The British Response to the Declaration of Independence

Gerard Magliocca

Gerard N. Magliocca is the Samuel R. Rosen Professor at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law. Professor Magliocca is the author of three books and over twenty articles on constitutional law and intellectual property. He received his undergraduate degree from Stanford, his law degree from Yale, and joined the faculty after two years as an attorney at Covington and Burling and one year as a law clerk for Judge Guido Calabresi on the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Professor Magliocca has received the Best New Professor Award and the Black Cane (Most Outstanding Professor) from the student body, and in 2008 held the Fulbright-Dow Distinguished Research Chair of the Roosevelt Study Center in Middelburg, The Netherlands. He was elected to the American Law Institute (ALI) in 2013.

You may also like...

12 Responses

  1. Kent says:

    That last paragraph is excellent. Someone needs to get that speech writer on the phone…

  2. Bruce Boyden says:

    Alas, it’s been done — although I don’t know whether any of these are “great” books: Stanley Weintraub, Iron Tears: America’s Battle for Freedom, Britain’s Quagmire: 1775-1783 (2005); Christopher Hibbert, Redcoats and Rebels: The American Revolution Through British Eyes (2002); Piers Mackesy, The War for America, 1775-1783 (1993); Michael Pearson, Those Damned Rebels: The American Revolution As Seen Through British Eyes (2000); Don Cook, The Long Fuse: How England Lost the American Colonies 1760-1785 (1996).

  3. prometheefeu says:

    I do love the way the king justifies his actions using virtually the same words as the rebels. I don’t suppose we’ll ever read a speech talking about the need to preserve tyranny and abolish liberty.

  4. uyjt says:

    DFYHTFUJHFYIK

  5. Erika says:

    To prometheefeu: I believe it’s called The Communist Manifesto. :-)

  6. Garret lamkins says:

    I think this is all baloney The british also paid a way bigger tax than e colonists did so why all of this. This is useless. I thought this would oppose the constitution not agree to it. I looked at this and lost the debate at my school. I was on the britsh side. This did not hel a freakin bit.

  7. Garret lamkins says:

    Poop poop poop

  8. Garret lamkins says:

    Tfutabihtcotusanducgtfh

  9. Garret lamkins says:

    F u

  10. Rick says:

    Garret, you clearly need some work on reading comprehension. Read that last line again.

    “My Desire is to restore to them the Blessings of Law and Liberty, equally enjoyed by every BRITISH SUBJECT, which they have fatally and desperately exchanged for all the Calamities of War, and the arbitrary Tyranny of their Chiefs.”

    America is a British colony to this very day. The lie that we won the Revolutionary war needs to end today! We are British SUBJECTS. Subject=SLAVE

    • Daniel P says:

      Rick, I dissagree with your notion that the people of the States, at least the 13 original colonies are still subjects of the British crown. This was clearly clarified in the 1783 Paris Peace Treaty, whereas the King George, had relinquished his claim of sole Sovereignty over the colonists, whom were once his subjects became sovereign in their own right, as the colonies then became States. Notice in his address to Parliment, he showed the distaste for the colonies of becoming States, as States they would no longer be colonies.

  11. XYZ says:

    Rick… um what? You need to take a trip to Greystone, look it up.