Chapter 2. “The Alienation of the Affection of the Colonies”

At whose door the onus for reigniting the crisis in 1767 belongs is and will remain an open question for historians. But it cannot be laid at the threshold of the revolutionary lawyers’ offices. Their conduct in the controversy thus far was wholly responsible and measured. Dulany wrote with judicial restraint. Otis, Dickinson, Bland, and Fitch were respectful. Only Hopkins blustered. All were careful not to defame their opponents in the colonies or the home country (not least because such defamation might lead to prosecution for seditious libel). In the main, they acknowledged their contributions to the debate by signing their essays. Reconciliation should have followed, could have followed, had not leaders across the water insisted on renewing Grenville’s legalist program.