On the eve of America’s 250th anniversary,
a reflection on where we’ve been, what we’ve
overcome, and what’s still at stake
Story by Gary Wade
Appeared in Cityview Magazine, Vol. 42, Issue 4 (July/August 2026)
The 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence is something called a Semiquincentennial, an unfamiliar term to most and one which has even confused my spellcheck device. Regardless, that America has endured these many years is a remarkable achievement worthy of celebration. So, I have resorted to my grade school lessons, not only to refresh my memory of how this all began but to place the course of events in a historical context.
The Seven Years War, lasting from 1763 and 1770, pitted Great Britain and Prussia against France, Austria, and Russia over disputed territories in North America and other parts of the world. While the French and Indian War in America was a component part of the conflict, the scope of the greater War included mostly Europe. In this country, Great Britain forces, which included a young militia officer by the name of George Washington, fought the French and its allies, including native tribes. In acknowledgment of winning the war, Great Britain received from France all of its territorial claims to Canada and the Ohio River Valley. Spain, an ally to the French, was required to cede to Great Britain its claim to Florida. During this long struggle, both England and France naturally incurred massive debt, which historians agree laid the groundwork to the Revolutionary War in this country and later, the revolution in France.
In 1765, Great Britain passed the Stamp Act, designed primarily to generate revenues to help service its war debt. The imposition of this direct tax on the 13 American colonies fueled hostilities toward its mother country. The act required their printed materials be produced on stamped paper from London with a revenue stamp. British currency, not colonial paper money, was required for payment on all magazines, newspapers, legal documents, and even playing cards and other papers utilized in the colonies. The response was predictable: “No taxation without representation.” As tensions rose within the colonies, the various means of protest resulted in the mass resignations of the intimidated stamp distributors who were designated to collect the tax. In consequence, Parliament rescinded the tax only months after its passage. Not to be outdone, however, Parliament passed the Tea Act of 1773, which imposed heavy taxes on daily goods, including tea, on the colonies. Moreover, the act granted a tax exemption to the East India Company, essentially creating a monopoly and crippling the tea trade of colonial merchants.
When an appeal for relief to Britain’s royal governor was denied, some 50 disguised colonists, dressed as Indians, staged the Boston Tea Party. They boarded the East India ships in the harbor and dumped some 46 tons of tea (having a value of nearly $2 million in today’s dollars) into the water. In response, Parliament retaliated by the passage of the Coercive Acts of 1774 — which the colonists termed “The Intolerable Acts.” This new law (1) closed Boston Harbor to all commercial traffic until the East India Company was fully compensated; (2) revoked the 1691 Massachusetts charter, replacing their local government with complete British control; (3) authorized trials of any British authorities to “friendly jurisdictions”; and( 4) allowed royal governors of all 13 colonies to occupy all empty buildings to house the British military.
Instead of isolating the Massachusetts colony, however, the legislation galvanized the other colonies. All but Georgia chose a collection of 56 representatives to meet in the First Continental Congress in Philadelphia. Among such notables as Washington, Patrick Henry, and John Adams, Virginian Peyton Randolph was elected president. Fifty days of deliberations resulted in a reiteration of the claim of “no taxation without representation,” and a boycott of British goods, but also included a respectful appeal to King George III and his parliament to nullify the Coercive (Intolerable) Acts. Meanwhile, colonial leaders in Massachusetts had called for their local militias to train for possible conflict, acts that the First Continental Congress endorsed. In response, the British declared Massachusetts to be in a state of rebellion. Lt. Colonel Francis Smith was ordered to destroy the local militia’s military supplies, which were stored in Concord. The colonist got wind of the plan and prepared to intervene.
At sunrise on April 19, 1775, the first shots were fired. While only one British regular was injured, eight of the Massachusetts militia were killed and 10 injured. When the militia withdrew, the British split into companies to search for supplies. At the Old North Bridge in Lexington, a party of 100 British regulars ran into a gathering of some 4000 local militiamen. The hostilities that took place resulted in casualties on both sides before the British sounded a retreat. Among the colonists, 49 were killed, 39 wounded, and 5 were missing. The British reported 73 killed, 174 injured, and 53 missing. The word spread fast. By the next morning, Boston harbor, which housed the British troops, was surrounded on three sides by a militia force estimated as high as 15,000, resulting in a stalemate of sorts.
In view of these battles, on May 10, 1775, the Second Continental Congress convened. Within a month, the body formally established the Continental Army, appointing Washington as Commander-in-Chief. In July, the Congress again appealed to King George III for a peaceful resolution of the conflict. Again, no relief was forthcoming. Finally, on July 4, 1776, our forefathers placed their signatures on the Declaration of Independence. Its language sets out their list of grievances.
” The history of the present King of England of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States,” including the imposition of taxes without consent and cutting off trade. Further, the document complains of the dissolution of colonial bodies, making judges dependent on the King’s will, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries, denial of rights to trial by jury, and for the obstruction of migrations of foreigners to the colonies.
Much has happened in the 250 years since the signing of the historic Declaration of Independence. Now, having reviewed the events leading to its adoption at the Second Continental Congress in Philadelphia, my list of highs and lows since are worthy of inspection – and perhaps debate. A chronological order of some of our most recognizable occurrences appear below:
Adoption of the Articles of Confederation, our first constitution;
1781: Victory in the siege of Yorktown over General Cornwallis;
1783: Treaty of Paris, acknowledging the independence of the 13 colonies;
1789: Adoption of the United States Constitution and election of President Washington;
1791: Ratification of the Bill of Rights;
1803: The Louisiana Purchase advocated by President Jefferson;
1812-14: War of 1812, including the 1814 burning of the White House, and Treaty of Ghent;
1828: The election of Democrat Jackson as the 7th president;
1838: The Trail of Tears pursuant to the Removal Act:
1846-48: Mexican American War;
1860: The election of Republican Lincoln as the 16th president;
1863: The Emancipation Proclamation;
1861 – 1865, the Civil War, A. Johnson succeeds Lincoln as 17th president;
1865-77, the Reconstruction Era;
1868 and 1872: Grant elected and re-elected as 18th president;
1872: Yellowstone becomes the world’s first national park;
1898: Spanish-American War;
1901: T. Roosevelt succeeds McKinley as the 26th president;
“Historically, when this country has faced various turning points, it has always—somehow and some way—prevailed in the interest of solidarity.”
1912: Wilson elected 28th president;
1914-18: World War I;
1929: Wall Street Crash;
1929-39: the Great Depression;
1932: F.D. Roosevelt elected as the 32nd president;
1941-45: World War II ending with two atomic bombs detonated in Japan;
1950-53: Korean War and the McCarthy Red Scare era;
1955-1975: Vietnam War;
1961: Alan Shepard becomes the 1st American in space;
1963: L. Johnson succeeds Kennedy as the 36th president;
1969: Armstrong becomes the first to walk on the moon;
1974: Nixon resigns as the 37th president;
1980: Reagan elected as the 40th president;
1989: The Berlin Wall, built in 1961, comes down;
1990: The Gulf War against Iraq:
2000: G. W. Bush declared 43rd president in contested election with VP Gore;
2001: 9-11 al-Qaeda attacks;
2008: Obama becomes first African American elected as 44th president;
2011: Osama bin Laden, leader of al-Qaeda, killed by US forces in Pakistan;
2016 and 2024: Trump elected as 45th and 47th president;
2021: Rioters attack the US Capitol, attempting to overturn 2020 presidential election.
In the last few years, many Americans — Republicans, Democrats, and independents – have increasingly voiced concerns about the future direction of our country. The hot button issues so prevalent today have served to create divisions, acrimony and violence, but these are not unprecedented.
Jon Meacham, a friend and colleague of former governor Bill Haslam, authored a book titled The Soul of America: The Battle for our Better Angels. The term “better angels” is, of course, a reference to a sentence in the inaugural speech of Abraham Lincoln in 1861, consistent with the theme that, historically, when this country has faced various turning points, it has always – someway, somehow – prevailed in the interest of solidarity. Slavery and the Civil War, Reconstruction, the fight for women’s rights, the immigration backlash, civil rights, and other issues stemming from fear and division, have always been overcome by our collective better selves – ultimately leading to progress and the advancement of liberty.
As we celebrate these 250 years of independence from foreign rule and in acknowledgment of Meachem’s optimism, there have always been doubts about the viability of a “republic,” a form of government in which the people have the supreme power through the representatives they elect. In 1787, just before the adoption of our US Constitution, an 81-year-old Benjamin Franklin was asked what kind of government – “a monarchy or oligarchy or mob rule” — the Continental Congress had proposed: “A republic,” he answered, “if you can keep it.” Just as in those days, that is the continuing challenge to our form of governance. In his final address to this body, he observed, “When you assemble a number of men and women [in order to] have the advantage of their joint wisdom, you inevitably assemble all their prejudices, their passions, their errors of opinion, their local interests, and their selfish views.”
More recently, Winston Churchill weighed in on the subject of a government of the people, by the people, and for the people: “A democracy is the worst form of government,” he deadpanned, “except for all the others.”
Fearful that I have left out other critical events, highs or lows, I invite readers to email garyrwade1@gmail.com.
Comments are closed.