Joseph Galloway Research Paper

"I wanted to be the first to view a country on which the eyes of a white man had never gazed and to follow the course of rivers that run through a new land."

Deep in the thick swamps and woods of Northern Gulf County, amidst the buzz and sting of mosquitoes, chirps of squirrels, and swirls of the Apalachicola, is a long-lost story. One hundred and eighty years ago the town of Iola sprang out of the cypress swamp of what is now north east Gulf County. That small community, was, and still is an enigma in the wilderness of territorial Florida and has all but faded from the memory of Gulf County and is nothing but a boat ramp now.

We continue with Part Two of Sydney hockey “lifer” Blair Joseph who, for the majority of his 70-odd years, has been deeply devoted to the sport.

The 18th century can be marked as a period of internal and external struggle for the American colonists. From improper representation, to unfair taxes, such as the Stamp Act, to being overall abused by Britain, the colonists were justifiably angry. From this anger, the slogan “No taxation without representation” was born and quickly began to emerge from the lips of almost every colonist all across America. The demand from colonists everywhere for no taxation without representation weighed heavily as a symbol for democracy, as it revealed the mindset of many – Britain was using the hardworking colonists and took their money without even giving them a say – and laid the foundation for the American revolutionary war, allowing more arguments and

Though the American colonists had not achieved a true, uniform sense of identity or unity by 1776, on the eve of Revolution, the progress towards unity and the inchoate idea of an “American” between 1750 and 1776 is inevitable in both existence and significance. Previous to the French and Indian War, America as a whole had been, more or less, loyal mercantile-based, and subservient to the British crown as British colonists in the New World; however, the Americans' sense of unity kindled and proliferated with the increased tax burdens and coercive Parliamentary decisions, while even until 1776,

A train barreled over Joseph Hewins' body on a wintry evening in 1845 in the Massachusetts Berkshires. Hewins had spent the workday shoveling snow off the tracks, only to be killed on his trip back to town when a switchman got distracted. Hewins left behind a wife and three children, who were poor even before his death. His widow sued but lost at every level. Had the train merely chopped off Hewins' leg, the railroad would have paid. But in the perverse logic of that time, when a man died, he took his legal claims with him. And so the thinking went for most of the century, until something unheard of began to happen. The courts started to put a dollar value on a life--after death.

Joseph E. Lee was born in Philadelphia in 1849, he graduated from Howard University in 1873. He moved to Florida that same year and became the first African American lawyer in Jacksonville and in the state of Florida. He served in the House of Representatives from 1875 to 1879 and in the state Senate from 1881 to 1882. He was one of the most influential African American men in Florida through the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. He was elected municipal judge of Jacksonville and was one of the first African Americans to have this honor. He educated free slaves at a college by the name of Edward Waters College. Lee worked as a public servant acting at various times as a state legislator, a lawyer, federal customs collector and educator.

Robert Moses has become a controversial figure in urban planning. He has built many important buildings, roads, and parks that make New York City the special place it is today. However, he has destroyed many old neighborhoods and created a different sense of community. Do you think he will be remembered as a positive or negative influence on the growth and development of NYC?

¬Though not entirely representative of their political factions, Thomas Paine and James Chalmers are major literary figures in describing loyalist and anti-loyalist sentiments in pre-revolutionary America. While Thomas Paine argued for America’s independence, James Chalmers counters the idea by proposing some of the possible negative consequences as well as down-playing the perceived necessity of declaring independence. The major points of contention in both of their arguments deal heavily with the outcome of the French and Indian War (Seven Years’ War) including the government actions that were imposed upon the American colonies as a result. By examining the way in which they interpreted these events, one can gain insight into their contrasting political and philosophical ideologies of pre-revolutionary America.

“Give me liberty, or give me death!” is a quotation attributed to Patrick Henry, which he used to close his speech to Virginia Convention. During this time period, the 1770s, Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, and Thomas Jefferson all made arguments in favor of separation of the American colonies from Great Britain; many of these appeals were persuasive for different reasons, whether that be logical, emotional, or pertaining to credibility and trust, which is to say logos, pathos, and ethos. First of all, we will examine Henry’s arguments during his speech at the Virginia Convention. Then, we will identify Paine’s appeals in a part of his essay, The Crisis n1. Lastly, we will evaluate Jefferson’s myriad of arguments in a part of his Autobiography.

In 46 Pages author Scott Liell is able to poignantly illustrate the colonies metamorphosis from a dependent arm of the English Empire to an independent country, the catalyst for which was Thomas Paine's Common Sense. Liell is able to not only articulate the turning point of the American consensus towards independence, but he also very intelligibly depicts the sentiments of all facets of colonial dogma and the torrential effect that Common Sense had in loosening the cement that held those beliefs. Using fantastic examples of the opinions of Tories, Whigs, and those ambivalent towards independence, Liell efficiently and

In this essay I explain the evolution of American attitudes and ideologies—apropos of Britain—from 1764 to 1776. I do so by, first, beginning with providing the context and explaining the state of the relationship between America and Britain throughout the course of the years 1764 to 1774, which in turn, consequently lead up to and instigated the creation of Thomas Jefferson’s 1774 piece entitled A Summary View of the Rights of British America. Next, second, I situate and analyze this very piece, that being: Thomas Jefferson’s A Summary View of the Rights of British America, which is was a tract written before the Declaration of Independence, in which Thomas Jefferson (under his own personal authority/discretion) lays out—for the delegates of the First Continental Congress—a set of grievances directly against the King of England and his corresponding Parliament, and moreover, ultimately radically forewarns and threatens specifically the King of England to fundamentally change, alter, and lessen Britain’s stronghold on America or else something will be done on behalf of America. Finally, third, I reach to and evaluate another subsequent document, that being: the Committee of Five/Continental Congress’ 1776 Declaration of Independence, which is a statement written by the so-called “Committee of Five” (Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman, and Robert Livingston) and the Continental Congress, which was to be adopted by the newly formed United States of

It is easy to interpret the American Revolution simply as a struggle for freedom. The magnanimous phrases of the Declaration of Independence have embedded in our hearts and minds glorious images of the Founding Fathers fighting for the natural rights of man. The American Revolution, however, also had a darker side to it, the side of self-interest and profit. The signers of the Declaration represented various classes – the working class, the wealthy land owners and merchants, the intellectuals, and the social elite. Each of these strata had its own set of expectations and fears, which lent a new dimension to the cause of the Revolution. The pressure of these internal, and often overlapping groups, combined with the oppressive external