Everyone knows the Declaration of Independence. It’s the big one. The rockstar of American history. But most people totally skip over the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Arms, which hit the streets a full year earlier in July 1775. Honestly, if you want to understand why a bunch of British subjects suddenly decided to shoot at their own king, you have to look at this document. It’s the messy, angry, "we’ve had enough" letter that paved the way for the 1776 breakup.
It wasn't a call for independence. Not yet.
The Continental Congress was in a weird spot. Blood had already been spilled at Lexington and Concord. The Battle of Bunker Hill had just happened. But the delegates weren't ready to quit the British Empire. They were basically trying to say, "Look, we’re arming ourselves, but we don't want to leave. We just want you to stop taxing us and sending troops into our homes." It's a document of transition. A pivot point. It captures a moment where the colonists were standing on the edge of a cliff, looking down, and still hoping they wouldn't have to jump.
Who Actually Wrote This Thing?
History is often a game of "too many cooks in the kitchen." This document is a perfect example. Initially, the task fell to a committee that included big names like Benjamin Franklin and John Adams, but the first draft by John Rutledge was a bit of a dud. It lacked the fire. It didn't have that "punch" needed to justify a literal war to the world.
Enter Thomas Jefferson and John Dickinson.
Jefferson, fresh from Virginia, wrote a draft that was—shocker—pretty aggressive. It was classic Jefferson: sweeping, bold, and maybe a little too spicy for some of the more conservative delegates. Dickinson, a lawyer from Pennsylvania who really, really wanted to avoid a total split with England, thought Jefferson’s tone was too harsh. So, they compromised. Dickinson ended up doing much of the final polishing.
You can actually see the tension in the text. One paragraph sounds like a legal brief written by a cautious attorney, and the next sounds like a revolutionary manifesto. It’s this weird hybrid. It reflects the exact state of the American mind in 1775: half-terrified of treason, half-ready to burn it all down.
👉 See also: What Really Happened With the Women's Orchestra of Auschwitz
What the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Arms Actually Said
The document doesn't mince words about the British Parliament. It accuses them of "an inordinate passion for power." It lays out a laundry list of grievances that feel strangely modern if you think about them in terms of government overreach. They weren't just mad about tea. They were mad about the suspension of trial by jury. They were mad about the "Quartering Act" which forced them to house soldiers. They were mad about the fact that they had no say in the laws governing their lives.
But here is the kicker: they explicitly stated they weren't seeking independence.
"Lest this declaration should disquiet the minds of our friends and fellow-subjects in any part of the empire, we assure them that we mean not to dissolve that union which has so long and so happily subsided between us."
That is a wild thing to say while you’re literally raising an army. It’s the ultimate "it’s not me, it’s you" argument. They were saying they were taking up arms strictly for self-defense. They claimed they were defending the "old" British constitution against a "new" and corrupt Parliament. It was a conservative argument used to justify a radical action.
The "Slavery" Paradox
We have to talk about the elephant in the room. In the text, the authors complain that the British government is trying to reduce the colonies to a state of "slavery." This came from men like Jefferson, who literally owned hundreds of enslaved people. It’s a massive, glaring contradiction that modern historians like Annette Gordon-Reed and Alan Taylor have dissected for years. When the colonists used the word "slavery," they meant political subjugation—the loss of their "rights as Englishmen." They weren't talking about the actual, chattel slavery happening on their own doorsteps. It's a nuance that makes the document uncomfortable to read today, but it’s crucial for understanding the 18th-century mindset. They saw themselves as the victims of tyranny, even while they were practicing it.
Why This Document Failed (And Succeeded)
If the goal was to get King George III to chill out, the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Arms was a spectacular failure.
✨ Don't miss: How Much Did Trump Add to the National Debt Explained (Simply)
When the news reached London, along with the "Olive Branch Petition" (a much more submissive letter sent around the same time), the King didn't even bother to read the petition. Instead, he issued the Proclamation of Rebellion. He basically said, "Fine, if you want to fight, let’s fight." By trying to explain themselves, the colonists actually convinced the King that they were already in a state of "open and avowed rebellion."
But in terms of PR? It was a masterstroke.
It gave the colonial militias a reason to keep fighting. It gave the various colonies—which usually hated each other and couldn't agree on what to have for lunch—a common set of talking points. It was the first time the United Colonies (as they called themselves in the text) spoke with a unified, defiant voice. It was the "soft launch" of the United States.
The Differences Between 1775 and 1776
People often get these two declarations confused. Here’s a quick way to keep them straight:
The 1775 declaration was about Resistance. It was a legal and moral justification for picking up guns while still claiming to be British. It was an explanation of why we are fighting.
The 1776 declaration was about Separation. It was the formal divorce decree. It was an explanation of why we are a new country.
🔗 Read more: The Galveston Hurricane 1900 Orphanage Story Is More Tragic Than You Realized
Without the 1775 version, the 1776 version would have seemed way too abrupt. The 1775 document did the heavy lifting of convincing the public that the British government was no longer "legitimate" in the colonies. It moved the needle. It turned farmers into soldiers.
What Most People Get Wrong About the History
There’s this myth that the Revolution was a sudden explosion of patriotism. It wasn't. It was a slow burn. Honestly, a lot of people in the colonies were terrified of what this document represented. If you were a merchant in New York or a farmer in the Carolinas, seeing the Continental Congress pass the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Arms was scary. It meant war was actually happening.
Also, we tend to think of the Founders as this monolithic group of geniuses who all agreed on everything. Nope. They were arguing constantly. John Dickinson was practically in tears trying to soften the language of this declaration because he knew that once it was published, there was likely no going back. He was right.
The document also proves that the Revolution wasn't originally about democracy in the way we think of it today. It was about "English liberties." They wanted the rights they thought they already had. They weren't trying to invent a new world yet; they were trying to save the one they knew. The "new world" part came later, almost by accident, when they realized the old one was gone for good.
Actionable Insights: How to Read the Declaration Today
If you actually want to understand American history—or even how political rhetoric works today—you should go back and read the full text of the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Arms. Don't just read the Wikipedia summary. Read the actual words.
- Look for the "But": Notice how many times they say "We love the King, BUT..." It’s a masterclass in "hedging" a political argument.
- Identify the "Us vs. Them": See how they frame the British Parliament as a foreign entity, even though they were technically part of the same country. This is a tactic used in every political conflict since the dawn of time.
- Analyze the Tone Shift: You can literally feel the parts where Jefferson’s "fire" meets Dickinson’s "caution." It’s like a song written by two people who are in different genres.
- Study the Grievances: Compare the list of complaints in this document to the ones in the Declaration of Independence. You’ll see that by 1776, they had stopped complaining about specific laws and started complaining about the King himself.
The Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Arms reminds us that big changes rarely happen overnight. They happen in stages. They happen through compromise, through failed letters, and through moments of profound uncertainty. It’s a snapshot of a country in the middle of a nervous breakdown, trying to decide who it wants to be.
To truly grasp the American story, start by visiting the National Archives or the Library of Congress online databases to view the original digitized drafts. Comparing Jefferson’s raw, unedited prose to the final version passed by Congress reveals the true, messy heart of the American Revolution.