IS-Responses+to+Essential+Questions

8/30/09  The Spanish colonization of the Americas was initiated by the Spanish conquistadors in the fifteenth century; within three centuries the Spanish empire encompassed small settlements in the Caribbean, Central America, much of South America, Mexico, and what is today the American Southwest. In short, the Spaniards had unprecedented success in colonization. Notwithstanding the heavy competition from Spain, England’s poor economic state, the New World’s promise of riches, and the Englishmens’ desire for independence compelled England’s rapid colonization of North America.

The woolen districts of England essentially supplied the first settlers in the New World, and severe depression in England essentially supplied such settlers with the motivation to travel to the Americas. Once landlords enclosed croplands for sheep grazing, small farmers were forced onto smaller plots of land or off the land entirely. Economic depression hit the woolen trade in the late sixteenth century; unemployed farmers were forced to drift about England as beggars. The economic depression generated an excessive amount of paupers in the country, and such paupers left England in search of an improved lifestyle. The New World offered the opportunity for a better life, and such opportunity ultimately sparked the colonization of the Jamestown settlement.

A principal intention of settlers of the colony of Jamestown was to acquire gold; the English learned of Spain’s success in the New World and wanted to accumulate riches themselves. Wealthy gentlemen desiring greater prosperity exhausted their resources, and the colony deteriorated due to the greed of the Englishmen. In striving to discover gold, the gentlemen neglected chores essential for the colony to function. The colony continued to deteriorate until it was exposed that there was no gold in the area; yet the colonists could not journey back to England because of the great amount of money, as well as time, invested in their adventure.

While the colonies of the New World offered an improved lifestyle and economic prosperity, freedom could additionally be acquired in the colonies. The charter of the Virginia Company guaranteed the colonists the same rights as Englishmen, yet the vast ocean separating the colonists from the English King provided the colonists with a sufficient amount of independence. The settlers relished such freedom; the colonists remained in North America to maintain their liberty, freedom, and independence.

The desire to keep pace with Spain’s success in the New World motivated the English to colonize, yet England’s rapid colonization ultimately resulted from severe depression in England, as well as the desires of Englishmen to be wealthy and independent.

9/6/09 The colonies of Massachusetts and Pennsylvania in the New World were established and sustained with dissimilar systems of beliefs, values, and ideas, yet Pennsylvania was a superior choice in terms of settlement. While each colony embraced unique social and economical characteristics, Pennsylvania was socially tolerant and economically prosperous. Religious and ethnic tolerance resulted in a diverse population, and close relations with Native Americans led to economic success.

The colony of Pennsylvania enforced no restrictions on immigration; the colony attracted people of a variety of religions and ethnicities. Broad religious toleration guaranteed the Quaker founders of the Pennsylvania colony the right to worship freely, eliminating persecution that was frequent in England. Additionally, such toleration guaranteed all the rights to vote and hold office, with the exceptions of Catholics and Jews due to England’s demands. Ethnic diversity, as well, strengthened the colony, in that Pennsylvania society was culturally rich.

William Penn’s friendly and civil treatment of Native Americans allowed an economically prosperous colony to flourish; Penn bought land from the Indians, while other colonial proprietors claimed the land through brute force. Advantageous relations with the Native Americans allowed Quakers the access to trade and prevented violent Indian assaults. It was ultimately the close relationship of Quakers and Native Americans that resulted in the thriving economy of the Pennsylvania colony.

In terms of social and economical characteristics, the colony of Pennsylvania was a favorable choice. Amiable relations with Native Americans led to economic prosperity, while religious and ethnic tolerance resulted in a complex and diverse society.

9/16/09 While the triumph of Britain and the colonies in the Seven Years War was essentially a joint triumph, it ultimately resulted in a rupture between Britain and the American colonies. The war enlarged England’s 72 million pound debt to a whopping 132 million pounds, and England relied on the colonists to pull the country out of debt. A true presence of British troops on North American soil ensured that the English monarch possessed an influence over the colonists, enraging the colonists during a time of mutual bitter feelings.

George Greenville, the British Prime Minister, was forced to take drastic measures to pull England out of debt; beginning in 1763, he established a program that consisted of four acts: the Sugar Act, the Currency Act, the Quartering Act and, indubitably the most galling of the four, the Stamp Act. All ultimately failed in that no act generated a substantial amount of money for England; however, such acts enraged the colonists, simply because their King was attempting to enforce policies. The Stamp Act, in particular, angered the lower class as well as the upper class in that all printed documents were taxed; the direct, internal tax affected every single colonist.

The general resentment of colonists towards the British and the British King was mutual; English soldiers who were forced to remain in the colonies looked upon American colonists with contempt. Such dislike, however, united Americans against a common enemy, England, for the first time. Colonists arrived in the New World guaranteed the rights of Englishmen, yet a shift became apparent in the aftermath of the war. By means of demeanor, the English soldiers distinguished themselves from the American colonists. American colonists were not looked upon as Englishmen; hence colonists no longer regarded themselves as citizens of England. Instead, they felt oppressed by England and the policies of the English King.

While Britain’s contempt for colonials during the aftermath of the war created bitter feelings, the actions of Britons, principally George Greenville and the British soldiers, amounted to high tensions between Britain and the American colonies. Greenville’s programs of 1763-1765, as well as the general demeanor of British soldiers in the Americas, enraged American colonists on the Eve of Revolution. 9/23/09 Richard Henry Lee’s proposal in the Continental Congress at Philadelphia on June 7, 1776 was essentially the original “declaration” of independence, though Thomas Jefferson was appointed chief draftsman of the Declaration. The document was ultimately successful in subverting British rule; it embodied the doctrine of natural rights as well as a list of grievances; colonists blamed King George III. The actions of the American colonists in declaring and fighting for their independence can be justified in that Britain did not treat the American colonists as Englishmen; American colonists believed themselves to be oppressed by the mother country.

Parliament’s authority over the colonies was absolute; in 1766, Parliament gained the right to pass any and all laws that they saw fit within the colonies through the Declaratory Act. American colonists were not represented within Parliament, hence the colonists were unable to give or withhold consent for Parliamentary legislature. Nevertheless, Parliament continued to enforce stricter laws and higher taxes within the colonies; the British East India Company’s monopoly on tea eliminated freedom in the colonies, ultimately arousing the Sons of Liberty who dumped 342 chests of tea into the Atlantic in 1773.

The Coercive or Intolerable Acts of 1774 closed Boston’s harbor and revoked the royal charter of Massachusetts as well. A new Quartering Act was implemented, and the Acts strengthened the writs of assistance in Massachusetts. The First Continental Congress made an attempt at unification; fifty-five delegates from twelve colonies were advised to prepare their local militias. In one last attempt at unification, the Second Continental Congress adopted the Olive Branch Petition in early May of 1775; all thirteen colonies were in attendance. The petition essentially professed American loyalty to the crown in an attempt to prevent further hostilities. In response to the Olive Branch Petition, King George III hired thousands of German troops to help crush his rebellious subjects.

In drafting the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson asserted that the English King had flouted the natural rights of people, thus justifying the actions of the American colonists in cutting all ties with Britain.

10/11/09 The Constitution was composed to provide a set of rules and principles defining the nature and extent of the government of the United States of America. The Constitution favored a strong central government and was supported by the Federalists, while Antifederalists argued in favor of state and local governments. Democratic Republican ideology stemmed from the Antifederalists; Democratic Republicans loosely interpreted the Constitution. The Constitution allows for political debate in that its contents can be interpreted in various ways; one can argue the absolute authority of the document.

President George Washington purposefully elected two men of varying political mindsets as members of his cabinet: as a Democratic Republican, Thomas Jefferson fought to give individual states power; while Federalist Alexander Hamilton feared the prospect of “mob rule.” Washington himself belonged to no political party; he heard both sides (Jefferson’s side as well as Hamilton’s side) of an argument before giving his final word on an issue. Washington hired men who he knew and trusted; hence he was unbiased in siding with one over another. Had Washington belonged to a distinct political party, political debate over the Constitution would have dissolved with his inauguration.

Jefferson and Hamilton clashed prominently in their interpretations of the Constitution; Jefferson favored a strict interpretation of its contents in order to limit the powers of the federal government, while Hamilton believed in a loose interpretation of the Constitution. Hamilton supported the establishment of the Bank of the United States, while Jefferson argued that such a measure was unconstitutional. Hamilton argued that the Constitution allowed for adjustments, while Jefferson insisted that the Constitution was to be interpreted strictly and trusted as authoritative. Debate stemmed from contrasting interpretations of the Constitution; disputation is still prevalent today.

The Constitution of the United States of America has sparked political debate since its beginning; the Constitution has allowed for debate in that, to this day, no single, distinct method of interpreting the Constitution has emerged. Its contents can be interpreted in various ways; in establishing a national law, the Constitution allowed for an enduring debate.

10/25/09 Jefferson himself claimed that the election of 1800 was a “revolution” comparable to that of 1776; he accepted his election as evidence of a return to the spirit of the Revolution, meanwhile condemning Hamilton and Adams for their disloyalty to the ideals of 1776 and 1787. John Adams was the last Federalist president of the United States, and his successor sought ardently to restore the republican experiment. While Jefferson’s election did ultimately shift political control from the Federalists to the Democratic-Republicans, the “revolution” of 1800 was not a revolution; it was peaceful transfer of power of the political system and a narrow victory in Jefferson’s favor.

Jefferson’s victory in 1800 came by the narrowest of margins; a switch of votes in New York alone would have given the White House to Adams. In reality, Adams gained significant electoral strength, notwithstanding New York’s support for Jefferson. Although southern and western states generally favored Jefferson, Aaron Burr turned New York to the Democratic-Republican. The three-fifths clause of the Constitution essentially concluded Jefferson’s victory; white southern voters gained a bonus that ultimately determined the outcome of the election of 1800. Jefferson won the election with 73 electoral votes, while Adams received 65; Jefferson’s victory was no popular upheaval of the political system.

While acrimony during Adam’s presidency troubled the young nation, all parties accepted the results of the election of 1800. The transfer of power from the Federalist John Adams to the Democratic-Republican Thomas Jefferson ensued calmly and peacefully. The vigor of the American experiment in democracy united the country; Americans took great pride in an achievement that went unmatched by Britain for an entire generation. The election of 1800 did not disturb the nation to a serious degree; it did not bring about a drastic political upending.

While Thomas Jefferson claimed that the election of 1800 was a “revolution” in that it represented a return to the original spirit of the American Revolution, the “revolution” of 1800 was, in fact, no revolution. No upheaval of the political system ensued; while Jefferson narrowly clenched the victory, the “revolution” resulted in a peaceful transfer of power.