Declaration of Independence – Indictment #3

The Declaration of Independence is often misunderstood, which I wrote about here. One of the most important, yet overlooked, sections of the document is the list of indictments against King George III. The indictments are further evidence that the Declaration was never meant to be a revolutionary statement. From the Magna Carta to the colonial constitutions, George III was indicted for violating existing laws. Jefferson listed a total of 27 indictments against the King. Throughout February, we’re going to look at one indictment a day, why it was levied, and why it is still relevant.

King George III faces indictment #3

Indictment #3 reads as follows:

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

Why was the indictment levied: The British government feared that the colonies were growing too large and powerful. As each colony grew, they chartered new districts. With those districts came additional representatives to their assemblies. The King denied the colonies the right to add assemblymen, stating that assembly was a privilege given by the King. The colonists claimed it was a right, as government is given legitimacy through consent of the governed.

The origins of this actually stem from the British province of Quebec. Parliament changed Quebec from a representative government to a council that would be run directly by the King. A similar attempt would be made by the King against representative government in Massachusetts, which lead to the indictment.

Representative government is so ingrained in the American psyche that years later when the U.S. Constitution was ratified, Article IV, Section 4 stated that “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.”

Why is this important today: 2020 was a census year. With the census, comes redistricting. This is done to keep with the tradition of a republican form of representative government. States that gain population, gain greater representation, and vice versa. California, New York, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia all lost one seat. Colorado, Florida, Montana, North Carolina and Oregon all gained one seat. Texas gained two.

Redistricting is a political consequence. If a state is bleeding population, they may need to look at root causes, such as barriers to doing business, schools, employment opportunities and crime. If a state is gaining population, that may be an indicator that they’re doing something right. After all, “foot traffic” is a real metric. Nobody moves somewhere to be worse off. This is the beauty of a federal republic. It has self-correcting mechanisms in place.

Which should concern Americans when political leaders are making serious pushes to include illegal immigrants in census data. If non-citizens, foreign students and work Visas are to be counted in the census, how is that representation under a federal republic? What’s to stop foreign dignitaries from being included? Or anyone, for that matter? Representation is based on citizenship. There is no limit to the amount of power that can be acquired if citizenship is disregarded. “Formidable to tyrants only.”

The answer is simple, like all politics, it’s about power. Just like how King George attempted to seize power from the colonies. Greater representation leads to increased federal funding for the state. You will notice that the states that are facing the largest population exoduses, California & New York, are the ones shouting for illegal census overhaul the loudest. It is a desperate attempt to keep political power and deny the right of self-determination. “Relinquish the right of representation.” And those who support this would have been indicted under the original spirit of the Declaration of Independence.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *