Divided We Stood, I
Frederick D. Malkinson

Delivered to
The Chicago Literary Club
March 31, 2003


This paper describes America's first and truly ruthless civil war, as the rebels battled both the Loyalists and the British armies. Severe deprivation of civil rights and astounding acts of physical violence marked the struggle for the Loyalists' cause, as the Tories actively aided the British campaign. During and after the war large numbers of Loyalists fled to Europe while others further colonized Canada and the Caribbean islands. A brief biography of Count Rumford illustrates the rare later success of individual Loyalists abroad. The still-persisting legacies of this first American civil war are also discussed.
President Harry Truman once said, "The only thing new in the world is the history that you don't know."

From the time of the American Revolution until well into the twentieth century, the historiography of that war almost totally ignored the experience of at least 20 per cent of the colonial population. While the "War Between the States" has always been considered to be a unique event in our history, the American Revolution was both a revolution and, in reality, the first, and much more vicious, American civil war. That war was not sectional, but raged throughout all of the colonies, resulting in incredible violence and in a massive deprivation of civil rights never seen before or since in the United States. Thousands upon thousands of colonists persecuted, tortured, robbed and killed each other, and at least 100,000, armed or unarmed, exerted every possible effort to defeat the colonial army and the revolutionary movement. What, then, were the setting and origins of this still little appreciated internal struggle that accompanied the epochal war with England? And, importantly, too, what were the legacies of that struggle?

The setting reveals that in 1775 2˝ million people populated the 13 colonies. Ninety per cent of the population was rural, but there were five major cities including Philadelphia which, with its 40,000 people, was larger than any in the British empire except London. These five cities, including New York, Boston, Newport and Charleston, had already achieved considerable progress in such diverse areas as fire-fighting, water supply development, road building, some outdoor lighting and even small-scale initiation of rudimentary smallpox vaccinations. Farmers, fishermen and merchants populated the North. In the South, an aristocratic planter society had arisen. Shipbuilding, iron mining, smelting, flour milling, small crafts (printing, tanning, etc.) and home industries such as weaving, spinning and production of farm implements all flourished. The colonies were largely exporters of raw materials and importers of finished goods.

Social and political leadership in the realm of local self-government was provided by a wealthy class of farmers, merchants, planters and professionals. Creditable societal achievements included scientific advances, such as Benjamin Franklin's experiments in the fields of electricity and oceanography, the founding of nine colleges and universities, early schooling producing a high literacy rate, the founding of 25 newspapers and several magazines, establishment of a post office system and several public and private libraries and the early flowering of poetry and painting.

Despite their various accomplishments, life in America was extremely hard for most inhabitants. The colonies suffered from British restrictions on trade, an adverse trade balance, shortage of hard cash and chronic indebtedness. Clashes with Indians on the frontiers were frequent and bloody, and the problems of slavery were already becoming recognized. Also there were occasional sectional quarrels and transient battles between some of the colonies. These had led Franklin to propose achieving peace and unified strength through colonial unification in alliance with the British government. Although a meeting of colonial delegates in Albany in 1754 approved a plan for unification, it failed miserably when no colonial legislature would yield its political powers, especially taxation rights, to a central government.

The Peace of Paris between France and England in 1763, with the ceding of Canada to the British, marked the beginning of problems between England and the colonies which led to the Revolutionary War 12 years later. The war ending in 1763 had left England with enormous debts and continuing high costs in administering the enlarging American colonial domains with their rapidly increasing populations. The subsequent oppressive revenue-raising acts of Parliament over the next12 years, which cannot be reviewed here but which aroused progressively more fierce colonial opposition to British rule, stemmed largely from England's grave need for cash. The subsequent battles of Lexington and Concord in 1775, the formation of the second Continental Congress in May of that year, the raising of a colonial army under Washington's command and the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, all finally led to outright war between the colonies and England.

Adherence to the rebel cause was not unanimous by any means. By 1774, the term Loyalist or Tory had arisen to label those who, though opposed to many of Parliament's anti-colonial acts, nonetheless wished to maintain strong ties with England and favored reconciliation. This division of loyalty in the general population first became overt after enactment of the Stamp Act in 1765. Ultimately the Loyalists numbered about a quarter of the non-black colonial population, or about 500,000 people, though the majority "were neither willing nor able to abandon their homes, speak out against their rebel neighbors, or take up arms to defend their point of view." About 100,000, however, actively and openly sided with the British.

Reasons for adoption of the Loyalist cause, which was basically to maintain the political status quo, were multiple and diverse. American royal officials, merchants in international trade, and wealthy planters had obvious political and economic motives. Loyalists also included some Americans educated in Britain and infused there with English customs and traditions, former British and Scottish soldiers who had seen military service in America and had settled here, and many recent British immigrants. Others simply welcomed the feeling of security and protection afforded as part of the greatest empire of the time, or believed England to be invincible in a war with the rebels. Many Anglican church leaders and adherents, pledged to allegiance to Church and king, also espoused Loyalisim. Large numbers of farmers, through apathy, physical remoteness from the political turbulence, or fear of losing land titles joined the Loyalist cause. Loyalism received further support later on from the tens of thousands of African-Americans who joined the British army when freedom was promised for doing so, and from Indians in the West who had long established trade relations with the British and who strongly opposed the relentless push of Americans westward.

In general, Loyalists' beliefs centered around a dread of social change and a fear that a truly democratic form of government would degenerate into anarchy and societal upheaval. Loyalists, too, were greatly impressed by the continuing strong growth of the colonies under British rule, both economic and, to some extent, political with their self-governing colonial legislatures. They also were great admirers of the unique English constitution, despite the fact that some British laws were applied far differently in the colonies than in England.

After passage of the Stamp Act in 1765, some of the American royal governors became the initial target of the growing, but still small, rebel or Whig population. Those in New York, Massachusetts and Connecticut were attacked verbally in print or replaced in office. A few of the early Loyalists left the country at this time, unreconciled to the strong patriot stand and mob actions being taken in a few locales against the British. Nevertheless, until the occurrence of the "Boston Tea Party" in December, 1773, few people in the general population supported the idea of complete independence from Britain. In fact, the First Continental Congress, called in 1774, contained several Loyalists, notably Joseph Galloway. Reviving the idea of the failed Albany meeting twenty years earlier, Galloway proposed, as a last gap measure, "a colonial union with internal autonomy subject to the authority of (two) Parliament(s), one colonial, one British." Amazingly, that proposal failed of adoption by just one vote.

Soon thereafter the colonies formed the Continental Association, which contained articles of agreement to neither import nor use British goods, together with a plan of enforcement. Individuals failing to support the Association were blackballed and their names printed in the local newspapers. Formation of local committees in each colony, established to oppose the British by force, were followed by a Congressional act declaring that all individuals opposed to the patriotic cause be disarmed. These acts now resulted in major declarations of outright Loyalist sympathies, although many families were divided, often resulting in long-lasting severance of family relationships.

On June 24, 1776, the Continental Congress "declared that all colonists who adhered to or fought for Great Britain were guilty of treason and should be suitably punished by the colonial legislatures." Finally it was this proclamation, followed ten days later by the Declaration of Independence, that overtly turned the Revolutionary War into a bloody and bitter civil war as well.

I cannot relate here the chain of events between the warring rebels and the British, but will concentrate on the Loyalists' wartime experiences. There is no doubt that their most significant actions by far were all directed toward aiding the British war effort. From the beginning, many thousands of Loyalists provided England with a wide variety of wartime services. "In (British) occupied areas they dug as sappers, (made) gunpowder and cartridges, (served) under a paymaster or barrack master or with civil departments of the army (commissary, ordnance, or hospitals) or joined the various companies that helped to police occupied towns.." Many of these assumed duties freed additional British soldiers for battle. Some Loyalists were allowed to commission privateers to prey on rebel ships, while others served as guides to landing parties or as British ship pilots in shallow or treacherous waters. Tories stole rebel supplies of gunpowder, salt, flour or other provisions, as well as horses for sale to the British. Sharing the same language, as well as indistinguishable dress and physical features, Loyalists passed easily back and forth through military lines. This enabled them to act as spies, encourage rebel soldiers to desert, recruit for the British army, aid British prisoners to escape, conduct message services between British-held New York and Canada, and raid the colonial mails. George Washington repeatedly complained of the "diabolical and insidious acts and schemes carried on by the Tories to raise distrust and divisions among us."

Two Loyalists, Benjamin Church and his brother-in-law, John Fleming, became historically probably the first to suggest-on this occasion to the British-that counterfeit money be used as a wartime economic weapon. This operation, along with the colonies' already excess printing of paper currency to pay wartime debts, was so successful in producing incredible inflation that by 1781, 167 dollars of Congressional money was worth only one dollar in gold or silver. It was this ruinous effect on the Continental Congress's paper currency that gave rise to the phrase, "not worth a Continental." The Loyalists were so involved in the successful production and dissemination of counterfeit money that one historian has stated, "If everything had turned on American economic strength, the British would have crushed the Revolution easily."

At one time or another, thirty to fifty thousand Loyalists enlisted in the British army. The large number of Loyalist volunteers encouraged the British to form entire Loyalist regiments with Loyalist commanding officers, some of whom were so skilled that they ultimately rose to the rank of general. Many more Loyalists joined organized militia and guerilla groups. "There is no doubt that the best Loyalist troops were the equal of any the patriots produced" and the guerilla forces were sometimes even more effective, winning several decisive victories. One Loyalist guerilla leader, colonel John Butler, with the help of some American Indian allies, ravaged the Cherry and Mohawk Valleys in New York and the Wyoming Valley in Pennsylvania, widely massacring peaceful farmers. Butler was so successful in laying waste to these areas that he was made the villain of D. W. Griffith's last epic film entitled, "America." Benedict Arnold, turned traitor, led the Loyalists to rout and murder the entire garrison at Fort Griswold in Connecticut. In the south, one Loyalist officer, Colonel David Fanning, even captured North Carolina governor Burke and his entire council.

Particularly vicious battles between Loyalists and patriots alone occurred widely throughout the colonies, sometimes resulting in the massive slaughter of hundreds of men on both sides, with even more combatants wantonly and deliberately murdered after one side or the other had actually surrendered. These losses were substantial in a war in which Washington's ertire army, by way of comparison, often comprised only 8 or 9 thousand men. During the course of the war, for example, in the colony of South Carolina alone, 103 battles were fought exclusively between only patriots and Loyalists. Captured patriots were usually imprisoned by the Loyalists or British troops, but Loyalists, captured by the patriots, were considered traitors and were often executed.

During the entire war, Loyalists were thoroughly deprived of their civil rights throughout the colonies. Mob actions often led to looting of their homes, arbitrary seizure and sale of property, or outright arson. Loyalists' names were frequently printed in local newspapers, often resulting in social ostracism, refusal of services from laborers and merchants and loss of their own clients or customers, leading in turn to loss of livelihood. Loyalists were forbidden to practice any profession. They were denied all legal assistance, prohibited from buying or selling land, and deprived of the vote, freedom of speech, resort to the press and executor rights. Upon a Loyalists' death, his property was left completely to the mercy of his fellow men. For some Loyalists these various actions led to severe mental disturbances, especially depression or suicide. "Tarring and feathering became classic Whig treatment (for) the Tories as were wanton executions without due process of law." Public floggings and maimings too, were not uncommon. A contemporary description of the range of Loyalist punishments included "chaining men together by the dozens, and driving them like herds of cattle into distant provinces, flinging them into loathsome jails, shooting them in swamps and woods, hanging them after a mock trial; and all this because they would not abjure their right sovereign and bear arms against him." "it is possible that the term 'Lynch law' derives from Charles Lynch, a (Virginian) justice of the peace renowned for his drastic cruel action against neighboring Tories." "As with many later day lynchings, government officials knew about the proceedings but did not care to stop them."

Execution of captured Loyalists was the fate met with not only by those in British army units, but also by captured Tory river pilots, counterfeiters, recruiters and spies. Even excepting these convicted of outright treasonable actions, it is clear that the number of Loyalists otherwise executed or murdered was substantial. Escape from the ubiquitous violence and atrocities was so common that, in addition to ocean routes, a series of hiding places for Tories was established leading from New York to Canada, not unlike the "underground railroad" route of later years established for escaped African-American slaves.

The severe and continuing oppression of Loyalists exacted reciprocal vengeful reactions in and around the few restricted areas of Tory concentration, especially New York and Charleston. "Legal persecution (of Whigs), mob actions (against them), imprisonment aboard horrific British prison ships and all the excesses of civil war ...." were seen in these areas as well. Fortunately for the Whigs, instances of persecution and murder were far less frequent than the myriads of those suffered by the Loyalists simply because of the few small geographical areas involved.

Voluntary exodus or outright exile of Tories from the colonies had begun before the war, had increased in 1774 and had then numbered many more thousands of refugees leaving for the British Isles when the war ended, in part because of renewed outbreaks of triumphant patriot violence. Most refugees reaching England were destitute, and the poorest received only meager governmental aid. Some ended in debtors' prison or the workhouse. England's hierarchical society with tremendous poverty provided few economic opportunities for newly arrived Americans. Britain still had massive debt problems and faced continuing enmity from powerful countries such as France and Spain. The British also had vastly overestimated Loyalist strength and numbers in America, in part at least from exaggerated Loyalist estimates, which had resulted in substantially reduced shipment of English army reinforcements from home. Consequently, the British placed part of the blame for loss of the war on the Loyalists, although "they (had done) next to nothing to organize, support, maintain and reward Loyalist military cooperation."

England did, however, recognize some responsibility for the expatriates and established a 5-man commission to examine financial claims. These were sharply restricted in number, however, since only certain specific losses (salaries, property, professional income) were allowed, provided loyalty to Britain and proof of losses could be established. Claimants were not always interviewed, moreover, nor were they permitted legal representation. Although claims were substantially reduced, "most historians agree that Britain acted generously. Over 4000 of the more than 5000 (qualified) claims (submitted) were awarded in excess of 3 million pounds, reduced from the 8 million pounds requested." Many of these pensions were continued well beyond 1790.

Although, at British insistence, the Treaty of Paris ending the Revolutionary War had promised restitution of rights and property to the Loyalists by the colonies, these provisions were widely ignored. Property was seldom restored and confiscation and persecution continued. Consequently, most Loyalists no longer regarded their exile as temporary, and very few returned, at least initially, to America. Even some who did faced physical violence, imprisonment, especially for debt, outright lynching or renewed exile. However, some patriot leaders, such as John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, urged conciliation. A few states (Connecticut, New Jersey, North Carolina) passed leniency laws and welcomed Loyalists back. By 1790 most states had followed suit, although Loyalists who had engaged in active warfare were still denied readmission to the newly named United States. Some laws directed against the Tories actually remained on a few state statute books for 35-40 years after the Treaty of Paris was signed in 1783.

Altogether, at least 80,000 to 100,000 Loyalists had fled from the colonies. Some settled in England, as I have described, and in Germany. However, by far the largest number left for the two already colonized Canadian provinces, about 30,000 to Nova Scotia and another 15,000 to 20,000 to non-French speaking Quebec. Here, paradoxically, the Loyalists produced their most notable achievements, as Canadian historian Wallace Brown describes it, laying "the foundation of modern, democratic English speaking Canada, which had previously been mainly a conquered alien territory." These Loyalist emigrés were lured by generous British offers of free transportation and shipment of property, as well as provision of various necessities for resettlement. Initially the early settlers found farming life hard, as the land supported few crops. Gradually, though, conditions improved substantially, aided further by the presence of plentiful game, timber and fish.

The first lieutenant governor of the later named Upper Canada was a former Loyalists army commander, John Simcoe, who now offered 200 acres of free land to anyone pledging allegiance to the King, thereby attracting many more former Loyalists from the United States, as well as a great number of Americans seeking improved circumstances. "By 1812 four-fifths of the 100,000 inhabitants of Upper Canada were American born.." Thereafter the Loyalists became "a stabilizing force" and "dominated the struggle for responsible government" in Canada, while seizing their "last hope of remaining British." As Wallace Brown has written, "Reviled or forgotten in the United States, the Loyalists are venerated in Canada as founding fathers."

In addition to Britain, Europe and Canada, the last major site of exodus for the Loyalists was the Caribbean islands. Most of the refugees came from the modern-day states of Florida, Alabama and Mississippi, territories gained by the British from Spain in 1763. Florida had been the main refuge for some 5,000 Loyalists and their accompanying 8,000 African-American slaves. When Britain ceded these territories back to Spain in 1783, some of the Loyalists attempted to return to the United States, but most left for the Bahamas, Jamaica, Dominica, St. Vincent and Bermuda. In the British controlled islands, refugees received some financial compensation, and land parcels were widely distributed. Some Loyalists were given important offices of governor, chief justice or customs official, especially in Bermuda and the Bahamas. Loyalist Americans soon came to dominate the populations and politics of some of the islands, especially the Bahamas. In almost all of them, moreover, they brought "spectacular commercial and agricultural growth."

Since I have presented the adverse collective experiences of the Loyalists during the Revolutionary War, it is superfluous here to add some minibiographies of individual Loyalist's sufferings. Conversely, however, there was a small number of individuals who achieved happiness and successful careers in their lands of exile, particularly as merchants, major landowners, artists or holders of political office, even in Parliament. But one expatriate Loyalist has been said to have been the most successful American abroad ever, and his varied career is of particular interest.

Benjamin Thompson was born into a poor family in Woburn, Massachusetts, on March 26, 1753. His schooling ended at age 13, but he later obtained tutoring in a variety of subjects, his main interests lying in science and technology. At age 18 he became a tutor himself and a year later was invited by Reverend Timothy Walker to become director of a school of 106 students in Concord, New Hampshire. At age 21 he married Walker's daughter, who gave birth to a daughter, Sally, 2 years later. Loyalists sympathies led Thompson to accept a commission as major in New Hampshire's royalist Fifteenth Regiment from that state's Loyalist governor, John Wentworth. In exchange, he agreed to collect rebel intelligence for the British generals, Gage and Howe. When his Loyalist activities soon aroused hostility in Concord, he fled without his family in fact, he never saw his wife again to the sanctuary of British occupied Boston. When the British evacuated that city in March, 1776, Thompson sailed for England. There he undertook a career that would bring him international fame and fortune.

Letters of recommendation from Governor Wentworth and General Howe and Thompson's charisma and keen intellect earned him a position with Lord Germain, Secretary of State for the colonies. Within four years, Thompson rose to the position of Undersecretary of State. With his continuing interest in science and encouragement from the military, Thompson undertook novel experiments to demonstrate that wet gunpowder was inferior to dry, despite a widely held curious myth to the contrary. His paper demolishing this idea, published in the Royal Society's "Transactions", earned him prompt election as a fellow of that Society. Thompson then bought a lieutenant colonel's commission and, toward the end of the war, successfully led a marauding regiment of Loyalist soldiers in America. At war's end he was promoted to colonel and pensioned off by the British with half pay for life at age 30.

Seeking further military action, Thompson headed to Vienna to help fight the Turks. En route he met the nephew of Karl Theodor, Elector of Bavaria, who persuaded him to go to Munich instead. There Karl Theodor appointed him colonel and aide-de-camp, and Britain awarded him a knighthood in exchange for gathering secret information to improve British Bavarian relations. Given an elaborate laboratory, Thompson spent the next 16 years in Bavaria where "he developed various scientific instruments, including a photometer to measure light-intensity, and a candle so consistent in the level of light it gave off.... (that it) became the international standard for measuring illumination in ' candlepower.'"

Bavaria was a backward state of the Holy Roman Empire and Thompson now complained to the Elector that soldiers robbed and tormented the peasants, and that officers were officious with underlings. With a mandate for reform and promotions to major general, Commander of the Army, and Minister of War and Interior Affairs, Thompson dismissed 800 top officers, built barracks for the soldiers, established schools for them and set some to building roads. He had other detachments undertake farming, where he added the potato as a food staple and introduced the idea of crop rotation.

Next, Thompson cleared the city of organized beggars and converted a factory into a dormitory for them with kitchens, craft shops and classrooms, both to teach adults various trades and to educate children. Later, this unique social experiment returned many of the impoverished residents to the community as self-reliant and useful citizens. Thompson went on to establish orphanages and public schools and to reform the prisons, "encouraging humane treatment and retraining of convicts." He inaugurated soup kitchens for the impoverished and underfed, a practice later adopted in many European countries.

By now Thompson was so revered by the Bavarian people for these pioneering social reforms that he was made imperial regent of the Holy Roman Empire with a peerage for which he selected the title, Count Rumford, Rumford being the previous name of Concord, New Hampshire.

Rumford now undertook the problem of more scientific cooking, since the widely used open hearth, as he said, "cook's the cook more than the food." His remedy was to enclose numerous small fires in an insulated brick or stone box and set the cooking pots on top, "thus developing the forerunner of the modern kitchen range." Shortly these ranges were then widely installed in institutions and homes throughout the continent. In an era when soldiers individually cooked all their own meals, Rumford also developed an army field kitchen, which was then widely copied by many European armies. His Rumford Roaster, "of which there are still a few in New England today", was the first convection oven for hot air roasting. Rumford also devised both the first pressure cooker and coffee drip machine. In his firm belief that all of his inventions and improvements should be freely available to all, he never sought a single patent.

In 1795, on leave in England, Rumford installed the first fireplace damper and redesigned the Benjamin Franklin fireplace to throw 50% more heat in the room, while decreasing fuel consumption and chimney smoke. In 1797 and 1798 Rumford carried out and published his studies on thermal conductivity for which he is best known, the first to link calories of heat to joules of energy.

In 1798 Rumford left Munich for good to become minister to England, a position he shortly resigned. Now enjoying a well-recognized international reputation he was actually invited back to America by the federal government to head a newly planned military academy, a most surprising gesture probably unique for any Loyalist active in the war and living abroad. Rumford decided to remain in England, however, and went on, with Sir Joseph Banks, Captain Cook's chief scientist and world renowned botanist, to raise funds and establish the Royal Institution "to apply science to improve living standards." He bought the building and, as director, supervised its interior design and construction of classrooms, library, and laboratories. He recruited chemist Humphrey Davy as one of the first lecturers, and it was Davy, whose first isolation of six of the elements later brought international renown to the Royal Institution. The Institution continues on its dynamic course even today, one of its recent directors, Lord Porter, having shared the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1967. At about the time Rumford founded the Institution, "he also established the Rumford professorship at Harvard and the Rumford Medals of both the Royal Society in Britain and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences."

In 1801 Rumford moved to France and, his wife having died in 1791, he married the widow of Antoine Lavoisier, the world famous chemist. He became only the second American, after then President Jefferson, to be elected to the National Institute of France, formerly the French Academy. He lived and worked the remainder of his life in France, inventing a colorimeter and experimenting in the field of light, now having published over 70 scientific papers. He died in 1814 and was buried in Auteuil. The inscription on his tomb reads, "A celebrated physicist, enlightened philanthropist, whose discoveries in the field of light and heat made his name illustrious and whose help to the poor will always be dear to friends of humanity." In 1798, President John Adams had called Rumford a genius. Much later, President Franklin Roosevelt, who had probably studied Rumford's pioneering social programs, grouped him with Jefferson and Franklin as, "the three greatest intellects America ever brought forth."

In this first American civil war, the Loyalists were persistent losers, while after 1865 the South gradually experienced total restoration, despite the fact that, "the road to reunion was paved with the broken dreams of African Americans." Reasons for the Loyalist failure were numerous and include their relatively small numbers and their woeful lack of organization, especially the absence of the inter-colonial linkage the patriots so notably achieved. Further, Tory numbers continually decreased during the war as up 100,000 active Loyalists fled the country. Many more stayed, but were quiet and did little to aid the Loyalist cause. Also, as British losses mounted, large numbers of Loyalist switched their allegiance to the patriot side. Lastly, in England citizen and political opposition to the war increased sharply as war costs and troop losses mounted, and some high ranking officers (generals, admirals), opposed to continuing the war, actually refused to fight on or resigned their commissions.

Finally, one might ponder the incomparably sad legacies that the vicious struggle between Whigs and Tories bequeathed to future American generations and, perhaps, in part to the modern world in general. The essentially complete deprivation of Loyalists' civil rights and, as already enumerated, the astounding variety of atrocious acts committed repeatedly by both sides have spawned a calamitous and continuing tradition of violence in this country, illustrating James Baldwin's statement that, "history is present in all that we do." "The War for Independence had proven that Americans needed protection -- not just from Kings but from themselves." Rebel legacies passed on to future American generations include fierce attitudes toward righteous patriotism (exemplified well by Stephen Decatur's, "My country right or wrong") and overwhelming commitment to "Cause" without breach, even by reasoned dissent. In conclusion, too, on the world stage, as Wallace Brown has written, "Of the long-dead (active) Loyalists themselves, it must be recorded they were a sad portent of things to come, the displaced persons' and war refugees of their time....and that, in spite of all, (to their cause) their Loyalty they kept."


1. Brown, G.I. "Count Rumford. The Extraordinary life of a Scientific Genius." Great Britain: Sutton Publishing Limited, 1999.

2. Brown, Wallace. "The Good Americans. The Loyalists in the American Revolution." New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc. 1969.

3. Dornberg, John. "Count Rumford: The most successful Yank abroad, ever." Washington, D.C.: "Smithsonian", vol. 25, number 9, pg. 102, December, 1994.

4. Foner, Eric. "Who Owns History? Rethinking the Past in a Changing World." New York: Hill and Wang, division of Farrar, Straus and Giroux. 2002.

5. Moore, Christopher. "The Loyalists. Revolution, Exile, Settlement." Toronto, Ontario: McClelland and Stewart. 1984.

6. Phillips, Kevin. "The Cousins' Wars. Religion, Politics and the Triumph of Anglo-America." New York: Basic Books. 1999.

7. Raphael, Roy. "A People's History of the American Revolution. How Common People Shared the Fight for Independence." New York: The New Press. 2001.

8. Van Tyne, Claude Halstead. "The Loyalists in the American Revolution." Gloucester, Massachusetts: Peter Smith. 1959.

9. Wood, Gordon S. "The Radicalism of the American Revolution." New York: Alfred A. Knopf. 1992.