|
By 1760, nearing his
twenty-fourth birthday, Henry decided to become a lawyer. Self-taught
and barely prepared, Henry persuaded the panel of distinguished Virginia
attorneys that he had the intelligence to warrant admission to the bar.
With his energy and talents, and some encouragement from his influential
family, Patrick Henry established a thriving practice in the courts of
Hanover and adjacent counties.
Patrick Henry’s political
career began in December 1763 with his rousing victory in the Parsons’
Cause, a controversy rooted in the peculiarities of colonial Virginia’s
tobacco-based economy that also became an important precursor of the
American Revolution. Clergymen of the established Anglican church and
other public officials in colonial Virginia received their annual
salaries in tobacco – 16,000 pounds per a year for a clergyman. For
decades the market price of tobacco had been about 2 cents a pound, but
severe droughts in 1759 and 1760 drove the price of tobacco much higher.
In response to this crisis, the colonial legislature passed a Two-Penny
Act, which declared that contracts payable in tobacco should be valued
according to the normal price rather than the higher “windfall” caused
by the recent drought. Many of Virginia’s Anglican clergy, who already
felt that their vestries paid them too little, protested the law.
Eventually, the parsons appealed to colonial authorities in England, who
overruled the Virginia statute and declared it void. This action aroused
a controversy over the nature of British authority within the colony.
The Parsons’ Cause came
home to Hanover County when the Reverend James Maury brought suit
against the vestry for his back pay, and won. At that point the novice
attorney Patrick Henry was asked to argue the vestry’s side when the
jury convened to determine how much Maury should be paid. In a fervent
oration that criticized the established clergy and challenged British
authority, Henry persuaded the jurors of Hanover County to grant token
damages of only one penny. Henry’s victory in the Parsons’ Cause
enhanced his legal practice and launched a political career marked by
similar moment of dramatic oratory.
Winning a seat in the
House of Burgesses from Louisa County in 1765, Henry began his career in
the lower house of the Virginia’s colonial legislature shortly after
news had reached the colony of Parliament’s passage of the Stamp Act.
Henry and entrenched leadership of the House of Burgesses agreed on the
constitutional grounds for opposing the Stamp Act, but Henry was more
outspoken and direct in his opposition to the Parliamentary taxation. By
narrow margins on May 29-30, 1765, the burgesses endorsed Henry’s Stamp
Act Resolves, which attacked Parliament’s claim of authority to tax the
colonies and seemed to advocate resistance if the imperial government
persisted in its course.
Henry’s Stamp Act
Resolves, which were published throughout the colonies and Great
Britain, established Henry’s place among the leaders of the American
Revolution. Their passage was the occasion for one of his most famous
orations, the “Caesar-Brutus” speech in which he suggested that the
British monarch risked a fate like Julius Caesar’s assassination by
Brutus, or Charles I’s displacement by Cromwell, if he permitted his
government to disregard American liberty. Despite cries of treason from
more cautious burgesses, his spirited remarks achieved their effect.
With attendance at the session thinned by the early departure of many
members, Henry introduced and carried five of an intended seven
resolutions, finding it necessary to hold back two of the stronger ones
that faced defeat. When one was later rescinded, but the newspapers
printed versions of six or all seven resolutions, quickly establishing
Henry’s reputation as an uncompromising opponent of imperial policy.
As tensions between the
colonists and the British government persisted during the next few
years, Henry remained a member of the Burgesses, occasionally
challenging the older leaders but always joining them in opposition to
British policies. His public career was balanced by the needs of a
growing family and his law practice. After scarcely a decade’s labor in
the county courts, Henry in 1769 was admitted to practice before the
General Court, the highest judicial body in the colony.
As the imperial crisis
mounted after the Boston massacre of 1770, Henry in 1773 joined with
other Virginians in the establishment of intercolonial committees of
correspondence. Both the Boston Tea Party in December and Parliament’s
subsequent enactment of the Coercive Acts and its closing of the port of
Boston in 1774, the colonies drew closer together in their resistance.
Henry attended the first
session of the Continental Congress in Philadelphia in September 1774 as
one of Virginia’s seven delegates and initially received several
important committee assignments. Early in the session he demonstrated
his powers as a speaker when he asserted that the old governments and
colonial boundaries were swept away. “The distinctions between
Virginians, Pennsylvanians, New Yorkers, and New Englanders, are no
more,” he declared. “I am not a Virginian, but an American.” Henry took
his seat in the Second Continental Congress in May 1775 but did not play
a major part in its cautious deliberations. When Congress adjourned on
August 1, Henry set out for home and never again held a continental or
national office.
For the few months
between the two sessions of Congress, Henry had been back in Virginia
organizing a volunteer militia company for Hanover County and coping
with the tragedy of Sarah Henry’s puerperal psychosis, a severe mental
illness that sometimes followed childbirth. When Sarah Henry died
sometime in early 1775, Henry resumed an active leadership role in the
Revolution, particularly at the second Virginia Convention at Richmond
in March 1775. The Virginia delegates were divided between those who
wanted only a peaceful solution to the imperial dispute and those who
also were ready to prepare for military resistance. Henry led the call
for preparedness and introduced a resolution to that effect. He supported
its passage with the legendary speech that closed with “Give me liberty
or give me death!” Henry carried the day by no more than a half dozen
votes.
Virginia’s royal
governor, the earl of Dunmore, responded promptly to the threat of armed
resistance. On April 20, l775 he dispatched a small force of British
marines to seize powder and guns stored in the Public Magazine in
Williamsburg. The raiders were discovered, but the attempt aroused
violent sentiments that threatened to explode into bloodshed. A few of
Virginia’s more cautious leaders, who had often opposed Henry in the
legislature, were able to quiet the citizens of Williamsburg and head
off a march on the capital by several volunteer companies that gathered
at Fredericksburg. Patrick Henry was not as easily turned aside. He led
his Hanover militia company to the outskirts of Williamsburg and
demanded payment to the colony for the cost of the seized powder and
arms before he finally agreed to break camp.
During Henry’s brief
absence from Virginia for the Second Continental Congress, the military
preparations that he advocated had come to fruition. The Virginia
Convention formed two provincial regiments, and by a narrow vote
appointed the inexperienced Henry as commander of the first regiment and
the senior officer of the entire force. “I think my countrymen made a
capital mistake,” said George Washington, “when they took Henry out of
the senate to place him in the field.”
Henry had little
difficulty recruiting troops from his growing body supporters, but in
the end his political opponents thwarted his military ambitions. They
dominated the Committee of Safety and dispatched the second regiment to
fight Dunmore’s forces at Great Bridge, in Norfolk County, in December
1775. Early in 1776, when the two regiments were incorporated into the
newly organized Continental army, Henry remained a colonel in command of
his regiment was placed under the command of his former subordinates. He
declined to serve, and his regiment threatened to resign in protest.
Henry, however, in little-known moment that many historians regard as
one of his finest, refused to let personal disappointment hurt the
American cause, and he persuaded his men to accept their new officers.
Patrick Henry's
short-lived military career was at an end but his political career was
just beginning. As the colonies moved toward independence, Henry was
elected to the last of Virginia’s revolutionary conventions, which met
in Williamsburg on May 6, 1776. During the next two months the
Virginians instructed their delegates at the Continental Congress to
declare independence; wrote a new constitution for the state, and
adopted the Virginia Declaration of Rights – a precursor of America’s
Bill of Rights. Without assurances of a strong union between the
colonies and foreign support, such as an alliance with France, Henry was
initially reluctant to support independence. Once reassured on these
questions, however, he participated in drafting Virginia’s resolution
calling upon Congress to declare the colonies “free and independent
states.” Henry also served on a large committee chosen to draft the
Virginia Declaration of Rights; according to Edmund Randolph, another
member of the committee, Henry drafted the fifteenth and sixteenth
articles of the document. Henry generally approved the new constitution
for the Commonwealth of Virginia, except for the insufficient
authorities granted to the governor, who was elected by the legislature
for a maximum of three successive one-year terms and denied any veto
over legislation.
After adopting Virginia’s
constitution on June 29, 1776, Henry was promptly elected to the office
he had described as a “mere phantom.” As the first elected governor of
the Commonwealth of Virginia, Patrick Henry served three terms from 6
July 6, 1776, to June 1, 1779, and he was subsequently elected for two
more terms from November 30, 1784 to November 30, 1786. Despite the
weakness of his office, Governor Henry worked closely with George
Washington to raise and equip the soldiers who won American
independence. In 1778 Governor Henry sent Virginia troops under George
Rogers Clark to hold the Old Northwest against the British and their
Indian allies.
When Henry left the
governor’s office in 1779, his political influence was strong. His
social standing was confirmed by his marriage, on October 9, 1777, to
Dorothea Dandridge, who was from an old and prominent Virginia family
and with whom he had eleven children. Settling upon a 10,000-acre
plantation in one of the newly created Southside counties that were was
named for him, he declined election to the Confederation Congress in
favor of his 1780 election of Virginia’s House of Delegates. Henry
promptly emerged as one of its most influential members, rivaled only by
Richard Henry Lee and James Madison. Shifting factions, rather than
clearly defined parties, were characteristic of the Virginia legislature
in the 1780s. Henry opposed many of James Madison’s efforts to enact
reforms had been advocated by Thomas Jefferson, and he was always wary
of fiscal policies that favored creditors over farmers and planters.
Henry supported measures to provide the national government under the
Articles of Confederation with adequate revenues, but was wary of giving
other states too much control over Virginia’s future. Henry and his
allies in the legislature passed only the occasional statute, often to
provide relief to debtors, but they were generally successful in
defeating or amending bills introduced by Madison and his allies. The
major exception was Jefferson’s Statute for Religious Freedom, which
Madison steered to passage in 1786. Although strongly committed to
religious freedom, Henry opposed Jefferson’s plan of total separation of
church and state, favoring instead the continuation of public taxation
for the support of all recognized religious groups.
Late in that same year,
Henry declined reelection to the governorship, citing reasons of health
and the need to look after his private affairs. A movement to strengthen
the central government of the new nation was gaining force, which
culminating in the Philadelphia convention of 1787. Henry remained
committed to augmenting the resources of the Confederation government
but suspicious of those who sought to replace it with a stronger central
government. Virginia’s emerging Federalists hope that he might be won
over to their viewpoint, and he was among those chosen to participate in
the Philadelphia constitutional convention.
Henry declined the honor,
citing a lack of funds. He was, however, clearly suspicious that the
supporters of a stronger national government included many New
Englanders who had favored a treaty with Spain in 1786 that, had it been
ratified, would have sacrificed southern interests in the free use of
the Mississippi River in favor of commercial advantages for northern
merchants. When George Washington sent him a copy of the new
constitution with a letter outlining its advantages in September 1787,
just after the convention had adjourned, Henry composed a cryptic reply
that made his deep reservations clear: “I have to lament that cannot
bring my Mind to accord with the proposed Constitution. The Concern I
feel on this account, is really greater than I am able to express.” By
the end the year James Madison regarded Patrick Henry as the greatest
threat to ratification by Virginia.
Henry ran as a delegate
to the state ratification convention from Prince Edward County, where he
then resided. When the convention met in Richmond on June 2, 1788, its
members were closely divided. As the foremost spokesman for the
Anti-Federalists, Henry detailed his objections to the document with
eloquent reminders of the liberties for which Virginians had fought and
confidence in the state’s autonomy. The unifying theme of all Henry’s
speeches in 1788 was the abiding fear of any powerful government that
was too centralized and too far removed from its citizens. He denounced
the constitution as “clearly a consolidated government” that would
destroy the rightful powers of the states. Its principles, he continued,
were “extremely pernicious, impolitic, and dangerous.” The Philadelphia
convention, he asserted, had proposed “a revolution as radical as that
which separated us from Great Britain.” In the end, the Federalists
outmaneuvered Henry with a strategy, which had already been successful
in other states, of accepting ratification along with a slate of
proposed amendments. This concession was enough to win over a small but
critical group of moderate Anti-Federalists. Virginia ratified the
Constitution by a vote of 89 to 79.
Convinced that individual
liberties and Virginia’s interests remained at risk unless the
Constitution was modified, Henry maintained unrelenting political
pressure toward those goals. When the General Assembly convened on the
heels of the ratifying convention, Henry commanded a strong majority of
former Anti-Federalists that blocked Madison’s aspirations for a seat in
the Senate and promoting a second convention to amend the Federal
Constitution.
Once the new government
went into operation, many Virginians who had supported the ratification
suddenly found themselves opposed to the economic policies advanced by
Alexander Hamilton. During the 1790s the commonwealth experienced a
major political realignment in which many of Henry’s former
Anti-Federalists joined forces with their former opponents to create the
new Democratic-Republican party of Jefferson and Madison.
In declining health,
Henry retired from the legislature at the end of 1790 and devoted
himself to a busy law practice, winning cases in some of his most
successful courtroom appearances. By the middle of the decade, however,
his political allegiance took a surprising turn, shaped in part by the
bloody excesses of the French Revolution, which Henry attributed to the
deism of its leaders. Henry proved receptive to overtures from Virginia
Federalists such as Washington, Henry Lee, and John Marshall who shared
his increasing dissatisfaction the Democratic-Republican opposition led
by Jefferson and Madison. Henry declined appointments as secretary of
state, attorney general, justice of the Supreme Court, and minister to
Spain, but he reentered politics in 1799 in response to controversies
over the repressive measures that Federalists in Congress had enacted
against their Democratic-Republican rivals. Henry never endorsed the
Federalist’s Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, but he was equally alarmed
by the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1799 (written anonymously by
Jefferson and Madison), which advocated state intervention against
unconstitutional actions of the federal government. Disunion, he feared,
would undo the revolution and lead to anarchy or tyranny. In the spring
of 1799 Henry supported John Marshall, a moderate Federalist who had not
voted for the Alien and Sedition Acts, for reelection to Congress. At
the same time, in response to a direct request from his old friend
George Washington, Henry ran again for a seat in the state legislature.
He won easily after delivering his last public speech at Charlotte Court
House, but he died at Red Hill on June 6, 1799, before the legislature
convened.
On June 14, 1799, the
Virginia Gazette announced the death of Patrick Henry. “As long as our
rivers flow, or mountains stand,” said the Gazette, “Virginia . . . will
say to rising generations, imitate my Henry.” Of the many Americans who
were active in the American Revolution at the state level and who
generally opposed ratification of the Federal Constitution, Patrick
Henry was one of the few who rank among the truly major figures of
American history. Unlike most of America’s political heroes, Henry never
held high national office. By his oratorical prowess and his unfailing
empathy with his constituents and their interests, Henry made the
Revolution a more widely popular movement than it might otherwise have
become. He explained the revolution to ordinary men and women in words
they understood. As an eloquent spokesman for American liberty, Henry
also expressed a distrust of centralized political authority that
remains a persistent theme in American political culture. “It is not now
easy to say what we should have done without Patrick Henry,” said Thomas
Jefferson. “He was before us all in maintaining the spirit of the
Revolution.”
Near his last will,
Patrick Henry left a small envelope sealed with wax. Inside was a single
sheet of paper on which he had copied his Resolutions against the Stamp
Act. On the back, Patrick Henry left a message that he knew could only
be read after his death. It began with a short history of his
Resolutions against the Stamp Act, which had “spread throughout America
with astonishing Quickness.” As a result, the colonies were united in
their “Resistance to British Taxation,” and won “the War which finally
separated the two Countries and gave Independence to ours.”
Whether America’s
independence “will prove a Blessing or a Curse,” Henry continued in his
message to posterity, “will depend on the Use our people make of the
Blessings which a gracious God hath bestowed on us. If they are wise,
they will be great and happy. If they are of a contrary Character, they
will be miserable. Righteousness alone can exalt them as a Nation.
Reader! whoever thou art, remember this, and in thy Sphere, practice
Virtue thyself, and encourage it in others. P. HENRY”
Suggestions for further
reading.
Thad Tate, “Patrick Henry,” in American
National Biography (New York, 1999), vol. 10: 615-619.
Mark Couvillon, Patrick Henry's Virginia: A
Guide to the Homes and Sites in the Life of an American Patriot
(Patrick Henry Memorial Foundation, 2001)
Robert Douthat Meade, Patrick Henry:
Patriot in the Making (Philadelphia and New York, 1957).
Robert Douthat Meade, Patrick Henry:
Practical Revolutionary (Philadelphia and New York, 1969).
Henry Mayer, Son of Thunder: Patrick Henry
and the American Republic (New York, 1986, 1991)
George Morgan, The True Patrick Henry
(Philadelphia, 1907, 1929).
Amy Kukla and Jon Kukla, Patrick Henry:
Voice of the Revolution (New York, 2001). A good biography for
children.
Edmund Randolph, History of Virginia
(ed., Arthur H. Shaffer (Charlottesville, 1970).
William J. Van Screven, Robert L. Scribner,
and Brent Tarter, eds., Revolutionary Virginia: The Road to
Independence (7 vols., Charlottesville, 1973-1983).
William Wirt Henry, ed., Patrick Henry:
Life, Correspondence, and Speeches (3 vols. New York, 1891).
Henry Reader McLain, ed., Official Letters
of the Governors of the State of Virginia, vol. 1, The Letters of
Patrick Henry (Richmond, 1926).
John P. Kaminski et al., eds. Documentary
History of the Ratification of the Constitution, Ratification of the
Constitution by the States, vols. 8-10, Virginia (Madison,
Wis., 1988-1993
David A. McCann’s, Patrick Henry, The
Orator (New York and Westport, Conn., 1990).
Click here for a brief biography.
|