Text Analysis -- Resolution of the Stamp Act Congress, October 19th, 1765

1. What is the author arguing?

The author is arguing that the colonists don’t deserve to be taxed by the British crown. The author wants the parliament to repeal the stamp act because they don’t deserve to be taxed without representation.

2. How does the author appeal to logos (logic), pathos (emotional quality), and ethos (the writer’s perceived character) with their argument?

The author writes in a calm manner. His words are very polite but also very direct. He writes in a humble manner, complimenting the Parliament and the British crown, although he is upset about the taxes. He emphasizes the colonist’s loyalty and respect to the crown, and how it’s not right for them to be taxed when they have no say in it. The author believes that the colonists are their own people and not property of the British any longer despite any lingering ties they may have. In between the compliments and polite words, the author lists the things he is not happy with. Basically
1. The colonists deeply respect the British

2. The colonists can’t be represented in the Parliament

3. It is unreasonable for the British to impose taxes on them when the colonists are no longer a part of Britain.

3. What is the historical significance/relevance of this document?

The historical significance of this document is that it shows America’s split with Europe. This document shows that the American colonists are taking initiative to become their own country with their own rights and liberties. Also, they acknowledge that they are no longer a part of Europe, which I think is significant, because they were still struggling for complete independence.

4. Do you find the author’s argument convincing? Why or why not?

I find the authors argument very convincing! I think mainly because the author remained so calm, and didn’t write a paper filled with angry remarks. He maintains a high level of respect while arguing his point. This makes him seem more informed of the situation and makes him sound more convincing to me. Also, I don’t think it was fair that they were being taxed because they are a separate entity and the British can’t act so superior and take their money. The colonists have their own government and rules, the British can’t continue to be in charge of them.

Why were some New Englanders accused of being witches?

FOR 4/14's CDL ! -- Why were some new Englanders accused of being witches?

Summary:

In today’s discussion reading, it talks about the fiasco of the Salem witch hunt. Since Puritans believed in supernatural spirits, people could legally accuse others of being a witch. In 1691-1692, an epidemic of accusations began in Salem. A witch was defined as someone who had become possessed by Satan. Through the law, nineteen ‘witches’ were legally executed. Most of the accusations were against old ladies, and people wouldn’t accuse family members or strangers, but they’d accuse a good neighbor. If you denied the accusation, your punishment would be greater. Many people would give names of other witches, to win the sympathy or a reduced punishment from officials. In trials, accusers would usually account some misfortune they had suffered at the hands of the accused witch. Looking back now, those misfortunes were quite silly, and witch hunts were results of overactive imaginations, emotional distress, or just accidents. In the end, the idea of witches made it easier for Puritans to believe they could be a saint rather than a sinner.

Q1. Do you think that the witch accusers faked the supposedly cursed/possessed symptoms?

Q2. Why did the people would accuse their good neighbors and not strangers they didn’t know? Do you think they truly believed their good neighbors and friends to be witches?

Q3. Do you think people would have still accused each other of witchcraft if the Puritan religion wasn’t so embedded in everyone’s lives?

--Julie