|
|
|
while he...broke out, since which she had heard nothing from him, and presumed he must be dead."55
Wooster revealed himself to his mother, and as proof, offered a look at a birthmark on his chest, The mother rejoiced over her long-lost son, but the story offers no hint of what happened subsequently.56 The parents' political allegiance is not known, but it is clear that son Henry had no love for the patriot cause.
It is obvious now that the Revolution produced "...in Oxford as...elsewhere...years of divided allegiance, some people staying loyal to the British government with others clamoring for independence."57 It is true that there were individuals that were happy to remain neutral, resisting the imprecations of both warring factions. Most obvious, however, is the fact that the label "Tory" has incorrect connotations for many applications. These are quite evident when studying Oxford's population during the Revolution. The true Tory, as a staunch advocate of British rule under the King, was rare indeed. Other Tories were merely Anglicans (i.e., "Tories by association"), or finally, political conservatives. While there are one or two known cases of members of St. Peter's (Anglican) Church who were loyal subjects of King George, it is not known that they took up arms against the patriot cause. There were others who suffered to varying degrees because of their political allegiance, as hinted by Peck. Oxford's line of separation was not along the lines of denomination, but determined by more complex factors, including family and a network of friends. Rather than being the exception to the rule, Oxford's example might suggest a more complicated political relationship between people in Revolutionary Connecticut.
55 Phelps, 58.
56 Phelps, 58.
57 Litchfield, St. Peter's 10.
| PREVIOUS |
11 | |
|
|
|