Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University History Theses Department of History 8-12-2016 The Nature of the Union: The Evolution of Understandings about Government and Society Under the Early Continental Congresses, 1774-1776 Tyler J. Kubik Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/history_theses Recommended Citation Kubik, Tyler J., "The Nature of the Union: The Evolution of Understandings about Government and Society Under the Early Continental Congresses, 1774-1776." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2016. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/history_theses/107 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of History at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in History Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE NATURE OF THE UNION: THE EVOLUTION OF UNDERSTANDINGS ABOUT GOVERNMENT AND SOCIETY UNDER THE EARLY CONTINENTAL CONGRESSES, 1774-1776 by TYLER J. KUBIK Under the direction of H. Robert Baker, Ph.D. ABSTRACT Understandings of the Founding Era have been under continuous debate since the American Revolution itself. Whether one examines the Articles of Confederation or the Continental Congresses, the successes, failures, and significance of each have been argued over since the beginning. By looking at American understandings of crucial ideas about government and society during the American Revolution, including the foundation of American rights, we can better come to terms with an understanding of American identity. These understandings evolved during the American Revolution, and their evolution can be examined through the resolutions, debates, correspondence, and diaries of members of Congress from the the First Continental Congress in 1774 to the adoption of the Declaration of Independence in July of 1776. The Declaration represented the synthesis of natural law thought with British constitutionalism that was forged out of the necessity of compromise during the lead up to war in 1774, the outbreak of hostilities in 1775, and the subsequent escalation into war shortly thereafter, exhibiting the importance of wartime exigencies in the evolution of American thought. INDEX WORDS: American Revolution, Declaration of Independence, Continental Congress, Natural rights, British constitutionalism, Republicanism THE NATURE OF THE UNION: THE EVOLUTION OF UNDERSTANDINGS ABOUT GOVERNMENT AND SOCIETY UNDER THE EARLY CONTINENTAL CONGRESSES, 1774-1776 by TYLER J. KUBIK A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts In the College of Arts and Sciences Georgia State University 2016 Copyright by Tyler James Kubik 2016 THE NATURE OF THE UNION: THE EVOLUTION OF UNDERSTANDINGS ABOUT GOVERNMENT AND SOCIETY UNDER THE EARLY CONTINENTAL CONGRESSES, 1774-1776 by TYLER J. KUBIK Committee chair: Robert Baker Committee: Robert Baker David Sehat Electronic Version Approved: Office of Graduate Services College of Arts and Sciences Georgia State University August 2016 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 2 THE FIRST CONTINENTAL CONGRESS, 1774 ............................................... 29 2.1 Delegate Authorizations .............................................................................. 33 2.2 Resolutions: Forging a Compromise ......................................................... 39 3 THE SECOND CONGRESS, 1775-1776 ........................................................... 68 3.1 Delegate Instructions ................................................................................... 76 3.2 Resolutions: Dashing Hopes of Reconciliation ......................................... 81 3.3 Independence & Classical Republicanism ............................................... 114 4 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................. 132 BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................... 137 1 1 INTRODUCTION No revolution has ever sprung forth, fully blown and fully armed like Athena, from the brow of existing society; no revolution has ever emerged from a vacuum. No revolution has ever been born out of ideas alone, but only from a long chain of abuses and a long history of preparation, ideological and institutional. —Murray N. Rothbard, Conceived in Liberty Understandings of the Founding Era have been under continuous debate since the American Revolution itself. Whether one examines the Articles of Confederation or the Continental Congresses, the successes, failures, and significance of each have been argued over since the beginning. These debates are not trivial, either. By looking at American understandings of crucial ideas about government and society during the American Revolution, including the foundation of American rights, we can better come to terms with an understanding of American identity. As Gordon Wood has said, many Americans' identities are attached to their understanding of the founding era and founding generation1—itself a rather unique phenomenon—so any study that attempts to come to grips with the American founding has the potential to alter Americans' understanding of their own identities. This thesis will examine the evolving American understanding of government, sovereignty, and its relation to society during the American Revolution by studying the acts and debates of members of Congress—from the First Continental Congress in 1 Gordon S. Wood, “What Made the Founders Different,” Lecture, Mercer University, Macon, GA, November 17, 2011. 2 1774 to the adoption of the Declaration of Independence in July of 1776. The Continental Congress was Americans’ first attempt at a national government and gave birth to national politics and can tell us much about how Americans understood their sovereignty. However, this period is notable because of the exigencies of the war that framed it. In short, it was not ordinary politics but extraordinary circumstances that shaped American Republican thought. In order to accomplish this task, it is important to consider the legal and constitutional meanings of the resolutions and acts of both Congress and the states, in order to answer important questions about how Congress and its actions would be practically understood: How were the state delegates’ authorizations worded; what powers did the delegates give them? How did the Congress word its acts, and what significance did this have for sovereignty; i.e., in the Continental Congress, their “acts” were resolutions, but is this law, as we think of Federal legislation today? How did members of Congress perceive Congress’ powers? Was it truly a government? We do not consider the United Nations a government, nor even the European Union; should the American confederation in the Continental Congress be understood differently? To what extent did Congressional resolves depend on the direct action of states? How did Congress react to state non-compliance with their resolutions and requisitions? What penalty or consequence was there for states that acted contrary to Congressional resolution; i.e., were these binding, or carried the threat of force behind them—or were they more like treaties, dependent upon the will of the parties to the treaty? Questions like these are important because if we misunderstand the nature and scope of authority under the Continental Congresses, it will skew how we view their relation to the events 3 of the Revolution. For instance, if we (erroneously) viewed the Congress as a proto- centralized state whose acts were equivalent to law, and thus construed the scope of Congressional authority broadly, one would be tempted to read into the Congressional debates the wrong ideas and thinkers. Additionally, this would affect how one viewed the trajectory from the Continental Congresses to the Articles of Confederation, and ultimately to the Constitution. After considering the Congressional resolutions themselves, the next important consideration is what ideas were members of Congress relying on when debating what steps to take during the immediate lead up to war and as they managed the war effort.2 Secondly, how did the American understanding of these ideas change over time in relation to the war effort? Do we see more radical ideas supplanting practical concerns, or perhaps do we see the same prominent ideas on display, just with different emphases or new understandings attached? In order to do this, it requires going beneath the resolutions of the Continental Congresses and examining the debates that led to the adoption of resolutions. For source material, then, it requires using the journals of members of the Continental Congress, as well as their letters, situating the answers to these questions within the deep historiography of the American Revolution. As much as the American Revolution has been focused on, and as much as scholars have paid attention to the workings of the Continental Congress and Confederation Congress, studies relating to the American understandings of government and society during the American Revolution have missed an important opportunity to examine in detail changing American understandings of society and government through the Continental Congress. 2 And, by implication, thinkers. 4 The history of the American Revolution presents