Robert M. Calhoon, The Loyalists in Revolutionary America (Part I)

Originally published in 1965, reprinted in 1973

A top-down history emphasizing elites: political players, merchants, lawyers, and Anglican clergy

Thesis: Loyalism was more than simple self-interest.  It was the result of many factors including a "perception" of political reality in which loyalty to the Crown made sense of their political world.

Loyalists Political Perceptions:

#1: (1760s-1770) Principled Loyalists.  Believed (generally) in virtual representation through Parliament. Parliament could legitimately tax British people.  Believed that colonists had English rights.   Privately believed Parliament was behaving foolishly, but that colonial violence was counterproductive.  Felt a "mob logic" was behind agitations.  For instance, Governor James Wright (GA) said colonists had the "strange, mistaken ideas that no power can tax or restrain them but themselves or representatives of their own choosing." (12)

#2: (1774-75) Accommodating Loyalists (aka Moderates): Believed compromise was possible.  Believed that Parliament had overstepped its bounds.  Believed the British Constitution must be flexible or reinterpreted to account for complexities of Empire.  For instance, Joseph Galloway (delegate to 1st Continental Congress) argued for a new Plan of Union with two Parliaments: an American Parliament and a London Parliament.  Said that "both countries should retreat a little and take other ground, seeing that which they are now upon is likely to prove dangerous and distressing to both." (88)

"The search for a viable alternative to the awful choice between submission (to Parliament) and Revolutionary tyranny (to the mob)" (177)

#3: (1774-77 [&beyond?]) Doctrinaire Tories: Anglican clergy and merchants whose business depended on British government.  Emphasis on social order and law.  All resistance to King & Parliament morally wrong.  "More shrill" and later arriving, this version is what most Americans remember.


Also- Neutralists: Quakers,

Loyalists torn between belief in submission to parliament and belief in the rights of Englishmen.

Many Loyalists were highly sympathetic to colonial grievances, but could not condone mob violence or military rebellion.

Some Loyalists were originally revolutionary agitators, including some attendees of the Stamp Act Congress and the First Continental Congress.


Thoughts:

Three-fold divisions to think through

Principled Loyalists
Moderate/Compromise Loyalists
Tories

Ideology (why are they Loyalists?)
Chronology (when are they Loyalists?)
Geography (where are they Loyalists?) 

SENTENCES: (I couldn't do it in 5!!!!!!)

Although anyone suspected of not being a Patriot for any reason was often labeled "Tory," Loyalism actually evolved over time through three basic stages: Principled loyalists, moderates, and Tories. Many people later called Loyalists advocated for colonial rights before the war.  In the 1760s-70s, Massachusetts's Lt. Governor Thomas Hutchinson and Georgia Governor James Wright enforced British orders in public while secretly trying to convince London officials that recent taxation policies should be abandoned.  The early loyalists agreed that Parliament had the right to tax the colonies, but did not think they were using that right wisely.  As agitation moved into outright war, other colonists desperately sought a middle way between rebellion and submission to Parliament.  These moderate Loyalists created plans in which America would remain British, but receive the political independence they sought.  Philadelphian Joseph Galloway was a member to the First Continental Congress, where he proposed the creation of a new American Parliament.  His proposal was narrowly tabled.  After the war, however, any true hope of moderation passed.  Leaders in this time became increasingly angry against the Patriots for starting the war and disrupting social and economic life.  These proud Tories, often Anglican clergymen and merchants with strong ties to British commerce, demanded absolute submission of the people to the will of the King and Parliament.  After the war, Americans used these later voices as proof that Loyalists would have made them submit to tyrannical government.  In part, this helped justify the confiscation of Loyalist's property after the war.