He was dragged through the streets by an angry mob. A few years later he helped make North Carolina the first colony to push for independence.
William Hooper grew up in Boston, went to Harvard, and studied law under James Otis, the man whose arguments against arbitrary British authority essentially invented the constitutional language of colonial resistance. Then he moved to North Carolina, became deputy attorney general, and promptly spent several years defending colonial government against backcountry farmers who thought the system was corrupt and rigged against them.
The Regulators weren't wrong about everything. They were protesting real abuses: corrupt local officials, excessive fees, taxes that hit small farmers harder than eastern elites. But their resistance turned disorderly and sometimes violent, and Hooper sided with Governor Tryon's government against them. In 1770, a crowd of Regulators in Hillsborough grabbed him and dragged him through the streets.
Hooper wasn't a hypocrite for siding with the government that day. He genuinely believed that legitimate authority deserved obedience and that disorder was its own kind of tyranny. That belief is actually what makes his later trajectory interesting. He didn't abandon his principles when he moved toward independence. He applied them to a different target.
By 1773 and 1774, Parliament's actions were convincing him that Britain itself had become the greater threat to constitutional government. The same framework he had used to defend the colonial government against the Regulators now pointed toward resistance against the Crown. When Parliament closed Boston's harbor after the Tea Party, his New England roots became unusually visible. He helped rally North Carolinians behind his native city, presided over meetings that pushed the colony toward its first Provincial Congress, and started writing publicly against Crown policy.
By 1774 he was already telling friends privately that the colonies were moving rapidly toward independence, which at that point was still a genuinely radical thing to say out loud.
North Carolina moved faster than almost anyone. On April 12, 1776, the Halifax Resolves authorized its delegates in Congress to support independence, the first formal authorization from any colony. Hooper had helped get it there, a Massachusetts-born lawyer who had once defended North Carolina's colonial government against internal rebellion, now helping that same colony become the first to push for a break with Britain.
The other signer worth knowing from this blog is Lyman Hall, who reached Philadelphia by an even stranger route. Hall was a Connecticut Yankee, Yale educated, originally trained as a Congregational minister before switching to medicine, who ended up in the Midway district of coastal Georgia as part of a transplanted New England community. Georgia was one of the most hesitant colonies, economically dependent on Britain and genuinely vulnerable. When the First Continental Congress met in 1774, Georgia sent nobody. But St. John's Parish, where Hall lived, wanted in anyway. They selected Hall to represent them in Philadelphia before Georgia itself had agreed to be represented. He showed up to Congress as the delegate of one parish inside a colony that hadn't officially joined the movement yet. Georgia eventually caught up. After the Revolution, St. John's Parish was renamed Liberty County in recognition of how far ahead of everyone else it had been.
Both men paid for their signatures after the fact. When the war moved south, British forces damaged Hooper's property near Wilmington and burned one of his houses. His family was forced inland during the British occupation of 1781. Hall lost his property when the British captured Savannah in 1778 and spent years displaced before returning to Georgia, where he was eventually elected governor.
The full story of both men is on the Virtual Wayback blog and there's a video on the YouTube channel going deeper. You can also talk directly with Hooper and Hall on Virtual Wayback.
What I keep coming back to is the Regulator episode. Hooper got dragged through the streets for defending the wrong government, then spent the next few years figuring out which government actually deserved defending. Does that make him more credible as a revolutionary than someone who had been against Britain from the start? And is there an argument that the people he opposed in 1770, the backcountry farmers protesting a corrupt system, had a better case for rebellion than the colonial elites who eventually declared independence?