The Loyalists of Pennsylvania
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
The Pennsylvania Assembly's Conflict with the Penns, 1754-1768
Liberty University “The Jaws of Proprietary Slavery”: The Pennsylvania Assembly’s Conflict With the Penns, 1754-1768 A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the History Department in Candidacy for the Degree of Master of Arts in History by Steven Deyerle Lynchburg, Virginia March, 2013 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................1 Chapter 1: Liberty or Security: Outbreak of Conflict Between the Assembly and Proprietors ......9 Chapter 2: Bribes, Repeals, and Riots: Steps Toward a Petition for Royal Government ..............33 Chapter 3: Securing Privilege: The Debates and Election of 1764 ...............................................63 Chapter 4: The Greater Threat: Proprietors or Parliament? ...........................................................90 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................................113 1 Introduction In late 1755, the vituperative Reverend William Smith reported to his proprietor Thomas Penn that there was “a most wicked Scheme on Foot to run things into Destruction and involve you in the ruins.” 1 The culprits were the members of the colony’s unicameral legislative body, the Pennsylvania Assembly (also called the House of Representatives). The representatives held a different opinion of the conflict, believing that the proprietors were the ones scheming, in order to “erect their desired Superstructure of despotic Power, and reduce to -
Joseph Galloway Speech
Galloway's Speech to Continental Congress, September 1774 - American Memory Timeli ... Page 1 of 3 Library of Congress Teachers The Library of Congress > Teachers > Classroom Materials > Presentations and Activities > Timeline Print Subscribe Share/Save Give Feedback home Joseph Galloway served as a delegate from Pennsylvania to the First Continental Congress in 1774. By 1776, Galloway had become a Tory and then left the colonies for England. In the following speech to the Continental Congress, what position does Galloway take concerning the relationship between Britain and its North American colonies? What arguments does he use to support his position? View the original document from the Journals of the Continental Congress in A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation . Use your browser's Back Button to return to this point. If we sincerely mean to accommodate the difference between the two countries, and to establish their union on more firm and constitutional principles, we must take into consideration a number of facts which led the Parliament to pass the acts complained of, since the year 1763, and the real state of the Colonies. A clear and perfect knowledge of these matters only can lead us to the ground of substantial redress and permanent harmony. I will therefore call your recollection to the dangerous situation of the Colonies from the intrigues of France, and the incursions of the Canadians and their Indian allies, at the commencement of the last war. None of us can be ignorant of the just sense they then entertained of that danger, and of their incapacity to defend themselves against it, nor of the supplications made to the Parent State for its assistance, nor of the cheerfulness with which Great-Britain sent over her fleets and armies for their protection, of the millions she expended in that protection, and of the happy consequences which attended it. -
The Fourteenth Colony: Florida and the American Revolution in the South
THE FOURTEENTH COLONY: FLORIDA AND THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION IN THE SOUTH By ROGER C. SMITH A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2011 1 © 2011 Roger C. Smith 2 To my mother, who generated my fascination for all things historical 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Jon Sensbach and Jessica Harland-Jacobs for their patience and edification throughout the entire writing process. I would also like to thank Ida Altman, Jack Davis, and Richmond Brown for holding my feet to the path and making me a better historian. I owe a special debt to Jim Cusack, John Nemmers, and the rest of the staff at the P.K. Yonge Library of Florida History and Special Collections at the University of Florida for introducing me to this topic and allowing me the freedom to haunt their facilities and guide me through so many stages of my research. I would be sorely remiss if I did not thank Steve Noll for his efforts in promoting the University of Florida’s history honors program, Phi Alpha Theta; without which I may never have met Jim Cusick. Most recently I have been humbled by the outpouring of appreciation and friendship from the wonderful people of St. Augustine, Florida, particularly the National Association of Colonial Dames, the ladies of the Women’s Exchange, and my colleagues at the St. Augustine Lighthouse and Museum and the First America Foundation, who have all become cherished advocates of this project. -
The Van Cortlandt Family
THE VAN CORTLANDT FAMILY BY L. EFFINGHAM DE FOREST, A.M., J.D., F.I.A.G. THE HISTORICA.L PUBLICATION SOCIETY NEW YORK Copyright 1930 by THE HISTORICAL PUBLICATION SOCIETY NEW YORK NOTE I This account •bf the Van Cortlandt family was prepared as an example of the articles to. be included in the series of volumes entitled THE OLD NEW YORK F.AMILIES . which will be prepared under the editorial super• vision of L. Effingham de Forest and published by The Historical Publication Soc'iety. THE VAN CORTLANDT FAMILY . HE VAN CORTLANDT family was one of the most L"lfluen ,..::::==-.1~91:1.1.:...=:::::::~ tial and prominent in Colonial New York. l11 that small group of families interlocked by marriage and interest which largely controlled th~. Colony, Province and State uritil the decline of aristocracy in the government of N 2w York the Van Cortlandts played a strong hand. In comm~rcial, pol itical and military 6elds their importance contin:i~d ·for generation~. · The founder of this f~ily iµ the sµi,all_ Dutch town of New Amsterdam was one Oloff Stevense Van,.Co~landt. Of ' •. ~' • t ,- • his origin many fanciful tales have been told and frequ~n::l y the story has been printed ,that he was a descendant of the Dukes of Co:irland and came to. this country as an officer of Dutch troops. · Even Burke of the "P .'!erag ./' once published this a.ccount of the Van Cortlandt origin but it was quietly dropped from later editions of that particular work on the British gentry• .,, Little is actually known of tbe origin of OloJf Stev~~e. -
Philadelphia, the Indispensable City of the American Founding the FPRI Ginsburg—Satell Lecture 2020 Colonial Philadelphia
Philadelphia, the Indispensable City of the American Founding The FPRI Ginsburg—Satell Lecture 2020 Colonial Philadelphia Though its population was only 35,000 to 40,000 around 1776 Philadelphia was the largest city in North America and the second-largest English- speaking city in the world! Its harbor and central location made it a natural crossroads for the 13 British colonies. Its population was also unusually diverse, since the original Quaker colonists had become a dwindling minority among other English, Scottish, and Welsh inhabitants, a large admixture of Germans, plus French Huguenots, Dutchmen, and Sephardic Jews. But Beware of Prolepsis! Despite the city’s key position its centrality to the American Revolution was by no means inevitable. For that matter, American independence itself was by no means inevitable. For instance, William Penn (above) and Benjamin Franklin (below) were both ardent imperial patriots. We learned of Franklin’s loyalty to King George III last time…. Benjamin Franklin … … and the Crisis of the British Empire The FPRI Ginsburg-Satell Lecture 2019 The First Continental Congress met at Carpenters Hall in Philadelphia where representatives of 12 of the colonies met to protest Parliament’s Coercive Acts, deemed “Intolerable” by Americans. But Congress (narrowly) rejected the Galloway Plan under which Americans would form their own legislature and tax themselves on behalf of the British crown. Hence, “no taxation without representation” wasn’t really the issue. WHAT IF… The Redcoats had won the Battle of Bunker Hill (left)? The Continental Army had not escaped capture on Long Island (right)? Washington had been shot at the Battle of Brandywine (left)? Or dared not undertake the risky Yorktown campaign (right)? Why did King Charles II grant William Penn a charter for a New World colony nearly as large as England itself? Nobody knows, but his intention was to found a Quaker colony dedicated to peace, religious toleration, and prosperity. -
POINT PLEASANT 1774 Prelude to the American Revolution
POINT PLEASANT 1774 Prelude to the American Revolution JOHN F WINKLER ILLUSTRATED BY PETER DENNIS © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com CAMPAIGN 273 POINT PLEASANT 1774 Prelude to the American Revolution JOHN F WINKLER ILLUSTRATED BY PETER DENNIS Series editor Marcus Cowper © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 5 The strategic situation The Appalachian frontier The Ohio Indians Lord Dunmore’s Virginia CHRONOLOGY 17 OPPOSING COMMANDERS 20 Virginia commanders Indian commanders OPPOSING ARMIES 25 Virginian forces Indian forces Orders of battle OPPOSING PLANS 34 Virginian plans Indian plans THE CAMPAIGN AND BATTLE 38 From Baker’s trading post to Wakatomica From Wakatomica to Point Pleasant The battle of Point Pleasant From Point Pleasant to Fort Gower THE AFTERMATH 89 THE BATTLEFIELD TODAY 93 FURTHER READING 94 INDEX 95 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com 4 British North America in1774 British North NEWFOUNDLAND Lake Superior Quebec QUEBEC ISLAND OF NOVA ST JOHN SCOTIA Montreal Fort Michilimackinac Lake St Lawrence River MASSACHUSETTS Huron Lake Lake Ontario NEW Michigan Fort Niagara HAMPSHIRE Fort Detroit Lake Erie NEW YORK Boston MASSACHUSETTS RHODE ISLAND PENNSYLVANIA New York CONNECTICUT Philadelphia Pittsburgh NEW JERSEY MARYLAND Point Pleasant DELAWARE N St Louis Ohio River VANDALIA KENTUCKY Williamsburg LOUISIANA VIRGINIA ATLANTIC OCEAN NORTH CAROLINA Forts Cities and towns SOUTH Mississippi River CAROLINA Battlefields GEORGIA Political boundary Proposed or disputed area boundary -
Of the Commemorative Ceremony-A Description
.DOCUMENT RESUME . SO00947 9 : Commemoration,Ceremony in konor, of the Two Hundredth Anniversary of the First ContinentalCongress in the United States House' of Representatives,September Twenty-Fifth, Nineteen Hundred andSeventy-Four. INSTITUTION Congress of the U.-$., Washington, D.C. House. 'REPORT NO 93-413 PUB:DATE 75 i NOTE 151p. Superintendent of Documents, U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office, Washington,.D.C. 20402 (stockno. -052-071-00432-7, $1.80) EDRS PRICE MF-$0.83 HC-$8.69 Plus Postage. -DESCRIPTORS American Culture; American Studies; Civics;*Colonial History (United States); ConstitutiOnal History; . Educational Resources; *FederalGovernment; Federal 'Programs; Government Publications; GovqrnmentRole; History Instruction; Political Influences;Political .Science; Politics; *Primary Sources;Roference Materials; Resource Materials;. RevolutionaryWar (United States); Social History; *supplcmentary Reading Materials; *United StatesHistelry IDENTIFIERS *Eicdntenniai; *Continental CongressOst) ABSTRACT This documen+ provides a report ofactivities undertaken at the first official bicentennialcelehrntion by the U.S. Congress in January 1974..The projectwas initiated .to provide commemoration of the First ContinentalCongress which met in Philadelphia in September 1774. The booldetpresents the proceedings of the commemorative ceremony-a descriptionof tiazo Old Guard Fife Drum Corps, and the Camerata Chorus Of Washington.In the major portion of the booklet, a documentaryhistory of the First Continental Congress is presented. Thethree sections -
General Washington and the Loyalists ! I by Wilbur H
34 American Antiquarian Sodety [April, GENERAL WASHINGTON AND THE LOYALISTS ! I BY WILBUR H. SIEBERT EORGE WASHINGTON attended the Second G Continental Congress in his blue and buff uni- form and was nominated for Commander in Chief after Lexington and Concord by Thomas Johnson of Mary- land. John Adams had previously moved that a general be appointed and in his speech had shown that he had Washington in mind as the proper person for that office by characterizing him as "a' gentleman whose skill and experience as an officer, whose inde- pendent fortune, great talents, and excellent universal character, would command the approbation of all America, and unite the cordial exertions of all the colonies better than any other person in the union." On June 15, 1775, Washington was unanimously elected. Four days later he was commissioned, and on the 25th reached New York City on his >vay to the army at Cambridge. As he left the Hoboken ferry, two bpdies of troops were waiting, one to do him honor and tiie other to perform the same office for Governor Tryon,' who was expected at any moment. • The situa- tion was embarrassing for those in conimand, but passed without leading to an awkwarii meeting. Before continuing his journey, Washington wrote to General Schuyler, at Albany, to "keep a watchful eye" on Tryon and use every means in his power to frustrate his inimical designs, and also to watch the movements of the Indian agent. Colonel Guy Johnson.^ iW. C. Ford. Writings of George Washington, Vol. 2, pp. 493-498; The Mississippi Valley Historical Review, June, 1930, p. -
The ^Penn Collection
The ^Penn Collection A young man, William Penn fell heir to the papers of his distinguished father, Admiral Sir William Penn. This collec- A tion, the foundation of the family archives, Penn carefully preserved. To it he added records of his own, which, with the passage of time, constituted a large accumulation. Just before his second visit to his colony, Penn sought to put the most pertinent of his American papers in order. James Logan, his new secretary, and Mark Swanner, a clerk, assisted in the prepara- tion of an index entitled "An Alphabetical Catalogue of Pennsylvania Letters, Papers and Affairs, 1699." Opposite a letter and a number in this index was entered the identifying endorsement docketed on the original manuscript, and, to correspond with this entry, the letter and number in the index was added to the endorsement on the origi- nal document. When completed, the index filled a volume of about one hundred pages.1 Although this effort showed order and neatness, William Penn's papers were carelessly kept in the years that followed. The Penn family made a number of moves; Penn was incapacitated and died after a long illness; from time to time, business agents pawed through the collection. Very likely, many manuscripts were taken away for special purposes and never returned. During this period, the papers were in the custody of Penn's wife; after her death in 1726, they passed to her eldest son, John Penn, the principal proprietor of Pennsylvania. In Philadelphia, there was another collection of Penn deeds, real estate maps, political papers, and correspondence. -
Genealogical Sketch of the Descendants of Samuel Spencer Of
C)\\vA CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 924 096 785 351 Cornell University Library The original of this bool< is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924096785351 In compliance with current copyright law, Cornell University Library produced this replacement volume on paper that meets the ANSI Standard Z39.48-1992 to replace the irreparably deteriorated original. 2003 CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY : GENEALOGICAL SKETCH OF THE DESCENDANTS OF Samuel Spencer OF PENNSYLVANIA BY HOWARD M. JENKINS AUTHOR OF " HISTORICAL COLLECTIONS RELATING TO GWYNEDD," VOLUME ONE, "MEMORIAL HISTORY OF PHILADELPHIA," ETC., ETC. |)l)Uabei|it)ia FERRIS & LEACH 29 North Seventh Street 1904 . CONTENTS. Page I. Samuel Spencer, Immigrant, I 11. John Spencer, of Bucks County, II III. Samuel Spencer's Wife : The Whittons, H IV. Samuel Spencer, 2nd, 22 V. William. Spencer, of Bucks, 36 VI. The Spencer Genealogy 1 First and Second Generations, 2. Third Generation, J. Fourth Generation, 79 ^. Fifth Generation, 114. J. Sixth Generation, 175 6. Seventh Generation, . 225 VII. Supplementary .... 233 ' ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. Page 32, third line, "adjourned" should be, of course, "adjoined." Page 33, footnote, the date 1877 should read 1787. " " Page 37, twelfth line from bottom, Three Tons should be "Three Tuns. ' Page 61, Hannah (Shoemaker) Shoemaker, Owen's second wife, must have been a grand-niece, not cousin, of Gaynor and Eliza. Thus : Joseph Lukens and Elizabeth Spencer. Hannah, m. Shoemaker. Gaynor Eliza Other children. I Charles Shoemaker Hannah, m. Owen S. Page 62, the name Horsham is divided at end of line as if pronounced Hor-sham ; the pronunciation is Hors-ham. -
Skinners: Patriot "Friends" Or Loyalist Foes? by Lincoln Diamant
Skinners: Patriot "Friends" or Loyalist Foes? by Lincoln Diamant t is never too late to correct a libel, even though, as Mark Twain joked, a lie is halfway around the world before the truth can pull on its pants. But to set the record straight for future lower I Hudson Valley histories, pamphlets, and schoolbooks . the answer to the title question of this essay is, simply, "loyalist foes." For more than a century and a half, the patriot irregulars who fought British and German invaders in the "neutral ground" between royalists and patriots in Westchester County during the Revolu tionary War have been slandered. Ignoring printed evidence 165 years old, too many authors and eminent historians have accused these patriotic citizens of war crimes equal to or worse than those committed by the British Army, its loyalist allies, and its German mercenaries. Unfortunately, the libel continues, telling us more about the ways mistakes are repeated in contemporary historical scholarship than we may wish to acknowledge. Correcting an error so long enshrined in the literature is no easy task. Where to begin? Perhaps the best place is Merriam-Webster's Una bridged Third New International Dictionary of the English Language, which carries this definition: "Skinner: one of a band of guerrillas and irregular cavalry claiming attachment to either the British or American troops and operating in Westchester County in New York during the American Revolution.'" 50 The Hudson Valley Regional Review , September 1987, Volume 4, Number 2 "British or American?" Even the simplest definition is ambiguous, and it ignores an important piece of evidence about the origin of the name. -
The Scandalous Indian Policy of William Penn's Sons: Deeds and Documents of the Walking Purchase
THE SCANDALOUS INDIAN POLICY OF WILLIAM PENN'S SONS: DEEDS AND DOCUMENTS OF THE WALKING PURCHASE BY FRANCIS JENNINGS* I N1737 Thomas Penn and James Logan produced a show that came to be called the Walking Purchase or Indian Walk. This much-described incident ostensibly was the fulfillment of a con- tract by which some Lenape Indians had sold a quantity of lands to be measured by a man walking for a day and a half from a fixed starting point. Penn and Logan forced the Walk upon un- willing and resentful Indians who charged fraud consistently from the day of its performance until they finally received compensa- tion twenty-four years later. During this period the anti-proprietary forces in Pennsylvania came to believe that the Walk was a cause of Indian hostilities in the French and Indian War, and they used it as the basis for a political campaign against Thomas Penn which led to a petition by Benjamin Franklin for a royal inquiry. In 1762 the Crown's commissioner, Sir William Johnson, presided over a turbulent hearing during which the chief Indian spokesman withdrew his charge that Thomas Penn had forged the Walk deed; but Johnson paid the Indians anyway at the end of the inquiry out of Thomas Penn's funds, thus raising some suspicions about the nature and purpose of the proceedings. There has been much contention over these highly dramatic events. Using the voluminous justifications prepared by Penn's lawyers and administrators, one school has held that Penn was libeled unscrupulously for the partisan purposes of some schem- ing Quakers working with that greatest schemer of them all, Benjamin Franklin.