In 1913, Woodrow Wilson was the newly elected president. Wilson and his fellow progressives scorned the Constitution and the Declaration. They moved swiftly to replace the Founders’ republic with a new regime.

There is widespread agreement that Wilson did not always show good judgment – for example, in his blunders in international relations – but in the project of overturning the Founding, he and the movement he led selected their targets shrewdly. By the time he left office, the American republic was, as they say, history. The fundamentals of the new regime were in place, and the expansion of government under FDR, LBJ, and Obama was made easy, perhaps even inevitable. Continue reading →

Builders of the American republic in the decades either side of 1800 grasped and employed new philosophical and ideological tools for its construction. The revolutionary idea of inherent political equality – “all men are created equal” with “inalienable rights” – however limited its reality then seems looking back from now, was the Next Big Thing of the day. Also critical were economic analyses originating with Adam Smith and his British colleagues. “Free market” arguments asserted that self-interested actors uncontrolled by authorities combine to create the greatest good for the greatest number.

John Lauritz Larson, in a recent presidential address to the Society for Historians of the Early American Republic, notes a couple of important similarities between the political theories and the economic theories of America’s revolutionary era. Both sets of ideas demanded that the king’s government get off people’s backs, especially by stopping its interference in commerce. And both sets of ideas asserted, based 18th-century “scientific” analysis, that state rule distorted the God- or Providence- or Nature-given order of things. Men, advocates argued, were naturally equal and self-governing; similarly, markets were naturally productive and self-governing. Continue reading →

These Do Not Mean What You Think They Do.

By April of 1775 the tensions between the Colonies and the Crown had reached a breaking point, and when the Kings men arrived at Lexington and Concord to confiscate the arms stored there they were met with locals who had grabbed whatever guns they had and assembled to prevent the Redcoats from taking their cache of arms. So it was that on that early April morning, just as the sun was rising, that America’s War for Independence began. So it was that on that early April morning a ragtag group of farmers, shopkeepers and merchants faced off against 500 of the most well trained and disciplined fighters on the planet. So it was that on this early April morning, that although these men were technically committing treason, they would go down into history books as patriots and heroes.

Why is that? Continue reading →

Printed in The Public Advertiser, September 11, 1773; incomplete draft and notes

Dr. Benjamin Franklin

Franklin was pleased with this satire, which was a companion piece to “An Edict by the King of Prussia.” Both had the virtues, he believed, of brevity, comprehensiveness, and “out-of-the-way forms” that caught attention; but he preferred the “Rules” to the “Edict” for the breadth and variety of its contents and for “a kind of spirited ending of each paragraph.” His technique in the two was different: in this one he challenged his readers to see their government’s policy through colonial eyes; in the “Edict” he jolted them with the fiction that they were colonists themselves. The two essays had a single purpose, to induce the public to take a fresh look at the American problem. When Parliament reconvened in the autumn, that problem promised to be a major subject of discussion; and the sensational demand from Massachusetts for the removal of Hutchinson and Oliver was sure, when it came before the Privy Council, to provoke a storm. Moderate counsels could never prevail unless the folly of past measures was exposed, and Franklin devoted himself to exposing it. At the top of his satirical bent he could not be ignored, and the initial public reaction to his efforts was gratifying. The issue of the Public Advertiser containing the “Edict” sold out immediately, and both satires were widely reprinted in England and then in America. Continue reading →

223 years ago today, “The Dreadful Night” occurred in Western Pennsylvania, after an uprising called The Whiskey Rebellion.

The United States was brand new. Soldiers who had fought for independence from Great Britain found themselves on opposite sides of a skirmish. Some were having their rights violated practically before the ink was dry on the Bill of Rights. Other Veterans of the Revolution were doing the oppressing at Alexander Hamilton’s behest.

The Whiskey Rebellion saw farmers stand up to an unfair tax handed down by the federal government, and the government responded with the force of a monarchy. It may have all sprung from Alexander Hamilton’s desire for glory. Or Hamilton, the first Secretary of Treasury, may have had other motives for setting the precedent of force which still lives on today. Continue reading →

Author’s Introduction: I originally completed this article in 1986, but it appeared only in an obscure, now-defunct (I believe) libertarian publication, Rampart Individualist (Summer 1988). I have long intended to revise it for some more prominent forum, but have never found the time. I offer it again, with only slight stylistic revision, because of the recent public action of Michael A. Bellesiles’s controversial book, Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture.1 Bellesiles’s most arresting claim, and the one for which he has drawn the most criticism, is that very few Americans owned firearms prior to the Civil War. In reaching this conclusion, Bellesiles makes some equally dubious assertions about the insignificance and incompetence of the American militia of the era. His denigration flies in the face of what military historians, whatever their ideological inclinations, have long known about the pervasive historical role and operations of the militia. Thus, I present this article as a mild corrective. If I were to revise it, I would primarily take notice of many of the relevant books and articles that have appeared in the intervening fifteen years. But very few of the scholarly gaps in the literature I identified then have yet been fully filled, and almost none of my overall conclusions require the slightest modification. Continue reading →

Editor’s note: For those who are wondering about the retro title of this black history series, please take a moment to learn about historian Joel A. Rogers, author of the 1934 book 100 Amazing Facts About the Negro With Complete Proof, to whom these “amazing facts” are an homage. ~ HLG

Nicolas Augustin Metoyer of Louisiana owned 13 slaves in 1830. He and his 12 family members collectively owned 215 slaves.

Did black people own slaves? If so, why?
One of the most vexing questions in African-American history is whether free African Americans themselves owned slaves. The short answer to this question, as you might suspect, is yes, of course; some free black people in this country bought and sold other black people, and did so at least since 1654, continuing to do so right through the Civil War. For me, the really fascinating questions about black slave-owning are how many black “masters” were involved, how many slaves did they own and why did they own slaves? Continue reading →

Although there are countless scourges which in general debilitate kingdoms, principalities, and republics, the four most important (in my judgment) are dissension, [abnormal] mortality, barren soil, and debasement of the currency. The first three are so obvious that nobody is unaware of their existence. But the fourth, which concerns money, is taken into account by few persons and only the most perspicacious. For it undermines states, not by a single attack all at once, but gradually and in a certain covert manner.

Coinage is imprinted gold or silver, by which the prices of things bought and sold are reckoned according to the regulations of any State or its ruler. Therefore money is, as it were, a common measure of values. That which ought to be a measure, however, must always preserve a fixed and constant standard. Otherwise, public order is necessarily disturbed, with buyers and sellers being cheated in many ways, just as if the yard, bushel, or pound did not maintain an invariable magnitude. Hence this measure is in my opinion the coin’s face value. Although this is based on the metal’s purity, nevertheless intrinsic value must be distinguished from face value. For, the denomination of a coin may exceed its metallic content, and the other way around. Continue reading →

The Holt Declaration of Independence

A major piece of printed Americana will go up for sale on November 11. It is a very rare, very early, and very valuable printing of the Declaration of Independence. It was printed in New York on July 9, 1776. However, the auction will not be taking place in New York, at least not the city. It will take place in Potsdam, New York. Where?

For the uninitiated, Potsdam is in the far upper reaches of upstate New York. Winter there begins in late July and ends in early July. It’s where if you speak a second language, it’s French, not Spanish. If you’re going to the “big city,” it’s Montreal, not New York. Montreal is 100 miles away, New York City 350. Canada is a mere 50 miles north.

Potsdam is not a large metropolis. It has a population of 9,400. However, it is no hick town either. It is home to two colleges, Clarkson University and the State University of New York at Potsdam. That must be one of the nation’s highest universities per capita ratios. It is also home of Blanchard’s Auction Service. Blanchard’s may not have the caché of a Sotheby’s or Christie’s, but every better known auction house on earth would love to have this item. As the listing explains, the Blanchards have known the unnamed seller for 25 years, who is “committed to our region.” This is how the Declaration came to be offered in far-off Potsdam. Continue reading →

What happened in the unseen labyrinth to which the pneumatic tubes led, he did not know in detail, but he did know in general terms. As soon as all the corrections which happened to be necessary in any particular number of ‘The Times’ had been assembled and collated, that number would be reprinted, the original copy destroyed, and the corrected copy placed on the files in its stead. This process of continuous alteration was applied not only to newspapers, but to books, periodicals, pamphlets, posters, leaflets, films, sound-tracks, cartoons, photographs — to every kind of literature or documentation which might conceivably hold any political or ideological significance. Day by day and almost minute by minute the past was brought up to date. In this way every prediction made by the Party could be shown by documentary evidence to have been correct, nor was any item of news, or any expression of opinion, which conflicted with the needs of the moment, ever allowed to remain on record. All history was a palimpsest, scraped clean and reinscribed exactly as often as was necessary.

Thus Orwell described the pneumatic tubes that fed the “memory hole” into which all of unwanted history, all facts and figures that were currently in disfavor, were consigned to the deep dark fires and erased for good. Continue reading →

Historians have long debated the causes of the war and the Southern perspective differs greatly from the Northern perspective. Based upon the study of original documents of the War Between The States (Civil War) era and facts and information published by Confederate Veterans, Confederate Chaplains, Southern writers and Southern Historians before, during, and after the war, I present the facts, opinions, and conclusions stated in the following article.

Technically the 10 causes listed are reasons for Southern secession. The only cause of the war was that the South was invaded and responded to Northern aggression. Continue reading →

“Just if we saw Confederacy named in it, we then highlighted it” says a school board spokesperson while describing a list which contained Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, and Sam Houston.

Battle of the Alamo: Even the Texas revolutionary defenders of the iconic Alamo were on a list of “controversial” historical figures which Dallas ISD needed to “research” for review of whether school names could stay.

The Dallas Independent School District is in damage control mode after an internal school board list was obtained by local press which shows schools under consideration for name changes due to possible “connections with slavery or the Confederacy.” News of the list, obtained by the Dallas Morning News early this week, caused outrage for the fact that it includes Texas revolutionaries and founders such as Sam Houston, James Bowie and William Travis, as well as Dallas pioneers James Gaston and William Brown Miller. It further names other early American figures who very obviously lived long before the existence of the Confederacy such as U.S. presidents Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and, inexplicably, Ben Franklin. Continue reading →

‘I am therefore resolved to resign my crown‘

A draft letter of abdication written by King George III is to go on display for the first time.

It will be part of a huge cache of documents from the reign of the last British monarch to rule over America which go online from today.

The letter, covered in blotches, scratchings and corrections, was penned during a period of political crisis in March 1783 at the end of the American War of Independence.

It was thought that George struggled to come to terms with British defeats in America and would retire to Hanover in Germany as a result.

He wrote: ‘I am therefore resolved to resign my Crown and all the Dominions appertaining to it to the Prince of Wales, my eldest son and lawful successor.’ Continue reading →

Many Americans will pause today to honor the men and women who have given their lives in the United States armed forces. What most probably don’t know is that this holiday originated in the South after the War for Southern Independence. It was originally called “Decoration Day.”

Don’t tell the social justice warriors.

The monuments that these modern day Leninists believe represent “white supremacy” were a byproduct of a movement that began one year after the conclusion of hostilities to remember the over two hundred thousand men who died defending the Southern fight for independence. Continue reading →

Publisher’s NOTE: We rarely will post information about such subjects, as they are generally looked upon as ‘advertising,’ however let the chips fall as they may. I am a subscriber to the website discussed herein. This is too powerful of  a historic piece of information. Welcome to Mr. Adair’s Classroom. ~ Jeffrey Bennett

We recently acquired a nice group of 18th century United States maps. Among these was the first printed map of Maine, then a District, some 25 years prior to achieving statehood in 1820.

Most early maps of American interest have been documented and catalogued in different reference books. These include the monumental and thorough two volumes by Philip Burden- The Mapping of North America- spanning the years 1511-1700. But all maps of individual states are produced after this date, so different cartobibliographic sources are needed.  Continue reading →

In December of 1860, many Republicans were beginning to take the secession movement seriously and felt that a compromise needed to be reached in order to keep the Upper South, including states like North Carolina and Tennessee, from seceding. For this reason, two committees were convened by Congress for the express purpose of dealing with proposals aimed at averting the secession crisis. The House of Representative’s “Committee of Thirty-Three” was formed on 4 December, 1860, the day after the second session of the thirty-sixth Congress convened. This committee took its name from the thirty-three Representatives, one from each state, that were appointed to its seats. The committee, chaired by Thomas Corwin of Ohio, met for the first time on 11 December. The Senate’s “Committee of Thirteen” was created on 18 December, and like the Committee of Thirty-Three, took its name from the number of seats assigned to it. On 20 December, Vice-President John C. Breckinridge appointed thirteen Senators to the committee, and they met for the first time that very day. Continue reading →

On May 22, 1856, South Carolina Representatives Preston Brooks and Laurence Keitt, along with Virginia Representative Henry Edmundson, made a visit to the Senate chamber. When they arrived, the balcony above the chamber still contained some straggling observers, mostly wives of senators. Since Brooks and Keitt were southern gentlemen, they respectfully waited for the ladies to leave.

Once the galleries were clear and only men remained in the chamber, Brooks and his allies approached Massachusetts Senator Charles Sumner, who was writing at his desk. Their reason for approaching Sumner was to respond to a speech Sumner had recently given, called “The Crime Against Kansas.” Continue reading →

Publisher’s Note: As we reopen Le Metropolis Café we are excited to post the following lengthy dissertation written by John Adams, an American patriot who would some years later serve as the second President of the United States (1797–1801) and the first Vice President (1789–97). He was a lawyer, diplomat, statesman, political theorist, and, as a Founding Father, a leader of the movement for American independence from Great Britain. The following was written by him some years before all of these events transpired. ~ Jeffrey Bennett, Publisher and frustrated Historian. Oct. 5, 2017

John Adams, Patriot

“Ignorance and inconsideration are the two great causes of the ruin of mankind.” This is an observation of Dr. Tillotson, with relation to the interest of his fellow men in a future and immortal state. But it is of equal truth and importance if applied to the happiness of men in society, on this side the grave. In the earliest ages of the world, absolute monarchy seems to have been the universal form of government. Kings, and a few of their great counselors and captains, exercised a cruel tyranny over the people, who held a rank in the scale of intelligence, in those days, but little higher than the camels and elephants that carried them and their engines to war.

By what causes it was brought to pass, that the people in the middle ages became more intelligent in general, would not, perhaps, be possible in these days to discover. But the fact is certain; and wherever a general knowledge and sensibility have prevailed among the people, arbitrary government and every kind of oppression have lessened and disappeared in proportion. Man has certainly an exalted soul; and the same principle in human nature, — that aspiring, noble principle founded in benevolence, and cherished by knowledge; I mean the love of power, which has been so often the cause of slavery, — has, whenever freedom has existed, been the cause of freedom. If it is this principle that has always prompted the princes and nobles of the earth, by every species of fraud and violence to shake off all the limitations of their power, it is the same that has always stimulated the common people to aspire at independency, and to endeavor at confining the power of the great within the limits of equity and reason. Continue reading →

Lincoln was relatively devoid of personal prejudice, but that doesn’t mean that he didn’t incorporate prejudice into his thinking. ~ Sebastian Page, Oxford University

By July of 1862, the Union was not faring so well against the Confederacy in its War of Aggression. Although they had won half again as many battles the Southerners, winning thirty-nine battles to the South’s twenty-six, the Southerners had fought them to a stand-still nineteen times, despite being outnumbered by two to one. Many in the North were beginning to grumble about the war, and morale, along with support for the war, was beginning to wane, and sympathy for the Southern cause was building in Western Europe. Continue reading →

For the people to rule wisely, they must be free to think and speak without fear of reprisal.

Detail of James Madison portrait by John Vanderlyn, 1816 (White House Historical Association)

The broad middle of this country seems caught between a rock and a hard place. On the far left, the “Antifa” movement has taken to protesting — often quite violently — ideas that do not conform to their transitory notions of social justice. On the other extreme, the alt-right has become indistinguishable from white-supremacist and neo-Confederate movements that have their origins in the seedy underbelly of American political history. Continue reading →