The following is the original rough draft of the Declaration of Independence, as penned by Thomas Jefferson prior to being edited by the Committee and later revised by Congress. Roman numerals preceding each Grievance have been added by Harman. Everything crossed out was struck out for the final, everything in parentheses is present in the final piece, which we all know, but was not in the original draft.
—A Declaration of the Representatives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in General Congress assembled. The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for a people to advance from that subordination in which they have hitherto remained, & (dissolve the political bands which have connected them to another, and) to assume among the powers of the earth the (separate and) equal & independant station to which the laws of nature & of nature's god entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the change (separation).
We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable (self-evident); that all men are created equal & independant, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable (that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain, unalienable rights), among which are the preservation of (that among these are) life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these ends (rights), governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government shall become destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, & to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles & organising its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety & happiness. prudence indeed will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light & transient causes: and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. but when a long train of abuses & usurpations, begun at a distinguished period, & pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to subject them to arbitrary power, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government & to provide new guards for their future security. such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; & such is now the necessity which constrains them to expunge their former systems of government. the history of his present majesty, is a history of unremitting injuries and usurpations, among which no one fact stands single or solitary to contradict the uniform tenor of the rest, all of which have in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. to prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world, for the truth of which we pledge a faith yet unsullied by falsehood.
(I) he has refused his assent to laws the most wholesome and necessary for the public good:
(II) he has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate & pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has neglected utterly to attend to them.
(III) he has refused to pass other laws for the accomodation of large districts of people unless those people would relinquish the right of representation, a right inestimable to them, formidable to tyrants alone:
(IV) he has dissolved Representative houses repeatedly & continually, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people:
(V) he has refused for a long space of time to cause others to be elected, whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise, the state remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, & convulsions within:
(VI) he has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither; & raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands:
(VII) he has suffered the administration of justice totally to cease in some of these colonies, refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers:
(VIII) he has made our judges dependant on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and amount of their salaries:
(IX) he has erected a multitude of new offices by a self-assumed power, & sent hither swarms of officers to harrass our people & eat out their substance:
(X) he has kept among us in times of peace standing armies & ships of war:
(XI) he has affected to render the military, independant of & superior to the civil power:
(XII) he has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitutions and unacknoleged by our laws; giving his assent to their pretended acts of legislation, for quartering large bodies of armed troops among us;
(XIII) for protecting them by a mock-trial from punishment for any murders they should commit on the inhabitants of these states;
(XIV) for cutting off our trade with all parts of the world;
(XV) for imposing taxes on us without our consent;
(XVI) for depriving us of the benefits of trial by jury;
(XVII) for transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offences: for taking away our charters, & altering fundamentally the forms of our governments;
(XVIII) for suspending our own legislatures & declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever:
(XIX) he has abdicated government here, withdrawing his governors, & declaring us out of his allegiance & protection:
(XX) he has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns & destroyed the lives of our people:
(XXI) he is at this time transporting large armies of foreign merce naries to compleat the works of death, desolation & tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty & perfidy unworthy the head of a civilized nation:
(XXII) he has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes, & conditions of existence:
(XXIII) he has incited treasonable insurrections in our fellow-subjects, with the allurements of forfeiture & confiscation of our property:
(XXIV) he has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it's most sacred rights of life & liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. this piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the CHRISTIAN king of Great Britain. determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce: and that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, & murdering the people upon whom he also obtruded them; thus paying off former crimes committed against the liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another.
(XXV) in every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms; our repeated petitions have been answered by repeated injury. a prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a people who mean to be free. future ages will scarce believe that the hardiness of one man, adventured within the short compass of 12 years only, on so many acts of tyranny without a mask, over a people fostered & fixed in principles of liberty.
(XXVI) Nor have we been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. we have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend a jurisdiction over these our states. we have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration & settlement here, no one of which could warrant so strange a pretension: that these were effected at the expence of our own blood & treasure, unassisted by the wealth or the strength of Great Britain: that in constituting indeed our several forms of government, we had adopted one common king, thereby laying a foundation for perpetual league & amity with them: but that submission to their parliament was no part of our constitution, nor ever in idea, if history may be credited: and we appealed to their native justice & magnanimity, as well as to the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations which were likely to interrupt our correspondence & connection. they too have been deaf to the voice of justice & of consanguinity, & when occasions have been given them, by the regular course of their laws, of removing from their councils the disturbers of our harmony, they have by their free election re-established them in power. at this very time too they are permitting their chief magistrate to send over not only soldiers of our common blood, but Scotch & foreign mercenaries to invade & deluge us in blood. these facts have given the last stab to agonizing affection, and manly spirit bids us to renounce for ever these unfeeling brethren. we must endeavor to forget our former love for them, and to hold them as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends. we might have been a free & great people together; but a communication of grandeur & of freedom it seems is below their dignity. be it so, since they will have it: the road to glory & happiness is open to us too; we will climb it in a separate state, and acquiesce in the necessity which pronounces our everlasting Adieu!
We therefore the representatives of the United States of America in General Congress assembled do, in the name & by authority of the good people of these states, reject and renounce all allegiance & subjection to the kings of Great Britain & all others who may hereafter claim by, through, or under them; we utterly dissolve & break off all political connection which may have heretofore subsisted between us & the people or parliament of Great Britain; and finally we do assert and declare these a colonies to be free and independant states, and that as free & independant states they shall hereafter have power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, & to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, & our sacred honour.
What's so interesting about this document? That is what my one magister is always asking me. There is much to be said about this beautiful document, and perhaps the best way to wrestle with its meaning is to decipher one piece at a time.
To begin, the heading of the draft is completely from that of the final.
Now we observe the first paragraph. It is all one sentence, but a long one with several clauses. I say this not to be patronizing, but we at Project 250 are not English majors, or even minors, and these documents are often challenging even for us without the help of our magistri. We sometimes therefore try to break down these sentences into their most basic parts, the clauses needed to make it a complete sentence: "When ... it becomes necessary ... to ... advance/dissolve the political bands ... and to assume ... the station to which the laws ... entitle them, a decent respect ... requires that they should declare the causes .... "
From this we get the core message of the sentence, and we can try adding the removed phrases back in, and then perhaps rewrite the sentence in a way in which it may be better understood. We can try by replacing one phrase at a time. "Human events" means "human history"—easy enough. "Political bands" would be "political ties". But why choose the verb "dissolve"? When most people try to visualize metaphorical ties, they usually picture rope or perhaps string, both of which are cut—severed, if you feel so inclined—rather than dissolved. Well, whenever one watches something dissolve, however quickly it may happen, it is the breaking-down of a given material over a certain amount of time, while cutting a rope (unless it takes some sawing) is a one-and-done action. Perhaps the delegates who agreed to adding this phrase were indicating a desire by the American colonists to gradually become independent from Britain over time, not to cut themselves off completely.
Moving on to the second paragraph, we see that narration moves from third to first-person: WE hold (or regard, or believe) that these truths are “self-evident”. But what did Mr. Jefferson, and by extension the entire Congress for having agreed with it, mean by “self-evident”? Did they mean obvious? Universally known? Something you know without being taught?
Let us consider some examples of self-evident truths:
Fire burns the same all throughout the world. Whether you light a fire in Greece or in Persia, in Washington or in Rome, the blaze is always the same.
The Pythagorean theorem:
Gravity:
A self-evident truth’s existence is not independent upon everyone believing it. Even today there are people who believe that some are created superior to others; even today some people deny gravity. Yet it still exists. And it shall always exist even when not one soul on earth believes it.
So now what exactly are these truths? Jefferson lists them as what are known to some as the 5 “That” Statements:
1. …that all men are created equal,
2. …that they are endowed by their Creator with certain, unalienable rights,
3. …that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness,
4. …that to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
5. …that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
But what exactly do each of the “That” statements mean? What do the founders mean when they say they believe all men are created equal? That we are all entitled to wealth equality? Should not we all have the same talents? Perhaps not. Both are impossible. Rather we are all equal in our Natural Rights. What exactly are Natural Rights? What distinguishes them from Political or Civil Rights? Is voting a Natural Right? I should hope not, for the entire world is not entitled to vote in American elections! Is our right to a trial by jury a Natural Right? No. So what is a Natural Right?
As Jefferson wrote, Natural Rights include, but are not limited to, Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. But how might we determine what the others might be? To answer this we must look to the Enlightenment thinkers who discussed the State of Nature, or rather, what human beings are like in a world without Governments. For the sake of understanding the Founders, we need only to discuss John Locke, though others like Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau have also speculated on this topic.
Understanding what humans are like in a state of Nature, in today’s words might be called understanding Human Nature. What are humans like without a government to control them?
Humans, like any animal, have a natural instinct to run from danger; it is within our Nature to preserve our Lives. We do not enjoy being subservient to others; we enjoy our Liberty. But then what is Liberty?
But what separates Man from other animals is our ability to use Reason. Through Reason we develop our thoughts, our opinions, our beliefs. These we communicate through speech. Should you look to the state constitutions and bills of rights from the 1770s, you shall find language very similar to the later Bill of Rights of 1791. One right you will be hardpressed to find in those bills, however, is that of free speech. The founders were largely in agreement that because speaking is something Humans can do in Nature, then it was a Natural Right and therefore it did not need to be mentioned, for its protection ought to be a given.
That is precisely what a Natural Right is: anything Mankind enjoys without a Government.
Notice that the Declaration uses the word “Creator”. It does not necessarily say God gave us these rights. That means that this statement, contrary to Sen. Tim Kaine’s views, is not “theocratic”. Our Creator could be God. Our Creator could be Allah, or Yahweh, or another being entirely, or ,aybe no god exists and our Creator is mere chance of evolution. Whichever the case, Man was created by something, and that something, God or not God, gave us our Conscience, our Reason, and our Rights. These Rights cannot be taken from us but by that Creator; they can, however, be denied to us, or violated.
Governments came of necessity when humanity began to have trouble respecting each other’s rights. Humans who were on the receiving end of being deprived of Life, Liberty, or Property came together and decided to create a system of rules led by a special person or persons who would protect them from those who violated these rights. These systems were the first Governments. Some came into power by force, but only those who came to power with the consent of the people whom they were to rule over, may say that their powers were justly derived. Marcus Aurelius, a popular and highly revered Roman Emperor, ruled over his people with great care for their rights. He could have used all the same powers which the President of the United States processes, but because he was not given his position by the People of Rome, his powers were not just.
But why is it so crucial that a ruler be given his position and powers by the people he wishes to rule over? Because we are all created equal, and we all have the same rights. If we are not equal then authority does not need anyone’s permission to govern. But in the state of Nature, an ordinary man can only acquire authority in one of two ways. He can force himself upon the masses, in which case they are entitled to fight back. Or he can persuade them until they say “Yes, please rule over us and protect us!” The people must then discuss among themselves what authority to give this man, and any others they choose to join him. These will be his or their just powers. This is how governments most likely came to being, and all persons who agree to live under this new leader have thus left the State of Nature and entered Civil Society.
There remain, however, circumstances during which, even when living in Civil Society, Man is returned to the State of Nature. Most of them would be in cases of life-threatening danger. Assume you are alone on the street and a mugger leaps out at you, gun drawn, announcing your choice between your life or your wallet. This is no time in which you can try calling the police to come to your aid. Meanwhile, in the State of Nature, you have the right to take the life of someone who is threatening your own. However, if you choose to give the mugger your wallet and he leaves, you have now returned to the State of Nature, and you can no longer kill that mugger; now you must call the police to help you recover your property.
On the other hand, there is also home burglary. The Founders and Thinkers believe that (even if the burglar is not planning to harm anyone, but only to get away with their property) if a burglar is willing to break into your home for your property, then because he clearly values your right to property over his own safety, it is not unreasonable to believe that he also disregards your right to Life. It is therefore just for you to defend yourself, your home, and most of all your family, by any means necessary. Until the burglar leaves, you both remain in the State of Nature, and you have the right to fight back. One may call it “taking the law into one’s own hands”, and for colloquial purposes, we may call it that. But the argument can be made that it is not so, for there was no law but Natural Law in the State of Nature.
Most laws we think of arose from the institution of Government and the rise of Civil Society. With them came certain rights as well. Take, for example, the aforementioned right to vote and the right to trial by jury. These are not Natural Rights, but Civil or Political Rights. Before Governments, there were no elections to vote in, nor courts in which to conduct trials. When you become a citizen under a certain government, whether by being born under it or by immigrating, you are afforded these rights. Of course, depending on the form of Government, these rights may be absent to the people. These governments are not just governments.
A just government secures the people’s Natural Rights and also grants them adequate Civil Rights with which to grant their consent. If the governed people cannot vote, they cannot give consent; if they cannot give consent, a government will make its powers unjust, even if those powers are used to protect the Governed and their rights.
But what about a government that has been given the Governed’s consent, but fails to secure the Natural Rights, or even purposefully deprives the Governed of those rights? That is addressed by Truth V, which describes what we will here call the Right of Revolution. When government fails to fulfill its purpose, the Governed are entitled to alterate if they can, or abolish it entirely if they must, and try again with something new.
All the truths rely upon the First. If Truth I is not a truth, then II, III, IV, and V are not true.