In May of 1766 Jefferson met with the Second Continental Congress in Philadelphia to discuss whether or not the states should regard themselves as part of the British Empire. The manner was debated by a group of radicals such as Jefferson and the Adams who advocated independence, while moderates such as John Dickinson debated towards reconciliation of the nations. Eventually, “Jefferson’s colleague Richard Henry Lee,” stood up and presented an enticing speech in favor of independence.After days of arduous debate, “James Wilson of Pennsylvania announced he felt ready to vote for independence” with expectations for the colonies to separate.
The decision became fixed; Congress appointed a five person committee composed of Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman and Robert Livingston to draft a document declaring independence. Jefferson was nominated by the committee to write a rough draft that was significantly altered by Congress and Jefferson’s colleagues Adams and Franklin. “In the end, Congress removed about a quarter of Jefferson’s original language. The finishing document is recapitulated into three parts. The first section introduces a preamble dealing with the “self-evident truths.
” Thus incorporating meanings as to why it is a necessity that the colonies have overthrown their government. The second part chastises the British ruling, declaring the monarchy and king to be tyrannical. The last portion concludes with the colonial response, including Richard Lee’s resolution that the new government has to right to do what it chooses under the signer’s pledge.Surprisingly ten years prior to the signing, the colonies had already been threatening the government for independence through Adams declaration of rights and grievances movement. The Stamp Act moreover exhibits how the colonists progressively formed into an independent union; initially wanting jurisdiction over England’s regulation of trade but accumulatively protesting and detaching from the British government. The Boston Port Bill was discretely used by Britain to take American’s freedom.
The Bill backfired on Britain giving reasons for Jefferson and colonists to point a finger at the King, and declaring him as a tyranny. In conditions of deciphering Jefferson’s viewpoint in the document produced from the Enlightenment era, most historians have concurred with Carl Becker in arguing that Jefferson’s ideas routed from English philosopher, John Locke. Jefferson grasped an appreciation towards quantification, a theory attempted by Scottish Enlightenment thinker Francis Hutcheson who simplified morality.Garry Wills’s contended that Jefferson “conceived the pursuit of happiness” which essentially helped him write the philosophical aspects of the Declaration including the portion of the right to life, liberty, and happiness. Contemporary events such as the waging war, and George Mason’s preamble, allow us to see how Jefferson also acquired his ideas. Jefferson stated “all men are created equal” with the premeditated notion that he was a slave owner and regarded “negroes” as inferior men and not real men.
This can be perceived as a form of hypocrisy. Nonetheless what is even more ridiculous is upon scrutiny of Jefferson’s original draft he blames the King for the inimical wrongdoings of slavery. He bases his accusations on tariffs which the king vetoed in reducing slavery, but this portion was inevitably left out of the declaration by Congress. Therefore it is no mere coincidence that the occurrence of insurgence and protest among slaves increased considerably in the decade following the Stamp Act.
Blacks begin offering their aid to fight in wars if granted freedom, especially by Virginian governor Dunmore. This affected the British and colonial men who saw it as an effective threat and depended on “which side could arm the negroes faster. ” In the end, despite Jefferson’s contradictions the Declaration of Independence helped our country escape a racially bigoted society, and has served as a precedent for many prosperous nations to live a life of “liberty in pursuit for happiness,” as we Americans do.The authors Davidson and Lytle summarized, reconstructed, and deciphered the complications and confusions aroused from the Declaration of Independence. The authors demonstrated how their writings differ from the vast majority of historians who only focus on what they are interested in and exclude essential information. In this sense, the authors thoroughly viewed the document as an entity.
The writings are so comprehensive and thoughtful that they account for how the Declaration would have been if things “Jefferson and the Congress might have declared but did not” were added.Therefore by looking at previous documents and drafts we are able to assert how the world would have been different and what changes the congressmen made under certain conditions. With comparison of the stamp act, the authors allow us to see what Congress and Jefferson excluded from the previous document. Also we are able to examine the intriguing way in which slavery was mentioned in Jefferson’s rough draft, and how the authors express chagrin in Jefferson’s overkill towards the King. Jefferson did not admit he was wrong for having slavery in his draft, but blamed the King for it.Therefore the authors believe “to accuse the King of enslaving black colonials was far-fetched enough, but Jefferson then turned around and hotly accused the king of freeing black colonials.
” It can be insinuated from this statement that the authors feel that Jefferson’s pretense on blaming the King was absurd and it was an astute decision that the Congress rejected his logic. As stated by the authors: “the less said, the better. ” The document shows the authors understanding and opinion of how difficult it can be to translate the implications concealed within the language of that time period.For example, Jefferson would not understand an ad for a computer magazine in today’s terms, so how are we going to understand the Declaration fully? Therefore the author appreciates Gary Wills’s insertion which states: in order to understand text from a remote time, we must reconstruct a world around that text.
In other words, place ourselves in the viewpoint of congressmen such as Jefferson by juxtaposing contemporary events and accounting for the interferences. The author’s emphasize that by “understanding the intellectual world from which a document arose, we can understand the document itself. I agree with the authors opinion’s that Jefferson life embodied the contradictions of the Declaration, and therefore I now view him as a hypocrite. However, as stressed by the authors I have taken into account the conditions that Jefferson was in and view him as an honorable hypocrite who is not to blame because nearly every aristocrat owned slaves. In spite of Jefferson’s contractions, I salute him for contributing towards the downfall of slavery and helping shape America into the open minded society.
I am proud to say I live in America because in many places across the world, especially the Middle East, independence is not easily attained. Just image, where would America be if Jefferson had not elaborated on George Mason’s idea that, “all men are created equal and that the United States Colonies are and of right to be free and independent states…” The answers are self evident. In the past we see how other movements including the civil war and Seneca Falls Convention of 1848, have used Jefferson’s well distinguished words in aspirations to benefit their cause.I recommend this article to other teachers and students who are fascinated with the founding of America.
Although at times the article is tedious, the countless questions and topics aroused from the article are fascinating to discuss. The article adds interesting insight. For example, Jefferson and Adams argued on who would write the draft. “You shall do it,” persisted Jefferson.
“Oh no! ” Why will you not do it” You ought to do it. ” I will not. ” I find it remarkable that the article still provides accurate records of what happened during a time period that occurred hundreds of years ago.This conversation vividly allows me to imagine what colonial times where like for the aristocrats.
I also enjoyed how the author provokes though to the reader: “What was Jefferson thinking about on the eve of his authorship of the Declaration of Independence? ” By analyzing demanding questions, the authors allow us to contemplate many possible scenarios. We cannot always take words literally and we need to comprehend the sentiments of the Declaration and understand that the Congress may have had reasons for declaring independence that they did not openly announce.The truisms of slavery is one possibly topic which also interest me, especially how it was mentioned in Jefferson’s rough draft and how he did acknowledge the wrongdoings. I am overall pleased with the article because of the vast amount of knowledge which I have learned. The ramifications of the Declaration have appreciably engaged and altered the nation for more than two centuries and will continue to do so.
The Declaration of Independence surpasses the flawed contradictions of slavery Jefferson himself faced, with the reluctant outcome of the free and independent minded society we live in today.
