We didn't forget them, it was just hard to take them seriously all covered in feathers.
That is their place in history, as it will be for the NYT soon enough.
Posted on 07/04/2006 4:57:26 AM PDT by radar101
In June 1776, just a month before the Declaration of Independence was ratified, the white men of Barnstable, Mass., voted on whether America should break its bonds with Great Britain. The tally: 30 for independence, 35 against and 65 abstentions.
These days, the Colonists who opposed the revolution have been all but forgotten. Yet, in the years leading up to the Revolutionary War, as many as a fifth of those living in America wanted to remain British subjects. Probably at least that many again were apathetic or opportunistically waiting to see which side won. The American Revolution, many historians argue, was also a civil war.
The loyalists or Tories, as the opponents of independence were known, came from all social and economic classes. An act of banishment, passed against some 300 Massachusetts loyalists in 1778, listed them by trade or profession: About a third were merchants or professional men, a third were farmers, and the rest were artisans, laborers or small shopkeepers. Many Southern slaves and American Indians also believed they would fare better under continued British rule.
Clearly, some loyalists were motivated by self-interest or greed; Britain was paying their salaries or buying their goods. Others believed only oligarchies of well-bred intellectuals were competent to govern a country. They looked down on revolutionary leaders as “men whom nobody knows.” And some were convinced that Great Britain, then the world's most powerful nation, would make short work of America's shabby rebels.
Still others, lovers of order and tradition, felt emotionally attached to Britain's flag and what it stood for – a constitutional monarchy with proven mechanisms for resolving disputes and maintaining social stability. “They pointed to the amazing growth and prosperity of the Colonies and to the great freedom they enjoyed – how much more could a reasonable man want?” wrote Wallace Brown in his 1965 book, “The King's Friends.”
The loyalists also feared the “madness of the multitude,” the violence and anarchy of rebellion and the possible despotism of an American Caesar.
“Almost all of the loyalists were, in one way or another, more afraid of America than they were of Britain,” said William H. Nelson in the 1961 “The American Tory.”
Poorly organized and without unifying leaders, the loyalists never stood a chance against the zealous Patriots. In 1774, the first Continental Congress authorized local governments to form “committees of inspection,” which would test their citizens' allegiance to independence. People who refused to take the Patriots' oath often lost their homes and were prohibited from working. The General Court of Massachusetts advised Harvard College's overseers to question their faculty and “dismiss any instructors who appeared to be unfriendly to American liberty.” At least 75,000 loyalists fled to Canada, England or the West Indies during or just after the war.
Violence against loyalists wasn't uncommon. Some were tarred and feathered. Hundreds were jailed. One Delaware loyalist, convicted of aiding and abetting the enemy, was sentenced to be hanged “but not 'til you be dead for you must be cut down alive ... and then your head must be severed from your body and your body divided into four quarters and these must be at the disposal of the Supreme Authority of the state.”
Until the 19th century, most historians of the American Revolution echoed Thomas Paine's opinion that “servile, slavish, self-interested fear (was) the foundation of Toryism.” History is, after all, written by the victors. But the Civil War helped change Americans' notions of loyalty and rebellion, and some historians began crediting loyalists with the courage to maintain a deeply unpopular minority view.
Maybe they were even men and women of principle, such as Daniel Leonard, a Massachusetts loyalist, who wrote, “When government is destroyed, whether by men who love liberty or by men who do not, there are then no laws to protect the weak against the powerful or the good against the wicked.”
Gee, that means only 4/5 ths of the people wanted to break away from Britain! What idiots. They are trying to imply that we shouldn't have broken off becasue 100 percent of the people didn't want to.
Something else I didn't see here, when the revolution was over we shipped a lot of the loyalist out of the country. I think that would be precedent for shipping people like Cindy S. out of the country!
Say what?
Conservatives feared by Loyalists? The Loyalists ARE the Conservatives.
What Loyalists i.e. Conservatives fear and have always feared is The Mob.
In other words, Democrats.
I saw something about the "evacuation" of Boston on the history channel yesterday. Some 2000 odd british loyalists were kicked out of the country from Boston alone.
The Communists are emboldened and have come out of the closet. Another consequence of Clintonism.
It would be intersting if one of the rich dudes would charter some cruise boats and offer to take those disaffected libs for a free 1 way ride to anywhere they want to go to PERMANTLY. Nah, couldn't be enough of em leave, I guess.
We didn't forget them, it was just hard to take them seriously all covered in feathers.
That is their place in history, as it will be for the NYT soon enough.
The Loyalists did not disappear. They live on today as American liberal anti-Patriots.
My point:
For 40 years (1932-1994) DEMOCRATS held Congress. They forced Republican Presidents to foillow their line. They drove out people who tried to keep America free of Communists and traitors(Joe McCarthy and Oliver North)
They passed information to the communists (Verified by Ann Coulter in the book TREASON)
Now they are saying we have to go back to their ways.
Although Charles Lee had his fans, there was one overriding issue that prevented him from leading the Continental Army: he wasn't an American. And, as an interesting footnote, his retreat at the Battle of Monmouth caused General Washington to take over his command (some accused him of cowardice). He badmouthed Washington continuously, and was challenged to a duel by one of Washington's officers. He was wounded in that duel and died a lonely man surrounded by his dogs near Philadelphia. He is buried at Christ Church, Philadelphia, where more Signers are buried than at any other place.
Actually the 1/5th figure for Loyalists is pretty darn low. Actually most of the country was very much on the fence without strong feelings either way in the years leading up to the war.
Loyalists were concentrated in New York City and especially in the South..Georgia, South Carolina, etc. A lot of the Mid-Atlantic was pretty mixed. It was New England and Virginia with most of the rebels.
Yes, which is why it's so important not to cut and run from Iraq. If we do, I'll predict a blood-bath of at least 1,000,000 dead. Reminder: when we cut and ran from Southeast Asia there were about 2,500,000 dead.
I mentioned Lymamn Hall as a declaration of independence signer earlier this morning. Hall was governor of Georgia and even proposed taking a sizable portion of Georgia and adding it to South Carolina due to the loyalist sentiment that was the majority in his state. (he wasn't a loyalist obviously)
Just like today's anti-American liberals.
My bad: my dates are mixed up. I have asked the Mods to delete. Sorry Metesky!
The political spectrum has shifted, or rather, reversed polarity. Conservatives, rather than maintaining what is now the status quo, continue to place value on the individual, individual freedom, local government and the rights that go with it. Conservatives place great value on the original intent of the constitution, the declaration of independence, free enterprise, and values of religious expression that propelled this nation to world power; and yes, these were Christian ideals that shaped this nation. Washington was a Christian, not a deist as revisionists have claimed. Washington, Adams, and Jefferson were actually raving liberals but are now classed as conservatives as are the people today who see value in all the good they stood for. Today’s liberals do not share these values. Liberals are loyalists to big government (also, the UN, not unlike loyalists were to the British Crown), group rights, individuals subservient to manipulation by the powerful in government, the entertainment industry, the superrich Soros’ of the world, and liberals support the tentacles of an all-controlling secular nanny-state--think British Empire.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.