Why would fifty-five prominent men sacrifice their lives to declare independence from a King? Although each of them came from similar backgrounds, similar educational roots, they were prominent in their community and had wealth of their own right, they all had one thing in common – they wanted to be free to live their lives according to their own pursuit of happiness.
They were men chosen by their fellow citizens to lead them: 28 Lawyers, 11 Merchants, 4 Physicians, 1 High Sheriff, 8 Farmers, 1 Clergy and 2 Career Soldiers. They were also writers, poets, educators, philosophers, fathers, husbands and stewards of the land.
How could they have envisioned their experiment of a country free from tyranny and oppression being taken over by people who would have the same selfish grandeur as King George II? How could they have envisioned future generations losing sight of what was important – their freedom? When they signed this document, how could they have envisioned these United States of America to flourish without a citizenry filled with generosity and compassion towards their fellow Americans? With all the selfless acts performed by these men and many others including women and children alike, before, during and after the American Revolutionary War who sacrificed their lives for freedom, how could they have known we would come to this stage in 2011?
Due to the current political environment of today, many questions haunted my thoughts. What prompted these men to gamble on their future and the future of their family, when they agreed to be a delegate in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on that fateful day of July 4th, 1776? What happened in their lives that caused them to take such a gamble? After all, they weren’t high stake gamblers at the crap tables of Las Vegas or Atlantic City. With this in mind, I decided to do a little research to find the answers. What I found was fifty-five similar stories, but chose to highlight one man. This one man represents them all, for they had courage enough to stand up to tyranny and oppression, and the determination to right a wrong done to all their fellow citizens.
The 1st Signer, the President of Continental Congress, John Hancock.
"There, I guess King George will be able to read that."
John Hancock, Delegate from Massachusetts
Who was John Hancock? Hancock was the wealthiest man in the colonies. Having inherited the House of Hancock Shipping Company from his uncle, Thomas Hancock, along with land and homes, Hancock was known as the Baron of Beacon Hill. The House of Hancock was the largest shipping company in the Colonies because it not only imported manufactured goods from Britain, it also exported a wide variety of commodities from the Americas.
Hancock’s introduction into politics was partly due to his relationship with Samuel Adams, his mentor. It all began in 1766, when Hancock entered the Massachusetts House of Representatives and began learning the ropes of being a politician. One year later, the thrill of being a representative diminished when Parliament established the Townshend Act; Hancock was enraged. Throughout the next year, he raised his voice more than once at how the Townshend Act would eventually destroy the shipping industry and cause more hardship to those who import and export goods. Due to his stepping forward on behalf of all merchants in the colonies, Hancock became the political target of the crown. Accusations of smuggling, violations of the Navigation Act and trading with ports outside the realm of the British Empire to ensure not paying import taxes were levied against him. Outraged by these accusations, Hancock refused to attend Governor Francis Bernard’s soirees, if Custom officials were invited. As a result, Customs agents were sent to inspect his ships upon entering the harbor to publically humiliate him.
In early 1768, Tidesman (custom agents) attempted to board the sloop “Lydia” owned by Hancock without the benefit of a search warrant, Hancock refused them access. Hancock’s refusal gained him Patriot Resistor status and his reputation as a Patriot grew throughout the colonies. In May of that same year, when his sloop the “Liberty” arrived in port with a shipment of Madeira Wine, a favorite libation of Governor Bernard and other representatives of the Crown, the ship was seized by Bernard’s Custom agents. The taking of the “Liberty” wasn’t about duty taxes; it was politically motivated to destroy the character and integrity of Hancock by the Crown. This was a scheme to plunder his vast wealth, his homes and his land for the Crown. Although all charges were dismissed without any explanation, his “Liberty” was never returned. The Crown used the “Liberty” to enforce the Crown’s duty tax regulation over the next year. Upon its arrival in Rhode Island, the citizens took matters into their own hands and set the “Liberty” ablaze in a stand against the duty tax. Governor Bernard was removed as Royal Governor and returned home to England.
After the Boston Massacre occurred Hancock was once again outraged and met with the new Royal Governor, Thomas Hutchinson and Colonel William Dalrymple, Commander of British Regulars demanding the removal of all British soldiers. It was Hancock not Paul Revere who advised Hutchinson that there were over 10,000 armed colonists prepared to march on Boston if they didn’t leave. Shortly there after, the British Army moved to the outer part of Boston Harbor known as Castle William. Hancock was again regaled as a Patriot Leader for this accomplishment.
Tensions remained over the next year until the Townshend Act was repealed. The streets of Boston became quiet, but tension was still smoldering among the colonists.
Royal Governor Hutchinson knew he had to gain Hancock’s assistance in order to maintain peace, so he began cultivating the young politician in an attempt to lure him away from his fellow Whigs. He appointed him as Colonel of the Boston Cadets. Two years later he appointed him to the Council, the Upper Chamber of the General Court. However, Hancock began to see he was being manipulated and declined the appointment. Realizing his political mistake, Hancock immediately regrouped and proposed moving the General Court who was meeting outside the city, back into Boston to avoid lengthy travel for all concerned.
By 1772, the Committee of Correspondence had been formed and although Hancock was invited to join them, he declined this too. A year later the passage of the Tea Act was established by Parliament. This new tax impacted Hancock both personally and professionally. In December 1773, the imfamous Boston Tea Party took place. Hancock didn’t participate in this act of defiance, but he quietly approved of their actions.
Outraged by the defiance, Parliament and King George II wouldn’t give up and responded with yet more acts. The two that fueled the fires of a simmering colony’s anger were called the Boston Port Act and Coercive Acts. These were known as the “Intolerable Acts” authorized to strengthen British control over the Colonists. Royal Governor Hutchinson was removed from office and replaced with General Thomas Gage.
The year was now 1774 and the First Continental Congress was being formed in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania as a result of the “Intolerable Acts.” Delegates from twelve of the thirteen colonies were represented – Georgia didn’t send anyone.
At the same time the First Continental Congress convened in Philadelphia, Royal Governor Gage was enforcing his power over Massachusetts. The House of Legislators fought back by convening the Provincal Congress, independent of British Control and John Hancock was elected as its president. First course of action under Hancock’s leadership was the creation of the first minuteman units.
When the Second Continental Congress was called in Philadelphia a year later, the Massachusetts Provincal Congress elected John Hancock to be one of their delegates.
After attending the Provincal Congress session in Concord, Massachusetts in April 1775, Hancock and Adams rested a few days before leaving for Philadelphia. Meanwhile, Gage outraged over losing so much control over the colonists prepared letters of instructions to arrest the principle actors in the Provincal Congress who appeared to be engaging in acts of treason or rebellion. On the evening of April 18, 1775, Gage sent British Regular Soldiers on their fateful last mission that would spark the American Revolution.
When the gun smoke settled over Concord and Lexington, General Gage made yet another mistake by proclaiming a general pardon which stated, “To all who would lay down their arms and return to the duties of peaceful subjects.” This wouldn’t have been a problem with the colonists if he hadn’t added, “with the exception of Hancock and Adams.” That one line singling two of the most prominent men in the area added more fuel to the fire of distain and proclaimed Hancock and Adams true Patriots against the Crown.
In July 1776 John Hancock signed his name to the Declaration of Independence with a flourish. Many historians say it was because of his elitist stature of wealth and ego that caused him to sign his name so boldly. In reality, after learning the true facts of why Hancock joined the fight, it is very clear to this writer the symbolism of John Hancock’s bold signature – for “LIBERTY” I sign this document in defiance of your greed. The symbolism of his signature and story is so profound, yet it was lost even to this writer until recently.
Each of these men joined forces not for wealth or grandeur, for they already had that before. Josiah Bartlett said it best when he stood before his fellow delegates and said,
“The time is now at hand when we shall see whether
America has virtue enough to be free or not.”
Josiah Bartlett, Delegate from New Hampshire
These men were selfless in their actions to give us a country based on freedom, integrity and strong character, yet somewhere along the way, we've lost our way. We've lost our strength and our honor. We've forgotten that thousands gave their lives for freedom so that we could be free. Our failure to engage our elected officials in Washington, DC have now resulted in our freedom, our LIBERTY, and our pursuit of happiness being taken away from us by modern day equivalents of King George II and his merry men of Parliment.
The question I ask myself now is equally profound – Does America have any virtue left in order to remain free?
No comments:
Post a Comment