PRECIS #1: Nathan Barber
Santa Margarita Catholic HS
1st Period-John Braithwaite-Instructor
Were the Puritans Puritanical?
By Carl Degler, Stanford University
THESIS:
Carl Degler, in this provocative article, takes issue with the popular notion that the
Puritans were people who had “the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy”
as advocated by Mencken, Macaulay, & Heffner who got it all wrong! They are not repressed
sex misfits and bigots, but rather, keepers of the Victorian moral code with the highest levels
of education anywhere in the colonies.
Degler Discounts the distortions of Puritans:
 Mencken, Macaulay, and Heffner distort rather than illuminate the essential
character of Puritans.
 The word, “Puritan” has become encrusted with a good many barnacles that need to
be stripped away. Often historians must declare what something is not, as well as,
what it is! In the case of Puritanism—it is not synonymous with repression, fear,
and sexual abstinence at all levels.
 This current usage of the adjective form of the term is misleading, incorrect, and
unfair. Puritans cautioned against excess of merry-making. The Mather quote is
appropriate: “Wine is of God… but the drunkard is from the Devil.”
 Among the Cotton clan, John Cotton saw little to object to in dancing between the
sexes as long as it was not lascivious.
 In matters of dress the Massachusetts colony endeavored to wear “something
modest” Puritan dress was the opposite of severe, long hair was acceptable among
the upper-class. They detested that men and women of a mean condition should
take upon themselves the garb of gentlemen.”
 If the Puritans are to be saved from the canard of severity of dress, it is also worth
while to soften the charge that they were opposed to music and art!
 Well known American Puritans like Samuel Sewell and John Milton were sincere
lovers of music. After all this was the age of Bach, Handel, Gluck and Monteverdi.
 The King Charles collection of art was dispersed, but Cromwell and others bought
several pieces of it for themselves. Puritans, unlike Quakers, did not object to portrait
painting.
 Modern scholars have professed to find in Puritanism, evidence of sexual repression
and inhibition. It would be false to suggest that Puritans did not subscribe to the
canon of simple chastity. It was equally erroneous to think that their sexual lives
were crabbed or that sex was abhorrent to them. Court records of Massachusetts
show that sexual issues dominated the concern and that the sexuality of the Puritans
was wide-open and virile.
 Because as another divine said, “use of the Marriage Bed” is “founded in man’s
nature.” It is difficult to reconcile the usual view of the stuffiness of Puritans with
the literally hundreds of confessions to premarital sexual relations in the extant
church records. These confessions were made by the saints, not the unregenerate.
 Strict moral surveillance by the authorities was a seventeen-century rather than a
Puritan attitude.


Relations between the sexes in Puritan society were often much more loving and
tender than the mythmakers would have us believe.
Anne Bradstreet wrote a number of poems devoted to her love for her husband in
which the sentiments are distinctly romantic.
Puritan Characteristics:
 It would be a mistake…to try to make these serious dedicated men and women into
rakes of the Renaissance. They were sober human folk. God sent you into the world
not as “play-house” but as work-house. Perry Miller said, “only a man convinced of
the inevitable and eternal character of evil could fight it so hard and so unceasingly.
 The Puritan, at his best, was a “moral athlete”. More than most men the Puritan
strove with himself and his fellow men to attain the moral high ground. Puritans
drove himself and his society to tremendous heights of achievement material and
spiritual.
 To realize how different Puritans could be, one need only to contrast Roger Williams
and John Cotton. But despite the range of differences they were all linked by at least
on characteristic. That was their belief in themselves, in their morality and in their
mission to the world!
 In his ceaseless striving for signs of salvation and knowledge…the Puritan placed
great reliance upon his intellect.
 Always the mere emotion of religion was to be controlled by reason. Because of this,
the university trained Puritan clergy prided themselves in the truth that “glory of God
was intelligence.”
 Convinced of reason’s great worth, it was natural that the Puritan should also value
education. Ignorance is the mother of heresy, poverty, and discrimination!
 Doubt as one may, Samuel Eliot Morison’s claims for the secular origins of Harvard,
his evidence of the typically Renaissance secular education was available to all of New
England.
 Schools were a necessity for families, communities, churches, and colonies.
 No other colony in the seventeenth-century imposed such a high educational
standard upon simple people farming as the Puritans did.
 Unlike the Puritans, the Quakers exhibited little impulse toward popular education.
CONCLUSION;


Though the line which runs from the early New England schools to the distinctly
American system of free public education is not always progressively upward. The
Puritan innovation of public support and control on a local level was the American
prototype of a proper system of popular education!
Puritans sought social and religious balance in life. Their cultural legacy was a high
point in literature.
Bibliographic Citation:
Oates, Portait of America. Volume I, 6th edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, pp. 2837 and the same reading can be found in Carl Degler’s book, Out of Our Past. Pp. 922.
Suggested corollary reading:
Alan Taylor,
The American Colonies
Penguin Books pp. 158-186
MICHAEL STROCK
Weber State University
American Civilization 1700
Prof. John Braithwaite
Assignment #2
“The Personal Side of Developing People”
By Jack Larkin
Taken From Portraits of America, Vol. I
THESIS OF THE ARTICLE:
Larkin takes a look at this young American Republic and their ways of life,
particularly their personal practices such as what they wore, their likes and dislikes,
what they did to occupy their free time (amusements), and even their sexual
preferences and practices.
SALIENT POINTS OF READING INTEREST:
 It was very common for the people to wear dull and inexpensive clothing; to
have facial hair, and to make physical gesture which did not depict their
feeling.
 Blacks in their celebrations used bodily expressions that were strange to
whites.
 Farmers walked awkwardly, slouching from side to side-these different
gestures and conduct characterized average American people
 According to Larkin, each class and group of people were distinct in the way
they carried themselves.
 The conditions in which the early American lived were quite repulsive, along
with urine odors throughout the house and offices, the mixing of smells of
dung, from horses and buffalo [in western areas] decorated the bars.
 Pigs cleaned the streets of food liter—and along with them came more
infection and disease among those who took the swine for food. (poor classes)
 Privy habits differed in the areas of the country—the chamber pots [bed pans]
were widely used.
 Bedding accommodations were dirty and infested with insects, lice, and mites,
along with the same for children who were likewise infested.
 Means to improve sanitation and personal cleanliness were made through
efforts such as washing once a day(almost), moving wash basins into
bedchambers from the kitchen and later on, into personal water closets and
bathtubs—the rich got cleaner—the poor got dirtier.












Drinking [which was considered “healthy and fortifying”] was largely a part of
society [generally among white males], thus, taverns played a significant role
in their drinking as a means for socials and such, not for a lady to become
drunk—this was shameful and hence, one sees the gender differences.
Violence and fighting always accompanied men and their drinks. Not just on
the frontier but in towns and cities as well.
Thieves were publicly punished for their crimes which were looked upon as
joyous and celebrated equality. These were almost holidays.
Due to drunken accidents, campaigns began to promote temperance and
respectability to civilize the “American man” and as a result, drinking along
with its advocates declined in popularity in some areas.
American Temperance Society was founded in 1826
Religion had become a respectable exercise and many new American religions
surfaced during the Age of Jackson
Forms of public punishment changed—John Hancock wrote, “…mutilating or
lacerating the body…” was an indignity to human nature, yet southerners
continued the practice with custom.
It was common action for men and women to become sexually acquainted
before taking their vows of marriage, and in so doing; it was also common for
the marriage to be accelerated due to early pregnancies. (Blacks were also
involved with such customs), hence, this heightened sexuality aroused even
the married to resort to prostitution and liaisons.
Bundling (or the act of a single man and woman to lie together, fully clothed)
was a widely accepted form in courtship.
A greater emphasis on control (sexually) surfaced, and more focus was placed
on personal establishment in the working world, before marriage or any
possible altering or aspects (of sexual activity)—and consequently the common
size of the family decreased. Apprehension of contraception and its use grew
dramatically, thus after 1830, the birthrate declined. Alcott and Graham
argued that these sexual relations be limited.
Social customs such as smoking, snuffing, and chewing began to lose favor
amongst the honorable and respectable when at one time they were shared by
all alike.
To top off these changes with the young republic, the old English customs of
bowing the head, tipping the hat, and other similar quirks, slowly diminished
to the all too recognizable American “hand-shake” so simple yet so equal.
MY ASSESSMENT & CONCLUSION:
It’s very interesting to actually read of the characteristics and customs of the early
Americans. I believe that as we are taught through our schooling, those who
determine the curriculums choose not to portray our early parents as they really
were. I had always thought of those before me as clean and chaste examples. I have
even found myself repeating the words, “why couldn’t the people of today be more
like those before us,” but in actuality we are not much different. Although in
reading this essay, it is very comforting in noting how this young American Republic
was willing to do better and change. They were eager to build their own morals from
a foundation of lesser values and they were successful in do it. Not only did they
change morally, but ethically too! Emphasis on prestige and position soon
diminished under the idea that people really were created equally. The evident class
distinctions grew unfamiliar even to their foreign associates. Yes, our forefathers
and parents participated in many things that generally would cause some of us to
frown upon their past, and yet, it is quite possible that the strong ethics and morals
that so many identify with in this day and age were planted by the very same young
republic that so indulged in those practices.
“Cowboys don’t bath, they just dust off!”
Richard Schoenfeld
Weber State University 1998-7 am T-Th
Professor John Braithwaite
“Why The Union Won”
by James MacPherson, Princeton University
THESIS:
Years passed in turmoil. Thousands of Americans died. Major changes resulted in the
country, industrial, political, emotional, socially and culturally. All of these issues from the war that
would change history forever. The war went on and only one side could overcome the other and come
out victorious. The Union Army emerged the winner. There are many assumptions why the Union
Army overcame the Confederates; therefore leaves us the question, “Why did the Union win?”
I.
The weeks after the assassination of Lincoln
A. Confederate armies were surrendering.
B. Confederate President flees toward: convicted falsely with connection to Lincoln’s
assassination
C Steamboat Sultana sinks in the Mississippi
D Gangs, guerillas, and outlaws ravaged the region for years afterwards.
E 620,000 soldiers died. This does not included civilian deaths.
II.
Why did the Confederate Army lose?
A,
God was on the side heaviest battalions
1.
North had superior man power of at least 3 to 1, the Union Army at least 2 to 1.
2.
North had greater advantage economically and logistically.
3.
However, if was possible for the South to overcome the disadvantages
B.
Internal division which weakened the Confederacy.
1.
Conflicts between governors, disaffection of non-slave holders from a rich
man’s war and a poor man’s fight, opposition habeus corpus, disloyalty from
slaves, and growing doubts from slave holders.
2.
“Weakness in morale” a “loss of the will to fight.”
3.
However, the North experienced the same types of internal struggles
a.
Opposition to conscription, taxation, suspension of habeas corpus, etc.
b.
Whit as well as blacks grew disaffected with war to preserve slavery.
4.
North had the institutionalization of obstruction in the Democratic Party in the
North which compelled the Republicans to close the ranks in support of war
policies and overcome opposition.
C.
Quality of leadership. (Military and Civilian)
1.
Northern leadership
a.
Gradual development of superior northern leadership
b.
Better strategic leadership in the West.
2.
c.
Remarkable war leadership by Lincoln
d.
Ulysses S. Grant, William Tecumseh Sherman and others
Southern Leadership
a.
Early was the South enjoyed better leadership
b.
Beauregard, Lee, Albert Sidney and Joseph E. Johnston, Stonewall
Jackson.
c.
South neglected the war in the West.
d.
Bumbling leaders who performed miracles of organization and
improvisation.
III.
Four major turning points which sculpture the eventual outcome.
A.
Great counter-offensives by the Southern leaders in summer of 1862
1.
Assured a prolongation in the conflict.
2.
Created potential Confederate success.
B.
Defeat of Confederate invasions in Maryland and Kentucky and stalled European
mediation. Fall of 1862.
1.
Perhaps prevented Democratic victory in the northern elections
2.
Set the stage for the Emancipation Proclamation.
C.
Union victories at Gettysburg, Vicksburg, and Chattanooga. Fall of 1863.
D.
Sherman’s capture of Atlanta, Philip Sheridan’s destruction of rebel army in the
Shenandoah Valley. Summer of 1864.
E.
Defeat cause demoralization and loss of will.
F.
Victory pumps up morale and the will to win.
IV.
Consequences of the war:
A.
Secession and slavery were killed.
B.
Results brought on transfiguration of American society.
C.
War marked a transition of the United States to a singular noun.
D.
Speeches given by Lincoln on importance of the Union. “This last best hope…etc
E.
Change in the federal government:
1
Creation of internal revenue to collect taxes, the draft to the army, expansion of
federal courts, national currency and banking system, first agency for social
welfare.
2.
Powerful shift of political power from South to the North
3.
Traditional ideals kept by the South.
4.
Government of limited powers that protected the rights of property and
protected. the yeoman farmer from “industrialization.”
5.
Saw Black Republican party as “essentially a revolutionary party.”
F.
Destroyed the Southern vision of America and ensured the Northern vision would
become the American vision.
SUMMARY VIEW:
Why did the Union army win? There are many reasons for the reason they won, just as there
theories for the extinction of dinosaurs. Perhaps the better leadership of the North had the advantage
over the Confederate army. But let’s look at the statistics: 360,000 Yankees dean compared to
260,000 rebels killed. Better leadership? Perhaps not until the end. Yet the argument of a weary
South losing its “will to fight” is a convincing one after important victories won by the North. Perhaps
the reason for the South losing is conglomerate of many reasons, which may be the greatest argument.
There’s just not a single reason but the positive affects the war had on the country may outweigh any
derogative resulted from the war. Were 620,000+ lives a small price to pay for a Union victory? “The
war marked a transition of the United States to a singular noun. The ‘Union” became a nation…”This
was a challenging and informative piece of reading. I now care about what I learn.
PRECIS #9—Jared Dee Huggard
Professor Braithwaite—T&Th 8:00 am
Weber State University
“Hell Cannot Be So Terrible: Trench Warfare on the Western Front”
by Dr. Paul Fussell, in Portrait of America. Pp 152-164
THESIS:
We can acquire insight as to what warfare was really like during the Great War [WW
I] by looking at the physical, military, and tactical aspects of trench warfare as well
as the effects it had on the soldiers both physically and psychologically.
PHYSICAL ASPECTS:
 There were over 12,000 miles of trenches on the allied side and an astounding
25,000 miles accredited to the Central Powers.
 The British line contained nearly 800 battalions of 1,000 men each.
 Trenches began in nearby towns and gradually deepened.
 British trenches were wet, cold, and smelly while German trenches were very
well constructed and comparably comfortable.
 There was an ever-present stench of rotting flesh caused by the casualties of
the war that could not be properly disposed of.
 Some trenches had several feet of water because the table was very high and
the annual rainfall was high as well.
TACTICAL ASPECTS:
 The idea of trench warfare to gain ground and terrorize the opponent with as
little damage to one own troops.
 There were three types of trenches: firing trenches, communications
trenches, and saps [used for fighting]
 Two new and American inventions were used in trench warfare: barbed wire
and the machine gun—later on, the hand grenade was also used.
 The British always had the hope that a general breakout in the fighting would
occur and consequently their trenches were hastily built.
 As equipment improved so did the success in the battles by the allied forces.
Soft cloth hats used at the beginning of the war were replaced by helmets.
Respirators were also later used to protect from gas inhalation.
MILITARY EFFECTS ON THE SOLDIERS:
 Seven thousand British men and officers were killed and wounded daily in
the trenches.
 Soldiers had to learn excellent self control because of constant threat that
hung over them from a non-stop bombardment of shelling.






Scanty rations were brought to the men in sand bags and hastily prepared or
eaten. Many advances were made in the way a soldier eats. Fresh meat and
bread were in high demand.
Because of such death rates, a report of casualties was made each evening
and form-letters of condolence became commonplace.
Health became a problem. Lice were rampant and there was little that
professional “delouser’ could do to control it. Rats ran rampant and spread
disease and fed on the rotting corpses.
At the onset of the war the men were not equipped properly and there were
many hurt and killed as a result. The felt hat thing for example.
The men in the trenches experienced an “unreal, unforgettable enclosure”
Often times they spent the whole time disoriented and lost any how.
When Gen. Pershing saw this, he forbade American to get into the trenches
which sparked a military conflict between himself and the French General,
Marshall Foch.
CONCLUSION:
Trench warfare wasn’t just a part of the World War I. I believe it is safe to say that
World War I was trench warfare. [At least until the Americans arrived in 1918]
Technology has allowed warfare to escalate until the present time where modern
warfare inventions have made trench warfare obsolete. Nevertheless, was is war
and I believe it is helpful to study the facts and compare the details of this form a
warfare to those that we are familiar with today such as tank combat, air to air
battle, and jungle warfare. As in the thesis, more than anything we learn what the
war really was like. I find it particularly interesting and useful to note the direct
effects it had on the soldiers [and civilians] as well as the actual effectiveness of it in
winning the war.
The essay was compelling and brilliant. It convinced me how futile modern warfare
really is when it has to be fought hand to hand “in the trenches”. Fussell is a great
writer. He was a product of Normandy all the way to Berlin from 1943-1945. With
good reason he knows what he is talking about.
MICHAEL STROCK
Weber State University
American Civilization 1700
Prof. John Braithwaite
Assignment #3
“Andrew Carnegie—The Master of Steel!”
By Robert Heilbroner
Taken From Portraits of America, Vol. II
THESIS OF THE ARTICLE:
The Civil War and the years to follow planted the industrial seeds that gave
root to entrepreneurship and economic growth in America. Many tycoons and
money hungry giants surfaced the American society and held to the power and
control that they had attained. Yet among the chief’s of the economy arose one who
was the example and paved the way for business world we know today. Through
“Andy” [Carnegie], one could measure the failures and successes that he was able to
realize as an industrial statesman during the “Gilded Age.”
SALIENT POINTS OF READING INTEREST:
 Andrew Carnegie was during his time (and even beyond) considered the
richest man in the world.
 Over the course of his life, he had given away $324,657,399 of his wealth, and
estimated total of 90% of his wealth.
 At the age of 33, he had great hopes of retiring at 35 and not making work his
life, yet, he worked for many more years, not unwilling to give up his business
affairs when the time came.
 He had once said, “the man dies rich thus dies disgraced!”
 Carnegie grew up around radical (industrial movements that left an
impression on him.
 “Death to Privilege” was his motto as a young republican derived from seeing
his uncle fight against economic disputes in Scotland.
 From one uncle [G. Lauder] he embraced the love of poetry and literature.
 The Industrial Revolution forced his family business to sell out-this shocked
him, and as a result, his family moved to America to better their chances.
 He first worked for small wages [$1.20.3.00], but then was promoted to a
messenger boy where he excelled, became the best, and was later able to
obtain a job with the railroad working under Thomas A. Scott.
 His enthusiasm and initiative paid off when he took control of a particular
railroad mishap while Scott [his employer] was away.
 He then began investing as the opportunities arose (such as Adams Express
and T.T. Woodruff), which in turn resulted in money making events.












Due to the money he was able to acquire on the side from his investments, he
quit the railroad and pursued his interests in iron.
He saw and took opportunities to combine British capital with American
expanding business, increasing his wealth and strong circle of influential
friends which enabled Carnegie with the monopolizing tools of his trade.
During a visit to a British mill, he came across the Bessemer Converter [which
revolutionized the iron industry, combining iron with other metals resulting in
steel], it was with this invention that he formed the Carnegie, McCandles and
Company
Carnegie became the king of steel for three reasons:
o Steel replaced iron in every aspect and the need was tremendous
o Carnegie was surrounded by purely talented men [such as: Wm Jones,
Henry C. Frick, and Charles Schwab]
o Carnegie himself was a salesperson and business diplomat
Under the “Iron-clad” agreement, stock holders could only sell to the
company, and so Frick disagreed and wanted to get out.
Business grew fierce due to competition and Carnegie’s desire to get out.
Charles Schwab gave a speech resulting in personal meetings with J.P.
Morgan, who offered to buy Carnegies enterprise.
Carnegie made an offer and J.P. Morgan accepted, buying out Carnegie
Later, it was said of Carnegie that his sentiments on $and business did not
match his actions.
Working conditions in the towns and plants that Carnegie had developed were
found to be horribly unpleasant.
Carnegie had dined with kings and queens yet in the end, he lived according
to his thoughts; giving all of his money away [90%] and forming libraries,
foundations, and institutions of music and education. The Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace!]
Amazingly, in the end he was able to live up to his conviction though they
contradicted all else lived.
MY ASSESSMENT & CONCLUSION:
What an amazing man. We find in our day that men like Andrew Carnegie
depicted is a breed of men that rarely exists. In his desire to obtain wealth and
power through his investments and monopolies we find many of his counterparts in
the business world of our time. But, who in this day and age obtains such wealth
and power and constantly wishes for the whole of it to be divided up in other
charitable and productive causes such as learning centers? He had the ability to
not only lead and carry through, but furthermore, he never stopped wheeling and
dealing. Everything was business to him. He made it part of his life. And the
outcome was tremendously great in his favor. Yet despite his success, his true
thoughts and feelings told a different story. Never did he want for his money to
become such an integral part of his everyday life. He originally planned to retire
young with a liberal salary he had acquired at the young age of 33. These plans
were soon overlooked but they did not lie dormant in the back of his mind, until
when he did finally retire he was able to live according to his real sentiments. An
amazing man, and truly one of a kind.
PRECIS #3: Ryan Hodge
1st
Santa Margarita Catholic HS
Period-John Braithwaite-Instructor
Black People In White People’s Country
THESIS:
“The African slave trade, which began in the late fifteenth century and continued for
the next 400 years is one of the most important phenomena in the history of the modern
world . . . the slave trade and slavery is the cultural diffusion that took place when ten
million Africans were brought to the western hemisphere.” Nash argues that the answer lies
in a combination of racial prejudice and labor needs in early America.
The Atlantic Slave Trade:
 A half century before Columbus, Antam Goncalvez, made the first European landing
in the sub-Sahara region of Africa.
 The notion of “backwardness” and cultural impoverishment was the myth that
perpetuated after the slave trade had transported millions of Africans to the Western
Hemisphere.
 The people of Africa may have number 50 million, they lived in widely in different
ecological zones, they had increased rapidly over the past 2000 years,
 A number of extraordinary empires had developed—the Kingdom of Ghana and at the
center was the kingdom of Mali with extensive wealth, university, and scientific
achievements in medicine and metallurgy.
 Lesser kingdoms came from Zimbabwe and Benin. They were skilled in metal works,
weaving, architecture, and complex religious rites. Cultural development occurred at
varying rates.
 The slave trade itself seems to have begun in 1472 when Ruy do Sequira of Portugal
reached the coast of Benin. European powers raided African coast for slaves.
Africans were sold by other Africans for guns, iron, copper, brass and textiles, while
Europeans received gold, ivory, and slaves.
 The African slave trade began in the second half of the 15th century, it served to fill
the labor shortages in the economies of Europe (centered on mercantilism!)
 Once the gold and silver of the New World were found in Mexico and Peru, they
turned to sugar, coffee, and tobacco all demanding human labor for profit.
 From the late 15th century to mid-19th century—almost 400 years—Africans were
taken from their ancestral homelands to fil the labor needs in the colonies of North
and South America.
 Once established on a large scale, the Atlantic slave trade dramatically altered the
patter of slave recruitment in Africa. (See Map p.38)
 More than anything else, it was sugar, that transformed the slave trade.


In the forcible recruitment of slaves, adult males were consistently preferred over women and
children. Women in Africa were the agriculturalists of society and, in matrilineal and
matrilocal kinships systems, were too valuable to be spared.
For the Europeans the slave trade itself became an immensely profitable enterprise.
Capture and Transport of Slaves:
 Once captured, the slaves were marched to the sea in coffles over 500 miles
 The anger, bewilderment, and desolation that accompanied the forced march, was only the first
leg of a 5,000 mile journey to the New World
 Cruelty followed cruelty. Slaves were branded with a hot iron to signify ownership and
nationality (Spanish, Portuguese, French, or English) [See diagram of slave ship]
 The primary sources of demand were Brazil, the West Indies, and later the southern US
tobacco, rice, and cotton plantations.
 Suicide was prevalent while they were still on African soil. That was a great financial loss.
 Taking into consideration the mortality involved in the capture, the forced march to the sea, and
the middle passage, only 1 in 2 lived to see the New World.
The Development of Slavery in the English Colonies:
 Even though familiar with Spanish, Dutch, Portuguese African slave labor, the English
colonists did not turn to solve the labor problems.
 However, African stereotyping of slaves made it easier for the English when they did turn to
slavery.
 Mainland colonies made it easy to employ slaves based upon what English planters had set the
precedent on the sugar islands of the Caribbean.
o By 1680 there were only 7,000 slaves in the colonies
o By in Virginia and Maryland, it was primarily white indentured servitude
o The reasons for the shift to slave based economy was two-fold:
1- English entry into slave trade gave the South opportunity for cheap labor
2- Also, the supply of white indentures from England began to dry up
 Thus it was late 17th century the number of Africans began to grow based upon the exodus of
white indentures.
 Finally, the two words, Negro and slave, were one in the same and convertible.
 In the north, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware, slavery only existed on an occasional
basis. In New York, the English who filter in saw no reason to change the Dutch slave trade
 Gradually, the number of slaves increased and legal codes controlled their activities. These
“black codes” were borrowed from the law books of the English West Indies.
 Thus slavery was everywhere in the colonies and had to adapt to a more circumscribed world.
 Discriminatory steps were slight, in comparison to the stripping away of the rights of slaves.
o Slaves lost their rights to testify in courts
o To engage in commercial activity
o To hold property
o To travel without permission
o Or, to engage in legal marriage
o Some colonies prohibited the right to education and religion
Assessment:
 The movement to annul slaves rights had both pragmatic and psychological dimensions
 New York passed a slave code that rival the southern colonies after the 1712 revolt
 Thus occurred one of the great paradoxes in American history—the building of what some
thought was to be a utopia in the wilderness upon the backs of black men and women wrenched
from their African homeland and forced into a system of abject slavery.

The massive enslavement of Africans profoundly affected white racial prejudice. In this long
evolution of racial attitudes in America, nothing was of greater importance than the
enslavement of Africans.
Jessica Rothmeier
APUSH Pd 1
Mr. Bosley
02 February 2009
Précis Summary for The Master of Steel: Andrew Carnegie
Robert L. Heilbroner
Thesis of Article:
Heilbroner exposes the life of Andrew Carnegie to convey the opinion that even though
Carnegie embodied some character flaws, just as every human does, his motives for were purely
capitalistic and his thirst to get ahead in the world is not comparable to greed. Because he gave 90% of
his wealth away, Carnegie is to be considered the essence of the Gilded Age, a man of determination
and of resourcefulness. He was an industrial statesman not a robber baron.
Salient Points of Reading Interest:
 The many sources of impetus for industrialization came from the Civil War when the
government “created a national currency and banking system, enacted homestead legislation,
and appropriated federal aid for a transcontinental railroad”
 The federal government played a crucial role in the postwar boom: maintained a protective
tariff, gave public land to railroad companies, adopted a hard-money policy, refused to regulate
the consolidation of America’s industrial order
 Robber barons: controlled the essential tools of the economy itself and made millions of dollars
from railroads, banking, and manufacturing
 Horatio Alger: wrote many novels that had plots that dealt with rags-to-riches individuals,
written to encourage the American Dream: all were capable of rising to the top
 John D. Rockefeller was a penny-pinching man, Standard Oil Company, had little interest in
money, stressed the values of order, organization, and planning
 Some robber barons were “rapacious” capitalists like Michael Douglas
 Andrew Carnegie: self-made man, embodied the spirit of the Gilded Age, advocated and
celebrated industrial power, defended democracy, capitalism, and the Anglo-Saxon race, social
Darwinism
 Carnegie gave approximately $324,6557,399 away
 Carnegie sold the Carnegie steel empire to J.P. Morgan to create the United States Steel
Company in 1901
 In a notebook: Carnegie did not want his business to become the center of his life, he just
wanted to make $50,000/a year so that he could move to Oxford and join ranks with the literary
men of the time period
 He wanted to retire at 35, instead he worked for 33 more years rather than his expected 2
 All of the points in that note were hypocritical, he was greedy, but he felt bad about his
acquisitive nature and thus proceeded to give away 90% of his wealth
 Carnegie was born in 1835 in the village of Dunfermline, Scotland
 Was a product of a revolutionary childhood






















Had a love of poetry, especially that of Burns, romantic egalitarianism, also Shakespeare
Power of thought to seek answers to questions that hadn’t occurred to him
Carnegie’s early life was shaped by currents of the material rather than intellectual
Emigrated to Allegheny, Pennsylvania with his mother and father to America at age 13 when
there was no work to be found after the Industrial Revolution
After being a bobbin-boy, he became a messenger, decided to excel at the job and memorized
all of the important names and locations of the main streets and the main firms in Pittsburgh
Went in early and stayed late, learned Morse Code, took a message “by ear”, thought that
anyone could “get along” in America
Thomas A. Scott: local superintendent of the Pennsylvania railroad- Carnegie became his
telegrapher, secretary, and general factorum
Scott gave Carnegie the chance to subscribe to five hundred dollars worth of Adams Express
Stock
That stock gave Carnegie the first money from capital-money that was not worked for with “the
sweat of his brow”
Next chance came when T.T. Woodruff introduced him to the idea of the first sleeping car in a
train, Carnegie arranged for Woodruff to meet Scott, Woodruff then gave Carnegie a 1/8 stock
in the Palace Car Company- $5000/year
Became a “human catalyst” in many big business decisions-profited from them
Suggested that the company of his and of Pullman unite into one, got a lot of stock
When British capital was needed, Carnegie, being from Scotland was the go between
England gave Carnegie the process to make steel with the Bessemer converter
Advocate of the most daring technology of the era and of business expansion
Formed Carnegie, McCandless & Company
Steel was usable everywhere and everyone needed it
What lay behind Carnegie’s expansion included: the massive economic expansion, the personal
talent with which Carnegie surrounded himself (Captain William Jones, Henry Frick, Charles
Schwab), and he himself-master salesman and a skilled diplomat of business, could win loyalty
Problems faced: prevented from selling stock unless to the company, looming competitive
struggle within the steel market, increased desire to get out
On one hand he handled business, on the other he “courted the literacy and creative world”
Carnegie benevolence was exposed as false- Hamlin Garland investigated working conditions
and living conditions of the workers
Established Carnegie institutes in Pittsburgh and Washington, Carnegie Hall in New York,
famous libraries, Hague Peace Palace, and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
My Assessment and Conclusion:
Even though Carnegie could be considered a Robber Baron, because he started out as a poor
man who emigrated from Scotland to the United States, this fact establishes the majority of his
character. He was both a man of literacy and creativity as well as a man of business. He wove his
loves of the arts into his goals as a business man and was in the end, able to afford the luxuries of
education and art in his later years. Luck was the main factor in Andrew Carnegie’s life. Without
chance meetings with the other influential men of the age, it is doubtful that Carnegie would have
made his millions. Even so, he was able to fulfill his “acquisitive” nature while remaining humble and
in the end, giving most of his money away. Carnegie embodied the spirit of the American Dream in
that he rose from a man of little material wealth to a giant in the business world. Some people may
deem him as greedy, but Carnegie loved what he did and affected the economy of America through his
determination and drive. SCORE: ‘9’
Alec Graham
Mr. Braithwaite/Mr Brohawn
St. Peter & St Paul
23 November 2008
“The Personal Side of a Developing People”
By Jack Larkin
Thesis:
In its earliest days, America was a diverse and rapidly changing nation. Since that time,
the country has thusly changed a great deal, yet some things have stayed the same.
Citations & Ideas of Evidence Discussed:
 Rural New Englanders carried themselves distinctly probably because of heritage and
manual labor
 Planter carried themselves in a refined manner, trying to differentiate their class
 Americans of the early republic had little regard for sanitation
 Privies were widely used at conspicuous locations
 1840, significant families owned “chamber sets
 The elite classes could boast running water by the 1830s
 Americans drank more, in the early 19th century, than ever before or since
 Dramming- taking a fortifying glass in the forenoon and afternoon was part of the
daily routine of clergymen, lawyers, doctors, etc.
 Drunkenness in women was not tolerated
 Penal codes in America were less severe than in Great Britain; not much received the
death penalty
 The temperance movement became evident in the North by the 1820s
 American Temperance Society founded 1826
 With success in temperance came decreases in other forms debauchery
 Pregnancy before marriage hit a high in the US in the late 18th century
 Birth control could be learned starting 1830s
 Sylvester Graham preached that man should remain chaste as much as possible
 Tobacco was a cheap, domestic crop in America
 The Revolution in America did away with most acts of subordination (ie bowing)
 Americans a decade after leaving Europe were of a greater stature due to the
country’s abundance.
 In the North, less forest and wilds decreased a reliance on game
Reading Assessment & Summary:
Americans in the early republic were a diverse group. The differing groups had
distinctive physical habits. For instance, the New Englanders walked in an odd manner due
to much physical work. Also, they wore strait faced expressions due to their strict Calvinist
heritage. The other nationalities also behaved in unique manners. This was witnessed
with the Irish and German immigrants. Differences in this regard could also come about
from environment. For example, the merchants of New York City were said to walk “as if
they had a good dinner before them.
Early Americans were lacking in good health and sanitation. In this way they were
very different than the Americans of today. There was much to be desired in the area of
waste management. As sewers were not widespread, Americans habitually threw refuse into
the streets. The chamber pot, an early and primitive toilet, was widely used. But at the
time, a sanitary lifestyle was a difficult to lead. Washbasins, for the majority of the
population were rare and had only cold water. Bathing was therefore an uncomfortable and
highly public ideal. Yet Americans were slowly learning the value of good hygiene. Running
water came into use in the 1830s, though only the elite classes could afford it.
Americans at the turn of the century were notoriously crude, violent, and drunken.
The consumption of spirits was at an all time high. Thusly, taverns sprang up across the
nation. Tavern life, gambling, talking, and drinking itself was considered a necessary part
of life. Abstaining from drink even at work was unheard of. In a social sense, drink was a
sign of commaderie and hospitality used by all good hosts. Often accompanying drinking
was another vice, tobacco. Because of its wide availability in American since early times,
tobacco was chewed and smoked by all classes. By today’s standards, the use of tobacco
was very excessive. This lifestyle based around alcohol was bound to have repercussions.
An unsavory one was violence. Violence due to alcohol could take place between enemies or
within families. Eventually, a temperance movement began. It took root in the North,
under supervision of ministers. Thusly, one goal of the movement was religious piety, but
another was greater social order. Leaders of the movement claimed that alcohol did not
“fortify,” but “poisoned.” In the end, the temperance movement was greatly successful.
From 1820 to 1840, the amount of alcohol consumed was reduced almost 75%. With
drunkenness, went the other elements of that lifestyle such as gambling and fighting.
Meanwhile, church attendance went up in these years. The reform movement was largely
successful, but mainly in the northern states.
Another area of early American life experiencing reform was the penal system. The
penal system in early America was not as severe as its counterparts in Europe. Still, pain
was a regular part of punishment. Brandings and lashings were usual. The death penalty
was relatively rare, yet in use for a number of crimes. Furthermore, hangings were on
public display. The reform that swept through America changed this. Slowly, jails replaced
whippings, and if there were hangings, more were in private.
All in all, early Americans were more immoral. This was especially true of their sex
life. Premarital sex in the early republic was much more prolific than remembered.
Pregnancy before marriage hit a high in the US in the last decade of the 18 th century.
Bundling, a practice allowing couples to sleep in the same bed while remaining abstinent,
was abandoned. Sexual relations came to extend between different races. Masters often
fathered children with their female slaves, the children becoming enslaved to their own
father. The sex business flourished. Women turned to prostitution for economic help or
just to get freedom from families. But by the turn of the century, moral reform was to reach
this issue. Some reform was not on moral ground though. Young couples, wanting to limit
the sizes of their families, abstained from intercourse and even married later. At this time,
different forms of contraception were even used. New views on sex came about in the early
years of the 19th century. Sylvester Graham preached that men should remain abstinent for
the greater part of their lives in order to reach better physical well being. Furthermore,
women came to be viewed as the keepers of the republican virtue in their homes.
Therefore, the sexual act for women would be solely for the purpose of child bearing.
Not all aspects of American society have changed since that time, though. The way
in which Americans treated their fellow Americans is basically the same as it is today. This
was due mainly to the American Revolution and the egalitarian ideals it promoted.
Regardless of social standing, all Americans were basically treated and greeted in the same
fashion. Unlike the bowing of earlier, “monarchical” times, Americans greeted one another
with a simple handshake. This idea of a common, American ground was basically repeated
throughout the rest of society.
As is somewhat true nowadays, Americans of that period were physically different
from people throughout the rest of the world. Because of the relative abundance in the
United States, its citizens were about an inch taller than their relatives in Europe. The
stature of Americans fluctuated from region to region, though. For instance, city dwellers
were likely to be shorter than their well fed, country dwelling counterparts. Slaves, because
of harsher diets, were also likely to be shorter than the white farmers.
America, in the years following its Revolution, was a rapidly changing nation. This is
visible in the amount, and effectiveness of the reform movements of the day. Yet some parts
of the American life have remained constant, such as the diversity.
Jarrett Klein
Mr. Bosley--2/3/09
AP US History
“The
Master of Steel: Andrew Carnegie”
By: Robert L. Heilbroner
Thesis statement:
Andrew Carnegie was a “benevolent old gentleman” of great integrity. He was one who
followed the Gospel of Wealth, one who made hundreds of millions in his lifetime only to give it all
away when he died. Carnegie was not a Robber Baron, like many multi-millionaires, but the leading
Captain of Industry. YEA, YEA, YEA! In achieving his success, along with much luck, Carnegie was
always “driven by a genuine respect for the power of thought”. The determination in his work is what
would eventually get him at the for-front of the industrial age. [This is great work!]
Salient Points of Interest:
 Throughout his business career Carnegie had given over $324 million to the community
 It was speculated that at his death, Carnegie’s estate would be worth over $500 million, but after
further investigation his estate was only worth about $20 million
 He took part in improving public education and improving the standards of living for the poor
 Carnegie called wealth “one of the worst species of idolatry” and instead of retiring at thirty-five he
choose instead to spread his wealth to others
 As a young boy Carnegie developed into a Republican who hated the rich
 After his family business failed he and his father resorted to working in a cotton mill for $1.20 a
day
 Not seeing this as a way of life Carnegie moved to Pittsburgh to become a messenger boy
o So determined to be the best, he studied the street names and locations for weeks
o And at night he would learn Morse Code so that he could again be promoted to something
better
 Impressed by this determination Thomas A. Scott (superintended of the Pennsylvania Railroad)
made Carnegie his telegrapher, secretary, and general factotum at $35 a month
 After an incident involving the Railroads that Carnegie was able to fix by himself, he became
Thomas’s favorite
 He later gave Carnegie $500 worth of stock to Adams Express
o Carnegie later remarked, “It gave me the first penny of revenue from capital—something
that I had not worked for with the sweat of my brow…” This became the backing behind
Carnegie’s future
 He immediately invested in Woodruff Palace Car Company and received over $5,000 a year within
two years
 At the time of becoming a young railroad executive Carnegie invested in the Keystone bridge
company earning him $15,000 in 1868
 In 1865 Carnegie left the Railroad business and his superintendent position, seeing that he could
make more money concentrating all his efforts on investment















His next purchase was in Pennsylvania oil country which eventually earned him over one million
dollars in one year
In 1869 Carnegie met George Pullman (his competitor in the train car market) at the St. Nicholas
Hotel, where they would later form a new company that combined both companies naming it the
Pullman Palace Car Company
Acting as the middleman between American Railways and those willing to give British capital to
the railroads he became good friends with prominent bankers including Junius Morgan. His trips
also earned him over $100,000 per return
Also as a result of his trips to London, in 1872 Carnegie learned of the Bessemer steel process,
which at first sight he became fascinated with
Carnegie formed Carnegie, McCandless & Company as a result, which would become his main
source of income for the next thirty years
Steel soon replaced iron railroads, ships, buildings, bridges, and machinery of every kind
From 1885 to 1900 Britain fell from the number one producer of steel to producing 700,000 tons
less than just the Carnegie Steel Company
Carnegie surrounded himself with the talents of Captain William Jones, Henry Frick, and Charles
Schwab, all of which aided in his steel making company
Also aiding his business was Carnegie himself, he was a skilled diplomat and he promoted
competition among his workers leading to a more efficient workforce
His steel business grew from one earning $3.5 million in 1889 to $40 million in 1900
After a long time in the business and because of the increasing competition among companies
Carnegie showed an increasing desire to “get out”
Carnegie soon sold his company to J.P. Morgan for $492 million, $300 million of which would be
Carnegie’s
In the Gospel of Wealth “Carnegie had proclaimed the duty of the millionaire to administer and
distribute his wealth during his lifetime”
The wealthy at the time believed that his statement was absurd and those with money earned it and
therefore should be able to keep it (Social Darwinism)
As a result of Carnegie’s donations over 3000 libraries, numerous Carnegie institutes, and the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace were formed [You read the book!]
Conclusion:
As determined by his actions, Carnegie was a benevolent man, probably because his family had been
put out of business by the expanding industry so he knows the situation that families are in. He knows
of the working conditions, of the long hours and horrible pay and he knows that is not the fault of the
individual for such problems. By creating the libraries and educational institutes Carnegie made it
possible for those who wish to be better, as he did, to become better. Carnegie also promoted
competition among his workers that would better themselves and the business at the same time, and in
doing so he was not just out to become the richest person in the world. In fact his benevolent industry
methods are what caused that occurrence. Other industry leaders, especially Robber Barons should
have followed Carnegie’s example, although maybe not as radically as him.
Alec Graham
US History
Mr. Braithwaite
8 December 2008
“The Checkered History of the Great 14th Amendment”
Eric Foner
Thesis:
The 14th Amendment was one of the most important consequences of the great crisis
occurring after the Civil War. It has shaped American life up to modern times.
Facts Used:
 The 17th Amendment’s purpose was to guarantee rights to blacks and loyal
Southerners
 Late in 1866, the 14th Amend. was passed. No surprise because the South wasn’t
represented
 Pres. Johnson, a racist and pro-states’ rights, was sworn in 1865
 Moderate Republicans, led by Trumbull and Sherman, did not believe in black
suffrage like the Radicals, but did want “loyal” Southern gov’ts and basic rights for
freedmen
 Civil Rights Act of 1866 was the 1st piece of legis. To become law over a president’s
veto. It outlined rights that all Americans would enjoy (regardless of race)
 The 14th Amend. did not directly guarantee blacks the right to vote; it only punished
those states restricting blacks from voting
 Johnson’s 1866 “swing around the circle” was to drum support against the 14th
Amend.
 The “Constitutional Revolution” became complete with the 15th Amendment: states
could not deprive vote because of race
 only use of the term equality in the original Constitution had to do with numbers of
senators
 1873 Slaughterhouse Cases ruled that the 14th Amend. only protected those rights
which came from the federal gov’t
 “liberty of contract”- one way the 14th Amend. was interpreted which protected
corporations from gov’t regulation
 Incorporation- a practice using the 14th Amend. to apply Bill of Rights freedoms to
citizens on a state level
 In the 50s and 60s, the Supreme Court under Earl Warren expanded civil liberties for
all
Summary:
In 1866, as can be seen by the career of the majority leader, Thaddeus Stevens,
Congress was very radically Republican. They viewed the Reconstruction as a chance to
increase black rights and change Southern life in its essence. The legislature to come about
was the 14th Amendment. It did much, including to give rights to blacks and to take rights
from former Confederate leaders.
Andrew Johnson instated a Reconstruction plan which allowed for much freedom of
local rule. With the coming of “Black codes” and racial violence, it became clear to many
that Johnson’s plan was too lenient. Radicals, led by Stevens, wanted to dissolve Johnson’s
governments in the former Confederate States. It was not until Johnson’s policies became
completely detrimental to Republican plans in the South that these Radicals could count on
backing from their moderate counterparts. When the Civil Rights Act of 1866 became law
after Johnson’s veto, it became evident who had the power.
To define, once and for all, the meaning of the Civil War, Congressional Republicans
wrote out the 14th Amendment. It became now a trick of uniting the Republican factions.
As it turned out, the Amendment did not completely satisfy the Radical Republicans. For
instance, it did not guarantee black voting. Yet, it did make very important strides in
guaranteeing the rights of American citizens. In section 1, it promised citizenship on a state
and national level to all born or naturalized in the US. The Reaction of President Johnson,
as expected, was to campaign against the Amendment. Though he did drum up support in
the South, this only served to convince Republicans that Reconstruction should be even
more uncompromising in its dealings with the southern people.
After the 14th Amendment, the national government took on a new meaning. No
longer a threat to individual liberty, the national government was viewed as its protector.
Previous amendments, like those in the Bill of Rights, dealt only with federal-state relations.
The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments dealt with freedoms guaranteed by the federal
government for individual citizens.
But Reconstruction soon ended. Equality was again attacked by white southerners.
The Supreme Court took many rights from blacks in their interpretations of the
amendments. Segregation became state policy because “separate can be equal.” A system of
deference came into being, where blacks lost economic and political privilege. It continued
because of the North’s new indifference. The 14th Amendment went on to have different
interpretations. For a period, it was used to protect corporations form government
intervention. Then, it was used to “incorporate” rights of the first ten amendments into the
rights of state citizens.
But in the 60s, the court once again became the friend of racial justice, and
interpreted the 14th Amendment thusly. Segregation was deemed as a violation of the
Amendment because “separation ins inherently unequal.” All citizens achieved greater
liberty in this period. The most influential of new rights was “privacy.” This was to be used
in cases such as Roe v. Wade, legalizing abortion. All minorities and walks of life began to
look upon the 14th Amendment for greater liberty. Started in a time of chaos after the Civil
War, the 14th Amendment has transformed and continues to be a mainstay of equality in
the United States.
Suki Ferris
Précis Number 6
Hereford High School
AP US History
Mr. Bosley, Pd # 6
The Secret Life of a Developing Country
John Larkin
Thesis: John Larkin asserts that there was a great variety of social customs and behaviour in the newly
independent country of the United States, many of which are entirely contradictory to the common
assumption that Colonial Americans were placid and prim, for example, Larkin illustrates how many
Americans in that era were dirty, smelly, bathed infrequently, had horrendous table manners, and were
infested with lice and fleas. Larkin also proves that the nature of a region (fertility of the soil,
temperance of the seasons) moulds the character and culture of the people who inhabit the region. For
example, the people that lived in the Northern Colonies (New England) had to endure arduous labour
to earn their livelihood, establishing their strong belief/hold in Calvinism and thus a dour outlook on
life reflected in their stiff and formal stance; contrasted with the people living on the Western Frontier
who were far more open and expressive, as they had everything to gain and nothing to lose. Larkin also
emphasises how certain social traits apply to the people/country as a whole; such as the shaking of the
hands, pregnancies before wedlock, tavern drinking, gambling and smoking tobacco. John Larkin also
attests that social customs change slowly over time, as different customs come into and out of fashion.
Salient Points:
 Wide variety of characteristics of facial expressions/stance due to regional differences
 NE- constrained, gruff, ponderous gait, slow, slouch (due to heavy labour/Calvinist beliefs)
 Irish- lively, Blacks- uncontrolled physical energy, rhythmic motion
 City folk- fast face, knitted eyebrow and compressed face of concentration- thinking of work
 South- plantation farmers, did little work, carried themselves gracefully/with arrogance
 Westerners- lively, freely expressed selves, eccentric
 1800’s Americans very dirty, clothes and bodies rarely washed, clothes covered in sweat, dirt,
manure. Most only washed hands and faces from washbowl in the mornings
 Waste- chamber pots/outdoor privies (in south just used outside-bushes), thrown into streets out
windows in cities and cleaned up by pigs
 Bedbugs/lice/fleas infested clothing, hair, bed sheets
 Baths- over time more privacy- basin/washstand/ewer/pitcher in each room- but not heated
 By 1830 some hotels in NY had baths and flushing toilets
 More people more concerned with washing, but very slow advancement
 Americans drank more than they ever have done before, the average 4 gallons per capita
 More taverns than churches, in NY 1 per 80 people. Taverns social life- gaming (gambling,
poker, billiards, faro betting on races/cock fights/wrestles), drinking, brawling, talking
 Sordid sailor grog shops- prostitutes/brawls, liquor selling groceries- craftsmen, decorous
places for merchants with a fine taste
 Accommodated women, but mostly men, women drunk was shocking while normal in men
 Men drank far more than women, who got tipsy but not drunk like men folk
 Alcohol became a problem, people viewed it as healthy and vital, always had hard liquor to
drink at meals and offer to guests/neighbours
 Gouging- when drunk people fought they would try and gouge the others eye out
 Slaves, fought amongst themselves/occasionally with masters (Nat Turner Uprising) caused
stricter laws
 Masters used whips and flogging to keep slaves in line
 Public punishment for crimes- use whipping posts/stocks/branding/ear mutilation
 Executions were rare but drew huge crowds of thousands of people, in 1830’s began to make
executions private- made crowd bloodthirsty
 Clapp- a preacher in 1830 campaigned civilized manners (less heavy drinking)
 American Temperance Society in 1826, created for social order/evangelical piety
 Drinking no longer fashionable, changed from the good creature to demon drink- proven by
Benjamin Rush to be a poison/depressant
 1810-1840’s church going became more regular- almost mandatory and stopped mail on
Sunday
 Many couples had children before getting married, was the social norm (1/3), the only concern
was if the couple didn’t get married who would pay for the upkeep of the baby (burden on
town)
 Slaves, same freedom of courtship if not more- slaves marriages were not legitimized, may
slave women raped by masters
 Prostitution- poor women in cities drawn into prostitution, could not find other well paying jobs
 Most customers were frustrated young men, prostitution was available to poor and rich
 Some women resorted to abortion, not considered a crime until foetus moved, used methods
such as strenuous exercise, bitter herbal drinks
 At end of 1800’s Americans began limiting children in families, reducing prostitution,
increasing faithfulness, longer before marriage- less children out of wedlock
 Abstinence, abortion, contraception manuals-author put in jail for obscenity but thousands
copies
 Almost everybody smoked and spat tobacco, was cheap (home grown) poor used clay pipes
rich bought Segar’s from Caribbean
 More chewing than smoking; could work and chew. Floors covered in saliva and black tobacco
 Traditional signs of deference done away with (bowing to people of higher social order)
 Instead encouraged shaking hands- showed equality among men
 Americans and Blacks a lot taller than Europeans, better nourished
 Two staple foods- corn and salted pork, (In NE also had cattle and thus butter/cheese)
 Game- part of diet but usually more if lived on the frontier
 Before 1800 families would each have a spoon and would communally tuck in to a meal
 By 1800 meals became social events, each person got separate plate and knife and fork, only
used fork to hold meat and cut, still scooped food into mouth
 As new immigrants (East/Southern European) joined older American stock- more diversity
 Modern culture- dept stores, newspapers, radios, movies, public education
Substantive Assessment: I found The Secret Life of a Developing Country to be extremely
informative; Larkin provided numerous detailed examples to further prove his purpose- to demonstrate
how different Colonial Americans were to the common stereotype of a prim and proper people. For
example, pictures of American Cities often portray smartly dressed merchants/lawyers outside of
proud, tall stone buildings. In reality, these cities streets were filled with people’s rubbish, waste and
emptied chamber pots. The streets were so filthy, pigs were released into the cities to eat (clear away)
the vast and unsanitary amounts of waste. Cities were also home to taverns, where men drank
themselves into stupors, brawled violently, and played games of cards and gambled. Americans also
smoked and chewed tobacco, filling the streets and even a courthouse in New York with black spit and
chewed tobacco. However, even though the information is very interesting, I do not feel like I gained
any revelations after reading this essay. For example, the industrial revolution began in England in the
late 1730’s, it had to gain momentum in Europe, and then be transported over the Atlantic Ocean to
reach the colonies, thus no wonder they did not flushing toilets, or other advanced manufactured tools.
I would never associate the early 1800’s with cleanliness, thus I was not surprised to hear that the
average American did not daily wash themselves with soap and water, or launder their clothes often.
Before advanced water technology systems and mass manufacturing, acquiring hot water and soap was
difficult. It is almost impossible in the capitol city of Uganda today!! Also, the practice of throwing
ones waste out of the window into the street was a concept we learned in World History. It was a
common practice many Europeans used at that time when serfs began acquiring freedom and moving
into the cities, taking their country customs (throwing waste out of windows to ground below) with
them. On a final note, I have yet to find an American who eats properly, thus back in the 1800’s I
imagine table manners must have been even worse than they are now (I’m just kidding.)!!!
Suki Ferris
Précis Number 7
Hereford High School
APUSH
Mr. Bosley, Pd. 6
The Trail of Tears
By: Dee Brown
Thesis: Brown asserts that the forced removal of Cherokee Native Americans from their ancestral
homelands was morally indecent, a terrible misuse of power on behalf of the government, and caused
the Cherokee to suffer far more than was necessary. Jackson’s motives for removing the Native
Americans were giving land to settlers and gold speculators in order to win an election, he does not
consider the fate of the Cherokee, or how they would survive in alien lands. Brown also proves how
the Cherokees were removed from their lands unlawfully, as the very person (Davis) whom Jackson
sent to determine whether the Cherokee had accepted the treaty to ceding their lands in exchange for
safe passage and money, reported that the treaty was actually void as the vast majority of Cherokee did
not wish to give up their ancestral homeland. Thus, by enforcing the treaty, Jackson ignored the
constitution, and the basic natural laws of the right to life, liberty, and property. Brown also reveals
how Native Americans suffered an enormous amount (lost ¼ of population), yet had the strength and
dignity not to start a violent rebellion, simply peaceably allowed soldiers to remove them from their
ancestral homelands, to alien lands.
Salient Points:
 In the first 400 years of Europeans arriving in the Americas, they systematically forced their
cultural and religious cultures upon them, and if the NA revolted, they were systematically
destroyed
 Americans drove NA into the interior of the US, “Indian Removal” in 1700-1800
 Jefferson began official removal of NA, either by treaty/war
 Andrew Jackson most impassioned remover of NA, hated NA- fought them in frontier wars,
one of his first acts as President was to announce tribes must be sent west
 In 1830 Congress passed Indian Removal Act, guaranteed lands west of Mississippi belonged
to NA, however settlers moved into that land before act was passed, thus pushed the boundaries
back to 95 merid.
 1838 General Winfield Scot arrived with artillery, infantry, dragoons in Cherokee country
Georgia
 May 10- New Echota city, read speech demanding Cherokee had to leave land in a month to
lands across Mississippi to honour treaty of 1835
 For more than 100 years Cherokee had been gradually ceding lands
 1819 had 35,000 square miles of fertile Georgia land settlers wanted very much
 In order to assimilate with Whites, NA had cultivated land, planted orchards, fenced pastures,
built roads, towns, homes, learned to read and write, adopted clothing, government and religion
 Most of the tribe was resistant, and refused to leave
 1828 Jackson was running for President, in order to win had to sweep frontier states- give land
to settlers
 Cherokee were not citizens of US and thus could not vote against treaties- had no voice in govt
 Jackson justified himself- Cherokees had fought with British in Revolutionary War, but they
had also been vital allies in victory over British at Horseshoe Bend
 Jackson made law annexing all Cherokee land in Georgia- 2/3 of Cherokee lived within border
 Georgia legislature abolished all Cherokee laws, sent surveyors to map land lots of 160 acres
 Gold was discovered at Dahlonega, adding pressure for land
 John Ross, Cherokee Leader, rushed to DC to protest Georgia’s actions
 Ross found sympathizers with Anti-Jackson men
 Jackson declared could not protect NA unless they were willing to move west
 Georgia began giving land plots away on a land lottery, and white settlers were claiming land,
taking homes from Cherokee by force
 Cherokee remained united, all dispossessed people were found homes in Cherokee land
 1834- Chiefs declared would never voluntarily leave homeland, but would cede some land in
exchange for permanent protection of interior and would eventually become citizens of US
 Serious split in Cherokee, sub-chiefs decided further resistance futile, wanted move west
before violence
 Ross returned to DC resume campaign saving Cherokee lands, Sub-Chiefs arrived looking
terms removal
 Bitterness between 2 Cherokee factions, Sub chiefs got treaty for removal within days and full
support from US govt, while Ross and remainder received nothing
 Major William Davis was sent to investigate validity of Cherokee treaty, and he declared it void
as not all Cherokee has signed it. He warned the only way the Cherokee would leave is by
force.
 1836 General Dunlap refused to remove NA- against values
 However, terms of treaty expired in 1838, the govt had gathered the troops and built
concentration forts
 Squads of troops search entire Cherokee country, capturing NA in their small cabins at diner/in
the fields
 Many outlaws followed soldiers, and when the took NA immediately started looting and
burning
 In less than a month thousands of Cherokees were peaceably herded into stockades
 800 Cherokee crowded onto flotilla of 6 flatboats lashed to steamboat, then taken by train then
steamboat
 Long water route- North on Tennessee river to Ohio, down Mississippi and up Arkansas to new
land
 Drinking water/food contaminated, the young then the old died
 When Cherokee leaders heard of mortality rates, petitioned scot to postpone dept until autumn.
 Cherokees decided to organize move themselves
 Meanwhile, Scott’s soldiers hunted for the missing Cherokees in wilderness
 Tsali and brother killed the soldiers who tried to remove them; they turned themselves in to be
executed to buy time for the remaining Cherokees, some of whom still live in those mountains.
 By end of 1838 drought was over and Ross and 13,000 Cherokee prepared for journey
 Huge lines of wagons, horsemen, people of foot from Tennessee to Arkansas- and beyond to
NA territory
 Had no shoes, people were sick, travelled 10 miles per day and buried 15 at every stopping
place
 Autumn rains softened roads, slowing down wagons, tollgate operators overcharged, seized
horses
 Cole weather made NA contract measles/whooping cough
 Time last of Wagons reach the Mississippi to cross, river was frozen over, had to wait till
channel cleared
 Hundreds of sick/dying were in wagons or lying on the ground covered in a single blanket
 When finally reach NA territory, 4,000 Cherokee had died, ¼ of the population.
 Remember it as “the trail where I cried”
Substantive Assessment:
Dee Brown’s assessment of the Trail of Tears is concise and contains an abundant amount of facts and
information about the forced removal of the Cherokee Native American Tribe. I learned some new
information, and was surprised and shocked on multiple occasions. For example, when Brown revealed
how tiny the population of the Cherokee was, a mere 16,000 in total, I was shocked to know that the
white settlers would not allow such a tiny tribe of people to keep their land. What also amazed me was
the audacity of Georgia to enact a land lottery, and hand out Cherokee land to land hungry settlers like
candy on Halloween. I was also astonished at how little resistance the Cherokee put up against the
soldiers and the settlers, how they did not revolt even when they knew their land and homes were being
stolen from them unlawfully, and the journey ahead was dangerous and uncertain. I believe this
displays a stark ideological difference between the NA and the Americans, who started bloody
rebellion simply because they were taxed. Perhaps the most shocking part of the essay was the
impression I received of the government, they appeared to have no regrets or second examinations of
their abandoning of basic rights and protections. Brown proves how the NA tried to assimilate into
American Culture, farming land, adopting western religion, government, and language. When the NA
rejected Jackson’s proposal of removal of NA, they peacefully petitioned. It is incredible to think that
Jackson did not in any way see the resemblance of the Cherokee to the American Colonists. Hadn’t the
Colonists petitioned England when they believed the taxes to be unfair? It is terrifying to think that
government has the power to ignore all written law in order to achieve goals. Doesn’t that make all of
us susceptible to the wrath, inhumanity, and negligence of Government? In my opinion, the most
effective part of Brown’s essay is the fact that he used many Westerners as sources for information,
and discussed the two parties of the dilemma, instead of solely focusing on the Cherokee. However, I
also found Brown’s article to be particularly un-inspiring. The Cherokee Trail of Tears is such a tale of
woe, I imagined it would be impossible to write about the event, and not fill the reader with grief,
shame and anger at the wrong doings of the early US govt, and greed of settlers. However, Brown
proved me wrong, his article is unquestionably the most life-less piece of literature I have yet to read in
this class. If Brown had wanted to impress upon his readers the wrong-doings of the US govt, the
insatiable greed of settlers, and the mental and physical pain the Cherokee had to endure, Brown
should have included more quotes and tales of the Cherokee. I think Cherokee quotes are vital to this
essay because their language, religion and culture is based off their love and dependence of their land,
thus their quotes would more effectively reveal their loss, than that of a passing Westerner. Also, I
wish Brown had used more impassioned language, such as the like of Patrick Henry (rhetorical
devices), as then the readers would truly be horrified and impassioned against the evil of greed, and
filled with grief for the Cherokee (which I imagine is the response he was aiming for), instead of
merely feeling more informed on the topic.
Suki Ferris
Précis # 9
Hereford High School
APUSH
Mr. Bosley, pd. 6
Gallantry Under Fire
By: John E. Aliyetti
Thesis: John E. Aliyetti asserts that coloured troops proved they could perform and achieve success in
battle (as well as white men could) due to their courageous effort at the battle of New Market Heights.
He reveals that the valour and fortitude of the coloured troops overcame the racism they faced from
their leaders (not allowed to be officers, were over-exposed in order to prove ability), to expose their
own true colours (coloured troops were mostly successful). Aliyetti proves his opinion by describing
the heroism of the coloured soldiers in the face of certain death (James- grabbed the national colours
and ran into the fray, firing with the one arm he had left), and their steadfast determination to reach
their goal (as musket fire rained down on the troops, they patiently waited for the forest in front of
them to be cleared in order to carry on). Aliyetti also provides evidence to reveal white mans growing
respect for coloured troops (explains fourteen members of the coloured division were given Medals of
Honour, a rare privilege, and given silver coins of recognition from their commander).
Salient Points:
 Fall of 1864, Confederacy was nearly defeated
 An obscure battle in mid-September proved that black men could fight in battle just as well as
white men
 Major General Benjamin F. Butler commander of Army of James convinced Grant to allow him
to assault key forts and try to break through Richmond
 The 3rd division of X corps would lead attack against confederate forces at New Market Heights
 Third division X had never been in combat, and their commander had never led a force as large
into battle
 Butler- abolitionist, one of the first to promote acceptance of black soldiers into army
 1864- more than 100,000 black troops in Union army (fugitives/free), 140 regiments- 10% of
union army
 Butler wanted to see for himself how well his black soldiers performed in battle
 3rd division had 3 brigades- 3,800 troops in total, 2 more brigades as well (led by Paine and
Terry)
 All enlisted men were black, all of the officers were white
 Brigade’s led by Duncan, Draper (Duncan would lead, followed by Draper in a two pronged
attack) and then Holman (task was to keep left flank secure)
 Division expected inexperienced militia, turned out to be Texas veterans of Greggs Brigade,
under Bass
 Texans supported by artillery and cavalry
 Duncan’s brigade moved into position (wanted another division to draw out first and detract
attention, but other division never moved)
 Troops moved out, forming five-brigade front of 2,300 yards
 Realized how large the opposing force was, under heavy musket fire from Texans- men
dropping like flies
 An obstacle slowed down army- had to chop down a forest that was in the way while under
heavy fire
 Drapers brigade joined Duncan’s- were suffering from musket and cannon fire
 When reached main confederate line, fire came down from a set of fortified pits- yet another
obstacle
 Fire/smoke/gunshot made it impossible to give or understand orders
 Draper tried to rally troops around colours, but men were falling too fast
 Black soldiers replaced white officers, grabbed regimental colours and led ragged arm toward
the battle
 Drapers attack deteriorated- heavy fire roared into his regiment
 Duncan’s brigade started a yell, Duncan and Drapers brigade rallied together and attacked
confederates who fell back
 Attacked Fort Gilmer, but Robert E Lee organised troops and held the fort
 At the end of the battle, the confederate line was pushed back, captured Fort Harrison-renamed
Burnham
 Richmond defence remained intact, Lee attacked the next day but was forced to retreat with
heavy casualties
 The siege of Richmond lasted another six months when Lee surrendered at Appomattox court
house
 When the war ended, more than 186,000 black men had served in the union
 Black soldiers had fought 149 engagements, 49 major battles
 20 black men were awarded Medal of Honour, 16 won at the battle of New Market Heights
 The battle of New Market Heights was a day of glory- but at a heavy price- hundreds died
 Butler admitted he deliberately exposed black men beyond the value of the engagement to test
them, and establish confidence in their ability
 Rewarded his soldiers by ordering 200 Army of James Medals (from Tiffany’s- silver coin)
 This caused controversy and the soldiers were not allowed to wear medals on uniform
 Virginia route 5- highway historical marker about Battle of New Market Heights, honours
soldiers who fought
 Medal of honour- Americans had lingering resentment of British nobility, hated formal uniform
decked with medals
 Since 1782 no medals had been given out by the US army/navy
 After Civil war, navy and army requested Lincoln sign Army of medal bill
 Sergeant William H. Carney of Company C MA received first medal of honour- grabbed units
flag and led attack to fort and only returned when only dead/dying union soldiers were left
 In civil war 2,438 medals of honour were given out
 1917 this number was deemed too large, 911 were rescinded
 Final number of medals-1,200 soldiers, 310 sailors, 17 marines
 37 medals of honour were given out on Battle of New Market Heights, 17 to black men
 1918 congress approved secondary medals, the Distinguished service cross, silver star
 Medal of honour only given out to those who were gallant and intrepid at the risk of their lives,
above the call of duty, and committed acts which could not have been criticised
Conclusion: I found John E. Aliyetti’s account of the Battle of New Market Heights to be interesting
and extremely factual, the article definitely kept my interest (which I found impressive as it is
sometimes hard to interest readers in the tactics of the military if one is not inclined towards the
military) through particularly gory details (for example, when Corporal James seized the national
colours even though he only had one arm left, and continued to lead the regiment forward), the opinion
and tactics of General Butler and the interesting history of the Medal of Honour. Concerning the Medal
of Honour, I was amazed that the medal had to be re-introduced, and at such a late stage in America’s
history (1862), I would have thought that medals of honour would have been used by the military
before then (especially because I have found America to be inclined to reward effort/good actions
above and beyond any other culture I have experienced). I was horrified to learn that General Butler
deliberately led the coloured troops into a dangerous mission, and knowingly put them at risk on a task
which had little value. When I had finished reading the article, I actually found I entirely disagreed
with John E Aliyetti, I did not think the Battle of New Market Heights proved blacks ability to combat
to the whites. It certainly proved their bravery and courage to me; however I was not convinced that the
battle had any effects on white American’s opinion of Blacks ability to combat. I believe this for many
reasons, for one thing the very man who was supposed to be an abolitionist, a proponent of black men
in the army- deliberately sent them into danger, this speaks louder than words that he was not
convinced of their bravery, as he would not have needed to see them perform acts of bravery/die to
convince him of their ability. I actually believe Butler was not so pure as Aliyetti portrays him, I
believe Butler was racist, not only because he deliberately placed coloured troops in the line of fire to
judge their reaction, he also only had white men serve as the generals and colonels, not one black man
was above the rack of soldier, yet every ingle soldier was black. The hypocrisy of America; and its
facade of idealistic values- is again revealed to be wearing thin. Also, this battle has been buried in the
history of the nation; it is not a famous battle which most people can recall and remember the
significance, thus the white people of the time period could not have been particularly impressed by it.
Another point- the white people were not impressed/convinced of the coloured soldiers ability to battle
because they were not even permitted too wear their medals of recognition on their uniform. I was
horrified at the end of the article, and I did some research on the topic of blacks in the Union army.
Apparently Lincoln only allowed blacks in the army because the number of white volunteers was
declining, and they needed more troops, and at the beginning of the war blacks were turned away
because they were not permitted to have guns in a previous law/act. By the end of the war, 40,000
black Americans had died, they had died for a country which had enslaved them, brutalized them, and
had hesitated upon allowing them to join the war. I was appalled at the situation, and how blind white
people can be. On top of this, at the end of the battle, there was no decisive victory. The confederate
lines may have fallen back a little, and one fort may have been captured, but it did not cause any drastic
changes. It took another six months for the area to fall, and that was only because the entire
confederate army has surrendered. I believe the only real thing which was accomplished was the deaths
of hundreds of innocent black Americans, desperately trying to prove themselves worthy of belonging
to a country which refused to accept them, and still has difficulty today.
Suki Ferris
Précis # 12
APUSH
Mr. Bosley, Pd. 6
Henry Grady and the New South
By: Henry Grady
Thesis: The author of Henry Grady and the New South asserts that the term “New South” is actually
inaccurate, Southern business leaders and journalists, such as Henry Grady and Richard Edmond,
wanted to promote the idea that the south was moving toward industrialization, and had improved race
relations. The author of the article finds them faulty on both, as industrialization only actually affect a
mere 15% of the South’s population, (barely began building cotton mills, iron works). Also, race
relations had actually worsened, due to the enactment of segregation laws, and Jim Crow laws (literacy
test, property requirement), which blatantly disenfranchised blacks. Thus, there was no New South by
1900- not yet.
Salient Points:
 By 1860’s Southerners wanted a diversified economy, change from farm to factory, promoted
industrialization
 Southern leaders eager to rejoin Union, gain economic strength
 Henry Grady- editor of Atlanta Constitution- created myth of “New South”
 Grady wanted to change stereotype that South was full of plantations, sleepy towns, magnolia
flowers
 Instead- promoted image south was lively, ready for investment and prosperous times
 Grady was invited to speak in front of the New England Society 1866, prestigious NE
organization
 Audience of talented businessmen, Politian’s- even Sherman who had burned Atlanta to the
ground in his march to the Sea
 Grady’s three main points- US was a united country, south’s economy was moving forward into
industrialization, blacks had become a part of the “New South”
 Richard Edmonds- editor and then owned important agricultural journal
 Edmonds wanted to promote capital investment in south (wanted tax exemptions for industries
in south), and expanded commercial fairs where machinery was displayed
 Edmonds opposed unions, did not believe blacks should work machinery in industrial work
 Edmonds respected in North, on board of many banks, owned a lot of land, businessman
disguises as a southern gentlemen
 Immediately after war south turned to rebuilding rail roads and expanding them
 By 1880’s had laid down 40,000 miles of track- quadrupled since civil war
 Federal govt gave vast amounts of money to the south to rebuild buildings in towns and ports
destroyed during civil war in the south
 Began to process cotton- before used to send raw product to Europe or Northern mills
 Then towns began investing in their own cotton mill, doubled amount of mills- mostly N/S
Carolina
 Mill work performed by white and black labourers, whites handled the machines
 Blacks worked in the yard, menial labour, boiler stokers
 Mill-owners hired them in yard as a warning to strikers, that they had an extra supply of men to
fill theirs
 Southerners justified- black slaves had monopoly on agricultural work, time for white workers
to have their time- whites more qualified to work on machinery
 Iron manufacturing- Tredegar Iron Works in Richmond VA largest one, not many others
 Mid-1870’s began to tap into coal resource, by 1900 second largest producer in the whole
world
 Also began building iron works and tapping into iron resources
 Birmingham Alabama- a city which expanded (exploded) solely off of its iron factory
 Andrew Carnegie recognized potential in south- started investing
 1880 a machine patented by an 18 year old Virginian- to manufacture cigarettes
 1900 southern profits from manufactured tobacco was 55 million a year
 Once southern businesses and industry got momentum, northern and European investors took
control of the companies
 The radical republicans had achieved goal- new south was more linked to north than ever
before
 The south used all northern manufactured goods, relied on north to fund their industry
 Race relations, however, were worse not better
 Congress passed three amendments to create civil rights for African Americans
 13th Amendment- slavery is abolished
 South evaded this with black codes- stopped blacks from buying land, voting, had to work in
contracts
 14th- African Americans are given citizenship, if voters are denied the vote then the
representation of that state would be reduced in congress
 15th Amendment- rights of citizens not be denied/abridged because of race or colour- equality
 Redeemers in the south were in power, nicknamed the Bourbons (tried to restore monarchy in
France)
 Redeemers determined to re-install white superiority, take all blacks out of power
 South Carolina- set up a system of integrated schools, all white children withdrawn
 Made “separate but equal” schools for whites and blacks
 Wade Hampton- served in confederate army, wanted blacks to vote democrat and obey planters
 Reign of terror and violence (KKK) disenfranchised blacks
 Voting restrictions- 1890, Mississippi- wrote new constitution stating blacks had no place to
vote or be in office as they created a legacy of corruption
 Called the Mississippi plan- contained purity clause- wanted to purify government from black
influence
 Williams v. Mississippi- Supreme court upheld Mississippi’s plan to defy Blacks right to vote
 Property test- had to own certain amount of land, pay taxes
 Impossible literacy tests designed to disenfranchised illiterate blacks as well as poor whites
 Grandfather Clause- no black was allowed to vote who had not had ancestors in the 1867
 Segregations laws- separate accommodations for blacks and whites in schools, public transport,
courts, library, cemeteries, water foundations
 Jim crow laws- name for all the laws which discriminated against blacks- named after a black
character who was a civil war cartoon- shiftless, plantation slave worker
 Plessy v. Ferguson- Supreme Court ruled that facilities for blacks and whites could be separate,
if they were separate but equal.
Substantive Assessment: I found Henry Grady and the New South to be a very interesting article, it
was well organized and had a clearly set out agenda- to explore the validity of the term “New South”. I
especially appreciated the author’s humorous tone/diction (Cigarette manufacturing spread its “Cancer
filled tentacle” over the country- I read in the homework that one of the reasons why cigarettes were so
popular was because when the union army was marching through the South during the civil war, many
of them encountered tobacco for the first time and became addicted to it, creating an enormous market
for the South to satisfy. This reminds me of when the British gave the Chinese opium- in order to make
the Chinese addicted to the substance, and creating an enormous, desperate market. Although the
northerner’s addiction to tobacco was completely unintended by the South, it is ironic how similar the
success of a product has been fuelled by addicting the general populace to a product. I believe this is
similar to the fast food craze in America- the mix of sugar and salt is addicting, and has addicted many
westerners to the combination- beginning a revolution in the food industry, and causing fast food
companies such as MacDonald’s and Wendies and Kentucky Fried Chicken to become commonplace
in every town, and city.) I also enjoyed his personal descriptions of the characters he portrayed in his
article (he fully described Henry Grady, detailing how he was “young and dynamic”). I found his the
logic to his argument appealing as well; the organization was flawless and easily and convincingly
carried the reader from topic to topic, point to point. I especially appreciated his explanation of Section
two of the 14th Amendment, I feel like I now fully understand what it means (if a southern state chose
to disenfranchise blacks, then the black population apportion seats would be removed from the amount
of seats that the certain state had in congress). I found it fascinating, and appalling, how southern states
could so easily navigate around the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendment, to still be able to disenfranchise
blacks. This in particular disturbed me; I don’t understand how the states could simply ignore
something which is set in stone, into their constitution, the law of the land. I was particularly surprised
that the northerners had no reply to such abominations such as the Jim Crow laws, which so blatantly
disenfranchised blacks. I was disappointed that Northerners really only pushed for change during
reconstruction, a very short period of time- only a decade.... I also found the Supreme Court to be
especially shocking, backwards, and perhaps not fulfilling its purpose. Williams V Mississippi and
Plessy v Ferguson were rulings to be ashamed of; I don’t see how some of the wisest and most
educated men in the country could defend a morally wrong decision. Their decision I find doubly
wicked because it basically gave the south the thumbs up to continue discriminating against blacks, and
there is evidence that violence against blacks increased dramatically because of the ruling- southerners
felt empowered (increased lynchings). It’s incredible that the Supreme Court could make such a
decision, especially in the period of and after reconstruction, when congress had been trying so hard to
give civil rights to African Americans; I just think it is wrong. I think that their is a flaw in the
Supreme Court system- I think it is a mistake that members of the court can serve life- sentences. The
Supreme Court was made up of members appointed by previous administrations, and they most
certainly reflected those backward policies in their decisions. Thus, I think they’re needs to be a set
term for a judge on the Supreme Court, certainly not life-long. On an entirely different tangent, what I
found it fascinating about that the Jim Crow laws, is that they were not solely meant to discriminate
against the black voters, it also kept the poor whites from voting (PWT), thus, not only were the
redeemer’s racist, they were also elitist- and had no qualms in alienating some of their own people
from the ballot box. Also, the other day I was watching a film that was set in a cotton mill (called
North and South- a bonnet movie!) and it was fascinating because the British did exactly the same
thing as the Americans- while the Americans had African Americans as a stored labour pool should the
white workers strike, the English mill owners simply shipped some Irish families down to the Cotton
mills to replace the British workers on strike. It caused the exact same effect as in America, British
people have an aversion to Irish and the Southerners had an aversion to blacks, and the businessmen
entirely used this to their advantage, in order to squeeze the most labour out from their workers, and
not fear they would demand more wages, or higher standard of living (as this would cut down their
profit). Both the British and the South loathed Unions, and the very word “strike” terrified and angered
both nations, as mill owners appeared to be extremely elitist, as no businessman wanted to bargain with
their workers.