---On this essay have been more able to ust write the content, write without the added "necklaces" as craige would put it. I was more able to identify what was necessary and waht was not, at least more than before and i hope better. According to me, my roughs started with less junk then my previous one. What ilike more about the first essay was the great amount of research time that we got, i wish i had that time this essay. I believe my structure would have been sturdier and just better composed to being with.
----What i id different was the way of editing and what i was looking for. I tried really hard to only put in words and sentences that were absoltuly needed. The structe of it was way different then then i have ever written. Thanks to a brillaint suggestion by Craig and i hope i pulled it off. I write my intro and conclusion first whish was odd. I'm afraid my conclusion was sloppy... my problem is a do tend to get sick of my writting and almost numb to it. I totally trashed my first rough which is not what i did my first essay at all and i have no idea if that was a good or bad thing.
----What is stil hard of course is knowing whats right or wrong. I mean I'm more confident, but still unsure. I think realizing the structure of an essay, the way it should flow, that made more sense to me this essay it kinda clicked for me. I hope I'll be able to recreate it next essay but... unsure. The essay as a whole was easier i flet more confident , felt like i needed less help BUT still shaky of course and i doubt ill ever be positive in writing.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Friday, November 21, 2008
The Passion of a New Jersey Loyalist(Final)
The Passion of a New Jersey Loyalist
----Freedom is all in the eye of the beholder. A man, who burns a government building due to supposed unjust causes, is one man's freedom fighter and another man's terrorist. Difference of opinion is inevitable, in future, present, and past. In present times of the revolution, freedom has become a complicated thought, placing my colony of New Jersey and the remaining 12 colonies in conflicting groups of loyalists and patriots. "We have it in our power to begin the world over again ... 'Tis time to part" ( Cook A12). A speech given by Thomas Paine , making evident the Patriots hope for a new beginning. This is something identical to what I, as loyalists hope for. It’s my belief that the best way to commence this new beginning is with sturdy support, with Britain by our side. My view is that a common belief of the patriots is that the loyalists are in it for the money, or even view us as cowards, giving up and retreating to the supposed strongest power. Truth be told yes, benefits are relevant as would be by choosing any side, this I do not deny, but we still have much to lose in the same. I believe by staying loyal to Great Britain, what the patriots and loyalists both wish to achieve will fall into place. To have economic freedom, which the colonies are striving for, you must have an economy first. Without Britain's economy, ours would be nonexistent due to their economic support. By observing influences within my colony of New Jersey and neighboring ones, and witnessing the irrationality shown by the patriots, I choose to remain loyal to Great Britain.
---By living in the colony of New Jersey, my loyalist standing is well supported. “British domination of the trade outlets in the southern part of Bergen County by strongholds of Paulus Hook and Staten Island provided practical reasons for supporting the royal cause”(Keesey 560 ). The colonists of New Jersey, as do I, prefer “to sell their produce for British gold rather than or the nearly worthless provincial and Continental currency” ( Keesey 560), that’s just a nice addition for the British being well established in our colony. New jersey is strongly dominated by British, and the loyalists view is especially dominant in my county of Bergen and it shows in the powers that be, such as governor William Franklin who believed in adhering to Strahahn advice of “ Looking upon England as our home” (Fennelly 363). The men of the New Jersey Provincial Congress delivered resolves to the continental congress stating “ That it is our duty to render true and faithful allegiance to George the Third, King of Great Britain, and to support and maintain the just dependence of his colonies upon the Crown of Great Britain.” (Burgess 18). This resolve is one I believe took courage to present to the colonies, makes me proud of my colony and their standing. Bergen country has “the largest number of proportion of active loyalists in the state… slightly less than 20 per 1,000 white citizens , as compared with just under 7 per 1,000”( Keesey 559) as a result of the good trade brought by Britain, which is one reason why they have received my , and obviously as well as my colonies, loyalty,
----Economic wise the British have done wonders for us, 55% of our exports from here go to great Britain(Roark and Johnson 159). Great Britain is one half of our trading economy not to mention their large amount of imports that keep us going. The result of British trade being taken out is already showing in colonies from the Boston ports being shut down and it’s rough! What if all trading ceased, this situation would only worsen. England is a key partner in the foundation of our economy. And King George being such a good provider, our land technically being his, I believe he reserves the right to do as he wishes with the land and the people who he so kindly let migrate an live here.
-----“King George III's offenses were countless: cutting trade, declaring war against his own subjects, imposing taxes without consent”(1 Cook), comments like these are numerous in this time, twisted to the most dramatic affect. When one requests land from a noble, it was never without a price, you have a debt to pay, or work off. Nothing has been free not in Britain nor here, and I believe it’s a small misconception that has been formed. The King has the right, the land being lived on being his property and such. The Patriots have acted disrespectful and even as traders, throwing their fellow colonists into the streets along with other numerous brutal acts. If freedom is what they preach then the must learn to tolerate it, their immaturity and lack or preparation they have shown for what they wish to take on, has turned me away from their cause. Along with the Patriots issue of taxing being the main underlying disagreement they have with the throne and government, and me finding no good reasoning in them, I have continued to keep my loyalist views.
-----My most persistent view that I hope will not be overlooked is, "[T]hat the rebels sought the Whig ends of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness; "( 82 Reid ). I, loyalist, want the same thing! The patriots, showing their lack of readiness to control a government, have triggered a process that should have been in the form collaboration due to that we are working for the same thing, into a sparing match. Yes, money, protection, and authority within the colony had an affect on the loyalists group within our colony. This is in every way true, but a view overlooked is that this revolution and division of the people was simply and naturally a difference in opinion. Yes, it's a well known fact that many loyalists were wealthy and of a good ranking within their communities. They were happy with where they were at, so an automatic assumption by the patriots is that therefore they saw no need for the change that the less fortunate patriots did. The truth is, those who remained loyal did so with the possibility of their house being ransacked, torched, and torn to bits and pieces. They had more to loose than most. Numerous family friends, such as, the Bayards, Doremus, Dr. Abraham L. Van Buskirk, Zabriskie , were wealthy and by choosing to stand up for what they felt to be the way to freedom, they gave up more than most had. They choose where to stand "not for the government but for the right and freedom is represents" ( 3 Burgess). As I watch those who claim "Freedom" as the reason they spur into action destroying homes and putting families onto the streets, if that’s what their "freedom" takes, I want no part. I am pushed even further away from them towards the opposing side from what I’m seeing done by those who claim us the “Tories”. I will not willingly place my future into their hands but into the ones whose empire has lasted, remained sturdy and shown their accuracy.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
1: Title: Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution? Author(s): Joseph D. Reid, Jr. Source: The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 38, No. 1, The Tasks of Economic History (Mar., 1978), pp. 81-100 Publisher(s): Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Economic History Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2119317
2:Record: 1
Title:Tyranny to terrorism
Authors:Jane Hampton Cook
Source:Washington Times, The (DC); 09/11/2008
ISSN:0732-8494
Accession Number:4KB520080911031459000
Persistent link to this record (Permalink):
http://moe.ic.highline.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip&db=bwh&AN=4KB520080911031459000&site=ehost-live&scope=site
3: EBRARY BOOK: Burgess, Susan. "So Obstinately Loyal: James Moody 1744-1809." (2000):
4: Title: Loyalism in Bergen County, New Jersey Author(s): Ruth M. Keesey Source: The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 18, No. 4 (Oct., 1961), pp. 558-576 Publisher(s): Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1921101
5: Title: William Franklin of New Jersey Author(s): Catherine Fennelly Source: The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 6, No. 3 (Jul., 1949), pp. 361-382 Publisher(s): Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1919982
6: Title: Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution? Author(s): Joseph D. Reid, Jr. Source: The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 38, No. 1, The Tasks of Economic History (Mar., 1978), pp. 81-100 Publisher(s): Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Economic History Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2119317
7: Roark, James, and Michael P. Johnson. The American Promise. 4th. Boston: Bedford'St. Martin's, 2009.
----Freedom is all in the eye of the beholder. A man, who burns a government building due to supposed unjust causes, is one man's freedom fighter and another man's terrorist. Difference of opinion is inevitable, in future, present, and past. In present times of the revolution, freedom has become a complicated thought, placing my colony of New Jersey and the remaining 12 colonies in conflicting groups of loyalists and patriots. "We have it in our power to begin the world over again ... 'Tis time to part" ( Cook A12). A speech given by Thomas Paine , making evident the Patriots hope for a new beginning. This is something identical to what I, as loyalists hope for. It’s my belief that the best way to commence this new beginning is with sturdy support, with Britain by our side. My view is that a common belief of the patriots is that the loyalists are in it for the money, or even view us as cowards, giving up and retreating to the supposed strongest power. Truth be told yes, benefits are relevant as would be by choosing any side, this I do not deny, but we still have much to lose in the same. I believe by staying loyal to Great Britain, what the patriots and loyalists both wish to achieve will fall into place. To have economic freedom, which the colonies are striving for, you must have an economy first. Without Britain's economy, ours would be nonexistent due to their economic support. By observing influences within my colony of New Jersey and neighboring ones, and witnessing the irrationality shown by the patriots, I choose to remain loyal to Great Britain.
---By living in the colony of New Jersey, my loyalist standing is well supported. “British domination of the trade outlets in the southern part of Bergen County by strongholds of Paulus Hook and Staten Island provided practical reasons for supporting the royal cause”(Keesey 560 ). The colonists of New Jersey, as do I, prefer “to sell their produce for British gold rather than or the nearly worthless provincial and Continental currency” ( Keesey 560), that’s just a nice addition for the British being well established in our colony. New jersey is strongly dominated by British, and the loyalists view is especially dominant in my county of Bergen and it shows in the powers that be, such as governor William Franklin who believed in adhering to Strahahn advice of “ Looking upon England as our home” (Fennelly 363). The men of the New Jersey Provincial Congress delivered resolves to the continental congress stating “ That it is our duty to render true and faithful allegiance to George the Third, King of Great Britain, and to support and maintain the just dependence of his colonies upon the Crown of Great Britain.” (Burgess 18). This resolve is one I believe took courage to present to the colonies, makes me proud of my colony and their standing. Bergen country has “the largest number of proportion of active loyalists in the state… slightly less than 20 per 1,000 white citizens , as compared with just under 7 per 1,000”( Keesey 559) as a result of the good trade brought by Britain, which is one reason why they have received my , and obviously as well as my colonies, loyalty,
----Economic wise the British have done wonders for us, 55% of our exports from here go to great Britain(Roark and Johnson 159). Great Britain is one half of our trading economy not to mention their large amount of imports that keep us going. The result of British trade being taken out is already showing in colonies from the Boston ports being shut down and it’s rough! What if all trading ceased, this situation would only worsen. England is a key partner in the foundation of our economy. And King George being such a good provider, our land technically being his, I believe he reserves the right to do as he wishes with the land and the people who he so kindly let migrate an live here.
-----“King George III's offenses were countless: cutting trade, declaring war against his own subjects, imposing taxes without consent”(1 Cook), comments like these are numerous in this time, twisted to the most dramatic affect. When one requests land from a noble, it was never without a price, you have a debt to pay, or work off. Nothing has been free not in Britain nor here, and I believe it’s a small misconception that has been formed. The King has the right, the land being lived on being his property and such. The Patriots have acted disrespectful and even as traders, throwing their fellow colonists into the streets along with other numerous brutal acts. If freedom is what they preach then the must learn to tolerate it, their immaturity and lack or preparation they have shown for what they wish to take on, has turned me away from their cause. Along with the Patriots issue of taxing being the main underlying disagreement they have with the throne and government, and me finding no good reasoning in them, I have continued to keep my loyalist views.
-----My most persistent view that I hope will not be overlooked is, "[T]hat the rebels sought the Whig ends of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness; "( 82 Reid ). I, loyalist, want the same thing! The patriots, showing their lack of readiness to control a government, have triggered a process that should have been in the form collaboration due to that we are working for the same thing, into a sparing match. Yes, money, protection, and authority within the colony had an affect on the loyalists group within our colony. This is in every way true, but a view overlooked is that this revolution and division of the people was simply and naturally a difference in opinion. Yes, it's a well known fact that many loyalists were wealthy and of a good ranking within their communities. They were happy with where they were at, so an automatic assumption by the patriots is that therefore they saw no need for the change that the less fortunate patriots did. The truth is, those who remained loyal did so with the possibility of their house being ransacked, torched, and torn to bits and pieces. They had more to loose than most. Numerous family friends, such as, the Bayards, Doremus, Dr. Abraham L. Van Buskirk, Zabriskie , were wealthy and by choosing to stand up for what they felt to be the way to freedom, they gave up more than most had. They choose where to stand "not for the government but for the right and freedom is represents" ( 3 Burgess). As I watch those who claim "Freedom" as the reason they spur into action destroying homes and putting families onto the streets, if that’s what their "freedom" takes, I want no part. I am pushed even further away from them towards the opposing side from what I’m seeing done by those who claim us the “Tories”. I will not willingly place my future into their hands but into the ones whose empire has lasted, remained sturdy and shown their accuracy.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
1: Title: Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution? Author(s): Joseph D. Reid, Jr. Source: The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 38, No. 1, The Tasks of Economic History (Mar., 1978), pp. 81-100 Publisher(s): Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Economic History Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2119317
2:Record: 1
Title:Tyranny to terrorism
Authors:Jane Hampton Cook
Source:Washington Times, The (DC); 09/11/2008
ISSN:0732-8494
Accession Number:4KB520080911031459000
Persistent link to this record (Permalink):
http://moe.ic.highline.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip&db=bwh&AN=4KB520080911031459000&site=ehost-live&scope=site
3: EBRARY BOOK: Burgess, Susan. "So Obstinately Loyal: James Moody 1744-1809." (2000):
4: Title: Loyalism in Bergen County, New Jersey Author(s): Ruth M. Keesey Source: The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 18, No. 4 (Oct., 1961), pp. 558-576 Publisher(s): Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1921101
5: Title: William Franklin of New Jersey Author(s): Catherine Fennelly Source: The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 6, No. 3 (Jul., 1949), pp. 361-382 Publisher(s): Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1919982
6: Title: Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution? Author(s): Joseph D. Reid, Jr. Source: The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 38, No. 1, The Tasks of Economic History (Mar., 1978), pp. 81-100 Publisher(s): Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Economic History Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2119317
7: Roark, James, and Michael P. Johnson. The American Promise. 4th. Boston: Bedford'St. Martin's, 2009.
NEWEST ESSAY ON JERSEY
Freedom is all in the eye of the beholder. A man, who burns a government building due to supposed unjust causes, is one man's freedom fighter and another man's terrorist. Difference of opinion is inevitable, in future, present, and past. In present times of the revolution, freedom has become a complicated thought, placing my colony of New Jersey and the remaining 12 colonies in conflicting groups of loyalists and patriots. "We have it in our power to begin the world over again ... 'Tis time to part" ( Cook A12). A speech given by Thomas Pain , making evident the Patriots hope for a new beginning. This is something identical to what I, as loyalists hope for. It’s my belief that the best way to commence this new beginning is with sturdy support, with Britain by our side . My view is that a common belief of the patriots is that the loyalists are in it for the money, or even view us as cowards, giving up and retreating to the supposed strongest power. Truth be told yes, benefits are relevant as would be by choosing any side, this I do not deny, but we still have much to lose in the same. I believe by staying loyal to Great Britain, what the patriots and loyalists both wish to achieve will fall into place. To have economic freedom, which the colonies are striving for, you must have an economy first. Without Britain's economy, ours would be nonexistent due to their economic support. By observing influences within my colony of New Jersey and neighboring ones, and witnessing the irrationality shown by the patriots, I choose to remain loyal to Great Britain.
By living in colony of New Jersey, my loyalist standing is well supported. “British domination of the trade outlets in the southern part of Bergen County by strongholds of Paulus Hook and Staten Island provided practical reasons for supporting the royal cause”(Keesey 560 ), the colonists of New Jersey,as do I, prefer “to sell their produce for British gold rather than or the nearly worthless provincial and Continental currency” ( Keesey 560) New jersey was strongly dominated by British, and the loyalists view is especially dominant in my county of Bergen and it shows in the powers that be such as governor William Franklin who believed in adhering to Strahahn advice of “ Looking upon England as our home” (Fennelly 363). The men of the New Jersey Provincial Congress delivered resolves to the continental congress stating “ That it is our duty to render true and faithful allegiance to George the Third, King of Great Britain, and to support and maintain the just dependence of his colonies upon the Crown of Great Britain.” (Burgess 18). Trade with Britain as been good to us, and in return , we have “the largest number of proportion of active loyalists in the state… slightly less than 20 per 1,000 white citizens , as compared with just under 7 per 1,000”( Keesey 559)
Economically they have done wonders for us, 55% of our exports from here go to great Britain.(The American Promise 159) . Great Britain is one half of our trading economy not to mention their large amount of imports that keep us going. The results of British trade being taken out is already showing in colonies from the Boston ports being shut down and its rough! What if all trading ceased, this situation would only worsen. England is an key partner in the foundation of our economy. And King George being such a good provider, our land technically being his, I believe he reserves the right to do as he wishes with the land and the people who he so kindly let migrate an live here.
“King George III's offenses were countless: cutting trade, declaring war against his own subjects, imposing taxes without consent”(1 Cook), comments like these are numerous in this time, twisted to the most dramatic affect. When one requests land from a noble, it was never without a price, you have a debt to pay, or work off. Nothing has been free not in Britain nor here, and I believe it’s a small misconception that has been formed. The King has the right, the land being lived on being his property and such. The Patriots have acted disrespectful and even as traders, throwing their fellow colonists into the streets along with other numerous brutal acts. If freedom is what they preach then the must learn to tolerate it, their immaturity and lack or preparation they have shown for what they wish to take on, has turned me away from their cause. Along with the Patriots issue of taxing being the main underlying disagreement they have with the throne and government, and me finding no good reasoning in them , I have continued to keep my loyalist views .
My most persistent view that I hope will not be overlooked is, "[T]hat the rebels sought the Whig ends of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness; "( 82 Reid ). I, a loyalists, want the same thing! The patriots, showing their lack of readiness to control a government, have triggered a process that should have been in the form collaboration due to that we are working for the same thing, into a sparing match. Yes, money, protection, and authority within the colony had an affect on the loyalists group within our colony. This is in every way true, but a view overlooked is that this revolution and division of the people was simply and naturally a difference in opinion. Yes, it's a well known fact that many loyalists were wealthy and of a good ranking within their communities. They were happy with where they were at, so an automatic assumption by the patriots is that therefore they saw no need for the change that the less fortunate, mainly patriots ,did. The truth is, those who remained loyal did so with the possibility of their house being ransacked, torched, and torn to bits and pieces. They had more to loose than most. Numerous family friends, such as, the Bayards, Doremus, Dr. Abraham L. Van Buskirk, Zabriskie , were wealthy and by choosing to stand up for what they felt to be the way to freedom, they gave up more than most had. They choose where to stand "not for the government but for the right and freedom is represents" ( 3 Burgess). When you see all those who claim "Freedom" as the reason they spur into action, destroy homes and put families onto streets, I am pushed away from them towards the opposing side from what I’m seeing done by those who claim us the “Tories”. I will not willingly place my future into their hands but into the ones whose empire has lasted, remained sturdy and shown their accuracy.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
1:Title: Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution?Author(s): Joseph D. Reid, Jr.Source: The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 38, No. 1, The Tasks of Economic History (Mar., 1978), pp. 81-100Publisher(s): Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Economic History AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2119317
2:Record: 1
Title:Tyranny to terrorism
Authors:Jane Hampton Cook
Source:Washington Times, The (DC); 09/11/2008
ISSN:0732-8494
Accession Number:4KB520080911031459000
Persistent link to this record (Permalink):
http://moe.ic.highline.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip&db=bwh&AN=4KB520080911031459000&site=ehost-live&scope=site
3: EBRARY BOOK
4:Title: Loyalism in Bergen County, New JerseyAuthor(s): Ruth M. KeeseySource: The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 18, No. 4 (Oct., 1961), pp. 558-576Publisher(s): Omohundro Institute of Early American History and CultureStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1921101
5: Title: William Franklin of New JerseyAuthor(s): Catherine FennellySource: The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 6, No. 3 (Jul., 1949), pp. 361-382Publisher(s): Omohundro Institute of Early American History and CultureStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1919982
6: Title: Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution?Author(s): Joseph D. Reid, Jr.Source: The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 38, No. 1, The Tasks of Economic History (Mar., 1978), pp. 81-100Publisher(s): Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Economic History AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2119317
By living in colony of New Jersey, my loyalist standing is well supported. “British domination of the trade outlets in the southern part of Bergen County by strongholds of Paulus Hook and Staten Island provided practical reasons for supporting the royal cause”(Keesey 560 ), the colonists of New Jersey,as do I, prefer “to sell their produce for British gold rather than or the nearly worthless provincial and Continental currency” ( Keesey 560) New jersey was strongly dominated by British, and the loyalists view is especially dominant in my county of Bergen and it shows in the powers that be such as governor William Franklin who believed in adhering to Strahahn advice of “ Looking upon England as our home” (Fennelly 363). The men of the New Jersey Provincial Congress delivered resolves to the continental congress stating “ That it is our duty to render true and faithful allegiance to George the Third, King of Great Britain, and to support and maintain the just dependence of his colonies upon the Crown of Great Britain.” (Burgess 18). Trade with Britain as been good to us, and in return , we have “the largest number of proportion of active loyalists in the state… slightly less than 20 per 1,000 white citizens , as compared with just under 7 per 1,000”( Keesey 559)
Economically they have done wonders for us, 55% of our exports from here go to great Britain.(The American Promise 159) . Great Britain is one half of our trading economy not to mention their large amount of imports that keep us going. The results of British trade being taken out is already showing in colonies from the Boston ports being shut down and its rough! What if all trading ceased, this situation would only worsen. England is an key partner in the foundation of our economy. And King George being such a good provider, our land technically being his, I believe he reserves the right to do as he wishes with the land and the people who he so kindly let migrate an live here.
“King George III's offenses were countless: cutting trade, declaring war against his own subjects, imposing taxes without consent”(1 Cook), comments like these are numerous in this time, twisted to the most dramatic affect. When one requests land from a noble, it was never without a price, you have a debt to pay, or work off. Nothing has been free not in Britain nor here, and I believe it’s a small misconception that has been formed. The King has the right, the land being lived on being his property and such. The Patriots have acted disrespectful and even as traders, throwing their fellow colonists into the streets along with other numerous brutal acts. If freedom is what they preach then the must learn to tolerate it, their immaturity and lack or preparation they have shown for what they wish to take on, has turned me away from their cause. Along with the Patriots issue of taxing being the main underlying disagreement they have with the throne and government, and me finding no good reasoning in them , I have continued to keep my loyalist views .
My most persistent view that I hope will not be overlooked is, "[T]hat the rebels sought the Whig ends of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness; "( 82 Reid ). I, a loyalists, want the same thing! The patriots, showing their lack of readiness to control a government, have triggered a process that should have been in the form collaboration due to that we are working for the same thing, into a sparing match. Yes, money, protection, and authority within the colony had an affect on the loyalists group within our colony. This is in every way true, but a view overlooked is that this revolution and division of the people was simply and naturally a difference in opinion. Yes, it's a well known fact that many loyalists were wealthy and of a good ranking within their communities. They were happy with where they were at, so an automatic assumption by the patriots is that therefore they saw no need for the change that the less fortunate, mainly patriots ,did. The truth is, those who remained loyal did so with the possibility of their house being ransacked, torched, and torn to bits and pieces. They had more to loose than most. Numerous family friends, such as, the Bayards, Doremus, Dr. Abraham L. Van Buskirk, Zabriskie , were wealthy and by choosing to stand up for what they felt to be the way to freedom, they gave up more than most had. They choose where to stand "not for the government but for the right and freedom is represents" ( 3 Burgess). When you see all those who claim "Freedom" as the reason they spur into action, destroy homes and put families onto streets, I am pushed away from them towards the opposing side from what I’m seeing done by those who claim us the “Tories”. I will not willingly place my future into their hands but into the ones whose empire has lasted, remained sturdy and shown their accuracy.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
1:Title: Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution?Author(s): Joseph D. Reid, Jr.Source: The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 38, No. 1, The Tasks of Economic History (Mar., 1978), pp. 81-100Publisher(s): Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Economic History AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2119317
2:Record: 1
Title:Tyranny to terrorism
Authors:Jane Hampton Cook
Source:Washington Times, The (DC); 09/11/2008
ISSN:0732-8494
Accession Number:4KB520080911031459000
Persistent link to this record (Permalink):
http://moe.ic.highline.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip&db=bwh&AN=4KB520080911031459000&site=ehost-live&scope=site
3: EBRARY BOOK
4:Title: Loyalism in Bergen County, New JerseyAuthor(s): Ruth M. KeeseySource: The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 18, No. 4 (Oct., 1961), pp. 558-576Publisher(s): Omohundro Institute of Early American History and CultureStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1921101
5: Title: William Franklin of New JerseyAuthor(s): Catherine FennellySource: The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 6, No. 3 (Jul., 1949), pp. 361-382Publisher(s): Omohundro Institute of Early American History and CultureStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1919982
6: Title: Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution?Author(s): Joseph D. Reid, Jr.Source: The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 38, No. 1, The Tasks of Economic History (Mar., 1978), pp. 81-100Publisher(s): Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Economic History AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2119317
possible final number 2
Freedom is all in the eye of the beholder. A man, who burns a government building due to supposed unjust causes, is one man's freedom fighter and another man's terrorist. Difference of opinion is inevitable, in future, present, and past. In present times of the revolution, freedom has become a complicated thought, placing my colony of
By living in colony of
Economically they have done wonders for us, 55% of our exports from here go to great Britain.(The American Promise 159) .
“King George III's offenses were countless: cutting trade, declaring war against his own subjects, imposing taxes without consent”(1 Cook), comments like these are numerous in this time, twisted to the most dramatic affect. When one requests land from a noble, it was never without a price, you have a debt to pay, or work off. Nothing has been free not in
My most persistent view that I hope will not be overlooked is, "[T]hat the rebels sought the Whig ends of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness; "( 82 Reid ). We want the same thing! The patriots, showing their lack of readiness to control a government, have triggered a process that should have been in the form collaboration due to that we are working for the same thing, into a sparing match. Yes, money, protection, and authority within the colony had an affect on the loyalists group within our colony. This is in every way true, but a view overlooked is that this revolution and division of the people was simply and naturally a difference in opinion. Yes, it's a well known fact that many loyalists were wealthy and of a good ranking within their communities. They were happy with where they were at, so an automatic assumption by the patriots is that therefore they saw no need for the change that the less fortunate, mainly patriots ,did. The truth is, those who remained loyal did so with the possibility of their house being ransacked, torched, and torn to bits and pieces. They had more to loose than most. Numerous family friends, such as, the Bayards, Doremus, Dr. Abraham L. Van Buskirk, Zabriskie , were wealthy and by choosing to stand up for what they felt to be the way to freedom, they gave up more than most had. They choose where to stand "not for the government but for the right and freedom is represents" ( 3 Burgess). When you see all those who claim "Freedom" as the reason they spur into action, destroy homes and put families onto streets, I am pushed away from them towards the opposing side from what I’m seeing done by those who claim us the “Tories”. I will not willing place my future into their hands but into the ones whose empire has lasted, remained sturdy and shown their accuracy.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
1:
Title: Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution?
Author(s): Joseph D. Reid, Jr.
Source: The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 38, No. 1, The Tasks of Economic History (Mar., 1978), pp. 81-100
Publisher(s): Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Economic History Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2119317
2:Record: 1
Title:Tyranny to terrorism
Authors:Jane Hampton Cook
Source:
ISSN:0732-8494
Accession Number:4KB520080911031459000
Persistent link to this record (Permalink):
3: EBRARY BOOK
4:
Title: Loyalism in
Author(s): Ruth M. Keesey
Source: The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 18, No. 4 (Oct., 1961), pp. 558-576
Publisher(s): Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1921101
5:
Title: William Franklin of
Author(s): Catherine Fennelly
Source: The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 6, No. 3 (Jul., 1949), pp. 361-382
Publisher(s): Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1919982
6:
Title: Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution?
Author(s): Joseph D. Reid, Jr.
Source: The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 38, No. 1, The Tasks of Economic History (Mar., 1978), pp. 81-100
Publisher(s): Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Economic History Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2119317
NEW JERSEY EDIT 4? hopeful final
Freedom is all in the eye of the beholder. A man, who burns a government building due to supposed unjust causes, is one man's freedom fighter and another man's terrorist. Difference of opinion is inevitable, in future, present, and past. In present times of the revolution, freedom has become a complicated thought, placing my colony of
By living in colony of
Economically they have done wonders for us, 55% of our exports from here go to great britian.(159 Volume A The American promise a history of the
“King George III's offenses were countless: cutting trade, declaring war against his own subjects, imposing taxes without consent”, comments like these are numerous in his times, twisted to the most dramatic affect. When one requests land from a noble, it was never without a price, you have a debt to pay, or work off. Nothing has been free not in
My most persistent view that I hope will not be overlooked is, "[T]hat the rebels sought the Whig ends of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness; "( Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution? pg 82 ). We want the same thing! The patriots, showing their lack of readiness to control a government, have triggered a process that should have been in the form collaboration due to that we are working for the same thing, into a sparing match.Yes, money, protection, and authority within the colony had an affect on the loyalists group within our colony. This is in every way true, but a view overlooked is that this revolution and division of the people was simply and naturally a difference in opinion. Yes, it's a well known fact that many loyalists were wealthy and of a good ranking within their communities. They were happy with where they were at, so an automatic assumption by the patriots is that therefore they saw no need for the change that the less fortunate,mainly patriots ,did. The truth is, those who remained loyal did so with the possibility of their house being ransacked, torched, and torn to bits and pieces. They had more to loose than most. Numerous family friends, such as, the Bayards, Doremus, Dr. Abraham L. Van Buskirk, Zabriskie , were wealthy and by choosing to stand up for what they felt to be the way to freedom, they gave up more than most had. They choose where to stand "not for the government but for the right and freedom is represents" (The early years PAGE 3). When you see all those who claim "Freedom" as the reason they spur into action, destroy homes and put families onto streets, I am pushed away from them towards the opposing side from what I’m seeing done by those who claim us the “Tories”. I will not willing place my future into their hands but into the ones whose empire has lasted, remained sturdy and shown their accuracy.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Intro and Conclusion of new essay
Dont ask how i got the two end results first its just happened but please tell me what you think!
INTRO Freedom is all in the eye of the beholder. A man, who burns a government building due to supposed unjust causes, is one man’s freedom fighter and another man’s terrorist. Difference of opinion is inevitable, in future, present, and in past. In present times of the revolution, what freedom is has become a complicated thought that has put my colony of New Jersey and the remaining 12 colonies in conflicting groups of loyalists and patriots. "We have it in our power to begin the world over again ... 'Tis time to part" ( Cook A12) quoted from Thomas Pain when addressing an Patriot group referring to Britain. Patriots hope for a new beginning this is something identical to what I as loyalists hope for and believe the best way to begin is with sturdy support, with Britain by our side My view is that a common believe of the patriots is that the loyalists are in it for the money, or even view us as cowards, a way of giving up and retreating to the supposed strongest power. Truth be told, yes benefits are relevant as would be by choosing any side, this I do not deny, but we still have much to lose in the same. Which is where I fall into the conclusion that Great Britain has been proven worthy of our respect and loyalty and I believe by staying within their government, what the patriots and loyalists both wish to achieve will fall into place. To have economic freedom you must have an economy first, and without Britain ours would be nonexistent and due to their economic support, influences within my colony of New Jersey and neighboring ones and the irrationality shown by the patriots, my loyalty remains with Great Britian.
CONCLUSION My most persistent view that I hope will not be overlooked is "[T]hat the rebels sought the Whig ends of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness; "( Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution? pg 82 ). We want the same thing! The patriots, showing their lack of readiness to control a government, has turned something that should have been a collaboration it into a sparing match! Yes money, protection, and authority within the colony had an affect on the loyalists group within our colony, this is in every way true but a view overlooked is that this revolution and division of the people was simply and naturally a difference in opinion. Yes, it’s a well known fact that many loyalists were wealthy and of a good ranking within their communities, they were happy where they were at so an automatic assumption was that therefore they saw no need for the change that the less fortunate did. But the truth is those who remained loyal did so with the possibility of the house being ransacked, torched an torn to bits and pieces. They had more to loose than most. Numerous of my old family friends like The Bayards, Doremus, Dr. Abraham L. Van Buskirk, Zabriskie , their families were wealthy and by choosing to stand up for what they what the felt to be the way to freedom they gave up more than most had. They choose where to stand “not for the government but for the right and freedom is represents” (The early years PAGE 3). When you see all those who claim “Freedom” the reason the spur into action, destroy homes and put families onto streets, I am pushed away from them towards the opposing side from what I’m seeing done by those who claim us “Tories”, and my future I will not willing place into their hands but into the ones whose empire has lasted and remained sturdy and shown their accuracy.
INTRO Freedom is all in the eye of the beholder. A man, who burns a government building due to supposed unjust causes, is one man’s freedom fighter and another man’s terrorist. Difference of opinion is inevitable, in future, present, and in past. In present times of the revolution, what freedom is has become a complicated thought that has put my colony of New Jersey and the remaining 12 colonies in conflicting groups of loyalists and patriots. "We have it in our power to begin the world over again ... 'Tis time to part" ( Cook A12) quoted from Thomas Pain when addressing an Patriot group referring to Britain. Patriots hope for a new beginning this is something identical to what I as loyalists hope for and believe the best way to begin is with sturdy support, with Britain by our side My view is that a common believe of the patriots is that the loyalists are in it for the money, or even view us as cowards, a way of giving up and retreating to the supposed strongest power. Truth be told, yes benefits are relevant as would be by choosing any side, this I do not deny, but we still have much to lose in the same. Which is where I fall into the conclusion that Great Britain has been proven worthy of our respect and loyalty and I believe by staying within their government, what the patriots and loyalists both wish to achieve will fall into place. To have economic freedom you must have an economy first, and without Britain ours would be nonexistent and due to their economic support, influences within my colony of New Jersey and neighboring ones and the irrationality shown by the patriots, my loyalty remains with Great Britian.
CONCLUSION My most persistent view that I hope will not be overlooked is "[T]hat the rebels sought the Whig ends of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness; "( Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution? pg 82 ). We want the same thing! The patriots, showing their lack of readiness to control a government, has turned something that should have been a collaboration it into a sparing match! Yes money, protection, and authority within the colony had an affect on the loyalists group within our colony, this is in every way true but a view overlooked is that this revolution and division of the people was simply and naturally a difference in opinion. Yes, it’s a well known fact that many loyalists were wealthy and of a good ranking within their communities, they were happy where they were at so an automatic assumption was that therefore they saw no need for the change that the less fortunate did. But the truth is those who remained loyal did so with the possibility of the house being ransacked, torched an torn to bits and pieces. They had more to loose than most. Numerous of my old family friends like The Bayards, Doremus, Dr. Abraham L. Van Buskirk, Zabriskie , their families were wealthy and by choosing to stand up for what they what the felt to be the way to freedom they gave up more than most had. They choose where to stand “not for the government but for the right and freedom is represents” (The early years PAGE 3). When you see all those who claim “Freedom” the reason the spur into action, destroy homes and put families onto streets, I am pushed away from them towards the opposing side from what I’m seeing done by those who claim us “Tories”, and my future I will not willing place into their hands but into the ones whose empire has lasted and remained sturdy and shown their accuracy.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
NEW AND IMPROVED draft 3? intro
Freedom is all in the eye of the beholder. A person who burns a government building due to supposed unjust causes, is one man’s freedom fighter and another man’s terrorist. Difference of opinion is inevitable, in future, present, and in past. In present times of the revolution, what freedom is has become a complicated thought that has put my colony of
NEW JERSEY EDIT 2
NEW INTRO!! Feeling and position is all in the eye of the beholder. A person, who burns a government building due to supposed unjust causes, is one man’s freedom fighter and another man’s terrorist.
IGNORE BRAND NEW ONE COM ING SOON
------In the words of Strahahn , we are to be “looking upon England as our home” (William Franklin of New Jersey 363), and this is something I agree with. England has helped us as one would a child, caring for us when we were in danger , protecting us ,growing us and helping us learn to walk and take our first couple steps into these blooming world, it was help that was needed. And being of the New Jersey colony, the umbilical cord still remains fairly intact with Britain leaving a deep bond still in between us two. Many communities, towns , and colonies would disagree with the deciding of being loyal , most would refer to us as “Tories”, but we find plenty reason of why to stay loyal . More reason than to become what those true “Tories” call being a “patriot”. If you take it from my view and the view of many other New Jersey folk, we have made the decision to stay close by the side of our country due to its maximum influence in and around our colony along as the encouraging possibilities and additions doing so gives to the people, and because we believe remaining within the body of Britain is the only way to get where we all , patriots and loyalists alike, are wanting to be. -------- The British are very well disturbed and represented within our town and our neighboring trading town New York, as well. And we find their presence not only useful to our economy, but it makes our decision to remain loyal an easier path. “British domination of the trade outlets in the southern part of Bergen County by strongholds at Paulus Hook and Staten Island provided practical reasons for supporting the royal cause” (E BOOK), and its very true, the Britains have always been a great support to the colonies when it comes to finance. Not to mention their currency is one “the inhabitants of the county preferred to sell their produce for British gold rather than for the nearly worthless provincial and continental currency.” ( 560 Keesey). Of course similar to all other colonies , this revolution does have negative affects on our town “Harassing militia raids which disrupted trade and personal indignities inflicted on the people by both sides did not deter the population from trading constantly with the British and supplying them with produce and forage.” (560 Keesey). The positives of the British still remain dominant throughout our hard times, which are just as harsh as the other struggling colonies. --------When it comes to trading, New York was our partner. And New York , being so close with Boston trade, was affected in the British’s shutting down the harbor (FIND MORE AND QUOTE). This harshly affected us but the governor, along with many of the people remained in support of Britain. " The New Jersey legislature was inclined to accommodate its young American Governor , and there were no difficult, unpopulat British ruling with which to contend. All that began to change in 1765, when William Franklin kept that assembly obedient to the mother country in the Stamp Act controversy, yet realized that he dislikes the measure as mush as did his people, though on different grounds... he, if not his wife, was finding it difficult to take Strahan's advice in "looking upon England as our home", (William Franklin of New Jersey 363) but they did. Us loyalists did not stand behind the British because it was “easier” for us at any rate . With the growing passionate patriot crowd if anything it was harder. There was strong reasoning behind the decision to remain loyal, he patriots were fighting for their freedom, and so were we. ------ "[T]hat the rebels sought the Whig ends of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness; that the rebels desire for those ends stemmed from their participation in the empire-wide enlightenment; that those ideals sparked revolt because of the colonists homogeneity and distance from London "( Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution? pg 82 ). Yes money, protection, and authority within the colony had an affect on the loyalists group within our colony, "The loyalty of officeholders and wealthy person closely allied to the machinery of government involved decisions fundamental dissimilar to those made by tenants, indentured servants, poor mechanics, and artisans who were induced by cash bounties to join loyalists regiments" (pg 261 of the American Loyalists: notes on their organization and Numerical strength) . This is in every way true but a view overlooked is that this revolution and division of the people was simply and naturally a difference in opinion. Yes, it’s a well known fact that many loyalists were wealthy and of a good ranking within their communities, they were happy where they were at so an automatic assumption was that therefore they saw no need for the change that the less fortunate did. But the truth is (FIND QUOTE) those who remained loyal did so with the possibility of the house being ransacked, torched an torn to bits and pieces. They had more to loose than most. Families like The Bayards, Doremus, Dr. Abraham L. Van Buskirk, Zabriskie , their families were wealthy and by choosing to stand up for what they believe, what the felt to be the way to freedom they gave up more than most had. They choose where to stand “not for the government but for the right and freedom is represents” (The early years PAGE 3). When you see all those who claim “Freedom” the reason the spur into action, destroy homes and put families onto streets, I am pushed away from them towards the opposing side from what I’m seeing done by those who claim us “Tories”.
IGNORE BRAND NEW ONE COM ING SOON
------In the words of Strahahn , we are to be “looking upon England as our home” (William Franklin of New Jersey 363), and this is something I agree with. England has helped us as one would a child, caring for us when we were in danger , protecting us ,growing us and helping us learn to walk and take our first couple steps into these blooming world, it was help that was needed. And being of the New Jersey colony, the umbilical cord still remains fairly intact with Britain leaving a deep bond still in between us two. Many communities, towns , and colonies would disagree with the deciding of being loyal , most would refer to us as “Tories”, but we find plenty reason of why to stay loyal . More reason than to become what those true “Tories” call being a “patriot”. If you take it from my view and the view of many other New Jersey folk, we have made the decision to stay close by the side of our country due to its maximum influence in and around our colony along as the encouraging possibilities and additions doing so gives to the people, and because we believe remaining within the body of Britain is the only way to get where we all , patriots and loyalists alike, are wanting to be. -------- The British are very well disturbed and represented within our town and our neighboring trading town New York, as well. And we find their presence not only useful to our economy, but it makes our decision to remain loyal an easier path. “British domination of the trade outlets in the southern part of Bergen County by strongholds at Paulus Hook and Staten Island provided practical reasons for supporting the royal cause” (E BOOK), and its very true, the Britains have always been a great support to the colonies when it comes to finance. Not to mention their currency is one “the inhabitants of the county preferred to sell their produce for British gold rather than for the nearly worthless provincial and continental currency.” ( 560 Keesey). Of course similar to all other colonies , this revolution does have negative affects on our town “Harassing militia raids which disrupted trade and personal indignities inflicted on the people by both sides did not deter the population from trading constantly with the British and supplying them with produce and forage.” (560 Keesey). The positives of the British still remain dominant throughout our hard times, which are just as harsh as the other struggling colonies. --------When it comes to trading, New York was our partner. And New York , being so close with Boston trade, was affected in the British’s shutting down the harbor (FIND MORE AND QUOTE). This harshly affected us but the governor, along with many of the people remained in support of Britain. " The New Jersey legislature was inclined to accommodate its young American Governor , and there were no difficult, unpopulat British ruling with which to contend. All that began to change in 1765, when William Franklin kept that assembly obedient to the mother country in the Stamp Act controversy, yet realized that he dislikes the measure as mush as did his people, though on different grounds... he, if not his wife, was finding it difficult to take Strahan's advice in "looking upon England as our home", (William Franklin of New Jersey 363) but they did. Us loyalists did not stand behind the British because it was “easier” for us at any rate . With the growing passionate patriot crowd if anything it was harder. There was strong reasoning behind the decision to remain loyal, he patriots were fighting for their freedom, and so were we. ------ "[T]hat the rebels sought the Whig ends of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness; that the rebels desire for those ends stemmed from their participation in the empire-wide enlightenment; that those ideals sparked revolt because of the colonists homogeneity and distance from London "( Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution? pg 82 ). Yes money, protection, and authority within the colony had an affect on the loyalists group within our colony, "The loyalty of officeholders and wealthy person closely allied to the machinery of government involved decisions fundamental dissimilar to those made by tenants, indentured servants, poor mechanics, and artisans who were induced by cash bounties to join loyalists regiments" (pg 261 of the American Loyalists: notes on their organization and Numerical strength) . This is in every way true but a view overlooked is that this revolution and division of the people was simply and naturally a difference in opinion. Yes, it’s a well known fact that many loyalists were wealthy and of a good ranking within their communities, they were happy where they were at so an automatic assumption was that therefore they saw no need for the change that the less fortunate did. But the truth is (FIND QUOTE) those who remained loyal did so with the possibility of the house being ransacked, torched an torn to bits and pieces. They had more to loose than most. Families like The Bayards, Doremus, Dr. Abraham L. Van Buskirk, Zabriskie , their families were wealthy and by choosing to stand up for what they believe, what the felt to be the way to freedom they gave up more than most had. They choose where to stand “not for the government but for the right and freedom is represents” (The early years PAGE 3). When you see all those who claim “Freedom” the reason the spur into action, destroy homes and put families onto streets, I am pushed away from them towards the opposing side from what I’m seeing done by those who claim us “Tories”.
Monday, November 17, 2008
rough draft numba 2 of new jersey
IGNORE BRAND NEW ONE COMING
------In the words of Strahahn , we are to be “looking upon England as our home” (William Franklin of New Jersey 363), and this is something I agree with. England has helped us as one would a child, caring for us when we were in danger , protecting us ,growing us and helping us learn to walk and take our first couple steps into these blooming world, it was help that was needed. And being of the New Jersey colony, the umbilical cord still remains fairly intact with Britain leaving a deep bond still in between us two. Many communities, towns , and colonies would disagree with the deciding of being loyal , most would refer to us as “Tories”, but we find plenty reason of why to stay loyal . More reason than to become what those true “Tories” call being a “patriot”. If you take it from my view and the view of many other New Jersey folk, we have made the decision to stay close by the side of our country due to its maximum influence in and around our colony along as the encouraging possibilities and additions doing so gives to the people, and because we believe remaining within the body of Britain is the only way to get where we all , patriots and loyalists alike, are wanting to be.
-------- The British are very well disturbed and represented within our town and our neighboring trading town New York, as well. And we find their presence not only useful to our economy, but it makes our decision to remain loyal an easier path. “British domination of the trade outlets in the southern part of Bergen County by strongholds at Paulus Hook and Staten Island provided practical reasons for supporting the royal cause” (E BOOK), and its very true, the Britains have always been a great support to the colonies when it comes to finance. Not to mention their currency is one “the inhabitants of the county preferred to sell their produce for British gold rather than for the nearly worthless provincial and continental currency.” ( 560 Keesey). Of course similar to all other colonies , this revolution does have negative affects on our town “Harassing militia raids which disrupted trade and personal indignities inflicted on the people by both sides did not deter the population from trading constantly with the British and supplying them with produce and forage.” (560 Keesey). The positives of the British still remain dominant throughout our hard times, which are just as harsh as the other struggling colonies.
--------When it comes to trading, New York was our partner. And New York , being so close with Boston trade, was affected in the British’s shutting down the harbor (FIND MORE AND QUOTE). This harshly affected us but the governor, along with many of the people remained in support of Britain. " The New Jersey legislature was inclined to accommodate its young American Governor , and there were no difficult, unpopulat British ruling with which to contend. All that began to change in 1765, when William Franklin kept that assembly obedient to the mother country in the Stamp Act controversy, yet realized that he dislikes the measure as mush as did his people, though on different grounds... he, if not his wife, was finding it difficult to take Strahan's advice in "looking upon England as our home", (William Franklin of New Jersey 363) but they did. Us loyalists did not stand behind the British because it was “easier” for us at any rate . With the growing passionate patriot crowd if anything it was harder. There was strong reasoning behind the decision to remain loyal, he patriots were fighting for their freedom, and so were we.
------ "[T]hat the rebels sought the Whig ends of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness; that the rebels desire for those ends stemmed from their participation in the empire-wide enlightenment; that those ideals sparked revolt because of the colonists homogeneity and distance from London "( Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution? pg 82 ). Yes money, protection, and authority within the colony had an affect on the loyalists group within our colony, "The loyalty of officeholders and wealthy person closely allied to the machinery of government involved decisions fundamental dissimilar to those made by tenants, indentured servants, poor mechanics, and artisans who were induced by cash bounties to join loyalists regiments" (pg 261 of the American Loyalists: notes on their organization and Numerical strength) . This is in every way true but a view overlooked is that this revolution and division of the people was simply and naturally a difference in opinion. Yes, it’s a well known fact that many loyalists were wealthy and of a good ranking within their communities, they were happy where they were at so an automatic assumption was that therefore they saw no need for the change that the less fortunate did. But the truth is (FIND QUOTE) those who remained loyal did so with the possibility of the house being ransacked, torched an torn to bits and pieces. They had more to loose than most. Families like The Bayards, Doremus, Dr. Abraham L. Van Buskirk, Zabriskie , their families were wealthy and by choosing to stand up for what they believe, what the felt to be the way to freedom they gave up more than most had. They choose where to stand “not for the government but for the right and freedom is represents” (The early years PAGE 3). When you see all those who claim “Freedom” the reason the spur into action, destroy homes and put families onto streets, I am pushed away from them towards the opposing side from what I’m seeing done by those who claim us “Tories”.
Essay NEw JERSEY 1
------In the words of Strahahn , we are to be “looking upon England as our home” (William Franklin of New Jersey 363), and this is something I agree with. In many ways England has treated us like her child, caring for us when we were in danger , protecting us ,growing us and helping us learn to walk and take our first couple steps into these blooming world. And being of the New Jersey colony, the umbilical cord still remains fairly intact with Britain leaving a deep bond still in between us two. Many communities, towns , and colonies would disagree with the deciding of being loyal , most would refer to us as “Tories”, but we find plenty reason of why to stay loyal , more reasons then to become what those true “Tories” call being a “patriots” If you take it from my view and the view of many other New Jersey folk alike, we have made the decision to stay close by the side of our country due to its maximum influence in and around our colony and as well as the encouraging possibilities and additions doing so gives to the people.
-------- The British are very well disturbed and represented within our town and our neighboring trading town New York, alike. And we find their presence not only economically useful, but it makes our decision to remain loyal an easier path. “British domination of the trade outlets in the southern part of Bergen County by strongholds at Paulus Hook and Staten Island provided practical reasons for supporting the royal cause” (E BOOK), and its very true, the pretty have always been a great support to the colonies when it comes to finance. Not to mention their currency is one “the inhabitants of the county preferred to sell their produce for British gold rather than for the nearly worthless provincial and continental currency.” ( 560 Keesey). Of course similar to all other colonies , the revolution did have negative affects on our town but the positives of the British remained dominant throughout most of the revolution. “Harassing militia raids which disrupted trade and personal indignities inflicted on the people by both sides did not deter the population from trading constantly with the British and supplying them with produce and forage.” (560 Keesey). Along with the British within the colony and having a fair amount of loyalists, our governour has also remained loyal and obedient to the crown , even though for us if affects our trading even to a point more than most.
--------When it comes to trading, lots of virgins resource was New York, who , being so close with Boston trade, were affected in the British acts of shutting down the harbor. This harshly affected us but the governor, along with many of the people remained in support of Britain. " The New Jersey legislature was inclined to accommodate its young American Governor , and there were no difficult, unpopulat British ruling with which to contend. All that began to change in 1765, when William Franklin kept that assembly obedient to the mother country in the Stamp Act controversy, yet realized that he dislikes the measure as mush as did his people, though on different grounds... he, if not his wife, was finding it difficult to take Strahan's advice in "looking upon England as our home", (William Franklin of New Jersey 363) but they did. Us loyalists did not stand behind the British because it was “easier” for us at any rate . With the growing passionate patriot crowd if anything it was harder. There was strong reasoning behind the decision to remain loyal, he patriots were fighting for their freedom, and so were we.
------ "[T]hat the rebels sought the Whig ends of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness; that the rebels desire for those ends stemmed from their participation in the empire-wide enlightenment; that those ideals sparked revolt because of the colonists homogeneity and distance from London "( Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution? pg 82 ). Yes money, protection, and authority within the colony had an affect on the loyalists group within our colony, "The loyalty of officeholders and wealthy person closely allied to the machinery of government involved decisions fundamental dissimilar to those made by tenants, indentured servants, poor mechanics, and artisans who were induced by cash bounties to join loyalists regiments" (pg 261 of the American Loyalists: notes on their organization and Numerical strength) . This is in every way true but a view overlooked is that this revolution and division of the people was simply and naturally a difference in opinion. Yes, it’s a well known fact that many loyalists were wealthy and of a good ranking within their communities, they were happy where they were at so an automatic assumption was that therefore they saw no need for the change that the less fortunate did. But the truth is (FIND QUOTE) those who remained loyal did so with the possibility of the house being ransacked, torched an torn to bits and pieces. They had more to loose than most. Families like The Bayards, Doremus, Dr. Abraham L. Van Buskirk, Zabriskie , their families were wealthy and by choosing to stand up for what they believe, what the felt to be the way to freedom they gave up more than most had. They choose where to stand “not for the government but for the right and freedom is represents” (The early years PAGE 3). When you see all those who claim “Freedom” the reason the spur into action, destroy homes and put families onto streets, I am pushed away from them towards the opposing side from what I’m seeing done by those who claim us “Tories”.
-------- The British are very well disturbed and represented within our town and our neighboring trading town New York, alike. And we find their presence not only economically useful, but it makes our decision to remain loyal an easier path. “British domination of the trade outlets in the southern part of Bergen County by strongholds at Paulus Hook and Staten Island provided practical reasons for supporting the royal cause” (E BOOK), and its very true, the pretty have always been a great support to the colonies when it comes to finance. Not to mention their currency is one “the inhabitants of the county preferred to sell their produce for British gold rather than for the nearly worthless provincial and continental currency.” ( 560 Keesey). Of course similar to all other colonies , the revolution did have negative affects on our town but the positives of the British remained dominant throughout most of the revolution. “Harassing militia raids which disrupted trade and personal indignities inflicted on the people by both sides did not deter the population from trading constantly with the British and supplying them with produce and forage.” (560 Keesey). Along with the British within the colony and having a fair amount of loyalists, our governour has also remained loyal and obedient to the crown , even though for us if affects our trading even to a point more than most.
--------When it comes to trading, lots of virgins resource was New York, who , being so close with Boston trade, were affected in the British acts of shutting down the harbor. This harshly affected us but the governor, along with many of the people remained in support of Britain. " The New Jersey legislature was inclined to accommodate its young American Governor , and there were no difficult, unpopulat British ruling with which to contend. All that began to change in 1765, when William Franklin kept that assembly obedient to the mother country in the Stamp Act controversy, yet realized that he dislikes the measure as mush as did his people, though on different grounds... he, if not his wife, was finding it difficult to take Strahan's advice in "looking upon England as our home", (William Franklin of New Jersey 363) but they did. Us loyalists did not stand behind the British because it was “easier” for us at any rate . With the growing passionate patriot crowd if anything it was harder. There was strong reasoning behind the decision to remain loyal, he patriots were fighting for their freedom, and so were we.
------ "[T]hat the rebels sought the Whig ends of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness; that the rebels desire for those ends stemmed from their participation in the empire-wide enlightenment; that those ideals sparked revolt because of the colonists homogeneity and distance from London "( Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution? pg 82 ). Yes money, protection, and authority within the colony had an affect on the loyalists group within our colony, "The loyalty of officeholders and wealthy person closely allied to the machinery of government involved decisions fundamental dissimilar to those made by tenants, indentured servants, poor mechanics, and artisans who were induced by cash bounties to join loyalists regiments" (pg 261 of the American Loyalists: notes on their organization and Numerical strength) . This is in every way true but a view overlooked is that this revolution and division of the people was simply and naturally a difference in opinion. Yes, it’s a well known fact that many loyalists were wealthy and of a good ranking within their communities, they were happy where they were at so an automatic assumption was that therefore they saw no need for the change that the less fortunate did. But the truth is (FIND QUOTE) those who remained loyal did so with the possibility of the house being ransacked, torched an torn to bits and pieces. They had more to loose than most. Families like The Bayards, Doremus, Dr. Abraham L. Van Buskirk, Zabriskie , their families were wealthy and by choosing to stand up for what they believe, what the felt to be the way to freedom they gave up more than most had. They choose where to stand “not for the government but for the right and freedom is represents” (The early years PAGE 3). When you see all those who claim “Freedom” the reason the spur into action, destroy homes and put families onto streets, I am pushed away from them towards the opposing side from what I’m seeing done by those who claim us “Tories”.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Essay two outline
Emily Furgason OUTLINE FOR NEWWWW JERSEY
POSSIBLE POINTS: (thoughts) WHY THEY WERE LOYALISTS;
Useful facts along the way?:
-From The American Loyalists: "one third of the american popultion was loyal" page 2 of my citation
-261 of the american loyalists: " Men joinging the royal cause in the spring of 1782 in the Carolinas probably did so from motives far different from those of loyalists fleeing inside the British lines in New York and New Jersey in the autumn of 1776"
-William Frankline of New Jersey 363: " he New Jersey legislature was inclied to accommodate its young American Governor , and there were no difficult, unpopulat British ruling with which to contend. All that began to chagne in 1765, when William Franklin kept that assemblly obedient to the mother country in the Stamp Act controversy, yet realized that he dislikes the measure as mush as did his people, though on different grounds... he, if not his wife, was fiding it difficult to take Strahan's advice in "looking upon England as our home"
ISSUES THAT WERE TIED WITH THE CROWN TAKING OVER:(363 same doc. as last)
"salaries of crown officials, provision for the militia, control of the Indians and guarding of the frontier, problems of the provincial courts, provincial councils, provincial agesnt, that ever-present question of the currency-- all of these were tied to the conflicting interest of the colonial assemblies, the crown and parliament. To certian degree William Franklin is representative of all the royal governors, and New jersey struggled with difficulties troubling all the royal colonies"
1.The strongholds of the British within virgin and New York their trading neighbor .( page 560 2nd paragraph) (more than likely turn into two paragraphs)
I.The money and prosperity that came along with the British alliance
A. British gold rather then American currency was preferred. (more facts on trade and statistics on the income that came with the brits trade and such But this is said on 560 as well)
II. The British power throughout the area, made it easier and to some extent safer to be on the power that be side.
A. “British domination of the trade outlets in the southern part of bergen County by strongholds at Paulus Hook and Staten Island provided pratical easons for supporting the royal cause”
III. Strong ties with New York trade with was being affected due to the disagreement.(page 560 of Notes and documents , Loyalism in Bregen County, New jersey)
A.“The main market for Bergen famr produce as New Yrok City and trade between New Jersey towns and with New York City was carried on Primarily by river boat” ( 560 1st para.)
i.THAT means that Britain’s take over of the ports could of easily and probably did affect new jersey to a great negative amount.
2There was personal gain in keeping things the way they were with the British or in helping/supporting them.(maybe turn into two paragraphs)
I Families who were already wealthy who were fine with the way things were/believed in England.
A -The Bayard family, mainly the father Stephen
-Hendrick doremus
-Dr. Abraham L. Van Buskirk
-The (JOHN) Zabriskie(s)
-James moody
i “… flee to the shelters of the british lines. Only from there could he fight to maintain legitimate government, the only kind of government that in his eyes could defend freedom in his country(The early years page one) PAGE 3 “ not for the government but for the right and freedom is represents”
a Not a surprising thought when the other freedom riders are tearing down homes , killing families and torching peoples property.
i ".. that the rebels sought the Whig ends of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness; that the rebels desire for those ends stemmed from their participation in the empire-wide enlightenment;that those ideals sparked revolt because of the colonists homogeneity and distacne from london " (From Economic Burden:Sprak to the Ameican Revolution? pg 82 )
RECOGNIZE that also there was much to loose by fighting to the british as well, that veiw is supported by the believe the britian had the right, they mothered them helped them and also they were the only way for tru freedom
II People who gained(personal) from just supporting them.
A trading with them as the came through, securing safety by being on their side.
i Slaves and how they were granted freedom by serving or fighting for the British
a. "The loyalty of officeholders and wealthy person closely allied to the machinery of government involved decisions fundamental dissimilar to those made by tenants, indentured servants, poor mechanics, and artisans who were induced by cash bounties to join loyalists regiments" ((pg 261 of the American Loyalists: notes on their orginaization and Numerical strength)
3( MAYBE might have enough already) THE POWER OF GREAT BRITAIN IN GENERAL/ positives of the past.
I there numbers being the best and strongest
A obvious facts that shouldn’t be hard to find
II Their involvment in the french war on the colonists side obviously
A: Different ways the supported,statements , happy ones if possible from the colonists. Could say that after that the colonists in a way becamce traders, ungrateful.
III The British built,claimed, and funded the colonies.
CITATIONS:
• -William Franklin of New Jersey
• Catherine Fennelly
• The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 6, No. 3 (Jul., 1949), pp. 361-382
• Published by: Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture
1.
Title: Review: The Problem of the Loyalists-and the Problems of Loyalist Historians
Author(s): Mary Beth Norton
Reviewed Title(s): The Loyalists in Revolutionary America, 1760-1781. The Price of Loyalty: Tory Writings from the Revolution.
Reviewed Authors(s): Robert McCluer Calhoon Catherine S. Crary
Source: Reviews in American History, Vol. 2, No. 2 (Jun., 1974), pp. 226-231
Publisher(s): The Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2701658
1.
Title: The American Loyalists: Notes on Their Organization and Numerical Strength
Author(s): Paul H. Smith
Source: The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 25, No. 2 (Apr., 1968), pp. 259-277
Publisher(s): Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1919095
-1.
Title: Loyalism in Bergen County, New Jersey
Author(s): Ruth M. Keesey
Source: The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 18, No. 4 (Oct., 1961), pp. 558-576
Publisher(s): Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1921101
* Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution?
* Joseph D. Reid, Jr.
* The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 38, No. 1, The Tasks of Economic History (Mar., 1978), pp. 81-100
* Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Economic History Association
* Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2119317
FIND THE BOOK E BOOK!!!!!!!
POSSIBLE POINTS: (thoughts) WHY THEY WERE LOYALISTS;
Useful facts along the way?:
-From The American Loyalists: "one third of the american popultion was loyal" page 2 of my citation
-261 of the american loyalists: " Men joinging the royal cause in the spring of 1782 in the Carolinas probably did so from motives far different from those of loyalists fleeing inside the British lines in New York and New Jersey in the autumn of 1776"
-William Frankline of New Jersey 363: " he New Jersey legislature was inclied to accommodate its young American Governor , and there were no difficult, unpopulat British ruling with which to contend. All that began to chagne in 1765, when William Franklin kept that assemblly obedient to the mother country in the Stamp Act controversy, yet realized that he dislikes the measure as mush as did his people, though on different grounds... he, if not his wife, was fiding it difficult to take Strahan's advice in "looking upon England as our home"
ISSUES THAT WERE TIED WITH THE CROWN TAKING OVER:(363 same doc. as last)
"salaries of crown officials, provision for the militia, control of the Indians and guarding of the frontier, problems of the provincial courts, provincial councils, provincial agesnt, that ever-present question of the currency-- all of these were tied to the conflicting interest of the colonial assemblies, the crown and parliament. To certian degree William Franklin is representative of all the royal governors, and New jersey struggled with difficulties troubling all the royal colonies"
1.The strongholds of the British within virgin and New York their trading neighbor .( page 560 2nd paragraph) (more than likely turn into two paragraphs)
I.The money and prosperity that came along with the British alliance
A. British gold rather then American currency was preferred. (more facts on trade and statistics on the income that came with the brits trade and such But this is said on 560 as well)
II. The British power throughout the area, made it easier and to some extent safer to be on the power that be side.
A. “British domination of the trade outlets in the southern part of bergen County by strongholds at Paulus Hook and Staten Island provided pratical easons for supporting the royal cause”
III. Strong ties with New York trade with was being affected due to the disagreement.(page 560 of Notes and documents , Loyalism in Bregen County, New jersey)
A.“The main market for Bergen famr produce as New Yrok City and trade between New Jersey towns and with New York City was carried on Primarily by river boat” ( 560 1st para.)
i.THAT means that Britain’s take over of the ports could of easily and probably did affect new jersey to a great negative amount.
2There was personal gain in keeping things the way they were with the British or in helping/supporting them.(maybe turn into two paragraphs)
I Families who were already wealthy who were fine with the way things were/believed in England.
A -The Bayard family, mainly the father Stephen
-Hendrick doremus
-Dr. Abraham L. Van Buskirk
-The (JOHN) Zabriskie(s)
-James moody
i “… flee to the shelters of the british lines. Only from there could he fight to maintain legitimate government, the only kind of government that in his eyes could defend freedom in his country(The early years page one) PAGE 3 “ not for the government but for the right and freedom is represents”
a Not a surprising thought when the other freedom riders are tearing down homes , killing families and torching peoples property.
i ".. that the rebels sought the Whig ends of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness; that the rebels desire for those ends stemmed from their participation in the empire-wide enlightenment;that those ideals sparked revolt because of the colonists homogeneity and distacne from london " (From Economic Burden:Sprak to the Ameican Revolution? pg 82 )
RECOGNIZE that also there was much to loose by fighting to the british as well, that veiw is supported by the believe the britian had the right, they mothered them helped them and also they were the only way for tru freedom
II People who gained(personal) from just supporting them.
A trading with them as the came through, securing safety by being on their side.
i Slaves and how they were granted freedom by serving or fighting for the British
a. "The loyalty of officeholders and wealthy person closely allied to the machinery of government involved decisions fundamental dissimilar to those made by tenants, indentured servants, poor mechanics, and artisans who were induced by cash bounties to join loyalists regiments" ((pg 261 of the American Loyalists: notes on their orginaization and Numerical strength)
3( MAYBE might have enough already) THE POWER OF GREAT BRITAIN IN GENERAL/ positives of the past.
I there numbers being the best and strongest
A obvious facts that shouldn’t be hard to find
II Their involvment in the french war on the colonists side obviously
A: Different ways the supported,statements , happy ones if possible from the colonists. Could say that after that the colonists in a way becamce traders, ungrateful.
III The British built,claimed, and funded the colonies.
CITATIONS:
• -William Franklin of New Jersey
• Catherine Fennelly
• The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 6, No. 3 (Jul., 1949), pp. 361-382
• Published by: Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture
1.
Title: Review: The Problem of the Loyalists-and the Problems of Loyalist Historians
Author(s): Mary Beth Norton
Reviewed Title(s): The Loyalists in Revolutionary America, 1760-1781. The Price of Loyalty: Tory Writings from the Revolution.
Reviewed Authors(s): Robert McCluer Calhoon Catherine S. Crary
Source: Reviews in American History, Vol. 2, No. 2 (Jun., 1974), pp. 226-231
Publisher(s): The Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2701658
1.
Title: The American Loyalists: Notes on Their Organization and Numerical Strength
Author(s): Paul H. Smith
Source: The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 25, No. 2 (Apr., 1968), pp. 259-277
Publisher(s): Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1919095
-1.
Title: Loyalism in Bergen County, New Jersey
Author(s): Ruth M. Keesey
Source: The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 18, No. 4 (Oct., 1961), pp. 558-576
Publisher(s): Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1921101
* Economic Burden: Spark to the American Revolution?
* Joseph D. Reid, Jr.
* The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 38, No. 1, The Tasks of Economic History (Mar., 1978), pp. 81-100
* Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Economic History Association
* Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2119317
FIND THE BOOK E BOOK!!!!!!!
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
TEXT (delcaration and resolution)
Declaration :
who : LONG LIST OF PEOPLE that can be read at the end of the document, who refferred to themselves as "the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress assembled" (last written paragraph)
AUDIENCE: British elite as in government, King and parliament
Who they represent: Obvious if they call themselves the "representatives of the United States of America"
WHAT IS BEING SAID: Their main point is that they plan to transform the government , such as switch or take power from Britain for many reasons that they have listed in the document.
"that these unites colonies are, and of right ought to be FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES'; that they are dissolved; and that , as free and independent states that all political connection between them and the states of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolves." (last paragraph)
How is it being said: Its being written with much authority such as when they say " we have warned them from time to time" in the second to last paragraph i was a little shocked to hear hat THEY the colonist of AMERICA took the guts to warn the British. They have taken authority, and yes in right mind are a little perturbed and even refer to the king as a "tyrant"( third paragraph), but they don't go over board. They are for the most part respectful and just saying it how it is.
JUSTIFICATION: There is a long list in the document but a quote to sum it up would be "the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpation, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let the facts be submitted to candid world" ( second paragraph) and then the list of what they believe has been done wrong , their support of this quote is listed.
RESOLUTION:
WHO: Richard Henry Lee
AUDIENCE: similar and same to the first except its also back to the Representatives of America
REPRESENT: colonists..... or Virignia
WHAT IS BEING: The previous declaration is basically being restated but also added point that alliances should be made and a "confederation" as well
HOW: Basic, to the point, not much bias , just facts.
JUSTIFICATION : Does not show or describe any but i would be the same as the first declaration of independence article.
who : LONG LIST OF PEOPLE that can be read at the end of the document, who refferred to themselves as "the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress assembled" (last written paragraph)
AUDIENCE: British elite as in government, King and parliament
Who they represent: Obvious if they call themselves the "representatives of the United States of America"
WHAT IS BEING SAID: Their main point is that they plan to transform the government , such as switch or take power from Britain for many reasons that they have listed in the document.
"that these unites colonies are, and of right ought to be FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES'; that they are dissolved; and that , as free and independent states that all political connection between them and the states of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolves." (last paragraph)
How is it being said: Its being written with much authority such as when they say " we have warned them from time to time" in the second to last paragraph i was a little shocked to hear hat THEY the colonist of AMERICA took the guts to warn the British. They have taken authority, and yes in right mind are a little perturbed and even refer to the king as a "tyrant"( third paragraph), but they don't go over board. They are for the most part respectful and just saying it how it is.
JUSTIFICATION: There is a long list in the document but a quote to sum it up would be "the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpation, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let the facts be submitted to candid world" ( second paragraph) and then the list of what they believe has been done wrong , their support of this quote is listed.
RESOLUTION:
WHO: Richard Henry Lee
AUDIENCE: similar and same to the first except its also back to the Representatives of America
REPRESENT: colonists..... or Virignia
WHAT IS BEING: The previous declaration is basically being restated but also added point that alliances should be made and a "confederation" as well
HOW: Basic, to the point, not much bias , just facts.
JUSTIFICATION : Does not show or describe any but i would be the same as the first declaration of independence article.
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
CONTINENTAL CONGRESS
what might the First Continental Congress teach us about how PSEC, with its different feeder schools and perspectives, can come together via community meetings and the Advisory Council?how would we design it differently, how could YOU as individuals engage that process/ structure more? How might you design it differently, if we should design it differently?But more specifically, the words of Edmund Morgan provide some additional context. According to him, "the Continental Congress appeared as a challenge to Parliament" To what is the PSEC government a possible challenge? And what does it mean if that challenge is ignored or not engaged?Does/ how does Gerda Lerner's view of history and historic interpretation complicate this process?
------ I think to continental congress is an obvious example of PSEC advisory council and what were trying to work for. The nice thing about our council compared to their is that we are much more close knit, and i think this is an advantage, a great advantage that gives PSEC more hope and possibility in changes and progress. Even though, to me , i feel our small council has the hope of being much more succesful, there are points that we should look at , or more draw inspiration out of from the old continental congress.
----- The Continental congress of the new world made changes, made impacts. They saw what they believe was wrong and fixed it. I think with the way most of us are used to seeing schools run, we see something we disagree with and almost automatically disregard it. We're use to our schools being not how we wanted them , we have become use to not having a voice which shows something terrible about our education system if you ask me.I think this is a issue that will take time for us to change and adapt to but more than anything i am hoping not to long cause time is short. I believe its something we don' understand or realize. Were use to stubborn teachers , where its their way or the highway , and rules that are rules just to have rules! At least in school we have been taught to not question authority because even when we try, there has never been a positive or productive outcome. These are old habits that are very important to abandoned while we still have the possibility of growth.
---"the Continental Congress appeared as a challenge to Parliament" , and the same is with PSEC. PSEC is obviously the underdog, not because of our low standards or qualifications but because we are new, we are different. And boy if theres one thing we can gain from our history its that changes, and innovations are not always taken lightly. Thats simply one reason why we have to show the older strict education what we got! Not only for the benefit of our school , but for the benefit of our education. PSEC is training us to be leaders, to e strong and confident and why be in this program if we do not take in the the main point of this program! PSEC is the underdog because its challenging.And well maybe Americans never lost that old colonists habit of being lazy :). It challenges its students to make them great and challenges education to change, to put in that extra effort and risk to make the students, future leaders, great. Most, would rather stay on the easy, familiar path.
------ I think to continental congress is an obvious example of PSEC advisory council and what were trying to work for. The nice thing about our council compared to their is that we are much more close knit, and i think this is an advantage, a great advantage that gives PSEC more hope and possibility in changes and progress. Even though, to me , i feel our small council has the hope of being much more succesful, there are points that we should look at , or more draw inspiration out of from the old continental congress.
----- The Continental congress of the new world made changes, made impacts. They saw what they believe was wrong and fixed it. I think with the way most of us are used to seeing schools run, we see something we disagree with and almost automatically disregard it. We're use to our schools being not how we wanted them , we have become use to not having a voice which shows something terrible about our education system if you ask me.I think this is a issue that will take time for us to change and adapt to but more than anything i am hoping not to long cause time is short. I believe its something we don' understand or realize. Were use to stubborn teachers , where its their way or the highway , and rules that are rules just to have rules! At least in school we have been taught to not question authority because even when we try, there has never been a positive or productive outcome. These are old habits that are very important to abandoned while we still have the possibility of growth.
---"the Continental Congress appeared as a challenge to Parliament" , and the same is with PSEC. PSEC is obviously the underdog, not because of our low standards or qualifications but because we are new, we are different. And boy if theres one thing we can gain from our history its that changes, and innovations are not always taken lightly. Thats simply one reason why we have to show the older strict education what we got! Not only for the benefit of our school , but for the benefit of our education. PSEC is training us to be leaders, to e strong and confident and why be in this program if we do not take in the the main point of this program! PSEC is the underdog because its challenging.And well maybe Americans never lost that old colonists habit of being lazy :). It challenges its students to make them great and challenges education to change, to put in that extra effort and risk to make the students, future leaders, great. Most, would rather stay on the easy, familiar path.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
