Data Bases • Custom Term Papers • Free Term Papers • Free Research Papers • Free Essays • Free Book Reports • Plagiarism? Links • Top 100 Term Paper Sites • Top 25 Essay Sites • Top 50 Essay Sites • Search 97,000 Papers @ DirectEssays.com • Search 101,000 Papers @ ExampleEssays.com • Search 90,000 Papers @ MegaEssays.com Free Essays • Term Paper Sites • Chuck III's Free Essays • Free College Essays • TermPaperSites.com • My Term Papers • Get Free Essays • Essay World • Planet Papers	Search Lots of Essays Back to Subjects - History Other land of the free home of the brave land of the free home of the brave In the earlier years of the colonies life was a bit more difficult than it is now in the presant. People led simpeler lives without all the things we take for granted today. Times when our government was merely a puppet of mother England thousands of miles away. It was this government and its actions that brought out the anger in its subjects to the point of rebellion and eventual emancipation from the larger power. So what brought this small country to the boiling point? It seemed to be a serious of pushes from England that led to the eventual split of the colonies and the U.K. Circa 1763, England. Parliament wrights up the proclamation of 1763 and sends it too America. No more western expansion, no more land surveying, no more land purchasing. Those are some of the laws that the proclamation stated, laws that only enraged the colonies. But with this social rage and hatred a union was born, the United States of America blossomed out of a seed of frustration and hate, planted by their British forefathers. With the help of the actual document, the book a history of the united states, by Philip Jenkins, Zinn, Nash, and the internet I will prove this fact. In the 1760s war was ravaging England’s economy, they were fighting off the French on the northern borders and paying dearly for it. To pay for these prices England enacted the stamp act, a taxing system forced on the colonies making them pay heavy prices for their war. Not only did his enrage the colonies but also it gave England the stigma of a tyrannical force that the American revolutionaries would use to rationalize their war. It was in 1763 that a major push was made by the Britain, giving the colonist even more reason to have anger and ill regards. Throughout the Anglo-Freanch war Indian allies had been used on both sides buy the French and bye the British. To show the Indians their gratitude the British decided to show them their gratitude in the form of a royal proclamation. By making the Appalachians off limits too white settlers the natives received hunting ground. For the Indians this deal was great, after years of being persecuted and subjugated they finally get something in return. Now for the land hungry settlers this was devastating, they saw it as a travesty seeing as how this was passed right after the French war. This is because once the French were gone lands to the south west of the colonies were open for business, but then parliament stepped in. This proclamation, written bye parliament in 1763 was the major turning point in American history from passive criticism to active disagreement. This proclamation was somewhat of a leash, to the settlers of America. To keep the anxious settlers from moving out of their jurisdiction Britain saw this law as not only a sign of good faith to the Indians but a way to control its people. It created much frustration, and feelings of rage in lower and upper class citizens of America. Unable to gain commercial success in the urbanized areas farmers and spectators need more land to support themselves and their families. Rich landowners in turn were missing out on more land, I.E more money. Unfortunately for both groups this law created a racial boundary between the white and the native peoples. And whereas it is just and reasonable, and essential to our Interest, and the Security of our Colonies, that the several Nations or Tribes of Indians with whom We are connected, and who live under our Protection, should not be molested or disturbed in the Possession of such Parts of Our Dominions and Territories as, not having been ceded to or purchased by Us, are reserved to them, or any of them, as their Hunting Grounds -- We do therefore, with the Advice of our Privy Council, declare it to be our Royal Will and Pleasure, that no Governor or Commander in Chief in any of our Colonies of Quebec, East Florida. Or West Florida, do presume, upon any Pretence whatever, to grant Warrants of Survey, or pass any Patents for Lands beyond the Bounds of their respective Governments. As described in their Commissions: as also that no Governor or Commander in Chief in any of our other Colonies or Plantations in America do presume for the present, and until our further Pleasure be known, to grant Warrants of Survey, or pass Patents for any Lands beyond the Heads or Sources of any of the Rivers which fall into the Atlantic Ocean from the West and North West, or upon any Lands whatever, which, not having been ceded to or purchased by Us as aforesaid, are reserved to the said Indians, or any of them. (Royal parliament, 1763) A line drawn down from the great lakes through and the Appalachian Mountains, A line that strictly forbade any white man to pass, by penalty of punishment. Is this unfair? This law was unfair to white settlers everywhere but for the natives it secured their native lands and brought back some sort of pride on glory. But did it secure lands or just make the spoiled colonist angry to the point of a temper tantrum. As said before settlers had either no choice, or they cared so little about this law that they would just pass bye the border anyways. This was the initial step in the breaking of bonds. First you are limited to an area which has nothing for you but poverty, then in order to pay for their war the British tax you (the stamp act), the tea tax, and the stationing of troops in your town and your house. What is the most rational response? The problem is it is so hard to see a clear-cut definition of who is right in this situation. On one end you have Britain these people are your subjects and they have a responsibility to obey you, you have the colonist with their strong economy and brilliant leaders such as Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin, who needs Britain, and you have the Indians forced off their land all they want is their home back and the right to be free. So who is right? This is the kind of confusion that can only lead to conflict, and as tension grew it was fairly obvious that the battles would too. So what right did the Americans have to disagree? Spawned from Britain should they be grateful for what they have, should they just accept the position they were in? That seems one aspect doesn’t it, but the colonies were stubborn and insubordinate. With the real power thousands of miles always they figured they couldn’t do anything about it. And it was that attitude which led into the rebellion. But who was rebelling against this law? It was men like Patrick hennery and other rich Virginian landowners, Richard Henderson and his friends in North Carolina. These men openly rejected the proclamation and surveyed, settled and negotiated land grants from the Cherokee and other Indian nations. Although illegal, settlers openly dismissed the document that stated the laws and continued to settle I Indian Territory. Seen as a tyrannical force the new “Americans” found union in a common goal. What once were divided were eventually joined in matrimony of rebellion and civil strife. It is interesting to see how our nation of the free, and land of opportunity, is formed from the suffering of others. Weather it was the Indian land we occupied, the slave labor we used, the settlers we sent to tame our lands, or the British blood we spilled, our country was built on rebellion. This document is just a symbol of how through the oppression of a scattered few a union can form into what we today call the United Stated of America, land of the free, home of the brave. Bibliography: Bibliography: Royal parliament, the royal proclamation of 1763. England, 1763 Jenkins, Philip. A history of the united states. New York, New York. St martains press, 1997. Zinn, Howard. A peoples history of the united states. New York, New York. HarperCollins puplishing inc, 1995. Nash, Gary. Red, white, and black. Upper saddle river, New Jersy. Prentince-Hall inc, 2000. www.bloorstreet.com/200block/rp1763.htm Word Count: 1325
Copyright © 2005 College Term Papers, INC All Rights Reserved.