A Proclamation on the Whiskey Rebellion

In the proclamation, the president of the united states is arguing that the farmers of Pennsylvania that took up arms against the government officials in an attempt to collect excise tax on whiskey be brought to justice. He then calls out the militia, a force of about 15,000 to march on Pennsylvania. This is the first account of our government calling on the militia or military, and more over the first test of power of our new federal government. But in the end the rebel farmers disbanded before the militia could get there, and about a dozen people were arrested, and later released on pardons.

The president, George Washington, appeals to logos, pathos and ethos by showing that logically we need to have reprecautions for people actions, something that will set an example for the rebel farmers. The emotional quality is then layed out with the examples he gives of the rebels attacking government officials, and by this they were creating an act of treason. Washingtons character is un paralleled and completely upright by his presidential actions that result in him leading the malitia into battle himself as commander and chief.

The historical significance of this document is that it is the first and I believe only time we see a president leading troops into battle, but also that the government had the means and ability to stop any acts of violence on its laws. Also this issue created support for the new democratic republican party which the political parties that we are familiar with today. 

I did find the Washington’s argument convincing. With the proclamation we were successful in our attempts to make a national military to protect the interests of our government. Also that Washington was passionate about the use of force against the people who would so ardently oppose our countries laws and policies. We see that Washington was successful in his attempt to disband the rebel forces, although the whiskey tax remained very difficult to collect and farmers still refused to pay.  Not only did the president create a force as big as the one used to fight the british, he also was very compassionate in offering pardons to the rebels. We see that George Washington was a true patriot and very reasonable man. 

Was the United States a christian country?

The United States was a country founded on religion, but at that time they had several different key religions around. With freedom came religious freedom, this was what made us different from all the other countries. We didnt owe anything to the roman church who was the dominant force in those times. However, not all, but most individual state laws back then only recognized the protestant religion. With this only protestant people could vote and be elected, this was the states way of protecting the political office out of fear that different nationalities could inter into public office. Overall I believe that it wasn't based upon the christian religion but it was filled with all types of christian from all different sorts of backgrounds, which probably made it hard for the founding fathers to pick a religion and put it into the constitution. Also the passage talks about how they were trying to protect the church by keeping it separate from state, where the term separation of church and state. So this just shows why it was not founded on christian beliefs even though the majority of people in America at the time were christian, so some could argue both sides, I however will argue that it was filled with christians but the nation itself was not.

In what way did the people react when they found out that every religion was equal in the eyes of our constitution?

How did Madison judgement play a role in how our country would view religion?

Why did the states start executing different types of laws to their individual governments?

Declaration of Independence, Continental Congress July 1776

The argument for the declaration of independence was done so based upon religious and self-imposed convictions that a union with Great Britain was no longer possible. As Thomas Jefferson writes on November 29, 1775 in response to the inevitable independence from Great Britain, “    Believe me, dear Sir: there is not in the British empire a man who more cordially loves a union with Great Britain than I do. But, by the God that made me, I will cease to exist before I yield to a connection on such terms as the British Parliament proposes; and in this, I think I speak the sentiments of America.” I love this quote it simply states why we as Americans had a duty to preserve our way of life. It also shows us that they did try to reason with the King, and that we did everything humanly possible to avoid a war. But with the actions of the privileged comes consequences and it shows that we will not stand idle and allow our god given rights to be stripped from us.

The logos, pathos and ethos in the Declaration of Independence are simply put with the first sentence of the Declaration. It simply shows as a matter of law that the people are to assume an independence that’s political and at the same time acknowledging within reason the grounds for the Independence from Great Britain. In the Declaration it states in the first sentence, “We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.” With that we can see how appealing this declaration was for the people, and how it sparked a fire in all people to stand up and fight. Facing the wrath of the British Empire at that time was a scary thing because of the powerful force they had, but with these motivational words we got to take back our natural rights as human beings "that all men are created equal."

The historical significance is that by January of that year, it had become clear that the king was not inclined to act as a peacemaker, as we read in Thomas Paine’s article, “Common Sense.”  Also by the time the Declaration of Independence was being conceived the Colonies were already at war for over a year. This Declaration gave the spark to all the American Colonies to continue fighting and to eventually win, in my opinion.  Also it was not only significant for our country, but for others as well. It was kind of a role model in a sense to those countries that were experiencing the same turmoil that the Colonies were facing from Great Britain at the time. But the biggest significance it holds is our freedom from Great Britain, and it justified our rights to fight against a government that no longer valued or guaranteed our rights.  

The argument Continental Congress makes is very convincing. You can see how important it was to break off of the British Empire and start a new world free from tyranny. You sometimes forget the importance of the ideals and fundamentals of a free society, and take for granted a place where everyone will be held to the same standard regardless of position or standard. It really makes you value our founding fathers all the more reading the excerpt again, and seeing the passion of the continental congress as it expressed its oppositions of King George III. With this Declaration we broke off as a FREE and INDEPENDENT country, and made us a powerful force to be reckoned with.

How Long Did the Seven Years’ War Last in Indian Country?

The article starts with how the French and British were fighting globally, and how the French were defeated and a new era of peace begun. Only to discover that the Native Americans had no intension of peace because of how the British disrespected their customs and traditions that the French did not. In the article it talks about how the chief of the Chippewa’s conversation with an English trader mentions that they might have conquered the French, but they have not conquered the Native’s and the British will not take our lands that were given to them by way of inheritance. The natives believed that through gifts you could get respect and develop a relationship. Well the British did not see fit to give gifts or even think that the natives were on the same level as them. In the book Major General Jeffery Amherst saw this as “demeaning to the British, forcing them to pay tribute to people whom he considered inferior.” Although his advisors to the Indian affairs warned him that this would be an insult in the eyes of the Natives he still did not back down.  Amherst could not have predicted what was to become because he vastly underestimated the Native’s ability in warfare. This resulted in about thirteen British garrisons defeated by an “inferior force.” We see this time and time again with the struggle of an oppressed nation or people rising to the occasion to victory.  The result of this war brought Amherst back to England disgraced, and begun negotiations and gift exchanges through the new leadership of Thomas Gage. So with everything that happened ten years after the seven year war had started there was a short lived peace that ended briefly with the start of a new war against the Americas. So in some eyes the seven year war lasted about sixty-one Years.

1.       What could have been done differently by the British, to spare all the blood shed?

2.       In what ways did the British underestimate the Native Americans?

3.       What were the three major wars discussed in the article?