-HN+Responses+to+Essential+Questions

8/29/09 From the fifteenth to seventeenth centuries, Spain led the colonization effort in the Americas, earning new land and gathering valuable natural resources. Though the competition between England and Spain helped to spur English colonization in North America in the early seventeenth century, the English were ultimately motivated by the prospects of wealth, an overflow of paupers, and the desire for independence.

The majority of colonists in the burgeoning Jamestown settlement were wealthy gentleman; their primary objective in coming to the New World was to seek out gold. After learning of the riches that Spain had accumulated from their colonies, these English gentlemen hoped to gain more from themselves in North America. In order to start the expedition, they invested in the joint-stock Virginia Company. When they established Jamestown, their fruitless attempts to discover gold devastated the settlement as they neglected the essential task of gathering food and supplies; this plan was eventually thwarted when the gentlemen discovered that there was no gold in the area. However, they stayed in the Americas because they had already invested too much time and money to leave. Though they failed to achieve their goal, they were the initial founders of the English colonies.

England at this time was dealing with a severe depression on the wool trade and the enclosure movement, causing an excess of poor in the country; these beggars and paupers went to the Americas to seek opportunities that were not available to them in England. The country relied heavily on its wool trade, which many of the lower class worked in. When the depression hit, many of the workers were unemployed, forcing them to roam around the country searching and begging for food and supplies. In addition, the enclosure movement, in which landowners fenced off large common areas into small plots, took away community fields from peasants who could not afford to rent or tend their own tiny strips of land. Therefore, these peasants had to find another way to obtain necessities. These displaced workers and peasants made their way to the New World in order to find a better life than the one they had in their own country. Their hopes for an improved lifestyle and the opportunities that the colonies offered helped entice England's poor to go to North America and expand the colonies.

Many English wanted the individual freedom that could be pursued in the colonies. When the Viriginia Company first created its charter, it promised that colonists would have the same rights as Englishmen. The colonists clung to this promise, incorporating it into many of their own documents. However, these settlers also desired liberty from the English and enjoyed the freedom they had due to distance and neglect from the English monarchy. Hence came one of the basic foundations of American ideology: that independence is an essential right. The colonists stayed in North America mainly because they hoped to maintain their liberty and individual freedoms.

Despite the heavy competition from Spain, England's rapid colonization was mainly due to the excessive poor and the desire for riches and independence.

9/4/09 After the colonies of Massachusetts and Pennsyvania were established in the early and late seventeenth century, respectively, they began to take on definitive social and economic traits. These colonies were maintained with different ideologies, though by modern standards, Pennsylvania was a far more preferable choice. In Pennsylvania, beneficial relationships with the natives led to economic prosperity, while tolerance of varied religious and ethnicities caused the development of a diverse society.

The Pennsylvanian Quakers' respectful treatment of the Native Americans opened their trading networks and allowed them to maintain a thriving economy. After William Penn was granted colonial land by King Charles II in 1681, he proceeded to purchase the land from the Indians instead of forcibly claiming it, as had been done with the other colonies. This positive relationship prevented Indian attacks and gave the peaceful Quakers access to trade with the natives. This stimulated the economy, unlike Massachusetts, whose Puritanical isolation discouraged the expansion of trade. With the economy bolstered by good relations and trade with the Native Americans, Pennsylvania became the most prosperous colony.

In Pennsylvania, an assortment of religions, nationalities, and ethnicities were tolerated and welcomed, creating a rich population. The people of Pennsylvania hailed from many places: Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, and more. Each of these ethnic groups contibuted strengths to the colony; for example, the Dutch contributed knowledge of technology and science. In addition, there was broad religious toleration, which created a haven for religions that were persecuted in other areas. The Quakers, who founded the Pennsylvania colony, were themselves persecuted in England. The multitude of immgrants were lured to the colony by the offer of free land. This meant that anyone who came to Pennsylvania could vote, because one of the only requirements involved land-owning; only Catholics and Jews were prevented from voting or holding office due to pressure from England. Pennsylvanian society grew to be complex and diverse as several religious beliefs and ethnicities were accepted.

Pennsylvania was a far superior choice to Massachusetts in terms of economic prosperity due to advantagous relations with the Native Americans and a complex society as a result of religious and ethnic liberality.

9/16/09 The French and Indian War, which lasted from 1756 to 1763 as an extension of the European Seven Years' War, caused underlying conflicts between the British and the colonists to become apparent and escalate. Though differing social structures, attitudes, and goals had always existed between England and the American colonies, tensions escalated with the tightening of monarchial control in the colonies, seen in the distribution of land, the writs of assistance, and Grenville's acts, all of which were enforced by the troops remaining in North America.

After the French and Indian War, the British instated land policies that restricted the colonists in order to improve Anglo-Indian relations. As a provision of the 1763 Treaty of Paris, the British gained control of almost the entirety of the North American French holdings. The colonists, whose population was exponentially expanding, hoped to spill over into these new frontiers. However, in light of the increasing tensions between the colonists and the Indians, King George III chose to limit areas for settlement to avoid sending money and supplies to the Ohio River Valley. The Proclamation of 1763 forbade colonists from settling west of the Appalachian Mountains, which served as a natural land barrier. This law angered colonists who wanted to take advantage of the plentiful land, which they felt they had justly earned by participating in the war. The allowance of land by the British crown greatly offended the colonists, who believed that the land was theirs to use.

In 1761, the British established the writs of assistance, which were a set of laws that controlled tha activities of the colonists. They were established as a measure to prevent smuggling, which was actively practiced in the Americas. A British official was permitted to seize and search any ship or store without probable cause. Another practice was that of admiralty courts; a commander of a ship that stopped another ship suspected of smuggling was the judge and jury than the accused. Above all, suspects were considered guilty until proven innocent. These laws were essentially King George restructuring the colonies in order to better control them. The writs of assistance agitated the colonists, who feared that their rights as Englishmen were being disregarded. In a well-known court case, colonial lawyer James Otis claimed that the writs of assistance did not fairly treat the colonists and took away their rights as citizens; though he lost, he highlighted the tenacity with which the colonists clung to their rights. The writs of assistance, which were intended to reign in the colonists, heightened the tension between the colonists and the mother country.

The war greatly increased Britain's debt; though the British landowners bore the brunt of the taxation, the government felt that the colonies should also be taxed. George Grenville, the prime minister, developed a series of acts to be implemented in order to raise revenue. The first law put in place was the Sugar Act in 1764; this act placed a tax on sugar as an attempt to put an end to smuggling. This attempt actually cost the crown money, as the monarchy was forced to hire forces to enforce the law in the colonies. The act actually affected the colonists' mentality, as the attack on their daily life and tradition enraged them; it also drastically impacted the port towns of Boston, Charleston, Savannah, and Philadelphia. The act was eventually repealed, just as all the subsequent acts enacted by Grenville were. The Sugar Act was followed by the Currency Act of 1764, an attempt to have the colonies use a universal British currency, and the Quartering Act of 1765, which forced the colonists to provide shelter, food, and supplies to soldiers, both of which failed. The most controversial act was the Stamp Act of 1765: a direct, internal tax that placed a tax on all printed documents and paper products, which were used by all social classes. The tax affected every colonist and incensed the lower, middle, and upper classes. More than any other act, the Stamp Act unified the nation and propelled it towards the impending revolution. Though it was eventually revoked, the Stamp Act fueled the fiery cries against taxation without representation in the colonies. Grenville's program, which was intended to alleviate the monarchial debt, created the colonists to bitterly resent the British, who they began to view as oppressors.

The measures taken by the British to control the colonies and end the long-standing policy of salutory neglect was enforced by troops stationed in America. Some 10,000 British soldiers remained in the colonies after the French and Indian War; these soldiers were decidedly British and stood out in the colonies, which adopted a more relaxed demeanor than the mother country. The presence of these troops strengthened the feeling of monarchial control and interference in colonial affairs. The soldiers' presence in the American colonies to enforce British laws increased the tension between the colonists and the British.

The French and Indian War led to land decrees, colonial taxation, military presence, and the writs of assistance, which provided the founding grievances that caused a decisive clah between the colonies and Britain in the American Revolution. The aftermath of the Seven Year's War marked a near-complete disintegration of positive British and colonial relations.

9/24/09 From the end of the French and Indian War until the initiation of the American Revolution in 1775, restless colonists had to endure numerous acts established by the British to reclaim order. Each new measure increased the tension, creating a cycle of rebellion and reataliation, as the colonists reacted to the laws set forth by the British, causing them to impose harsher rules. The Americans were finally forced to fight for their liberty. The colonists were justified in revolting for their rights and independence due to the harsh acts enacted by the British, ranging from economic interference to political restructuring.

After the repeal of the unsuccessful Grenville program, the British instituted the Townshend Act and the Tea Act as an attempt to garner revenue and revitalize the economy. The Townshend Duties, in place from 1767 to 1770, turned the British focus away from the repaying of war debts to maintaining the colonial governments and the salaries of the officials. An indirect tax, it placed taxes on British manufacturers, who in turn raised prices of the goods exported to the colonies. In order to combat these increased prices, most of the colonies adopted non-importation policies and sought to become self-sufficient. The Tea Act of 1773 gave the failing British East India Company a monopoly over tea sales in the colonies. This cut out the middleman in tea transactions and allowed the company to sell directly to the colonists. Though this lowered the prices of tea, the act upset the merchants, who lost business. They spread discontent; the colonists began to believe that the law was a deceptive way for the British to collect their money. The Tea Act greatly agitated the colonists and set them along the path to revolution. The economic unfairness experienced by the colonists spurred them to take action against the mother country.

The backlash against the Tea Act sparked riots and demonstrations, causing the British to enforce strict laws concerning the politics and society of the colonies. After the Boston Tea Party in 1773, the British established the Coercive, or Intolerable, Acts in 1774. It was essentially a suppression of the Bostonians and the entirety of Massachusetts. The Acts were comprised of four parts: the Port Bill, which closed Boston harbor and led to a blockade by British warships; the Government Act, which revoked the royal charter of Massachusetts and placed it under martial law; the New Quartering Act, which stated that soldiers could expel colonists from their homes in order to use them as barracks; and the Administration of Justice Act, which reintroduced viceadmiralty courts, essentially the core of the writs of assistance. Though this only affected Boston and Massachusetts, it represented the extent of oppression that the British were willing to establish to maintain order. The Quebec Act was also enacted in 1774; it allowed the French to inhabit and trade in the Ohio River Valley and returned the territories given to Spain in the Treaty of Paris. It was an attempt to enhance the colonists' sense of dependence on the British, but the colonists felt betrayed: the enemy that they had worked so hard to expel in the French and Indian War was simply permitted, even invited, to return. As a response to the Coercive and Quebec Acts, the First Continental Congress, comprised of fifty-five delegates from twelve colonies, met in order to establish unification and to prepare the colonial militias for any eventualities. The colonists, tired of the oppression and political pressure, were on the brink of rebellion.

Though the colonists hoped to reconcile and improve relations with the British, their rebellious attitude was incited by the unfair taxes and economic and political policies imposed on them by the mother country. The harsh measures taken by the British provided the justification for the Americans to revolt.

10/11/09 The Constitution was composed with the purpose of providing a national law that fufilled most of the states' demands by making compromises. From its very beginning, the Constitution allowed for political debate, as arguments ranged from division of powers and adherence to the document to its creation.

When the Constitution was drafted, the Federalists staunchly supported its composition while the Antifederalists expressed reservations; this was the first semblance of political parties in the United States. The Federalists were in favor of a strong central government, which is what the Constitution supported, while the Antifederalists feared a powerful federal government. They felt that the federal government could not represent the people as well as the state and local governments. In addition, the Antifederalists criticized the lack of a bill of rights in the original Constitution, fearing that this would lead to the neglect of inalienable rights. From its very conception, the Constitution was marked by debate.

The contents of the Constitution also lead to controversy as the states argued over the division of powers within the federal government itself. One of the major points of contention was the way that representation in the legislature was determined. The large states supported the Virginia Plan, which benefitted these larger states by appropriating representatives based on population, whereas the small states favored the New Jersey Plan, which proposed that there be an equal number of representatives for each state regardless of size. Eventually, the Connecticut Compromise was reached, creating a bicameral legislation: the House of Representatives, derived from the Virginia Plan, and the Senate, developed from the New Jersey plan. This division alllows for debate not only between the states, but by political parties striving to gain control in either piece of the legislation. The compromises reached in the Constitution led to enduring debate between various political groups.

A source of contention comes from the interpretation of the Constitution, as evidenced by the clash between Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton as members of Washington's cabinet. Jefferson, a devoted Democratic-Republican, believed in a strict interpretation of the Constitution, while Hamilton adopted a loose interpretation. Because he followed the Constitution to the letter, Jefferson argued that measures proposed by Hamilton, such as the Bank of the United States, were unconstitutional and should not be considered. Hamilton defended his suggestions by stating that the Constitution left room for adjustments. This same controversy was prevalent throughout American history, whether in court cases, presidential acts, etc. Debate stems from the varying degrees with which people judge the absolute authority and strictness of the Constitution.

The Constitution had sparked debate since its conception, as its contents and the adherence to them have been viewed from various angles and argued from a multitude of sides. In establishing a national law, the Constitution set the stage and allowed for the endurance of political debate and disputation.

10/25/09 The Revolution of 1800 was the election of Thomas Jefferson in 1800; it is so named because the power shifted from the Federalists to the Democratic-Republicans. Though this change of political party is considered revolutionary, the subsequent presidents, Jefferson and James Madison, continued policies that were Federalist in nature and were highly conservative in essence, namely the Embargo Act of 1807 and the War of 1812.

On December 22, 1807, Jefferson enacted the Embargo Act, which better resembled the beliefs of the Federalists than those of the Democratic-Republicans. This piece of legislation prohibited Americans from trading with foreign countries and vice versa. The intention was to put pressure on the British and French, who were restricting trade with the United States with the Orders-in-Council and the Continental System, while continuing the previous position of neutrality as established by Washington and Adams. The Embargo Act was ill-received by the common man, and most turned to illegal activities such as smuggling to bypass it. The Democratic-Republican ideal of representing the common man was disregarded, as evidenced by the low approval. Eventually, the act was replaced in 1809 by the Nonintercourse Act due to lack of response from France and Britain. Instead of reinventing American trade, Jefferson imposed Federalist, conservative policies that contradicted his earlier stance against acts like the Protective Tariff of 1789. The Embargo Act of 1807 was a continuation of Federalist administration that counteracted the credo of the Democratic-Republicans, which does not represent a revolution.

Though the Federalists had been clamoring for war with France during Adams's presidency, the War of 1812 occured during Madison's presidency against Britain. Spurred on by the impressment of American sailors, the Orders-in-Council, and squabbles over North American territory, the war spanned from 1812 to 1814; it was concluded by the Treaty of Ghent, which restored both nations to the conditions existing previous to the conflict. In essence, it was a pointless war exasterbated by leftover sentiments that the United States should become involved in fighting with a European power. Federalist ideas perpetuated in the declaration of war against the British, with whom the Americans continued to have tensions. The War of 1812 did not constitute a revolution in political ideologies; it was a Federalist intention later executed by a Democratic-Republican president. The War of 1812 serves as an example that the actions of the Democratic-Republican presidents were not revolutionary.

Despite being labeled a political revolution, the election of 1800 served only as an altered continuation of the previous administrations. Democratic-Republicans Jefferson and Madison introduced policies that either contradicted their ideologies or supported Federalist beliefs, as evidenced by the Embargo Act of 1807 and the War of 1812. Therefore, the Revolution of 1800 was not in actuality a revolution.

11/7/09 The Jackosnian Era, lasting from 1828 to 1840, has been dubbed the "Rise of Mass Democracy" as Andrew Jackson, the Champion of the Common Man, was elected; his encouragement of mass participation in politics allowed the American people to become involved with the government. Jackson made significant social and economic changes as the country was increasingly democratized. Although Jackson showed strong support for the common man with his economic actions against the Bank of the United States and his initial election, he alienated the South and other ethnic groups in his dealings with the American Indians and the Nullification Crisis of 1832.

Jackson's first election in 1828 ushered in mass voting and campaigns centered around the common man. Jackson had enormous popularity, especially in the West, due to his history as a war hero and the perception of him as the defender of the masses; however, he failed to obtain the majority of electoral votes in the Election of 1824 and lost to John Quincy Adams, who subsequently appointed his enemy Henry Clay to the position of Secretary of State. Jackson was furious, as were his supporters, and his following campaign set precedents for all future presidential campaigns. Voting restrictions such as property qualifications had been lifted in many states, so obtaining the vote of the masses became key. Jackson's campaign centered largely on appealing to these newly enfranchised commoners and slandering Adams. The presidency was decisively won by Jackson as a result of mass voter turnout; the voters showed up to the poll in masses in order to exercise their power to choose their leader. Jackson's election represented a shift in power, as the wealthy elites who formerly had control were overturned and the center of power shifted from the East to the burgeoning West. Increased democratization was displayed early in Jackson's presidency as the common man was a large influence in changing federal authority by taking advantage of mass suffrage.

Economically, Jackson defended the masses in his Bank War against Nicholas Biddle, the head of the Bank of the United States. As Biddle was well-aware of, Jackson was highly anti-banking. The charter of the bank would need to be renewed in 1836; however, Biddle and Henry Clay proposed its rechartering in 1832. They believed that Jackson, who was running for reelection, would be forced to approve of the proposal as to not alienate the New England demographic, which supported the bank. Jackson vetoed the bank's rechartering, which followed the wishes of the West. Jackson, and the common man, felt that the Bank of the United States represented a bastion of elitist aloofness that interfered with the commonors ability to prosper. The masses of the West approved of the veto, which supported states' rights while attacking central power. Jackson then began to deposit money into "pet banks," which further weakened the Bank of the United States. Jackson's attack on the bank benefited the common men and their interests as the federal government's economic hold waned.

Though he showed concern for the common white man, Jackson heavily persecuted the Native Americans through extermination and the Indian Removal Act of 1830. Previous to his presidency, Jackson nearly extinguished the Seminoles by pursuing them into Florida against orders. In 1830, he established the Indian Removal Act, which proposed the forced removal of all natives left to a reserved Indian Territory, which today is Oklahoma. Most of the American Indians refused to leave their cultural lands and saw themselves as independent nations who were not subject to state laws. Notably, the Cherokees brought the state of Georgia to court for imposing their laws on the tribe. Though Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall ruled in favor of the Cherokee, Jackson's defiance spelled doom for the tribe. In 1838, the Cherokee walked the Trail of Tears as they journeyed from their native homes to the Indian Territory. This scene had occurred with several other tribes as well. Jackson also suppressed the Indians in the Black Hawk War of 1832 and the Second Seminole War, which lasted from 1835 to 1842 and was the bloodiest conflict between the Americans and the Indians in United States history; in both cases, the Native Americans were defeated and forced to go to Oklahoma. Jackson's dealings with the American Indians display that he was the defender of the white masses, not the ethnic masses.

Jackson's opposition to the South in the Nullification Crisis of 1832 cut off the southern masses, increased executive power, and set the stage for the Civil War. The crisis began with the adjustment of the Tariff of Abominations, which set duties at 45%, hurting the southern planters and benefitting northern industries; in the Tariff of 1832, Jackson lowered the taxes to 35%, which meant the tariff was still protective and unsatisfactory to the South. South Carolina, long an advocate of defying the federal tariffs, nullified the Tariff of 1832, meaning that it did not apply within its borders; in addition, the state prepared a military and threatened to secede from the Union. Jackson responded by condemning supporters of nullification and subtly raising his own military force. Eventually, the crisis ended with the passing of the Tariff of 1833; this tariff, proposed by Henry Clay, would be reduced by 10% over the course of eight years. However, Jackson further enraged the South when Congress enacted the Force Bill, which stated that the president was authorized to employ military force in collecting federal tariffs. The crisis drove a wedge between the South and the federal government, which led to the secession of the South in the Civil War. The actions taken by Jackson in the Nullification Crisis infuriated and estranged the southern population, which contradicts his image as the "Champion of the Common Man."

Jackson's presidency led to the increased democratization of the United States socially and economically; however, some of his political and social dealings led to the repression of the involvement of the masses in the government. With his election and his involvement in the Bank War, Jackson became a proponent of the common man and supported the interests of the multitude. Jackson turned his back on the South in the Nullification Crisis of 1832 and the Native Americans with the Indian Removal Act of 1830. The Jacksonian Era was the rise of mass democracy, but Andrew Jackson was only the champion of some of the common men.