Assertion Journal
Paul Johnson
Much of the push for independence came from the wealthy land owning Founding Fathers
because they stood to profit the most from the separation from Britain.
Paul Johnson writes in his book Revolutionary America about the motivations for the
independence of America. The Founding Fathers however are not the saints he makes them out to
be. Washington was one of the founding fathers and an ambitious man often looking to improve
himself and his standing. Washington wanted a bigger place in Britain and “made repeated efforts
to gratify, to get a regular commission in the British Army.”(Johnson p.130) He did not receive
this as stayed by Johnson. “But the system was against him. In the eyes of the House Guard, the
headquarters of the British Army in London, colonial army officers were nobodies. American
militaries were dismissed with special contempt both social and military” (Johnson p.130). Since
gain social stature from his military career was a bust Washington needed money. The
Proclamation Line,” forbade Americans to settle on ‘any lands beyond the heads or sources of any
of the rivers which fall into the Atlantic Ocean from the West or Northwest.’”(Johnson p.129) The
proclamation prevented Washington or any of the founding fathers from acquiring more land over
the boundary line. Many of the founding fathers owned slaves. Not being able to expand meant
that the Founding Fathers couldn’t acquire more land therefore no more money. When writing the
Declaration the Founding Fathers removed the part that would free the slaves. Which would mean
no more free labor.
Johnson claims that the Continental Congress was just being sneaky by removing the
passage about freeing slaves but keeping equality. Johnson suggests that was intentional so that
the matter of equality could be later rectified. Johnson points out that the men preaching freedom
had slave but also states” However the words ‘equality’ remained in the text, and the fact that it
did so was, as it were, a constitutional guarantee that, eventually, the glaring anomaly behind the
Declaration would be rectified.” (Johnson p.156). I would like to point out that as I have stated
before many of these men, the Founding Fathers, owned slaves and profited greatly from the free
labor. It would not be logical for the Founding Fathers to put in anything to be later revised seeing
as they were setting up rules and rights for ‘’their” new country. When writing a governing set of
rules one usually makes the rules as solid as possible.
Paul Johnson wrote from a very subjective point of view. Though he presented both
qualitative and quantitative evidence he did not use any of it in a compelling way. A majority of
his chapters are opinions and speculation. When introducing each of the Founding Fathers Johnson
lists adjectives building up the view to which the reader should hold these men. Johnson never
explains why the Founding Fathers were men of such stature. Johnson states that the Founding
Fathers are,’’ Enlightenment made flesh” (Johnson p.128) however his writing leaves readers
unconvinced. Johnson only belittles the British leadership without giving reason why the Founding
Fathers were so much better. Johnson lacks the evidence to support most of his claims.