what happended to signors of declaration of independance
;
The Myth Nearly the Signers of the Announcement of Independence that Won't Die
Fact & Fiction
This article was get-go published in July 2002.
On July 4th, 2002, the Pentagon published an Independence twenty-four hour period bulletin from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Richard B. Myers. In this message General Myers urged Americans to call up that the United States is at state of war with an enemy that "threatens the principles and values that liberty-loving people hold beloved--equality, self-governance, religious tolerance, and rule of constabulary." To inspire people, he reminded Americans of the sacrifices the Founding Fathers made on behalf of liberty:
When our founding fathers signed the Declaration of Independence on July 4th, 1776, they mutually pledged their lives, fortunes, and sacred honour to each other and to the globe. During the course of the seven-twelvemonth state of war that followed, nine of the signers died of wounds or hardships, 17 lost everything that they owned, and v were imprisoned or captured. They risked all they had, sacrificing everything for freedom -- they all kept their sacred honor.
Was this roster of sacrifices accurate? The brusk respond is no. General Myers--or his speechwriters--were taken in by a myth in circulation for at least half a century, and recently given broad circulation via an email starting time dispatched in 1999. The electronic mail includes a whopper Full general Myers overlooked: that signer Thomas McKean, who agreed to serve in the Continental Congress without pay, died broke after the British seized his fortune, his poor sons having to beg their neighbors to help finance the funeral.
The story has been debunked many times. In 1999 the myth-debunking website, Snopes.com, featured a lengthy refutation of the claims fabricated in the email. In 2000 reporter David Daley set the record direct in an article published in the Hartford Courant:
The existent story is that five signers were captured, just none for treason, and all were eventually released. Only ii, it appears, were wounded in activeness,
and none died of state of war wounds. As for McKean, well, the Pennsylvania Historical Society confirms that he became the state'south second governor and
died a wealthy human being in 1817.
The myth first surfaced, according to James Elbrecht, creator of a website established expressly to refute the email's claims, in 1956 in a book by conservative radio commentator Paul Harvey, The Rest of the Story. Later others picked upwards the tale including Ann Landers, Oliver North, Pat Buchanan, and Rush Limbaugh. Limbaugh claims that his father wrote a piece that inspired Harvey'due south story. The Limbaugh piece was reprinted by the Daughters of the American Revolution. In 2000 Boston Globe columnist Jeff Jacoby debunked the myths in a column without mentioning that the source that inspired him was the bogus electronic mail account. His paper suspended him.
comments powered past
More Comments:
andy mahan - 9/xviii/2006
I of the many great progressive Republican presidents in our history, the lineage from which extends to George W. Bush.
Les Castrios - seven/19/2004
Y'all know, there is i comment here I am actually boggled by: "all those big government advocates who simply can't stand the idea that the common human being tin can determine how to live on his own without large brother deciding for him."
Since you are using the term "liberal car" in your argument I must conclude you are a conservative, which begs the question: if conservatives are so against big government, why exercise they feel then compelled to monitor people'southward individual lives? (For example, what'south the rush to change our CONSTITUTION to prevent two people who intendance about each other from getting married? Sheesh. Speaking of big authorities...don't we have annihilation more important to do?)
Spare usa the double talk, please.
David Lion Salmanson - seven/7/2004
And yet, had they been Torries, they nearly likely would have lost everything (depending on whether they chose evacutation or non and a few other factors). Basically most Americans during the Revolution suffered from hardship, loss, deprivation, illness, injury, and financial reversals. It was a pretty lousy time to try to lead a normal life.
Chris Randall - 6/29/2004
Legally, they were guilty of treason and subject field to prosecution every bit such.
However, once the colonists began taking British prisoners, theory was sacrificed to practicality and captured rebels were treated co-ordinate to existing conventions as POWs, and exchanged or paroled accordingly.
Paul Noonan - 6/29/2004
The Brits might take been inside their legal rights in hanging ordinary American soldiers (this was pre-Geneva convention after all) but, humanitarian considerations aside, they didn't want to furthur inflame the population with executions of low level rebels. Likewise, one time it is known that you execute prisoners you are not going to go anyone to give up.
Over a century later, in the 1916 Easter Rebellion in Dublin, the Brits contented themselves with executing a dozen or so of the leaders. The rank and file were treated as prisoners and a few very young rebels (early on teens) were only sent home. Even the execution of the leaders is almost universally considered a political mistake in retrospect, equally it inflamed resistance and helped lead to Irish independence.
John H. Lederer - 6/28/2004
in British eyes of a soldier in the Continental Regular army who was captured. Clearly he was in rebellion and presumably a traitor. What made the british not make up one's mind to hang them (Their own men who were pisoners of the Continentals? A hope for reconciliation?). What was the legal fiction?
What about a civilian "detained" every bit a insubordinate?
Anybody know?
John H. Lederer - 6/28/2004
Very illuminating. Thanks for the URL!
Graham Hick - 6/28/2004
"To denote that at that place must exist no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president correct or wrong, is not merely unpatriotic and servile, simply is morally treasonable to the American public."
Theodore Roosevelt
Michael Barnes Thomin - half-dozen/28/2004
"You are not to be then blind with patriotism that you tin't face reality. Wrong is wrong, no affair who does it or says it."
- Malcolm Ten
"Are we tending to exist of the numbers of those who, having eyes, see non, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit information technology may toll, I am willing to know the whole truth, to know the worst, and to provide for it."
- Patrick Henry
Seton - ix/22/2003
I'm deplorable, merely you accept hit a nerve with the war affair. I'm sorry, but equally far as I am aware of, nosotros were non even looking at Afganistan when Bin-Laden decided to send followers to commit the atrocities on 9-11. Practice you back up those that would commit these atrocities because ideals are dissimilar? I am not forgiving the killer(south) of those who died that 24-hour interval that easily. Forgiveness and avoiding conflict gave Hitler a rise to power.
Seton - 9/22/2003
Ummm...If it was legal to violently overthrow the goverment, wouldn't that be kind of pointless?
Current Ruler: "Oh, sorry General, looks like my troops have beaten yours, Volition y'all be back to overthrow me once again? Same twenty-four hour period side by side month?"
Leader of coup: "Yes, sir. Next time though, I will be ruler!"
Cody - ix/9/2003
where is the pictures
Another Jeff - 7/3/2003
Gary - 9/16/2002
An open letter to knuckle draggers.
If you lot take offense to this term, and then you must have been called it before; Take listen!
History is an indisputable fact. If a statement is made nigh history and it is not an indisputable fact, then it is not history, it is a story. Stories entertain and history teaches.
This is equally basic an interpretation of what history is, as I can make. If this is not satisfactory, then truth doesn't much thing to you. To complain about correcting erroneous statements about historical information, begs the question; How practice y'all think a lie servers ane's love of country, and his willingness to make a sacrifice for information technology?
Vietnam started as a political lie, and it only created deep feelings of hate and mistrust. Information technology made a criminal out of me; I knew the truth near Vietnam, and chose to dodge the typhoon, instead of putting my life on the line for no reason other than, the military machine needed something to do.
To this day, I carry my draft carte du jour in my wallet. I don't ever want to forget the faces of those people I cared about, who where forever harmed by that 'Regime Change' (Which by the way, is spin for a 'insurrection d'etat', and nether whatever term or condition, is an illegal human action.).
Gary - ix/16/2002
Yous forget the U in your name Dumb
Loki - nine/eleven/2002
Chris, Chris, Chris...if there was anything that fabricated the Usa deserving of those attacks that put in this "country of state of war" as you put (which there isn't) it's morons like you. Y'all hate anyone that isn't blindly behind America, right or incorrect. If y'all e'er demand to wonder why America is hated, expect in a mirror.
The article is truthful. History cannot be trusted. This has been proven.
I can definately say this almost yous, Chris. Given your mentality, if we were to rewind time well-nigh 230 years, you would have put on the Redcoat and gone to war against the "traitors" that defied the British government.
DMB - 9/xi/2002
You can't fifty-fifty spell. Come up on!
John Horst - eight/7/2002
I believe Chris's comment is grounded in the frustration many folks have with the historical/academic elite today. Historical hereos, peculiarly the not bad white men of our past are perfect targets for the politically correct in that they feel that they can make blanket statements and disparage them without feeling like bigots. The reality is that the founding fathers' actions does not need embellishment. The significance of their actions and sacrifices stand up solitary. It is good to debunk myths about history, only it is the way in which the liberal car goes about it that is and then disturbing. Those of us who find comfort in the American experience will continue to be labeled "slack-jawed morons", steeped in sentimentality. But at to the lowest degree this Deliverence clone will take solace in the fact that the Revolution is and will continue to be a stick in the eye to all those big government advocates who just can't stand up the idea that the common human being can decide how to live on his ain, without big brother deciding for him. At least for a while, the American experiment was live. But it is certain that you culturally and intellectually superior beings will ensure not for long.
Jeff - viii/five/2002
I am very familiar with the essay "The Price They Paid" and have seen it roll into my in box on several occasions. Information technology is an emotionally stirring essay - but according to what I take read here and in other places, information technology is a flawed inaccurate document. And so my question is this. How could y'all possibly phone call someone a traitor for speaking the truth? No one is trying to change American History - they are trying to preserve it by dispelling a widely spread untruthful document. What if I told y'all that many of the signers of the declaration didn't fifty-fifty sign the certificate on the 4th of July? Surprising as it may be, that is a truthful statement. However, following your logic it makes me a traitor because information technology goes against what you were taught to believe all these years. I also can non even begin to concieve where you got the bulletin that any of the writing here said anything about "Antisocial America". My friend, I think you need to work on your communications skills.
J Johnson - 7/20/2002
Hey Phil, well said! Mega-dittoes!
Phil - 7/19/2002
What a genius to compose such a missive ! If you concur : y'all are linked to what appears to be an ignorant, slack-jawed, inbred, mouth breather caricature from "Deliverance" or perhaps a George 2 (Bush) voter.
If y'all disagree: you are supporting the viewpoint that freedom of expression shouldn't be permitted this far below the surface of the genetic puddle.
(Is sarcasm nevertheless alive?)
Marty - 7/xviii/2002
It is obvious from your misuse of the English language and logic that you have no business organisation entering the conversation of rational men.
dtf - 7/18/2002
Since when has telling the truth about American history made someone a traitor. If you think this data is false, then provide authentic references and sources to demonstrate that. Otherwise, all you lot have is rant and insult to offer.
Perhaps Yous should detect a country where freedom of expression and a willingness to research and learn the actual facts of history is discouraged and punished. Fortunately, that'south not withal the case in THIS state......though not for lack of trying by folks similar yourself.
dtf
Chris - 7/17/2002
If yous detest america so much why don't you leave it, yous people are always trying to change history to fit your politically correct view..well i take to say now is not the fourth dimension to be spreading your diease we are at a land of state of war.
laniganquaecte1993.blogspot.com
Source: https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/860
0 Response to "what happended to signors of declaration of independance"
Post a Comment