At first glance it would seem that the Sons of Liberty were Colonial patriots who helped steer the course of history and inspire the American Revolution. However, some revisionist historians have reexamined the philosophy behind the organization as well as their tactics and offer a more negative viewpoint about their motives and their schemes. The question of whether the Sons of Liberty were a good or bad organization is depend on the rational one uses to examine the history. An ends means rational would indicate they that they were overall a good group because their furthered the patriotic cause. If the motivations and tactics of the Sons of Liberty as well as their roots are examined closely then they group seems to be less noble and more self-serving. There is no quick and simple judgement that can be applied to this issue; however, a review of their history does shed light on perspectives, which are alternative from the traditional American History perspective. The Sons of Liberty began in Boston, Massachusetts in 1765 as a somewhat secret society. Tensions were already high because of the proclamation from Britain by which they attempted to control trade in the colonies in order to recoup their investment in defending territories there on the frontier. The Sugar Act of 1764 reduced the tax on imported molasses in half and had built in collection enforcement. Then Britain passed another proclamation which banned the colonists from printing their own money with which to trade domestically. Finally, largely due to the passionate devotion of Samuel Adams, men grouped together in collectives in order to lobby colonists to declare independence from England. Samuel Adams is usually known as one of the most religiously devout of the American Revolutionary agitators. Adams worked hard advertising his criticisms of England’s treatment of the colonists. He rallied others to defend their rights, and worked to organize protests against Royal policies. Many who support the Sons of Liberty point to the fact that Adams was a devoted Congregationalist. He believed he was doing what was morally right and he constantly contended that the colonist’s complaints and actions were just. As men rallied around him to pursue various liberty oriented goals, Adams affirmed that as long as they behaved virtuously, God would provide. To Adams, God was everywhere giving evidence that the colonists were on the right path and that history would prove that God wanted them to be independent from England. Accordingly, “Adams continually exhorted patriots to maintain their religious fervor and lead godly lives. Inspired by his understanding of Scripture and strong faith in God, Adams worked to achieve three principal aims: attain American independence, protect people’s constitutional liberties, and construct an upright society.” When the British began increasing taxes on colonists and began more aggressive collection of taxes, Adams organized Committees of Correspondence and assisted as one of the leaders in Boston’s Sons of Liberty. The Stamp Act was another example of the British Parliament usurping the colonial legislature. The Sons of Liberty perceived this additional tax as one more oppressive act by the British. The Sons of Liberty argued that because the colonists had no effective representation in Parliament (and they did not want to) that the tax was tyrannical and unfair. Foner points out that one of the problems with viewing the Sons of Liberty as strictly a virtuous group of patriots lies in the fact that they did not rely solely on debate. In New York hundreds took to the streets shouting for liberty at the behest of the Sons. In addition, the group confronted duly appointed administrators and forced them to resign, usually under duress and in a humiliating fashion in front of crowds as big as two thousand people. They plastered warning signs and threats, for example, “Pro Patria. The first Man that either distributes or makes use of Stampt Paper, let him take Care of his House, Person & Effects. Vox Populi; We dare.” These types of threats and the act of humiliating duly appointed commissioners make the Sons less sympathetic. By August after the Stamp Act passed, the Sons of Liberty had organized a full blown riot. The group agitated successfully and eventually the Crown was persuaded to repeal of the Stamp Act. Revolutionary heroes such as Paul Revere were active in the Sons of Liberty. For a several years after the repeal of the Stamp Act riot, Revere and others in the Sons of Liberty joined together to celebrate and commemorate the repeal. At one of these events they hanged in effigy the stamp-distributor elect. Some historians depict this type of behavior as simply an excuse to agitate, drink, and scuffle. Besides the ciolence the Sons of Liberty were in a contest with the Bristish soliders to see who could post and tear down the others announcements . for example, “A DREAM upon a subject which engages Men’s Minds very much, when they are awake, as well as when they are asleep.” By 1770, tensions had become so high that in Boston a confrontation between colonists and British soldiers resulted in bloodshed. After what the colonists called a Liberty riot, British troops became more forceful and Bostonians greatly disliked their presence. The Boston legislature declined to provide either food or housing for the soldiers. Consequently, the soldiers were haphazardly staying wherever their officers found lodging. To make matters worse, the soldiers were under paid and so they sought part-time work in Boston, which aggravated Boston workers. Clashes between Bostonians and the British soldiers became a regular part of daily life. The Sons of Liberty took aggressive action against soldiers who posted Royal notices around town. The upshot was what is usually considered a battle between patriotic Bostonians with clubs and about thirty British soldiers with bayonets. Things worsened as soldiers continued to go about town cutting down the Liberty Trees that the Sons erected to announce meetings. At one point some Bostonian workers threw snowballs at some British soldiers and they responded by firing into the crowd, killing five colonists. This event was glorified by Paul Revere especially in an engraving depicting his version of the incident. Revere was an accomplished artists and silver smith, creating beautifully wrought silver Liberty Bowls commemorating heroic actions taken by the Sons of Liberty. However, there is an alternative interpretation offered about the Sons of Liberty, Paul Revere, and even the Boston Massacre by Eric Foner. According to Foner, The Boston Massacre was “actually a disorganized brawl between residents of Boston and British soldiers.” Foner contends that Paul Revere's seemingly heroic depiction of the martyrs of the Boston Massacre was nothing more than a piece of “political propaganda.”
Charges of propaganda and threats are the main ways in which some revisionist historians attempt to undermine the credibility of the Sons of Liberty. The New York chapter of the group has been attacked for proclamations and resolutions that imply violence may be expected if their warnings are ignored. In eth case of an issue in which the Sons notified the New York citizenry that “whoever shall aid or abet, or in any manner assist” the British in enforcing an “Act of Parliament, to the payment of a duty, for the purpose of raising a revenue in America, he shall be deemed an enemy to the liberties of America.” It is this type of proclamation that some point to in order to argue that the Sons were little better than a terrorist organization. The Sons of Liberty used boycotts more often than violence. Boycotts are a legitimate way of demonstrating moral and political opinions. The Sons of Liberty were determined to enforce nonimportation, and when boycotts and peaceful protests failed to work, they resorted to violence. Violence is a common occurrence in the course of revolutions and the time and place were violent culturally. When the British sent in new customs commissioners, Boston Sons of Liberty swarmed them chanting, “Liberty, property, and no commissioners!” British commissioners were equally aggressive and often instigated violence. For example, commissioners seized John Hancock’s ship, Liberty, in June 1768. The response by the Sons of Liberty and the colonists was fast and furious. Crowds assaulted several of the commissioners and then ransacked their houses. Some commissioners fled in fear to Castle William Island, which was protected by the Royal Navy. Once at Castle William, he commissioners summoned British soldiers. This type of exchange, call it guerilla warfare, is not diabolical or immoral. This type of fighting is part and parcel of a revolution. In response to the Sons of Liberty routing of the commissioners, the British sent four regiments of soldiers into Boston. At this point the Sons of Liberty and the colonists had endured years of encroachment, hostility, and confrontation. The Sons expounded a gradually more complex philosophy supporting their struggle against the aggressive infringements on their rights and liberty by Parliament. They unleashed there most zealous supporters on the crowds who offered up a flood of discourses, sermons, and leaflets that explained why colonists had rights. The Sons also restated and reframed the many ways in which they needed to have a representative government. The philosophical groundwork for the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution was laid by the Sons of Liberty.
Bibliography
Primary SourcesAmerican Antiquarian Society. A New Collection of Verses Applied to the First of November, A.D. 1765, &c. Including a Prediction that the S---P A-T Shall Not Take Place in North America, Together with a Poetical Dream, Concerning Stamped Papers, New Haven, Connecticut, 1765.
Niles, Hezekiah. Principles and acts of the Revolution in America: or, An attempt to collect and preserve some of the speeches, orations, & proceedings, with sketches and remarks on men and things, and other fugitive or neglected pieces, belonging to the men of the revolutionary period in the United States. Baltimore, Printed and pub. for the editor, by W.O. Niles, 1822.
Revere, Paul 1770 in Eric Foner’s Give Me Liberty and Voices of Freedom. Volume 2. Columbia College Custom Edition. W.W. Norton, 2014
Van Pelt, Daniel. Leslie's History of the Greater New York. New York, U.S.A.: Arkell Pub. Co, 1898.
Secondary Sources
Dreisbach, Daniel L., Hall, Mark D., and Morrison, Jeffry H., eds. Forgotten Founders on Religion and Public Life. Notre Dame, IN, USA: University of Notre Dame Press, 2009.
Foner, Eric. Give Me Liberty and Voices of Freedom. Volume 2. Columbia College Custom Edition. W.W. Norton, 2014
Murphy, Daniel P. American Revolution: From the Boston Massacre to the Campaign at Yorktown. Avon, MA, USA: Adams Media Corporation, 2008.
