LO+Responses+to+essential+questions

8-30-09 Even though Spain was one of England’s biggest competitors it was not the main reason that England started to colonize in the New World. Ultimately the English began colonizing in the New World because they wished to incur new opportunities, more wealth, and have some independence from the English crown. Even though they failed in finding gold and their survival rates were low, they had spent to much money and time trying to get to America that they were not going to give up so easily. For a lot of people the conditions of living in America would be better than living in England in the long run. During the seventeenth century England was amidst a depression. There was over population in the country and poor people were just wandering in the streets. Many of the wool manufacturers were struggling and out of business. The enclosure movement also hurt a lot of people. This movement was when areas for farming were fenced off rather than having communal farming plots. Peasants who could not afford to buy out these lots were hurt because they were left unemployed. All of these disadvantaged people in England turned to the colonies for a fresh start. There the English had more job opportunities and they could have hundreds of acres of land to them selves. Even though the going was rough in the colonies when they first started settling, it was better than what they left behind in England. When Spain first started going to the Americas in the fifteenth century they were very prosperous in finding gold. They came back with shiploads of gold and various treasures. The English learned of this and realized that they too wanted in on the gold hunt. They received a charter to travel to America from the Virginia Company. The men traveling to the colonies were gentlemen that wanted to strike it rich here and were not used to doing things for themselves. They sailed over in three ships because they expected to fill all three with gold and riches. When they failed to find any gold in the region that they were in they soon realized that they also neglected to take proper care of themselves and find and adequate amount of food. It was hard for them but they soon learned how to provide for themselves. They did not go back to England because they had put forth so much effort in planning the trip to Jamestown that it would be an embarrassment to go back empty handed and they would not give up. In the New World many people could have some freedom from the English crown without being completely separated from them. With the colonies being so far away from England people in the motherland often forgot about or neglected the people over seas. The colonists then had the freedom to do what they want. They could practice their own religion without being ridiculed and they could farm where they wanted or work where they wanted. In was a fresh start for many people and they would do what it takes just to get away from complete and total control of the king. Although Spain did show the English how much wealth they could get in the Americas the English went over there for their own reasons.

6 September 2009 The colonies of Massachusetts and Pennsylvania were both settled during the seventeenth century. Although they were both New England settlements they soon began to take on divergent traits when it came to social and economic happenings within the colonies. Looking back, Pennsylvania was a much better colony to settle in. The settlers in Pennsylvania thrived economically due to their good affiliation with the Native Americans, and their society prospered because of religious and ethnic toleration. The beliefs of the Quakers played a large role in keeping peaceful terms with the Native American tribes surrounding Pennsylvania. The Quakers were a religious group that settled in this colony who did not involve themselves in violence and sought passive alternatives to fighting. William Penn, an aristocratic gentleman who founded Pennsylvania, was among many of the Quakers. Rather than forcing the Native Americans out of the land they wanted to settle in like the Puritans in the Massachusetts Bay Colony often did, Penn bought the land off of them using goods from England that the Indians did not possess. This opened up a friendly trading system between the Native Americans and the Pennsylvanian colonists and stimulated their economy. Pennsylvania attracted many different religions and people from different ethnicities because of their open toleration. This created a very diverse and fruitful society unlike the Massachusetts Bay Colony who shunned people if they did not believe in the Puritan ways because of their dreams in achieving the perfect utopian society. When William Penn received the grant to create Pennsylvania in 1681 he sent out people to advertise the colony using pamphlets describing that anyone was welcome there and whoever came would receive land. This encouraged many different people to flock there. The colony had many social perks that were different from many of the other colonies making Pennsylvania the colonial hippies. There was no slavery, there was freedom of worship, the death penalty was only given for murder and treason, there was no military defense, and all landowners could vote. Since everyone who settled in Pennsylvania were given land, that made everyone landowners and everyone had the right to vote except for Jews and Catholics. Because of all of these qualities Pennsylvania soon acquired a very prosperous society. Overall, Pennsylvania was a better choice for people to settle in for economic and social reasons. Their economy flourished because of friendliness towards the Native Americans and their society contained a mixture of many different people because of their open toleration. Living in hippy Pennsylvania was by far better than living in strict and uniform Massachusetts.

16 September 2009 The French and Indian War, also known as the Seven Years War lasted from 1754-1763 as a world war. This war was the turning point in British-colonial relations. __The American colonies had a different social structure and economic goals than the English. This became more apparent when the British put aside their policy of salutary neglect and started to tighten its grip on the colonies. When the war debt started to take its toll on Great Britain they turned to the colonies to help them gain back their wealth. Great Britain puts many laws into place such as the Proclamation of 1763, the Writs of Assistance, and Grenville’s Program. These acts are enforced by a standing army of ten thousand men from Great Britain and this does not sit well with the American colonists. __The French and Indian War in the American Colonies was fought to gain the land in the Ohio River Valley from the French. The English defeated the French during the Battle of Quebec and the land was technically theirs now. In 1763 the Pontiac’s Rebellion occurred in which members from his tribe attacked major English forts like Fort Detroit. This rebellion led to the Proclamation of 1763. This proclamation was signed and put into place by George III to ensure that there would be no more problems with the Native Americans. The Proclamation of 1763 stated that no man could settle west of the Appalachian Mountains. King George III did this because England owed two million dollars of debt after the Seven Years War and they could not afford another conflict in the Americas. This infuriated the colonists because their friends and family just died fighting for a land that is now prohibited to them. Their efforts were now pointless. Some people, such as the Paxton Boys from Pennsylvania crossed the Appalachian line on purpose to show an open defiance towards the English crown. An act instated by Great Britain that really angered the colonists was the writs of assistance. This law was an extension to the Navigation Laws. The Navigation Laws prohibited the colonies to ship to anyone but Great Britain. This meant that everything the colonies shipped out had to go straight to England and the colonists could only buy goods from England. In 1761, when colonists started to illegally smuggle in sugar from the Caribbean, Great Britain put the writs of assistance into place. This gave England to search ships and storehouses without any probable cause. In the British eyes the colonists were guilty until proven innocent. James Otis’ case brought about the point the protection of a citizens property needs to be of higher importance than parliamentary laws, but he lost because Thomas Hutchinson claimed parliamentary had the same value as protection of property. Another breaking point between the colonists and Great Britain were the installation of George Grenville’s Program from 1763 to 1765. Each of these three laws was expected to bring Great Britain money so that they could relieve their war debt, but the only thing they were successful in was tightening the tensions between the two countries. The Sugar Act was put into place in 1764 as an amendment to the Molasses Act. Its goal was to stop the smuggling of sugar into the colonies from the Caribbean and stated that the colonies could only buy sugar from England. The Currency Act of 1764 is when Great Britain wanted to make a uniform currency within the colonies that was sent from England. The Quartering Act of 1765 stated that any person must house and feed a solider should the situation come upon itself. None of these laws lasted very long and the English ended up losing more money than they were gaining because they put a standing army in the colonies to help enforce the new laws. The French and Indian War, along with the years after it, induced a breaking point between the colonies and England. Their differences were really becoming noticeable and they had different social and economic structures than each other. When the English started to instill laws on the colonies the settlers went through the roof and were very angry. We can see this list of complaints in the Constitution. The colonists wrote this list about the things they did not like about what King George III was doing to them so that it would never happen again. It was time for the settlers to run the colonies their way.

23 September 2009 In the years leading up to the Declaration of Independence in 1776 tensions were rising between the British and the colonists. The British wanted to govern and take control of the colonists, but the colonists did not wish to be governed. The people back in Great Britain kept reeling out new laws and acts to dictate many aspects of the colonist’s life and they made sure there was a good supply of British soldiers to restrain them from doing anything against what Great Britain wanted them to do. These events led up to the decision for the colonies to fight for their independence against Great Britain and they had every right to do it. In 1760, when King George III came to power, Great Britain put aside their policy of salutary neglect in return for a more hands-on control over her colonies. England realized that they can make money off of the colonies and prevent them from trading with anybody else. It all started with the Writs of Assistance in 1761 in which British officials had the right to search any boat or store in an effort to prevent the smuggling of sugar. The British wanted to be the colony’s sole provider of sugar. Soon after in 1763 the Grenville’s program was instated into the colonies. This program included the Sugar Act, the Currency Act, the Quartering Act, and the Stamp Act. All of these acts were very annoying to the colonists and their anger began to bubble. What made them the angriest was the Stamp Act of 1765. This act put a direct tax on all printed documents in the colonies so it affected everyone. Through this the colonists come up with the idea of taxation without representation in which it was not fair for England, an ocean away, to make decisions for the colonies without a representative from the actual colonies there. Other acts that were created and added to the colonists’ anger were the Declaratory Act, the Townshend Duties, the Coercive Acts, and the Tea Act. The Tea Act of 1773 especially added to the rising tensions between the British and the colonists when the British East India Company put a monopoly on all British Tea imports. This eliminated the middle man in the colonies and made the merchants very upset. All of the acts being put into place by the English were very frustrating for the colonists and it added stress to the breaking point between the mother country and the colonies. Another aspect that created more anger and frustration within the colonies was the soldiers that Great Britain placed in the colonies to watch over the settlers and control them. Often times these soldiers were very aggressive such as in the Boston Massacre on March 5, 1770. This event was due to an increase of the British soldiers in Boston. Another act against the British soldiers was the Gaspe Incident in 1772. This was when the Sons of Liberty set a British warship on fire. The colonists did not agree with have all of these officials in their colonies watching every step they take and reporting back to King George III. All in all the colonists were very annoyed with the British. Great Britain wanted to rule the colonies but the colonies did not want to be ruled. The two things that annoyed the colonies the most was the creation of all of the acts and taxes and the soldiers that were sent to watch over them. The colonists deserved their independence from England and they had every right to fight for it.

11 October 2009 __The constitution allows an enduring political debate through the first amendment of the Bill of Rights. Through this amendment people have the right to have freedom of speech and they are entitled to their own opinions about the different ways our country should be run.__ There are always going to be at least two sides to every argument. In almost every situation there is going to be one person who does not agree with the rest. The first amendment in the Constitution makes it possible for people to voice their views so that people can decide which route to take in decision making. George Washington’s presidency was the only office to hold people from two different political parties. Thomas Jefferson was a democratic republican and he was George Washington’s Secretary of State. Alexander Hamilton was a federalist and was George Washington’s Secretary of Treasury. Both of these men helped George Washington a lot but they had completely different views about how the country should be run. Thomas Jefferson felt that the power should be given to the states so that they could decide what was best for each individual area. Alexander Hamilton wanted to create a central government in which all the states were united under a central power. These men had opposing views because Jefferson felt as if the central government would be too similar to a monarchy that they have been trying to escape from in Europe. Although these men did not agree with each other, the first amendment of the Bill of Rights gave them the right to openly discuss their views. Then it was left up to George Washington to decide what he wanted for his country. Over two hundred years later the freedom of speech amendment still allows different political parties to express their views about successfully running a country. Although no other president has had an office with more than one political party in it the public and the Electoral College vote for which party they feel would be the best leader for America. People vote based on how each candidate persuades them in their speech. Candidates are able to express themselves in their speech using the first amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America.

25 October 2009 Was the Revolution of 1800 truly a revolution? At the turn of the nineteenth century the United States of America was going through instability and havoc. Relations were not good with France and Great Britain and America was at the brink of war with either of them at any second. The United States of America were not very united with their separate views on Federalism and John Adam’s presidency was not very helpful for anybody. When Thomas Jefferson was elected president in 1800 it was a huge political shift from Federalists to Democratic Republicans. Not only this, but it was a shift towards a more politically stable nation. __Thomas Jefferson’s election was a revolution in a sense that it set the standards for presidents to come. He paved the way for our nation and he helped to get them started in making the United States of America what it is today.__ The Revolution of 1800 did not consist of any violent uprisings or anything of that sort. Much like President Obama’s election this year it was just a change, a milestone that will be marked in history as something that shaped our country. John Adam’s presidency put America in a hole. It gave Federalists a bad reputation and it almost caused us a costly war with France. It was Jefferson’s job to try and pull us out of that hole and help put America on the right track. The Embargo Act put into place on December 22, 1807 restricted trade between the United States and all other countries after hostilities encountered by Great Britain. Many people viewed it as a Federalist act because it did not support the common man, but what else could Thomas Jefferson do in order to maintain America’s neutrality and prevent a war from breaking out. The election of 1800, in which Thomas Jefferson was elected president was indeed a revolution. Although he did not correct everything that was wrong with our country, I mean what human could in just eight short years; he did set the country on track for the future presidents to come, like James Madison. The Revolution of 1800 changed America politically, socially, and economically. It converted America from being Federalist to being Democratic-Republican and anything or anybody that is able to sway a nation to a different political party and is successful deserves the title of revolutionary.

7 November 2009 Andrew Jackson’s presidency, from 1828 to 1837, has been commonly known as the “Rise of Mass Democracy” in the United States of America. Although Jackson did not win the race for presidency in 1824, it was the first time in the history of this young country that the common man, that does not own a significant amount of land, could vote for a president. The Jacksonian Democracy was characterized by increased male suffrage and manifest destiny. Jackson supported the rights of the common man, and did not want any signs of aristocracy in America. Although Jackson’s presidency supported the rise in democracy through the economy and socially in the bank war and male suffrage, in some ways it did not support democracy by excluding certain groups of America through the Nullification Crisis and the Indian Removal Act. Andrew Jackson stood up for the common man economically during the bank war in 1832. The charter for the Bank of the United States was due to expire in 1836, but in a plot to politically overthrow Jackson, Henry Clay requested for the charter to be renewed four years earlier than that in 1832. Jackson claimed that the “bank…is trying to kill me, but I will kill it.” If Jackson rechartered the bank he would be making it difficult for the west, but if he vetoed it he would be making the wealthy in the east very upset with him. This put him in a difficult situation, but Jackson took his chances by vetoing the bill. He did not trust the Bank of the United States because it put all of the power in the hands of the upper class on the east coast and it was not very beneficial to the whole country. Jackson did not feel as if the bank appealed to the masses and he wanted to create something that did. This was a democratic move because it was a step towards giving the common man even more right and moving away from aristocracy. Andrew Jackson also gave more rights to the common man through voting. In 1800 a person was only allowed to vote for a president if the owned property. As time went on voting restrictions soon evolved into allowing tax payers vote, and finally the common man in most states. Jackson’s election in 1828 showed a shift in voting power from the rich, elite to the popular masses within the country. Although Jackson demonstrated democracy in theses ways, he did not represent it as much in others. This was clearly seen through the Nullification Crisis and the Indian Removal Act. The Nullification Crisis occurred in 1832 when South Carolina was still really mad about the Tariff of 1828. This bill raised the tariff to 45% and it made many in the south angry because it was only benefitting the north. Jackson tried to make a compromise with the south by lowering it to 35% but even this did not pacify them. South Carolina took measures into their own hands by nullifying it and the saying that they would secede from the union. This made Jackson angry and he prepared to send military their. This problem created an even bigger divide between the north and south which did not really promote unity and the equality of the common man. Andrew Jackson also secluded groups using the Indian Removal Act of 1830. He wanted the remaining Indian tribes to move west into an area specified for them in Oklahoma. Many Native Americans were forced out of their homes and the only way they could stay is if they adopted white ways. The Cherokee had the biggest problem with this uprooting and they even brought Georgia to court over it. The act was not a very democratic act because it singled them out and it did not unite the Native Americans or accept them into being a part of the common man. Andrew Jackson has done a lot for America from his victory at the Battle of New Orleans to his victory in the Bank Wars. Whether or not his actions were entirely democratic is debatable. Some of them were, like the ending of the Bank of the United States and male suffrage. Others were not, such as the Nullification Crisis and the Indian Removal Act.