Thomas Paine Slaps Congress With His Résumé

Even after Lexington, Concord, and Bunker’s Hill, and the closing of the port of Boston — even after the creation of a Continental Army and the appointment of Washington as its commander — most colonists in late 1775 still hoped for reconciliation with England.  Then, seemingly out of nowhere, Thomas Paine’s pamphlet hit the streets.  Published anonymously on January 10, 1776 for the bargain price of two shillings, Common Sense set the country ablaze with talk about independence.  It “was read by cobblers in their shops, bakers by their ovens, teachers in their schools, and by officers in the army to their standing ranks.”

Common Sense became the best-selling pamphlet ever written in the English language. Though several publishers profited handsomely from its sale, Paine re-directed his earnings to the American cause, to purchase mittens for soldiers in Quebec.  Three years after its publication, Paine reflected that “the importance of [Common Sense] was such that if it had not appeared, and at the exact time it did, the Congress would not now be sitting where they are [representing independent states].”

Common Sense had many detractors, including John Adams, the leading champion for independence in Congress.  Though Adams liked the part favoring independence, he referred to Paine as a “Star of Disaster” for his Old Testament arguments against monarchy and his recommendation for a unicameral legislature.

The distinguished Harvard lawyer Adams had little in common with Paine, who had scant formal education and led an obscure existence in England before arriving in Philadelphia in late 1774 at age 37.  Though Adams was a prolific writer, his literary style was too bookish for mass consumption.  Paine wrote so that people could understand him.

If Common Sense was needed to radicalize Americans to the cause of independence, what might have happened if Paine had devoted his time to his bridge-building passion, say, instead of writing the pamphlet?

Desperate for popular support, would the independence faction in Congress try to recruit a writer to sell their message to the people?

Perhaps.  And perhaps Paine might have sent his résumé to them.  And what could Congress infer from Paine’s résumé about his potential as a revolutionary pamphleteer?  Nothing.  But they would try.  Here’s what might have happened:

(Fictional) Proceedings of the Second Continental Congress, 1775.

Charles Thomson, Sec.

Sunday October 15, 1775.

After brief debate between Mr. John Dickinson and Mr. John Adams, Congress agreed to hire a pamphleteer who would argue the cause for independence.

Mr. Dickinson wanted a comparable publication presenting the case for reconciliation, but Mr. Adams pointed out that many American newspapers carried commentaries outlining the British side.

Therefore it was Resolved, that a committee be appointed to hire, for compensation of five pounds, an author of known merit to write a pamphlet presenting the case for separation from England.  The pamphlet shall be written with such clarity and force that persons from all stations in life will comprehend its message.

Résumés should be couriered with all possible dispatch to John Adams, Committee for Independence, Continental Congress, State House, Philadelphia.

Mr. Adams said the ideal candidate will possess most, if not all, of the following qualifications:

1. He will belong to a family of distinction, whose surname will be synonymous with leadership and will strike confidence and respect in every soul.

2. His life will have been a trail of triumph in matters of import, well-known to all.

3. He will have been schooled at a leading America

Read More

Article from LewRockwell

Lew Rockwell

LewRockwell.com is a libertarian website that publishes articles, essays, and blog posts advocating for minimal government, free markets, and individual liberty. The site was founded by Lew Rockwell, an American libertarian political commentator, activist, and former congressional staffer. The website often features content that is critical of mainstream politics, state intervention, and foreign policy, among other topics. It is a platform frequently used to disseminate Austrian economics, a school of economic thought that is popular among some libertarians.