Olive Branch Petition

[Doc7505]

Olive Branch Petition - July 5, 1775​

Olive Branch Petition

Sent to King George in an attempt to settle the dispute with Great Britain amicably.

www.battlefields.org

The Olive Branch Petition was adopted by Congress on July 5, 1775, to be sent to the King as a last attempt to prevent formal war from being declared. The Petition emphasized their loyalty to the British crown and emphasized their rights as British citizens.

​

The Congress met according to adjournment. The Petition to the King being engrossed, was compared, and signed by the several members. To the king's most excellent Majesty: Most gracious sovereign,
We, your Majesty's faithful subjects of the colonies of new Hampshire, Massachusetts bay, Rhode island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, the counties of New Castle, Kent, and Sussex, on Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina, in behalf of ourselves, and the inhabitants of these colonies, who have deputed us to represent them in general Congress, entreat your Majesty's gracious attention to this our humble petition.
The union between our Mother country and these colonies, and the energy of mild and just government, produced benefits so remarkably important, and afforded such an assurance of their permanency and increase, that the wonder and envy of other Nations were excited, while they beheld Great Britain riseing to a power the most extraordinary the world had ever known.

Commentary:
Can’t help but thinking that the signatories of this document knew it would be ignored and place their lives in jeopardy by doing so.
Of course the style and lack of brevity of the document the style of English used during the 18th and 19th Centuries.
What matters most is that they attempted to reason with the King, but it’s likely that they already knew their plea was doomed. But they approached the coming storm with straight backs - unbowed, morally at peace.
The also knew that by signing such a document placed the freedom and lives at risk.
Fortunes and families were at stake and they still signed their names. Patriots and Loyalists were as divided as we are today but they had none of the protections that came later that they won for us. And those are the protections that have softened us against the threats the other side holds up against us.
Flashback to the 21st Century, where liberals have performed the jaw dropping feat of reforming government and re-educating our children until it isn’t clear whether our nation or military would ever recover. But those who remember with pride and strength still teach their children and I have faith that Republic we formed and the military forces will recover and our children grow into a strong peoples.

 

[whitehall]

Maybe the former colonies of New Hampshire and Mass. would still rather to side with G.B. today. Usually left out of the equation is the fact that King George was clinically insane due to the inbreeding of the Royal family and was institutionalized by his own people after the U.S. became independent.

 

[Mushroom]

Maybe the former colonies of New Hampshire and Mass. would still rather to side with G.B. today. Usually left out of the equation is the fact that King George was clinically insane due to the inbreeding of the Royal family and was institutionalized by his own people after the U.S. became independent.

That would have little to nothing to do with the American Revolution.

Ultimately, the King was actually favorable of the Colonists in the Americas. A lot of the actions that directly led to the Revolt were conducted by Lord North. Refusing to overturn the Stamp Act, Currency Act and Sugar Act, then creating the Tea Act. Most in Parliament wanted to see the acts repealed, and he was behind even more acts and taxes against them.

Most do not really understand that the majority of historians place the blame on Lord North, not the King. Parliament really runs the nation, then as much as it does now. However, his mental illness was not the result in inbreeding. That might have been an issue if he was of the House of Hapsburg, but he was from the House of Hanover. And the House of Hanover never had inbreeding as any major part of their lineage.

 

[whitehall]

That would have little to nothing to do with the American Revolution.

Ultimately, the King was actually favorable of the Colonists in the Americas. A lot of the actions that directly led to the Revolt were conducted by Lord North. Refusing to overturn the Stamp Act, Currency Act and Sugar Act, then creating the Tea Act. Most in Parliament wanted to see the acts repealed, and he was behind even more acts and taxes against them.

Most do not really understand that the majority of historians place the blame on Lord North, not the King. Parliament really runs the nation, then as much as it does now. However, his mental illness was not the result in inbreeding. That might have been an issue if he was of the House of Hapsburg, but he was from the House of Hanover. And the House of Hanover never had inbreeding as any major part of their lineage.

The Brit strategy based on a clinically insane King had nothing to do with the American war of Independence? How does that work?