The Mecklenburg Declaration - May 20, 1775

Today is somewhat of a holiday in Charlotte, North Carolina. We don’t take the day off, but we do recall, with ceremony and remembrance, the events of May 20, 1775 and the document affectionately called the “Meck Dec.” It seems that on that long ago day, over a year before the Declaration of Independence was released in Philadelphia, the residents of Charlotte declared themselves to be free of British rule.

They did it right where the heart of downtown Charlotte sits today; at the courthouse which was then located at Tryon and Trade Streets. What was once an old Indian trading post and trail is now home to Bank of America and several other major banks.

 

The Mecklenburg Declaration was the product of a local citizen’s committee, which; having taken the measure of the people in the area; then decided to declare their Independence from Britain. This decision was reached after news of the Battle at Lexington and Concord; over 1 month earlier; reached Charlotte in late May. Some people still dispute the claim, and the first mention of it cannot be found in newspapers or broadsides until about 1819. There is however, a document known as the Mecklenburg Resolves, which was released to the public on May 31, 1775.

The resolves were a rather radical set of proposals set forth by the citizens as an approach to the problems the colonies were having with King George III, but did not go so far as to call for breaking away from the “mother country.” The text was published in the newspapers of the time, but the original was misplaced; or hidden; until 1838.

Some people believe that the myth of the Mecklenburg Declaration began as an attempt to recreate the Resolves. Since this was done by memory, perhaps the authors remembered the document as having called for independence, but the rediscovery of the original Resolves proved that to be a false assumption. And still another group argues that both documents were real.

The Resolves were taken to the Continental Congress via Captain James Jack who rode to Philadelphia with them on horseback. The Congressional Delegation from North Carolina; Richard Caswell, William Hooper, and Joseph Hewes; made the decision that it was too early to call for a separation between the colonies and the mother country. Captain Jack returned home and then the document disappeared for several decades.

No matter what the truth is, it is apparent that Charlotte; which was named in honor of King George’s wife; proved to be the “hornet’s nest” that the British dubbed it to be.

Here are the original Resolves;

1. Resolved, That whosoever directly or indirectly abetted, or in any way, form, or manner, countenanced the uncharted and dangerous invasion of our rights, as claimed by Great Britain, is an enemy to this County, to America, and to the inherent and inalienable rights of man.

2. Resolved, That we the citizens of Mecklenburg County, do hereby dissolve the political bands which have connected us to the Mother Country, and hereby absolve ourselves from all allegiance to the British Crown, and abjure all political connection, contract, or association, with that Nation, who have wantonly trampled on our rights and liberties and inhumanly shed the innocent blood of American patriots at Lexington.

3. Resolved, That we do hereby declare ourselves a free and independent people, are, and of right ought to be, a sovereign and self-governing Association, under the control of no power other than that of our God and the General Government of the Congress; to the maintenance of which independence, we solemnly pledge to each other, our mutual cooperation, our lives, our fortunes, and our most sacred honor.

4. Resolved, That as we now acknowledge the existence and control of no law or legal officer, civil or military, within this County, we do hereby ordain and adopt, as a rule of life, all, each and every of our former laws - where, nevertheless, the Crown of Great Britain never can be considered as holding rights, privileges, immunities, or authority therein.

5. Resolved, That it is also further decreed, that all, each and every military officer in this County, is hereby reinstated to his former command and authority, he acting conformably to these regulations, and that every member present of this delegation shall henceforth be a civil officer, viz. a Justice of the Peace, in the character of a 'Committee-man,' to issue process, hear and determine all matters of controversy, according to said adopted laws, and to preserve peace, and union, and harmony, in said County, and to use every exertion to spread the love of country and fire of freedom throughout America, until a more general and organized government be established in this province.

Here is a list of the signers as recalled in 1819;

1. Abraham Alexander

2. Adam Alexander

3. Charles Alexander

4. Ezra Alexander

5. Hezekiah Alexander

6. John McKnitt Alexander

7. Waightstill Avery

8. Rev. Hezekiah J. Balch

9. Richard Barry

10. Dr. Ephraim Brevard

11. Maj. John Davidson

12. Henry Downs

13. John Flenneken

14. John Foard

15. William Graham

16. James Harris

17. Robert Harris

18. Robert Irwin

19. William Kennon

20. Matthew McClure

21. Neil Morrison

22. Duncan Ochiltree

23. Benjamin Patton

24. John Phifer

25. Col. Thomas Polk

26. John Queary

27. David Reese

28. Zacheus Wilson, Sr.

Virginia Same Sex Marriage Ban

There comes a time in every argument where one side must give way to the other; either out of common sense, or self-preservation. As regards the arguments for; or against; gay marriage, that time has come.

There is a scene in the docudrama “Adams” in which David McCullough has Benjamin Franklin stating that; in regards to the colonies being free; the time had come to state the obvious, that these colonies were not asking for freedom, rather they were declaring it to be a fact.

The recent decision by the Eastern District Court in Norfolk by Judge Arenda Wright Allen; in which she stayed Virginia’s new law banning gay marriage; going so far as to draw upon the Declaration of Independence to arrive at her decision ignores the fact that the Declaration of Independence is not considered law. But this seems to be of no concern to the Judge as she tramples upon the stated wishes of the voters in her district. Which is not to say that this issue is one which should be up for a popular vote to begin with.

Let me state right here that I don’t care who marries who; and my marriage never needed the “protections” offered by Bill Clinton’s DOMA; an absurdity unto itself. But to celebrate; as they are in Virginia and elsewhere; this decision, as a victory for anybody is a farce. I’ll explain.

Look at the article below, which I have reprinted from the Associated Press. You can check it at the link below the article for accuracy. Tell me if you find any reference to the judge’s misnomer in citing the Declaration of Independence as a source for her decision. Then look below at the text of her actual decision and tell me why that is not in the news reports. And, if you don’t know why it’s important I’ll tell you.

People are celebrating a STAY of a law. This is not an automatic win. Coming, as it does, after 57% of Virginians voted for the ban, is inflammatory and does little to ease the divide in relation to an already controversial issue. As a matter of fact it does the opposite.

Moreover, it distorts the very foundation of the law our society rests upon; the United States Constitution. So, what would I do? That’s simple. I’m with Benjamin Franklin. Rather than continuing this divisive voting on an issue which is a Civil Right; and as such is not subject to a Popular Vote; why not declare it what it is; a Right and be done with it?

In short, you have people celebrating a non-existent victory over a STAY, which is founded upon a document which has no legal merit in court, of a law approved by Voters who really have no legal basis to decide a Civil Right. I am not making this up- and, if I did; I hope that you would not believe it. I can hardly believe it myself.

Other than making judges appear to be fools, and voters appear to be bigots; why not recognize that; just as you cannot vote to disenfranchise an African-American, or a Woman from marrying the person of their choice; regardless of color; the same right is inherent for all human beings?

The only reason I can discern is to keep us all divided upon a social issue, and thus ensure that the power remains with those who already hold it. I urge you to call Judge Wright Allen at her chambers in Norfolk and ask for an explanation about that Declaration of Independence thing. Here’s the number;

1-757-222-7013 Tell ‘em Robert at Rooftop is still waiting for an answer.

A 1st for South: Va. Gay Marriage Ban Overturned

NORFOLK, Va. February 13, 2014 (AP)

By BROCK VERGAKIS Associated Press

Associated Press

In a first for the South, Virginia's same-sex marriage ban has been overturned, with a federal judge ruling that the voter-approved amendment is unconstitutional and declaring the move "another moment history when We the People becomes more inclusive."

U.S. District Judge Arenda Wright Allen on Thursday issued a stay of her order while it is appealed, meaning that gay couples in Virginia still won't be able to marry until the case is ultimately resolved. Lawyers for the clerks in Norfolk and Prince William County who defended the ban are expected to file the appeal, which will be heard by the 4th Circuit Court in Richmond. It could uphold the ban or side with Wright Allen. If the 4th Circuit sides with overturning the ban, it too could issue a stay while the case is appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Both sides believe the case won't be settled until then — or until the high court rules on a similar case.

Wright Allen's decision echoes recent rulings elsewhere in the U.S. and is the strongest foothold yet in the South for the gay-marriage movement. On Wednesday, a judge declared that Kentucky must recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states, but didn't rule on the constitutionality of whether such marriages can be performed in the state.

The office of newly elected Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring took the unusual step of not defending the law because it believes the ban violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. In her ruling, Wright Allen agreed.

She struck down the three key arguments offered for denying gay marriages.

"Government interests in perpetuating traditions, shielding state matters from federal interference, and favoring one model of parenting over others must yield to this country's cherished protections that ensure the exercise of the private choices of the individual citizen regarding love and family," Wright Allen wrote.

She also wrote: "Gay and lesbian individuals share the same capacity as heterosexual individuals to form, preserve and celebrate loving, intimate and lasting relationships."

Wright Allen's stay was requested by the Virginia Attorney General's Office to avoid a situation like what happened in Utah when a gay-marriage ban was declared unconstitutional. More than 1,000 couples were married in the days after the ruling until the U.S. Supreme Court granted the state an emergency stay, creating a cloud of uncertainty for their status. Soon after, a federal judge also declared Oklahoma's ban unconstitutional. That ruling also is on hold while it is appealed.

In a Valentine's Day news conference, the two couples at the center of a Virginia case said that while the decision has been stayed, it brings them one step closer to marriage.

"The saying here is Virginia is for lovers, and truly we are experiencing that today in a way that we never have before," Carol Schall said. She and Mary Townley have been together about 30 years. They married in California in 2008 and have a teenage daughter. The couple wants Virginia to recognize their marriage.

Timothy Bostic — who was denied a marriage license with Tony London by the Norfolk Circuit Court on July 1, shortly after the Supreme Court struck down parts of the federal Defense of Marriage Act — said the judge in this case "gets it."

"She understands why we're doing this and how important this is to us, and anyone that believes in the ideals upon which this country was founded can't help but understand," Bostic said.

Adam Umhoefer of the American Foundation for Equal Rights, which sponsored the challenge for the plaintiffs, emphasized the message the ruling sent to the South. "Today in places like Birmingham and Biloxi, Chattanooga and Charleston, gay and lesbian couples know that equality isn't just something that happens up north," he said.

Supporters of the state ban on same-sex marriages issued statements decrying Wright Allen's ruling.

"It appears that we have yet another example of an arrogant judge substituting her personal preferences for the judgment of the General Assembly and 57 percent of Virginia voters," said Tony Perkins, president of the conservative Family Research Council.

Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, called the ruling "another example of an Obama-appointed judge twisting the constitution and the rule of law to impose her own views of marriage in defiance of the people of Virginia."

In a movement that began with Massachusetts in 2004, 17 states and the District of Columbia now allow gay marriage, most of them clustered in the Northeast. None of them is in the old Confederacy.

Opponents of the Virginia ban say the issue resonates in Virginia in particular because of a landmark 1967 U.S. Supreme Court decision involving a Virginia couple and interracial marriage.

Mildred and Richard Loving were married in Washington, D.C., and lived in Virginia when police raided their home in 1958 and charged them with violating the state's Racial Integrity law. They were convicted but prevailed before the Supreme Court.

During verbal arguments in the gay marriage case, Virginia Solicitor General Stuart Raphael said that ban is legally indistinguishable from the one on interracial marriage. He said the arguments used to defend the ban now are the same ones used back then, including that marriage between two people of the same sex has never been historically allowed. Wright Allen concurred with that assessment in her ruling.

"Tradition is revered in the Commonwealth, and often rightly so. However, tradition alone cannot justify denying same-sex couples the right to marry any more than it could justify Virginia's ban on interracial marriage," she wrote.

In defending the law, the attorney for the Norfolk clerk said the issue is best left for the General Assembly and the voters to decide.

Attorney General Herring, in a news conference Friday, said his decision not to defend the ban was "consistent with the rule of law."

"Although this process is far from over, it remains a great day for equality in Virginia," he said.

Nationwide, there are more than a dozen states with federal lawsuits challenging state bans on same-sex marriage.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BgZ1olhCUAAVHEZ.png

Government Shutdown and the 10th Amendment

With the government all but shut down; as the Republicans and Democrats face off with one another over “Obamacare”; there has been much talk of how stagnant and stymied our representatives in both the Congress and Senate, have become. They can’t even agree on a budget, again.

Some articles have suggested that this is the first government shutdown in 17 years. I have to disagree with that statement, as the government has been leapfrogging from the threat of one shutdown after another for quite some time now, and as such, they have become ineffective. And the people are concerned; rightfully so; that we are getting shortchanged by our lack of representation in Washington by the very people we elect; and then pay; to serve us.

   

So what can we, as the people who employ these jerks do? Well, for starters, let’s look at the Declaration of Independence, which, although not law in itself, is the underpinning of our country’s quest to become a nation of laws. That document states that;

“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.”*

When the smoke from our Revolution faded away and the Constitution adopted as the law of the land, the Founding Fathers; wise men that they were; added 10 Amendments, known as the Bill of Rights, in order to make sure that our government would continue to afford “we the people” the protection from the tyranny which we had just thrown off. It’s time to take a closer look at the 10^th Amendment, which states that;

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Now, what does that Amendment mean to us as citizens of our beleaguered country in the throes of stagnation brought about by the “Shutdown?” It means that we the people, acting collectively in our individual states, can fire these bastards and take back our government. No killing necessary; though it does seem an attractive idea; just good old Constitutional law.

Since the Federal Government cannot regulate what is not stated in the Constitution; and there is no provision prohibiting it; we can call for elections in our individual states as per Article 1 Section 4 which states that;

“The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

The Congress shall assemble at least once in every Year, and such Meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by Law appoint a different Day.”*

Now, I’m by no means a Constitutional scholar, but it would seem to me that we have some wiggle room to make them squirm like a worm on a fishing hook. And, it appears to me that now would be a good time to use it.

*Any perceived “errors” are from the original text of the documents noted. They reflect the language and accepted spelling of the time in which they were written. For me to “correct” those words would seem to be a bit of sacrilege. 

The Declaration of Independence - Under Siege

                                               

Today is my wedding anniversary. I usually post a loving tribute to my wife, Sue, and our ability to make it through the minefield which all marriages are at some point or another. It was 27 years ago today when Sue and I took the vows, and though it hasn't always been easy, we are still together, relying on one another more and more with each passing year.

So, it was with great regret that I asked her if it would be okay for me to skip doing a post about our anniversary in order to  address a more pressing issue; our rights as citizens in our own land. Those rights include the freedom to speak our minds; assemble peacefully without penalty; and to enjoy the freedom from unwarranted intrusion into our personal lives. It is with sorrow that I have to state these things are all under assault at the present time.

I was a bit uncomfortable with the NSA news; that they have been reading our e-mails and listening to our phone calls; but since I have nothing really important to hide, I was almost willing to chalk it up to “national security”; trusting that our government “by the people and for the people” would be capable of making the distinction between terrorists and ordinary individuals.

I was also comfortable with the “leaks” generated by Messrs.’ Assange and Snowden; it gave me the feeling that this kind of information should be available for the public. Just as the government tells us that if we “have nothing to hide, then we have nothing to fear”, I make the same claim against them.

What are they afraid of? “Leaking” the truth? If I had “leaked” the truth to my Dad, rather than answer his questions on the first shot, I got punished. It was a great lesson to me, and one that reverberates this July 4^th, on the heels of the latest revelation about Obama’s 2 year old “secret” (until this week) program dubbed the “Insider Threat Program.” 

The IRS scandal, along with the NSA nonsense, still don’t worry me as much as this latest infringement of the rights which we all seem to take for granted, even as they are being slowly whittled away by both political parties.

This “Insider Threat Program” is the most disturbing to me because it goes against the very grain of the Whistle Blower Protection program. Just the very name says it all; “Insider Threat Program.” Think of what the term really means. It’s not a program designed to stop national security “leaks” and keep us safe from foreign enemies; it’s a program specifically designed for government employees to identify; and punish; the people who work in government agencies and may see something wrong going on.

All this brings us to the vaunted document displayed above; the Declaration of Independence. It was 237 years ago today when the last of the signers affixed their signatures to the document which gave birth to a nation founded upon the principles later codified in the United States Constitution. I wonder how many of our politicians have read; or even understand; the document. In light of all recent events, I would venture that, even if they have read it, they think of it in terms of antiquity; almost as if it were no longer relative. For those who share that view I am printing the text of the Declaration below, in the hopes that you will read it.

When you do, substitute all of the recent scandals for the things which the Declaration accuses King George the Third of. You may be surprised to discover that we have as much to complain about now, as we did 237 years ago.

So, here is the text, and after that a bit of music, which; although calling for change; does not require anyone to kill anyone else in the endeavor. Happy 4^th, and don’t forget to make those phone calls to your Representatives and Senators in Washington when the holiday is over. Let them know how angry you are at their attempt to rob of your birthright. 

And, whatever you do, wave that flag proudly today – it belongs to us, the people. And that’s something we can never afford to let them forget.

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

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. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. 

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

 He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an

Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. 

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Happy Anniversary Sue. 

I love you more than ever - as if that were even possible...

Happy 26th, Sue

This is Sue, my wife. I have written about her here and also posted photos of her before now. But this is one of my favorites. It really captures the inner light of the woman I married; so different than myself. When I see only darkness, she sees only light. That's what makes this picture so special to me. And, with all the ups and downs of marriage, I do believe we would both do it all again. That's love...

Happy 26th, Sue. Love grows.

Happy Fourth of July!

And to the rest of my fellow Americans, have a safe and happy Fourth of July. A lot of thought went into the creation of our nation; let's not allow partisan bickering to tear it all down. And, wherever you are today, "let freedom ring!"

The Declaration Of Independence

In the run up to tomorrows celebration of July 4th, I hope that you will take the time to read the Declaration Of Independence. If you have never read it, well, you should. History repeats itself when we are not watching closely. And afterwards, when all of the analysis is done, you are left wondering why we didn't forsee this thing or that thing coming.

These men went far out on a limb to create a new society and they paid a price for their actions. 5 were captured as traitors, 12 had their homes burned, 2 lost sons in the war, and 2 sons were captured and imprisoned. Thomas Nelson of Virginia was present at Yorktown where British General Cornwallis had made his headquarters in Nelson's home. Nelson instructed General Washington to lay waste to it.

John Hart was driven from his home and his wifes deathbed, his 13 children were scattered and his fields and home were burned. Delegates Norris and Livingstone suffered the same fates. Francis Lewis lost his property, his wife was jailed and died in prison. These are just the more extreme examples of what happened to these men, whose lives would be forever changed by their signatures on this document.

These were 56 extraordinary men, of whom 24 were lawyers, 11 merchants and 9 farmers or plantation owners. They all had something to lose by signing this document. So here it is, complete with the names of the original signers. I hope that you will take a moment and read the full text.

The Declaration of Independence

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

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 to 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. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.

He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:

For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing taxes on us without our consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:

For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:

For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:

For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:

For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.

We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

Source: The Pennsylvania Packet, July 8, 1776