Part 1035

The King was particular in many other enquiries relative to my Administration, to the state of the Province, and the other Colonies. I have minuted what remained the clearest upon my mind, and as near the order in which they passed as I am able. He asked also what part of my family I brought with me, and what I left behind, and at length advised me to keep house a few days for the recovery of my health. I then withdrew. I was near two hours in the K. closet. Lord D. feared I was tired so long standing. I observed that so gracious a reception made me insensible of it."

_Diary and Letters of Thomas Hutchinson. chapter 5._

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1774 (September). The meeting of the First Continental Congress.

"On the 5th day of September most of the delegates elected to the congress were in Philadelphia. They were invited by the speaker of the Pennsylvania assembly to hold their sessions in the State House, but decided to meet in the hall owned by the carpenters,—a fine brick building, having commodious rooms for the use of the committees, and an excellent library in the chambers. It is still in good preservation. At ten o'clock in the morning the delegates met at the City Tavern, walked to Carpenters' Hall, and began the sessions of the Continental Congress. This assembly, when all the members had taken their seats, consisted of 55 delegates, chosen by 12 colonies. They represented a population of 2,200,000, paying a revenue of £80,000 sterling. Georgia, which did not elect delegates, gave a promise to concur with her 'sister colonies' in the effort to maintain their right to the British Constitution. … In general, the delegates elect were men of uncommon ability, who had taken a prominent part in the political action of their several localities. … New England presented, in John Sullivan, vigor; in Roger Sherman, sterling sense and integrity; in Thomas Cushing, commercial knowledge; in John Adams, large capacity for public affairs; in Samuel Adams, a great character, with influence and power to organize. The Middle colonies presented, in Philip Livingston, the merchant prince of enterprise and liberality; in John Jay, rare public virtue, juridical learning, and classic taste; in William Livingston, progressive ideas tempered by conservatism; in John Dickinson, 'The Immortal Farmer,' erudition and literary ability; in Cæsar Rodney and Thomas McKean, working power; in James Duane, timid Whiggism, halting, but keeping true to the cause; in Joseph Galloway, downright Toryism, seeking control, and at length going to the enemy. The Southern colonies presented, in Thomas Johnson, the grasp of a statesman; in Samuel Chase, activity and boldness; in the Rutledges, wealth and accomplishment; in Christopher Gadsden, the genuine American; and in the Virginia delegation, an illustrious group,—in Richard Bland, wisdom; in Edmund Pendleton, practical talent; in Peyton Randolph, experience in legislation; in Richard Henry Lee, statesmanship in union with high culture; in Patrick Henry, genius and eloquence; in Washington, justice and patriotism. 'If,' said Patrick Henry, 'you speak of solid information and sound judgment, Washington unquestionably is the greatest man of them all.' … The congress was organized by the choice of Peyton Randolph of Virginia for President, and Charles Thomson of Philadelphia, not a member, for Secretary. … A discussion … arose on the rules to be observed in determining questions, … which was renewed the next day, when it was agreed that each colony should have one vote."

_R. Frothingham, The Rise of the Republic of the United States, chapter 9._

ALSO IN: _J. T. Scharf and. T. Westcott, History of Philadelphia, volume 1, chapter 16._

_C. J. Stillé, Life and Times of John Dickinson, chapter 5._

_V. C. Bryant and S. H. Gay, Popular History of the! United States, volume 3, chapter 13._

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1774 (September-October). The action of the Congress.

"The Congress first resolved 'to state the rights of the colonies in general, the several instances in which those rights were violated or infringed, and the means most proper for a restoration of them.' Next, 'to examine and report the several statutes which affect the trade and manufactures of the colonies,' not earlier than the last nine years. While these subjects were under consideration, resolutions of Boston and its neighbors [Middlesex and Suffolk counties] were laid before them, stating their wrongs and merely defensive measures to which they would adhere, 'as long as such conduct may be vindicated by reason and the principles of self-preservation, but no longer.' … Congress unanimously approved and recommended 'a perseverance in this firm and temperate conduct,' trusting a change in the councils of the British nation. The merchants were urged not to order goods, and to suspend those ordered; and it was resolved, that after the first of next December there should be no importation of British goods, and no consumption of, or traffic in them. A loyal petition to the king was ordered, assuring him that by abolishing the system of laws and regulations of which the colonies complained, enumerating them, the jealousies they had caused would be removed, and harmony restored. 'We ask but for peace, liberty and safety. We wish not a diminution of the prerogative, nor do we solicit the grant of any new right in our favor. Your royal authority over us, and our connection with Great Britain, we shall always carefully and zealously endeavor to support and maintain.' General Gage was entreated to discontinue the erection of the fortifications on Boston Neck, and to prevent all injuries on the part of the troops; and Massachusetts was asked 'temporarily to submit to a suspension of the administration of justice where it could not be procured in a legal and peaceable manner.' Persons accepting office under the recent act, changing the form of her government, were denounced, 'as the wicked tools of that despotism which is preparing to destroy those rights which God, nature, and compact have given to America.' A memorial was next ordered to the inhabitants of the British colonies there represented, exposing their common wrongs and urging a united 'commercial opposition,' warning them to extend their views 'to mournful events,' to be 'in all respects prepared for every contingency, and to implore the favor of Almighty God.' {3215} An appeal was made to the enlightened sympathies of the British people. … Finally, an address was made to the inhabitants of the Province of Quebec, inviting their co-operation. In the meantime, the form of a non-exportation, non-consumption association was adopted, and signed by each of the delegates. … A declaration of the rights and injuries of the colonies was made, in which the most difficult question was disposed of. The right to participate in the legislative council of their common country, was declared to be the foundation of English liberty and of all free government. … Of all these proceedings the language was that of peace, except where other language was demanded. For they approved the opposition of the inhabitants of Massachusetts Bay to the execution of the late acts of Parliament, and declared, 'If these acts shall be attempted to be carried into execution by force, in such case all America ought to support them in their opposition,' and 'that seizing or attempting to seize any person in America, in order to transport such person beyond the sea for trial of offences committed within the body of a county in America, being against law, will justify, and ought to meet with, resistance and reprisal.' These were the essential resolutions. They bound the colonies to a common resistance to acts of force against all, or any one of them. They also declared their opinion of the necessity that another Congress should be held in the ensuing month of May, unless the redress of grievances which they had desired was obtained before that time, and that all the colonies in North America choose deputies, as soon as possible, to attend such Congress. On the twenty-sixth of October, after a secret session of fifty-one days, this body adjourned. The recommendations of this Congress were received with marked respect among the patriots of the colonies."

_J. C. Hamilton, History of the United States as traced in the Writings of Alexander Hamilton, chapter 3 (volume 1)._

"Trained in all the theories of the mercantile system, America had been taught to believe (1) that two countries could continue to trade, though one of necessity did so at a loss; (2) that in the trade between England and the colonies, the former both through natural advantages and through law was the party to which the profit accrued; (3) that England was 'a shop-keeping nation,' whose very existence depended on her trade and manufactures. A suspension of trade between England and America therefore would mean misery, if not ruin, to the mother country, while the colonies would 'both save and gain.' With measures of non-importation, non-exportation and non-consumption, accordingly, did this otherwise powerless body hope to coerce the English people and government. Though founded on an economic fallacy, this method of action was certain to have a great effect in England. Twice already had it been employed on a limited scale—against the Stamp Act and against the revenue acts,—and each time with sufficient success to warrant the belief that its wider application would result in victory. Now the agents of the colonies in London were writing home: 'If you have virtue enough to resolve to stop, and to execute the resolution of stopping, your exports and imports for one year, this country must do you justice.' … In both England and America the temporary destruction of British trade was viewed not merely as an effective weapon, but as the only peaceful one which the colonies possessed. A failure to unite in a non-importation agreement against England would, according to a prominent English politician, leave nothing for the colonies 'but to decide between ruin and submission.' The question for the Congress was not, therefore, a choice of remedies, but merely whether, and to how great an extent, the dele·gates could be brought to agree to the only one within their reach. For even while accepting the system as effective against Great Britain, the delegates and their constituents had so far progressed as to realize that it bore with uneven force on the different colonies. The southern colonies were really no more diversified in their industries than the West India islands. South Carolina grew rice and indigo; North Carolina depended largely on tar, pitch and turpentine; Virginia raised tobacco. Unless these products could be exported to Europe, those colonies might suffer for the necessaries of life. … The first consideration of the subject in the Congress revealed serious difficulties. The Virginia delegation, 'to avoid the heavy injury that would arise,' were prevented by their instructions from agreeing to an immediate cessation of trade relations. Imports would cease on November 1, 1774, but exports must continue till August 10, 1775. It was in vain they were told 'that a non-exportation at a future day cannot avail,' and that at the Virginia date non-exportation would not operate before the fall of 1776. The Virginians had determined to cure and sell their tobacco crop of 1774 before 'consideration of interest and of equality of sacrifice should be laid aside.' So vital, however, did most of the delegates consider the immediate enforcement, that it was proposed to act without Virginia; for Boston and New England, it was said, would need active support before that date. This proposition was defeated by the refusal of the delegates of North Carolina and Maryland to join unless Virginia should also make the sacrifice. With sorry grace the Congress had to accept the dictation of Virginia. But the trouble did not end here. Virginia's selfish interest having been triumphant, the South Carolina delegation sought for an equal advantage, and demanded that the two great products of that colony should be especially reserved from the non-exportation clause. … Rather than yield, the Congress preferred a cessation of business for several days, in order 'to give Our [South Carolina] deputies time to recollect themselves.' But when the Association was ready for signing, the South Carolina delegates, with but one exception, seceded from the Congress, and their assent was only secured eventually through a compromise, by virtue of which rice alone was excluded from the agreement, while indigo was brought under its terms. Such were the secret deliberations of the Congress, in endeavoring to unite the colonies in the use of their only weapon. The first public results appeared in the form of a unanimous resolution, passed and published on September 22, requesting 'the merchants and others in the several colonies not to send to Great Britain any orders for goods,' and to delay or suspend orders already sent. Five days later it was unanimously resolved that after December 1, 1774, 'there should be no importation into British America from Great Britain or Ireland, or from any other place,' of any goods, wares or merchandise exported from Great Britain or Ireland. {3216} Three days later, with no assertion of unanimity, a resolution was announced to the effect 'that from and after the 10th day of September, 1775, the exportation of all merchandise and every commodity whatsoever to Great Britain, Ireland and the West Indies ought to cease, unless the grievances of America are redressed before that time,' and a committee was appointed to draft a plan for carrying into effect these resolves. On October 12 this committee brought in a report, which, after consideration and amendment, was on the 18th of October agreed to and ordered signed. On October 20 it was signed and ordered to be printed. Possessed of no real power, the Congress relied on the people to enforce this agreement. It was recommended that in every county, city and town a committee be chosen 'whose business it shall be attentively to observe the conduct of all persons touching this Association.' With hardly an exception, this recommendation was adopted. … As America had refused to trade with Great Britain and her colonies, the government replied by acts prohibiting any such trade. The policy of 'exhausting its opponent by injuring itself' was at last to have a fair trial, but through British, not American action. The colonies were by law interdicted from all commerce, trade and fishing. But before the legislation went into effect blood had been shed at Lexington. The contest could no longer be fought with acts of Parliament and resolves of Congress; 'blows must decide.' The Association was distinctively a peace weapon. Had the Congress really expected war, no action could have been more foolish. A garrison soon to be beleaguered virtually shut its ports to supplies. No better proof is needed of how little the delegates wished or worked for separation."

_P. L. Ford, The Association of the First Congress (Political Science Quarterly, December, 1891.)_

'That the foundation of English liberty, and of all free government, is a right in the people to participate in their legislative council; and us the English colonists are not represented, and from their local and other circumstances cannot be properly represented in the British Parliament, they are entitled to a free and exclusive power of legislation in their several provincial legislatures, where their rights of representation can alone be preserved, in all cases of taxation and internal polity, subject only to the negative of their sovereign, in such manner as has been heretofore used and accustomed. But from the necessity of the case, and a regard to the mutual interest of both countries, we cheerfully consent to the operation of such acts of the British Parliament as are bona fide restrained to the regulation of our external commerce, for the purpose of securing the commercial advantages of the whole empire to the mother country; and the commercial benefits of its respective members; excluding every idea of taxation, internal or external, for raising a revenue on the subjects in America, without their consent.' This was not precisely what John Adams wanted, but it was much. When this declaration went forth, the cause of Massachusetts, in whatever it might eventuate, was the cause of the colonies. It was nationalized. This was John Adams's greatest feat of statesmanship. On it the Success of the impending war, and the Declaration of Independence rested."

_M. Chamberlain, John Adams, the Statesman of the American Revolution, pages 78-80._

"How far the authority of this first congress extended, according to the instructions of the delegates, it is impossible to determine with certainty at this distance of time. But it is probable that the original intention was that it should consult as to the ways and means best calculated to remove the grievances and to guaranty the rights and liberties of the colonies, and should propose to the latter a series of resolutions, furthering these objects. But the force of circumstances at the time compelled it to act and order immediately, and the people, by a consistent following of its orders, approved this transcending of their written instructions. The congress was therefore not only a revolutionary body from its origin, but its acts assumed a thoroughly revolutionary character. The people, also, by recognizing its authority, placed themselves on a revolutionary footing, and did so not as belonging to the several colonies, but as a moral person; for to the extent that congress assumed power to itself and made bold to adopt measures national in their nature, to that extent the colonists declared themselves henceforth to constitute one people, inasmuch as the measures taken by congress could be translated from words into deeds only with the consent of the people. This state of affairs essentially continued up to March 1, 1781. {3217} Until that time, that is, until the adoption of the articles of confederation by all the states, congress continued a revolutionary body, which was recognized by all the colonies as 'de jure' and 'de facto' the national government, and which as such came in contact with foreign powers and entered into engagements, the binding force of which on the whole people has never been called in question. The individual colonies, on the other hand, considered themselves, up to the time of the Declaration of Independence, as legally dependent upon England and did not take a single step which could have placed them before the mother country or the world in the light of 'de facto' sovereign states. They remained colonies until the 'representatives of the United States' 'in the name of the good people of these colonies' solemnly declared 'these united colonies' to be 'free and independent states.' The transformation of the colonies into 'states' was, therefore, not the result of the independent action of the individual colonies. It was accomplished through the 'representatives of the United States'; that is, through the revolutionary congress, in the name of the whole people. Each individual colony became a state only in so far as it belonged to the United States and in so far as its population constituted a part of the people."

_H. von Holst, Constitutional and Political History of the United States, volume 1, chapter 1._

ALSO IN: _W. V. Wells, Life of Samuel Adams, volume 2, pages 213-247._

_J. Adams, Diary (Works, volume 2) pages 358-401._

_Journal of the Congress which met at Philadelphia September 5, 1774 (London: J. Almon)._

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1774-1775. Provincial Congress of Massachusetts and Committee of Safety. Military preparations.