TOPIC I
Challenging an Empire
North America before and after the
French and Indian War
DOCUMENT 4.1
1754 and 1763
Competition between the French and the English over control of North America came
to a head in the French and Indian War (1754–1763) (known as the Seven Years’ War in
Europe). The British victory in this conflict guaranteed British control over much of North
America. The two maps below show European colonies in North America at the beginning of the French and Indian War and at the end.
North America
1754
Spanish
French
BR
ITISH
St. Pierre
Miquelon
&&
Miquelon
Fr.(Fr.)
Louisbourg
Louisbourg
La
Missouri R
.
St. Pierre
R.
e
A
N
pi R
.
0
500
IT
pu
New
Gul f Orleans
of
Mexico
Ba
h
(B ama
r. ) s
Guadeloupe
(Fr.)
Puerto
Rico (Sp.)
Dominica
(Br.)
St. Lucia
Martinique (Fr.)
(Fr.)
St. Domingue Santo
Domingo
Barbados
Caribbean
(Br.)
Caribbean
Sea
Cuba
Jamaica
H
I
0
ATLANTIC
OCEAN
Dis
and
Gr
SP
S
Mississip
o
Ri
PACIFIC
OCEAN
o
Ohi
ted
F RE
FRENCH
RENCH
BR
R.
IS
H
St
.
E
S
British
wr
enc
e
N
W
Hudson
Bayy
Ba
1,000 miles
Sea
500 1,000 kilometers
M4.1-a
Size: 19p6p x 18p8
North America-1754
Third Proof
88
CHAPTER 4
|
AN ATL ANTIC EMPIRE
|
Period T hree 175 4 –18 0 0
North America
1763
Spanish
French
H uds o n
Ba y
W
E
BAY
CO
e
EW
SP
500 1,000 kilometers
R.
BRR
ITT
ISH
CCO
and
Gr
N
0
1,000 miles
New
Orleans
Louisbourg
Cuba
IN
ATLANTIC
OCEAN
Proclamation
Line of 1763
Ba
h
(B ama
r. ) s
G ul
G ul
f of f o f
MeMxeicxoi c o
A
500
o
Ohi
Mississip
o
Ri
PACIFIC
OCEAN
pi R
.
LOU
LOUI
UIS
S
SIAN
SIANA
ANA
AN
0
St. Pierre
& Miquelon
(Fr.)
R.
QU
Missouri R
.
British
NY
S
S
HUDSON’S
A
MP
t
OLL . Law EBE
ren
OO
C
ce
NI
ES
N
Guadeloupe
(Fr.)
Puerto
Dominica
Rico (Sp.) (Br.)
St. Lucia
Martinique (Fr.)
(Fr.)
St. Domingue Santo
Barbados
Domingo
(Br.)
Caribbean
Sea
Jamaica
M4.1-b
Size: 28p x 27p
PRACTICING
Historical Thinking
North America-1763
Third
Identify: DescribeProof
the changes in territorial holdings in the two maps.
Analyze: Analyze how the changing territorial holdings could influence the European
relationships with Native Americans. (Consult your textbook or class notes if needed.)
Evaluate: Using your textbook and classroom notes and lessons, determine whether
Native Americans gained advantages from the war. Explain your response.
DOCUMENT 4.2
The Diary of William Trent
1763
William Trent (1715–1787) was a British merchant who served as an officer for the Virginia
militia during the French and Indian War (1754–1763). This excerpt from Trent’s journal
describes the siege of Fort Pitt (in what is now Pittsburgh, Pennsvlvania), during Pontiac’s Rebellion, when native peoples west of the Appalachian Mountains revolted against
British settlement in territories formerly held by the French.
[July 27, 1763]
Fifty-seven Indians all on horseback were seen from the fort, going down the
road and some on foot. Soon after some were seen returning, some appeared in
Hulings field cutting some wheat with their knives and a scythe[.] [W]e imagine
they are hungry.
TOPIC I
|
Challenging an Em pire
89
A gun was fired according to agreement to call them over to get their answer,
soon after they appeared on the other side; as soon as they came over, Captain
Ecuyer’s answer to this speech was delivered . . . , letting them know that we took
this place from the French, that this was our home and we would defend it to the
last, that we were able to defend it against all the Indians in the woods, that we
had ammunition and provisions for three years (I wish we had for three months),
that we paid no regard to the Ottawas and Chippawas, that we knew that if they
were not already attacked, that they would be in a short time in their own country
which would find enough for them to do.
That they had pretended to be our friends, at the same time they murdered
our traders in their towns and took their goods, that they stole our horses and
cows from here, and killed some of our people, and every three or four days we
hear the death halloo [a war cry], which we know must be some of their people
who have been down the country and murdered some of the country people. That
if they intended to be friends with us to go home to their towns and sit quietly till
they heard from us. . . .
The Yellow Bird, a Shawnee chief, asked for the four rifle guns we had taken
from the four Indians the 25th[.] [T]hey were answered, if it appeared that their
nation had done us no harm, and that they continued to behave well, when we
were convinced of it that they should either have their guns or pay for them. He
was very much enraged. . . . White Eyes and Wingenum seemed to be very much
irritated and would not shake hands with our people at parting.
Mary C. Darlington, Pierre Joseph Céloron de Blainville, Simeon Ecuyer, and William M.
Darlington, Fort Pitt and Letters from the Frontier (Pittsburgh, PA: J. R. Weldin, 1892),
103–104.
PRACTICING Historical Thinking
Identify: List three key features of the relationship between Trent’s army and the
native peoples.
Analyze: Does Trent’s attitude appear more sympathetic or more critical of the
native peoples? Explain your response with textual support.
Evaluate: In the aftermath of the French and Indian War, what advantage might
the British have seen in maintaining good relations with western natives?
DOCUMENT 4.3
Stamp Act
March 22, 1765
The Stamp Act was one of many ways in which the British government tried to recoup
some of its losses from the French and Indian War. This tax on paper products and other
90
CHAPTER 4
|
AN ATL ANTIC EMPIRE
|
Period T hree 175 4 –18 0 0
common goods was the first British tax on goods that were produced and used exclusively in the colonies.
Whereas, by an act made in the last session of Parliament, several duties were
granted, continued and appropriated toward defraying the expenses of defending, protecting, and securing the British colonies and plantations in America;
and whereas it is first necessary, that provision be made for raising a further revenue within your majesty’s dominions in America, towards defraying the said
expenses; we, your majesty’s most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Commons of
Great Britain, in parliament assembled, have therefore resolved to give and grant
unto your majesty the rights and duties hereinafter mentioned. . . . That from
and after the first day of November, one thousand seven hundred and sixty-five,
there shall be raised, levied, collected, and paid unto his majesty. . . :
. . . For every skin or piece of vellum or parchment, or sheet or piece of paper,
on which shall be engrossed, written, or printed, any declaration, plea, replication,
rejoinder, demurrer, or other pleading, or any copy thereof, in any court of law within
the British colonies and plantations in America, a stamp duty of three pence. . . .
Charles Botta, History of the United States of America: War of Independence, vol. 2 (London:
A. Fullarton & Co.), 29–33.
PRACTICING Historical Thinking
Identify: Summarize the purpose of the Stamp Act as described in the first
paragraph above.
Analyze: Why might a North American colonist see the Stamp Act as unfair? Why
might a British policy maker see it as fair?
Evaluate: Compare the British treatment of the colonists as outlined in the Stamp
Act with William Trent’s treatment of the native peoples in Document 4.2.
DOCUMENT 4.4
PATRICK HENRY, Virginia Resolves
1765
Patrick Henry (1736–1799), a Virginia attorney and planter, shocked his fellow members of
the Virginia House of Burgesses with his heated speeches against the Stamp Act. Henry’s
arguments proved increasingly popular as relations between the British government and
the colonies soured throughout the 1760s and 1770s.
Whereas, the honorable House of Commons in England have of late drawn into
question how far the General Assembly of this colony hath power to enact laws
for laying of taxes and imposing duties, payable by the people of this, his majesty’s
TOPIC I
|
Challenging an Em pire
91
most ancient colony: for settling and ascertaining the same to all future times, the
House of Burgesses of this present General Assembly have come to the following
resolves:—
. . . Resolved, That the first adventurers and settlers of this, his majesty's colony
and dominion, brought with them and transmitted to their posterity, and all other
his majesty’s subjects, since inhabiting in this, his majesty’s colony, all the privileges, franchises, and immunities that have at any time been held, enjoyed, and
possessed, by the people of Great Britain. . . .
. . . Resolved, That his majesty’s liege people of this most ancient colony have
uninterruptedly enjoyed the right of being thus governed by their own Assembly
in the article of their taxes and internal police, and that the same hath never been
forfeited, or any other way given up, but hath been constantly recognized by the
kings and people of Great Britain.
. . . Resolved, therefore, That the General Assembly of this colony have the only
and sole exclusive right and power to lay taxes and impositions upon the inhabitants of this colony; and that every attempt to vest such power in any person or
persons whatsoever, other than the General Assembly aforesaid, has a manifest
tendency to destroy British as well as American freedom.
Moses Coit Tyler, Patrick Henry (New York: Houghton, Mifflin, 1898), 69–70.
PRACTICING Historical Thinking
Identify: Describe the problem and proposed solution to the injustices that Henry
describes.
Analyze: Determine two opposing audiences that Henry has in mind, and explain
why you chose them.
Evaluate: In what ways does Henry’s resolution echo documents like John Locke’s
“Second Treatise on Civil Government” (Doc. 3.9)?
DOCUMENT 4.5
JOHN DICKINSON, Letter from a Farmer
in Pennsylvania
1767
John Dickinson (1732–1808) was a prominent Pennsylvania lawyer and essayist who published
the series Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania to protest British imperial policies in the aftermath of the Stamp Act crisis of 1765. Here he is referring to the Townshend Duties, which
were a series of taxes placed on imported goods in the aftermath of the Stamp Act crisis.
The assembly of that government [New York] complied with a former act of parliament, requiring certain provisions to be made for the troops in America, in
every particular, I think, except the articles of salt, pepper and vinegar. . . .
92
CHAPTER 4
|
AN ATL ANTIC EMPIRE
|
Period T hree 175 4 –18 0 0
If the British parliament has legal authority to issue an order, that we shall
furnish a single article for the troops here, and to compel obedience to that order,
they have the same right to issue an order for us to supply those troops with arms,
cloths, and every necessary; and to compel obedience to that order also; in short,
to lay any burthens they please upon us. What is this but taxing us at a certain sum,
and leaving to us only the manner of raising it? How is this mode more tolerable
than the Stamp-Act? Would that act have appeared more pleasing to Americans,
if being ordered thereby to raise the sum total of the taxes, the mighty privilege
had been left to them, of saying how much should be paid for an instrument of
writing on paper, and how much for another on parchment? . . .
The matter being thus stated, the assembly of New-York either had, or had not,
a right to refuse submission to that act. If they had, and I imagine no American
will say they had not, then the parliament had no right to compel them to execute
it. If they had not that right, they had no right to punish them for not executing it;
and therefore no right to suspend their legislation, which is a punishment. In fact,
if the people of New-York cannot be legally taxed but by their own representatives,
they cannot be legally deprived of the privilege of legislation, only for insisting on
that exclusive privilege of taxation. If they may be legally deprived in such a case,
of the privilege of legislation, why may they not, with equal reason, be deprived
of every other privilege? Or why may not every colony be treated in the same
manner, when any of them shall dare to deny their assent to any impositions, that
shall be directed? Or what signifies the repeal of the Stamp-Act, if these colonies
are to lose their other privileges, by not tamely surrendering that of taxation?
John Dickinson, The Writings of John Dickinson, vol. 1, Political Writings, 1764–1774, ed.
Paul Leicester Ford (Philadelphia: Historical Society of Pennsylvania, 1895), 308–309.
PRACTICING Historical Thinking
Identify: Is Dickinson for or against paying taxes to the British? Explain.
Analyze: What are Dickinson’s chief concerns?
Evaluate: Based on Dickinson’s letter and your outside knowledge, evaluate the
pros and cons of the colonists’ obedience to the Stamp Act.
DOCUMENT 4.6
Testimony in the Trial of the British Soldiers
of the Nineteenth Regiment of Foot
1770
In March 1770, tensions between colonists and British soldiers erupted in Boston, Massachusetts, when British soldiers fired into an angry crowd of protesters, killing five and
injuring six. Called the Boston Massacre by anti-British forces throughout the colonies,
TOPIC I
|
Challenging an Em pire
93
six accused soldiers were acquitted by a jury of colonists, and two were convicted of
the lesser charge of manslaughter and given relatively light punishments. John Adams
(1735–1826), a Boston lawyer who later served in the Continental Congress and eventually became the second president of the United States, defended the accused British
soldiers. In this passage from court transcripts, Adams questions a citizen of Boston who
witnessed the event.
Q. Do you know any of the prisoners at the bar?
A. I particularly saw that tall man (pointing to Warren, one of the prisoners).
Next day after the firing in King street, I saw more of them whom I cannot particularly swear to now.
Q. Did you see the soldiers before the justices on examination?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you then observe you had seen any of them the night before in King
street?
A. I was well persuaded next day in my own mind, that I saw that tall one; but a
few days after, I saw another man belonging to the same regiment, so very like
him, that I doubt whether I am not mistaken with regard to him.
Q. Were there any other of the party you knew?
A. I am well satisfied I saw the corporal there.
Q. Did you see White there?
A. I do not remember.
Q. What was the situation of the corporal?
A. He was the corner man at the left of the party.
Q. Did you see either of the persons, you think you know, discharge their guns?
A. Yes; the man I take to be the tall man, discharged his piece as it was upon a
level.
Q. Did you see the corporal discharge his gun?
A. I did not.
Q. Where did you stand?
A. I was behind them in the circle.
Q. What part of the circle did the tall man stand in?
A. He stood next but one to the corporal. The tall man, whoever he was, was the
man I saw discharge his piece.
Q. Was any thing thrown at the soldiers?
A. Yes, there were many things thrown, what they were I cannot say.
94
CHAPTER 4
|
AN ATL ANTIC EMPIRE
|
Period T hree 175 4 –18 0 0
Q. How did the soldiers stand?
A. They stood with their pieces before them to defend themselves; and as soon
as they had placed themselves, a party, about twelve in number, with sticks in
their hands, who stood in the middle of the street, gave three cheers, and immediately surrounded the soldiers, and struck upon their guns with their sticks,
and passed along the front of the soldiers, towards Royal Exchange lane, striking
the soldiers’ guns as they passed; numbers were continually coming down the
street.
Frederic Kidder, History of the Boston Massacre, March 5, 1770; Consisting of the Narrative
of the Town, the Trial of the Soldiers: and a Historical Introduction, Containing Unpublished
Documents of John Adams, and Explanatory Notes (Albany, NY: Joel Munsell, 1870), 17–18.
PRACTICING Historical Thinking
Identify: Summarize the testimony of this witness.
Analyze: Does this testimony paint the British soldiers in a sympathetic light?
Explain your response.
Evaluate: To what extent was the Boston Massacre a culmination of economic,
geographic, and political concerns? Explain your response with evidence from
the first six documents of this chapter and information from your textbook and
classroom lessons.
DOCUMENT 4.7
“Account of the Boston Tea Party,”
Massachusetts Gazette
1773
By the early 1700s, secret Patriot organizations like the Sons of Liberty actively resisted
British economic policies throughout the colonies and encouraged fellow colonists to
boycott British goods. The Boston Tea Party, organized by the Sons of Liberty, is the most
famous of these protests and led Parliament to pass the Coercive Acts, which closed the
port of Boston and suspended the Massachusetts legislative assembly in favor of a military governor.
“Just before the dissolution of the meeting” [discussing the new Tea Act], . . . a
number of brave and resolute men, dressed in the Indian manner, approached
near the door of the assembly, gave the war-whoop, which rang through the
house, and was answered by some in the galleries, but silence was commanded,
and a peaceable deportment enjoined until the dissolution. The Indians, as
they were then called, repaired to the wharf, where the ships lay that had the
tea on board, and were followed by hundreds of people, to see the event of
TOPIC I
|
Challenging an Em pire
95
the transactions of those who made so grotesque an appearance. The Indians
immediately repaired on board Captain Hall’s ship, where they hoisted out the
chests of tea, and when on deck stove the chests and emptied the tea overboard. Having cleared this ship, they proceeded to Captain Bruce’s, and then to
Captain Coffin’s brig. They applied themselves so dexterously to the destruction of this commodity, that in the space of three hours they broke up three
hundred and forty-two chests, which was the whole number in these vessels,
and discharged the contents into the dock. When the tide rose it floated the
broken chests and the tea insomuch that the surface of the water was filled
therewith a considerable way from the south part of the town to Dorchester
Neck, and lodged on the shores. There was the greatest care taken to prevent
the tea from being purloined by the populace; one or two being detected in
endeavoring to pocket a small quantity were stripped of their acquisitions and
very roughly handled. . . .
Francis S. Drake, Tea Leaves: Being a Collection of Letters and Documents Relating to the
Shipment of Tea to the American Colonies in the Year 1773, by the East India Tea Company
(Boston, MA: A. O. Crane, 1884), lxviii.
PRACTICING Historical Thinking
Identify: Describe the events of the Boston Tea Party as recounted by the
Massachusetts Gazette.
Analyze: What do you think the rebels intended by dressing as Indians?
Evaluate: A writer’s bias reveals his attitude about an event or a phenomenon.
What is the article’s bias? Is it more sympathetic to the British or to the colonists?
Support your response with references to statements in the document.
DOCUMENT 4.8
“Memory of a British Officer Stationed at
Lexington and Concord,” Atlantic Monthly
April 19, 1775
Military Governor Thomas Gage (1720–1787), following the requirements of the Coercive
Acts, ordered British regulars into the Massachusetts countryside in April 1775 to retrieve
weapons that he believed were stored by Patriot forces in an arsenal in the town of Concord. The British met stiff resistance from the Massachusetts militia, as recalled by a British officer in this contemporary diary entry, which was published over a hundred years
after the events it describes.
We set out upon our return; before the whole had quitted the Town we were fired
on from Houses and behind Trees, and before we had gone ½ a mile we were fired
96
CHAPTER 4
|
AN ATL ANTIC EMPIRE
|
Period T hree 175 4 –18 0 0
on from all sides, but mostly from the Rear, where People had hid themselves in
houses till we had passed, and then fired; the Country was an amazing strong one,
full of Hills, Woods, stone Walls, &c., which the Rebels did not fail to take advantage of, for they were all lined with People who kept an incessant fire upon us, as
we did too upon them, but not with the same advantage, for they were so concealed there was hardly any seeing them: in this way we marched between 9 and
10 miles, their numbers increasing from all parts, while ours was reducing
by deaths, wounds, and fatigue; and we were totally surrounded with such an
incessant fire as it’s impossible to conceive; our ammunition was likewise near
expended. . . .
“A British Officer in Boston in 1775,” The Atlantic Monthly 39, no. 234 (April 1877): 400.
PRACTICING Historical Thinking
Identify: List the key details that the British officer remembers.
Analyze: Compare the attitude of the speaker with the writer from the
Massachusetts Gazette (Doc. 4.7). Who is more hostile to the Patriot cause? What
statements in the documents support your answer?
Evaluate: This passage was found in a diary. Who might have been the intended
audience? How does the intended audience affect the trustworthiness of the
document in your opinion?
APPLYING AP ® Historical Thinking Skills
SKILL REVIEW
Patterns of Continuity and Change over Time
Consider the following protests (and their corresponding documents in this book) that
took place in the British North American colonies during the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries:
Bacon’s Rebellion, 1676 (Doc. 2.10)
Leisler’s Rebellion, 1689–1691 (Doc. 3.8)
British North American protests of the 1770s (Docs. 4.4–4.8)
What patterns of continuity do you notice among these rebellions? What are some
of the changes that you trace between 1676 and the 1770s? To what extent are
these continuities a product of recurring issues between colonists and those in
power? To what extent are the changes that you traced a product of changes within
the colonies themselves?
Construct two paragraphs that answer these questions—one paragraph for continuities
and one paragraph for changes. Each paragraph must begin with a claim that is followed by
supporting evidence. To write your paragraphs, be sure to consult your textbook, your class
notes, and the documents mentioned above.
TOPIC I
|
Challenging an Em pire
97