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.
Indictment #12 reads as follows:
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.
Why was the indictment levied: In 1774, Lieutenant General Thomas Gage, who was commander-in-chief of the British forces in America, was appointed Governor of Massachusetts (you will notice that many of the grievances are the result of events in Massachusetts). Gage was the first military governor of the colony. All previous governors were civilians.
Gage implemented the Boston Port Bill, which barricaded the Port of Boston from commerce. This is one of the “Intolerable Acts” that came as punishment for the Boston Tea Party. To help implement these measures, he used regiments of British troops, who were eventually reinforced by troops from Halifax, Quebec and even Ireland. The colonists were subject to a military governor, in charge of a “military independent of and superior to the civil power.”
This was all done despite the fact that the colonies were in a time of peace.
Why is this important today: We touched on the ramifications of an unrepresentative military in the previous indictment. To place this in line with this indictment specifically, what about a military that acts independent of American interests altogether?
President Woodrow Wilson failed to get the United States into the League of Nations, but a renewed push to form a global governing coalition occurred after World War II. The United States joined the United Nations to prevent the spread of communism (and that’s a VERY simplified version of events). When North Korea invaded South Korea in 1950, President Truman sent American troops to Korea to “uphold the principles of the United Nations.”
There was no congressional declaration of war. This was the first time in American history that troops were committed without one. Nowhere in the Constitution does it state that a foreign government (which is what the United Nations is) can declare war on behalf of Americans.
This is not identical to what Jefferson indicted George III for, but it’s closer than it may appear on first glance. The indictment that came under the Declaration occurred due to the King using the colonist’s own military to spite them. The Korean War was not used to spite Americans like George III’s military occupancy did. But it did come with economic takeover via price, wage and production controls, and higher taxes. All things that negatively impacted American citizens, without any representative say.
History is littered with examples of war/military being used an as an excuse for politicians to do whatever they want. So how convenient is it that we never constitutionally declared another war after World War II? Independent of and superior to the civil power, indeed.