15 AHMP Revolutionary Barriers & Blazes

What extraordinary steps were taken by the Continental Army to limit British navigation of the Hudson River? What is a chevaux-de-fries, a boom, and a fire raft? Is it truly possible that a chain could be stretched across the Mighty Hudson? We will learn the answers to these questions in this episode.

In the 14th edition of American History for the Modern Patriot, we learned about the Separation of Powers which is a barrier created for us by our Founders to assure our liberty. We will learn in this episode about a series of great barriers created across one of the most important waterways during the American Revolution.

Strategists for the Continental Army, with drastically limited resources in comparison to their opponent, looked for clever ways to achieve success. It was far easier for both men and supplies to travel along the rivers than on foot. They knew that British would be crippled if their war and supply ships could not freely travel along the Hudson River. Not only did the ships carry supplies, but they carried soldiers, munitions, and communications as well. Of the river, George Washington said in a letter to General Israel Putnam on December 2, 1777: “The importance of the Hudson River in the present Contest, and the necessity of defending it, are Subjects which have been so frequently and fully discussed, and are so well understood, that it is unnecessary to enlarge upon them. These Facts at once appear, when it is considered that it runs through a whole State; that it is the only Passage by which the Enemy from New York, or any Part of our Coast, can ever hope to cooperate with an Army from Canada; that the possession of it is indispensably essential to preserve the Communication between the Eastern Middle, and Southern States; and further, that upon its Security, in a great Measure, depend our child Supplies of Flour for the subsistence of such Forces as we may have occasion for, in the course of the War, either in the Easter or Northern Department, or in the Country lying high up on the West side of it.” To understand how important the river was to the British, consider that in August, 1776, General William Howe and his brother Admiral Richard Howe had established a base of command at Staten Island that included approximately 34,000 troops and 427 ships. Out manned, out gunned, and out financed, the colonists had to use strategy to their advantage wherever they could.

Although it took some time to construct the first obstruction on the Hudson, on May 25, 1775, which was only weeks after the Battle of Lexington, the following resolve was passed by the Continental Congress:

“Resolved, that a post be also taken in the highlands on each side of Hudson’s River and batteries erected in such manner as will most effectually prevent any vessels passing that may be sent to harrass the inhabitants on the borders of said river; and that experienced persons be immediately sent to examine said river in order to discover where it will be most adviseable and proper to obstruct the navigation.”

Before learning more about their attempts to block the river, let’s spend a moment learning about the installations that were built along the Hudson. They will be an important part of this story.

Fort Lee: located near the Hackensack Township in New Jersey, it is located across the river from Fort Washington.  The fort was built just above Burdett’s Landing on what is known as the Hudson Palisades.

Fort Washington: located across the river from Fort Lee, and on the highest and northern point of the island of Manhattan. The fort sat on top of a large outcrop of rock known as Manhattan schist.

Fort Montgomery: located near Peekskill, New York, Fort Montgomery was built where the Popolopen Creek empties into the Hudson near...

14 AHMP The Separation of Powers According to Montesquieu, Locke, and the Founding Fathers

Who was the philosopher known as Montesquieu? What governmental structure did he believe would be assure political liberty, and why did he believe so strongly that each branch must be firmly separated from one another? When we meld the ideas of Locke and Montesquieu together, how can we hear them in the writings of the Founding Fathers? We will explore these questions in this episode.

First, let’s learn a bit about his life history

Who was Montesquieu? First of all, his name is a mouthful to say the least! Let me see if I can stumble over it for you. His full name is Charles-Louis de Secondat, Baron de La Brede et de Montesquieu.

In the 13th edition of American History for the Modern Patriot, we learned about the life and philosophy of John Locke. You will recall that he was an empiricist, meaning the he believed that knowledge arises not from a series of deductions, but from the sensate or experiential collection of data. He talked about broad concepts such as natural law, the state of nature, property, liberty, and tyranny. Montesquieu focused on much more concrete systems such as the structure of government. Is it any surprised that Locke was trained in medicine, and Montesquieu was trained in the law?

But let’s start from the beginning of his life.  As with Locke, Montesquieu’s parents died while he was a child. However, unlike Locke, both of Montesquieu’s parents were French nobles. Although his mother carried a minor title, Montesquieu’s guardian and uncle was a Baron and left him that title, wealth, and with a Parliamentary office upon his death. In 1708, He received a law degree from the University of Bordeaux. Montesquieu watched the events of England’s Glorious Revolution from afar, and the limitations set upon the English Sovereign, as well as guarantees instituted in documents such as the English Bill of Rights and the Act of Settlement. He also connected with exiled members of the House of Stuart in France, and spent more than a year in England intermixing with members of Parliament and becoming a member of the Freemasons.

He served in the office of President a Mortier for eleven years. During that time, he supervised prisons and  sat as the trier of fact in proceedings. He also became active in the Academy of Bordeaux which was focused on science rather than the law. Although trained as an attorney, he was financially able to devote himself to writing. He began publishing in his early thirties, and published the book that is of most interest to us as he neared his 60th birthday.

The book that those interested in the American Founding most closely associate with Montesquieu is the Spirit of the Laws.

As with Locke, Montesquieu first published this work anonymously.  It is an immense work with four volumes, hundreds chapters, and discusses everything from anthropology to governmental structure. Montesquieu was nearly blind when he produced this work, and he employed several secretaries to help him read material and scribe the text.  Montesquieu worked on his masterpiece from 1731 until 1748. In it, he considered a vast number of social institutions including that of the governments of Rome, China, England and France, as well as why those government thrived or may have become corrupt. He expounded on slavery, liberty, religion, and most important for our purposes the structure of a republic

Although the book was well received in Britain, and most certainly in the American Colonies, it was banned by the Catholic Church and not well received by those in power in his own country. Why? It might have something to do with Montesquieu’s description three different types of governments: despotism, monarchies,

13 AHMP: John Locke and The Whigs

Who was John Locke? Which English Lord was Locke’s patron, and why did the events of his life impact the development of Locke’s theories? Which party in Parliament was led by Locke’s patron, and why was the name given to that party so derogatory? What are some of the ideas from Locke’s Second Treatise of Civil Government  that impacted the Founding Fathers and were echoed in documents such as the Declaration of Independence? We address those questions in this episode.

As you study the Founding period and the Founding Documents, you will hear about terms, concepts or ideas that were espoused by several philosophers of the Enlightenment period. Do your eyes glaze over when you hear someone talking about philosophy? It’s no doubt that for most people the idea of researching a particular line of reasoning can be about as interesting as watching paint dry.  In my mind, it is important to not only understand those premises  and ideas, but the context in which they were developed. Things often seem much simpler when you understand what was going on in the person’s life as those ideas were formed.

In this episode, we will study one such philosopher, John Locke, as well as the social context in which he wrote a document that was of particular interest to many of the Founding Fathers.

John Locke, who was born in 1632 and died in 1704, is amongst the most well-known philosophers of the Enlightenment.  It is because of Locke that we think about concepts such as “natural law,” “the civil society,” and “consent of the governed.”

Locke’s father was a self-trained attorney and legal clerk for several Justices of the Peace near Somerset, England. Locke’s father also served on the Parliament’s side in the fight against King Charles I during the English Civil War. You may recall from the 12th episode of American History for the Modern Patriot that King Charles I believed in the divine right of kings and thought he could use his “royal prerogative” to impose customs duties and forced loans on his subjects and imprisoned them if they refused to obey his will. Being raised in the home of a jurist, as well as the fact that his father served in the effort against King Charles, undoubtedly planed seeds inside of Locke that influenced his views of government.

Locke received his early education at the Westminster School in London and went on to undergraduate studies at Christ Church, Oxford. During his undergraduate studies, Locke had already familiarized himself in the writings of philosophers such as Descartes. You might remember Descartes from geometry class because of his Cartesian coordinate system. You might also know him for his famous statement, “I think, therefore I am.” But he is also known for his theory of rationalism. This line of thought is very consistent with mathematics and believes that deductive reasoning is a better path to the truth than any type of sensory or hands-on experience.  Locke ultimately rejected this line of thinking and believed in the importance of observation and experience. He was one of most prominent of the “British empiricists,” formulated the concept of the “Tabula Raza,” and his line of thinking led to the development of the scientific method.

After completing his own undergraduate education in 1656, Locke began to teach  undergraduate courses himself. He then received a Master’s degree in 1658. He went on to study medicine at Oxford, and learned about natural philosophers, including Robert Boyle, along the way. Locke’s best known work, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, was obviously impacted by his interest in biology, and discussions of concept of the law of nature could be found even in his earliest works.

In 1666, Locke met the man who would most influence his life and perhaps his thoughts as well.

12 AHMP: Tyrannical Englishmen on Both Sides of the Pond

What is the Separation of Powers? What are key aspects of England’s history which impacted the Founding Fathers’ views of governmental structure and what could they learn about despotic leadership from the monarchs of Britain? Which royal governors gave the Founders an up-close view of the results of oppression upon a people by a tyrannical leader?  We will answer those questions in this podcast.

The Separation of Powers is the balance between the branches which was created within the structure of our Federal Government.

But how did it come to pass that the Founding Fathers chose to create the type of governmental structure that is found in our Constitution? I believe that you have to examine the context of a situation in order to understand why a particular event occurred. In this case, the Founders only needed only to examine the history of their mother country in order to see the effects of unrestrained government gone wild.

Let’s learn about some of the egregious behavior exhibited by several of the English monarchs. It will give you a glimpse into why the first proposal for uniting the colonies, the operational pattern of the Continental Congress, and governmental structure created under the Articles of Confederation all functioned without a distinct executive branch, and why the idea of a balanced structure of governmental branches eventually became so appealing to those in the American Colonies. Of course, the colonists knew all too well about of the system of government that existed in Great Britain. That government had transformed over time from an absolute monarchy into a constitutional monarchy. An absolute monarchy is similar to a dictatorship. Although King George III ruled the British Empire, he did so within a set of parameters outlined in a variety of documents including the Magna Carta, the Petition of Right, the Bill of Rights of 1688, and the Act of Settlement of 1701.

The Magna Carta, complete with 63 clauses, was issued by King John in 1215. But the good king, whom you might already be familiar with because of his association with English folklore hero Robin Hood, did not issue those clauses willingly. He and his circle of advisors believed that his power was given to him by God and was known for his cruelty and bad temperament. After 16 years of tyrannical and despotic rule, a group of barons rose up and forced him into agreeing to terms such as the “security clause” which permitted them to go to war with the king if a subcommittee of barons believed he was not complying with the Magna Carta’s terms. Is it any surprise that after only a few contentious years later John and the barons took to their weapons? John died during the civil war that resulted from their disagreements. The French who at first sided with the barons, turned on them, took control of London and terrorized the town’s inhabitants. Of the 63 clauses in the Magna Carta, only three of those original clauses remain active in law today. One pertains to the customs and liberties of towns such as London, another focuses on the Church of England. Perhaps the one most important to our discussion is: “No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land. To no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice.”

Let’s move forward once again, to the 1600’s, when tyranny once again was in full force and effect during the rule of Charles I. He believed in the divine right of kings and thought he could use his “royal prerogative” to impose customs duties and forced loans on...