Basis of the Revolution: Compliance Destroys Freedom
“RESIST THEM”
American Independence was built on the understanding that compliance with arbitrary power isn’t safety – or peace.
It’s surrender.
That’s an essential, but long-forgotten foundation of the American Revolution: Laws made outside the limits of the constitution aren’t law at all.
And they should be treated that way too.
LIMITS
The starting point? Government doesn’t get to do whatever it wants. It has limits.
As third Chief Justice Oliver Ellsworth put it, when it goes beyond those limits – those acts aren’t “law.” They’re void – right from the start.
“If they make a law which the Constitution does not authorize, it is void”
Declaring something void is one thing. But making it that way in practice is another. Algernon Sidney, whose book Discourses Concerning Government was highly influential on the American revolutionaries, said the people should treat them that way, too.
“That which is not just, is not Law; and that which is not Law, ought not to be obeyed”
This view was widely held throughout the Revolution. For example, Patrick Henry, in his Virginia resolves against the Stamp Act, said that when government goes beyond its limits, the people are not required to obey.
“The Inhabitants of this Colony, are not bound to yield Obedience to any Law or Ordinance whatever, designed to impose any Taxation whatsoever upon them, other than the Laws or Ordinances of the General Assembly aforesaid.”
But the British persisted in passing more arbitrary acts. And by the time the First Continental Congress met in 1774, noncompliance was the American default. Obedience to arbitrary power was never even on the table.
“To these grievous acts and measures Americans cannot submit”
FOUNDATION
Ellsworth’s view that laws beyond the limits of the Constitution are void wasn’t new or radical when he made the statement in 1788. That went right back to the start of the revolution in 1761, and James Otis Jr.’s speech against the writs of assistance.
“An Act against the constitution is void”
Even under the unwritten British constitution, this explains the difference between free people and subjects. John Jay gave us the hierarchy: Creator > people > government at the bottom.
“You and all men were created free, and authorized to establish civil government, for the preservation of your rights against oppression, and the security of that freedom which God hath given you, against the rapacious hand of tyranny and lawless power.”
Government then, is supposed to be an agent of the people – the hired help. So the people themselves, as John Dickinson explained, get to decide when government goes too far.
“They will always have the same rights, that all free states have, of judging when their privileges are invaded, and of using all prudent measures for preserving them.”
Thomas Jefferson put that in practice in 1774 in response to a long list of British acts going back over a century. But first, he started with an important caveat, an act is not null and void because of its policy results.
“We do not point out to his majesty the injustice of these acts, with intent to rest on that principle the cause of their nullity”
Instead, it’s based on something much deeper – staying within the bounds of a constitution or not.
“The true ground on which we declare these acts void is, that the British parliament has no right to exercise authority over us.”
To reject this hierarchy – as James Madison wrote – is to reject the Declaration of Independence.
“A plain denial of the fundamental principle on which our independence itself was declared”
CHAINS
On the other side of the process, John Dickinson warned that compliance with unconstitutional acts – like the stamp act – guarantees tyranny
“If you comply with the Act by using Stamped Papers, you fix, you rivet perpetual Chains upon your unhappy Country.”
He knew – every time you let them get away with enforcing one unconstitutional act, you give them the precedent for more and more of the same in the future.
“You unnecessarily, voluntarily establish the detestable Precedent, which those who have forged your Fetters ardently wish for, to varnish the future Exercise of this new claimed Authority.”
This was similar to what Sidney warned of almost a century earlier: Submission doesn’t buy peace or safety, it guarantees destruction.
“People must certainly perish, who tamely suffer themselves to be oppress’d … by the injustice, cruelty and malice of an ill magistrate”
Understanding this, it’s easy to see why Dickinson called every unconstitutional act a test of the backbone and resolve of the people.
“If you quietly bend your Necks to that Yoke, you prove yourselves ready to receive any Bondage to which your Lords and Masters shall please to subject you.”
James Otis, Jr. took it even further. The people demanding endless, and even blind obedience? They’re traitors.
“He that would palm the doctrine of unlimited passive obedience and non-resistance upon mankind …is not only a fool and a knave, but a rebel against common sense, as well as the laws of God, of Nature, and his Country.”
LATER
Despite all this – there are always people who say “now is not the time.” Samuel Adams rejected that outright, warning the “wait till later” approach will guarantee the destruction of liberty.
“If the liberties of America are ever compleatly ruined, of which in my opinion there is now the utmost danger, it will in all probability be the consequence of a mistaken notion of prudence, which leads men to acquiesce in measures of the most destructive tendency for the sake of present ease”
Otis called these people – the ones who say “we’ll take action later!” – the greatest threat to liberty.
“There is however no character so dangerous to liberty as the man of prudence. You may possibly be right, but at this juncture it is not prudent to insist upon it, is the language of artful courtiers, and has done more hurt than can well be imagined.”
His sister, Mercy Otis Warren, recognized that this is just part of human nature. It happens all the time, all through history. The people sleep on the job because they think doing the right thing is too dangerous – or requires too much effort.
“There is a certain supineness which generally overspreads the multitude, and disposes mankind to submit quietly to any form of government, rather than to be at the expense and hazard of resistance”
As a result, they get trapped in a cycle of obedience – no matter how tyrannical the laws may be.
“They become attached to ancient modes by habits of obedience, though the reins of authority are sometimes held by the most rigorous hand.”
But even the most submissive people have a limit, and sometimes find some backbone after living under “a long train of abuses and usurpations.”
“Thus we have seen in all ages the many become the slaves of the few; preferring the wretched tranquility of inglorious ease, they patiently yield to despotic masters, until awakened by multiplied wrongs to the feelings of human nature; which when once aroused to a consciousness of the native freedom and equal rights of man, every revolts at the idea of servitude.”
Waiting till the last moment, as John Adams warned, creates a far more difficult and dangerous environment.
“It is one of these early advances, these first approaches of arbitrary power, which are the most dangerous of all, and if not prevented, but suffered to steal into precedents, will leave no hope of a remedy without recourse to nature, violence, and war.”
So Rather than waiting, and waiting – and waiting – John Dickinson said the best approach for a free people is to stay vigilant: awake, aware and active
“A free people therefore can never be too quick in observing, nor too firm in opposing the beginnings of alteration either in form or reality, respecting institutions formed for their security.”
BACKBONE
For James Otis – later is always the wrong time, and now is always the right time.
“When our rights are invaded, it is high time to throw aside prudence”
That’s because – as Joseph Hawley warned – if you won’t defend your rights, you will lose them, guaranteed.
“The people or state who will not or cannot defend their liberties and rights will not have any for any long time.”
Quoting Cato the Younger through the Roman historian Sallust, Benjamin Franklin reminded us that this defense has to be supported by courage.
“Be not deceived; Divine assistance and protection are not to be obtained by timorous prayers and. To succeed, you must join salutary counsels, vigilance, and courageous actions.”
Almost 4 years before the war for independence – Samuel Adams clearly articulated the hard line that built American Independence. When power is arbitrary – lawless, unconstitutional – resistance isn’t just optional.
It’s a moral imperative – a duty.
“Who will presume to say that the people have not a right, or that it is not their indispensible duty to God and their Country, by all rational means in their power to RESIST THEM.”
Of course, you’ll always find people who fearmonger. They warn of chaos and calamity if the people themselves resist government power. But as Thomas Gordon put it in Cato’s Letters, it’s really the other way around.
“It is said, that the doctrine of resistance would destroy the peace of the world: But it may be more truly said, that the contrary doctrine would destroy the world itself, as it has already some of the best countries in it.”
In the end, Thomas Paine was right. Freedom isn’t going to defend itself. Never did, and never will.
“Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigues of supporting it.”
Latest posts by Michael Boldin (see all)