CDL: How Did Washington, D.C., Become the Federal Capital?

The article is about how Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison played a role in deciding to locate the federal capital in Washington, D.C.  Congress had been meeting from place to place during and after the Revolution.  In 1788, the U.S. Constitution had authorized establishment of a federal district but it did not choose an exact place.  Many states fought to have their city picked as the capital.  But Congress decided they needed a land that was not part of any state to avoid any conflicts.  They also needed a land where the federal government would provide for its own safety and security.  In 1790 at a dinner meeting, Hamilton, Jefferson and Madison agreed that capital would be located on the Potomac River under the condition that the federal government would pass the assumption bill.  This was a bill requiring the federal government assume state’s war debts, which was originally proposed by Hamilton but rejected by Madison.  Finally, Hamilton agreed to the location in exchange for enough southern votes to pass the bill.  Philadelphia became the temporary capital until President Washington picked an exact site on the Potomac River.

President Washington had personal interests in choosing to site the capital on the Potomac River, which was overlooked.  For one, he was a president of a canal-building enterprise called the Potomac Company. For two, he owned many lands along the Potomac River.  But this was not considered a conflict of interest during that time.  Also, the Potomac was geographically convenient because of easy waterways to the east and west.  Also, it was centrally located for the 13 colonies.  In the end, it was located on the southern side, a slaver country, which was significant during the Civil War.

1.      President Washington had personal gains and benefits in locating the capital on the Potomac River. Why was not it considered a conflict of interest during that time?

2.      Why the northern states wanted the new federal government to assume the war debts?

Text Analysis: The Crisis by Thomas Paine, December 1776

What is the author arguing?

Thomas Paine is arguing that the colonists should unite to fight against Britain.  He says that British rule over the colonies is like slavery or bondage.  He states that no man or king should have such unlimited power as the Britain to bind man in “all cases whatsoever” to “his absolute will.”  He states that it is tyranny and evil.

He is also arguing that Americans must to continue to fight in the face of defeat or there will be a higher price to pay for their submission to Britain.  They should fight because America “will never be happy till she gets clear of foreign dominion.”  He also gives the reason that America will be in a “worse ruin than any we have yet thought of,” if they do not continue to fight for their independence.   He states that if they do not fight they will face a worse evil like “slavery without hope” under British rule.

How does the author appeal to logos, pathos, and ethos?

Thomas Paine uses powerful and provoking words to appeal to the emotions of the colonists.  For example, he compares British rule to “slavery.”  He also says that living under British rule is like “hell,” and “tyranny.”  He uses such strong words to appeal to anger or stir anger among the colonists so that they will unite to fight for the cause.

He also uses a lot of short but powerful statements of truth or principles to appeal to logic and pathos.  For example, “tyranny, like hell is not easily conquered,” which is meant to say the fight against evil is not always easy.  Another example is, “what we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly,” meaning that if you gain something easily than you will have less appreciation for it.  In this case, he saying that there will be a higher cost for liberty but it will be highly appreciate it.   He is also making an emotional appeal when he states, “the heart that feels not now is dead, the blood of his children will curse his cowardice, who shrink back a time when a little might have saved the whole.”  This is a very strong powerful statement which implies that those who are not fighting or supporting the war are “cowards.”  They also will be cursed by their children, who will have to deal with the conflict.

What is the historical significance/relevance of this document?

This document is historically significant because it was distributed all over the colonies to inspire, encourage, and support Americans to continue to fight the war for independence despite many defeats.   It was written in support for independent and democracy for America during the Revolutionary war.  It is also important because there were many colonists who did not believe in separation from Britain but this writing helped to persuade them to change their minds and fight for independence.

Do you find the author’s argument convincing?

I find his argument convincing because I believe freedom is a basic human right that no king or government should be able to take away.  His argument is convincing because he writes with so much confident about his position.  He states, “I fear not, I see no real fear.  I know our situation well.”   He sounds courageous and willing to face whatever comes his way for freedom and liberty for his country.

Newspapers: The Spring of Knowledge

1. Newspapers became popular in the British North American colonies because it was one of the ways that people can voice their ideas and opinions without fears.    Through newspapers, they were able to expose their dissenting opinions to the public without fears.  After all, most of the settlers were sent to America because of they were dissenters; they spoke against the Church of England.  In the New World, they wanted to be free to broadcast their dissenting opinions.  Newspapers also became popular because it was an age of enlightenment, where individuals were seeking answers and asking questions about their world.  Our text says that enlightenment ideas encouraged people “to study the world around them, to think for themselves, and to ask . .”  Newspapers made this possible.

2.    Newspapers contributed to the union of the colonists because they had many experiences in common.  All the colonies (New England, Middle, and Southern colonies) were under the dominion of the British monarchy.  It was British policies that controlled trade, which was their economic security.  All the colonies had enemies on their borders including the Indians, French, and Spanish.   Newspapers made it possible for the colonists to realize and became aware that they had the same problems.

3.   Newspapers had a huge influence in the political changes occurring in the colonies because it made it possible or information to spread quickly.  Newspapers made it possible for people to become aware of the political issues at home and abroad.   It helped to “form public opinion” about the political changes through such newspaper as the New England Courant, which dared to expose the truth about officials and government institutions (American Promise, pg. 160). 

CDL: American Tobacco and European Consumers

American Tobacco and European Consumers

The article is about how tobacco changed the history of the English North American colonists and Europeans.  For decades, the colonists in the Chesapeake struggled to find ways to prosper until they became dedicated planters of tobacco and started sending it to England and other countries in Europe.

In the 1600, only a few people smoked tobacco because it was very expensive.  But in the 1700, North American colonists started growing it in mass amount and importing all of it to Europe.  There was so much tobacco to go around that it became very cheap to buy.  Everyone in Europe started smoking it; men, women, young and old.  Smoking tobacco became a daily ritual at all times and in all places.  It was so common that it forced King of England to warn the public of the harm and danger of it. But he was alone because many believed it was good for the health and mind including doctors and scholars.

The demand for tobacco by Europeans was the greatest news for the North American colonists in Chesapeake.   In 1600, England imported about 25,000 pounds of tobacco.  In 1700, England imported about 40 million pounds of tobacco from the Chesapeake colonists.  The use of tobacco increased drastically in Europe because of the low price made possible by the Chesapeake planters.

The use of tobacco was changing the economic and social life of the Europeans.  It became the center of the social life scene in bars, social clubs, events, and social gatherings.  There were many new industries to provide the paraphernalia including wrappers, pipes, and pipe cleaners.  It also created new jobs for merchants and sellers.

The book says that the “history of both the English North American colonies and the rest of the world would have been very different” if Europeans hated tobacco.  How different do you think would have been?

Why did the Europeans become so dependent on tobacco?

Text Analysis: Destruction of the Indies

Destruction of the Indies

“The Destruction of the Indies” is a personal account in a form of a letter by Bartoleme de Las Casas. Las Casa was a colonist, who traveled to the Indies as a soldier then as an encomendero. After witnessing the inhumane treatment of the Indians, he became an activist and advocate for the rights of the native people. He also became an ordained priest, a platform he used to preach against the injustice in the New World and change the ways of the Christian Spaniards. 

In the “The Destruction of the Indies,” he argues about the significant negative impact of Europeans presence in the Indies. Since the arrival of the Spaniards, the once populated islands of the Indies were desolate and deserted. The Indians were tortured, raped, burned, hanged, and slaughtered. He argues that at least twelve million native men, women, and children have been killed since the settlement of the Spaniards in the Indies. The native Indians civilization was lost and their wealth plundered. He argues that this has been going on for forty years but nothing has been done to stop or change the colonist ways. He argues that the Indians were the kindest and humblest people on earth, who did not deserve to be mistreated or killed in such ways.

Las Casas gives a very detailed account of the acts committed by the Spaniards against the helpless and innocent Indians. He uses descriptive language to plead his case and appeal to his audience that there must be a change in the ways of colonists. He paints a vivid image of the crimes committed against the Indians. Phrase such as “dismembering them but cutting to pieces as if dealing with sheep in the slaughter house” is an example of his use of emotional language. “They took infants from their mother’s breasts, snatching them by the arm and threw them into the rivers,” is another example of his use of graphic language to appeal to pathos. The text is full of gruesome images, which is hard to read at times.

This document is historically significant because it is an eyewitness account of the first interaction between the Europeans and the native Indians. It paints the full effect and extent of colonialism in the sixteenth century, which was to kill and conquer by any means in order to gain wealth. A civilization was lost over a short period and there are no real documents about the history and culture of the Indians. The killing and torturing was happening for forty years but the Europeans were still in denial about it. Through their actions, the Spaniards send the message to the rest of the world that native people were worthless and inferior people. Other Europeans were able to exploit Indians because of this message.

I think the author’s argument is convincing for many reasons. For one, he had nothing to gain by defending the Indians, who were helpless and powerless. He had everything to lose by standing against the colonists, who were ruthless and merciless. But he chose to speak against the injustice because of his religious belief, which he mentions many times as being a “Christian.” He also goes into great length to describe the Indians as being the good natured people on earth, which shows he genuinely loved and honored them and did not want to see them suffer for no reason.