The Loyalists of Massachusetts and the Other Side of the American RevolutionStark, James Henry
History
The Loyalists of Massachusetts and the Other Side of the American Revolution
Stark, James Henry
American loyalists -- Massachusetts; Massachusetts -- Politics and government -- 1775-1783
"That each party should hold what it possesses, is the first point from
which nations set out in framing a treaty of peace. If one side gives up
a part of its acquisitions, the other side renders an equivalent in some
other way. What is the equivalent given to Great Britain for all the
important concessions she has made? She has surrendered the capital of
this state (New York) and its large dependencies. She is to surrender
our immensely valuable posts on the frontier, and to yield to us a vast
tract of western territory, with one-half of the lakes, by which we
shall command almost the whole fur trade. She renounces to us her claim
to the navigation of the Mississippi and admits us to share in the
fisheries even on better terms than we formerly enjoyed. As she was in
possession, by right of war, of all these objects, whatever may have
been our original pretensions to them, they are, by the laws of nations,
to be considered as so much given up on her part. And what do we give in
return? We stipulate that there shall be no future injury to her
adherents among us. How insignificant the equivalent in comparison with
the acquisition! A man of sense would be ashamed to compare them, a man
of honesty, not intoxicated with passion, would blush to lisp a question
of the obligation to observe the stipulation on our part."[58] In return
for these advantages which Hamilton informs us Great Britain gave to the
States, Congress had most solemnly undertaken three things, and people,
wearied by the sufferings of our eight years' war, would have gladly
purchased the blessings of peace at a much higher price. The first of
these conditions was that no obstacle or impediment should be put in the
way of the recovery of debts due to British subjects from the citizens
of the Republic; the second that no fresh prosecution or confiscation
should be directed against Loyalists; the third, that Congress should
sincerely recommend to the legislatures of the various states a repeal
of the existing acts of confiscation, which affected the property of
these unfortunate persons. On the last no stress could be laid, but the
first and second were understood by every man, honest or dishonest, in
the same sense as when peace was joyfully accepted. The American states
took the benefits of peace which the efforts of Congress had secured to
them, they accepted the advantages of the treaty which their
representative had signed, they watched and waited until the troops of
King George were embarked in transports at New York for England, and
then proceeded to deny, in a variety of tones, all powers in the central
government to bind them in the matter of the _quid pro quo_. It was not
a great thing which Congress had undertaken to do, or one which could be
of any material advantage to their late enemy. All their promises
amounted to was that they would abstain from the degradation of a petty
and personal revenge, and this promise they proceeded to break in every
particular.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account