Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Colonial American bastardy laws wikipedia , lookup
Shipbuilding in the American colonies wikipedia , lookup
English overseas possessions in the Wars of the Three Kingdoms wikipedia , lookup
Dominion of New England wikipedia , lookup
Colonial South and the Chesapeake wikipedia , lookup
Colonial American military history wikipedia , lookup
Province of New York wikipedia , lookup
Thirteen Colonies wikipedia , lookup
Province of Massachusetts Bay wikipedia , lookup
The American Revolution: Battle Over Who Will Govern Part II a. Parliamentary Supremacy—The Central Issue Parliament (1) Who Will Rule—Parliament or the People? "The central element in this Anglo-American debate was a concept known as parliamentary sovereignty. The English ruling class viewed the role of Parliament from a historical perspective that most colonists never shared. They insisted that Parliament was the dominant element within the constitution. . . . [During] the Glorious Revolution of 1688. . . the English crown family formally recognized Parliament's supreme authority in matters such as taxation. . . . The notion of dividing or sharing sovereignty simply made no sense to the English ruling class. . . . No middle ground existed 'between the supreme authority of Parliament and the total dependence of the colonies: it is impossible there should be two independent legislatures in one and the same state' [Thomas Hutchinson, royal governor of Massachusetts] . . . . Parliamentary leaders could never quite understand why the colonists were so difficult to persuade. . . . Americans most emphatically did not see it in their 'interest' to maintain the 'supremacy of Parliament.' The crisis in imperial relations forced the colonists first to define and then to defend principles deeply rooted in their own political culture. For more than a century, their ideas about the colonies' role within the British empire had remained a vague, untested bundle of assumptions about personal liberties, property rights, and representative institutions. . . . Since no one in the mother country bothered to clip their [provincial assemblies’] legislative wings, these provincial bodies assumed a major role in policy making and routine administration. . . . It seemed unreasonable, therefore, for the British suddenly to insist on the supremacy of Parliament. The constitutional debate turned ultimately on the meaning of representation itself. In 1764, a British official informed the colonists that even though they had not elected members to Parliament. . . there were nevertheless 'virtually' represented by that august body. The members of parliament, he declared, represented the political interests of everyone who lived in the British empire. It did not really matter whether they had cast a vote. . . . [However,] the only representatives that the Americans recognized as legitimate were those actually chosen by the people for whom they spoke. . . . British strategists never appreciated the depth of the Americans' commitment to a political ideology. . . . [Among American troops, there was] a remarkable commitment to republican ideals" (America, pp. 128-129, 147). (2) An Issue Cast in Moral Garb An allegory (far left) of the Coercive or “Intolerable” Acts (see D. 7. below) as the British force their will on the colonies. Satan (immediate left) shows horrified English Parliamentarians their destiny of defeat in North America. 1 Americans "seem to have gained resolution from a deep Protestant tradition, a set of religious values recently reinforced during the Great Awakening. For ordinary men and women, the American Revolution may have seemed a kind of morality play, a drama that transformed complicated issues of representation and sovereignty into a stark conflict between American good and British evil. . . . Religious passions helped to draw" many Americans into the fray. Moreover, "the devil was a familiar feature in American political cartoons," and patriots cast British loyalists "not only as political opponent[s] but also as a moral traitor." The victim of tarring and feathering "became the main actor in a public morality play, in which he was wheeled in a cart before jeering crowds and forced to repent." Americans accused Benedict Arnold "of selling out to the devil." Revolutionary leaders channelled "protestant moral fervor into a commitment to the patriot cause. . . . During the war itself . . . religion helped sustain patriotism. . . Religious symbol and ritual thus galvanized common men and women by expressing in moral terms the issues that divided the colonies from England. The Great Awakening [Wesleyan revivalist orator, George Whitfield, had set off a frenzy of religious enthusiasm during his tour of America in the late-1730s] had prepared the colonists to view the contest in terms of American virtue and English vice, of God and the devil. By appealing to the strong Protestant tradition in the colonies, patriots mobilized the American people for revolution" (America, pp. 138-139. For an additional application of this concept—political position equated with moral virtue or the lack thereof—see also pp. 214-215). Gilbert Tennent (1703-1764) Jonathan Edwards (17031758) George Whitefield (1714-1770) The Triumvirate of the Great Awakening (left); Whitefield preaching (right) The movement stimulated religious sensitivities Benedict Arnold (1741-1801) Arnold betraying Colonial interests by passing information to the British "By the beginning of the eighteenth century, the survivors of the old Puritan order lamented the disappearance of the fervent sense of mission and charged that Bostonians had grown more interested in making money than in discussing Calvinist doctrine" (Modern Europe, p. 449). A. Final Prelude to Revolt 1. Townshend Duties, June-July 1767 Townshend himself "was an impetuous man whose mouth often outran his mind." His "ill-conceived duties unnecessarily angered the colonists," and also "hurt English manufacturers." They constituted a "grab bag" of duties on imports to America (America, pp. 135, 140). Colonial dissent often found expression in overt acts of violence, for example the tarring and feathering of British officials seeking to collect the hated taxes placed on the American colonists. Lord Charles Townshend, 1725-1767 2 These were new imposts dressed up in the guise of "indirect taxes." a. Levies or import taxes placed on: (1) paint (2) glass (3) lead (4) tea The taxes demonstrated Parliament's determination to raise revenue in America. b. Instruments of Enforcement (1) American Board of Customs Commissioners The Board regularly abused its powers of search and seizure—"Writs of Assistance"1—not to mention the fact that its officials took advantage of Board’s authority for personal gain. Commissioners were short-sighted, corrupt, and unable to control their greed. (a) abuse of powers i) search and seizure ii) personal enrichment (b) harassment of wealthy, powerful Bostonians "The commissioners' actions drove some members of the colonial ruling class into opposition to the king's government” (America, p. 140). (2) Rigorous Enforcement of the Navigation Acts c. American response (1) boycott of British goods—"rituals of non-consumption" Boycotting Tea The Patriotic Ladies of Edenton, North Carolina (left)—a satirical cartoon appearing in London in March 1775 to “commemorate” the decision of those women to refrain from drinking English tea. The boycott movement reached its logical conclusion in 1773 with the so-called “Boston Tea Party” (D. 6. below) and the destruction of thousands of dollars worth of tea in Boston Harbor. Boston Tea Party Organized by Sons of Liberty, these actions were "moments of public moral reaffirmation" (America, p. 136). (2) attempts to stimulate American manufacturing, develop own industries d. House of Commons Drops Townshend Duties, 1767-1770 However, they retained the tax on tea as a "reminder that England's rulers still subscribed to the principles of the Declaratory Act. They would not compromise the supremacy of Parliament" (America, p. 140). e. Circular Letter of Massachusetts—February 11, 1768 1 This could be and was "dramatized as an invasion of an Englishman's fundamental rights." Modern Europe, p. 451. 3 The General Court of Massachusetts sent out this moderate letter to other colonial legislatures summarizing its opposition to the Townshend Duties and soliciting suggestions about what to do Lord Hillsborough, England's Secretary for American Affairs, perceived this letter as grossly treasonous. Suddenly, the letter became a cause célèbre, the royal governor of Massachusetts dissolving the House of Representatives. “The atmosphere [in 1768], already inflamed, fed on its own high temperature" (Modern Europe, p. 452). "In fact, Parliament's challenge had brought about the very results it most wanted to avoid: a foundation for inter-colonial communication and a strengthening of conviction among the colonists of the righteousness of their position" (America, p. 136). f. The American response precipitated: 2. Boston Harbor/Long Wharf—September 30, 1768 This precipitate action of transferring 4,000 regular troops from Nova Scotia and Ireland in Boston "raised tensions almost to the pitch they had reached during the Stamp Act riots." The action was taken "in part to save money and in part to intimidate colonial trouble-makers." In fact, it raised "more acutely than ever the issue of why troops were in America at all" (America, p. 136). a. Perceived as Act of Vindictiveness **The placing of British troops in Boston implied a use of force to enforce the new duties. Americans perceived the act as one of pure vindictiveness. b.Competition in the Work Place The British redcoats were underpaid and ill-treated. They sought to compensate by competing for local jobs as dockworkers or artisans, putting additional pressure on an already over-employed work environment. c. Colonial Pamphleteering Against the British Presence These writers articulated a pattern of tyranny which seemed manifest to them. The consequent discontent precipitated a series of petty incidents culminating in: 3. The Boston Massacre—March 5, 1770 Paul Revere immortalized the incident with his famous and widely circulated engraving to the left. On the far right stands the monument erected in 1888 to commemorate the five colonists who died at the hands of Red-coated British soldiers. Revere’s image inflamed colonist attitudes and confirmed their worst suspicions about British “misrule.” Another artist’s depiction of the Boston Massacre a. Angry colonials pelted British soldiers with snowballs As the mob grew increasingly threatening, the soldiers panicked. b. Five (not 7 as legend has it) men were killed 4 Victims were memorialized in extravagant terms, the most widely known being the famous Revere engraving (above) that became an instant best-seller. Sequel to this crescendo of events: the British repealed all taxes save that placed on tea. 4. The Gaspee Incident, 1772 a. The Gaspee ran aground in Narragansat Bay b. Its commander, Lieutenant Dudingston antagonized the people of the area by his officious zeal. c. Local residents of Providence, Rhode Island went aboard the Gaspee and burned it. Colonials took considerable pleasure in burning the Gaspee and striking a blow against perceived British arrogance and abuse of power. The Gaspee, run aground in Narragansat Bay, is burned by Rhode Islanders. The Gaspee burns d. These actions further convinced the British that colonials were lawless 5. Tea Act of 1773—Precipitation of the Final Crisis a. Financial difficulties of the British East India Company BEIC Seal (above) and ships (left & far right) The East India Company’s interests were globe-girdling Their problem was in part the product of American boycott of tea, which left a large store of tea on the company's hands. b. Parliament allowed the BEIC to sell directly to the colonies (which lowered the price of tea for colonials). This process cut out the wholesaling English middle men and channelled tea directly to American retailers, thereby eliminating payment of duties in England. It provided the colonials with high quality tea at low prices. c. Americans perceived the situation as an assertion of Parliamentary supremacy/domination (1) The new act seemed a devious scheme to seduce colonists to support Parliamentary right to tax without consent of those taxed (2) The act threatened to undercut powerful colonial merchants who made a good profit dealing in smuggled Dutch tea. 5 Bostonian "Samuel Adams and his fellow agitators inflamed excited crowds with their single argument that to permit the tea to land was to submit, abjectly to tyranny from overseas" (Modern Europe, p. 452). On Samuel Adams: He "was a genuine revolutionary, an ideologue filled with a burning sense of indignation at the real and alleged wrongs suffered by his countrymen. . . . He kept the cause alive with a drumfire of publicity. He reminded the people of Boston that the tax on tea remained in force. He organized public anniversaries commemorating the repeal of the Stamp Act and the Boston Massacre. . . . He seemed obsessed with the preservation of public virtue. The American goal, he declared, was the creation of a 'Christian Sparta,' an ideal commonwealth in which vigilant citizens would constantly guard against the spread of corruption, degeneracy, and luxury [cf. John Winthrop]. . . . He observed ominously that the British intended to use the tea revenue to pay judicial salaries, thus freeing the judges from dependence upon the assembly. . . . [Through the vehicle of committees of correspondence] Adams developed a structure of political cooperation completely independent of royal government" (America, p. 141). 6. The Boston Tea Party, December 16, 1773 The Exploding Teapot (left) illustrates how “tea” was a flashpoint for resisting British rule. Respectable Bostonians watched as “Mohawk Indians” destroyed British cargo. Colonists dumped 340 chests (£10,000 or $75,000 worth) of tea into Boston harbor. "The North ministry was stunned. The people of Boston had treated parliamentary supremacy with utter contempt, and British rulers saw no humor whatsoever in the destruction of private property by subjects of the Crown dressed in costume" (America, p. 142). 7. The Coercive (or Intolerable) Acts, 1774 "Wooden-headedness enjoyed no finer hour. . . . [British] emotionalism. . . ignited [colonial] solidarity" (Barbara Tuchman, March of Folly, pp. 196-197, 200201). Barbara Tuchman, 1912-1989 **“Wooden-headedness” is acting against your own self-interest, even when you need not do so 6 "In part, the impasse resulted from sheer ignorance. Few Englishmen active in government had ever visited America. . . . Accurate information proved extremely difficult to obtain. . . . One could not expect to receive from America an answer to a specific question in less than three months. As a result of the lag in communication between England and America, rumors sometimes passed for true accounts, and misunderstanding influenced the formulation of colonial policy. But failure of communication alone was not to blame for the widening gap between the colonists and England. Even when complete information was available, the two sides were often unable to understand each other's positions" (America, p. 128). "Rumor, half-truths and outright fabrication were read to the British and the Colonials. Emotionalism carried many along the path toward war. Reason dragged itself along slowly in the rear. War was not imminent" (Raymond McNair, Ascent to Greatness, p. 71). "Events had forced the colonists to think out their relation with Great Britain. . . . Fumblingly but inexorably, they were also becoming aware of their common interests, their Americanism. . . . A nation was being born" (John Garraty, American Nation, pp. 86-87). a. Boston Port Bill Boston port was closed until full payment for the tea was made. Boston Harbor today b. Administration of Justice Act Court cases could be tried outside Massachusetts if the governor so deemed it wise. c. Massachusetts Government Act The colony's charter was drastically restructured/revised with the power of the governor strengthened and the effectiveness of the town meetings reduced. (1) Power of governor strengthened at expense of local government He received the right to transfer British officials arrested for offenses done in line of duty to England thus reducing likelihood of their conviction. (2) The upper house became an appointed rather than an elected body. (3) The Act reduced the number of legal annual town meetings to one. (4) The Act authorized the army to quarter troops wherever they were needed. In total, these tough actions amounted to a "sweeping denial of constitutional liberties [and] confirmed the colonists' worst fears. To men like Samuel Adams, it seemed as if Britain really intended to enslave the American people. Colonial moderates found their position shaken by the vindictiveness of the Coercive Acts. . . . Few persons advocated independence, but they could not remain passive while Boston was destroyed. . . . In the midst of this constitutional crisis, Parliament announced plans to establish a new civil government for the Canadian province of Quebec" (America, p. 142). 8. The Quebec Act, June 22, 1774 The Act redefined the Province of Quebec to include all lands north of the Ohio River and east of the Mississippi River. 7 The Quebec Act restored the Catholic Church’s right to tithes and levies. The Act also extended the boundaries of Quebec. The new boundaries were at the junction of the Ohio and Mississippi rivers, thwarting ambitions of furtraders in the 13 colonies. Sir Guy Carleton, Governor of Quebec (right) a. A blow for Catholicism Colonials perceived this as a blow for popery since French civil law permitted religious freedom for Roman Catholics, not to mention a large voice in local political affairs. b. Restriction of westward expansion Claims of various states to western territory were made null and void. B. Committees of Correspondence Suffolk Resolves—encouraged forcible resistance to Coercive Acts C. Revolt of the Colonies "The revolutionary movement generated a momentum that they [colonial leaders drawn from the gentry, the rich, and the wellborn who resented Parliament's efforts to restrict their rights within the Empire] could not control. As relations with the mother country deteriorated, particularly after 1765, the traditional leaders of colonial society invited the common folk to join the protest—as rioters, as petitioner, and finally, as soldiers. Newspapers, sermons, and pamphlets helped transform what had begun as a squabble among the gentry into a mass movement, and . . . once the common people had become involved in shaping the nation's destiny, they could never again be excluded" (America, p. 126). "Lord Chatham, Edmund Burke, even Lord North himself suggested far-reaching concessions. But then large-scale violence frustrated such hopes" (Modern Europe, p. 453). These circumstances were intimately tied to the birth of the U.S. as a nation and help to explain much of the nation's national psyche today. 1. **Lexington and Concord—April 18, 1775 At Lexington, 8 colonials died. Special companies of the Massachusetts militia prepared to respond quickly to military emergencies. "Minuteman" (above) Pitcairn’s Redcoats attack militiamen on Lexington Green A new style of warfare: guerilla “The Shot Heard ’Round the World” fired on the Lexington Green The British at Concord The militia of Lexington was "a collection of ill-trained farmers, boys as well as old men" (America, p. 144). 2. Bunker [Breed's] Hill—June 17, 1775 8 "Colonial militiamen again held their own against seasoned troops. . . . [British General Gage (17211787), right] suffered 40 percent casualties. . . . During the earliest months of rebellion. . . [the Americans] suffered no lack of confidence. Indeed, they interpreted their courageous stands at Concord and Bunker Hill as evidence that brave, yeomen farmers could lick British regulars on any battlefield" (America, p. 147). 3. Dispatching of General Howe and 50,000 British Troops to America This action came once the British government realized that it would take more than a "police action" to crush American rebellion. Battle of Harlem Heights, September 16, 1776. Howe (right) succeeded General Thomas Gage in 1775 as Commander of British forces in North America. Sir William Howe, 1729-1814 a. New York b. New Jersey c. Howe's Offer of a General Pardon 4. Declaration of Independence—July 4, 1776. The document was "a mixture of natural-law sentiments and specific grievances" (Modern Europe, p. 453). Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration A draft of Jefferson’s Declaration (right)—he took great offense to the edits that his colleagues insisted on including in his original document. a. Independence Not the Original Intent "Colonists who were alive during the 1760s did not anticipate the coming of independence. . . . It is testimony to the Americans' lingering loyalty to the British Crown and constitution that rebellion did not occur in 1765. . . . [Even after Lexington and Concord] many Americans were not convinced that such a step [independence] was either desirable or necessary" (America, pp. 126, 135, 144). The Grand Union Flag 9 The ambiguity of the Grand Union Flag (left), a.k.a., the “Cambridge Flag” (raised at Cambridge, Massachusetts in January 1776): it combined the stripes of the rebellious colonies with the British Union flag. It flew over Prospect Hill and overlooked the city of Boston. The flag sports the crosses of Saint George and Saint Andrew—and are borrowed from the British flag. Common Elements Contributing to a Sense of Uniqueness: (1) most Americans were farmers (2) availability of plentiful, free land to American populace (3) thinly scattered population b. Signers of the Declaration Fifty-six men signed. Of these, 33 held college degrees. There were 5 doctors, 11 merchants, 4 farmers, 22 lawyers, and 3 ministers. Nearly all were affluent. The official status of the colonies was "unambiguous: they were colonies, governed from England presumably for its sake. Yet these colonies displayed most of the characteristics one expects from developed states. They had far-flung trade, established elites, social conflicts, colleges, newspapers, and an emerging self-awareness. . . . Through the seventeenth century, American colonials had looked to England as their home, and their attachment reflected more than economic or political dependence. England set the tone for Americans: their religious and political convictions, their cultural styles. . . came from there. . . . It was not until the eighteenth century that this began to change. Economic self-interest dictated conduct sharply at variance with the needs of the mother country. . . . While the colonies squabbled with one another over boundaries. . . the American colonists had enough common interests (inter-colonial trade) and common enemies (the Native Americans, the French, and increasingly, the English government) to develop a certain sense of distance from Europe and a certain sense of identity. Yet it is striking how slowly these feelings grew; Americans became Americans with marked reluctance. . . . Through the 1760s. . . [they] borrowed their most subversive ideas from English political writers. . . . America's separation from England and from Europe came, when it finally did come, with English and with European words and ideas. . . . The special quality of the American experience—what made Americans American—has been debated since the time of the Revolution. . . . [The] assertion of American uniqueness. . . . Despite all opportunities for independent development, the ties between the colonies and the motherland remained intimate to the very edge of the revolution" (Modern Europe, pp. 447-449). c. Continuing British Provocation "The British government appeared intent upon transforming colonial moderates into angry rebels" (America, pp. 144-145). (1) Prohibitory Act—December 1775 Declared war on American commerce; enforced with seizure of American ships and naval blockade to prevent American trade with rest of world. (2) Hiring of German Mercenaries (Hessians) to put down revolt (3) Royal Governors urging slave revolt 10