The Ely miner. [volume] (Ely, Minn.) 1895-1986, 1936-07-02

in the character of Committee
man." to issue processes, hear and de-
termine all matters of controversy,
according to said adopted laws, and
to preserve peace, union and har-
mony in said county; and to use
every exertion to spread the love
of country and fire of freedom
throughout America, until a more
general and organized government
be established in the Province.
1t has often been pointed out that
this declaration contains many of
the ideas and some of the very
phrases and forms of expression aft
erwards used by Jefferson in the
document which was adopted by the
Continental congress a year later.
CHOSE phrases are printed in black
face type in the quotation above.)
An explanation for that fact may
be found in the statement of John
Spencer Bassett, one of the few re-
cent historians who mentions the
Mecklenburg Declaration. In his
"Short History of the United
States" he says: "a copy of these
resolutions was sent TO England,
where it is preserved, and they were
also printed in a Charleston newspa-
per. The original was destroyed by
fire, and being rewritten from men,
DRY survived in a form resembling
the national Declaration of Independ-
ence. Many people have taken this
paper, whose date, May 20, is sup
posed to be accounted for by the
difference between new and old
chronology, for the resolutions &C.
tUaIly passed on May 81. This
'Mecklenburg Declaration of indie
pendence' is not supported by relia-
bic contemporary evidence, and is
now rejected by the best histo-
rians."
In contrast to this, however, is
this statement in Justin Windsor's
Narrative and Critical History of
America:
1t has been strenuously claimed
and denied that. at a meeting of the
people of Mecklenburg county in
North Carolina, on May 90, 1775, res
olutions were passed declaring their
independence of Great Britain. The
facts in the case appear to be these:
On the 31st of May, 1775, the people
of this county did pass resolutions
quite abreast of the public senti-
ment of that time, but not venturing
on the field of INDEPENDENCE further
than to say that these resolutions
were to remain in force till Great
Britain resigned it's pretentions.
These resolutions were well writ
ten, attracted notice, and were cop
led in the leading newspapers of
the colonies, North and South, and
can be found in various later works.
copy of the South Carolina Ga
zette containing them was sent by
Governor Wright of Georgia to Lord
Dartmouth and was found by Ban
croft in the State Paper Office,
while in the Sparks manuscript is
the record Of copy sent to the
home government by Governor Mar
tin of North Carolina with a letter
dated June 80, 1775. OF these reso-
tions there is no doubt.
In 1893 or earlier, some of the
actors in the proceeding, apparent
ly ignorant that the record of these
resolutions had been preserved in
the newspapers, endeavored to sup
ply them from memory, unconscious
ly intermin Cling some of the phrase
ology of the Declaration of July 4th
in congress, which gave them the
tone of a pronounced INDEPENDENCE
Probably through another dimness
of memory they affixed the date of
May 90, 1875, to them. These were
first printed in the Raleigh Register
on April 80, 1919. They are found
to resemble in some respects the
now known resolves of May 31st, as
well as the national Declaration of
independence. In 1929 Martin print
Caraolina," but it is not known
where his copy came from. In 1881
the state printed the text of the
1919 copy, and fortified it with rec
objections and certificates of persons
affirming that they were present
when the resolutions were passed on
the Goth.
But if there is doubt as to the
authenticity of this purported action
by the North Carolina patriots, there
is no doubt of subsequent actions
elsewhere in which the keynote was
freedom or independence" OnJune
the provincial congress of South
Carolina adopted this association"
'The actual commencement of hos
tilities against this continent by
the British troops, on the 10Th of