# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Table of Contents

1. America Before the Declaration of Independence

2. Thomas Jefferson Writes the Declaration of Independence

3. The Continental Congress Votes for Independence

The Declaration of Independence was the first formal statement by a nation's people asserting their right to choose their own government.

When armed conflict between bands of American colonists and British soldiers began in April 1775, the Americans were ostensibly fighting only for their rights as subjects of the British crown. By the following summer, with the Revolutionary War in full swing, the movement for independence from Britain had grown, and delegates of the Continental Congress were faced with a vote on the issue. In mid-June 1776, a five-man committee including Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and Benjamin Franklin was tasked with drafting a formal statement of the colonies' intentions. The Congress formally adopted the Declaration of Independence-written largely by Jefferson-in Philadelphia on July 4, a date now celebrated as the birth of American independence.

America Before the Declaration of Independence

Even after the initial battles in the Revolutionary War broke out, few colonists desired complete independence from Great Britain, and those who did-like John Adams- were considered radical. Things changed over the course of the next year, however, as Britain attempted to crush the rebels with all the force of its great army. In his message to Parliament in October 1775, King George III railed against the rebellious colonies and ordered the enlargement of the royal army and navy. News of his words reached America in January 1776, strengthening the radicals' cause and leading many conservatives to abandon their hopes of reconciliation. That same month, the recent British immigrant Thomas Paine published "Common Sense," in which he argued that independence was a "natural right" and the only possible course for the colonies; the pamphlet sold more than 150,000 copies in its first few weeks in publication.

Did you know? Most Americans did not know Thomas Jefferson was the principal author of the Declaration of Independence until the 1790s; before that, the document was seen as a collective effort by the entire Continental Congress.

In March 1776, North Carolina's revolutionary convention became the first to vote in favor of independence; seven other colonies had followed suit by mid-May. On June 7, the Virginia delegate Richard Henry Lee introduced a motion calling for the colonies' independence before the Continental Congress when it met at the Pennsylvania State House (later Independence Hall) in Philadelphia. Amid heated debate, Congress postponed the vote on Lee's resolution and called a recess for several weeks. Before departing, however, the delegates also appointed a five-man committee-including Thomas Jefferson of Virginia, John Adams of Massachusetts, Roger Sherman of Connecticut, Benjamin Franklin of Pennsylvania and Robert R. Livingston of New York-to draft a formal statement justifying the break with Great Britain. That document would become known as the Declaration of Independence.

Thomas Jefferson Writes the Declaration of Independence

Jefferson had earned a reputation as an eloquent voice for the patriotic cause after his 1774 publication of "A Summary View of the Rights of British America," and he was given the task of producing a draft of what would become the Declaration of Independence. As he wrote in 1823, the other members of the committee "unanimously pressed on myself alone to undertake the draught [sic]. I consented; I drew it; but before I reported it to the committee I communicated it separately to Dr. Franklin and Mr. Adams requesting their corrections....I then wrote a fair copy, reported it to the committee, and from them, unaltered to the Congress."

As Jefferson drafted it, the Declaration of Independence was divided into five sections, including an introduction, a preamble, a body (divided into two sections) and a conclusion. In general terms, the introduction effectively stated that seeking independence from Britain had become "necessary" for the colonies. While the body of the document outlined a list of grievances against the British crown, the preamble includes its most famous passage: "We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

The Continental Congress Votes for Independence

The Continental Congress reconvened on July 1, and the following day 12 of the 13 colonies adopted Lee's resolution for independence. The process of consideration and revision of Jefferson's declaration (including Adams' and Franklin's corrections) continued on July 3 and into the late morning of July 4, during which Congress deleted and revised some one-fifth of its text. The delegates made no changes to that key preamble, however, and the basic document remained Jefferson's words. Congress officially adopted the Declaration of Independence later on the Fourth of July (though most historians now accept that the document was not signed until August 2).

The Declaration of Independence became a significant landmark in the history of democracy. In addition to its importance in the fate of the fledgling American nation, it also exerted a tremendous influence outside the United States, most memorably in France during the French Revolution. Together with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence can be counted as one of the three essential founding documents of the United States government.

HISTORY Vault

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
America Before the Declaration of Independence Thomas Jefferson Writes the Declaration of Independence The Continental Congress Votes for Independence The Declaration of Independence was the first formal statement by a nation's people asserting their right to choose their own government.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
April 19, 1775 - Minute Man National Historical Park (U.S. National Park Service)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Minute Man National Historical Park in Lexington, Lincoln, and Concord, Massachusetts, preserves and interpretes the sites, structures, and landscapes that became the field of battle during the first armed conflict of the American Revolution on April 19, 1775. It was here that British colonists risked their lives and property, defending their ideals of liberty and self-determination.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Revere supplemented his income with other business ventures. During the economic depression that followed the French and Indian War, Revere began working as a copperplate engraver. He produced illustrations for books and magazines, business cards, political cartoons, bookplates, a song book, and bills of fare for taverns. He also practiced as a dentist from 1768 to 1775, to the extent that his time and skills allowed. He cleaned teeth, fastened in false teeth and sold toothpaste. Contrary to popular myth, he did not make George Washington's false teeth. There is no evidence he made full sets of dentures.
Revere's silversmith shop
Political Activities / Revolutionary War

Revere's political involvement arose through his connections with members of local organizations and his business patrons. As a member of the Masonic Lodge of St. Andrew, he was friendly with activists like Dr. Joseph Warren. In the year before the Revolution, Revere gathered intelligence by "watching the Movements of British Soldiers," as he wrote in a 1798 account of his ride. He was a courier for the Boston Committee of Correspondence and the Massachusetts Committee of Safety, riding express to the Continental Congress in Philadelphia. As a member of the North Caucus, Revere took part in meetings that planned the destruction of East India Company Tea in December 1773. The next day, he spread the word of the Boston Tea Party to New York and Philadelphia.

The Midnight Ride

The Midnight Ride, including map and images.

At 10 pm on the night of April 18, 1775, Revere received instructions from Dr. Joseph Warren to ride to Lexington to warn John Hancock and Samuel Adams of the British approach. Following the Battles of Lexington and Concord, Revere and his family lived in Watertown, Massachusetts, just outside of Boston. During this time Revere printed paper currency for the Massachusetts government, and helped to acquire powder and ammunition for the colonial troops. Revere went on to serve as lieutenant colonel in the Massachusetts State Train of Artillery and commander of Castle Island in Boston Harbor. Revere and his troops saw little action at this post, but they did participate in minor expeditions to Newport, Rhode Island and Worcester, Mass. Revere's rather undistinguished military career ended with the failed Penobscot expedition in 1779.

In the summer of 1779, Paul Revere was appointed commander of the field artillery in a large multi-colony expedition sent to the Maine district of Massachusetts (now the state of Maine) to capture a small British fort at Castine, near the mouth of the Penobscot River. Lack of cooperation between the naval and land forces virtually guaranteed that little would be accomplished before a British relief squadron arrived and trapped the American expedition in Penobscot Bay. An orderly retreat up the Penobscot River quickly turned into a panicked rout, with vessels exploding, being run aground, and scuttled to prevent their falling into enemy hands. The American land forces became scattered and most made their way back to Boston on foot.

Accused of cowardice and insubordination, Revere was unhappy with the results of a Board of Inquiry, which did not rule on his case one way or the other. Determined to receive a proper hearing, Revere petitioned the Massachusetts government seven times for a court-martial before one was finally convened in February of 1782. The court-martial ruled that Revere be found not guilty of all charges, although the language in the second charge was somewhat equivocal. Revere accepted the result as a vindication of his honor, and returned to his business activities.

Lecture all about Paul Revere's court-martial.

Paul Revere Industrialist - Post War Businesses

Revere expanded his business interests in the years following the Revolution. His plan was to turn the day-to-day operations of his silver shop over to his oldest son, Paul, Jr. and use the profits to invest in new businesses. From 1783 to 1789 he operated a hardware store in downtown Boston where he sold locally made and imported English goods, including hammers, chisels, ink stands, looking glasses, and rolls of wallpaper. At times he operated his silver shop and hardware store at the same location. By 1788 he had opened a foundry which supplied bolts, spikes, and nails for shipyards in Boston and elsewhere (including brass fittings for USS Constitution), produced cannons of various sizes and, after 1792, cast bells. One of his largest bells still rings in Boston's Kings Chapel.

Concerned that the United States had to import sheet copper from England, Revere opened the first successful copper rolling mill in North America in 1801. He provided copper sheeting for the hull of USS Constitution when it was re-coppered and the dome of the new Massachusetts State House in 1802. Revere Copper and Brass, Inc., the descendent of Revere's rolling mill, is best known for "Revere Ware" copper-bottomed pots and pans. Revere Ware is now manufactured by a different company.

Details on Revere's other businesses.

Community Involvements

Revere's community and social involvements were extensive. He was an active Freemason for many years, beginning in 1760, holding several offices in St. Andrew's and Rising States Lodges. He also served as Grand Master of the Massachusetts Grand Lodge for three years in the 1790s. A member of the Massachusetts Charitable Mechanics Association, Revere also served as the association's first president. Founded in 1794, the group was an organization of artisans and small businessmen who sought to improve the conditions under which their peers worked, and aided members in "distressed" circumstances. Revere also served as Suffolk County Coroner for several years in the 1790s, and as President of Boston's Board of Health in 1799 and 1800.

Last Years

In 1811, at the age of 76, Paul Revere retired and left his well-established copper business in the hands of his son Joseph Warren Revere and two of his grandsons. Revere seems to have remained healthy in his final years, despite the personal sorrow caused by the deaths of his wife Rachel and son Paul in 1813. Revere died of natural causes on May 10, 1818 at the age of 83, leaving five children, several grandchildren, and many great-grandchildren. The son of an immigrant artisan, not born to wealth or inheritance, Revere died a modestly well-to-do businessman and a popular local figure of some note. An obituary in the Boston Intelligencer commented, "seldom has the tomb closed upon a life so honorable and useful." Paul Revere is buried in Boston's Granary Burying Ground.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Revere supplemented his income with other business ventures. During the economic depression that followed the French and Indian War, Revere began working as a copperplate engraver. He produced illustrations for books and magazines, business cards, political cartoons, bookplates, a song book, and bills of fare for taverns.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Why Did the Boston Tea Party Happen?

In the 1760s, Britain was deep in debt, so British Parliament imposed a series of taxes on American colonists to help pay those debts.

The Stamp Act of 1765 taxed colonists on virtually every piece of printed paper they used, from playing cards and business licenses to newspapers and legal documents. The Townshend Acts of 1767 went a step further, taxing essentials such as paint, paper, glass, lead and tea.

The British government felt the taxes were fair since much of its debt was earned fighting wars on the colonists' behalf. The colonists, however, disagreed. They were furious at being taxed without having any representation in Parliament, and felt it was wrong for Britain to impose taxes on them to gain revenue.

Boston Massacre Enrages Colonists

On March 5, 1770, a street brawl happened in Boston between American colonists and British soldiers.

Later known as the Boston Massacre, the fight began after an unruly group of colonists-frustrated with the presence of British soldiers in their streets- flung snowballs, ice and oyster shells at a British sentinel guarding the Boston Customs House.

Reinforcements arrived and opened fire on the mob, killing five colonists and wounding six. The Boston Massacre and its fallout further incited the colonists' rage towards Britain.

Tea Act Imposed

Britain eventually repealed the taxes it had imposed on the colonists except the tea tax. It wasn't about to give up tax revenue on the nearly 1.2 million pounds of tea the colonists drank each year.

In protest, the colonists boycotted tea sold by British East India Company and smuggled in Dutch tea, leaving British East India Company with millions of pounds of surplus tea and facing bankruptcy.

In May 1773, British Parliament passed the Tea Act which allowed British East India Company to sell tea to the colonies duty-free and much cheaper than other tea companies-but still tax the tea when it reached colonial ports.

Tea smuggling in the colonies increased, although the cost of the smuggled tea soon surpassed that of tea from British East India Company with the added tea tax.

Still, with the help of prominent tea smugglers such as John Hancock and Samuel Adams -who protested taxation without representation but also wanted to protect their tea smuggling operations-colonists continued to rail against the tea tax and Britain's control over their interests.

Sons of Liberty

The Sons of Liberty were a group of colonial merchants and tradesmen founded to protest the Stamp Act and other forms of taxation. The group of revolutionists included prominent patriots such as Benedict Arnold, Patrick Henry and Paul Revere, as well as Adams and Hancock.

Led by Adams, the Sons of Liberty held meetings rallying against British Parliament and protested the Griffin's Wharf arrival of Dartmouth, a British East India Company ship carrying tea. By December 16, 1773, Dartmouth had been joined by her sister ships, Beaver and Eleanor; all three ships loaded with tea from China.

That morning, as thousands of colonists convened at the wharf and its surrounding streets, a meeting was held at the Old South Meeting House where a large group of colonists voted to refuse to pay taxes on the tea or allow the tea to be unloaded, stored, sold or used. (Ironically, the ships were built in America and owned by Americans.)

Governor Thomas Hutchison refused to allow the ships to return to Britain and ordered the tea tariff be paid and the tea unloaded. The colonists refused, and Hutchison never offered a satisfactory compromise.

Facts: What Happened at the Boston Tea Party

That night, a large group of men-many reportedly members of the Sons of Liberty- disguised themselves in Native American garb, boarded the docked ships and threw 342 chests of tea into the water.

Said participant George Hewes, "We then were ordered by our commander to open the hatches and take out all the chests of tea and throw them overboard, and we immediately proceeded to execute his orders, first cutting and splitting the chests with our tomahawks, so as thoroughly to expose them to the effects of the water."

Hewes also noted that "We were surrounded by British armed ships, but no attempt was made to resist us."

Did you know? It took nearly three hours for more than 100 colonists to empty the tea into Boston Harbor. The chests held more than 90,000 lbs. (45 tons) of tea, which would cost nearly $1,000,000 dollars today.

Boston Tea Party Aftermath

While some important colonist leaders such as John Adams were thrilled to learn Boston Harbor was covered in tea leaves, others were not.

In June of 1774, George Washington wrote: "the cause of Boston...ever will be considered as the cause of America." But his personal views of the event were far different. He voiced strong disapproval of "their conduct in destroying the Tea" and claimed Bostonians "were mad." Washington, like many other elites, held private property to be sacrosanct.

Benjamin Franklin insisted the British East India Company be reimbursed for the lost tea and even offered to pay for it himself.

No one was hurt, and aside from the destruction of the tea and a padlock, no property was damaged or looted during the Boston Tea Party. The participants reportedly swept the ships' decks clean before they left.

Who Organized the Boston Tea Party?

Though led by Samuel Adams and his Sons of Liberty and organized by John Hancock, the names of many of those involved in the Boston Tea Party remain unknown. Thanks to their Native American costumes, only one of the tea party culprits, Francis Akeley, was arrested and imprisoned.

Even after American independence, participants refused to reveal their identities, fearing they could still face civil and criminal charges as well as condemnation from elites for the destruction of private property. Most participants in the Boston Tea Party were under the age of 40 and 16 of them were teenagers.

Coercive Acts

But despite the lack of violence, the Boston Tea Party didn't go unanswered by King George III and British Parliament.

In retribution, they passed the Coercive Acts (later known as the Intolerable Acts) which:

Closed Boston Harbor until the tea lost in the Boston Tea Party was paid for

Ended the Massachusetts Constitution and ended free elections of town officials

Moved judicial authority to Britain and British judges, basically creating martial law in Massachusetts

Required colonists to quarter British troops on demand

Extended freedom of worship to French-Canadian Catholics under British rule, which angered the mostly Protestant colonists

Britain hoped the Coercive Acts would squelch rebellion in New England and keep the remaining colonies from uniting, but the opposite happened: All the colonies viewed the punitive laws as further evidence of Britain's tyranny and rallied to Massachusetts' aid, sending supplies and plotting further resistance.

Second Boston Tea Party

A second Boston Tea Party took place in March 1774, when around 60 Bostonians boarded the ship Fortune and dumped nearly 30 chests of tea into the harbor.

The event didn't earn nearly as much notoriety as the first Boston Tea Party, but it did encourage other tea-dumping demonstrations in Maryland, New York and South Carolina.

First Continental Congress Is Convened

Many colonists felt Britain's Coercive Acts went too far. On September 5, 1774, elected delegates from all 13 American colonies except Georgia met in Carpenter's Hall in Philadelphia for the First Continental Congress to figure out how to resist British oppression.

The delegates were divided on how to move forward but the Boston Tea Party had united them in their fervor to gain independence. By the time they adjourned in October 1774, they'd written The Declaration and Resolves which:

Censured Britain for passing the Coercive Acts and called for their repeal

Established a boycott of British goods

Declared the colonies had the right to govern independently

Rallied colonists to form and train a colonial militia

Britain didn't capitulate and within months, the " shot heard round the world," rang out in Concord, Massachusetts, sparking the start of the American Revolutionary War.

Sources

A Tea Party Timeline: 1773-1775. Old South Meeting House.
The Boston Tea Party. The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation.
The Boston Tea Party. Massachusetts Historical Society.
The Boston Tea Party, 1773. EyewitnesstoHistory.com.
The Intolerable Acts. U.S.History.org.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Boston Tea Party - Definition, Dates & Facts | HISTORY

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Boston Tea Party was a political protest staged on December 16, 1773 at Griffin's Wharf in Boston, Massachusetts. American colonists, frustrated at Britain for imposing "taxation without representation," dumped 342 chests of British tea into the harbor. The event was the first major act of defiance to British rule over the colonists.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
French and Indian War - Seven Years War _ HISTORY

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Stamp Act - Fact, Reaction & Legacy _ HISTORY

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On May 21, 1796, Ona "Oney" Judge fled her enslavement to Pres. George Washington, while the first family resided in Philadelphia, then the nation's temporary capital.

Yes, Washington was an enslaver. He was one of 12 presidents in U.S. history (1 out of 4) who owned and sold people. Pennsylvania began to abolish slavery gradually in the 1780s but Washington was able to keep enslaved members of his household in Philadelphia by finding loopholes in the law. (For example, state law said that enslaved individuals brought to Pennsylvania and kept there would be free after six months, so Washington rotated people between Mount Vernon and Philadelphia every few months to ensure none of them could legally claim their freedom.)

Judge, in her early 20s, had learned that the Washingtons planned to transfer her to Martha Washington's granddaughter, Elizabeth Parke Custis, as a wedding gift.

Decades later, Judge recalled her escape in an 1845 interview with an abolitionist newspaper in New Hampshire, where she had lived in freedom for the rest of her long life:

Whilst they were packing up to go to Virginia, I was packing to go, I didn't know where; for I knew that if I went back to Virginia, I should never get my liberty. I had friends among the colored people of Philadelphia, had my things carried there beforehand, and left Washington's house while they were eating dinner.

Judge, who had worked as Martha Washington's personal attendant, was smuggled aboard The Nancy, a sloop that took her to liberty in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. "Judge knew that the moment she walked out of the President's Mansion that she would become a hunted woman," historian Erica Armstrong Dunbar wrote in Never Caught: The Washingtons' Relentless Pursuit of Their Runaway Slave, Ona Judge (2017). "She would transform from a trusted house slave for the most powerful American family to a criminal, guilty of stealing her own body away from her owners."

Upon discovering that Judge had fled, Washington had an aide post newspaper advertisements for her recapture. A May 23, 1796, advertisement includes the following:

Absconded from the household of the President of the United States on Saturday afternoon, ONEY JUDGE, a light Mulatto girl, much freckled, with very black eyes, and bushy black hair - She is of middle stature, but slender, and delicately made, about 20 years of age.

Washington offered a $10 reward, which equated to the cost of a barrel of flour at the time, according to Dunbar.

As for Judge, in 1797 she married John Staines, a free Black sailor, with whom she had three children. She worked as a seamstress and avoided at least two attempts by Washington's agents to capture her in New Hampshire. Judge died February 25, 1848, at about age 75.
By Michael Knepler, who prepares periodic #tdih posts for the Zinn Education Project.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
May 21, 1796: Ona Judge Escapes Enslavement by President George Washington - Zinn Education Project

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On May 21, 1796, Ona "Oney" Judge fled her enslavement to Pres. George Washington, while the first family resided in Philadelphia, then the nation's temporary capital. Yes, Washington was an enslaver. He was one of 12 presidents in U.S. history (1 out of 4) who owned and sold people.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Deborah Sampson became a hero of the American Revolution when she disguised herself as a man and joined the Patriot forces. She earned a full military pension for participation in the Revolutionary army.

Born on December 17, 1760, in Plympton, Massachusetts. Sampson was one of seven children to Jonathan Sampson Jr. and Deborah (Bradford) Sampson. Both were descendants of preeminent Pilgrims: Jonathan of Myles Standish and Priscilla Alden; his wife, the great granddaughter of Massachusetts Governor William Bradford. Still, the Sampsons struggled financially and, after Jonathan failed to return from a sea voyage, his impoverished wife was forced to place her children in different households. Five years later, at age 10, young Deborah was bound out as an indentured servant to Deacon Benjamin Thomas, a farmer in Middleborough with a large family. At age 18, with her indenture completed, Sampson, who was self-educated, worked as a teacher during summer sessions in 1779 and 1780 and as a weaver in winter.

In 1782, as the Revolutionary War raged on, the patriotic Sampson disguised herself as a man named Robert Shurtleff and joined the Fourth Massachusetts Regiment. At West Point, New York, she was assigned to Captain George Webb's Company of Light Infantry. She was given the dangerous task of scouting neutral territory to assess British buildup of men and materiel in Manhattan, which General George Washington contemplated attacking. In June of 1782, Sampson and two sergeants led about 30 infantrymen on an expedition that ended with a confrontation-often one-on-one-with Tories. She led a raid on a Tory home that resulted in the capture of 15 men. At the siege of Yorktown, she dug trenches, helped storm a British redoubt, and endured canon fire.

For over two years, Sampson's true gender had escaped detection despite close calls. When she received a gash in her forehead from a sword and was shot in her left thigh, she extracted the pistol ball herself. She was ultimately discovered a year and a half into her service-in Philadelphia, when she became ill during an epidemic, was taken to a hospital, and lost consciousness.

Receiving an honorable discharge on October 23, 1783, Sampson returned to Massachusetts. On April 7, 1785, she married Benjamin Gannet from Sharon, and they had three children, Earl, Mary, and Patience. The story of her life was written in 1797 by Herman Mann, entitled The Female Review: or Memoirs of an American Young Lady. She received a military pension from the state of Massachusetts. Although Sampson's life after the army was mostly typical of a farmer's wife, in 1802 she began a year-long lecture tour about her experiences-the first woman in America to do so-sometimes dressing in full military regalia.

Four years after Sampson's death at age 66, her husband petitioned Congress for pay as the spouse of a soldier. Although the couple was not married at the time of her service, in 1837 the committee concluded that the history of the Revolution "furnished no other similar example of female heroism, fidelity and courage." He was awarded the money, though he died before receiving it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Deborah Sampson: American Revolutionary War Hero

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn about Deborah Sampson, and American Revolutionary War Hero from Massachusetts.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
The official website for the Pennsylvania General Assembly.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Benjamin Franklin - PA House of Representatives

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Photo credit:Duplessis, Joseph Siffred. Benjamin Franklin. 1785. Gift of the Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation, Smithsonian Institution, National Portrait Gallery. http://npg.si.edu

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The following is a guest post by Danielle Herring, an intern with the Digital Resources Division of the Law Library of Congress. She is a graduate of the School of Information at Florida State University.
On a winter's night in 1769 ladies assembled at a ball held in the future Virginia capitol of Richmond, an unremarkable event, yet their attendance, or specifically, what they were wearing, merited a mention in the colony's newspaper. The Virginia Gazette reported that more than 100 of the women at the ball had worn homespun gowns, and the publication encouraged other American women to follow their example.

What was the significance of this wardrobe choice? The promotion of homespun clothing in the American colonies traces its origin to resistance on the part of colonists to several British laws that required the taxation of imported goods.

The Navigation Acts were a series of laws that limited trade in British colonies. Beginning in the late 17th century, English colonies were required to exclusively import goods from Britain. Colonists were also limited to shipping their own goods produced within the colonies to Britain. While these laws were originally lax in their enforcement, the tightening of these laws, and the introduction of the Sugar Act, led to increased tensions between American colonists and the British government.

The Stamp Act required a tax to be paid on any legal document, academic degree, appointment to office, newspapers, pamphlets, playing cards, and dice. A stamp from the treasury on the taxed item indicated the payment of this tax. Protests of the Stamp Act by colonists, as well as the refusal on the part of colonial government officials to collect taxes led to its repeal.

The Townshend Duties were then introduced. This law required taxes on paper, paints, glass, tea, and any goods imported from Britain to the colonies. Protests and boycotts resumed, now involving an expanding network of families and communities across all of the colonies. Resistance on the part of the colonists to these new taxes on goods took on many forms, but one notable method of resistance was a boycott of imported fabrics in favor of American-made goods, also known as the homespun movement.

Women would play a significant role in boycotts of British products, especially in the homespun movement. Newspaper articles during this time praised women for avoiding imported goods, and encouraged other women to make similar decisions:

We hear that there was held two or three evenings ago, an assembly of Ladies of the first quality, in a very respectable alley in Town, who have not wore ribbons for many years past, and who thro' a resolution to encourage to the most of their Power the manufactures of this country, have made spinning their only employment, and drink nothing at their meetings but New England Rum, the best part of their lives ; and the patriotism of the above Ladies is more illustrious and worthy of imitation[...]

Previously existing boycotts, known as non-consumption agreements, resumed in response to the Townshend Duties. Wearing homespun fabrics was viewed by the colonists as a show of patriotism. Spinning parties held by women were now politically charged social gatherings, this traditional form of woman's work deemed an acceptable avenue for the expression of political opinions.

The non-importation agreements were also made by colonists in an effort to have the Townshend Duties repealed. These agreements were boycotts of the sale of imported goods on the part of colonial merchants. Women played a central role in the effectiveness of these agreements as both consumers and manufacturers of domestic products. The few single women who owned their own shops were able to act politically as part of the male-dominated mercantile class, also signing non-importation agreements.

Like the merchants and other colonists who signed the non-importation agreements, George Washington also understood the importance of domestic fabric manufacture as part of the resistance to taxes. In 1769 he endorsed a letter from George Mason who was writing on behalf of the Virginia Merchants Association. A few years prior to the endorsement of this non-importation agreement, Washington had begun an enterprise of domestic manufacture of cloth to replace boycotted fabric imports. Large-scale manufacturing of fabric in the American colonies like Washington's at Mount Vernon relied on the labor of free and enslaved women, especially the spinning of raw materials before they could be woven into cloth.

In 1774, women took a more public political stand with the Edenton Tea Party. Organized by Penelope Barker, women in Edenton, North Carolina exercised their economic power by collectively agreeing to a boycott. Fifty-one women gathered and signed a petition agreeing not to purchase imported English tea or cloth, the petition echoing the earlier non-consumption and non-importation agreements written by men. They formed an organization called the Edenton Ladies' Patriotic Guild, stating in the Virginia Gazette:

As we cannot be indifferent on any occasion that appears nearly to affect the peace and happiness of our country, and as it has been thought necessary, for the public good, to enter into several particular resolves by a meeting of Members deputed from the whole Province it is a duty which we owe, not only to our near and dear connections who have concurred in them, but to ourselves who are essentially interested in their welfare, to do everything as far as lies in our power to testify our sincere adherence to the same; and we do therefore accordingly subscribe this paper, as a witness of our fixed intention and solemn determination to do so.

When tensions between American colonists and English rule boiled over into war, it was also women who made the uniforms for the Continental Army. Throughout the war, domestic fabric production continued after all imports from England, including cloth, were banned by the English government in 1775 with the passage of the Prohibitory Act.

Revolutionary-war era fashions were often simpler compared to their European counterparts due to prohibitions of imported goods and the influence of Quaker styles. Already possessing an ethos of simplicity in dress as part of their faith, Quakers were considered the leaders and originators of the homespun movement.

Fine fabrics were difficult to access during the American revolution, which also had an impact on fashion in the American colonies. In the World of the American Revolution, Merril Smith notes that old dresses were often mended and remade into newer, more fashionable styles. Reworking old fashions into new ones was undertaken by individual women, or by seamstresses, whose skills were in high demand during this time.

During and after the revolution, following European fashions was a subject of controversy, but ultimately French and English styles returned after the war. American women's fashion after the revolution remained an avenue for political expression. Discouraged from speaking publicly about politics, fashion could be used by women to communicate their opinions about politics by more socially acceptable means. In post-revolution America, federalist women incorporated golden eagles or black cockades into their ensembles, and women who supported republicanism wore Phrygian caps. Boycotts ended on foreign goods and support for foreign policies or governments could be indicated by wearing clothing made of fabrics imported from different countries.

As the main consumers of fabrics, as well as playing a significant role in their manufacture, I think the homespun movement could be considered one of the earliest forms of political participation by women on a large scale in American history. Participation in the homespun movement and other boycotts was an awakening for many women about their own economic power. Women's participation in early American politics did not end with the homespun movement. Other forms of collective action on the part of women would follow, such as textile mill worker strikes in 1824. When women participated in boycotts and other activism in early America, they were often met with the frustrations of limits placed on their participation within the public sphere. This frustration only spurred further activism on the part of women who were seeking the promise of 1776 to be fulfilled.

We acknowledge that this blog article focuses on women broadly and implicitly free women. Enslaved women would have been part of the domestic cloth manufacture, but neither this work nor the clothes they wore would have given them any sort of a political voice. If you would like to know more about the American revolution, the homespun movement, enslaved women, and the history of 18th-century fashion in politics, you can consult these additional selected sources:

Library of Congress, Women in the American Revolution Research Guide

Jack Darrell Crowder, African Americans and American Indians in the Revolutionary War (2019)

Eric Grundset, Briana L. Diaz, Hollis L. Gentry, America's Women in the Revolutionary Era (2011)

Kate Haulman, The Politics of Fashion in 18th Century America (2014)

Susan Falls, Jessica R. Smith, Overshot:The Political Aesthetics of Woven Textiles from the Antebellum South and Beyond (2020)

Laurel Thatcher Ulrich, The Age of Homespun:Objects and Stories in the Creation of an American Myth (2001)

Margaretta M. Lovell, Art in a Season of Revolution: Painters, Artisans, and Patrons in Early America (2005)

Joseph Cummins, Ten Tea Parties: Patriotic Protests That History Forgot (2012)

Lisa L. Moore, Joanna Brooks, Caroline Wigginton, Transatlantic Feminisms in the Age of Revolutions (2012)

Subscribe to In Custodia Legis - it's free! - to receive interesting posts drawn from the Law Library of Congress's vast collections and our staff's expertise in U.S., foreign, and international law.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Hands that Spun the Revolution | In Custodia Legis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A brief history of how the promotion of homespun clothing in the American colonies traces its origin to resistance on the part of colonists to several British laws that required the taxation of imported goods.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
From the moment Washington announced his retirement, the American people have remembered him as one of the greatest presidents in the nation's history. The name of the Capitol City, the Washington Monument, his inclusion on Mount Rushmore, and his regular place near the top of presidential polls attests to the strength of his legacy. Indeed, generations of Americans have used Washington's uniquely popular memory for their own political purposes. Most notably, after the Civil War, northerners and southerners valorized Washington and the founding era as a shared history they could both celebrate.

There is much to honor in Washington's legacy. He was the only person who could have held the office in 1789. He was the most famous American, the only one with enough of a national platform to represent the entire country and overwhelmingly trusted by the populous. Americans knew they could trust him to wield immense power because he had already done so once during the Revolution and willingly gave it up.

The trust and confidence Washington inspired made possible the creation of the presidency and helped establish the executive branch. Once in office, he cultivated respect for the presidency, regularly exhibited restraint in the face of political provocations, and attempted to serve as a president for all citizens (which admittedly meant white men). He was always mindful of the principles of republican virtue, namely self-sacrifice, decorum, self-improvement, and leadership. Our modern notions that the president should be held to higher standards and the office carries a certain level of respect and prestige began with Washington's careful creation of the position.

Washington also left an inveterate imprint on the political process, especially through his formation of the cabinet. Every president since Washington has worked with a cabinet, and each president crafts their own decision-making process. They select their closest advisors and determine how they will obtain advice from those individuals. Presidents might choose to consult friends, family members, former colleagues, department secretaries, or congressmen, and the American people and Congress have very little oversight over those relationships. Some presidents, like Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt, flourish with the flexibility; others, including James Madison and John F. Kennedy, find their administrations undermined by domineering advisors or cabinets. That legacy is a direct result of Washington's cabinet.

Washington's decision to step away from power, again, solidified his legacy and had a powerful impact on the future of the presidency. All his successors, until Franklin D. Roosevelt, willingly followed his example of retiring after two terms, and the 22 nd Amendment made sure that no future president can serve more than two terms. More importantly, Washington recognized the structural importance of leaving office willingly. He knew that Americans needed to learn how to elect, transition, and inaugurate a new president. That process was fraught with potential missteps, and Washington concluded that it would go more smoothly if it was planned, rather than haphazardly done after an unexpected death. Washington understood how much of the political process is based on norm and custom, and that those had to start with his example.

For all these achievements, and there are many, recently Washington's legacy lost a bit of its sparkle as Americans grapple with his personal failures. Of the many political choices in his long career, Washington's decisions in retirement were perhaps his worst. In 1798, Congress created the Provisional Army as the Quasi-War with France accelerated. President John Adams asked Washington to come out of retirement one more time to lead the army.

Washington reluctantly agreed but extracted two promises. First, he wanted to stay at Mount Vernon until a French invasion. Second, Washington insisted on naming his subordinate officers who would manage the army in his absence. When Adams reluctantly caved, Washington named Alexander Hamilton as his deputy. Hamilton and Adams hated each other, and Washington knew it. By forcing these concessions, Washington undermined the presidency and civilian authority over the army. As Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army, Washington had studiously upheld Congress's authority. His failure to make the same choice in his retirement is often overlooked but should be viewed with considerable criticism.

However, Washington's ownership of enslaved humans is by far the most challenging part of his legacy. To be sure, Washington's ideas about slavery and the potential for Black emancipation evolved over his lifetime. He did free the enslaved people he owned in his will, which is much more than most people in his generation. This commitment required decades-long planning to leave his estate unencumbered by debt which could only be reduced through the sale of enslaved individuals. And he did so in the face of resistance from other Virginians, including his wife. When the terms of Washington's will were published, the emancipation of his enslaved community sent ripples through the country. He had issued a forceful statement about the morality of slavery from the grave.

Yet, Washington clearly benefitted from exploiting enslaved people. And by the end of his life, he knew the institution was wrong and could have done more to end it. Washington pursued enslaved people who escaped when he could have left them to their freedom. He could have freed the enslaved people he owned during his lifetime but elected to enjoy the fruits of their labor until his last days. He also chose not to deprive Martha of that care either, which is why the enslaved people he owned were not to be freed until her death.

On a public scale, Washington could have made the terms of his will public before his death or spoken against slavery while he was alive. His words would have had an enormous impact-which is perhaps why he remained silent. Washington worried that if he forced the issue, southern states would secede from the Union. There will be no way to know if he was right or if these concerns were correct. But much of Washington's lifestyle and personal wealth were dependent on slavery, and that must be considered a part of his legacy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
George Washington: Impact and Legacy | Miller Center

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From the moment Washington announced his retirement, the American people have remembered him as one of the greatest presidents in the nation's history. The name of the Capitol City, the Washington Monument, his inclusion on Mount Rushmore, and his regular place near the top of presidential polls attests to the strength of his legacy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Women accomplished extraordinary things to advance their cause during the revolution.