The Origin Of The Second Amendment - Early Sources On America's Armed Civil Population, Part 10

 

General Gage Disarms The People Of Boston, The Continental Congress Declares Such Action A Cause And Necessity Of Taking Up Arms, And Some Observations On Boston's Armed Civil Population

Updated October 4, 2024

After the Battles of Lexington and Concord on April 19, 1775, the British army was confined within town by a large force of Massachusetts voluntary militia besieging it. The people of town were essentially held as hostages under the guns of the British fleet. An agreement was reached between the selectmen of Boston, approved by vote of the people and General Gage, to allow anyone outside Boston wishing to enter with their relatives and all their belongings, and all those wishing to leave to do likewise with all of their property, except arms. All private arms of Boston's population were to be deposited for safekeeping in Fanueil Hall with the town's selectmen. Arms would be marked by the selectmen with the names of the owners so they could be returned to them at a suitable time in the future. Once all arms had been turned in, departing town would be allowed with a pass from a particular British officer.

It became evident once removals started that virtually everyone in town was going to leave with all of their relatives, take all of their possessions, including all the private stocks of stores in town with them. Gage was informed by loyalists that, if all the patriots departed, who made up the vast majority of the population, there would be no reason for them not to burn down their own town to drive the British out. Gage first reneged on the agreement by preventing merchandise from being removed. Then, he prevented provisions and medicine from being removed. Then, the officer necessary to approve a pass became very difficult to locate. Finally, Gage fully reneged on his agreement, claiming that large numbers of arms had been hidden away. No one else was allowed to leave, and relatively few had been able to so. Then Gage placed a military guard on Fanueil Hall preventing anyone from access to their own arms. At least two individuals were later imprisoned for 75 days for simply concealing arms in their homes. 

On July 6, 1775, the Continental Congress passed a Declaration Of The Causes And Necessity Of Taking Up Arms. One of the many reasons given for this Declaration was the disarming of Boston's population of all their private arms. Note that it was passed almost one year prior to the Declaration of Independence.

The selectmen of Boston recorded the following list of types and number of arms deposited by their owners at Fanueil Hall:

Firearms:     1,778

Pistols:           634

Bayonets:       973

Blunderbusses: 38

Comments on specific types of arms, starting at the bottom of the list:

Blunderbusses were short barrel shotguns with bell shaped barrel ends usually used for personal defense, or defense of coaches or vessels.

Bayonets were long, thin metal spear like detachable  instruments that were used on military style musket barrel ends used for stabbing enemy soldiers.

Pistols were short firearms held in one hand, often found in pairs, and normally used for personal protection, with larger types normally used as military arms carried in pairs on horseback.

"Firearms" in this list is a term clearly encompassing more than one type of small arms that were longer in size than pistols or blunderbusses. It would have included military style muskets. Presumably, based on the number of bayonets turned in, there would have been at least 973 military style muskets among the 1,778 firearms listed, although there could have been many more muskets than bayonets listed. Most of the other "firearms" were likely fowling pieces along with some rifles.

General comments on this list and the types of arms listed - These arms were the property of private individuals. Without doubt they were not all of the arms that the people of Boston possessed, as some individuals were imprisoned for simply having arms in their home. Also, Gage may well have been correct that large numbers of arms had been hidden away. Patriots in Boston trusted General Gage no further than a man could throw the British Admiral's flagship.

Given that Boston's population was around 16,000 at that time, the number of males would have been about half of that number, or 8,000, and the number of males 16 and older around 4,000. Under Massachusetts' militia law that dated back to the late 1600's, which was still in effect, but not being enforced by the Royal governor at this period, there should be a musket and bayonet present in Boston owned by individuals for every male 16 through 59, and every house holder as well. That would have been a considerably larger number than the 973 bayonets turned in.

The 4,000 male townspeople 16 and older possessed at least 2,450 what would be described today as firearms, as well as nearly 1,000 bayonets that were obviously military arms associated with military muskets. If that was the maximum number of private firearms in Boston in April of 1775, it is still well over one firearm for half of all males above 16 years old. Either the people of Boston were relative arms lovers, or firearms ownership in colonial America was rather widespread.

Considering that over ninety per cent of the American population were involved in farming, the percentage of arms ownership of the free male population was undoubtedly even greater than Bostons. As the total count of firearms for Boston was probably higher than the number of arms seized, and all Massachusetts farmers out in the countryside had to deal with numerous daily threats to their crops and livestock that the people in town would rarely have a problem with, arms possession in Massachusetts was widespread indeed. Plus, the people had been arming up since 1768. Recall Gage, prior to hostilities, stating that "arms are carried out openly by every man that goes out of Boston without molestation" as quoted in Part 6 of this series.

In Part 11, John Adams' statement that the American Revolution was over before the War for Independence began will be used as a retrospective on Parts 1 through 10 of this series and an introduction to American constitutional development.

The Origin Of The Second Amendment - Early Sources On America's Armed Civil Population, Part 9

Patrick Henry Marches With Hanover Volunteers Against Virginia's Governor, And Benjamin Franklin Describes All America Learning The Use Of Arms

As noted in the previous part, imports of arms and ammunition into the America Colonies were banned by the British in late 1774. And, as previously noted, British appointed governors in the Colonies were preventing laws from being passed by the people for any purpose because they would vote for armed defense by the militia, meaning by the people. Those governors were also actively trying to assure government control over all types of arms and ammunition anywhere possible.

The day after the Revolutionary War started in Massachusetts, and well before any news of that event was available to the south, Governor Dunmore of Virginia ordered the removal of gunpowder from the Williamsburg powder house. British marines used the governor's private wagon to haul the powder away before dawn on April 20, 1775, and store it on a British vessel under his control. The governor claimed this action was to prevent a slave rebellion and assured local leaders that if a rebellion occurred, he would instantly return the powder. However, the next day Dunmore threatened to free the slaves and lay waste to Williamsburg due to perceived threats to himself and the two British officers involved. 

On learning of the powder seizure, Patrick Henry sought approval from the local committee for marching the Hanover Volunteers to retrieve the powder. Such approval was denied. After news of hositilies between British forces and the people of Massachusetts at Lexington and Concord was received around April 28, 1775, the committee approved such action. Henry was offered command of the Volunteers and accepted. His forces were augmented with other volunteers joining his march to Williamsburg to retrieve the colony's powder. It was never likely that the powder could be retrieved unless the Governor gave such an order. However, Henry was able to collect full payment for the powder from the colony's receiver general. This ended possible military action, but it earning a rebel declaration for all involved, especially Henry, from Dunmore.

In Pennsylvania, Benjamin Franklin, having departed London as represenative of the American colonies, arrived back home in Philadelphia on May 5, 1775. From Franklin's letter to Jonathan Shipley in England regarding America when he first returned in early May:

"I found at my arrival all America from one end of the 12 united Provinces to the other, busily employed in learning the Use of Arms. The Attack upon the Country People near Boston by the Army had rous'd every Body, & exasperated the whole Continent. The Tradesmen of this City were in the Field twice a day, at 5 in the Morning, and Six in the Afternoon, disciplining with the utmost Diligence, all being Volunteers. We have now three Battalions, a troop of Light Horse, and a company of Artillery, who have made surprizing Progress. The same Spirit appears every where and the Unanimity is amazing." [Letters Of Delegates To Congress, Vol. 1, p.604]

Joseph Hewes, delegate to Congress from North Carolina, wrote Samuel Johnston on May 11, 1775 from Philadelphia:

"Nothing is heard but the sound of Drums & Fifes, all Ranks & Degrees of men are in Arms learning the Manual Exercise Evolution & the management of Artillery. They have now in this City Twenty eight Companies of Foot of 68 men each including Officers all of whom are out twice every day in Training. Several more Companies are forming, they have also two companies of Light Horse in short it is impossible to describe the Spirit of these people and the alteration they have undergone since I left them in December last. All the Quakers except a few of the old Rigid ones have taken up arms, there is not one Company without several of these people in it, and I am told one or two of the Companies are composed entirely of Quakers. The people of this Province in general are associating in Companies and employing Sarjants to teach them the exercise. I find all the Provinces are in Arms Except No. Carolina. New York has been Converted almost as instantaneously as St Paul was of old,. . ." [Delegates, Vol.1, pp.342-343]

A most interesting question here - where did all of these arms come from in Pennsylvania, the only American colony that never adopted a compulsory militia law requiring arms possession? And what was the actual deal with the Quakers and arms? How could these things happen without some law being passed to authorize it? These points will be addressed in an appropriate later post.

In Part 10, The people of Boston Are disarmed, and the Continental Congress declares such action as one of the causes and necessity of taking up arms.

The Origin Of The Second Amendment - Early Sources On America's Armed Civil Population, Part 8

General Gage Attempts Cannon Seizure At Salem, Patrick Henry Gives His Liberty Or Death Speech In Virginia, And The Revolutionary War Begins At Lexington

Updated September 24, 2024

Note that Britain banned imports of arms and ammunition into the American Colonies by November of 1774. Even fancy, expensive fowling pieces arriving in New York were seized by customs officers. Needles to say, none of this sat well with most Americans.

General Gage ordered a second action to disarm the people of Massachusetts on February 28, 1775. British troops sailed for Marblehead on a mission to Salem to avoid detection. The object was seizure of cannons and military supplies stored there. Quick action by the townspeople delayed the troops from entering by simply lifting Salem's drawbridge, all the while pelting the redcoats with insults and laughter. The delay allowed for relocation of the sought items making the British mission impossible to complete. However, the alarm bells went off early on, and there were companies of minutemen from surrounding towns arriving at Salem as British troops departed in failure.

Down in Virginia, Patrick Henry gave his famous "give me liberty, or give me death" speech on March 23, 1775, at the colony's convention. This speech was in support of his proposed resolution recommending the militia of the colony be put into a state of defense. The introduction stated:

"Resolved, That a well regulated militia, composed of the gentlemen and yeomen, is the natural strength and only security of a free government; that such militia in this colony would for ever render it unnecessary for the mother country to keep among us, for the purpose of our defence, any standing army of mercenary soldiers, always subversive of the quiet, and dangerous to the liberties of the people, and would obviate the pretext of taxing us for their support."

By this time, well regulated militia language had become a common American motto or maxim of the Revolutionary Era based upon repeated earlier usage. It was very similar to language in George Mason's earlier Fairfax County Committee of Safety resolution copying Maryland's language regarding a well regulated militia, quoted in Part 5. Henry's resolution went on to note necessary laws for defense could not be passed "to secure our inestimable rights and liberties, from those further violations with which they are threatened." The threat was from the royal governor, who was blocking legislative meetings under the colony's charter, and planning to seize the colony's powder supply to more easily compel obedience by armed government force.

The relevant period sources indicate that our ancestors understood well regulated militia references to relate to the body of the people, meaning an armed civil population capable of defending their country and rights, as well as keeping the government's armed forces under control. Well regulated simply meant that the people were capable of organized defense, something impossible without widespread arms possession and use. As noted in the previous part, the people could simply self embody by voluntary associations or private agreements if the law making apparatus was denied them, and the government was violating their rights as well as attempting to rule by force.

Back up in Massachusetts, General Gage sent out a third expedition to seize arms and supplies, this time to Concord well before dawn on April 19, 1775. Vigilant patriots noted military activity and express riders went out to spread the alarm. Some were seized by disguised British officers on the road, but they escaped and eventually the alarm was spread. The British were also trying to capture John Adams and John Hancock, who just happened to be at Lexington that night.

At Lexington's green, where the minutemen of town were assembled by dawn, the officer of the lead British column of troops rushed forward and ordered the minutemen standing at attention to throw down their arms several times. They did not. That officer later told people in Boston that a firearm misfired behind one of the rock walls around Lexington's green. His troops began firing on the militiamen without orders to do so. A number of militia were killed and injured, and the others fled the field faced with the much larger British force suddenly attacking them. Each side blamed the other for initiating hostilities.

The British troops then marched on to Concord and began burning military stores found there. The local militia observed their actions from a nearby hilltop, marching down to prevent the destruction of their town when smoke started rising from behind the buildings. They engaged the redcoats and routed them back towards Boston as reinforcements from all surrounding towns arrived in the area. The British were constantly fired at from behind stone walls by incensed farmers on their march back to Boston. The militia stopped pursuit at Charlestown, allowing for British wounded to be tended by the townspeople. Once inside Boston, British troops were confined there by a mass of militia preventing their march out anywhere into Massachusetts again.

In Part 9, Patrick Henry leads the Hanover Volunteers to retrieve powder clandestinely removed from the Williamsburg powder house in the night by British marines under orders of Virginia's governor.

The Origin Of The Second Amendment - Early Sources On America's Armed Civil Population, Part 7

John Adams On Americans Self Embodying As Effective Militia By Voluntary Associations And Private Agreements

Updated September 15, 2024

As noted in Part 1, John Adams was involved in early Second Amendment related development activity. Specifically, he wrote the seventh Revolutionary Era state declaration of rights for Massachusetts. Note all eight of them had a protection for an armed civil population. Details of Adams' contributions will appear in the future. Here, his earlier activities in the Continental Congress assuring the people capable of defending themselves against government tyranny are being addressed.

We have already noted numerous cases of people in various colonies self embodying as an effective, or "well regulated militia", or calling on the people to do so. The intent of these activities was to make certain that the civil population was capable of organized defense. There were no new American constitutions or governmental bodies until June of 1776 when George Mason wrote the earliest documents for Virginia. However, there were numerous well regulated militia associations that were formed much earlier. Some of these were done by individuals joining existing voluntary defensive associations. The earliest of those in Virginia was based upon individuals agreeing to act in concert for their own defense. George Mason and George Washington's early September 1774 activities forming the Fairfax Volunteers are an example stemming from their private meeting with Patrick Henry and two other patriots on August 30th. Government authorization was not understood as essential in order to establish an effective militia in the minds of Mason, Henry, Washington, and others.

Here is a period document from John Adams regarding this very point. It is one of his proposed resolutions for a recommendation by the Continental Congress on Sept. 30, 1774:

"Resolved that it be recommended to all the Colonies, to establish by Provincial Laws, where it can be done, a regular well furnished and disciplined Militia, and where it cannot be done by Law, by voluntary Associations, and private Agreements." [Letters of Delegates To Congress, 1, p.132]

Congress eventually passed a resolution on this subject on July 18, 1775, nearly nine months later. This was long after voluntary associations had been formed all across Virginia and many other parts of the American Colonies, and also well after open hostilities with the British began on April 19, 1775.

Note that it was the very authors and promoters of the future Second Amendment, George Mason and Patrick Henry, who implemented private and voluntary association related defensive actions in Virginia prior to Adams proposal to Congress. The reason why private agreements and voluntary associations for defense were necessary was simple. Only two colones had all government officials elected by the people, Connecticut and Rhode Island. The governors of those colones did not prevent their militia from being effective for defense. Most others were royal colonies with British appointed governors, and those were not allowing any meetings of elected representatives - specifically to prevent the people from resisting British actions. If such meetings were allowed, the people's representatives would have passed laws to immediately require all the able bodied free men to possess their own arms and to organize and train for defense. These were defensive actions private individuals and local voluntary associations were already engaging in. Local committees and provincial committees and congresses recommended defensive activities because the people who elected them wanted to defend themselves in an organized way.

In Part 8, General Gage again tries to disarm Americans, Patrick Henry gives his liberty or death speech, and the Revolutionary War begins.

The Origin Of The Second Amendment - Early Sources On America's Armed Civil Population, Part 6

 Americans Armed Up For Defense While General Gage Nearly Initiated The Revolutionary War On September 1, 1774

Updated September 6, 2024

Virginians started defensive measures much earlier than indicated in George Mason's Fairfax Country Resolves of January 17, 1775. Mason, Patrick Henry, and other patriots met with George Washington at Mount Vernon on August 30 1774, over four months earlier. Mason began forming a voluntary defensive association for Fairfax County immediately thereafter with Washington's assistance. On September 21, 1774, Mason's Fairfax Independent Company Of Volunteers was initiated. The introduction of this defensive association indicated primary reasons for its establishment as follows:

"In this Time of extreme Danger, . . . and threat'ned with the Destruction of our Civil-rights, & Liberty, and all that is dear to British Subjects & Freemen . . . sensible of the Expediency of putting the Militia of the Colony upon a more respectable Footing, & hoping to excite others by our Example" [Mason Papers, Vol. 1, p.210]

By early 1775, many others had been motivated by the example, as noted in Part 5.

By the time Mason's Fairfax Volunteers had formed, the wisdom of their defensive association was fully justified in light of General Gage's actions. He began to disarm the people of Massachusetts starting on September 1, 1774. Before dawn that date, General Gage sent troops surreptitiously out from Boston by boat to seize gunpowder from the Charlestown powder house and two cannons from Cambridge. These necessities for defense were transported to Fort William and placed under British military control. Though there were no hostilities, a rumor about casualties spread out across the countryside. As a result, massive numbers of armed inhabitants started marching towards Boston. A correction of the rumor then spread out turning around the waves of incoming militia. This event nearly ignited the Revolutionary War, and it most certainly convinced most Americans that Britain fully intended not only to disarm, but to conquer them.

Gage took other actions after learning of the extensive militia forces that had been marching towards Boston at the beginning of September. He ordered that no gunpowder be removed from Boston's powder house without his written permission. Large amounts belonging to merchants and other private individuals were stored there. He also began fortifying the only land entrance into Boston. When questioned about the latter point around September 24th, he stated it was evident that the people, who were not soldiers, were collecting arms and were intent on attacking his forces. He also indicated that the fortifications were entirely defensive, and that:

 "arms are carried out openly by every man that goes out of Boston without molestation." [American Archives, 4th Series, Vol. 1, p.807]

General Gage's September 1774 activities caused the people of Massachusetts to take precautions to prevent future such military actions. Generally, they voted for militia officers who were patriots, meaning supporters of the people's rights; they began training regularly; they appointed part of the militia to be ready to march at a moments notice (minutemen); they built more extensive communications networks for accurate information; and they planned watches of suspicious British military movements and for express riders to warn the countryside in case danger.

Reasons for the rather swift spread of voluntary militia associations and use of  free government related well regulated militia mantras by American patriots were not only Britain's claim of "a right to bind" Americans "in all cases whatsoever". Repeated British activities and resulting events made clear that the attempt to place the military in control of the civil population of Massachusetts would require conquering the people in order to disarm them. The first resolution in George Mason's Fairfax County Resolves of July 18, 1774 addressed this very topic. It specified:

"Resolved that this Colony and Dominion of Virginia can not be considered as a conquered Country; and if it was, that the present Inhabitants are the Descendants not of the Conquered, but of the Conquerors." [Mason Papers, Vol.1, p. 201]

On December 15, 1774 General Gage answered a question of Lord Dartmouth regarding disarming the New England colonies. Gage's answer was that such action would require force and being masters of the country. By this time, many Americans had already prepared to prevent disarming of the civil population by British military forces.

In Part 7, some views of John Adams will be examined relative to effective voluntary militia and the American Revolution that clarify period American historical reality.

The Origin Of The Second Amendment - Early Sources On America's Armed Civil Population, Part 5

 Josiah Quincy's Thoughts On Free Government And A Well Regulated Militia Spread  Across Revolutionary Era America

Josiah Quincy's May 1774 views on whether a standing army or the armed civil population should be in control of civil society were quoted in Part 4. His view of a well regulated militia was largely copied into a resolve of the Maryland Convention on December 12, 1774. Maryland's definition of who composed a well regulated militia was adopted verbatim later on December 21st by the committee in New Castle County Delaware. Such well regulated militia references became common during the early Revolutionary Era.

George Mason copied Maryland's resolution into a Fairfax County Virginia Committee of Safety resolution on January 17, 1775. Mason's copy is presented here for comparison to Quincy's original ideas quoted in Part 4:

"Resolved, That this Committee do concur in opinion with the Provincial Committee of the Province of Maryland that a well regulated Militia, composed of gentlemen freeholders, and other freemen, is the natural strength and only stable security of a free Government, and that such Militia will relieve our mother country from any expense in our protection and defence, will obviate the pretence of a necessity for taxing us on that account, and render it unnecessary to keep Standing Armies among us - ever dangerous to liberty; and therefore it is recommended to such of the inhabitants of this County as are from sixteen to fifty years of age, to choose a Captain, two lieutenants, and Ensign, four Seageants, four Corporals, and one Drummer, for each Company; that they provide themselves with good Firelocks, and use their utmost endeavours to make themselves masters of the Military Exercise . . ." [Mason Papers, Vol. 1, p. 212]

In fact, many voluntary defensive associations already existed well prior to this period in Virginia. On January 5, 1775 George Washington wrote:

"In this County [Fairfax], Prince William, Loudoun, Faquier, Berkely, & many others round about them, a noble Ardour prevails. Men are forming themselves into independent Companies, chusing their officers, arming, Equipping, & training for the worst Event. The last Appeal!" [Letters of Delegates to Congress, Vol. 1, p. 306]

George Mason began working to establish a voluntary defensive association in Fairfax County in late August of 1774, over four months previous to Washingtons's above observation. While Mason did not originate the widespread American Revolutionary Era well regulated militia definition, he did later condense those longer period definitions into "the body of the people". It was he who later mainstreamed that free government related definition into American bill of rights development as author of  America's earliest constitutional document, the Virginia Declaration of Rights in June 1776.

In Part 6 of this series, Mason's much earlier activity relating to self embodying of the armed civil population will be identified, and the proximate cause of such voluntary defensive activities rapid spread across the American Colonies will be addressed.

The Origin Of The Second Amendment - Early Sources On America's Armed Civil Population, Part 4

The Context Of All Second Amendment Predecessors: Control Of Society By The Armed Civil Population Rather Than Government Paid Armies

Updated

Friction between the townspeople of Boston and British troops increased over time after their arrival in October of 1768. On March 5, 1770, a demonstration at the customhouse against the soldiers got out of hand and resulted in a deadly riot often called the Boston Massacre. The solders were criminally charged, and two lawyers, John Adams and Josiah Quincy Jr., defended them.

Both men were major American patriots. Adams became first vice president in the Washington administration and second president of the United States. Quincy passed away of natural causes at the beginning of the War for Independence and is relatively unknown today. However, both made contributions regarding America's armed civil population that led to eventual development and inclusion of the Second Amendment in the U.S. Bill of Rights. Adams views will be examined in later posts.

Quincy's May 1774 publication critical of Britain's Boston Port Bill closing the port and subjecting the civil population to rule by the military will be addressed here. The Port Bill and the British fleet and troops scheduled to arrive that month to enforce it were Britain's response to the Boston Tea Party. The full title of Quincy's work was Observations On The Boston Port Bill With Thoughts On Civil Society And Standing Armies. Quincy's thoughts on whether the people or a standing army should be in control lead to three concepts later included in America's first constitutional document, the Virginia Declaration of Rights, and specifically Section 13. These concepts were later incorporated into every subsequent American bill of rights related predecessor of the Second Amendment. Their language and context were crystal clear - civil control over government and any armed force it might raise.

Here are Quincy's views on civil society and who should make decisions relative thereto:

"The people who compose the society (for whose security the labour of its institution was performed, and of the toils its preservation daily sustained), the people, I say, are the only competent judges of their own welfare, and, therefore, are the only suitable authority to determine touching the great end of their subjection and their sacrifices." [Quincy,Memoir, p.396-397]

Quincy's views on "free government" and the purpose and composition of a well regulated militia follow:

"No free government was ever founded, or ever preserved its liberty, without uniting the characters of citizen and soldier in those destined for the defence of the state. The sword should never be in the hands of any but those who have an interest in the safety of the community, who fight for their religion and their offspring, - and repel invaders that they may return to their private affairs and the enjoyment of freedom and good order. Such are a well regulated militia composed of the freeholders, citizens, and husbandmen, who take up arms to preserve their property as individuals, and their rights as freemen." [Quincy, Memoir p.413]

This early Revolutionary Era tract influenced language adopted elsewhere well before any hostilities occurred or new American governments were formed. It was the descriptive vehicle relied on by Americans as they continued to self arm  and self embody as militia at the local level in order to defend their rights and property in an organized manner against claims of unlimited authority from government officials and troops.

The links between Quincy's views and subsequent use of such terminology in American Second Amendment related bill of rights predecessors provide the obvious Revolutionary Era context of their intent. Americans rejected having government be in control of the people. They decided to fight for the opposite proposition and establish it as a constitutional check on government power.

In Part 5, an early example incorporating Quincy's well regulated militia terminology as adopted by the December 1774 Maryland Convention will be examined.

The Origin of the Second Amendment - Early Sources On America's Armed Civil Population, Part 3

The Freemen Of Boston Recommend That Inhabitants Obtain Arms

Updated

As noted in Part 2, Britain began treating Americans as conquered in 1763. The hated Stamp Act, adopted in 1765, had been successfully defeated by Americans associating to boycott British goods in an organized manner resulting in the Act's repeal in 1766. Along with repeal came the Declaratory Act claiming unlimited authority for Parliament over the American Colonies - a right to "bind" Americans "in all cases whatsoever". Most Americans rejected this concept outright.

On June 15, 1768, due to some rioting in Boston relating to the new Townshend Acts including a duty on tea, a request was made that British troops be sent there to protect British customs officials in the performance of their duties.

At a Boston Town meeting held September 12/13 of 1768, the freemen of Boston passed a resolution recommending that the inhabitants who did not possess arms should provide themselves at that time. The resolution noted the English Bill of Rights protecting arms for protestants, and also Massachusetts militia law that required all males 16 to 60 to possess arms and a considerable quantity of ammunition. It cited a possible war with France as the reason for passage, but it was obvious to all as being directed against British threats of armed force. A British fleet with troops arrived at Boston a few weeks thereafter.

Why would there need to be any such vote on this subject if the law was still in effect? Because after the conquest of Canada, British officials were not enforcing existing militia laws that were intended to assure all able bodied males possessed their own arms and ammunition. Instead, they wanted taxes from America to support an army to guard British possessions, help pay for the previous war, and keep the unruly colonials in line. They wanted compliance to their decrees. Parliament referred to Boston's 1768 vote as "illegal and unconstitutional", in spite of the freemen noting the English Bill of Rights and existing law in their resolution.

Based upon the vote described above and the Tea Party information from Part 2, it appears that arms possession by the male population (those who fight for defense and vote on matters relating thereto) was common, and was also understood as a right.

British troops were later involved, on March 5, 1770, in the Boston Massacre, a demonstration that turned into a deadly riot. A number of Americans were killed, and the soldiers involved faced criminal trails for those deaths.

In Part 4, writings of the two patriot lawyers who defended British soldiers involved in the 1770 Boston Massacre will be identified, and their involvement in development of Second Amendment related concepts and language regarding the armed civil population will be examined.

The Origin of the Second Amendment - Early Sources On America's Armed Civil Population, Part 2

What happened at the time of the Boston Tea Party? 

Updated  August 10, 2024

Many Americans died helping Great Britain defeat France and conquer Canada in the French and Indian War that ended in 1763. After that, Britain began treating the American colonists as if they were also conquered. Parliament imposed taxes upon Americans with no input from American legislative assemblies contrary to their rights and past practice. Well before the end of 1773, many Americans were vehemently opposed to British actions and determined to put a stop to them.

On November 29, 1773, one of Boston's selectmen wrote "twould puzzle any person to purchase a pair of p[istols] in town, as they are all bought up, with a full determination to repell force with force." Then on December 18th, he described what happened at the Tea Party two days earlier.

In the morning "a general muster was assembled" at the Old South Church numbering 5,000 to 6,000 men. A unanimous vote was taken that the tea in the three tea ships at the wharf should go out of the harbor that afternoon. Attempts were made by a ship's captain to allow for the three ships' departure without paying the tea tax. The port officer refused. Then he went to another town to locate the governor, who also refused. Very late in the day when the captain returned with this news, there was considerable shouting at the Church, and the meeting broke up with more shouting and three cheers.

Immediately thereafter, about two hundred men appeared who were dressed like indians and marched two by two to the wharf, "each armed with a hatchet or axe, and a pair of pistols". By 9 o'clock, all the tea chests were broken and tossed into the harbor by these native american actors.

The population of Boston in 1773 included a maximum of approximately 4,000 males 16 and older. Assuming that every male over 16 from Boston attended the "general muster", it would have included a minimum of 1,000 to 2,000 men who were from the surrounding small towns.

Period actions like those described above indicate why the Founders understood the body of the people to be the militia and vice versa. In the next post, a vote of Boston's freemen in a town meeting recommending that the inhabitants without arms should arm themselves in September of 1768 will be addressed.

The Origin Of The Second Amendment - Early Sources On America's Armed Civil Population - Part 1

What Did "A Well Regulated Militia" Mean To The Founders?

Updated June 22, 2024

The following short general post is planned as the first of many to examine specific details that directly relate to understanding the historical reality of America's armed civil population and Founding Era period usage of terms in the Second Amendment.

Did the Founders view the Second Amendment's "well regulated militia" language as a government institution reference or as intending the people themselves? There is extensive period source evidence that it was universally understood as applying to the latter - "the body of the people". That very definition is found in five direct American bill of rights related predecessors of the Second Amendment. The final four state ratifying conventions (VA,NY,NC,RI) prior to ratification of the U.S. Bill of Rights all included exactly that language.

Virginia's ratifying convention originated the proposal, which was copied by later conventions. Virginia simply copied verbatim from its own 1776 Declaration of Rights. Both the 1776 and 1788 iterations of Virginia's "the body of the people" understanding of a well regulated militia terminology were written by George Mason, and in both conventions Patrick Henry and James Madison were involved in adopting them. Madison promised in the 1788 convention to push for adoption of Virginia's Bill of Rights proposals and some other amendments by Congress in order to achieve ratification of the U.S. Constitution by his state.

The following year, Madison was able to convince the First Congress to adopt most of Virginia's rights proposals and four of its other amendment recommendations. While Americans refer to all of the first ten amendments as the Bill of Rights, that title was not applied to the amendments by Congress. It is an American oral tradition based on their origin in state ratifying convention bills and declarations of rights.

In the next post, sources from the Boston Tea Party period will be examined regarding period terminology and America's armed civil population.