rel="nofollow" href="#ulink_176c2c8c-600f-5fde-bad7-ea73a93d479c">3. The London Chronicle, of October 25, 1774, printed Major Cartwright's "American Independence the Interest and Glory of Great Britain," and it was reprinted in the Pennsylvania Journal. Although it has little relation to the form in which the question presently suggested itself, the article is interesting as an indication that separation was then more talked of in England than in America. Twelve years before the Revolution a pamphlet in favor of separation was written by Josiah Tucker of Bristol, England. Then as now colonists were more loyal than the English at home.
4. "The Rights of Man," part ii., chapter i.
5. Notes and Queries (Eng.), series 3 and 5. See also in Lippincotts Maga-rine, May, 1889, my paper embodying the correspondence of Washington and Boucher.
6. These resolutions further organized a provisional government to be in force until "the legislative body of Great Britain resign its unjust and arbitrary pretensions with respect to America." In 1819 a number of witnesses stated that so early as May 20th Mecklenburg passed an absolute Declaration of Independence, and it is possible that, on receipt of the tidings from Lexington, some popular meeting at Charlottetown gave vent to its indignation in expressions, or even resolutions, which were tempered by the County Committee eleven days later. The resolutions embodying the supposititious "Declaration," written out (1800) from memory by the alleged secretary of the meeting (Dr. Joseph McKnitt Alexander), are believed by Dr. Welling to be "an honest effort to reproduce, according to the best of his recollection, the facts and declarations contained in the genuine manuscripts of May 31, after that manifesto had been forgotten."—(North American Review, April, 1874.) But the testimony is very strong in favor of two sets of resolutions.
7. Mr. Moreau mentions it as Paine's in his MS. notes in a copy of Cheetham's book, now owned by the Pennsylvania Historical Society. No one familiar with Paine's style at the time can doubt its authorship.
{1776}
Chapter VI. "Common Sense"
In furrows ploughed deep by lawless despotism, watered with blood of patriots, the Thetford Quaker sowed his seed—true English seed. Even while he did so he was suspected of being a British spy, and might have been roughly handled in Philadelphia had it not been for Franklin. Possibly this suspicion may have arisen from his having, in the antislavery letter, asked the Americans "to consider with what consistency or decency they complain so loudly of attempts to enslave them, while they hold so many thousands in slavery." Perfectly indifferent to this, Paine devoted the autumn of 1775 to his pamphlet "Common Sense," which with the new year "burst from the press with an effect which has rarely been produced by types and paper in any age or country." So says Dr. Benjamin Rush, and his assertion, often quoted, has as often been confirmed.
Of the paramount influence of Paine's "Common Sense" there can indeed be no question.1 It reached Washington soon after tidings that Norfolk, Virginia, had been burned (Jan. 1st) by Lord Dunmore, as Falmouth (now Portland), Maine, had been, Oct 17, 1775, by ships under Admiral Graves.
The General wrote to Joseph Reed, from Cambridge, Jan. 31st: "A few more of such flaming arguments as were exhibited at Falmouth and Norfolk, added to the sound doctrine and unanswerable reasoning contained in the pamphlet 'Common Sense,' will not leave numbers at a loss to decide upon the propriety of separation."2
Henry Wisner, a New York delegate in Congress, sent the pamphlet to John McKesson, Secretary of the Provincial Congress sitting in New York City, with the following note: "Sir, I have only to ask the favour of you to read this pamphlet, consulting Mr. Scott and such of the Committee of Safety as you think proper, particularly Orange and Ulster, and let me know their and your opinion of the general spirit of it. I would have wrote a letter on the subject, but the bearer is waiting." In pursuance of this General Scott suggested a private meeting, and McKesson read the pamphlet aloud. New York, the last State to agree to separation, was alarmed by the pamphlet, and these leaders at first thought of answering it, but found themselves without the necessary arguments. Henry Wisner, however, required arguments rather than orders, and despite the instructions of his State gave New York the honor of having one name among those who, on July 4th, voted for independence.3 Joel Barlow, a student in Yale College at the beginning of the Revolution, has borne testimony to the great effect of Paine's pamphlet, as may be seen in his biography by Mr. Todd.
An original copy of Paine's excise pamphlet (1792) in my possession contains a note in pencil, apparently contemporary, suggesting that the introduction was written by Barlow. In this introduction—probably by Barlow, certainly by a competent observer of events in America—it is said:
"On this celebrated publication ('Common Sense'), which has received the testimony of praise from the wise and learned of different nations, we need only remark (for the merit of every work should be judged by its effect) that it gave spirit and resolution to the Americans, who were then wavering and undetermined, to assert their rights, and inspired a decisive energy into their counsels: we may therefore venture to say, without fear of contradiction, that the great American cause owed as much to the pen of Paine as to the sword of Washington."4
Edmund Randolph, our first Attorney-General, who had been on Washington's staff in the beginning of the war, and conducted much of his correspondence, ascribed independence primarily to George III., but next to "Thomas Paine, an Englishman by birth, and possessing an imagination which happily combined political topics, poured forth in a style hitherto unknown on this side of the Atlantic, from the ease with which it insinuated itself into the hearts of the people who were unlearned, or of the learned."5 This is from a devout churchman, writing after Paine's death. Paine's malignant biographer, Cheetham (1809), is constrained to say of "Common Sense": "Speaking a language which the colonists had felt but not thought, its popularity, terrible in its consequences to the parent country, was unexampled in the history of the press."6
Let it not be supposed that Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, Randolph, and the rest, were carried away by a meteor. Deep answers only unto deep. Paine's ideas went far because they came far. He was the authentic commoner, representing English freedom in the new world. There was no dreg in the poverty of his people that he had not tasted, no humiliation in their dependence, no outlook of their hopelessness, he had not known, and with the addition of intellectual hungers which made his old-world despair conscious. The squalor and abjectness of Thetford, its corporation held in the hollow of Grafton's hand, its members of Parliament also, the innumerable villages equally helpless, the unspeakable corruptions of the government, the repeated and always baffled efforts of the outraged people for some redress,—these had been brought home to Paine in many ways, had finally driven him to America, where he arrived on the hour for which none had been so exactly and thoroughly trained. He had thrown off the old world, and that America had virtually done the same, constituted its attraction for him. In the opening essay in his magazine, written within a month of his arrival in the country (Nov. 30, 1774), Paine speaks of America as a "nation,"
