[lit-ideas] Re: Why us?
- From: John McCreery <mccreery@xxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 11:32:57 +0900
On 2005/07/11, at 1:54, Eric Yost wrote:
The Continental Army versus Redcoat analogy applies to a colonial
rebellion which, though a bit of a stretch, could be said to
compare to Iraq.
Found the following by Googling "American Revolution Treatment of
Tories." The source for this particular bit is
http://www.geocities.com/kiltsfamily/loyalistspersecution.htm
The noun "persecution" means "pursue with harassing or oppressive
treatment especially because of religion, race or belief."(1) For
their belief in the British system of government and the Crown, the
Loyalists or Tories were persecuted before, during and after the
Revolutionary War. Most historians of this war agree there were two
types of persecution to which the Loyalists were subjected,
oppresive treatment by lawless mobs, and abuses carried out
constitutionally by unjust and cruel laws authorized by the
Thirteen Colonies. It was at the hands of the mob that the
Loyalists first suffered persecution. On 26 August 1765 Sam Adams
organized the Sons of Liberty, a secret organization of artisans,
shipyard workers and wharfingers of northern Boston who were
opposed to the Stamp Act that had been passed by the British
Parliament for raising revenue in the thirteen colonies. The Sons
of Liberty met around a liberty pole or tree, and "pledged their
sacred fortunes and their sacred honors."(2) The Sons of Liberty
planned and incited atrocities against the Loyalists through the
use of mobs and propaganda. Sam Adams was the Master of Propoganda
against the Loyalists.
During that same year Thomas Hutchinson, the Lieutenant (Acting)
Governor, attempted to enforce the Stamp Act. Samuel Adams, James
Otis and a radical mob attacked and destroyed the magnificent home
and library of Governor Hutchinson and the home of his brother-in-
law, Judge and stamp collector Andrew Oliver. The Boston mob broke
down the doors with broadaxes, destroyed the furniture, stole the
jewels and money, scattered the papers and books, drank the wine in
the cellar and dismantled the roof and walls. The families barely
escaped with their lives!
Meanwhile, Sons of Liberty associations sprang up in the Thirteen
Colonies. Through mob action, they intimidated the British
officials through vicious propaganda, they prompted the patriots to
fight against those who were loyal to the British Crown. In many of
the colonial towns they created local Committees of Correspondence
to resist the Trade and Navigation Acts imposed by the British
government, Committees of Inspection to ensure that British trade
was boycotted, and Committees of Safety which supplied the
continental army with men and equipment.
The conflict between the populace and the British soldiers in such
towns as New York and Boston led to such barbaric acts as the
Boston Massacre.
On March 5, 1770, the mob of rowdies, knowing well that the British
troops had strict orders not to fire on the populace, pelted and
insulted a patrol and mocked it with commands of "fire"! In the
confusion the patrol did fire and four or five of the mob were
killed. A young lawyer named John Adams risked his career to defend
the soldiers in court, and they received only a technical
punishment.(3)
Seventeen months before the commencement of the Revolutionary War,
on 16 December 1773, a group of Bostonians, instigated by patriot
Sam Adams and disguised as Mohawk Indians, boarded three British
ships and threw 342 chests of tea, worth ￡18,000 wholesale, into
the Boston harbour. This act was meant to show defiance against
England's taxation of goods imported into the American colonies.
The Sons of Liberty did manage to dump a consignment of East India
Company tea into New York Harbour, but only to the decorous strain
of "God Save the King", played by a band on shore.(4)
In other places the excesses of the mob were nearly as great as in
Boston. In New York, mobs were active in destroying printing
presses which had printed Loyalist pamphlets, in stealing cattle
and personal property.
The nucleus of such radical mob action was the Sons of Liberty,
groups first making their appearance in New England and New York,
but soon springing up in virtually every colonial town. These
organizations functioned as independent entities and in fact no one
has demonstrated a clear and undisputed lineage between them and
the...Committees of Correspondence....At the heart of radical
demonstrations was the "mechanic," a catchall term covering both
master employees and journeymen wage workers. The "mechanics" were
the "radicals" and as such were indispensable ingredients in
fueling the flame of political protests.(5)
One of the favourite pastimes of the mob was to tar and feather
"obnoxious Tories." The tar was usually heated before the victim
was stripped naked. The hissing tar was poured over the victim's
head, shoulder, chest and back and feathers were placed over the
pine tar. The victim was then paraded about the streets in a cart
for all the townspeople to see what happens to supporters of the
British government.
Another form of torture inflicted on some of the Tories was to
force them to ride the rail. This involved placing the "unhappy
victim" upon sharp rails with one leg on each side; each rail was
carried upon the shoulders of two tall men, with a man on each side
to keep the poor wretch straight and fixed in his seat.
Seth Seeley, a Connecticut farmer, who later fled to New Brunswick
was brought before a local committee in 1776 and, as punishment for
signing a declaration to support the king's laws was put on a rail
carried on men's shoulders through the streets, put into stocks and
besmeared with eggs and was robbed of money for the entertainment
of the Company.(6)
Some of the other acts of extreme cruelty used on the Tories by the
Patriots were hoisting enemies of liberty up a liberty pole with a
dead animal on the pole; forcing a Tory to ride an unsaddled horse
with his face to the tail of the horse and his coat turned inside
out; sitting Tories on lumps of coal; whipping, cropping ears,
placing the enemy in the pillory or stockade. The mob could at
times be moved by extremely reactionary impulses and cruel acts.
Some of the revolutionary leaders encouraged the sadistics acts of
the mobs. In December 1776 the Provincial Congress of New York went
so far as to order the Committee of Public Safety to purchase all
the pitch and tar necessary for the public's use and safety.
General George Washington seems to have approved mob persecution of
the Tories. In 1776 General Israel Putnam, one of Washington's
generals, met a procession of the Sons of Liberty parading a number
of Tories on rails up and down the streets of New York and he
attempted to halt this inhuman proceeding. On hearing this,
Washington reprimanded General Putnam, stating that "to discourage
such proceedings was to injure the cause of liberty in which they
were engaged, and that nobody would attempt it but an enemy of his
country."
As the revolution progressed, semi-official organizations began to
harass the Tories. The Continental Congress or Provincial Congress
laid down the general policy to be observed in the treatment of
Tories, and local committees carried it out in detail. Early in
1776 the Continental Congress, which at the time had no basis in
law, recommended that Tories be disarmed; it was the committee
which then enforced the recommendation. Tories were arrested,
tried, exiled to other districts and, in some cases, imprisoned. A
few Tories, particularly in the southern states, were hung.
The political situation changed in the colonies when the
Declaration of Independence was adopted on 4 July 1776. It
recounted the grievances of the colonies against the British Crown
and declared the colonies to be free and independent states.
Loyalism to the British Crown became the equivalent of treason to
the state. Penalties for treason began to be laid against the Tories.
The Declaration of Independence was followed by the Test Laws which
required all colonists to swear allegiance to the state in which
they lived. A record was kept of those who took the oath and they
were issued a certificate for safety from arrest. Failure to take
the oath meant possible imprisonment, confiscation of property,
banishment and even death.
Not, to be sure, car bombs and video-tapped beheadings.
Cheers,
John McCreery------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
