LAD #4- Federalist Papers

1. Why are factions so difficult to eliminate?
People who had smiliar ideas and interests created factions, and then opposing factions were created to oppose the first faction. This makes the abolition of these factions very difficult because neither side likely would step down to make a resolution without the original problem being resolved. Neither side of the faction could really be pleased, for if one side was favored, the other would get angry, and vice versa, creating a cycle. Thus, the faction would be impossible to abolish without the original problem being abolished, which would take away the liberties the people gained. This would be worse than the factions themselves, for the people strove for personal liberties, and they would then be faced with no say in the government and no personal liberties. The people could also be designated to have the same opinion, which would abolish the need for any factions, which would also be a removal of personal liberties, as it is clear that people have differing opinions. Since people throughout the country have different opinions based on their location, religion etc., it is important that factions are available to help lobby for a particular group.

2. If factions cannot be removed then how can they be controlled?
The Constitution played a vital role in the control of the factions. The Constitution created a republic, which prevented a single group from taking complete power, since votes were cast and won by which the majority voted for. As long as one faction did not gain too many members and become dominant, other factions could counteract it. Also, the republic encouraged the principal that individual people would vote for officers, who would make decisions based on what was good for the country as a whole. Although these decisions may not be best for an individual person, they are usually made with the best interests of the country in mind. Also, as more representatives are elected, the more diversity is present in elections, thus also decreasing the power of a particular faction. As more representatives are elected, more people represent Federal governments, thus increasing their power. Since more representatives means more diversity, the factions can be controlled by having a strong federal government with more power, which would help diminish the factions by having diversity and not one central idea shared by the representatives.

LAD #3- Declaration of Independence

The Declaration states that all men are created equal, with certain rights that should never be taken away from them, the ‘unalienable rights,’ which everyone is born with. Also, it states that the government and their laws are derived from the people of the country, and that if the government becomes corrupt, it is the job of the people in the country to change it. If there becomes an absolute ruler, the people have the power to overthrown them and create a new government based on the laws stated in the Declaration of Independence. Also, there is a section where grievances towards the king are listed which include some of the following; the fact that he refused to change his laws in order to adapt them to the common good of the people. Also, they stated that the king did not pass laws that were of immediate importance, and that he did not pass other laws that would accommodate large masses of people. He also called together legislative bodies that were great distances from the colonies, and he did this in order to exasperate them and force them into doing that he desired. He also went away with representative houses, which went against the rights of the people. He also wanted to prevent the population of the states, and discouraged migration to the states, also reducing the power of the court system and the rights to all men. In doing so, he made the courts only compliant to him, giving him basically complete authority over the judiciary system. Also, in compliance with the Quartering Acts, he had standing armies in the United States even in times of peace. He acquitted them on all accounts of murder. Also, he cut off American trade with other parts of the world, and imposed taxes on the colonies without representation in the Parliament. Following the grievances, the Declaration stated that the ‘United Colonies are… free and independent states.” And that they have no connection to the British crown and should be treated as free states. They have their own power to ‘levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce,’ and to do all other things that other free countries are able to do.

Political Cartoon #1- The American Rattlesnake

1. Interpret the cartoon. What historical event/issue is being represented?
This cartoon displays the fact that the British had trouble suppressing the Americans. The date, 1782, suggests that the peace treaties had begun being negotiated. The ‘American Rattlesnake’ is trying to restrain the British, who are coming into America for trading purposes, and the Americans retaliated, and were willing to do even more in order to keep their freedom. The Americans already beat two English armies, General Burgoyne's forces at Saratoga, New York, in 1777, and General Cornwallis's at Yorktown, Virginia, in 1781, and this made the many of British inhospitable to fight yet another war in the Americas. The third empty circle on the left indicates that although two British armies already were taken over, there was room for a third, and the Americans were willing to do this.

2. What is the message that the cartoonist is trying to convey? Which side of the issue does he support?
The author is trying to convey that through his support of the American people and their retaliation against the British government, they should keep fighting against the British to get full freedom from them and have their trading posts and any other means of control out of America. In doing so, he also was encouraging Loyalists and British people to support the withdrawal of the British troops in American in order to maintain a British-free America. Almost trying to embarrass the British, by the fact that the new nation beat the once all-powerful British, he even went as far as including a third unoccupied ring which represents the fact that the Americans still have energy to fight and are willing to do so.

3. What effect(s) did this cartoon have on American History? What were the results of this issue being addressed?
This cartoon had impacts that went well beyond that of many of its contemporaries. It helped to get the Americans fired up and ready to retaliate against the British for any forts or outposts that were in the US. It also helped to pave the way for the future settlements in America, and helped to restrain the British into getting any power in the fledgling nation. This cartoon also brought about nationalist feelings among the new nation in order to ban together and expel the British completely. This led to the furthering of the new nation and its eagerness to withdrawal completely from its former mother country.

LAD #2- Zenger Trial

1. Who was John Peter Zenger?
He was the printer of the New York Weekly Journal, which criticized the acts of New York mayor William Cosby. Cosby was not satisfied with his salary, and he could not get a raise unless he fired the Chief Justice Lewis Morris, and replaced him with a member of the Royal Party, who actually had a say in the counsel. In his newspaper, Zenger brought up these corruptions, as well as others, until Cosby considered it sedition and arrested Zenger.

2. What was the controversy over his charges? Talk about Hamilton’s defense
A great controversy soon ensued over whether what Zenger printed was actually libel, and worthy of his incarceration. The outcome of this trial ultimately would decide the power and freedoms of the press. If the prosecutors won the case, the freedom of the press even today could be severely limited. However, Andrew Hamilton and Zenger both admitted that the newspaper did uncover many of the corruptions in the American government, but he also pointed out that these were all truths, and he did not lie in any of the papers. And in order to accuse someone of libel, they had to be exposing falsehoods, something which Zenger did not do. Luckily for Zenger, the jury agreed with him, although the judge did not, and he was acquitted.

3. What influence did his case have on American governmental tradition?
It set the precedent for the freedom of the press, as long as what is being published is true. Nothing can be considered libel unless it is false, which gives the press the right to speak out against the government freely. It also set the precedent against judicial tyranny, for the judge voted Zenger guilty, but the jury ruled in favor of him. This set the precedent that juries can strike down bad laws, by issuing not-guilty verdicts.

4. What is the lasting significance of his trial? Explain.
The trial set the precedent for freedom of speech and freedom of the press, something that was added into the American Constitution years later, specifically the Bill of Rights, where the First Amendment protects citizens rights to freedom of speech, which was illustrated by Zenger’s straight telling of the facts which led to his acquittal, and the press.

LAD #1- Mayflower Compact

1. What concepts are included in the Mayflower Compact?
The Compact swears loyalty to King James and the Christian faith, and also the “empire” of England; Great Britain, Ireland, and Scotland. This article proclaims the placement of the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia, in the honor of the King, country, and faith. The Mayflower Compact also creates a governing body in order to enact just and equal laws. The governing bodies were to meet whenever the need arose for new laws or a change in officers or revision of the constitution.

2. How does the Mayflower Compact reflect and attachment to both the "Old" and "New" worlds?
The Mayflower Compact reflects attachment to both worlds in many ways. For example, by swearing allegiance to the King, the Pilgrims kept their old ties to England, although they fled from this King in the first place. Also, the Pilgrims noted their accomplishment for the glory of England, the King, and their faith. The compact reflects attachment to the new world by creating an “equal and just” governing body for the creation of laws and other ordinances and the election of officers. This differed greatly from England, where the king was the ruler, not a legislation of lawmakers.

3. How did the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut differ from the Mayflower Compact?
The Fundamental Orders of Connecticut vary from the Mayflower Compact in that the Orders set out specific laws, such as the rules of the election of a magistrate. These laws were set in stone, much like a modern constitution, with procedures for elections, and a regular time for a legislature to meet. This differs from the Mayflower Compact in that the Compact never had any specific laws that it set out, only a statement that a “governing body” would enact “just and equal laws.” Nowhere in the Mayflower compact is a specific law or procedure, only statements saying that these laws will be created by a legislature. This legislature will meet only when necessary, unlike the Orders, where a general court is required twice yearly.

4. What prompted the colonists of Connecticut to take this approach to government, i.e.: use of a written Constitution?
The colonists of Connecticut believed that an orderly and decent government needed to be established in order to rule over three different towns; Windsor, Hartford and Wethersfield. The colonists recognized this need because of the difficulties in working with three separate governments. This written Constitution set out laws that everyone had to abide by, and everyone agreed on when the Constitution was made. Instead of the Mayflower Compact, in which laws could be changed easily as different members passed through the government, these laws stayed with much more permanence.

5. In what significant way(s) does the Fundamental Orders reflect a fear of and safeguard against the usurping of power by one person or a chosen few?
The Fundamental Orders represent a fear in the usurping of power by a single person in the laws that were created by this constitution. The laws prevent a single person from taking control in many ways. The Orders created a law that prevented a magistrate from serving more then twice in two years, which prevented one man from dominating year after year. This may have prevented such “shady” practices as vote manipulation or bribery, as an elected official would not stay long in power. Also, the Orders created a law that requires the general courts to meet. This prevented a person of power to be able to disband the courts and take power. The three towns were also given the right to send four freemen to the general courts to cast a vote, which prevented the court from seizing power from the people. All of these laws helped prevent the usurping of power by a single individual, and set the precedents for many constitutions to follow.