A Revolution to Conserve

Obviously from the title of his article, Clinton Rossiter proposes that the goal of the American Revolution was to conserve or preserve what the colonists had, rather than to bring sweeping change. He points out that the American colonists, due to their heritage and their experience, enjoyed a high level of democratic development including political institutions with direct representation, religious tolerance, and economic and social mobility. These gains, enjoyed during a long period of salutary neglect, were threatened by new British policies enacted following the French and Indian War. The revolution began as a protest by loyal British subjects seeking restoration of their British rights, but the colonists eventually realized that their rights could only be preserved (conserved) by separating from Britain.

While Rossiter recognizes regional differences within the colonies, he believes a high degree of consensus about democracy and rights bound them together. Four features of colonial experience contributed to this consensus and hastened the independence movement including a common British heritage, the vast distance between the colonies and Britain, the colonial frontier experience, and the conflict between Britain and the colonists over their status in the Empire.

British heritage, itself, was an important factor in the democratic development of the colonies. Britain began its experiment with democracy all the way back in 1215 with the Magna Carta. Over time, England developed a representative parliament, jury trials, and guaranteed individual rights and liberties. At the time of the revolution, approximately 70% of the colonial population was English and believed they held these same rights.

The vast distance between Britain and the North American colonies added to a sense of independence in two ways. First, by necessity the colonists developed self-government and became self-reliant. Left on their own with little initial support from England, they passed their own laws, taxed themselves, provided their own defense and developed their own social and political institutions. Even when colonial laws were disallowed by Parliament, frequent disruption of trans-Atlantic mail and delays in communication meant the colonies followed their own practices anyway. Non-enforcement of Navigation Acts and trade restrictions led to widespread disregard for British authority. Added to the problems of distance, the frontier experience of the colonists also contributed to their growing sense of independence. The old European attitudes of class and nobility were not readily transferred to the colonies. On the frontier, ability, rather than nobility, was rewarded with economic success and social status. The availability of land not only had a decentralizing and democratizing influence as the colonies expanded further west, but led to better labor conditions and wages in the cities as the labor force was constantly being drained by the lure of western land. Again in a frontier, values of self-reliance, equality, and voluntary cooperation were reinforced.

While the colonists viewed themselves as British subjects with British rights and as equal partners within a benevolent empire, the British viewed the colonies as dependent on and subordinate to England. This conflict between Britain and her colonies reinforced the shared views of the colonists that they were being treated unfairly and that their rights were being violated.

Rossiter points out that most of the colonials came from the middle and lower classes of Europe looking for improved economic opportunity, social status and individual freedom. While 65-70% were English, the other 30-35% were a diverse group of Scots, Scotch-Irish, Germans, Irish, Dutch, & Swedes who added to the democratizing influences socially, politically and economically, but bore less loyalty to the crown. Most were protestant which added strength to the dissenting, individualistic character of colonial religion.

Rossiter concludes that the colonial success in gaining independence and creating a new, stable democracy, was due to the fact that they “went to war for liberty knowing ... what liberty was.” They therefore fought to “conserve” the rights and liberties they had long enjoyed rather than to create some new, untried system of government.

“A Revolution to Conserve” by Clinton Rossiter

1. Was the conflict conservative (to keep what they had) or revolutionary (to achieve major changes)?

2. Did the conflict with England grow from consensus among the colonists (if so, about what) or from internal conflicts among the colonists (if so, over what)?

3. According to Rossiter, what were the colonists trying to conserve or preserve by separating from Britain?

4. Explain how each of the following factors contributed to a growing consensus about democracy, rights and independence:

A. English heritage

B. British v. Colonial views of colonists’ status within the Empire

C. Remoteness of colonies

D. Frontier experience

5. What was the ethnic and socio-economic background of the colonial “Patriots?” Explain the connection