseph Henderson, Todd Lindley, and Georgeta Connor. Introduction to Human Geography (2nd Edition) (Blue Ridge, Georgia: 2019); Watts, Sir Arthur. “Sovereignty.” Princeton University, Encyclopedia Princetoniensis. https://pesd.princeton.edu/node/671 accessed November 23, 2024; United Nations, General Assembly. Resolution Number 2625 (XXV) (October 24, 1970), in United Nations, General Assembly—Twenty-Fifth Session, Resolutions Adopted on the Reports of the Sixth Committee, Declaration on Principles of International Law (New York: 1970), pp. 121, 124.

we most devoutly implore his divine goodness to protect us happily through this great conflict: Second Continental Congress. Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (July 6, 1775), in Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774–1789, Vol. II 1775 May 10–September 20, 1775, Ford, Worthington Chauncey, ed. (Washington, D.C.: 1905), p. 157.

death was leveling my companions on every side of me: Washington, George. “George Washington to John Augustine Washington, July 18, 1755,” in Encyclopedia Virginia, https://encyclopediavirginia.org/primary-documents/letter-from-george-washington-to-john-augustine-washington-july-18-1755. Accessed March 29, 2025.

a people yet unborn, will hail him as the founder of a mighty empire!: A “grand sachem [chief of a confederation].” “Remarks to George Washington and camp accompaniment in western Virginia,” 1770, in Custis, G. W. Parke. Recollections and Private Memoirs of Washington by His Adopted Son George Washington Parke Custis with a Memoir of the Author by His Daughter, Lossing, Benson J., illustrative and explanatory notes (New York: 1860), pp. 304–305.

prospering our strenuous efforts in the cause of freedom, virtue, and posterity: Second Continental Congress. Resolution (March 16, 1776), in Journals of Congress Containing the Proceedings from January 1, 1776, to January 1, 1777, Vol. IV (Yorktown, Pennsylvania: 1778), p. 93.

to crown the continental arms by sea and land, with victory and success: Ibid., pp. 93–94.

More than 11 percent of his graduates became college presidents, in eight different American States: Mailer, Gideon. “Anglo-Scottish Union and John Witherspoon’s American Revolution.” The William and Mary Quarterly, vol. 67, no. 4, 2010, pp. 709–46, 710.

and to endure as seeing Him who is invisible: Witherspoon, John. The Dominion of Providence over the Passions of Men, A Sermon Preached at Princeton, on the 17th of May, 1776, Being the General Fast appointed by the Congress through the United Colonies. To Which is Added, An Address to the Natives of Scotland residing America (London: 1776), p. 1.

they conspire with everything else in promoting his glory: Ibid., pp. 2–3.

and entreat him to plead it as his own: Witherspoon, John. The Dominion of Providence over the Passions of Men, A Sermon Preached at Princeton, on the 17th of May, 1776, Being the General Fast appointed by the Congress through the United Colonies. To Which is Added, An Address to the Natives of Scotland residing America (London: 1776), p. 39.

who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us: Henry, Patrick. “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death!” March 23, 1775, in Tyler, Moses Coit. American Statesmen, Patrick Henry, Morse, Jr., John T., ed. (Boston: 1894), pp. 144–145.

our relief in the critical stages of the revolution: Madison, James. Federalist Paper No. 37 (January 11, 1788), in Madison, James, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay. The Federalist Papers, Kramnick, Issac, ed. (New York: 1987), p. 475.

by the solemnity with which the whole business was conducted: Rush, Benjamin. “Benjamin Rush to John Adams, July 20, 1811.” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/99-02-02-5659. Accessed March 10, 2025.

That his head and quarters be at the king’s disposal: Blackstone, William. Commentaries on the Laws of England: Vol. IV, 4th Edition (Oxford: United Kingdom: 1770), p. 92.

the one thing that can make men march into the muzzles of the cannon which are trained at them is honor: Frederick the Great, in Bowman, J. Honor: A History (New York: 2007), p. 37. The quote could very well be apocryphal.

greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends: John 15:13, Holy Bible, King James Version, Red Letter Edition, Dictionary/Concordance (Nashville, Tennessee: 1971), p. 473.

The future of the world depends on it: Additional sources for this passage include Blackstone, William. Commentaries on the Laws of England: Vol. IV, 4th Edition (Oxford: United Kingdom: 1770), pp. 92–94, 375–390; Carpenter, Charles. History of American Schoolbooks (Philadelphia: 1963), pp. 21–34; Krause, S. R., Liberalism With Honor (Cambridge, Massachusetts: 2002); Sommers, T. Why Honor Matters (New York: 2018); Thayer, William Makepeace. George Washington: His Boyhood and Manhood (London: 1883), pp. 182–188, 258–259; Mac, Toby and Michael Tait. Under God, Willis, LeAnna and Bethany House, compilers (Minneapolis: 2004), pp. 11–24; Ferris, Robert G. Signers of the Declaration of Independence, A Biographical Introduction, Abridged Version (Washington, D.C.: 2020); Kiernan, Denise and Joseph D’Agnese. Signing Their Lives Away, The Fame and Misfortune of the Men Who Signed The Declaration of Independence (Philadelphia: 2019); Lossing, Benson John. Lives of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence, reprint of an 1848 original (Aledo, Texas: 1995 [originally published Biographical Sketches of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence: The Declaration Historically Considered, and a Sketch of the Leading Events Connected with the Adoption of The Articles of Confederation and of the Federal Constitution (1848)]); Goodrich, Charles Augustus & Thomas W. Lewis, Lives of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence, Updated with Index and 80 Rare, Historical Photos, Index by Thomas W. Lewis (Murrieta, California: 2018 [originally published Lives of the Signers to the Declaration of Independence (1834)]); Naveh, E. J. Crown of Thorns: Political Martyrdom in America From Abraham Lincoln to Martin Luther King, Jr. (New York: 1992); Miller, Thomas P. “John Witherspoon and Scottish Rhetoric and Moral Philosophy in America.” Rhetorica: A Journal of the History of Rhetoric, vol. 10, no. 4, 1992, pp. 381–403; Smylie, James H. “Madison and Witherspoon: Theological Roots of American Political Thought.” American Presbyterians, vol. 73, no. 3, 1995, pp. 155–64; Tyler, Moses Coit. “President Witherspoon in the American Revolution.” The American Historical Review, vol. 1, no. 4, 1896, pp. 671–79; Bayer, Peter Brandon. “Sacrifice and Sacred Honor: Why the Constitution is a ‘Suicide Pact.’” William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal, vol. 20, no. 287, 2011.

EPILOGUE

As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide: Lincoln, Abraham. “Address to the Young Men’s Lyceum of Springfield, Illinois,” January 27, 1838, in Lincoln, Speeches and Writings, 1832–1858, Speeches, Letters, and Miscellaneous Writings, The Lincoln–Douglas Debates (New York: 1980), p. 29.

We all have clay feet, especially with hindsight: Cultural norms will undoubtedly change to condemn most of us living in 2026. As but one obvious example, those of us who have ever used nonrenewable energy sources will likely someday be condemned for exacerbating climate change. Such condemnable activities include using gas-powered cars, buses, trains, ships, planes, and even those charging their electric cars and any electronic device with electricity produced by gas and coal power plants. Other immoral energy use will include coal and gas-heated/electrified houses, condominiums, apartments, offices, stores, schools, fitness clubs, community centers, libraries, movie theaters, restaurants, government buildings, factories, prisons, jails, hospitals, medical facilities, medical devices, etc. Further, any form of plastic usage (i.e., petroleum products), including polyester, rayon, saran wrap, plastic bottles and jugs, plastic silverware and plates, plastic bags, plastic wrapping, computers, cell phones, cars, and literally thousands of other products, will be moral travesties.

Similarly, in the coming decades, when all meat is grown in laboratories with no nervous systems, the 80–95 percent of people today (depending on where you live) who still eat meat from slaughterhouses will be considered barbaric monsters. After all, we could be vegans.

If this text is fortunate enough to be read 250 years from now, the reader may smirk about the glaring omissions or distortions of this endnote. Hopefully, such omissions and distortions do not condemn me and this generation of readers forever, negating all the good we strove and succeeded in accomplishing.

Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more: John 8:4–11, Holy Bible, King James Version, Red Letter Edition, Dictionary/Concordance (Nashville, Tennessee: 1971), p. 468.

our experiment in self-government rested on engaging all of our citizens in this work: Obama, Barack. “Remarks by the President at the 50th Anniversary of the Selma to Montgomery Marches,” March 7, 2015, in Office of the Press Secretary, The White House, National Archives, https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015/03/07/remarks-president-50th-anniversary-selma-montgomery-marches. Accessed March 10, 2025.

inevitably triumph against all other forms of government: Fukuyama, Francis. The End of History and the Last Man (New York: 1992).

monumental clashes among the West and several alternative civilizations was prescient: Huntington, Samuel P. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (New York: 1996).

Critical race theory: In their own words, Critical Race Theorists believe (1) racism is “ordinary, not aberrational […] [it is] the usual way society does business,” (2) “white-over-color ascendency serves important purposes,” (3) “race and races are products of social thought and relations,” (4) “differential racialization” exists (i.e., the “dominant society racializes different minority groups at different times in response to shifting needs” and “each race has its own origins and ever evolving history”), (5) individuals are defined by “intersectionality and anti-essentialism” (i.e., each person is defined by nearly unlimited classifications such as race, ethnic heritage, gender, sexual orientation, religion, political party, class, employment, intellect, education, geography, physical capacities, language, etc.); and (6) there is “a unique voice of color.” Delgado, Richard and Jean Stefanie. Critical Race Theory, An Introduction (New York: 2001), pp. 6–9.

In light of the foregoing, leading CRT theorists unapologetically attack the very philosophical foundation of America—and by implication the Declaration:

The critical race theory (CRT) movement is a collection of activists and scholars interested in studying and transforming the relationship among race, racism, and power. The movement considers many of the same issues that conventional civil rights and ethnic studies discourses take up, but places them in a broader perspective that includes economics, history, context, group- and self-interest, and even feelings and the unconscious. Unlike traditional civil rights, which embraces incrementalism and step-by-step progress, critical race theory questions the very foundations of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law.

Ibid., pp. 2–3.

In other words, CRT opposes self-evident truth, equality, the rule of law, limited government, unalienable rights, and the Social Compact as all lies intended to perpetuate racism.

the 1619 Project: As explained by its originator, The New York Times’s 1619 Project unequivocally argues (1) the Declaration is not motivated by equality and liberty but instead is designed to perpetuate slavery and (2) the signers of the Declaration of Independence were liars because they never believed in the First Principles it announces:

Conveniently left out of our founding mythology is the fact that one of the primary reasons some of the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery […]

The truth is that as much democracy as this nation has today, it has been borne on the backs of black resistance. Our Founding Fathers may not have actually believed in the ideals they espoused, but black people did.

Hannah-Jones, Nikole. “Our Democracy’s Founding Ideals Were False When They Were Written. Black Americans Have Fought to Make Them True.” The New York Times Magazine, August 14, 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/black-history-american-democracy.html. Accessed March 10, 2025.

The 1619 Project is the brainchild of journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones, who writes that “for Black Americans, the traditional origin story has never rung true. Black Americans understand that we have been taught the history of a country that does not exist,” and “[t]he United States is a nation founded on both an ideal and a lie.” A New Origin Story, One World, The 1619 Project (New York: 2021), p. 11. The 1619 Project argues that the country was not born in 1776, but in 1619, when the first ship with enslaved persons arrived in America.

Several giants of American History directly challenge much of this narrative. They point out, among other things, that:

These errors [of the 1619 Project], which concern major events, cannot be described as interpretation or “framing.” They are matters of verifiable fact, which are the foundation of both honest scholarship and honest journalism. They suggest a displacement of historical understanding by ideology. Dismissal of objections on racial grounds—that they are the objections of only “white historians”—has affirmed that displacement.

On the American Revolution, pivotal to any account of our history, the project asserts that the Founders declared the colonies’ independence of Britain “in order to ensure slavery would continue.” This is not true. If supportable, the allegation would be astounding—yet every statement offered by the project to validate it is false. Some of the other material in the project is distorted, including the claim that “for the most part,” black Americans have fought their freedom struggles “alone.”

Still other material is misleading […]

Wood, Gordon S., James M. McPherson, Sean Wilentz, Victoria E. Bynum, and James Oakes, “Letter to the Ed.” New York Times, December 20, 2019, updated January 19, 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/20/magazine/we-respond-to-the-historians-who-critiqued-the-1619-project.html accessed March 10, 2025.

In the end, the 1619 Project’s myopic and jaundiced view has the same flaws that it purports to expose in others. It ignores any nuances and subtleties in history and simply omits historical truth for the sake of its unflinching ideological narrative. For example, it fails to acknowledge that any of the Founding Fathers were abolitionists or embraced the First Principles, including equality. As this work documents, many Founders were abolitionists when such views were completely countercultural, and the delegates to the Second Continental Congress were genuine, passionate believers in the First Principles. Similarly, in a single sentence, the 1619 Project dismisses the Declaration’s grievances against the King’s efforts to protect the slave trade without any meaningful basis.

Additionally, much of the 1619 Project is overtly partisan, condemning recent Republicans by linking them to past Democrat segregationists. See, e.g., Bouie, Janelle. “America Holds onto an Undemocratic Assumption from its Founding: that Some People Deserve More Power than Others.” The New York Times Magazine, August 14, 2019 (arguing that the policies and politics of Democrat segregationists John C. Calhoun, George C. Wallace, and others are reflected in Reagan conservatism, Republicans over the last ten years, Tea Party Republicans, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, North Carolina Republicans, Governor Scott Walker, Wisconsin Republicans, Michigan Republicans, Senator John McCain, House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Senator Barry Goldwater, and President Donald J. Trump), https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/republicans-racism-african-americans.html. Accessed March 10, 2025

Although portions of the 1619 Project are admirable by highlighting too often neglected facets of American history, it reads more like a partisan propaganda piece than a serious historical or academic endeavor. This entire book stands as a testament to the glaring flaws of the 1619 Project. Unfortunately, hundreds of schools are using its curriculum.

we believe in this country’s sacred promise: Obama, Barack. “Remarks by the President at the 50th Anniversary of the Selma to Montgomery Marches,” March 7, 2015, in Office of the Press Secretary, The White House, National Archives, https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015/03/07/remarks-president-50th-anniversary-selma-montgomery-marches. Accessed March 10, 2025.

79 percent of eighth-grade students fall below the proficiency standard for civics: “NAEP Report Card: 2022 NAEP Civics Assessment, Highlighted results at grade 8 for the nation.” The Nation’s Report Card, National Assessment of Educational Progress, https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/highlights/civics/2022/. Accessed March 29, 2025.

The subtitle of these results is, “Civics score declines for the first time; score unchanged compared to 1998.” Ibid.

The NAEP defines “proficiency” as “solid academic performance for each NAEP assessment. Students reaching this level have demonstrated competency over challenging subject matter, including subject-matter knowledge, application of such knowledge to real world situations, and analytical skills appropriate to the subject matter.” Ibid.

they are back to the 1998 levels, the first year civics was tested: Ibid.

the results in 2022 were all but the same as 1994, the initial year of testing: “NAEP Report Card: 2022 NAEP US History Assessment, Highlighted results at grade 8 for nation.” The Nation’s Report Card, National Assessment of Educational Progress, https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/highlights/ushistory/2022/. Accessed March 10, 2025.

The subtitle of these results is, “US History score continues decline begun in 2014.” Ibid.

86 percent are below proficient: Ibid.

Where such infrastructure is in place, its quality varies widely: Diliberti, Melissa Kay, Ashley Woo, and Julia H. Kaufman. Rand Corporation Research Report, The Missing Infrastructure for Elementary (K-5) Social Studies Instruction, Findings from the 2022 American Instructional Resources Survey (Santa Monica: 2023), p. 1.

School district support for social studies is weak, haphazard, and generally an incoherent mess: Ibid.

Curricula and instructional practices alike reflect this neglect: Educating for American Democracy (iCivics). Educating for American Democracy: Excellence in History and Civics for All Learners (Cambridge, Massachusetts: March 2, 2021), p. 4.

to prepare them for informed and engaged citizenship: Ibid.

dedicates a single three-sentence paragraph to the Declaration: The Princeton Review. AP US Government & Politics Premium Prep 2021 (New York: 2020), p. 95.

(which naturalized citizens are required to pass to become citizens): “National Survey Finds Just 1 in 3 Americans Would Pass Citizenship Test.” Institute for Citizens & Scholars, October 3, 2018, https://citizensandscholars.org/resource/national-survey-finds-just-1-in-3-americans-would-pass-citizenship-test/. Accessed March 10, 2025.

with 81 percent scoring a 59 percent or lower: Ibid.

fourth to sixth grade teachers only spend twenty-one minutes: Banilower, Eric R., P. Sean Smith, Kristen A. Malzahn, Courtney L. Plumley, Evelyn M. Gordon, and Meredith L. Hayes. Report of the 2018 NSSME+, The National Survey of Science & Mathematics Education (Chapel Hill: 2018), p. 77.

many teachers avoid teaching it robustly: Sandra Day O’Connor Institute for American Democracy. When and Why Did America Stop Teaching Civics? Policy Brief (Phoenix: 2024), p. 5 [footnotes citing Molly A. Hunter. Guardian of Democracy: The Civic Mission of Schools (New York: Carnegie Corporation of New York, 2011]).

only 27 percent were able to pass: “National Survey Finds Just 1 in 3 Americans Would Pass Citizenship Test.” Institute for Citizens & Scholars, October 3, 2018, https://citizensandscholars.org/resource/national-survey-finds-just-1-in-3-americans-would-pass-citizenship-test/. Accessed March 25, 2025.

only four in ten Americans passed the exam: Ibid.

republicanism is a core principle of America: American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA) and College Pulse. Losing America’s Memory 2.0, A Civic Literacy Assessment of College Students (July 2024).

15 percent of respondents were unable to name a single branch of government: “Constitution Day Survey 2024.” Annenberg Public Policy Center, University of Pennsylvania, https://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/political-communication/civics-knowledge-survey/. Accessed March 10, 2025.

other than the freedom of speech: Ibid.

Only 7 percent could name five rights protected by the First Amendment: Ibid.

I uncovered many myths, hidden facts, and brilliant gems: The Patriot Week Foundation plans on publishing version 2.0 of these episodes.

awaken the people to an instantaneous resistance of encroachments: Webster, Noah. An Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution Proposed by the Late Convention Held at Philadelphia with Answers to the Principal Objections that have been raised Against the System (Philadelphia: 1787), p. 49.

they will inevitably lead to slavery and ruin: Huntington, Samuel. “Remarks at Connecticut Constitutional Ratifying Convention,” January 9, 1788, in The Debate on the Constitution, Part One, Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles and Letters During the Struggle Over Ratification, Bailyn, Bernard, ed. (New York: 1993), p. 887.

the people the safe, as they are the ultimate, guardians of their own liberty: Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 274.

composes their mass participates of the ultimate authority, the government will be safe: Jefferson, Thomas. A Summary View of the Rights of British America (1774), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 274.

whether their spirit dominates our institutions and the life of our country: Warren, Earl. “The Blessings of Liberty, Address at the Second Century Convocation of Washington University,” February 19, 1955, in The Public Papers of Chief Justice Earl Warren, Christmas, Henry M., ed. (New York: 1959), p. 67.

understanding our history and knowing what it means, is an everyday activity: Obama, Barack. “Remarks at Selma Rights March Commemoration,” March 4, 2007, in The American Presidency Project, University of Santa Barbara, Peters, Gerhard and John T. Woolley, eds., https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/node/277530. Accessed November 24, 2024.

self-directed, student-centered learning: For a policy adopting this approach that I drafted, see Michigan State Board of Education. Policy on Learning Expectations for Michigan Students (Lansing: 2002).

learning practices will dramatically enhance this effort: For comprehensive reviews and policy recommendations regarding this perspective, see Michigan State Board of Education. Embracing the Information Age, Task Force Report (Lansing: 2001), http://technologysource.org/resource/papers/01049-1X.htm. Accessed March 10, 2025. I was the Chair of this Task Force.

Most K–12 schools and institutions of higher education at least partially embrace e-learning, but not necessarily in the most efficacious manner. See, e.g., Al-Frahihat, Dimah, Mike Joy, Ra’ed Masa’deh, and Jane Sinclair. “Evaluating E-learning systems success: An empirical study.” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 102, 2020, pp. 67–86; Galvis, Álvaro H., and Diógenes Carvajal. “Learning from success stories when using eLearning and eLearning modalities in higher education: a meta-analysis and lessons towards digital educational transformation.” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, vol. 19, no. 1 (2022); Johnson, Carla C., Janet B. Walton, Lacey Strickler, and Jennifer Brammer Elliot. “Online Teaching in K–12 Education in the United States: A Systematic Review.” Review of Educational Research, vol. 93, no. 3, 2023, pp. 353–411; Hanover Research. “Best Practices in K-12 Online and Hybrid Courses.” August 2015; Saqlain, Nadeem, Michael K. Barbour, and Dennis Mulcahy. “E-learning at the K–12 level; An overview of the relevant literature.” I-manager’s Journal on School Education Technology, vol. 16, no. 2, 2020, pp. 39–51.

preparing leaders for them in the grand march of politics: Adams, John. “John Adams to James Warren, June 25, 1774,” in The Adams Papers, Papers of John Adams, vol. 2, February–August 1776, Taylor, Robert J., ed. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: 1979), pp. 99–100.

“dedicated bench and a militant bar are the natural leaders” to preserving our liberties: Warren, Earl. “Response to an Address by the President of the United States at the John Marshall Bicentennial Ceremonies of the American Bar Association,” August 24, 1955, in The Public Papers of Chief Justice Earl Warren, Christmas, Henry M., ed. (New York: 1959), p. 86.

sounding brass and tinkling cymbals: Ibid.

snuff the approach of tyranny in every tainted breeze: Burke, Edmund. “Speech on Moving His Resolutions for Conciliation with the Colonies,” March 22, 1775, in The Works of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke in Twelve Volumes, Volume the Second (London: 1887), pp. 120, 125.

drafted essays regarding “Founding Principles”: As articulated by the US Chamber of Commerce Foundation, the “Founding Principles” include private property, equality, separation of powers, rule of law, and consent of the governed.

and “Civic Virtues.”: As articulated by the US Chamber of Commerce Foundation, “Civic Virtues” include humility, integrity, moderation, respect, and responsibility.

a live quiz testing civics knowledge: “Calling All Middle School Students! National Civics Bee.” Student Flyer, Michigan Chamber Foundation, https://www.michamber.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/NCB-25-MCF_Student_Flyer_updated.pdf. Accessed March 10, 2025.

judges acting as members of Congress: “Welcome, We The People The Citizen and Constitution.” Center for Civic Education. https://civiced.org/we-the-people accessed March 10, 2025.

from this time forward, forever more: Adams, John. “Letter from John Adams to Abigail Adams, July 3, 1776,” in The Adams Papers, Adams Family Correspondence, Vol. 2, June 1776 – March 1778, Butterfield, L. H., ed. (Cambridge, Massachusetts:1963), pp. 29–33.

However, John Adams thought that the day of commemoration would be July 2 (when the resolution of independence was adopted), not July 4.

better men in the age, and race, and country in which we live for these celebrations: Lincoln, Abraham. “Speech at Chicago, Illinois,” July 3, 1858, in Lincoln, Speeches and Writings, 18321858, Speeches, Letters, and Miscellaneous Writings, The Lincoln-Douglas Debates (New York: 1980), pp. 455–456.

ought to be solemnized: Adams, John. “Letter from John Adams to Abigail Adams, July 3, 1776,” in The Adams Papers, Adams Family Correspondence, Vol. 2, June 1776 – March 1778. Butterfield, L. H., ed. (Cambridge, Massachusetts:1963), pp. 29–33.

Chief Justice Earl Warren: Chief Justice Warren was the son of a Norwegian immigrant (Erik Mathias Warren) and a Swedish immigrant (Christine Hernlund Warren). According to genealogy research undertaken by my daughter, Dr. Leah Warren, we are almost certainly descended from Englishman Richard Warren of the Mayflower, making us related to Dr. Joseph Warren and James Warren (Taylor Swift too!), but not the Chief Justice.

Lest we forget: Warren, Earl. “Address at the Justice Louis Dembtiz Brandeis Centennial Convocation of Brandeis University, November 11, 1956,” in The Public Papers of Chief Justice Earl Warren, Christmas, Henry M., ed. (New York: 1959), p. 90.

[W]e must live through all time, or die by suicide: Lincoln, Abraham. “Address to the Young Men’s Lyceum of Springfield, Illinois, January 27, 1838,” in Lincoln, Speeches and Writings, 1832-1858, Speeches, Letters, and Miscellaneous Writings, The Lincoln–Douglas Debates (New York: 1980), p. 29.

We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists: Jefferson, Thomas. First Inaugural Address (March 4, 1801), in Jefferson, Writings, Peterson, Merrill, ed. (New York: 1984), p. 493.

Make it so: Additional sources for this Epilogue include my first book, America’s Survival Guide, How to Stop America’s Impending Suicide by Reclaiming Our First Principles and History (Minneapolis: 2007) (admittedly, in the fine tradition of Supreme Court Justices quoting themselves, I have lifted several passages from my earlier book into this section [but without attribution]); Hughes, Charles E. “The Declaration of Independence.” American Bar Association Journal, vol. 11, no. 8, 1925, pp. 532–34; Lenore Annenberg Institute for Civics of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania and the Campaign for the Civic Mission of Schools. Guardian of Democracy: The Civic Mission of Schools, Gould, Johnathan, ed. (Philadelphia: 2011); Sandra Day O’Connor Institute for American Democracy. When and Why Did America Stop Teaching Civics? Policy Brief (Phoenix: 2024); Carrese, Paul O. “Restoring a Higher Civics in America’s Universities.” Law & Liberty, September 30, 2024, https://lawliberty.org/forum/restoring-a-higher-civics-in-americas-universities/. Accessed March 10, 2025; Carrese, Paul O. “The Restoration of Higher Learning.” Law & Liberty, September 2, 2024, https://lawliberty.org/forum/the-restoration-of-higher-learning/. Accessed March 10, 2025; Carrese; Bobb, David J. “Do they even teach civics anymore?” Fulcrum, September 19, 2024, https://thefulcrum.us/civic-engagement-education/do-schools-still-teach-civics?mc_cid=b7bdd61e5e&mc_eid=a7bf94ccff. Accessed March 10, 2025; McBreen, Ayla. “Increase civics education for service members to close the civil-military divide.” Stars and Stripes, July 19, 2023, stripes.com/opinion/2023-07-19/civics-education-service-members-10789144.html. Accessed March 10, 2025; Fishman, Dillon. “Military Leadership Requires Good Citizenship.” US Naval Institute, Proceedings, vol. 187/8/1,422, August 2021; Winkler, Claudia. “Riley Institute Program for South Carolina Teachers Enhances Civics Education.” Furman News, July 26, 2024; Constituting America. https://constitutingamerica.org/. Accessed March 10, 2025; US Chamber of Commerce. “The National Civics Bee, The Civic Trust.” https://civics.uschamberfoundation.org/national-civics-bee/. Accessed March 10, 2025.