I. The Background of a Revolutionary

It is said that the truth lies in the eye of the beholder as well as that history is written by the victor. In the case of the American Revolution, Patrick Henry was the victor as well as the beholder. His faith in “natural law” and “natural rights” of man provided him with his truths while also allowing him to win over public opinion in matters of politics and philosophy. Patrick Henry's unparalleled skill as an orator and conviction regarding freedom lead to a lethal combination that paved the way for a social revolution and the termination of rule of Great Britain over the colonies. He also played a vital role before, during, and after the revolution concerning the creation of a form of government that was to be a Democracy to replace a Monarchy.

Patrick Henry was born on May 29th, 1736 in Hanover County, Virginia. His parents were not of the aristocracy in America, but they were well educated in the matters of Religion and the Classics and they shared their knowledge with their children. It is important to understand the education of young Patrick Henry because many who are influenced by the writings and opinions of Thomas Jefferson assume that Henry’s education was lacking. Thomas Jefferson assumed that Patrick Henry was not well educated portraying “him as a child of nature, one whose knowledge and insight came not from books but from intuition.” On the contrary, Henry read many books and understood them well enough to apply them to a new forming political arena. 

Patrick was well read in the Classics by his Father, John Henry, throughout his early life, while simultaneously being taught of faith and piety by his mother. John Henry was a well respected man in Hanover and was well educated back in England. John Henry not only cultured Patrick from age ten to fifteen, but he was also paid to teach other young boys in the community where he presided. Patrick learned Latin, Greek, math, ancient and modern history not only by his father, but from his uncle, the Reverend Patrick Henry. At the early age of fifteen, “he could read Virgil and Livy in the original.” Rev. Patrick Henry not only contributed to the formal education of the young Patrick, but also pressed upon him a sense of honor and obligation “to do my duty in that state of life unto which it shall please God to call me.”

 Patrick’s studies were intensive, but it was common of the era for young boys to be educated in this manner. However, his studies of religion were quite vast for a young boy in his day and this is due to the plethora of religions in which he was educated. His father was a member of the Anglican Church and an Episcopalian; his mother was a Presbyterian and quizzed Patrick about the sermons she made him attend so as to ensure his understanding of the catechism. While on these religious visits with his mother, Patrick was introduced to the Rev. Samuel Davies whose sermons were “an exalted model of oratory worthy of imitation in his later political discourses.” Due to the various religions in which Patrick’s family was involved it is understandable why Patrick was “a recognized friend of all Christian denominations and a champion of religious toleration. “ Patrick gained an uncompromising faith in God and applied his religious convictions to his career as well as his life.

II. The Development of a Revolutionary

The career of Patrick Henry, like that of many successful people, was varied and unsuccessful early on. Patrick attempted to run his own business, a general store twice in his younger days, but failed both times. It was after these failures in business that Patrick decided to pursue a profession in Law. Having failed in business, Patrick succeeded well beyond expectations in the legal profession; in fact, he excelled as a lawyer despite the lack of traditional education and training as a lawyer. Patrick Henry could not afford to be educated in the law in England, nor did he have the time to work as an apprentice of an already established lawyer. Thus, he decided to educate himself and completed the required readings for a legal education “which is said to require the lucubration of twenty years, Mr. Henry devoted not more than six weeks.” Henry finished his study of the law in a minuscule amount of time by “reading the laws of Virginia and Coke upon Littleton [which] was not too unusual among law students in colonial Virginia.”

After his legal studies and preparation, Patrick Henry was required to pass the examination administered by prominent lawyers, one of which was John Randolph. Randolph was a member of the Virginia community and was of substantial wealth and influence. He also served as Virginia’s attorney general. Randolph thought very little of Patrick Henry and only agreed to examine him after he found out that he had already passed two examiners. During the examination conducted by Randolph, Patrick surpassed Randolph’s expectations. Randolph is quoted as saying of Patrick “if your industry be only half equal to your genius, I augur that you will do well, and become an ornament and an honour to your profession.” John Randolph was so impressed with Patrick Henry’s understanding of the law that he promised that he would never again judge someone based on appearances or assumptions as he did with Patrick. After Patrick Henry became a licensed lawyer and proved Randolph’s prediction right by winning many cases and establishing a reputation befitting of a great leader. It was in this profession that Henry was able to excel to the point where he would begin a revolution of inspiration which commenced with the case of the Parson’s Cause.

The Parson’s Cause was a legal case that took place in Hanover County, Virginia. It involved a clergymen of the Anglican Church and the County vestryman. The vestryman, Thomas Johnson, was being sued by the local clergymen, represented by Reverend Maury. Thomas Johnson was responsible for paying the local clergyman’s annual salary in tobacco which was 16000 pounds of tobacco per year. The tobacco crop was used as currency in payment of a salary. Due to the circumstance of a poor harvest in 1758, the price of tobacco rose from two to six pennies per pound. In order to prevent the vestrymen from becoming bankrupt, the Virginia legislature passed the Two Penny Act, which stated that the Anglican clergy could be paid a fixed rate of two pennies per pound of tobacco, a number far below the going rate at the time. This Act caused the clergymen to receive only a third of their salaries even though the drought affecting the tobacco crop had inflated the clergy’s salaries. The Two Penny Act was eventually vetoed by King George III of Great Britain. Consequently, Reverend Maury sued Thomas Johnson for unpaid wages effectively taking the side of the British Empire.

Patrick Henry had been practicing law for over three years and his reputation preceded him which is probably why he was hired to represent Johnson. Henry could not defend the client of the accusations brought against him because the jury had been chosen only to address the question remaining as to how much should be paid to Reverend Maury. Henry argued in favor of the Two Penny Act claiming “that the King had no authority to annul the law in question, and implied that by doing so he was a tyrant.” Henry furthered his argument by declaring that the Clergy, upon the Court’s decision, should be paid, but should also be punished for challenging the law in which they were supposed to uphold. The jury deliberated and very quickly awarded the Reverend Maury one single penny as compensation. The Parson’s Cause “solidified Henry’s local reputation as an orator, initiated his reputation as an American patriot, and … revitalized his interest in the study of the law.”

Although there is no account on the exact wording of Henry’s speech on that opportune day in the Hanover County Courthouse, there was a shared response by the Jurors, the visitors, and the justices. Nearly all in the Courthouse had the same awed reaction to Henry’s unbendable logic. They witnessed in Henry, his mastery of the English language they “now recognized the presence there of a great orator.” Patrick Henry not only won the case for his client, but also won the respect of much of the populace of Virginia. The Parson’s Cause was more than just a simple case in a courthouse; it was the first public challenge to the monarchy and its power over the colonies. Henry’s speech brought great rewards, but even more important, it was an enormous risk to his life since he in fact was committing an act of treason by questioning the King’s divine right. The Parson’s Cause resulted in “the established clergy’s loss of respect in the eyes of the public and a growing spirit of dissent against the monarchy.” It is even important enough to be looked at as “the commencement of the Revolution in Virginia.”

III. The Influence of a Revolutionary

Patrick Henry had answered an unanswerable question during the Parson’s Cause; should England rule the colonies with absolute power and give them no fair representation? This question arose again in a much wider arena during the Stamp Act Crisis of 1765. The Stamp Act was a tax implemented on any official document in the colonies to generate more revenue for England. Since it was enacted on all the colonies, there was a widespread reaction of anger among many Americans. Patrick Henry had just been admitted to the House of Burgesses, joining some of the most influential founding fathers, like that of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. Although it was polite at the time to allow the older members to speak in the House, Patrick Henry wasted no time in proposing the Stamp Act Resolves after just nine days of accepting his seat. The Resolves challenged King George’s right to tax the colonies and were yet another incident in which many of the House of Burgesses, including the speaker, were crying “treason,” directed at Patrick Henry as he defended the Resolves with his great oratory skills. Patrick’s powerful words were so moving that even Jefferson complimented him by saying “They were great indeed, such as I have never heard from any other man. He [Patrick Henry] appeared to me to speak as Homer wrote.” Eventually after much debate, the House passed the resolutions and many newspapers printed the Resolves. Patrick was merely twenty-nine years old and had become the most influential man of Virginia. His resistance to the Stamp Act “proved to be the ‘alarm bell’ of resistance and the beginning of the revolution.” Many states followed suit with the resolves, passing their own after Virginia. Thus by the time the Stamp Act was to go into effect, all the stamps were destroyed and no one was willing to distribute them. The Virginia Resolutions that Henry had introduced spread across the continent like wild fire and “precipitated the collapse of the imperial system of English authority in early America.”

Over the next few years, Patrick Henry played a crucial role in the Virginia Assembly and was considered a leader of Virginia. His goal “was to unite the colonial Assemblies in concerted action against the Crown.” The growing dissent between the colonies and England manifested itself with Parliament attempting to hold the right to tax the colonies and the colonies consistently resisting the taxations. The pinnacle of this battle was reached when Parliament passed the Coercive Acts which essentially stripped down the government of Massachusetts and closed the Boston Port.

In response Henry and the Virginia Assembly passed a resolution condemning Parliament’s actions. After learning of the resolution, the Governor of Virginia dissolved the Virginia Assembly. While the strain between the colonies and England kept growing, delegates were chosen to attend the First Continental Congress and among them was Patrick Henry. Patrick spoke many times during the Congress and urged that extreme measures were necessary for the colonies to unite and defeat Britain. He “showed just how keenly he understood the real meaning of the present conflict and its outcome. “ While Henry was attempting to unite the colonies and declare independence, the Congress time and again took a passive stance to the matters in hopes of reconciliation with the homeland. Patrick Henry knew that the colonies were already in a state of ‘nature’ and “that he was in advance of most men on the subject of independence” and that war was inevitable. Although Henry attempted to share his insight with the Congress, the members of Congress were too inept to take part in the bigger picture. “Henry was one of the few men willing to face the truth. While others talked of reconciliation, he encouraged preparation; while others imagined peace, he envisioned war.”

Patrick Henry was not able to convince the Continental Congress of the actions that were a necessity, but he was successful in convincing the Virginia Convention on March 23rd of 1775. During the Virginia Convention Henry took it upon himself to instigate the measures necessary for independence. He proposed a motion to enable the colony of Virginia to produce and arm a militia. Many of the other delegates believed this to be too extreme of a measure.

It was in that resistance that Patrick Henry honed his oratory skills and gave a speech that is unequaled to any other in the case of the American Revolution. The Virginia Convention addressing military preparations was already a revolutionary step, but Patrick Henry’s speech on the matter took it one step further “for down to that day, no public body in America, and no public man, had openly spoken of a war with Great Britain in any more decisive way that as a thing highly probable, indeed, but still not inevitable.” Patrick Henry took a leap of faith during the speech letting every man present know of the truth and the consequences of the action that was not only necessary but inevitable in order to attain liberty. “Forbid it, Almighty god! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!”

Patrick Henry had cornered the Virginia Convention so that it had only one of two choices, with one of the choices being unthinkable. Patrick showed the delegates, including George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, that “failure to move forward . . . would be more than cowardice. It would be treason against God Himself.” Needless to say, the speech was so brilliantly executed that it turned the tide of votes in the Convention and Virginia began preparations to arm itself for war. Patrick Henry was knowingly committing an act of treason by giving the speech, but he was fiercely turning the tables on the other delegates by pointing out that their inability to act would be treason to their duty to liberty. Henry’s speech inspired the revolution that was already inside his fellow American’s and secured his stature as the leader of Virginia. His speech also represented the “fundamental importance of securing liberty, even at the risk of death.” He was unquestionably elected again to the next Continental Congress. During the Second Continental Congress, the issues that Patrick Henry raised in the first session were accepted as undeniable and the new issue was who would be in charge of the Continental Army and how would it be supplied. 

Patrick Henry was an honorable man and when he “claimed his willingness to fight, and even die, if necessary, for liberty, he meant exactly what he said.” In May 1775, Governor Dunmore seized storages of gunpowder under orders from Great Britain. Henry was elected to captain of a small group of militia men in order to retrieve the silos of gunpowder that were seized. He had no fear of an opposition and no doubt that he and his men could reclaim the gunpowder. He began to march on Williamsburg and forced the Governor to back down and compensate the militia for the missing gunpowder.

Patrick Henry was guided by his faith in the just cause of the revolution and his faith spread confidence amongst his followers. He was elected after the Second Continental Congress to the position of Colonel and commander-in-chief of the Virginia army. Although it showed how revered he was, it was short lived because Henry had no experience in war or military matters and could not gain the full trust of the officers under his command. Henry resigned his post in February 1776 in order to maintain a sense of honor. Nevertheless, many believed that his true talents lay in his political powers of persuasion, not in military strategy. Washington is quoted as saying of Henry that “I think my countrymen made a capital mistake when they took Henry out of the senate to place him in the field”

IV. The Legacy of a Revolutionary

Patrick Henry joined his family after resigning his military post, but his oratory skills and conviction of freedom were needed again during the next and most important Virginia Convention. The question at hand during this convention was that of independence and a new form of government. It was difficult for Henry to gain support of a formal declaration of independence since the delegates were hesitant. He pushed the necessity of a clear declaration of independence as an issue and was able, by his oratory skills, to convince the delegates to unanimously vote in favor of independence. This was a decisive victory for Henry as “the knot had been cut by the sword of Henry’s tongue.” Unfortunately, Henry was unable to convince them of a “certified union among the colonies, and a friendly arrangement with France.” Both of these points eventually turned out to be true and necessary showing the perfect vision that Henry had for the course of a nation. Although the Declaration of Independence was in passage to Philadelphia, Henry hastily began work on the new government of Virginia.

Patrick Henry was appointed to a committee in order to produce a Bill of Rights and Constitution for Virginia. The end result set a precedent for the future of the colonies and the liberty of the people of the United States. The Virginia Bill of Rights highly influenced the United States Bill of Rights that allows liberty to its entire people. Henry played a prominent role in the creation of the Bill of Rights and his influence is easily shown in some of the articles. The first fourteen articles were written by George Mason, but the final two are attributed to Patrick Henry. The fifteenth article was “That no free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue, and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles.” The article takes its reader to the fundamental understanding of liberty and rights and how they are applied to government. The sixteenth article which is of more importance and more ably shows Henry’s influence states “That religion, or the duty we owe our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, and not by force or violence; and, therefore, that all men should enjoy the fullest toleration in the exercise of religion.” Henry’s upbringing put him in the center of multiple religions and it is obvious why the freedom of religion bore a special place in Henry’s heart. The above article was of such great importance to the colonies that it led to the first amendment of the United States Constitution. Patrick Henry’s influence over the new form of government had grown vastly enough that he easily achieved election as the first Governor of the state of Virginia.

Patrick Henry was a recognized leader and was dependable to do his duty. His first term of Governor was in a state of war which made things all the more difficult. Henry stood up to each challenge that the office required. He dealt with the raids by British and Indian troops while simultaneously keeping order and moral at a high level. Henry also sent many aids to the continental army as it moved around in which “much of the success . . . [and] reason for the survival, of the continental forces under Washington was due in large part to Henry’s efforts.” Henry’s efforts kept the continental army alive and “went beyond his call of duty as Virginia’s governor.” Henry absolutely believed in the cause of the revolution and it permitted him to keep on point of the important issues while he was an executive. Most people would have shrunk to such challenges, but Henry faced them with no fear and no regrets. He adamantly charged in the presence of resistance. Henry served three consecutive terms as governor and was even offered another position to the Continental Congress thereafter. He humbly refused the post due to poor health, but still maintained a presence in the Virginia Assembly and even held the office of governor again for two terms. 

Henry’s poor health affected much of his later life and influence. He was unable to compete with the requirements of a political leader, yet he never gave up trying to influence the creation of a fair and just form of government. His final act consisted of resistance towards a new federal constitution. When the Continental Congress gathered in 1787 to revise the Articles of Confederation, they took it one step further by completely creating a new form of government with the United States Constitution. Patrick Henry believed in “a federation of independent and sovereign states” instead of a nationalistic government who ruled over all of the new states. Henry was unwilling to give a government that much power to rule over the states and he petitioned it any way he could. He believed that what America needed “was not a more powerful government, but a more virtuous people.” This made Henry and his sympathetic colleagues the “Anti-Federalists”. Patrick Henry argued that the Congress had no right to change the government and that by “drawing power from the people and not the states, the principle of ‘federalism’ was denied and the sovereignty of the states was destroyed.” Most importantly, Henry disputed “the weaknesses of the proposed Constitution and to offer amendments to correct these defects.” Henry may have lost the battle when the new Constitution was ratified by merely ten votes, but won over the opinions of the delegates in the form of amendments to the Constitution. “As a result, the U.S. Bill of Rights found its way into the Constitution, ratified in 1791, as the fruit of Henry’s labors.”

Patrick Henry achieved a great deal in his lifetime and was able to do so with unparalleled oratory skills and an undying belief in the rights deserved by a free people. Henry was a prominent lawyer, an irrefutable leader, a devout revolutionary, and a grand Statesman. He allowed his instincts and religious beliefs to guide him through turbulent times to safe harbor. Henry never sunk into following the masses and kept his eye towards the ultimate goal of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Henry was and is undermined as one of the greatest founding fathers. His achievements can still be seen today throughout the complexity that is the democracy of the United States of America.

Hayes, Kevin J. The Mind of a Patriot: Patrick Henry and the World of Ideas. Virginia: University of Virginia Press, 2008.

Vaughan, David J. Give Me Liberty: The Uncompromising Statesmanship of Patrick Henry. Tennessee: Cumberland House Publishing, 1997.

Wirt, William. Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry. Philadelphia: J. Webster, 1818.

Tyler, Moses Coit. Patrick Henry. Boston: Houghton Mifflin and Co., 1887.

Morgan, George. The True Patrick Henry. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Company, 1907.

Einhorn, Robin L. “Patrick Henry’s Case Against the Constitution: The Structural Problem with Slavery.” Journal of the Early Republic Vol. 22 Issue 4 (2002): 549-573.

McCants, David A. “The Role of Patrick Henry in the Stamp Act Debate” Southern Speech Communication Journal Vol. 46 Issue 3 (1981) 205-227.