America nothing which he should say against it might make the least impression. He then urged that a Declaration of Independence, at such a juncture, might divide the people of America, and firmly unite against them the people of England. Yet even Mr. Dickinson went no further than to counsel that some assurance should be obtained of aid from a foreign Power before they renounced their connection with Great Britain, and that the Declaration of Independence should be the condition to be offered for such aid.' So far, under a sense of ill-usage, had the old spirit of loyalty declined!

Without expressly adopting the Resolution thus before them, the Congress appointed a Committee to prepare a Declaration in the form desired. This Committee was to consist of five members, including John Adams, Jefferson, and Franklin. Jefferson, though the youngest of all, was deputed to hold the pen. In his own Memoirs may be seen the draft, as he had first framed it, with some slight amendments by Franklin and Adams, and as it was then reported to the House. Several alterations of importance were subsequently made by the Congress at large. They deemed it wiser to omit the passages which conveyed a censure on the British people, and to aim their complaints and charges as directly as possible against the King. Thus, as they imagined, they should in great measure keep clear of offence to their friends in England. On other grounds of policy they also determined to strike out a clause inserted by Jefferson, reprobating in strong terms the African slave-trade. That clause it was found would displease the Southern Colonies, which had never sought to prohibit the importation of slaves, but, on the contrary, desired to continue it. "Our "Northern brethren," adds Jefferson, "also, I believe, "felt a little tender under these censures, for though "their people had very few slaves themselves, yet they "had been considerable carriers of them to others." †

It is remarkable that Jefferson, in his first draft, had not scrupled to avail himself of the low and most un

A sketch of Mr. Dickinson's speech will be found in Dr. Ramsay's History (vol. i. p. 339.).

† Memoirs and Correspondence, vol. i. p. 16. ed. 1829.

worthy prejudice which then prevailed against the nation. north of Tweed. We find him therein complain of the King and people at home because they have permitted themselves "to send over not only soldiers of our common "blood, but Scotch and foreign mercenaries." But this passage also was struck out by his colleagues.

66

66

66

Such numerous mutilations of the Draft were by no means welcome to those who had framed it. Franklin, who was sitting next to Jefferson, turned round to him, and said, "I have made it a rule, whenever in my power, "to avoid becoming the draftsman of papers to be re"viewed by a public body. I took my lesson from an "incident which I will relate to you. When I was a journeyman printer, one of my companions, an apprentice hatter, having served out his time, was about "to open shop for himself. His first concern was to have 66 a handsome sign-board, with a proper inscription. "He composed it in these words:-JOHN THOMPSON, HATTER, MAKES AND SELLS HATS FOR READY MONEY; "with a figure of a hat subjoined. But he thought he "would submit it to his friends for their amendments. "The first he showed it to thought the word HATTER tautologous, because followed by the words MAKES "HATS, which showed he was a hatter. It was struck ❝ out. The next observed, that the word MAKES might "as well be omitted, because his customers would not care who made the hats; if good to their mind, they "would buy, by whomsoever made. He struck it out. A "third said he thought the words, FOR READY MONEY, were useless, as it was not the custom of the place to "sell on credit. Every one who purchased expected to

66

66

66

66

pay. They were parted with; and the inscription now "stood: 'John Thompson sells Hats.' SELLS hats, says "his next friend, why nobody will expect you to give "them away. What, then, is the use of that word? It 66 was stricken out, and HATS followed, the rather as there "was one painted on the board. So his inscription was "reduced ultimately to JOHN THOMPSON, with the figure "of a hat subjoined." *

It is the part of an historian (so at least it seems to me,

* Life of Franklin, by Sparks, p. 407.

and on that principle are the foregoing chapters framed) to neglect no tale or incident, however trifling it may appear, that can best illustrate the feelings which produced, or the circumstances which attended, any great crisis in human affairs. But the changes in the Draft of the Declaration, though galling to the pride of its authors, were in truth mere matters of detail. On its general principle on the main point, that is to say, of Independence a division was taken at the beginning of July. Nine Colonies declared in its favour. Four others namely, South Carolina and Pennsylvania, New York and Delaware either voted against it or would not vote at all. But within a few days, or even hours, means were found to elude or to overcome that obstacle. The delegates of South Carolina were induced to declare that, although they continued to think the measure hurtful, they would vote for it for the sake of unanimity. In the Pennsylvanian delegation a minority assumed unto themselves the part of a majority, and undertook to give their signatures as such. By such means a seeming concordan unanimity on paper-was attained.* The Declaration of Independence, appearing as the act of the whole people, was finally adopted and signed by every member present at the time, except only Mr. Dickinson. was on the 4th of July-a day which has ever since been celebrated as a festival by the Americans- as the birthday, for thus they deemed it, of their freedom. And among all the coincidences of date which History records, there is none perhaps so striking as that John Adams and Jefferson, the two main movers of this Declaration, should both-after filling with signal reputation the highest office in their native land-expire on the fiftieth

This

These transactions, which for a long time remained secret, are explained by Mr. Jefferson, partly in his Memoirs, and partly in his appended Letter to Mr. Wells, dated May 12. 1819. He states that as to Pennsylvania, "The Convention, learning that the Declaration "had been signed by a minority only of their delegates, named "a new delegation on the 20th (of July)." None of the New York delegates were present on the 4th, and the signatures from that State were delayed for several days in order to obtain fresh powers from their provincial Convention. One Member (Mr. Thornton, of New Hampshire) was permitted to add his signature so late as the 4th of November.

anniversary of the day on which this their own handiwork, this the foundation of their own greatness, was first sent forth.

This memorable Declaration, on which the fate of so many millions of people, present and future, has depended for weal or for woe, commences by briefly stating, that men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, - that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it. The document then proceeds at great length, and with much bitterness of language, to enumerate what it terms the " repeated "injuries and usurpations" proceeding from "the pre"sent King of Great Britain." As already explained, the Congress had purposely, so far as possible, avoided any acrimonious allusions, either to the Parliament or to the people of that country. "We hold them," says the Declaration," as we hold the rest of mankind, -enemies " in war, in peace friends." The last paragraph, or summing up of this document, sets forth with these words:"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." From that day, — exclaim the native chroniclers of these States, with a not unbecoming pride, from that day the word COLONIES is not known in their history!*

66

66

At this period, the culminating point in the whole American War, I may be forgiven for desiring to interrupt its narrative in order to review its course and its results.

That injuries and oppressive acts of power had been inflicted by England upon America, I have in many places shown, and do most fully acknowledge. That from the other side, and above all from Massachusetts, there had been strong provocation, I must continue to maintain. I should not deem it consistent with candour to deny that

*Sparks's Life of Washington, p. 182.

the Americans had sufficient grounds for resisting, as they did resist, the Ministerial and Parliamentary measures. But whether these had yet attained a pitch to justify them in discarding and renouncing their allegiance to the Throne, is a far more doubtful question - a question on which, perhaps, neither an Englishman nor yet an American could quite impartially decide.

The time has come, however, as I believe and trust, when it is possible to do equal justice to the many good and upright men who in this great struggle embraced the opposite sides. The great mass of the people meant honestly on both shores of the Atlantic. The two chief men in both countries were alike pure-minded. On the one side there were deeds that savoured of tyranny, on the other side there were deeds that savoured of rebellion; yet at heart George the Third was never a tyrant, nor Washington ever a rebel. Of Washington I most firmly believe, that no single act appears in his whole public life proceeding from any other than public, and those the highest, motives. But my persuasion is no less firm that there would be little flattery in applying the same terms of respect and commendation to "the good old King." I do not, indeed, deny that some degree of prejudice and pride may, though unconsciously, have mingled with his motives. I do not deny, that at the outset of these troubles he lent too ready an ear to the glozing reports of his Governors and Deputies-the Hutchinsons or Olivers, -assuring him that the discontents were confined to a factious few, and that measures of rigour and repression alone were needed. For such measures of rigour he may deserve, and has incurred, his share of censure. But after the insurgent Colonies had proclaimed their Independence, is it just to blame King George, as he often has been blamed, for his steadfast and resolute resistance to that claim? Was it for him, unless after straining every nerve against it, to forfeit a portion of his birthright and a jewel of his Crown? Was it for him, without the clearest case of necessity, to allow the rending asunder of his empire, the array for all time to come of several millions of his people against the rest? After calling on his loyal subjects in the Colonies to rise, after requiring and employing their aid, was it for him on any light grounds to relin