Congress framed armed resistance as rights-defense that still permitted reconciliation.

Evidence

With warfare underway and armies massing, on July 6 Congress adopted a Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms, written by Jefferson and revised by Dickinson. It bore the hallmarks of both men. After listing the rights restricted and wrongs inflicted by Parliament and the pleas from colonies and Congress for redress and reconciliation ignored by cabinet ministers, the declaration stated, “We are reduced to the alternative of chusing an unconditional Submission to the tyranny of irritated Ministers, or resistance by Force.” In this manner, it presented force as an extension of the steps outlined in Dickinson’s Letters and Jefferson’s Summary View for defending rights and resisting wrongs. Still, as Dickinson insisted, even armed resistance for rights need not foreclose reconciliation. “We have not raised Armies with the ambitious Designs of separating from Great-Britain, and establishing Independent States,” the declaration asserted. We have done so solely “in defence of the Freedom that is our Birth-right” and “for the protection of our Property … against Violence actually offered.” Rights and reconciliation remained the official position of Congress even after it sent some 2,400 troops north during the fall of 1775 in a failed attempt to rally British-ruled Canada to the patriot side. — Edward J. Larson, Declaring Independence, 46

Categorization

• XREF: Dickinson and Jefferson’s shared framing of force-as-rights-defense prefigures modern debates over when armed force is legally justified — links to legal interpretation of self-defense and just-war doctrine. — connects to: Congress authorized Continental forces while still seeking rights and reconciliation under the king.

Broader Connections

• Congress authorized Continental forces while still seeking rights and reconciliation under the king. #expands (0.95)