Philosophy of Liberty of the Founding Generation

“Philosophy of Liberty of the Founding Generation” By: John “DrJohn” Sampson

I have been asked give a short presentation on Liberty during this Appleseed event. I must admit to being somewhat intimidated by the task, for several reasons. First, it is a very large topic. But since we are doing it in the context of Appleseed, I take it to mean what was the philosophy of Liberty of the founding generation. Why did they fight with such grim determination? What were they fighting for? Another reason is that each person fought and struggled for his own reasons, so there were many ‘philosophies’, not just one. But they were all pretty much complementary. Instead of giving you my own idea of what the founding generation had in mind, I think it best to describe their motivations in their own words, letting them speak for themselves. I will have some commentary on what they spoke and wrote, but as much as I can, I will do so by putting myself in their place and explaining as I think they would have done themselves.

One more item of difficulty is that their philosophy, their world view, so to speak, is so vastly different from ours. So much so that it is difficult or even impossible for many people even to imagine such ideas. Let’s explore them a little bit, the ideas of those men, women, and children who loved Liberty so much that they were willing to pay almost any price to attain it.

In the first place, we might wonder what they meant by ‘Liberty’. In the words of one of the most revered of the founding generation, Samuel Adams, “The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth, and not to be under the will or the legislative authority of man, but only to have the law of nature for his rule.” That’s a pretty revolutionary thing to say. What are your thoughts on the matter? Thomas Jefferson said “(R)ightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add “within the limits of the law,” because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual.” I might add a word about the meaning of the word “tyrant” or “tyranny”. The founding generation didn’t use these words as an epithet. Like everything they said, these words had a particular meaning. They referred to rule that was arbitrary and capricious, and treated men differently based on whim and preference, not on objectivity. It was rule based on connections and power.

I did not say these things myself, although I strongly support the sentiments. Let’s consider another quote or two from Thomas Jefferson, a man widely respected as being one of the pivotal intellectuals of the American Revolution and the principle author of the Declaration of Independence.

“Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others?” That’s pretty radical, don’t you think? How do you feel about the matter?

Thomas Jefferson also said, “The right of self-government does not comprehend the government of others.”

He also said, “A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.”

I think you get the drift. No need to belabor the point. The predominant theme of Revolutionary War era America was Liberty.

We aren’t going to be able to cover the philosophy of the founding generation in great depth because of time constraints, but let’s hit another couple of highlights. I would like to quote one of the most influential documents of its day, the one that seemed to encompass a great deal of the thinking that shaped their belief system. This is from the second and most famous paragraph of that document:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.---That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,-That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.”

Can anyone tell me what that is from? Yes, the Declaration of Independence. Let me make a few obvious comments. The founders considered some truths so obvious, so impressed on our very hearts, as it were, that they were ‘self-evident’, that is, that anyone knew they were true just by examining his own heart. Of course all the great religions reinforce these beliefs, but even if religions did not exist, we would still know these things to be true. Among these truisms is the knowledge that we have certain rights that are un-alienable, often mispronounced unalienable. That means we cannot split these rights off from ourselves even if we wanted to. They are as much a part of our very nature as gray, heavy, and space-occupying are to the nature of lead.  That governments are created by people to secure those rights. Just to secure our rights to life, freedom of action, and property. The right to property is essential because if government can deprive us of our property at will, our rights to life and freedom of action are meaningless. As one of the founders, George Mason of Virginia, phrased it, if Parliament can tax us one shilling out of twenty, what security is there for the other nineteen?  And the document refers not to happiness per se, but the pursuit of happiness. So it was recognized that each person had the right to live his own life as he saw fit, free from any meddlesome attempts to make him conform in any way whatever, except to leave his neighbors in peace.

One more thought on the wording of the Declaration, the phrase, “government derives its just powers from consent of the governed”. That implies that there are unjust powers as well that government exercises. Or in the words of Thomas Jefferson, speaking of the new Constitution, “Laws which violate the basic law of the land are null and void and of no force whatever.” The clergy of the Revolutionary generation well understood this concept and taught it constantly from the pulpit.

Let me just quote a few others of the founding generation, to give you a little ‘flavor’ of their thinking, so you can understand them a bit better and perhaps get a different perspective on the situation in which we now find ourselves. Capt. Levi Preston of Danvers had fought during the Battles of Lexington and Concord. He was interviewed many years later and asked what it was that made him fight. The old man considered the question a bit. To prompt a reply, the interviewer asked if it was the Stamp Act, or the tax on tea, or the writings of the philosopher John Locke. Finally the old man said, “Young man, what we meant in going for the Redcoats was this. We had always governed ourselves, and we always meant to. They didn’t mean that we should.”

One more quote, from a man who wrote with such conviction, sincerity, and common sense that he rescued the War for Independence from almost certain loss. The pamphlet appeared in December of 1776 and was instrumental in boosting the morale of the Continental army and in winning the battles of Trenton and Princeton and turning the tide of the war. Let me quote:

“Britain with its army to enforce her tyranny, has declared she has a right not only to TAX but “to BIND us in ALL CASES WHATSOEVER” and if being bound in that manner is not slavery, then there is not such a thing as slavery upon earth. Even the expression is impious, for so unlimited power can belong only to God.” Thomas Paine, The Crisis. This referred to the Declaratory Act passed by Parliament in 1766, at the time the Stamp Act was repealed. England wanted to alert her American colonies that the hated tax would be repealed, but that in no way meant that England forfeited her right to rule the colonies in every way imaginable. To the colonists, that was merely a euphemism for slavery. Can government rule us in all cases whatsoever? That is, do we have a moral or ethical obligation to submit to government without any reservation, even when it violates our conscience? In other words, do we have a moral obligation to act immorally? Asked in that way, the question more or less answers itself. I would like each of you to ponder that for yourselves. Does government have the right to bind us in all cases whatsoever? Or are there limits? What are your own thoughts on the matter?

Let me quote one more of the Founding Generation, Samuel West, a Congregationalist minister In Massachusetts Bay Colony during the Revolutionary period. He gave a very influential sermon after the fighting had broken out, and he eloquently outlined the American patriots’ high moral ground in opposing British tyranny. Let me paraphrase a paragraph of his sermon. I admit that I paraphrase his words quite a bit, but only to make them more understandable to modern ears. “Thus we see that a state of nature, though it be a state of perfect freedom, gives men no right to do anything that is immoral, or contrary to the will of God, and injurious to their fellow-creatures; for a state of nature is properly a state of law and government, even a government founded upon the unchangeable Natural Law, and a law resulting from the eternal fitness of things...A revelation, pretending to be from God, that contradicts any part of Natural Law, ought immediately to be rejected as an lie... Had this subject been properly understood, the world would have remained free from a multitude of absurd ideas, which have been industriously propagated by artful and designing men, both in politics and the pulpit. The doctrine of nonresistance and unlimited passive obedience to the worst of tyrants could never have gained support among mankind had the voice of reason been hearkened to for a guide, because such a doctrine would immediately have been discerned to be contrary to Natural Law and destructive of human happiness, peace and prosperity.” He goes on to say, “This plainly shows that the highest state of liberty subjects us to the law of nature and the government of God.”  In other words, men have no moral obligation whatever to obey any so-called ‘authority’ that acts contrary to God’s law, or Natural Law, or the Ten Commandments, as they would have understood the concept. What is your own opinion about that? Ever given it a thought? It is certainly not the kind of thing you hear in the popular culture, and to my way of thinking, we are the worse off because of it.

I have given you a lot to think about. And I certainly hope it has stimulated your thinking, and that you will read more. The thoughts, sentiments, and beliefs expressed are those that motivated a peace loving people to rise up and defeat the most powerful empire the world had ever seen. Their thinking is so different from the popular culture of today that it is hard for many people even to conceive of it. But to my way of thinking, their morality, responsibility, and determination are far more agreeable to me, and harmonize with what I feel to be just and true, than any amount of what I get through the popular culture. I hope it holds some attraction for you as well.

Let me end this with one more quote from one of my very favorite founding fathers, Dr. Joseph Warren. He was one of the principle leaders of the Patriots in Boston at the time of Paul Revere’s ride, one of the most influential and admired men in Massachusetts Bay Colony. He was killed at the Battle of Bunker Hill in June, 1775, fighting off the Redcoats so that as many Patriot militia as possible could escape and live to fight on. He spoke these words at the commemoration of the Boston Massacre in 1775:

“Our country is in danger, but not to be despaired of. Our enemies are numerous and powerful; but we have many friends, determining to be free, and heaven and earth will aid the resolution. On you depend the fortunes of America. You are to decide the important question, on which rest the happiness and liberty of millions yet unborn. Act worthy of yourselves.”