I. Borders
A. Between original thirteen colonies and Mississippi
B. South of great lakes, north of modern Louisiana (approx.)
II. Causes of Revolution
A. Imperial rivalries
1. Western Lands were site of intense war, esp. between France and Spain
2. Most intense: 7 years war
a) France lost most of Land in New World
b) British had foothold
B. Proclamation of 1763
1. Limited westward expansion
2. Made deals with Native Americans more fair
3. Ignored
C. Indian Raids
1. Native American resistance from west since beginning
2. Colonists had to fight them off themselves
a) No help from British troops
b) Made questionable view of Britain as a protective motherland
D. Impact
1. French domination focused on trade and fortification, leading to little settlement
2. War with French created debt leading to war
3. Proclamation angered colonists
a) Example of defiance against crown
b) Caused Indians to side with Brits in Revolution
4. Occasional cruelty of Natives
a) Convinced colonists it was no wrong to take from natives
b) Tarnished colonial trust in protection of British military
III. During Revolution
A. British Invasion
1. Invasions from Canada and other directions took place in western territories
2. Ticonderoga, Crown Point, Montreal
3. Drew Continental Army west
B. Indian Attacks
1. Sided with British due to colonial enmity
2. Increased colonial hate towards Native Americans
3. Decimated own populations
C. Impact
1. War brought west
a) Established a Continental military presence in the west
b) Familiarized generals with terrain
2. Indian Enmity
a) Colonists felt no remorse for taking land from loyalist natives
b) Populations decimated by war, paving way for future conquest
IV. Post Revolution
A. Problems
1. British continued to occupy western forts until debts paid
2. Indians continued to attack frontier settlers
3. Disputes over control of Mississippi between Americans/Spanish
4. Colonists ignore land treaties and grants, settle illegally
5. Congress can’t evict colonists settled in Ohio territory
B. Solutions:
1. Congress divides Western Territory into states (proposed by Jefferson)
a) Once states reach 20,000 people, can vote on own government
b) Once states reach size of original colonies, can become American State
c) Slavery permitted?
2. Land Ordinance of 1785
a) Organizes land into townships of 1 square mile, cost $1 per acre
3. Northwest Ordinance of 1787
a) Replaces Jefferson’s plan
b) 3-5 states total, governed by appointed courts and governor, no slavery
c) Once population reaches 5,000 white males, creation of assembly
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
The Land and Northwest Ordinances were pretty good, setting a standard for other US state acquisitions to go by. I just feel kinda bad about how the British abandoned the Indians and the Americans started taking over the western lands. The Indians get screwed over again...
I think that they had some really good ideas about how to reorganize the land with the land ordinance. However, I feel that taking advantage of the Indians once again was unfair and unjust to them, seeing that they were the founders of the land.
I believe that Tom Jefferson's idea was very intelligent because we still have some of these principles applied today, such as states and their own governments. I believe this system created is fair and a good idea.
The British provided no support for the Native Americans like they had promised previously for their service in the war. I feel like this was an abuse by the colonists in taking the western land away form the Indians wihtout respecting their territory.
Oh, I forgot, posted by TC and RL... Props to RL.
Its frustrating to once again hear about the Americans taking advantage of the N.Americans. Even the Natives who supported the American cause ran the risk of having their land taken. Its just sad and disapointing to see such little disrespect for the N.Americans. I mean after all, weren't the Colonists fighting for their right to not be "pushed around" by the British (in broad terms...) why should the Colonists have had the right to do the same thing to the N.Americans that the British did to them? (on different terms, but the situations are comparable)
Also, did they not consider the fact that there would be continuing conflict with the Natives and the Spanish, thanks to the NW ordinance? It was smart to expand and grow as a nation, but I do not think it was right the way the colonists approached the task. (They had the right idea, but had a really poor way of carrying it out, which ultimately led to more conflict, something they were trying to avoid...)
I feel that the plans the Americans made for the western frontier was a good one. It really had a fair distribution of democracy. though the Indians people suffered a little, it was overall a good idea.
Thomas Jefferson to me should be more recognized than he was. HE thought of ideas that are still ideal in our nation today. he is over shaddowed by George Washington
I feel that the Land and Northwest ordinances were good at organizing land out west. But once again we see that this is taking over western land that the indians have claimed, and this will cause some rivalries.
The Land and Northwest Ordinances played an important role in establishing a precedence for the formation of new states in an organized and rather civilized fashion. On the contrary, however, is how the Native Americans of the area were treated. Once again we find that American Indians were taken advantage of for the "needs of the people". I find it unfair, and slightly hypocritical, that expansion in the name of God (Manifest Destiny) took place on such a foundation.
It is wierd how land was divided between european powers with no regard to native opposition. It is also weird how Not many americans were in the western lands, but the colonies still claimed them. Selling the land was a pretty god way to raise money. Northwest ordinance also seems pretty fair to all colonies.
It seems like the western territories played a major role in many wars involving Britain, France, and Spain. Before the Revolution, they fought over it. During the Revolution, the countries used these territories to either aid or attack the colonists. And, after the war, these countries either lost land (Britain) or gained it (Spain). Land plays a huge role in wars.
The Land Ordinance and Northwest Ordinance organized western land well; however, it gave no consideration to the Native Americans already living there. It is sad to see Native Americans repeatedly have their land and homes taken away from them and treated cruelly.
Many are so eager to settle out in their newfound territories that they settle illegally. This could be a major problem because there is no use for a set government when there is no one to follow it and its laws. But the northwest Ordinance of 1787 were very effective in setting up the territories and showed how effective the government was in establishing laws and such.
These Ordinances were good for the Americans but it was very unfair to the Indians. They were there first so we should at least consider their land boundaries without being greedy and trying to have all the land for ourselves.
The Americans got a pretty good dealon land, getting almost all of the land that they could possibly ask for at the time, except for land in Canada that ended up being disputed between the British and the Americans. The land ordinances set a good precident for how other states should be organized, and were a good way to start building the country.
There were some good ideas, such as the Land and Northwest Ordinances, but they would have been better if they were enforced. The bottom line was that settlers still continued moving west into Native American land, and the Indians were ignored.
The Northwest Ordinance seemed like a fairly...fair plan. It's clear that the west was a constant place of turmoil and violence. This is understandable considering the mix of Native Americans, back-country woodsmen, and several European rivals.
The western front really seems like it was the source for a lot of the conflicts that surrounded the colonial Americas. I think it really made a big impact that the colonial settlers spread out into the west, causing treaty issues. These land disputes very well could be considered driving points for the 7 years war, which directly caused the revolution.
I think that the plans for creating a new state could have easily struck some issues with the pre-existing states. States had debts to pay after the war. If a group of people decided that the taxes in a state were too high they could leave and create a new state. Granted it would take a long time to actually happen, it could possibly benefit.
Considering the other acts that angered the colonists you would think that giving new states the same power as the old ones would cause some tension. I personally do not see nothing seriously wrong with the process, but i find it strange that it did not cause that much tension.
I think a reason for this might be the fact that the colonists technically had a say no matter how little.
Post a Comment