Talk:Continental Congress/Archive 1

Archive 1

Congress of the Articles of Confederation

There really probably should be a separate article for the Congresses under the Articles of Confederation after the Treaty of Paris. They were not exactly a continuation of the Second Continental Congress as this article implies. There were new and more regular elections. This body is styled by many historians the Congress of the Confederation. This is the body that passed the Northwest Ordinance and the one which called for what became the 1787 Constitutional Convention, whose original mandate was solely one of revising the Articles of Conferation. Rlquall 01:38, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

What are reliable sources for "Congress of the Confederation" as the official title of this body at any time? The library of congress site says the body immediately preceding the first US Congress was still the "2nd Continental Congress". Edison 17:52, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

The Declaration's adoption

The Declaration of Independence, as the official record kept by Secretary Thomson makes clear, was not signed until August 2nd. It should also be noted that the Congress declared independence of the 2nd of July, not the 4th. The article should probably be changed to reflect this discrepancy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.229.252 (talk • contribs) 20:04, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Leonard E. Patterson (talk) 03:15, 28 February 2008 (UTC) According to usa.gov, the Continental Congress voted to declare independence from the UK on July 2, 1776, but the Declaration was revised and debated until July 4, when it was formally voted into effect.

http://answers.usa.gov/cgi-bin/gsa_ict.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=6990

Opening statement

The article is excellent. I'm a little confused by the first line: The Continental Congress resulted from the American Revolution. Isn't it more accurate to say that the the Continental Congress (at least the first one) was "a significant milestone IN" the American Revolution, rather than "resulted from" it? As I understand it, even when the first Congress met and for some time afterward, many colonists (Ben Franklin and John Dickenson among them, and including actual delegates TO the Congress itself) still believed and fiercely argued that the colonies should not and would not ever formally break from Britain. If that is the case, the Continental Congress was not a "result of" a revolution but rather, only one in a series of increasingly radical (and dangerous) steps Americans took on a long, confusing path, the end of which (declaring full independence) was both unpredicted and unexpected. 24.211.220.127 (talk) 02:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)simonlefranc@hotmail.com

It's in line with the American Revolution article, which describes the Revolution as an ongoing process of the colonies gaining independence from Britain; the Declaration and the War of Independence did not alone define it. See in particular the second paragraph of the American Revolution article. Postdlf (talk) 03:11, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

The Second Continental Congress paragraph notes that former governor William Penn was sent to England in 1775. This cannot be the William Penn who founded Pennsylvania in 1682. Perhaps a Wm. Penn II or Wm. Penn III? Edward John Patrick (talk) 15:52, 14 November 2010 (UTC) Edward John Patrick

was it elected?

Was it elected by popular vote? Do we know the results of the election?

If not, how was it formed?BillMasen (talk) 21:22, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Membership?

Are there any membership lists available? DOR (HK) (talk) 04:37, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

The complete list is at List of delegates to the Continental Congress. —Kevin Myers 06:27, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I think it was elected. That is what I learnt in history class last year. It was the closests thing to a democracy ever in the New World... I believe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.76.79.180 (talk) 23:18, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

The Earlier two Congresses

The Continental Congresses of 1754 and 1765 are no different from the 1774 one. The one that became the government of the united states is a different matter entirely.Ericl (talk) 01:21, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Those were congresses, but not the "Continental Congress". —Kevin Myers 09:52, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

2009 Continental Congress

The 2009 Continental Congress November 9th - 22nd, 2009 Pheasant Run - Chicago

• OFFICIAL WEBSITE: http://www.cc2009.us/
• http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/
• http://wethepeoplecongress.org

This section should be added to this article because there is a large growing grassroots movement in the USA to bring it back to its constitutional roots. This event will go down in history as the 1st Continental Congress of the 21st century & therefore it should be added to this article. --66.67.106.96 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:10, 13 August 2009 (UTC).

No. If the event has received notable media coverage, then it could have its own article, provided it uses reliable third-party sources. - BilCat (talk) 16:51, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Philadelphia’s State House?

The article says the Continental Congress met in "Philadelphia’s State House" which is now called Independence Hall, and of course is in Philadelphia, but wouldn't it be more proper to call it the "Pennsylvania State House" as the seat of colonial and then state Pennsylvania government? Beyond that, a link to the Independence Hall article is needed, whatever we call the building. --DThomsen8 (talk) 10:46, 22 August 2010 (UTC)