RedState91%

Rare Copy of 'Declaration' Doc, Discovered by Accident in the U.K., Was Seized 250 Years Ago 23%

By Becca Lower0%

7/4/2026, 1:08:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 29 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Appeal to Emotion, and Anecdotal, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 31.1% saturation with 239 hits. Analysis detected 1,907 faulty-reasoning hits from 769 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 36.3% and a BS Rank of 23% (16,889 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 77.20% of the article peer group.

We continue to share many tales with readers about all things America 250. 
It's a journey that will last through the waning days of 2026. 
But there might not be a cooler story this week about the Declaration of Independence than this one. 
For the first time ever, a rare copy of the Declaration of Independence has been discovered outside the U.S,, and it happened by accident, by all accounts: 
LONDON  A rare copy of the Declaration of Independence lost for 250 years has been discovered in London, where it is the only known example of its kind outside the U.S. 
Printed in Exeter, New Hampshire, just days after the Declaration was adopted on July 4, 1776, the document was intended to spread news of American independence throughout the American colonies. 
The early copy remained tucked away in Britain’s National Archives until a volunteer cataloging records from the American Revolutionary War came across it in May among the papers of Royal Navy captains. 
Wait... how did a British naval captain get tangled up in one of America's founding documents? 
... 
Britain’s National Archives said in a news release Thursday...[that t]he Declaration was among a collection of papers the Royal Navy seized in December 1776 after it captured the American privateer vessel the Dalton, it said. 
“It was an amazing addition to the story of the Dalton and the many other privateers that fought the British at sea,” Amanda Bevan, who leads the National Archives’ project cataloging Royal Navy correspondence from the American Revolution, said in an email Friday. 
As Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) would readily explain to you, privateers were legal pirates, issued letters of marque and reprisal, that is, commissioned by the U.S. government to attack and take the cargo of enemy ships on its behalf. 
Lee re-introduced a bill in 2025 that would revive the practice (ended after the War of 1812) in order to let Americans aid in decimating suspected, Caribbean drug cartel vessels. 
The seized papers also included the Dalton’s commission, which granted it permission from the Continental Congress to attack British vessels, and other official orders explaining the rules of warfare for privateers. 
Bevan said it was common for such documents to be read aloud to crews to reinforce discipline. 
Now, how did the Dalton fare in the end, and what's the reason a copy of the Declaration of Independence could be quietly lost for over two centuries? 
On Christmas Eve 1776, the 18-gun vessel commanded by Eleazer Johnson was pursued for seven hours by the 64-gun HMS Raisonnable, commanded by Capt. 
Thomas Fitzherbert of the Royal Navy, before it was captured off Portugal. 
Johnson and his crew of about 120 men were imprisoned in Plymouth, England. 
The seized Declaration, listed simply as “another paper” in the Royal Navy inventory, remained buried in British archives for centuries. 
It was eventually uncovered by Michael Scurr, a retired insurance executive who has volunteered at the National Archives for 11 years. 
Back to the recovery of the Declaration copy. 
The BBC picks up the trail here, reporting on the shocked first reaction by Scurr, to seeing the historic paper's contents: 
Volunteer Michael Scurr, recalled feeling butterflies in his stomach after he opened up the paper and realised what it was. 
"I called over to my boss and said, 'I think you need to come and have a look at this'," he told BBC News. 
And just how rare is the copy? 
Dr Graham Moore from The National Archives said the discovery is "one of the rarest forms of the Declaration we know about", adding that it was not meant to be preserved due to the intention to distribute it quickly. 
"After the original printing on 4 July, the news of the Declaration is travelling fast around North America and its being reprinted as it reaches each successive colony," he told BBC News. 
"The copy we have is one of only 11 surviving from the first ones printed in New Hampshire." 
So don't let anyone convince you that there aren't any treasures left to be found out in the world. 
You never know what might be secretly hiding in plain sight due to the hurried filing habits of bureaucrats from some bygone era. 
Treasure hunters, take heart! 
Editor's Note: It’s America’s 250th birthday! 
Help RedState celebrate the greatest nation in history by honoring its past, defending its present, and preserving its future with reporting you can trust. 
Join RedState VIP and use promo code AMERICA250 to receive 74% off your membership. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 6.5%Becca Lower: 3.0%RedState: 7.0%Confirmation Bias6.5%This article: 2.3%Becca Lower: 0.2%RedState: 0.8%Anchoring Bias2.3%This article: 11.2%Becca Lower: 3.1%RedState: 3.4%Availability Heuristic11.2%This article: 4.2%Becca Lower: 0.5%RedState: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic4.2%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 0.0%RedState: 0.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 5.1%Becca Lower: 2.4%RedState: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias5.1%This article: 9.0%Becca Lower: 11.8%RedState: 9.2%Framing Effect9.0%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 0.5%RedState: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 0.0%RedState: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 0.0%RedState: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 8.3%Becca Lower: 2.5%RedState: 1.7%Optimism Bias8.3%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 0.6%RedState: 1.7%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 9.6%Becca Lower: 8.7%RedState: 13.9%Negativity Bias9.6%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 1.4%RedState: 1.8%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 1.1%RedState: 2.0%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 0.0%RedState: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 8.2%Becca Lower: 6.1%RedState: 4.7%In-Group Bias8.2%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 3.0%RedState: 3.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 11.4%Becca Lower: 1.4%RedState: 2.0%Halo Effect11.4%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 0.0%RedState: 0.8%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 0.1%RedState: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 2.7%Becca Lower: 0.4%RedState: 1.2%Recency Bias2.7%This article: 3.5%Becca Lower: 0.3%RedState: 0.5%Primacy Effect3.5%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 0.0%RedState: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 3.5%RedState: 6.9%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 1.2%RedState: 2.6%Straw Man0.0%This article: 31.1%Becca Lower: 4.6%RedState: 3.3%Appeal to Authority31.1%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 3.2%RedState: 2.4%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 1.8%RedState: 1.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 0.0%RedState: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.1%Becca Lower: 8.3%RedState: 10.1%Hasty Generalization8.1%This article: 5.7%Becca Lower: 1.2%RedState: 0.7%Red Herring5.7%This article: 2.5%Becca Lower: 1.1%RedState: 0.9%Bandwagon2.5%This article: 15.7%Becca Lower: 10.0%RedState: 8.5%Appeal to Emotion15.7%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 1.9%RedState: 1.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 3.0%Becca Lower: 1.8%RedState: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)3.0%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 0.0%RedState: 0.9%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 3.1%Becca Lower: 0.3%RedState: 1.2%Burden of Proof3.1%This article: 3.9%Becca Lower: 0.3%RedState: 0.1%Appeal to Nature3.9%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 0.2%RedState: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 12.5%Becca Lower: 1.9%RedState: 2.6%Anecdotal12.5%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 0.2%RedState: 0.3%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 11.8%Becca Lower: 1.3%RedState: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)11.8%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 0.0%RedState: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 0.0%RedState: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 5.7%Becca Lower: 0.5%RedState: 0.2%Personal Incredulity5.7%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 0.0%RedState: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 0.0%RedState: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 3.1%Becca Lower: 1.1%RedState: 2.4%Unattributed Quote3.1%This article: 6.6%Becca Lower: 1.9%RedState: 1.8%Quote-first Misdirection6.6%This article: 29.9%Becca Lower: 13.3%RedState: 21.5%Biased Writer Voice29.9%This article: 6.1%Becca Lower: 5.1%RedState: 4.8%Indoctrination6.1%This article: 0.0%Becca Lower: 0.0%RedState: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 12.1%Becca Lower: 18.6%RedState: 15.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias12.1%This article: 4.9%Becca Lower: 4.2%RedState: 3.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…4.9%

769 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers35%attributed speech503writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageBritain’s National Archives • 35 words • 0.0% coverageAmanda Bevan • 43 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageAmanda Bevan • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageMichael Scurr • 20 words • 0.0% coverageMichael Scurr • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageDr Graham Moore • 39 words • 0.0% coverageDr Graham Moore • 32 words • 0.0% coverageDr Graham Moore • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageRedState • 24 words • 100.0% coverageRedState • 14 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

RedState

100%flagged-word coverage
38 attributed words14% of attributed speech73% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%RedState: 100.0%100.0%Indoctrination+58.6 ptsWriter: 4.6%RedState: 63.2%63.2%Politically Right Leaning +49.4 ptsWriter: 13.7%RedState: 63.2%63.2%Biased Writer Voice-45.7 ptsWriter: 45.7%RedState: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-5.4 ptsWriter: 5.4%RedState: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.