EXAMPLE OF A+ PAPER FOR THE “RED HANDED MURDER” SOURCE
Record of a Strike
The late 19th century was a historical period in America when civil rights laws were
being disputed and racial tensions kept growing. There were many feuds between plantations
workers and their employers about fair wages. These disputes escalated and the militia was
eventually called in which led to violence. Here, an African-American newspaper writer in
Louisiana writes about the historical massacre that took place in Thibodaux, Louisiana in 1887.
Penned by an anonymous journalist during the reconstruction period and the Jim Crow laws, the
journalist uses the hatred between civilians and the government to make his struggle known.
While largely accurate, this newspaper report shows racial biases because it gathers the
viewpoints of the African-Americans but not of the government and militia.
The titular headline of the newspaper article begins by acknowledging the AfricanAmericans killed in Thibodaux, Louisiana. At the very beginning of his article he shrieks,
“Murder, foul murder has been committed and the victims were inoffensive and law-abiding
Negroes.” He captivates the attention of his readers by repeating “murder”; many are excited at
the horror of death even if it is a cruel fact. Others are alarmed or terrified by it, but are curious
to learn about it. The writer purposely chooses to begin in this way so that he can draw attention
to his message. This is a primary source document that details the lynching and cruel killings of
black men, women and even children to the public. The journalist expresses his anguish by the
event by providing visual and psychological cues. Part of the writer’s power is his rhetorical
devices, which make the reader feel empathic about the murders at Thibodaux. The anonymous
writer personifies the victims of the massacre when he mentions, “… like so many cattle, the
Negroes in and around Thibodaux, Lafourthe parish, La” at the beginning of his report. The
Negroes were hunted and lynched ignoring human rights and laws against murdering fellow
humans. Cattle are usually shot and killed for sport or slaughtered by butchers. In an effect to
explain the injustice endured by the Negroes, the author uses this visual imagery to describe to
his readers, the cruelty Negroes faced in Louisiana.
With this in mind, the journalist also uses the word such as “devilish devices” when
describing the planters and their followers. The “devil” of course is considered the most
powerful spirit of evil in many religious beliefs. By depicting the planters as this pure evil being,
it engraves a vivid picture to the audience of the newspaper. When describing the Negroes, the
writer states they are “behaving peacefully” however he describes the militia and planters as
characters “resorting to violence and bloodshed.” This further emphasizes the author empathy to
the Negroes while also painting them as model citizens who have done nothing wrong. The
journalist also gives the impression that the militia was only there to cause a ruckus and not there
to solve the conflict.
The main focus of the article is to persuade the audience of the senseless killing of
Negroes by the white men. While the source does fulfill this coaxing towards the public, he also
curves the truth. The tone of the author shifts in many perspectives throughout his work. When
he talks about the government and the militia, his tone is dark and gruesome but when he talks
about the Negroes, he uses a loving and empathic voice. The author uses descriptive words when
describing the individuals being killed; he calls them, “lame men and blind women.” These
words give the idea that they are vulnerable and feeble. The journalist projects the blame on the
governments for the act of violence by insinuating that the “Citizens of the United States” were
lynched by a mob on the orders of a State Judge. By implying that blacks are foremost
“citizens”, an attack against them, whatever your personal stance on race, is to attack America.
Although he calls the killed victims, “Citizens of the United States,” the author never mentions
that some of the sugar plantation workers were white. By not mentioning that the situation was
fueled by basic human rights and not race, he shows racial bias. He ignores any wrongdoing or
violence that the Negroes might have taken part in and puts all the blame on the white planters
and the militia. The journalist instead tries to insinuate war by persuading the readers to “fight
for their homes, their homes, and their lawful rights.”
It is important to realize although the writer was undoubtedly biased, the event is
historical significant. The Homestead strike of 1889 directly reflects both the labor and racial
struggles of this time period. The steelworkers of Carnegie Steel Company had won a three-year
contract, but his plant manager, Henry Clay Frick locked the workers out of the plant. What
followed was a unionized strike for labor laws, which led to several strikers being killed.
Although it was a failed attempt and setback worker’s right, it was an inspiration to many
workers. The Pullman Palace Car Company strike of 1893 was also another key moment in this
period of time. Strikers, who were fighting for wages being drastically lowered, torched several
buildings and looted railway cars until thousands of state troops were brought in to stop them.
While both of these events showed race wars between whites and blacks, it also displayed the
significant power of robber barons and government possessed.
These events shine a light on the workers demanding sufficient wages and walking off
the job when they were denied this simple right. In our modern society today we should be
thankful for the contributions of the labor related strikes in the past. Even in the world we live
today we have strikes at the workplace albeit with fewer violent outcomes. This newspaper
contribution to the public paved the way to some labor acts and even human rights laws we have
today.
EXAMPLE OF A+ PAPER FOR THE PULLMAN STRIKE SOURCE
A Call to My Brothers
In the midst of the industrial boom during the Gilded Age, factory workers became
dissatisfied with the treatment they received in the plants they labored in, while being paid barely
enough to get by, and began to strike. This source was a speech given during a Chicago
convention of the American Railway Union (ARU) in 1894, by a striker from the Pullman
factory, making it a primary source. This is a persuasive speech meant to draw sympathy from
the members of the union, so while it is not biased, it leans in favor of the strikers, portraying
them as oppressed workers who stood up against their oppressor. George Pullman on the other
hand, is portrayed as an evil man with an unquenchable desire to make more money, while
taking away the minuscule amount of wages paid to his workers.
The major point of this speech is to evoke sympathy for the strikers. The speaker starts by
saying that the ARU convention is “a glimmer of the heaven-sent message you alone can give us
on this earth.” This makes the striker sound desperate to the point of hopelessness, but glorifies
the convention and the people listening to him, implying that they were the only ones who could
bring him and his fellow strikers out of their misery. The descriptive language of utter despair
right away evokes sympathy from the people listening to him as he continues to paint his picture
of suffering.
Throughout the speech, the speaker weaves this imagery of an evil George Pullman
preying on the strikers. One example he uses is the high cost of rent that he has to pay Pullman to
live in the company town in comparison to elsewhere in the city that would “make a millionaire
a billionaire.” He also implies that no one in the town would dare to challenge Pullman because
“even the very streets are his.” This language is powerful because the speaker is setting up a
stark comparison of the different standards of living between Pullman and the strikers.
The speaker points out that George Pullman made “9 1/2 percent on $30,000,000 of
capital,” which is a tremendous amount of money. But even so, he was not satisfied. He
continued to reduce wages and his excuse was because he lost money from the contracts that he
took, a “petty loss, more than made up by us from money we needed to clothe our wives and
little ones.” The speaker implies that George Pullman would continue to leech away the
minuscule amount of money he pays his workers in wages through the pure necessities that they
needed to feed and clothe their families, even though he made more money in a year than the
workers could fathom. He then paints the picture of the goodness of the strikers, saying “we are
peaceable; we are orderly.” This is implying that they are unified as one and together have taken
a stand against their oppressor. While Pullman hides away, they have risen up against him with
the help of generous people and the speaker implores the audience to help him and his fellow
strikers once more.
The tone of the speech is evocative. The speaker draws strong and effective imagery of a
group of workers rising up together to fight for their rights. He reaches out to the audience and
speaks to them as if speaking to his own brothers, asking for their sympathy and help in his time
of need. He declares, “teach arrogant grinders of the faces of the poor that there is still a God in
Israel, and if need be a Jehovah—a God of battles.” He uses religion to conclude his speech,
rallying the audience like in a battle. This imagery is powerful because it implies that God is on
the side of the strikers and like when Jehovah rose up and led the Israelites on an exodus out of
Egypt, away from the oppression of the pharaoh, He will likewise lead the strikers away from the
oppression of their employers.
This speech is historically significant because it shows the class consciousness from the
strikers. To stand together as one people to fight their oppressors, no matter how much they were
risking is a powerful notion. They took a stand against the corporate leaders and demanded rights
for themselves and their fellow laborers. They declared that the rich could not pick on the poor
just because they were poor, and that together they were not a weak, unable group. They could
and would stand together, side by side, to fight for their liberation, no matter the risks.
EXAMPLE OF A+ PAPER FOR THE “RED HANDED MURDER” SOURCE
The late 19th century was a historical period in America when civil rights laws were
being disputed and racial tensions kept growing. There were many feuds between plantations
workers and their employers about fair wages. These disputes escalated and the militia was
eventually called in which led to violence. Here, an African-American newspaper writer in
Louisiana writes about the historical massacre that took place in Thibodaux, Louisiana in 1887.
Penned by an anonymous journalist during the reconstruction period and the Jim Crow laws, the
journalist uses the hatred between civilians and the government to make his struggle known.
While largely accurate, this newspaper report shows racial biases because it gathers the
viewpoints of the African-Americans but not of the government and militia.
The titular headline of the newspaper article begins by acknowledging the AfricanAmericans killed in Thibodaux, Louisiana. At the very beginning of his article he shrieks,
“Murder, foul murder has been committed and the victims were inoffensive and law-abiding
Negroes.” He captivates the attention of his readers by repeating “murder”; many are excited at
the horror of death even if it is a cruel fact. Others are alarmed or terrified by it, but are curious
to learn about it. The writer purposely chooses to begin in this way so that he can draw attention
to his message. This is a primary source document that details the lynching and cruel killings of
black men, women and even children to the public. The journalist expresses his anguish by the
event by providing visual and psychological cues. Part of the writer’s power is his rhetorical
devices, which make the reader feel empathic about the murders at Thibodaux. The anonymous
writer personifies the victims of the massacre when he mentions, “… like so many cattle, the
Negroes in and around Thibodaux, Lafourthe parish, La” at the beginning of his report. The
Negroes were hunted and lynched ignoring human rights and laws against murdering fellow
humans. Cattle are usually shot and killed for sport or slaughtered by butchers. In an effect to
explain the injustice endured by the Negroes, the author uses this visual imagery to describe to
his readers, the cruelty Negroes faced in Louisiana.
With this in mind, the journalist also uses the word such as “devilish devices” when
describing the planters and their followers. The “devil” of course is considered the most
powerful spirit of evil in many religious beliefs. By depicting the planters as this pure evil being,
it engraves a vivid picture to the audience of the newspaper. When describing the Negroes, the
writer states they are “behaving peacefully” however he describes the militia and planters as
characters “resorting to violence and bloodshed.” This further emphasizes the author empathy to
the Negroes while also painting them as model citizens who have done nothing wrong. The
journalist also gives the impression that the militia was only there to cause a ruckus and not there
to solve the conflict.
The main focus of the article is to persuade the audience of the senseless killing of
Negroes by the white men. While the source does fulfill this coaxing towards the public, he also
curves the truth. The tone of the author shifts in many perspectives throughout his work. When
he talks about the government and the militia, his tone is dark and gruesome but when he talks
about the Negroes, he uses a loving and empathic voice. The author uses descriptive words when
describing the individuals being killed; he calls them, “lame men and blind women.” These
words give the idea that they are vulnerable and feeble. The journalist projects the blame on the
governments for the act of violence by insinuating that the “Citizens of the United States” were
lynched by a mob on the orders of a State Judge. By implying that blacks are foremost
“citizens”, an attack against them, whatever your personal stance on race, is to attack America.
Although he calls the killed victims, “Citizens of the United States,” the author never mentions
that some of the sugar plantation workers were white. By not mentioning that the situation was
fueled by basic human rights and not race, he shows racial bias. He ignores any wrongdoing or
violence that the Negroes might have taken part in and puts all the blame on the white planters
and the militia. The journalist instead tries to insinuate war by persuading the readers to “fight
for their homes, their homes, and their lawful rights.”
It is important to realize although the writer was undoubtedly biased, the event is
historical significant. The Homestead strike of 1889 directly reflects both the labor and racial
struggles of this time period. The steelworkers of Carnegie Steel Company had won a three-year
contract, but his plant manager, Henry Clay Frick locked the workers out of the plant. What
followed was a unionized strike for labor laws, which led to several strikers being killed.
Although it was a failed attempt and setback worker’s right, it was an inspiration to many
workers. The Pullman Palace Car Company strike of 1893 was also another key moment in this
period of time. Strikers, who were fighting for wages being drastically lowered, torched several
buildings and looted railway cars until thousands of state troops were brought in to stop them.
While both of these events showed race wars between whites and blacks, it also displayed the
significant power of robber barons and government possessed.
These events shine a light on the workers demanding sufficient wages and walking off
the job when they were denied this simple right. In our modern society today we should be
thankful for the contributions of the labor related strikes in the past. Even in the world we live
today we have strikes at the workplace albeit with fewer violent outcomes. This newspaper
contribution to the public paved the way to some labor acts and even human rights laws we have
today.
EXAMPLE OF A+ PAPER FOR THE “ANTI-IMPERIALISM” SOURCE
The source, “Platform of the American Anti-Imperialist League” was a result of the
imperial ambitions of the United States during the turn of the 18th century. Renowned
personalities at the time came together to push against the nation’s imperialism. Regarding bias,
yes, the source is biased. It fails to objectively discuss the benefits of having colonies, and
reasons why most Americans at the time were in favor of the idea.
The document tries to convince its readers of why America should give up its
imperialistic agendas. It makes repeated emotional appeal that imperialism is against our great
nation’s character and the “character of our institutions” and a form of “open disloyalty to the
distinctive principles of our Government”.
The target audience of the source are two: the politicians and following that the “general
American public. Phrases like “we still hope that both of our great political parties will support”
are directly aimed at the political class, whereas “we cordially invite the cooperation of all men
and women” hint at the second audience, the general public.
Throughout the piece, the authors keep reminding the readers of what’s really at stake. It
was a higher principle which Americans had learnt to hold dear: freedom. This indispensable
value is a recurring theme throughout, and is brought to focus from the first sentence itself,
where it said “imperialism is hostile to liberty” and little later that America was at “war against
liberty”. It firmly establishes Liberty as the cornerstone of American culture and hence the
“foundation of the Republic is undermined” when imperialism become part of our national
agenda.
Liberty, a principle for which countless Americans had sacrificed and shed blood -- be it
during the Abolitionist Movement, or even our very own Revolutionary War of Independence.
To remind us of this the authors invoke American greats and that we were still “the land of
Washington and Lincoln” both of whom were champions of freedom.
Given that we ourselves were a colony in the past, the source highlights the hypocrisy of
America’s imperialistic stand. How could then we as a nation, in good conscience, support
imperialism and “extinguish the spirit of 1776 in those islands”?
The document is written to appeal to both our logical and emotional side. For example, it
cites some heavy hitting Lincoln quotes, such as -- “those who deny freedom to others deserve it
not for themselves, and under a just God cannot long retain it”. They serve to drive home the
points made about freedom throughout the paper. The source also employs some strong imagery
such as describing the war as “slaughter of the Filipinos as needless horror”, thereby depriving
imperialists of the respectable cover of the term “war”. The vivid imagery makes one think of
slaughter houses where we are the butchers and Filipinos as mere victims rather than as worthy
war opponents. The authors realize the usefulness of imagery, which is why they use the charged
word “slaughter” twice in the document.
The source is historically significant as it marks a turn in America’s imperialist policies.
There was now a firm official opposition in place -- the American Anti-Imperialist League -who firmly stood up against America infringing on the rights of sovereign nations. They wanted
us to distinguish ourselves from Spain’s legacy of colonization by mentioning that the imperialist
policies were an “extension of American Sovereignty by Spanish methods”. By using the phrase
“Spanish Methods” they were reminding the readers that this was borrowed behavior which
wasn’t natural to us. Hence concluding with the demand for “the immediate cessation of the war
against liberty, begun by Spain and continued by us.”
The language is sincere, using words such as “earnestly”, while also being dramatic and
forceful as illustrated by this line, “1899 is to destroy its fundamental principles and noblest
ideals”. The source uses strong words throughout -- for example, condemn, deplore, denounce,
protest — these were all words used in a single paragraph -- to make an impact on the reader.
The writing overall is concise and tightly edited.
The authors never lose sight of the end goal, and hence use every possible method to
convince and bring the reader over to their side.
Whether it is by making some iron-clad arguments (“a self-governing state cannot accept
sovereignty over an unwilling people); appealing to our historical legacy of doing what’s right
(United States have always protested against the doctrine of international law which permits the
subjugation of the weak by the strong.); invoking legends like Washington and Lincoln and
reminding people on which side they would have stood; calling out the hypocrisy (“those who
deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves”); making threats in one sentence (“we shall
oppose for reelection”) and then striking a conciliatory tone in the very next (“we still hope that
both of our great political parties will support”) — these are just some of the ways the source
brilliantly weaves its arguments.
And it all truly works. By the end of a less than two page document, one becomes hard
pressed to retain their imperialist stance, without at least a modicum of doubt. The only glaring
flaw of the piece is that it hardly mentions the opposing side’s argument -- what America might
stand to lose in giving up its colonies. Its standing in the world? Land? Claim on natural
resources? As if deciding that since the opposing viewpoint is morally unjustifiable, therefore its
not good enough to even merit a mention.
Finally, this source reminds us once again how charged and well-written pieces can
directly shape the course of history. From the Declaration of Independence to our Constitution,
such documents are held in high regard -- guiding generations over time they become the
nation’s Bible.