Who called the First Continental Congress?

[Elendil_s_Heir]

http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mcontcongress.htm

Well done, indeed! I learned a lot. Ignorance fought.

[Pleonast]

Excellent article!

Which colonies sent representatives to the First Continental Congress? I assume the Thirteen did. What about the Maritimes in what would become Canada? Did they participate in any way? Why or why not?

[Gfactor]

@Pleonast

Excellent article!

Which colonies sent representatives to the First Continental Congress? I assume the Thirteen did. What about the Maritimes in what would become Canada? Did they participate in any way? Why or why not?

Twelve of the thirteen sent delegates:

Delegates
New Hampshire: John Sullivan, Nathaniel Folsam
Massachusetts Bay: John Adams, Samuel Adams, Thomas Cushing, Robert Treat Paine
Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, Samuel Ward
Connecticut: Eliphalet Dyer, Roger Sherman, Silas Deane
New York: Isaac Low, John Alsop, John Jay, James Duane, William Floyd, Henry Wisener, S. Bocrum
New Jersey: James Kinsey, William Livingston, Stephen Crane, Richard Smith
Pennsylvania: Joseph Gallaway, John Dickinson, Charles Humphreys, Thomas Miffin, Edward Biddle, John Morton, George Ross
Delaware: Caesar Rodney, Thomas Keane, George Readv
Maryland: Matthew Tilghman, Thomas Johnson, William Paca, Samuel Chase
Virginia: Peyton Randolph, Richard Henry Lee, George Washington, Patrick Henry, Richard Bland, Benjamin Harrison, Edmund Pendleton
North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, R. Caswell
South Carolina: Henry Middleton, Thomas Lynch, Christopher Gadsden, John Rutledge, Edward Rutledge

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/related/congress.htm

and see, First Continental Congress - Wikipedia

I believe that only the 13 were invited, but, as I pointed out in my last report, that soon changed:

As Americans contemplated armed rebellion, they too made a bid for Canadien support. In the fall of 1774, the first Continental Congress invited “the oppressed inhabitants of the province of Quebec” to send delegates to the Congress. The Americans translated this invitation into French and sent two thousand copies to Thomas Walker, a Montreal merchant and vocal opponent of the Quebec Act. In the spring of 1775, when the pamphlets arrived, Walker distributed them to Canadiens in the Montreal area. Widely read and discussed, the pamphlets may have produced some sympathy for the American cause, even as that cause became a war against Great Britain.

http://www.civilization.ca/cwm/expo/background_e.html

[Spoke]

Nice job, Gfactor.

[John_W.Kennedy]

Lower Canada (modern Quebec) was the only part of Canada that could really be said to have been settled by the time. The modern maritimes and Upper Canada (modern Ontario) were pretty much frontier territory until Loyalists settled them after the Revolution.

The Americans hoped that they could bring Lower Canada into their party, but Britain had bent over backward to earn the loyalty of the Quebecois, fully emancipating Roman Catholicism (which would not happen in England for a lifetime yet), retaining Civil Law, etc. Indeed, one of the causes of the Revolution that we don’t like to talk about was Puritan resentment to this policy. A similar fear anent the French alliance was Benedict Arnold’s stated excuse for his treason, though I don’t know of anyone who thinks he was being particularly sincere.

[Elendil_s_Heir]

And, I should have added, at the opening of the musical “1776” (which is a lot of fun, and pretty accurate historically, too) John Adams declares, “I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a disgrace - that two are called a law firm - and that three or more become a Congress.”

[dougie_monty]

And I thought it was Ehan Allen.

[blueyonder]

@John W. Kennedy

Lower Canada (modern Quebec) was the only part of Canada that could really be said to have been settled by the time. The modern maritimes and Upper Canada (modern Ontario) were pretty much frontier territory until Loyalists settled them after the Revolution.

The Americans hoped that they could bring Lower Canada into their party, but Britain had bent over backward to earn the loyalty of the Quebecois, fully emancipating Roman Catholicism (which would not happen in England for a lifetime yet), retaining Civil Law, etc. Indeed, one of the causes of the Revolution that we don’t like to talk about was Puritan resentment to this policy. A similar fear anent the French alliance was Benedict Arnold’s stated excuse for his treason, though I don’t know of anyone who thinks he was being particularly sincere.

IIRC Lower Canada at that time was actually part of Quebec, so sending an invite to Quebec would include what is now Ontario. The maritimes were actual quite well established and included Nova Scotia (which is Nova Scotia and New Brunswick), St. John’s Island (PEI) and New Foundland. However, these colonies were quite isolated from the 13 American colonies due to geography. It has to be remembered that the mountains made it very difficult to travel to the maritime colonies over land, and going up the St. Lawerence was quite a long journey. Journey over the ocean was also very slow with the old style (square) sails. In the end, these colonies were too small and too remote to bother with.

[Bryan_Ekers]

@dougie_monty

And I thought it was Ehan Allen.

Huh. I thought it was the Great Jehovah.

[foolsguinea]

OK, but who called the Constitutional Convention?

[John_W.Kennedy]

The Constitutional Convention was called by the United States in Congress Assembled – that is, the Congress under the Articles of Confederation.

The United States in Congress Assembled was called by the Second Continental Congress. (In fact, the Second Continental Congress dissolved itself one day, and the same people assembled the next day as “The United States in Congress Assembled”.)

(The allusion to the “Third Continental Congress” in the article is a mystery to me. I suppose it refers to the United States in Congress Assembled.)

[Gfactor]

@John W. Kennedy

(The allusion to the “Third Continental Congress” in the article is a mystery to me. I suppose it refers to the United States in Congress Assembled.)

The Third Continental Congress got underway almost immediately following, on December 20, 1776. This Congress prosecuted the war, and also modified and finalized the Articles of Confederation. On November 15, 1777, the Articles were proposed to the colonies. The Articles originally proposed by Dickinson and his committee were greatly changed before being passed on to the colonies. Originally, for example, the Articles called for a strong central government, a feature the Articles as ratified definitely lacked. The Articles formally changed the designation of the colonies to States.

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_arti.html

The Constitutional Convention was called by the United States in Congress Assembled – that is, the Congress under the Articles of Confederation.

Well, sort of.

Actually, it’s a little more complicated. See, http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=6666289&postcount=5

[John_W.Kennedy]

usscontitution.net seems to be the only source for this. Every other reference I can find to “Third Continental Congress” is either irrelevant (a religious convention, for instance) or a reference to some present-day proposal by a right-wing nutcase, while every other source I can find on the Second says that it ran into 1781.

[Gfactor]

@John W. Kennedy

usscontitution.net seems to be the only source for this. Every other reference I can find to “Third Continental Congress” is either irrelevant (a religious convention, for instance) or a reference to some present-day proposal by a right-wing nutcase, while every other source I can find on the Second says that it ran into 1781.

IIRC, it was in at least one of the books that I used for the report as well.

The Congress under the Articles of Confederation–the one that wrote this ( http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/const/const04.htm#1 )–is also known as the Confederation Congress, btw. *E.g., *

In September 1786 delegates from several states met at Annapolis, Maryland, to discuss ways to improve American trade. They decided instead, with the backing of the Confederation Congress, to call a national convention to discuss ways of strengthening the Union.

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_1741500823_8/United_States_History.html

The Constitutional Convention was called by the United States in Congress Assembled

In fact in the Report of Proceedings in Congress; February 21, 1787, which approved the convention (link above), it calls itself Congress, but quotes other materials calling it both the The United States in Congress Assembled and The Congress of the United States. It doesn’t refer to itself that way. Although the Articles of Confederation call it several names, “The United States, in Congress Assembled,” “The United States in Congress Assembled,” and “Congress,” at least.

[Gfactor]

@foolsguinea

OK, but who called the Constitutional Convention?

Notwithstanding all of the above, the simple answer is nobody did.

The Philadelphia Convention was supposed to amend the Articles of Confederation:

Resolved that in the opinion of Congress it is expedient that on the second Monday in May next a Convention of delegates who shall have been appointed by the several states be held at Philadelphia for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation and reporting to Congress and the several legislatures such alterations and provisions therein as shall when agreed to in Congress and confirmed by the states render the federal constitution adequate to the exigencies of Government & the preservation of the Union.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/const/const04.htm#b1

This was in response to a request from the Annapolis Convention:

Under this impression, Your Commissioners, with the most respectful deference, beg leave to suggest their unanimous conviction, that it may essentially tend to advance the interests of the union, if the States, by whom they have been respectively delegated, would themselves concur, and use their endeavours to procure the concurrence of the other States, in the appointment of Commissioners, to meet at Philadelphia on the second Monday in May next, to take into consideration the situation of the United States, to devise such further provisions as shall appear to them necessary to render the constitution of the Federal Government adequate to the exigencies of the Union; and to report such an Act for that purpose to the United States in Congress assembled, as when agreed to, by them, and afterwards confirmed by the Legislatures of every State, will effectually provide for the same.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/annapoli.htm

The Report of February 21, 1787 also quotes the Instructions to the New York delegates:

That it be recommended to the States composing the Union that a convention of representatives from the said States respectively be held at on for the purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the United States of America and reporting to the United States in Congress assembled and to the States respectively such alterations and amendments of the said Articles of Confederation as the representatives met in such convention shall judge proper and necessary to render them adequate to the preservation and support of the Union

They were sent to fix the Articles of Confederation–not write a constitution.

[Gfactor]

@John W. Kennedy

usscontitution.net seems to be the only source for this.

@Gfactor

IIRC, it was in at least one of the books that I used for the report as well.

Also Harper’s Encyclopedia of United States History from 458 A. D. to 1909: Harper's Encyclopedia of United States History from 458 A. D. to 1909 - Benson John Lossing - Google Books

and The American Founding Experience: Political Community and Republican Government: The American Founding Experience: Political Community and Republican Government - Charles S. Hyneman - Google Books

and Illustrated Handbook of Geography (1881): Illustrated Hand-book of Geography - George Franklin Cram - Google Books (this one does not fit the timeline)

The Bill of Rights: A Primary Source Investigation Into the First Ten Amendments to the Constitution: The Bill of Rights: A Primary Source Investigation Into the First Ten ... - Nancy L. Stair - Google Books

The American War of Independence: The American War of Independence - Frederick Ernest Whitton - Google Books (has it starting in May)

*Siege and Evacuation of Boston and Charlestown: With a Brief Account of Pre-revolutionary Public…: * Siege and Evacuation of Boston and Charlestown: With a Brief Account of Pre ... - William Willder Wheildon - Google Books

*Samuel Adams * (1885): Samuel Adams - James Kendall Hosmer - Google Books (has Adams leaving for the Third Continental Congress on Sept. 12)

So it’s out there. It seems like there are a few different claims to the timing, and there isn’t a huge need for the distinction all the time. Indeed, as you say, some count this part with the Second Continental Congress, or call them all the Continental Congress, depending on their needs. In this case, the most common claim is that the Third CC began when Congress reconvened in Baltimore. American Memory from the Library of Congress)#N0170-126 ; American Memory from the Library of Congress):

Professor Hosner, the author of the Samuel Adams biography cited above, was using it in that way as early as 1885. But the geography book from 1881 gives the Third CC as already going on as early as June 17th 1775 (during the Battle of Bunker Hill).

Anyway people talk about it that way sometimes. I merely said I wasn’t talking about it at all.

[dougie_monty]

@Bryan Ekers

Huh. I thought it was the Great Jehovah.

According to Paul F. Boller and John George in They Never Said it, Allen was the only one who remembered mentioning the Great Jehovah and the Continental Congress and, as Charles A. Jellison popinted out in Ethan Allen: Frontier Rebel (1969) pointed out, Allen had a commission from neither one.