Final Post for A&P

Declaration of Independence

In the previous post, I mentioned that Danielle Allen had pointed out a punctuation error that is maintained and perpetuated by the National Archives.

Here are two versions, see if you can identify the difference and why it is important:

                  We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,--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. 

                  We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,--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.

I have read both versions multiple times and didn’t reflect on the difference. However, a philosopher would recognize the rhetorical difference that Jefferson was aiming for. As Allen’s elaborates, he was creating a syllogism with “three truths: one about human beings, one about government, and one about revolution. The truth about human beings, though, is a three-part truth.” By employing a period as in the first one above rather than a comma you disrupt the syllogism. Allen suggests that the complete syllogism should look like the following:

“Premise 1: All people have rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Premise 2: Properly constituted government is necessary to their securing these rights.

Premise 3: [All people have a right to whatever is necessary to secure what they have a right to].

Conclusion: All people have a right to a properly constituted government.”

If you omit premise 3, you can see the difference in meaning. If this has taught me one thing, it is to be a careful reader and think about not only the wording, but also the punctuation.

Matthew Stewart’s book, Nature’s God: The Heretical Origins of the American Republic exposed me to some individuals who played a major role in the American Revolution but whose names have been largely forgotten or deliberately omitted because of their views on religion. It also encouraged me to read three additional books, all three of which I would highly recommend. Danielle Allen’s Our Declaration: A Reading of the Declaration of Independence in Defense of Equality. Carl Becker’s The Declaration of Independence: A Study in the History of Political Ideas, and William Hogeland’s Declaration: The Nine Tumultuous Weeks When America Became Independent, May 1-July 4, 1776.

Hogeland’s book added some additional details to Stewart’s “gang of six” –Thomas Young, James Cannon, Christopher Marshall, Thomas Paine, Timothy Matlack, and Dr. Benjamin Rush. The first three met secretly with John and Samuel Adams after a failed vote on May 1, 1776 to elect Pennsylvania assembly men who would have supported independence. Sam Adams had instructed the attendees to burn any notes of the meeting, fortunately Marshall kept a diary of the discussion otherwise it would have been lost to history.

In my opinion as wonderful a document as the Declaration of Independence is, it was Sam Adams who deserves a lot of credit for moving independence forward. For over ten years while he lived in Massachusetts, he poured fuel on the anti-royal, anti-Parliament government sentiments with relentless verbal attacks. After the outbreak of the conflict on Lexington green, he moved to Philadelphia, PA as a delegate to the Continental Congress and he realized early on the geographic and strategic position of Pennsylvania to the outcome of independence. It was part of the middle colonies dividing the northern and southern colonies; it separated the ideologies of Massachusetts from Virginia.

Pennsylvanians favored reconciliation over independence and the May 1^st election reflected that; they elected assembly men who agreed with that reconciliation. Supporters of independence would have understandably been disappointed in defeat, but not Sam Adams. He met within two days to map out the next strategy. In two months, he basically overthrew the existing government by creating a convention that would support independence and serve as a leader in encouraging other colonies to follow suit. Hindsight applauds his efforts, but also serves as a warning that one individual with a powerful cause in his mind and a message can sway a majority of the populace.

While we seldom hear about the significant role some individuals played in our independence from England, most of us have seen the pictures of the delegates prominently featuring Benjamin Franklin. Few know that several years before, Franklin was involved in working to overthrow the existing proprietary government of the Penn’s and replace it with a royal government responsive to the king. His efforts were thwarted by John Dickinson, but who is remember favorably today – Franklin of course. Of the “gang of six,” only Dr. Benjamin Rush was a signer of the Declaration of Independence.

As Becker explained in 1922, the Declaration wasn’t positively received. In fact, it was widely criticized and dissected by those who saw that its intent focusing on equality and freedom wasn’t what they had fully understood and they created state constitutions to rectify what they saw as an attack on the elite’s power. In 1848, women who weren’t part of the “created equal” part, heartened back to the Declaration to support their argument for enfranchisement and created their Declaration of Sentiments. This document did not receive the recognition that it deserved but will be more read in the next couple of years as we approach the 100^th anniversary of the ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment.

Here's what it says:

http://www.womensrightsfriends.org/pdfs/1848_declaration_of_sentiments.pdf

I encourage you to read it.

I leave you with my final thoughts, it has been a great course for me, my life and my knowledge have been enriched by the professor, the students I have met in this class, the books that I have read, and the discussions we have had. Best wishes to you all.

Works Cited

Allen, Danielle. Our Declaration: A Reading of the Declaration of Independence in Defense of Equality. New York: Liveright Publishing Corporation, 2014.

Becker, Carl L. The Declaration of Independence: A Study in the History of Political Ideas. 1958 ed. New York: Vantage Books, 1942.

Hogeland, William. Declaration: The Nine Tumultuous Weeks When America Became Independent, May 1-July 4, 1776. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2010.