With thanks to the friend who sent me this:
"They call themselves Scotch Irish, and the bitterest railers against the Church [of England] that ever trod upon American Ground. I wish I had better neighbours or keener weapons to stop their career."- Rev. George Ross, Delaware, September 1723
These YouTube presentations are excellent – energetic, detailed, fun where appropriate, informal, yet information-rich.
William Findley was born in Co Antrim, and was one of the strongest voices to challenge the potential overreach of the proposed new United States Constitution of 1787. He and the other 'Anti-Federalists' eventually secured a new Bill of Rights in 1789 to help safeguard the rights of the individual.
In an autobiographical letter written in 1812, Findley said –
"I arrived in Pennsylvania in August 1763 in company with a great number of protestant emigrants from the North of Ireland who are chiefly the descendants of those who fled from the persecution of the Presbyterians, carried on in Scotland during the reigns of the two last of the Stuarts, therefore frequently called Scotch Irish.
They are the majority of five or six Counties of the Province of Ulster, in the north of Ireland. My grandfathers both came from Scotland in early life, and him of my name assisted in the memorable defence of London derry, the only place that was successfully defended against King James army.
I being a younger son of a younger son, is the reason why I am only the second in descent during more than 120 years. The descendant of those Scottish emigrants to Ireland have contributed exceedingly to people this Country and composed a great proportion of the Pennsylvania line including several Generals during the revolutionary war".
Here's another short video from Professor Tad Stoermer, majoring on the 1789 Bill of Rights as an act of resistance against the possible tyrannical abuse of the United States Constitution. He talks about the present day, and the very obvious 20th century regimes which re-created a mythical past to suit their own agendas. It's part of the centuries of social toxicity in Ireland too.
As he says "it's not just about making up history, it's about selectively remembering the parts that justify your power ... things were better back then because the right people were in charge, and we need to put them back in power".
Maybe as humans we all do that to some extent in our own individual lives. But when "power" does it, the results can be catastrophic.
250 years ago this month, the American 'Continental' Navy was born and a new flag, "The Grand Union" was created.
"At sunset the gentlemen of Donaghadee watched the Ranger tow her prize through the still sound between the Great Copeland and Orlock Head, and the following day both ships were hove-to off Ballywalter. On that day Jones achieved two other feats of incidental significance. He gave his name to a dance in which you capture a new partner when the music stops. And he changed the course of Irish history."
Patrick Henry is one of the biggest names in the story of the American Revolution.
His father, Colonel John Henry, had been born in Aberdeen in 1704. John's parents, Patrick Henry and Jean Robertson, were born in 1670s Scotland during the bloody persecutions of King Charles II against the Presbyterian Covenanters. One of the most infamous prisons where Covenanters were held was Dunnottar Castle just south of Aberdeen (see here), in a dungeon known as the "Whigs Vault" - many of them were transported as slaves to North America.
A branch of the Henry family came to Ulster in 1616 and settled at Loughbrickland in County Down; a Rev William Henry from Loughbrickland became minister of Dromore Presbyterian Church in 1753.
Patrick was born in Virginia in 1736; his two sisters married 'sons of Ulster' – Annie married William Christian (his parents were from the Londonderry area), and Elizabeth married William Campbell (his parents were Ulster Presbyterians). In later life Elizabeth became a dynamic Methodist lay preacher across America.
In the early 1770s, Patrick lived on the plantation estate known as Scotchtown.
1) 1775 – Patrick was just 39 years old when he took his seat on a pew of St John's Church in Richmond, Virginia, on 23 March 1775. He famously rose to his feet and gave the historic speech which closed with the immortal lines "Give me Liberty or give me Death". You can visit the church today - there was a re-enactment of the event on the 250th anniversary earlier this year.
..................................
2) 1776 – Henry wrote two of the articles of the Virginia Declaration of Rights, which was published in Williamsburg in June 1776, during the Fifth Virginia Revolutionary Convention (depicted above). A later author examined the text, which had mostly been written by George Mason, and said this –
"... When we look at the Declaration of Rights prepared by him, and which, with a few alterations, was adopted by the Convention, we shall find it a condensed, logical, and luminous summary of the great principles of freedom inherited by us from our British ancestors, the extracted essence of Magna Charta, the Petition of Rights, the acts of the Long Parliament, and the doctrines of the Revolution of 1688 as expounded by Locke—distilled and concentrated through the alembic of his own powerful and discriminating mind. There is nothing more remarkable in the political annals of America than this paper ..."
Henry's most acclaimed biographer, his grandson William Wirt Henry (Wikipedia here) wrote this in his three volume Patrick Henry, Life, Correspondence and Speeches (1891; online here):
"... The Bill of Rights of 1689, upon the accession of William and Mary, was the most complete statement of the principles of government ever attempted. This was written by the great Lord Somers, and it embodied the Pettion of Right of 1628, written by Sir Edward Coke. The Virginia Bill of Rights contained all that was of value in these celebrated papers, and much more, and as a summary of the rights of man, and of the principles of free government, stands, and is destined to stand, without a rival in the annals of governments..."
3) 1788 – Patrick Henry may have thought that the subsequent Declaration of Independence of 4 July 1776, his election as the first post-independence Governor of Virginia, the Revolutionary War (which ended in 1783), and his re-election as Governor for a second term in 1784, might all combine to secure the liberties he had long sought. Not a bit of it.
However, with his second term expired, it looked like the fledgling United States of America was about to install a new élite with centralised power that was not much different than the London version they had overthrown, with power in the hands of the few. George Washington sent Henry a copy of the emerging new Constitution and Henry had grave concerns at what he read. As the famous quote by Mather Byles says:
"Which is better—to be ruled by one tyrant three thousand miles away, or by three thousand tyrants one mile away?"
So in June 1788, the Virginia Ratifying Convention gathered to debate the Constitution. Once again in Richmond, Virginia, 52 year old Henry delivered another historic speech, asking the audience what it was that the new United States truly wanted – Liberty or Empire? Perhaps shockingly to his post-Independence audience, Henry invoked ancient British liberties –
“We are descended from a people whose government was founded on liberty; our glorious forefathers of Great Britain made liberty the foundation of everything. That country is become a great, mighty, and splendid nation; not because their government is strong and energetic, but, sir, because liberty is its direct end and foundation. We drew the spirit of liberty from our British ancestors ...
... Will the abandonment of your most sacred rights tend the security of your liberty? Liberty, the greatest of all earthly blessings—give us that precious jewel and you may take everything else. But I fear I have lived long enough to become an old-fashioned fellow. Perhaps an invincible attachment to the dearest rights of man may, in these refined, enlightened days, be deemed old-fashioned: if so, I am contented to be so..."
It's another brilliant example of how - even after the War was over, and the British government had been defeated by her own colonial subjects - a change of nationality was not the essential point, securing liberty was. The Constitution's famous introduction "We the People of the United States..." was insufficient rhetoric. A new national government in America was no guarantee of liberty for ordinary Americans.
Here's the plaque in Richmond:
The outcome was that an additional, new, document, would be required to protect the freedoms of the individual citizen from American Federal government overreach – the 1789 Bill of Rights (Wikipedia here). The Anti-Federalists, of which Henry was one, had succeeded. Unsurprisingly, sections of it were pretty much directly lifted from William III and Mary II's previous 1689 Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights lacks the poetry and drama of the Declaration and the Constitution, but it has substance. It begins with these words:
Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.
THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.
..................................
4) 1889 – Exactly a century later, Patrick Henry's grandson, William Wirt Henry, addressed the very first Congress of the Scotch-Irish Society of America, which met at Columbia in Tennessee in May 1889. He delivered a presentation entitled The Scotch-Irish of the South.
Far bigger than the title suggests, it's a broad sweeping narrative through centuries of history. He quoted John Knox confronting the Queen - "if princes exceed their bounds, no doubt they may be resisted even by power", he quoted Andrew Melville confronting the King - "there are two kings and two kingdoms in Scotland".
It's good solid stuff, and as an intro to the grand story of the Ulster-Scots / Scotch-Irish, its a pretty good starting point and ticks most of the boxes, with a few tastefully low-key references to his august ancestor. It also includes a superb account of a "Whig Wedding" in Pennsylvania in 1778 of an Ulster-born couple, Jane Roan and William Clingan. It's online here, from page 110 – 131.
"... the earliest Scotch-Irish emigrants to America were men who had been participants, or children of those who were participants, in the terrible drama which closed with the battle of the Boyne. Accordingly we find that these men were among the earliest champions of freedom, and the most earnest and persistent defenders of the rights; of the people, as against the unjust actions of the British government ... These devoted men kept alive the flame of liberty ..."
• Two years later, in 1891, William Wirt Henry's three volume biography of his grandfather, entitled Patrick Henry: Life, Correspondence and Speeches was published and is online at HathiTrust here.
"... Jefferson in after years said that the members from the upper counties invariably supported Mr. Henry in his revolutionary measures, and there can be no doubt they did so on this occasion, and that to the Scotch-Irish; and Huguenot members he was indebted for his triumph..."
• In 1898, he visited Belfast to continue his researches (see page 33 here)
• Why The Founders Feared You
This video is a superb summary of the 1786 Daniel Shay's Rebellion in western Massachussetts (Scotch-Irish country - the epicentres being Colrain, New Lisburn, Palmer and Blandford), the 1787 US Constitution, and the consequential 1789 Bill of Rights - and the ideological battles and manipulations among the new power structures and ruling class.
The role of Patrick Henry in securing the Bill of Rights based upon the threat of his popular support – "he had come close to toppling Virginia's Royal government in 1775 ... mobilising the same sort of people who followed Shays ... protect our rights and liberties or there will be consequences for the Constitution" – is fascinating stuff. And look at this quote below – resolutely Ulster-Scots covenantal philosophy:
"... The awareness that the people can revoke the consent that they give to the government, and return it to their own hands to redeploy it wherever they like, is a human political right - one of those pesky 'inalienable' things Jefferson wrote about in the Declaration, and its a real legacy we have contend with as a reality today" (14:25)
Loads of first class content in this sweeping overview - a Zoom presentation by Professor Richard Bell of the University of Maryland. His personal website is here.
A generation before the more celebrated United Irishmen movement, there had been earlier militant groups in Ulster. One of those groups was the Hearts of Steel; they are shamefully overlooked in our time. Active from 1769 in heavily Presbyterian areas of counties Antrim and Down and other counties too – and roughly contemporary with the Sons of Liberty movement which arose in America in 1765 – the authorities in the 13 Colonies were wise to be aware of potential transatlantic connections.
South Carolina had its version, called the Liberty Boys, with leaders such as Andrew Hamilton and Antrim-born James McCaw. There was also a group called Liberty Boys in Dublin.
On 3 August 1774 in South Carolina, the Lieut-Governor William Bull II (Wikipedia here) wrote to the overall Colonial Secretary the Earl of Dartmouth (Wikipedia here), expressing concerns about the machinations of the newly-established General Assembly of South Carolina, effectively a provisional government.
It had been formed just a month before, on 6 July 1774, with a Committee of 99 members. The General Assembly rushed through an early morning request that the Lieutenant Governor send guns to the "many poor Irish" who had settled along the western backcountry frontier, ostensibly to defend themselves against possible future attacks from Native Americans. Bull was dubious –
"Your lordship will see by this instance with what perseverance, secrecy and unanimity they form and conduct their designs, how obedient the body is to the heads, and how faithful in their secrets.
They had prepared a message to me, which the prorogation prevented, to desire I would purchase a number of small arms to be given to many poor Irish and others in our western frontiers, with ammunition, upon the apprehensions of an Indian war. Whenever that appears to me unavoidable, I shall take every step in my power to enable them to defend themselves.
It is not improbable but many of the poor Irish may have been White Boys, Hearts of Oak or Hearts of Steel, who have been accustomed to oppose law and authority in Ireland, may not change their disposition with their climate, and may think of other objects than Indians.”
William Bull saw the potential for this 'poor Irish' western backcountry frontier community to one day use government-approved firearms against the governmental authorities.
• One of the South Carolina Committee of 99 was Edward Rutledge; his father Dr John Rutledge is believed to have been from the north of Ireland, and Edward would eventually be the youngest signer of the Declaration of Independence, aged just 26.
• https://southcarolina250.com
• Charleston's Sons of Liberty by Richard Walsh (1959) is online here
.......................
Hearts of Steel activities were reported in newspapers in America, such as The New York Journal of 14 May 1772 which referred to attacks carried out by 'Steelmen' in Banbridge, Gilford and Newry; the Pennsylvania Gazette of 18 June 1772 carried more. Richard MacMaster's book Scotch-Irish Merchants in Colonial America has further information.
• Illustration below by JW Carey; published in Historical Notices of Old Belfast and Its Vicinity.
In his infamous letter to former President, George Washington (online here), Thomas Paine accused him of having been as deceitful during his two Presidencies from 1789-97 as King James II had been a century earlier from 1685-1689:
"... Elevated to the chair of the Presidency you assumed the merit of every thing to yourself, and the natural ingratitude of your constitution began to appear.. You commenced your Presidential career by encouraging and swallowing the grossest adulation, and you travelled America from one end to the other, to put yourself in the way of receiving it.
You have as many addresses in your chest as James the II.
As to what were your views, for if you are not great enough to have ambition you are little enough to have vanity, they cannot be directly inferred from expressions of your own; but the partizans of your politics have divulged the secret ..."
Putting this kind of stuff in writing against a two-time President is how to end up in an unmarked grave.
This is iconoclastic stuff, a response to the new Ken Burns series The American Revolution, by Tad Stoermer, which he calls "national therapy through origin story". I know nothing about him, but YouTube's algorithm sent me it today. He quotes the seminal John Adams comment that the revolution was not the war.
Bridget Lisle's life is hard to fathom – her father was shot dead by order of one king, her mother was beheaded by order of the next king...
In August 1664, Sir John Lisle was shot dead in Switzerland by an assassin sent to do the job by King Charles II.
His widow Lady Alice Lisle was left to raise their seven children. Their daughter Bridget emigrated to New England, where in 1672 she married the President of Harvard College, Leonard Hoar, and became a prominent figure in Massachusetts society. Leonard died in 1675, and Bridget remarried, to the wealthy Boston bookseller Hezekiah Usher junior.
A decade passed; King Charles II died and was succeeded by his brother, James...
....................
1. COTTON MATHER, 25 SEPTEMBER 1685
News of the failed double rebellion against the new King James II in June & July 1685, by the Earl of Argyll and the Duke of Monmouth, eventually reached New England. There were no newspapers there at the time, but a few important diaries and letters still exist which capture some of the details. On 25 September 1685, the renowned Cotton Mather wrote this letter to his uncle, Rev John Cotton of Plymouth, Massachussetts (I have put it through an AI tool to modernise it into present-day language):
My ever-honored Uncle,
Now some people will hang their harps upon the willows. The great God has given them the wine of astonishment to drink. The news which was so fresh at your departure hence was a grievous abuse put upon the silly doves.
First, a vessel comes in from England, which, lying at the Isle of Wight and at Falmouth, received certain intelligence that the Duke of Monmouth is utterly routed, taken prisoner, and on the 15th of July beheaded on Tower Hill, undergoing his death with much magnanimity, refusing to make any answers to what was asked him on the scaffold, saying that he came there not to speak but to die. He never had much above ten thousand men, most unarmed; had once beaten the King’s forces, but the second time, through the ill-management of the Lord Grey, he was overpowered—though he himself, it is said, fought in his own person with incredible valour till he lost the day. It is suspected that Grey was treacherous; for he and one or two more are reserved for discoverers of all that had any hand, and so much as a little finger, in the conspiracy—rather for his great estate, which upon his death would have gone to his brother.
And what use is now made of this attempt to ruin all Protestants is obvious to any considerate person, nor is it to be thought on without bleeding lamentations. But since, there comes in another vessel from Scotland which brings hither some of Argyle’s men to be sold for slaves, and they inform us that the Earl landed in a place where he could never get much above a thousand men, the forces of the kingdom being raised against him before he came ashore and intercepting all passages, so that they who had promised him their assistance failed him. He had a little brush or two with his enemies—once overnight—but their hearts were so taken from them, that before morning they every one went to shift for himself. Argyle was taken in the disguise of a grazier, and on the last of June he was beheaded at Edinburgh. Some that are come over were present at his execution. We have here a copy of his speech, which does abundantly justify and augment the opinion that we had of him. I am sorry I cannot get a copy of it to send you; but in due time expect it. His death had this odd circumstance in it, that after his head was off, he rose up on his feet and had like to have gone off the scaffold if they had not prevented it.
A standing army is that by which both kingdoms are now kept in subjection. Colonel Kirk is at Taunton; and there, in cold blood, has butchered five hundred people in that fanatic town.
You know what to think of these things, and you are no doubt so much of a Protestant as to make this use of the hideous calamities which these things will occasion to all Protestants: that you will quicken the importunate, groaning prayers of your own people, and those that are in the neighbour towns, with due privacy and discretion. Lift up prayers—he that does not now arise and call upon God and cry mightily is one of those sleepy sinners who make the times perilous. But you need not me for your monitor.
Remember me with my due services to my aunt and respect to my cousins, and to all friends that inquire after my welfare—especially to the good aged Simeon, your elder, to whom tell my wishes, that he may not think of departing until his eyes have seen the salvation of God.
I am
Your observant kinsman,
C. Mather
....................
2. SAMUEL SEWALL, 13 NOVEMBER 1685
When writing the letter, Cotton Mather would not have known that in the aftermath of the rebellion Lady Alice Lisle had already become the first of over 300 people to be publicly executed - she was a high-profile start to King James II's Bloody Assizes. Aged 68 and with failing eyesight, she was beheaded in the street in Winchester by order of King James II's infamous Judge George Jeffreys on 2 September 1685.
It took ten weeks for news of this to reach Boston; Samuel Sewall recorded it in his diary of 13 November 1685:
"... Friday, Novr. 13. Barington arrives, brings word of the beheading of my Lady Lisle, Mrs. Hez. Usher’s Mother, at Winchester. Four executed at London, Mr Jenkins’s Son, Alderm Hayes Son, and two more, and whipping the Taunton Maids. Capt. Jolls dead in London.
To which he added a glimmer of hope:
"... Is a Rumor that the Government will be Changed, this Fall or Winter, by some Person sent over, or a Comission to some here..."
....................
3. JOHN WINSLOW AND THE BOSTON REVOLT, 18 APRIL 1689
The cruelties of King James II of course would lead to the Boston Revolt of 18 April 1689, which was inspired by the news that William, Prince of Orange had arrived in England with a vast European army. A copy of William's Declaration had been brought ashore at Boston Harbour by John Winslow a few weeks earlier on 4th April. The Memorial History of Boston (published 1881) says this:
"(the Revolt) was a desperate venture, since the continuance of the rule of King James would have brought a speedy and terrible punishment upon the malcontents. The inhabitants of Boston in 1689 were fully aware of the scenes which followed Monmouth's failure. Some refugees indeed had found shelter here, and the daughter of that most noted victim, Lady Lisle, had recently been living here as the wife of President Leonard Hoar (of Harvard University)"
And the above-mentioned diarist, Samuel Sewall, wrote about it all (see previous post here)
....................
Maybe somebody has already assembled these incredible jigsaw pieces. The picture they reveal is one of 'absolute monarch' tyranny. It's a compelling picture, telling a transatlantic story, and of people who refused to bow the knee.
• A detailed biography of Bridget Lisle / Hoar / Usher is here on page 321–324 in the journal of Worcester Historical Society, Volume 1, Number 6, April 1933 edition
This is a superb article, from Slate magazine in 2012:
"... In 1838, his spunky granddaughter Ellen Wayles Randolph Coolidge wrote in her travel diary that “The music of Scotland may almost be called the national music of Virginia. The simple, plaintive or sprightly airs which every body knows and every body sings are Scotch. … This music is natural, intelligible, comes home to every body’s business and bosom.”
America also borrowed from the Scotch and Irish the fiddle tune. Though Jefferson himself didn’t do much fiddling at Monticello, others did. Isaac Jefferson Granger, one of his slaves, said that Randolph Jefferson, Thomas’ little brother, “used to come out among the black people, play the fiddle and dance half the night.” The sons of Sally Hemings played frequently when Jefferson’s daughters and granddaughters wanted dance music. According to Jefferson’s granddaughter, “On Saturday next the youngsters of Monticello intend to adjourn to the South-Pavilion and dance after Beverley [Hemings’] music.”..."
.................
Ellen was 30 years old when her grandfather Thomas died in 1826, and she wrote the above account twelve years later. That the music of Scotland was so prominent is no surprise – the Jefferson homeplace at Monticello outside Charlottesville was in the flat, plantation-ready plains – sweeping down from the Appalachian mountains, which had of course been so heavily settled by Ulster-Scots. Thomas Jefferson would later write of "the wild Irish who had gotten possession of the valley between the blue ridge and North mountain".
And the first published collection of fiddle tunes, George P. Knauff's Virginia Reels was published just a year after Ellen's diary entry, in 1839 - a collection described by Paul Wells in 2012 as 'strongly Scottish' (previous post here).
Samuel Sewall was in England at the time of the Boston Revolt of April 1689 – his Diary (online here) shows that he had set sail from Boston Harbour on 22 November 1688 and arrived at the Isle of Wight on 10 January 1689 into an England where the Prince of 'Aurang' [Orange] had taken charge. Sewall stayed for most of 1689, sailing back to America from Plymouth on 10 October 1689.
Sewall co-authored the publication The Revolution in New England Justified, and the People there Vindicated (printed by Samuel Green for Joseph Brunning in 1691; online here) in which Sewall defended the Boston Revolt, stating that King James II's governor Edmund Andros had "made laws destructive of the liberty of the people".
"... The uprising against Andros certainly bears the signs of a popular movement, not based upon any knowledge of the success of the revolution in England, and for that reason not probably the work of any of the citizens of position and wealth. It was a desperate venture, since the continuance of the rule of King James would have brought a speedy and terrible punishment upon the malcontents. The inhabitants of Boston in 1689 were fully aware of the scenes which followed Monmouth's failure. Some refugees indeed had found shelter here, and the daughter of that most noted victim, Lady Lisle, had recently been living here as the wife of President Leonard Hoar (of Harvard University), and later of Hezekiah Usher ..." - from The Memorial History of Boston (online here)
Almost a decade later Sewall turned his pen to challenge aspects of slavery. In 1700 he published The Selling of Joseph; A Memorial which was written regarding the high-profile case of a man called Adam who was enslaved by Boston merchant John Saffin. Sewall drew parallels with the Biblical enslavement of Joseph in Egypt –
"... Originally, and Naturally, there is no such thing as Slavery. Joseph was rightfully no more a Slave to his Brethren, then they were to him ...
... Tis pity there should be more Caution used in buying a Horse, or a little lifeless dust; than there is in purchasing Men and Women: Whereas they are the Offspring of GOD, and their Liberty is 'auro pretiosior omni' (more precious than gold)...
... It is likewise most lamentable to think, how in taking Negros out of Africa, and Selling of them here, That which GOD has joyned together men do boldly rend asunder; Men from their Country, Husbands from their Wives, Parents from their Children. How horrible is the Uncleanness, Mortality, if not Murder, that the Ships are guilty of that bring great Crouds of these miserable Men, and Women. Methinks, when we are bemoaning the barbarous Usage of our Friends and Kinsfolk in Africa ..."
However, Sewall appears to have also sold African slaves. Humans are a mess of hypocrisies and contradictions. In every culture, in every era, the desperate and poorest and weakest have always been fuel for the indulgences of the comfortable classes – from William Blake's "dark Satanic mills" to Wilfred Owen's "Dulce Et Decorum Est", to the deadly coalmines of Lanarkshire, Yorkshire, and Appalachia.
I wonder which unthinkable inhumanities our era turns a blind eye too, to preserve our comforts and pleasures? The sweat shops where designer brands make incredible fortunes out of vanity, and where the shiny device you are reading this on is made by tech companies who have nets around their buildings to try to stop staff "unaliving" themselves.
Ursula K LeGuin's short story The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas is worth a (harrowing) read.
As Sewall wrote in 1700, "It is most certain that all Men, as they are the Sons of Adam, are Coheirs; and have equal Right unto Liberty, and all other outward Comforts of Life."
• Thomas Hutchinson's account of the Boston Revolt is in his History of Massachussetts (online here, from page 332). His grandfather Elisha Hutchinson had been a merchant in Boston at the time of the 1688 Glorious Revolution.
Another superb source! Following the Boston Revolt of April 1689 (when, following the arrival of copies of William Prince of Orange's Declaration, colonists rose up to overthrow the colonial government of King James II and his Governor Edmund Andros) two accounts of the Revolt were published.
• The first was by lawyer John Palmer (bio here) who had been one of those seized and imprisoned by the 'rebels'. While imprisoned, he wrote his An Impartial Account of the State of New England, or the late Government there vindicated - it circulated in manuscript form and was printed in London in 1690 (online here).
• The second account, a response/rebuttal of Palmer entitled The Revolution in New England Justified, and the People there Vindicated was written in 1691 by Edward Rawson (Wikipedia here) and Samuel Sewall (Wikipedia here). Their preface explained what a liberty-oriented 'limited monarchy' was:
"but there are a sort of men, who call those that are for English liberties, and that rejoice in the government of their majesties, king William and queen Mary, by the name of republicans, and represent all such as enemies of monarchy and of the church. It is not our single opinion only, but we can speak it on the behalf of the generality of their majesties subjects in New-England; that they believe (without any diminution to the glory of our former princes) the English nation was never so happy in a king, or in a queen, as at this day. And the God of heaven, who has set them on the throne of these kingdoms, grant them long and prosperously to reign"
and the introduction:
"THE doctrine of passive obedience and non-resistance, which a sort of men did of late, when they thought the world would never change, cry up as divine truth, is by means of the happy revolution in these nations, exploded, and the assertors of it become ridiculous."
It included an appendix entitled A Narrative of the Proceedings of Sir Edmund Androsse and his Accomplices who acted by an Illegal and Arbitrary Commission from the late King James, during his Government in New England - written by five gentlemen who had served under Andros (Wikipedia here). But few revolutions are truly complete, and Andros was made Governor of Virginia by William III and Mary II.
.....................
• Nearly a century later with a new revolution in the air, in April 1773 the 24 year old Boston printer, and member of the Sons of Liberty movement, Isaiah Thomas (Wikipedia here) dusted down the Rawson and Sewell book and reprinted it, to remind the city's readership that there had been a justified revolution before. The Sons of Liberty would occasionally hold meetings in his print shop, and perhaps they imbibed the contents of 1689. Thomas advertised his reprint in the 8 April 1773 edition of his seditious newspaper The Massachussetts Spy or Thomas's Boston Journal.
And just eight months later, tea was floating in Boston Harbour....
• The 1773 Thomas edition is on Archive.org here
• Text is online here
