Although Jackson killed the central bank, fractional reserve banking remained in use by the numerous state chartered banks. This fueled economic instability in the years before the civil war. Still, the central bankers were out, and as a result American thrived as it expanded westward. The central bankers struggled to regain power of the bank, but to no avail. Finally, they reverted to the old central banker’s formula of war to create debt and dependency. If they couldn’t get their bank any other way, America could be brought to its knees by plunging it into a civil war, just as they had done in 1812, after, The First Bank of the U.S. was not rechartered.

One month after the inauguration of Abraham Lincoln, the first shots of the Civil War was fired at Fort Sumter South Carolina. This occurred on April 12th, 1861. Americans have always been taught that slavery was the cause of the Civil War. This is true in part, but slavery was U the primary cause. Continue reading →

James Otis, Jr. used his words to whip anti-British sentiment into a frenzy—so why isn’t he better remembered now?

Portrait of James Otis (1725-1783)

As John Adams told it, the American Revolution didn’t start in Philadelphia, or at Lexington and Concord. Instead, the second president traced the nation’s birth to February 24, 1761, when James Otis, Jr., rose in Boston’s Massachusetts Town House to defend American liberty.

That day, as five red-robed judges—and a rapt, 25-year-old Adams—listened, Otis delivered a five-hour oration against the Writs of Assistance, sweeping warrants that allowed British customs officials to search any place, anytime, for evidence of smuggling.

“It appears to me the worst instrument of arbitrary power,” argued Otis, “the most destructive of English liberty…that was ever found in an English law-book.” Until this case, the 36-year-old lawyer had been Massachusetts’ advocate general. But he resigned rather than defend the writs, then agreed to provide pro bono representation to the merchants fighting against them. Inside the courtroom, Otis denounced the British king, parliament, and nation as oppressors of the American colonies—electrifying spectators. Continue reading →

“I know not what course others may take;
but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!”

Patrick Henry

RICHMOND, Virginia, March 23, 1775 – 39-Year-old lawyer, with hair as red as the Virginia clay – Patrick Henry – today stepped across the irrevocable boundary line of rebellion against the Hanoverian Crown in an impassioned speech before the Virginia provincial convention, meeting in St. John’s Episcopal Church here.

Already noted for his angry speeches against the Stamp Act, Mr. Henry threw the convention into an uproar when he ended his talk with the stark words: “I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!”

Delegates to the convention immediately compared Mr. Henry’s speech with the outcry by Samuel Adams after the Boston Massacre five years ago this very month, and with John Hancock’s speech in Boston just a year ago memorializing that tragedy. However, Mr. Henry passed from the area of deprecation of British misrule into a call to arms. Continue reading →

Jonathan Edwards (Theologian)

ENFIELD, Connecticut, July 8, 1741 – The highest-flaming reach of Calvinist orthodoxy, aimed at frightening materialistic-minded New Englanders into a renewal of faith, already termed the Great Awakening, inspired Jonathan Edwards to deliver here today a notable sermon.

Soaring above even his own famous levels of eloquence, he exhorted his congregation, and all within reach of his thoughts, to look upon themselves as instruments of sin, saved from perdition only by the grace of a God whose patience they are taxing, and whose pity they are straining.

The 38-year-old theologian is forceful in exhortation and uncompromising in his doctrine of man as an earthly sinner. In some quarters his strong denunciation of sin-filled mankind already is making theological enemies, while unquestionably awakening lay-men to a renewed interest in religious matters. Continue reading →

Dred Scott

From the 1780s, the question of whether slavery would be permitted in new territories had threatened the Union. Over the decades, many compromises had been made to avoid disunion. But what did the Constitution say on this subject? This question was raised in 1857 before the Supreme Court in case of Dred Scott vs. Sandford. Dred Scott was a slave of an army surgeon, John Emerson. Scott had been taken from Missouri to posts in Illinois and what is now Minnesota for several years in the 1830s, before returning to Missouri. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 had declared the area including Minnesota free. In 1846, Scott sued for his freedom on the grounds that he had lived in a free state and a free territory for a prolonged period of time. Finally, after eleven years, his case reached the Supreme Court. At stake were answers to critical questions, including slavery in the territories and citizenship of African-Americans. The verdict was a bombshell. Continue reading →

“We fear not death!”

BOSTON, Massachussettes, March 5, 1774 – John Hancock, as fearless in his patriotism as he is eloquent in arguing the fine points of law, today told a cheering crowd on the Commons here that Americans stand as ready to die for liberty today as were the gallant victims of the Massacre of 1770.

In the midst of rising tensions between England and the American Colonies, Mr. Hancock memorialized the Massacre, as chief speaker on the fourth anniversary of the despicable event, when British troops fired point-blank into massed demonstrators who themselves were unarmed.

Far from frightening patriots into submission to oppression, Mr. Hancock said, the martyrdom of the victims of 1770 stands as a signal warning to the British crown that, come what may, “We fear not death.” Continue reading →

The Boston Massacre was a street fight that occurred on March 5, 1770, between a “patriot” mob, throwing snowballs, stones, and sticks, and a squad of British soldiers. Several colonists were killed and this led to a campaign by speech-writers to rouse the ire of the citizenry.

The presence of British troops in the city of Boston was increasingly unwelcome. The riot began when about 50 citizens attacked a British sentinel. A British officer, Captain Thomas Preston, called in additional soldiers, and these too were attacked, so the soldiers fired into the mob, killing 3 on the spot (a black sailor named Crispus Attucks, ropemaker Samuel Gray, and a mariner named James Caldwell), and wounding 8 others, two of whom died later (Samuel Maverick and Patrick Carr). Continue reading →

When Charles Adams published his book For Good and Evil, a world history of taxation, the most controversial chapter by far was the one on whether or not tariffs caused the American War between the States. That chapter generated so much discussion and debate that Adams’s publisher urged him to turn it into an entire book, which he did, in the form of When in the Course of Human Events: Arguing the Case for Southern Secession.

Many of the reviewers of this second book, so confident were they that slavery was the one and only possible reason for both Abraham Lincoln’s election to the presidency and the war itself, excoriated Adams for his analysis that the tariff issue was a major cause of the war. Continue reading →

Declaring the Independence of his slave

Stephen Hopkins (1707-1785) Born in Scituate, R.I., Hopkins was a self-educated merchant shipper, surveyor, and colonial Governor. After joining the Revolutionary cause, he signed the Declaration of Independence. Hopkins entered into politics while in his twenties, serving in the General Assembly, and in 1739 – about when Saint Jago was born into slavery – he became Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas. In 1742, he moved permanently to Providence and set up business as a merchant and ship builder. He continued to serve in politics and was a delegate from Rhode Island to the 1754 Albany convention that planned a military and political union of the colonies to help fight the impending French and Indian War (1754-1763). Although accepted by the convention, the plan was rejected by individual colonies and Great Britain. Continue reading →

What follows is one of the earliest known plans for union among the Colonies as proposed by William Penn before the London Board of Trade in 1697.

William Penn

A brief and plain scheme how the English colonies in the North parts of America, – viz., Boston, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jerseys, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, and Carolina, – may be made more useful to the crown and one another’s peace and safety with an universal concurrence.

That the several colonies before mentioned do meet once a year, and oftener if need be during the war, and at least once in two years in times of peace, by their stated and appointed deputies, to debate and resolve of such measures as are most advisable for their better understanding and the public tranquility and safety.

That, in order to it, two persons, well qualified for sense, sobriety, and substance, be appointed by each province as their representatives or deputies, which in the whole make the congress to consist of twenty persons. Continue reading →

~ Forward ~
Published anonymously by Thomas Paine in January of 1776, Common Sense was an instant best-seller, both in the colonies and in Europe. It went through several editions in Philadelphia, and was republished in all parts of United America. Because of it, Paine became internationally famous.

“A Covenanted People” called Common Sense “by far the most influential tract of the American Revolution….it remains one of the most brilliant pamphlets ever written in the English language.”

Paine’s political pamphlet brought the rising revolutionary sentiment into sharp focus by placing blame for the suffering of the colonies directly on the reigning British monarch, George III.

First and foremost, Common Sense advocated an immediate declaration of independence, postulating a special moral obligation of America to the rest of the world. Not long after publication, the spirit of Paine’s argument found resonance in the American Declaration of Independence.

Written at the outset of the Revolution, Common Sense became the leaven for the ferment of the times. It stirred the colonists to strengthen their resolve, resulting in the first successful antic-olonial action in modern history.

Little did Paine realize that his writings would set fire to a movement that had seldom if ever been worked out in the Old World: sovereignty of the people and written constitutions, together with effective checks and balances in government.

Common Sense challenged the authority of the British government and the royal monarchy. The plain language that Paine used spoke to the common people of America and was the first work to openly ask for independence from Great Britain.

Paine has been described as a professional radical and a revolutionary propagandist without peer. Born in England, he was dismissed as an excise officer while lobbying for higher wages. Impressed by Paine, Benjamin Franklin sponsored Paine’s emigration to America in 1774.

In Philadelphia Paine became a journalist and essayist, contributing articles on all subjects to The Pennsylvania Magazine. After the publication of Common Sense, Paine continued to inspire and encourage the patriots during the Revolutionary War with a series of pamphlets entitled The American Crisis. Eventually, Paine went on to write The Rights of Man and The Age of Reason.

But, it all started with Common Sense, the writing that sparked an American Revolution.

PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA, February 14, 1776

Introduction to the Third Edition
Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YET sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour; a long habit of not thinking a thing WRONG, gives it a superficial appearance of being RIGHT, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason. As a long and violent abuse of power, is generally the Means of calling the right of it in question (and in Matters too which might never have been thought of, had not the Sufferers been aggravated into the inquiry) and as the King of England hath undertaken in his OWN RIGHT, to support the Parliament in what he calls THEIRS, and as the good people of this country are grievously oppressed by the combination, they have an undoubted privilege to inquire into the pretensions of both, and equally to reject the usurpation of either. In the following sheets, the author hath studiously avoided every thing which is personal among ourselves. Compliments as well as censure to individuals make no part thereof. Continue reading →

“The Great Case of Liberty of Conscience, so often debated and defended is once more brought to public view, by a late Act against Dissenters, and Bill, or an additional one, that we all hoped the wisdom of our rulers had long since laid aside……”

William Penn was born in England and become a Quake, converted him from Anglicanism. Penn spent two years in prison for his beliefs, and wrote “the Great Case of Liberty of Conscience” during this time. Later, King Charles II gave Penn’s family a large grant in North America, which was named Pennsilvania. Penn came to American in 1682 and established a Quaker colony. Continue reading →

Immigrant Religious Extremist Group Signs Manifesto

CAPE COD, 1620 ~ A group of fundamentalist religious immigrants from Europe joined together today on a tiny ship called the Mayflower harbored in Cape Cod. Their purpose was to sign an agreement before establishing a religious settlement in the area to be called Massachusetts. According to inside sources, the manifesto declares their intentions to use the settlement as a base for increasing their religious sect in the New World.

The band of 103 immigrants left Holland a few months ago, and endured treacherous storms during their travels. They came to North America for freedom to practice their religion. Continue reading →

“I do not now, nor ever did, stand in favor of the unconditional repeal of the Fugitive Slave law.”

Springfield, Ill., June 16, 1858 ~ More than 1,000 delegates met in the Springfield, Illinois, statehouse for the Republican State Convention. At 5:00 p.m. they chose Abraham Lincoln as their candidate for the U.S. Senate, running against Democrat Stephen A. Douglas. At 8:00 p.m. Lincoln delivered the following address to his Republican colleagues in the Hall of Representatives. The title reflects part of the speech’s introduction, “A house divided against itself cannot stand,” a concept familiar to Lincoln’s audience as a statement by Jesus recorded in all three synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke).

Even Lincoln’s friends regarded the speech as too radical for the occasion. His law partner, William H. Herndon, considered Lincoln as morally courageous but politically incorrect. Lincoln read the speech to him before delivering it, referring to the “house divided” language this way: “The proposition is indisputably true … and I will deliver it as written. I want to use some universally known figure, expressed in simple language as universally known, that it may strike home to the minds of men in order to rouse them to the peril of the times.”

The speech created many repercussions, giving Lincoln’s political opponent fresh ammunition. Herndon remarked, “when I saw Senator Douglas making such headway against Mr. Lincoln’s house divided speech I was nettled & irritable, and said to Mr. Lincoln one day this – ‘Mr. Lincoln – why in the world do you not say to Mr. Douglas, when he is making capitol out of your speech, – ‘Douglas why whine and complain to me because of that speech. I am not the author of it. God is. Go and whine and complain to Him for its revelation, and utterance.’ Mr. Lincoln looked at me one short quizzical moment, and replied ‘I can’t.'” Continue reading →

“Liberty is the proper end and object of authority.”

Governor John Winthrop

PLYMOUTH COLONY, 1645 – Governor John Winthrop defined the duty of “magistrates,” or elected governing officials, as that of preserving the liberties of those they govern within all possible limits of human capacities, in a speech concluding a grave court dispute carried to Boston from the town of Hingham.

Simple as the judgment may seem to be, it constitutes a new definition added to the slim archives of precedent being constructed as part of the colonial legal structure. The case began at Hingham when a militia company, or “train-band,” deposed its elected lieutenant. When the lieutenant appealed to Boston for assistance in regaining his position, he won a commendation but the town refused to abide by the senior decision. A group of townsmen carried the case to court by suing Governor Winthrop. Continue reading →

Short Treatise on Political Power: Proper Response to Unjust Tyrannical Governments

~ Introduction ~
Short Treatise on Political Power by Dr. John Ponet, Bishop of Rochester and Worchester, was written in 1556 in response to the then current corruption in society, government, and church, the last two of which were at that time generally connected. What follows was published under conditions of severe persecution toward those who stood for truth and uprightness and thus the author’s name was encrypted in initials. A short treatise of political power, and of the true obedience which subjects owe to kings and other civil governors, with an exhortation to all true natural English men, compiled by Dr. John Ponet. It is quite lengthy, however is quite indicative of what ultimately drove many people in Europe to abandon their native lands in search of Religious and Political FREEDOM. ~ Ed.
Continue reading →

The Letter of Columbus to Luis De Sant Angel Announcing His Discovery

As I know you will be rejoiced at the glorious success that our Lord has given me in my voyage, I write this to tell you how in thirty-three days I sailed to the Indies with the fleet that the illustrious King and Queen, our Sovereigns, gave me, where I discovered a great many islands, inhabited by numberless people; and of all I have taken possession for their Highnesses by proclamation and display of the Royal Standard without opposition. To the first island I discovered I gave the name of San Salvador, in commemoration of His Divine Majesty, who has wonderfully granted all this. The Indians call it Guanaham. The second I named the Island of Santa Maria de Concepcion; the third, Fernandina; the fourth, Isabella; the fifth, Juana; and thus to each one I gave a new name. When I came to Juana, I followed the coast of that isle toward the west, and found it so extensive that I thought it might be the mainland, the province of Cathay; and as I found no towns nor villages on the sea-coast, except a few small settlements, where it was impossible to speak to the people, because they fled at once, I continued the said route, thinking I could not fail to see some great cities or towns; and finding at the end of many leagues that nothing new appeared, and that the coast led northward, contrary to my wish, because the winter had already set in, I decided to make for the south, and as the wind also was against my proceeding, I determined not to wait there longer, and turned back to a certain harbor whence I sent two men to find out whether there was any king or large city. They explored for three days, and found countless small communities and people, without number, but with no kind of government, so they returned. Continue reading →

“The democratic aspiration is no mere recent phase in human history… It was written in Magna Carta.” – Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 1941 Inaugural address

June 15, 1215 – In a field at Runnymede, King John affixed his seal to Magna Carta. Confronted by 40 rebellious barons, he consented to their demands in order to avert civil war. Just 10 weeks later, Pope Innocent III nullified the agreement, and England plunged into internal war.

Although Magna Carta failed to resolve the conflict between King John and his barons, it was reissued several times after his death. Continue reading →

~Foreword ~

During the process of compiling and editing the first volume of AMERICA: The Grand Illusion ~ Book I: Orphans of the Storm, I had occasion to work with my twelve year old granddaughter, Taylor (whose name fittingly works its way into this tale) on a history project for school, dealing with the War Between the States (which we have covered extensively on this site, but will eventually move into a category of its own). Needless to say, her teacher has been compromised in her education, and is subsequently passing her ignorance of American history onto the next generation of ill-informed children.

I searched our families’ boxes of historical archives to gather information on an ancestor, who had fought in that un-civil action, and found a family genealogy, which had been compiled by my great-grandparents in 1926, and later updated in 1959 by a family cousin. Whether it has been updated since remains to be seen, but that, which I am about to share with you has led to great discoveries on the internet about the subject matter of this chapter. For the purposes of brevity however, I will share with you directly from the family records, which are not unlike hundreds of thousands of similar ancestral stories, which can be told of this grand experiment we call, ‘America.’ Continue reading →

Fredericksburg, Virginia

The increasing moonlight drifts across my bed,
And on the churchyard by the road, I know
It falls as white and noiselessly as snow.
‘T was such a night two weary summers fled;
The stars, as now, were waning overhead.
Listen! Again the shrill-lipped bugles blow
Where the swift currents of the river flow
Past Fredericksburg: far off the heavens are red
With sudden conflagration: on yon height,
Linstock in hand, the gunners hold their breath:
A signal-rocket pierces the dense night,
Flings its spent stars upon the town beneath:
Hark! – the artillery massing on the right,
Hark! – the black squadrons wheeling down to… Death!

~ Thomas Bailey Aldrich

Stonewall Jackson was outraged. His entire body shook in anger as he looked around him at what had been done to the city of Fredericksburg. He saw the pianos and the works of art and the crystal chandeliers smashed and ruined on the streets. He saw elegant furniture that had been wantonly vandalized and the remains of elegant, leather-bound books that had been burned for kindling. But it was the churches – the churches – that infuriated him most. Houses of God were pocked with bullet holes and charred by cannon shot. This was a crime against God – a despicable blasphemy – and it very nearly made him weep.

Dr. McGuire, who was seldom far from Jackson’s side, shook his head in revulsion. “What can we do about this kind of barbaric behavior?”