Consider your responses to your classmates as "Letters to the Editor." Assume you are the reader of this newspaper and want to respond to what you read. Your responses must show some analytical thought and foster more dialogue. Ask questions, give a different point of view, and bring up another aspect of the topic your classmates did not cover, and so on. Interaction such as this is what makes this assignment relevant and prevents it from being merely a completion exercise. When writing your Letters to the Editor, you must reply to 3 classmates' Editorial.
Reply to Angela Allen
Hutchinson was a strong woman of the 1630 who believe in God could talk to people . Mrs. Hutchinson was a Guardian of Religion liberty. in the ( PBS website) I found out she and he r usband born to Boston. When I met her she since to be a nice person. As a Woman it is nice to hear a other woman talk about Theological . I know this woulf make the men man,because that did not think woamn had a brain. Woman were to taken care of house and children and not think of anything else. i love to meeting at her house and hear Anne explain the words of John cotton. This is new idea for the puritans in Boston to hear. (Morgan P.. 635-649) I know that the men of he area believe that God does not talk to people . I was told that the only way to live was to follow the Bible was absolute truth on how to live. The men of the area could not believe that women could tell them that everything they believe was wrong. in The( PBS video) I learn by talk to Anne that she is the daughter of a minister, so she learn alot about the bible. tthis was good for me to learn a woman can do more than keep house. I learn that Anne was a mid-wife and nurse. She got in trouble for stand up to the leader of the church. Anne said that the church was wrong in how they saw God. Anne told the leader that good work did not get you to heaven. She told them divide Grace was what people need to go to heaven. i can just imagine how mad the men of the town gotting at her. i know this is hard for us a puritans to take because this go against everything we stand for ( Morgan P. 635-649) I know that if we saw that why we came to American was wrong then what do we have left to believe. i still can not believe that that the leader got so mad they take her to court on November of 1637 ( PBS Video) They kick her and her husband out of the colony for not believe like we do. the leader of the colony thought her idea would couse people to loose living( Morgan PP. 635-649) I wish that had let us b=decide if we believe her.
Reply April Baber
Who would have thought that all that took place at the Parliament over the past month could have brought such a crisis to the city of Boston? Due to the economic struggles of the British East India Company, Parliament had allowed the company to continue the taxation of tea, as a way of repaying their debt, which was £400,000. Of all the supplies that were imported, such as glass, oil, paint, and paper; the tea was the only import with tax. The taxation of the tea would only allow certain retailers to distribute the tea. By doing this, the smaller retailers were out of business. This had infuriated Adams and The Sons.
Samuel Adams and the Sons of Liberty decided they would pay no more tax to Parliament. On Dec 13th the sons decided that the tea could not be brought ashore or stay on the ships for more than 20 days. If it did remain in Parliament custody for more than 20 days is would be seized by customs, in which customs would then sale it at a higher price.
The Sons of Liberty had planned to dump all 342 crates of tea into the ocean which has been estimated to be about £10,000- £18,000. So on the night of December 16th they took their stand against the British East India Company. By using ash and soot, they were able to disguise themselves as Mohawk Indians, so that they could board the ships. They boarded the 3 English ships that were in the Boston harbor. 2 out of the 3 were whale ships. The Beaver and Dartmouth where the whale ships, and The Eleanor was a ship which was owned by John Rowe whom was a Boston merchant.
Once they were aboard the ships, captains were ordered to retrieve the keys needed to unlock the hatches were the tea was being held. They could have easily destroyed everything aboard the vessels, but chose not to. Had they done so, their message of not wanting to pay the tax wouldn't have been heard as clearly as they had intended. Once they had the keys in their possession, the hatches were unlocked they began to dump the tea overboard. To ensure the tea was not able to be recovered and used by anyone, The Sons opened all of the crates to make sure the tea was soaked by the salty water. These events are what is now known as the Boston Tea Party.
Reply toJacque Anderson
We have just been informed that the Stamp Bill that was presented in Parliament on February 6, 1765 by George Grenville was approved and is now in effect as of today, March 22, 1765. We do know that there are 55 resolutions to the Stamp Bill. We will not report the details of each resolution, however we will give a brief summary of what this means for the American Colonies now that the Stamp Bill has passed. The Stamp Bill consists of a new tax imposed on all American colonists. All colonists will have to pay a tax on every piece of printed paper they use.
As news of the passing of the Stamp Bill is getting out it is quickly creating an uprising and outcry among the colonists. Even though the cost of the stamp is relatively small, it is questioning of the standard that this will seem to set among the colonists. It has been said that the main grievance among the colonists is taxation without representation. If the American colonists allow this tax to continue without any resistance, what other taxation issues could possibly arise in the future? In an act of opposition Patrick Henry has presented his "Stamp Act Resolve" to the House of Burgesses and the colonists are waiting for their response. According to SoameJenyns, a member of parliament, has raised opposing arguments to the English as to why they are wrong to oppose the Stamp Bill. Two of his arguments are as follows:
First then, that no Englishman is or can be taxed but by his own consent as an individual: this is so far from being true, that it is the very reverse of truth; for no man that I know of is taxed by his own consent; and an Englishman, I believe, is as little like to be so taxed, as any man in the world." (SoameJenys, The Objection to the Taxation consider'd 1765)
Secondly, that "no Englishmam is or can be taxed buy by the consent of those persons whom he has chose to represent him; for the truth of this I shall appeal only to the candid representatives of those unfortunate counties which produce cyder, and shall willingly acquiesce under their determination. (SoameJenys, The Objection to the Taxation consider'd 1765)
As tempers are running high, this could possibly put the colonies and the British parliament on the brink of war. We will bring further updates as they come in.