SSPX Respond to the Pope's Decree of Excommunication

SSPX Superior General Fr Davide Pagliarani issues a formal response to Leo and Fernandez's excommunication decree that canonists now say isn't even legal, while Pope Leo is awarded the Liberty Medal for being a promoter of causes condemned by formal Papal teaching.

Europe's Forgotten Terror - The Pirates Who Enslaved a Million People

From The History Squad

Who were the Barbary Pirates?

For over 300 years, the Muslim jihadist Barbary Pirates terrorised coastal Europe — striking as far north as Iceland and as close to home as Ireland, England, Spain, and Italy. Men, women, and children vanished from beaches in the dead of night. Some estimates suggest more than a million Europeans were captured and sold into slavery. Yet today, few people are aware of this forgotten slave trade.

In this documentary, join Kevin Hicks as he uncovers who the Barbary Pirates really were and how they built a slave-trading empire that the most powerful nations of the time struggled to stop.

Traditional Catholic Morning Prayers in English | July

Traditional Catholic morning prayers to help start your day in a godly way! The month of July is dedicated to the Most Precious Blood of Jesus. May our devotion to the salvific action of the Precious Blood of Christ increase more fervently this month. We've included the Memorare of the Sacred Heart and litany of the Sacred Heart. Begin your July with daily morning prayer. This video is a compilation of many traditional morning prayers Catholics say, and should not be considered a replacement for those who have an obligation to pray the Divine Office morning prayers.

Sacred Numbers in Scripture? Why 3, 7, and 12 Keep Appearing

From Totus Catholica

Why do the same numbers keep showing up across Scripture—from Genesis to Revelation?

No, it’s not numerology. It’s theology. In this video, you’ll discover how the numbers 3, 7, and 12 act as divine “signposts” throughout salvation history. They don’t just mark time or quantity—they symbolise God’s order, covenant, and kingdom. Learn how biblical authors—and the Holy Spirit—used numbers to reveal deep truths about God’s nature, the Church, and your spiritual life. ✨ What You’ll Learn in This Episode: Why Jesus rose on the third day, and why Peter denied Him three times What makes seven the number of the covenant How twelve forms the foundation of the Church What the Church Fathers and Catechism say about symbolic numbers How to read the Bible with deeper spiritual awareness ⏳ Chapters: 0:00 - Introduction: Why Sacred Numbers Matter 1:20 - The Mystery of Numbers in Scripture 2:02 - The Biblical Worldview of Numbers 2:29 - The Number 3: Divine Completeness and the Trinity 3:25 - The Number 7: Perfection, Covenant, and Rest 3:57 - The Number 12: Divine Governance and Unity 6:20 - Addressing Objections: Is This Numerology? 7:15 - Practical Takeaways: Applying Sacred Numbers to Your Life 8:24 - Conclusion & Blessing 📖 Key Scripture & References: Genesis 2:2 – Creation & Sabbath Luke 1:28, Matthew 10:1–4, Revelation 21;12–14 Matthew 12:40 – Jonah as a type of Christ Catechism of the Catholic Church – CCC 114, CCC 2116 St. Augustine, St. Ambrose – Sacred symbolism in numbers 💬 Discussion Prompt: Have you noticed patterns of 3, 7, or 12 in your Bible reading or prayer life? How do these sacred numbers help you understand the Mass, the sacraments, or Scripture more deeply?

The Little-Known Story of How St Thomas the Apostle Brought Christianity to India

St Thomas the Apostle is revered in India as the Enlightener of the country, because just years after Pentecost, he brought the Faith to the people of the subcontinent.

From Aleteia

By Lucien de Guise

For the St. Thomas Christians, there is still no doubt that theirs is an unbroken tradition going back to their patron’s arrival in the year 52.

Pentecost delivered the gift of tongues soon after Jesus had proclaimed: “… go and make disciples of all nations.” The paradox is how little recognition goes to the evangelist who used his powers of communication to take the message further than anyone else.

Eight days after Jesus met his disciples following the Resurrection, he encountered St. Thomas. Since then, St. Thomas the Apostle has been better known as Doubting Thomas. His least-used title is “Apostle of India.” In the Subcontinent, the situation is very different. There, even the vast non-Christian majority of 1.7 billion are mostly aware of his role as missionary extraordinaire.

When Vasco da Gama’s fleet reached India in 1498, the Portuguese were surprised to find Christian communities thriving in the south of the Subcontinent. They were even more surprised by the locals’ certainty that their church had been established by St. Thomas. They shouldn’t have been, as countless travellers, including Marco Polo, had claimed that the saint’s grave was there. St. Thomas had preached to the Hindus and the Jews of southern India and had won thousands of converts. For the St. Thomas Christians, there is still no doubt that theirs is an unbroken tradition going back to their patron’s arrival in 52.

Click here to launch the slideshow.

Launch the slideshow

There has been a revival of interest in St. Thomas’s path through the Middle East, with the continuing plight of Christians in Syria and Iraq. Further east than that, however, the co-religionist radar is picking up almost nothing. A recent book by one of the most enterprising travelers of present times might help western Christians look again at the development of their faith.

Serena Fass is an 80-year-old writer, photographer and wanderer who has followed St. Thomas’s progress across much of Asia. Her book In the Footsteps of St. Thomas corroborates the evidence that has existed for centuries. This does not come from the Bible or other texts that historians find unreliable, although written sources described his travels as long ago as 1,800 years. On-site investigation is the new key to unlocking the truth about St. Thomas.

There are few Christian communities that go back to the time of Jesus’s disciples. Serena Fass finds much to support the beliefs that the faithful in India hold firm to, although there are still plenty who dispute them. In those pioneering days, India was the magnet that drew Europe to the East. When Columbus chanced upon what was later called the West Indies, it was India he thought he had reached. India was the trading world’s most profitable destination.

The evidence of Thomas’s presence in India is considerable. Some of it stretches the imagination while the rest is at least as plausible as the Turin Shroud, albeit with less publicity. Keeping a low profile has been the secret of survival. Levels of hostility to Christians in India are on the rise, and the belief that St. Thomas was martyred by either a local ruler or a Brahmin priest hardly lessens what is considered by some Hindus to be a blood libel.

St. Thomas’s tomb is less conspicuous than that of other Apostles to be honored with a basilica. His original south Indian resting place was not in a Christian stronghold, and he was buried without much ceremony. Most of his bones were removed from India in the 3rd century and sent to Edessa in Mesopotamia, where the saint’s vital role in India was acknowledged at the time. Once again the bones’ progress is followed across the globe by Serena Fass as they eventually end up in the Italian town of Ortona.

The Catholic Church maintains a neutral stance on the proposition that Christianity might have been established in India long before it was in most of Europe. There is more evidence of St. Thomas’s life in India than anywhere else; in 1956 Pope Pius XII granted minor basilica status to San Thome Cathedral in Madras.

Serena Fass has collated traditions handed down over almost 2,000 years, along with a physical trail that includes some very old Crosses. The “Thomas Christians” of India use a Cross of distinctive shape. Crucifixes are rare, as would be expected of a community that started long before the Corpus became an accepted part of Christian imagery.

Relics of St. Thomas are less common than his tombs, of which there are purportedly six. A fascinating reliquary exists in Mylapore. Originally housing some of the saint’s bones, it is now empty. The decoration tells a heartening story of coexistence in India. With decoration in Hindu style, probably by Muslim craftsmen, on a Christian theme, it is a testament to Indian multiculturalism. The only thing missing is a Jewish element; it is known that the earliest converts to Christianity in southern India were, like Thomas himself, Jews. This is part of the Diaspora that tends to be as forgotten by the Jewish community as St. Thomas of India is by Christians around the world.

Even if every other part of the St. Thomas story is one day proved to be false, there can be no doubting the Thomas Christians’ incontrovertible inks with Syrian Christianity. In southern India they still use the liturgical Syriac language — a dialect of the Aramaic language spoken by Jesus and St. Thomas. Syria was the bedrock of early Christianity and an important part of the Roman empire, trading with southern India from the Red Sea. This was inevitable for the Romans, with their addiction to pepper and knowledge of monsoon winds. Roman coins and other evidence is found in abundance. In the 1930s one of Britain’s greatest archaeologists, Sir Mortimer Wheeler, even found the remains of a Roman trading post.

At a time when the earliest Christian communities are being eradicated in the Middle East, their legacy at least lives on in India, thanks to St. Thomas.

The Church vs Americanism

Americanism is, as Christopher Ferrara demonstrates in this talk, a religion of Nation, Constitution and Democracy which has regularly taught doctrines antithetical to everything Catholicism cherishes most. So subtle and effective has it been that Catholics have ended not only by not fighting off its unacceptable doctrines, but by actually becoming some of its most fervent adherents and cheerleaders. This was already crystal clear by the end of the nineteenth century in expressions of wild, anti-Catholic superpatriotism at the time of the Spanish-American War. Taken from a 3-part series: Catholics on the Global Auction Block - 2006 Roman Forum Conference.

Loyalist Declarations Which I Would Have Happily Signed 250 Years Ago

The myth (taught by omitting reference to the Loyalists) that all the American colonists joyfully broke their oaths to their lawful King and blithely became forsworn nithings is disproven by these declarations of loyalty signed by many colonists.

If you would like to learn more about the persecution to which many of these men were subjected by the 'Patriot' traitors, I would suggest reading Liberty's Exiles: American Loyalists in the Revolutionary World, by Maya Jasanoff.  Dr Jasanoff is not a Brit or a Canadian UE (United Empire Loyalist) with an axe to grind. She is an American academic who lays bare the horrendous sufferings these men bore because of their loyalty to their King.

From the Journal of the American Revolution  

By Sandra McNamara

THE LOYALIST DECLARATION OF DEPENDENCE, 1776

Our ancestors often believed in fate, and so do I. It was fate one day that brought me to the Fraunces Tavern in New York City. Fate that day that the waiter overheard me talking to my daughter. Fate that that same waiter told me of the museum on the top floor of the Fraunces Tavern. Fate that allowed me fifteen minutes prior to closing to view the museum.

In those fifteen minutes I scanned the exhibits and discovered a small posting regarding a declaration signed by 547 Loyalists in late November 1776 which declared their loyalty to the Crown and Great Britain. The voices of my ancestors and their friends kept calling to me from that document, asking me to not forget them, and to search out their names and signatures. To discover their lives, beliefs, and reasons for their actions.

After searching and making inquiries through social media, phoning museums and not giving up, two and a half years later I finally found someone, who on February 11, 2015, knew what I was talking and asking about. Charles Casimiro of Philipse Manor Hall State Historic Site, New York, informed me the document, the Declaration of Dependence, was housed in the New-York Historical Society. He was even able to provide a transcription.[1]

To the Right Honorable Richard Viscount Howe, of the Kingdom of Ireland, and His Excellency The Honorable William Howe, Esquire, General of His Majesty’s Forces in America, the Kings’ Commissioners for restoring Peace in His Majesty’s Colonies and Plantations in North America &c. &c. &c.

May it please your excellencies.

Impressed with the most grateful sense of the Royal Clemency, manifested I you Proclamation of the 14th. Of July last, whereby His Majesty hath been graciously pleased to declare, “That he is desirous to deliver His American subjects from the calamities of War, and other oppressions, which they now undergo:” and equally affected with sentiments of gratitude for the generous and humane attention to the disposition “to confer with His Majesty’s well affected subjects, upon the means of restoring the public Tranquility, and establishing a permanent union with every Colony as a part of the British Empire.”
We whose names are hereunto subscribed, Inhabitants of the City and County of New-York, beg leave to inform your Excellencies: that altho most of us have subscribed a general Representation with many other of the Inhabitants; yet we wish that our conduct, in maintaining inviolate our loyalty to our Sovereign, against the strong tide of oppression and tyranny, which has almost overwhelmed this Land, may be marked by some line of distinction, which cannot well be drawn from the mode of Representation that has been adopted for the Inhabitants in general.
Influenced by this Principle, and from a regard to our peculiar Situation, we have humbly presumed to trouble your Excellencies with the second application; in which, we flatter ourselves, none participate but those who have ever, with unshaken fidelity, borne true Allegiance to His Majesty, and the most warm and affectionate attachment to his Person and Government. That, notwithstanding the tumult of the times, and the extreme difficulties and losses to which many of us have been exposed, we have always expressed, and do now give this Testimony of our Zeal to preserve and support the Constitutional Supremacy of Great Britain over the Colonies; and do most ardently wish for a speedy restoration of that union between them, which, while it subsisted, proved the unfailing source of their mutual happiness and prosperity.
We cannot help lamenting that the number of Subscribers to this Address is necessarily lessened, by the unhappy circumstance that many of our Fellow-Citizens, who have firmly adhered their loyalty, have been driven from their Habitations, and others sent Prisoners into some of the neighbouring Colonies: and tho’ it would have afforded us the highest satisfaction, could they have been present upon this occasion: yet we conceive it to be the duty we owe to ourselves and our prosperity, whilst this testimony of our Allegiance can be supported by known and recent facts, to declare to your Excellencies; that so far from having given the last countenance or encouragement, to the most unnatural, unprovoked Rebellion, that ever disgraced the annuls of Time; we have on the contrary, steadily and uniformly opposed it, in every stage of its rise and progress, at the risque of our Lives and Fortunes.

The 242-year-old Declaration of Dependence is owned by the New-York Historical Society Library. Having only seen the on line version of this 242-year-old document,[2] I can describe it as a large sheet which has the wishes of the signers written on the top half followed below by eight columns with approximately thirty-five signatures in each column. The left most column has perhaps ten signatures worn away. There follows three smaller pages of signatures, in four columns on each page. The fourth column on the last page has been torn away. What appear to be water marks distort and disfigure other signatures on these three pages.

My curiosity was aroused as to why approximately ten signatures would have been worn away. Perhaps they were erased by persons not wishing to acknowledge that they, or their ancestors, signed this document. Or, the names may have been smudged by accident, possibly from too much handling. Considering that most people are right handed it is natural to pick up the paper with your left hand.

The second page has space for six columns, but only four columns of names appear; the first column is near the middle of the page, leaving blank space to the left. The bottom portion of the first column appears to have water stains, making the last eight or so signatures illegible.

The “Loyalist Declaration of Dependence,” pages 3 and 4, detail. (Internet Archive/New-York Historical Society Library)

The third page has water stains on the top portion of all four columns. The lower portion of the page also has stains.

The final page of the Declaration appears to be mostly lost due to the large amount of water stains. Below the four columns of signatures is the final sign-off of the Declaration. It reads in part,

We, Richard Hoyt Thomas T . . . ing and Frederick Hudson . . . of New York do hereby certify that we attended the signing . . . and that the subscribers have voluntarily signed their names.
Twenty Eight day of November in the Seventeenth Year of His Majesty.

King George III became King on October, 25 1760, so the final signatures on the Declaration were made on November 28, 1776.

The Declaration of Dependence was signed by 547 Loyalists from New York and surrounding areas. The signers were merchants, yeomen, freed slaves—basically a mixed representation of people all wishing to remain loyal to the Crown.

The signing of this valuable document took place in Fraunces Tavern, located at 54 Pearl Street at Water Street in Lower Manhattan. The City Hall was situated on the north side of the street. At the time, the tavern sign read “Sign of Queen Charlotte,” or the Queen to King George III. Commonly it was referred to as the “Queen’s Head Tavern.”

The signers are too numerous to list; here are a few of the more prominent:

Frederick Philipse. The house that Frederick Philipse once occupied is now a Historic Site, the Philipse Manor Hall in Yonkers, New York. The family lived in luxury. Rent from many tenant farmers who worked their lands helped pay for this lifestyle. As those around Frederick Philipse III began to rebel against Great Britain, he defended the Crown. George Washington did not approve of having such a strong-willed Loyalist at large and ordered Frederick Philipse III arrested in 1776, but he and his family fled to British occupied New York. His signature can be seen prominently in the middle of page one, column five. Frederick Philipse III had a sister Susannah Philipse. She married Col. Bevereley Robinson, a prominent Loyalist officer in whose home Benedict Arnold made his headquarters. From the strong Loyal bonds of this marriage was born Frederick Philipse Robinson, who began his career in the British army as a young officer in the American Revolution and eventually rose to the rank of major general. His portrait is found in the hallway of Queen’s Park, Toronto, Ontario. He was provisional lieutenant-governor of Upper Canada in 1815. Eventually the lands and the Manor of Frederick Philipse III were confiscated and sold at public auction by the New York State Legislature. The last “Lord of the Manor”, died of a broken spirit and poor health in England, 1786.[3]

Samuel Cox. Samuel Cox was a native of Bermuda, described as 5’10” in stature with a brown complexion, light brown hair, and about twenty-five years of age. On June 1, 1776, he set sail from Halifax as the Master of the transport sloop Charlotte, among approximately 130 ships carrying about 10,000 sailors that set sail that day from Halifax under the command of Lord Howe, carrying the British army that would land on Staten Island. On board Charlotte was a cargo of entrenching tools, spikes, Cheveaux-de-Frise, and mantelets, essential components for constructing field fortifications in the upcoming campaign. The American armed sloop Montgomery intercepted Charlotte on June 28, 1776. Samuel Cox was transported as a prisoner and carried to Fire-Island Inlet south of Long Island as a prisoner of war. He was released on parole on July 6, to return to his residence in Bedford Township in Westchester County, New York. He later became a member of a Loyalist regiment, Butler’s Rangers, and settled in the Niagara Region of Ontario.[4]

Samuel Wood. Samuel Wood was fifty-one years old when he signed the Declaration in 1776. Born in 1725 in New York, he married Amy Brundage about 1754 in Westchester County. Together they had fourteen children. After being imprisoned and suffering the loss of his Westchester County farm, his wife Amy refused to follow him when he fled from the United States in 1785. Perhaps she was too old and tired, or perhaps she chose to remain with her other twelve children. Samuel’s daughter Amy Wood Bedford and his son Peter Wood went to Nova Scotia with their father, later to be joined by their sister Rachel Wood Clark. Perhaps Rachel’s husband penned one of the two Clark signatures found on the Declaration. Compensation was granted by the British, and together Samuel Wood and his son Peter built a home on the Maccan River in Nova Scotia. It would appear that he died a broken man as his wife still refused to move to Nova Scotia with their remaining children. Both Wood and his son were buried in the Harrison burial ground, which sadly is now a farmer’s field.[5]

 [1]Personal correspondence, Charles Casimiro of Philipse Manor Hall State Historic Site.

[2]Petition of 547 Loyalists from New York City, commonly referred to as the ‘Loyalist Declaration of Dependence”, New-York Historical Society, www.nyhistory.org/exhibit/petition-0.

[3]Appleton’s Cyclopedia of American Biography, 1600-1889 Vol V: (New York: D. Appleton & Co., 1888), attached to ancestry tree www.ancestry.ca/family-tree/person/tree/109676453/person/110078560499/facts.

[4]“Parole of Samuel Cox,” American Archives, Peter Force, ed. (Washington, DC: M. St. Claire Clarke and Peter Force, 1848), 24, books.google.ca/books?id=r2cYAQAAMAAJ&pg=RA1-PA23&lpg=RA1-PA23&dq=Samuel+Cox+1776&source=bl&ots=wzIf35eggK&sig=2n9tixBHCcKzgZ2CdzlbctUTqxk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjmnuvqnbHRAhWF34MKHTrbBkgQ6AEIMjAF#v=onepage&q=Samuel%20Cox%201776&f=false.

[5]Find A Grave Memorial# 93590782, www.findagrave.com/memorial/93590782/samuel-wood.

ANOTHER THREE LOYALIST DECLARATIONS SIGNED IN THE FALL OF 1776

The Declaration of Dependence signed by 547 New York City Loyalists in November 1776 was not the only such declaration written and signed by loyal inhabitants of the colony of New York soon after British military forces established their presence in the region. At least three others are known to exist, bearing a total of 3,414 signatures of individuals willing to pledge their support of, and subservience to, the British government.

In the December 1776 issue of the London publication The Lady’s Magazine or Entertaining Companion the Fair Sex, Appropriated Solely to Their Use and Amusement under “Home News,” this article was reprinted from an American newspaper:

From the New-York Gazette, Nov. 4.

To the Right Hon. Richard, Lord Viscount Howe, of the Kingdom of Ireland, and to his Excellency the Hon. William Howe, Esq; General of his Majesty’s Forces to America the King’s Commissioners for restoring Peace to his Majesty’s Colonies North-America.

Your Excellencies, by your declaration bearing date July 14, 1776, having signified that “the king is desirous to deliver his American subjects from the calamities of war, and other oppressions which they now undergo, and to restore the colonies to his protection And peace:

And by a subsequent declaration, dated Sept. 19, 1776, having also been pleased to express your desire, “to confer with his majesty’s well affected subjects upon the means of restoring the public tranquility, and establishing a permanent union with every colony, as a part of the British empire.

We there, whole names are hereunto subscribed, inhabitants of the city and county of New-York, in the province of New-York, reflecting, with the tendered emotions of gratitude, on this instance of his majesty’s paternal goodness; and encouraged by the affectionate manner in which his majesty’s gracious purpose hath been conveyed to us by your excellencies, who have hereby evinced that humanity is inseparable from that three magnanimity, and those enlarged sentiments, which form the most shining characters, beg leave to represent to your excellences.

That we bear true allegiance to our rightful sovereign George the Third, as well as warm affection to his sacred person, crown and dignity.

That we esteem the constitutional supremacy of Great-Britain over these colonies, and other depending parts of his majesty’s dominions, as essential to the union, security, and welfare of the whole empire, and sincerely lament the interruption of that harmony which formerly subsistedbetween that parent state, and these her colonies.

That many of the loyal citizens have been driven away by the calamities of war, and the spirit of perfection which lately prevailed; or sent to New England, and other difference parts.

We, therefore, hoping that the sufferings which our abused fellow-citizens undergo, for their attachment to the royal cause, may plead in their behalf; humbly pray. That your excellencies would be pleased, on these our dutiful representations, to restore this city and county to his majesty’s protection and peace.

New York, OC. 16, 1776

(This address was voluntarily signed by nine hundred and forty-eight persons of respectable character).[1]

This petition was reprinted in 1861 in a collection of manuscripts from the Mercantile Library Association of New York City, and included the complete list of 948 signers. In that published version, their surnames, of which 402 are unique, are listed in alphabetical order, which makes it easy to find a person, but is not as historically useful had they had been listed in signing order. It can be very instructive to know how the names are related to each other on these signed Loyalist Declarations, as family relationships may appear, or those of neighbors. The publication does, however, provide some detail on the lives and occupations of some of the signers.[2]

The Howe brothers’ published declaration of September 19, 1776, “upon the means of restoring public tranquility, and establishing a permanent union with every colony as part of the British Empire.” This declaration prompted the response from Loyalists in Kings County, New York. (Library of Congress)

In November 1776, the people of Kings County, New York, “after a few had been persuaded or forced into rebellion” found that their fellow countrymen had abandoned them “to all its penalties.” Wishing to make peace they lost little time in petitioning the King’s commissioners with a declaration of their own. This Declaration reads very closely to the one printed in The Lady’s Magazine, but one notable difference is that the location of this Declaration’s signing is given, as well as the name of the person who witnessed it: “(in the church at Flatbush) before Wm. Axtell, Esq., one of His Majesty’s Council for this Province.” The petition was signed by 1,174 area residents; not surprisingly, many from the prominent Wyckoff family signed this Declaration, the location being so close to their homes.[3]

The freeholders and inhabitants of Queen’s County also found it necessary to make a “humble representation and petition” to “the Right Honorable Richard, Lord Viscount Howe, of the Kingdom of Ireland,” commander in chief of the Royal Navy in America, and “to his Excellency the Honorable William Howe, Esquire, General of His Majesty’s Forces in America.” A copy of their petition can be found in the Library of Congress. Essentially it reads in the same manner as the above two petitions, and was signed by 1,292 subscribers of Queen’s County and dated October 21, 1776.[4]

The Freeholders and Inhabitants of Queen’s County found it necessary to send the following, also signed at Queen’s County on October 21 to His Excellency William Tyron, Esq., the colonial governor:

To His Excellency WILLIAM TRYON, Esq;

Captain General and Governor in Chief of the Province of New-York, and the Territories thereon depending in America;Chancellor and Vice Admiral of the same, &c. &c. &c.

May it please Your Excellency,

WE the Freeholders and Inhabitants of Queen’s County, are happy once again to Address your Excellency in the Capital of the Province. We heartily congratulate you on your Return, which we consider as the Earnest of farther Success, and hope e’re long the whole Province will feel the Blessings of your Excellency’s upright Administration.

Anxiously do we look forward to the Time when the Disobedient shall return to their Duty, and the Ravages of War cease to desolate this once flourishing Country.

That we may be restored to the King’s most gracious Protection; torn from us by the Hand of Violence, and quicken others by our Example, to embrace the repeated Invitations of His Majesty’s Commissioners, we have resolved on, and subscribed, a dutiful Representation and Petition, setting forth to them our loyal Disposition, and praying that the County may be declared at the King’s Peace.

We intreat your Excellency to present our Petition; and rely on your known Humanity and Benevolence, for the Exertion of your Influence in Behalf of the well-affected County of Queen’s, that it may again, in the Bosom of Peace, enjoy the Royal Favour, under your Excellency’s paternal Care and Attention.

Signed by Desire and in Behalf of the Freeholders and Inhabitants,

Queen’s County, Oct. 21, 1776.

By DAVID COLDEN.

A reply was sent three weeks later from Wm. TYRON:

SIR,

New-York, Nov. 12, 1776.

IN Compliance with the Request in the Address presented to me by you, in Behalf of the Inhabitants of Queen’s County, I immediately after my Return from Head-Quarters, waited on Lord HOWE, one of the King’s Commissioners for restoring Peace to His Majesty’s Colonies, and presented to his Lordship the very dutiful and loyal Petition and Representation of the said Inhabitants, who was pleased to say “He would take the earliest Opportunity of communicating with General HOWE on the Occasion.”

This public Testimony from the Inhabitants of Queen’s County, of their unshaken Loyalty to our most Gracious Sovereign, and of their zealous Attachment to the British Constitution is particularly agreeable to me, and entitles them to my best Endeavours for a speedy Accomplishment of their Wishes; the Season and Expediency of the granting whereof, are safely and happily committed to the Wisdom and Discretion of His Majesty’s Commissioners.

I am, with Regard, Sir, Your most obedient Servant.

Wm. TRYON.

David Colden, Esq; of Queen’s County.

Printed in WATER-STREET, between the COFFEE-HOUSE and the OLD SLIP.[5]

The petition that was sent from Queen’s County on October 21 can be found transcribed on the Northern Illinois University Digital Library with 1,292 subscribers’ names following. The names are not in alphabetical order but likely in the order in which the declaration was signed.[6]

[1]A Lady’s Magazine Vol. VII (1776), 672, books.google.ca/books?id=ZEpGAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA672&lpg=PA672&dq=to+the+right+honorable+richard,+lord+viscount+Howe,+of+the+kingdom+of+Ireland+and+to+his+Excellency&source=bl&ots=ZTzOREN0Pr&sig=Ekk2L0JI-PPBk-59R5PeHVt-I-c&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwixroKN5NfZAhXs5oMKHfEHA2kQ6AEIRjAJ#v=onepage&q=to%20the%20right%20honorable%20richard%2C%20lord%20viscount%20Howe%2C%20of%20the%20kingdom%20of%20Ireland%20and%20to%20his%20Excellency&f=false.

[2]New York City during the American Revolution being A Collection of Original Papers (now first published) From the Manuscripts in the Possession of The Mercantile Library Association of New York City (New York: privately printed for The Association, 1861), books.google.ca/books?id=DxFH_pUmqHcC&pg=PA117&lpg=PA117&dq=to+the+right+honorable+richard,+lord+viscount+Howe,+of+the+kingdom+of+Ireland+and+to+his+Excellency&source=bl&ots=7rYccbbYbm&sig=gS6KciVmGbpxeUJTJKZhGz7u7VI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwixroKN5NfZAhXs5oMKHfEHA2kQ6AEIPDAF#v=onepage&q=to%20the%20right%20honorable%20richard%2C%20lord%20viscount%20Howe%2C%20of%20the%20kingdom%20of%20Ireland%20and%20to%20his%20Excellency&f=false.

[3]Henry Onderdonk, Jr., Documents and Letters intended to Illustrate the Revolutionary Incident of Queen County; with connecting narratives, explanatory notes, and addition (New-York: Leavitt, Trow and Company, 1846), books.google.ca/books?id=KWc-o4q5WkUC&pg=RA2-PA166&lpg=RA2-PA166&dq=to+the+right+honorable+richard,+lord+viscount+Howe,+of+the+kingdom+of+Ireland+and+to+his+Excellency&source=bl&ots=BlsKqJAkjE&sig=OXkU5psz6hFwmJDgUmYIkuhh5bQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiNhq3j59fZAhUJKKwKHWlABlE4ChDoAQgoMAA#v=onepage&q=to%20the%20right%20honorable%20richard%2C%20lord%20viscount%20Howe%2C%20of%20the%20kingdom%20of%20Ireland%20and%20to%20his%20Excellency&f=false

[4]To the Right Honorable Richard, Lord Viscount Howe, of the Kingdom of Ireland, and to his Excellency the Honorable William Howe, Esquire … The humble representation and petition of the freeholders and inhabitants of Queen’s County, on the Isla,New York, 1776, www.loc.gov/item/rbpe.10902500/.

[5]Ibid.

[6]Petition and Representation of Queen’s County,Northern Illinois University Digital Library, v2:1159, digital.lib.niu.edu/islandora/object/niu-amarch%3A94490.