The Everything Founding Fathers Book

All you need to know about the men who shaped America

Meg Greene, Paula Stathakis

• Publisher: Everything
• Year: 2011
• ISBN:
  9781440526626
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: North American History
• Index: History

George Washington. John Adams. Benjamin Franklin. These great leaders--and many others--made innumerable contributions that laid the groundwork for our nation. But who were they really?In actuality, the founding fathers were a diverse group of men and not the homogenous collection history has shaped them into. Some were puritanical but some were philanderers; some were wealthy while others were plagued with money woes.Inside you'll discover the triumphs, failures, and little-known facts about our founding fathers, including:

• Why George Washington never lived in the White House
• What John Adams and Thomas Jefferson stole from Shakespeare's birthplace
• Why Alexander Hamilton never ran for president
• How Thomas Paine narrowly escaped execution in France
• Why Thomas Jefferson kept grizzly bears on the White House lawn

Featuring fun quizzes to test your knowledge, this book uncovers both the great accomplishments and also the very human flaws of the founding fathers and brings them to life like no dry history book can!

PART I

The World of the Founding Fathers

The world of the Founding Fathers encompassed some of the most important events in American history. It was a road that started out as a desire for colonial autonomy from the British Crown that eventually led to a quest for freedom as a new nation. In the process, a war was fought, even as patriot leaders debated and argued over what this new free nation would be. No one had a map or a guide to what constituted this new country. Yet somehow, this seemingly disparate group of men from a wide variety of backgrounds and interests were able to craft a new nation bound by new documents that talked of freedom, equality, and government by and for the people. All very radical concepts made even more amazing in light of the gentlemen who dreamt, argued, and wrote of them.

Quiz: The World of the Founding Fathers, 1754–1789

1. Where was the first shot fired in the Revolutionary War?

A. Boston Common

B. Boston Common

C. Lexington

D. Lexington

2. Who was King of England during the American Revolution?

A. Edward VI

B. Edward VI

C. James I

D. James I

3. What was the name of the German mercenaries who fought in the American Revolution?

A. Hessians

B. Hessians

C. Bavarians

D. Bavarians

4. The Revolutionary War lasted from:

A. 1775–1777

B. 1775–1777

C. 1775–1789

D. 1775–1789

5. The last half of the war was fought in what area of the country?

A. The South

B. The South

C. The West

D. The West

6. Which of the following were taxed by the British to raise money to pay their war debt?

A. Cloth and buttons

B. Cloth and buttons

C. Glass and china

D. Glass and china

7. Which of the following groups was most likely to approve the Articles of Confederation?

A. Those who believed in a strong central government

B. Those who believed in a strong central government

C. Those who feared a strong central government

D. Those who feared a strong central government

8. Which group dominated the American Constitutional Convention of 1787?

A. Former soldiers of the Continental Army

B. Former soldiers of the Continental Army

C. Artisans and working men

D. Artisans and working men

9. Those who opposed the ratification of the Constitution were called:

A. Antifederalists

B. Antifederalists

C. Democrats

D. Democrats

10. What was a major weakness of the Articles of Confederation?

A. It created a powerful executive branch.

B. It created a powerful executive branch.

C. It did not provide for a judicial or legislative branch.

D. It did not provide for a judicial or legislative branch.

Answers

1. C 2. D 3. A 4. B 5. A 6. B 7. C 8. B 9. A 10. C

CHAPTER 1
The Road to Revolution

With the end of the French and Indian War in 1763, the English were at peace for the first time in more than fifty years, but new problems awaited the British Crown. It was clear to British statesmen that the previous decade had been fraught with a number of vexing problems in trying to manage their vast and growing empire. Saddled with a national debt of approximately £175 million, on which the annual interest alone amounted to £5 million, the English government desperately sought new sources of revenue. The colonies were the logical place to look for them. Yet, the experience of the French and Indian War made it clear that extracting money from the colonies would not be easy. The colonists were unwilling to allow Parliament to tax them, and were reluctant to levy taxes on themselves.

The Burdens of Empire

The problems of managing the Empire were compounded after the French and Indian War by a fundamental shift in imperial policy. In the past, the English government viewed the empire as a commercial venture and opposed the acquisition of territory for its own sake. After 1763, a number of English and colonial leaders argued that land itself was of value. Land could sustain a huge population, generate abundant revenue from taxes and other sources, and confer imperial splendor upon England itself.

The French and Indian War was a conflict between Great Britain and France in North America from 1754 to 1763. The name refers to the two main enemies of the British colonists: the French forces and the various Native American forces that allied with the French. The war was part of a much larger world conflict involving Austria, England, France, Great Britain, Prussia, and Sweden.

The territory added to the British Empire as a result of the French and Indian War in 1763 doubled its size. The difficulties of settling, administering, defending, and governing these holdings were immensely complex. Unfortunately, the expansion of the British Empire took place in the context of a worsening debt crisis in England itself. Landowners and merchants staggered under burdensome taxes, and objected to additional levies. Their resentment of the colonists deepened, for they believed that the colonists had contributed little to support a war fought largely for their benefit. They believed that only the imposition of taxes on the colonists could relieve the financial burdens of the empire.

Grenville’s Crackdown

George Grenville, the prime minister of England, like many of his fellow Englishmen believed that the colonies had been coddled for far too long. They should now be compelled to pay some of the costs of defending and administering the Empire, and he quickly moved to increase the authority of Parliament in the colonies. In 1764, Grenville announced the Sugar Act, which was to eliminate the illegal sugar trade between the colonies and the French and Spanish West Indies. In addition, the act provided for the establishment of vice-admiralty courts in America that would try accused smugglers and also discourage the possibility of having cases heard before sympathetic jurors of their peers. The Sugar Act also placed duties on imported sugar, coffee, indigo, and wine.

In September, Parliament passed the Currency Act of 1764, which effectively gave the British Empire control over currency in the colonies. Until this point, colonists only had access to currency through trade with the British Empire. Suffering from a shortage of hard currency, the colonists had created their own paper currency in the form of Bills of Credit, the value of which differed from one colony to another. British merchants and creditors did not like being paid in a currency that wasn’t based on any real value system and could easily depreciate in value. The Currency Act sought to protect them by making paper currency no longer valid for the payment of private debts.

In addition, colonial legislatures were ordered to withdraw all paper currency already in circulation within a reasonable period of time. The rationale for the Currency Act was to end inflation by reducing the money supply. Unfortunately, the colonies were in the midst of a severe depression, and limiting the amount of money available made a bad situation worse. Now colonists could not obtain the money needed to conduct business or to pay increased duties and taxes. In the colonists’ eyes, the British government appeared unconcerned about their economic welfare.

The Stamp Act Crisis

If he had tried, Prime Minister Grenville could not have devised a better way of antagonizing the colonists than by introducing the Stamp Act of 1765, which placed a tax on almanacs, newspapers, pamphlets, legal documents, insurance policies, ship’s papers, operating licenses for taverns and shops, and even dice and playing cards. The Sugar Act of 1764 had largely affected New England merchants, whose business it hampered. The Stamp Act, by contrast, affected all Americans, and as a result, evoked opposition from some of the wealthiest and most powerful groups in the colonies: lawyers, merchants, printers, tavern owners, and land speculators.

The colonists were not as upset about the costs of the Stamp Act as they were about the precedent it had apparently established. Prior to the Stamp Act, taxes were used to regulate trade and commerce, not to directly raise money for the British Empire. Colonists were almost unanimous in their opposition to a direct tax, fearing that if they did not resist, more burdensome taxes would follow. Moreover, Parliament had failed to obtain the consent of the colonial assemblies before imposing the tax. Some of the delegates to the Virginia House of Burgesses proceeded to challenge the legality of the Stamp Act and by implication, the right of Parliament to tax the colonies at all without first securing their consent.

As with the Sugar and Currency Acts, the economic burdens of the Stamp Act were comparatively insignificant. It was designed to raise £60,000 annually, which would generate about one-third of the estimated £300,000 needed to pay for the defense of the colonies.

Patrick Henry also introduced seven resolutions in which he asserted that Americans, as subjects of the Crown, had the same rights as Englishmen, and that only local representatives could levy taxes on the colonies. Virginians, Henry declared, should pay no taxes except those voted by the Virginia Assembly, and anyone who advocated the right of Parliament to tax Virginians should be deemed an enemy of the colony. The House of Burgesses defeated the most radical of Henry’s proposals, but all of them were printed and circulated throughout the colonies as the “Virginia Resolves.”

Foremost among the Virginia protestors was Patrick Henry. On May 29, 1765, Henry made a dramatic speech in the House of Burgesses in which he concluded that George III, like earlier tyrants, might lose his throne and perhaps his head if he did not reverse current policies. Henry is reputed to have ended his speech with the famous injunction: “Caesar had his Brutus; Charles the First, his Cromwell; and George the Third may profit by their example. If this be treason, make the most of it.”

In Massachusetts, James Otis similarly persuaded his fellow legislators that the Stamp Act was illegitimate. He called for an intercolonial congress to act against it. In October 1765, the Stamp Act Congress met in New York, composed of delegates from nine colonies. They decided to petition the king and both houses of Parliament for redress. The petition conceded that Americans owned Parliament “all due subordination,” but at the same time it denied that Parliament could tax the colonies.

Meanwhile, during the summer of 1765, serious riots had broken out in several cities along the Atlantic seaboard, the most serious of them in Boston. Men who belonged to the newly organized Sons of Liberty terrorized stamp agents and set the stamps ablaze. Many agents hastily resigned, and the sale of stamps in the colonies virtually ceased.

Certainly one of the most famous groups formed during this period was the Sons of Liberty, created in Boston during the early summer of 1765. The Sons of Liberty were initially a group of shopkeepers and artisans who called themselves the Loyal Nine and were against the Stamp Act. As that group grew, it came to be known as the Sons of Liberty. The group grew dramatically, attracting workers and tradesmen.

The violence in Boston continued to escalate when a mob attacked such pro-British aristocrats as the lieutenant governor, Thomas Hutchinson. Privately, Hutchinson opposed the Stamp Act, but as an officer of the Crown, he felt an obligation to uphold it. For his devotion to duty, Hutchinson paid a high price. An angry mob pillaged and destroyed his elegant home.

The Stamp Act thus provoked serious tension between the British government and the American colonies. The crisis subsided when Parliament backed down. It was not the colonial protests, speeches, resolutions, petitions, or even riots that deterred authorities in London; their attitude changed as the result of economic pressure. Beginning in 1764, many colonists boycotted English goods to protest the Sugar Act. By 1765, they had extended the boycott to include goods covered by the Stamp Act. The Sons of Liberty intimidated those colonists who refused to participate. Having lost their colonial markets, English merchants implored Parliament to repeal the Stamp Act.

The Townshend Acts

In July 1765, the Second Marquis of Rockingham, Charles Watson-Wentworth, succeeded Grenville as prime minister. Unlike his predeccesor, Watson-
Wentworth was more concialatory toward the colonists while trying to maintain the goodwill of English merchants. On March 18, 1766, he engineered the repeal of the Stamp Act. On that same day, Rockingham issued the Declaratory Act, which asserted the authority of Parliament over the colonies “in all cases whatsoever.” In their rejoicing about the repeal of the Stamp Act, most Americans ignored this new, sweeping declaration of parliamentary power.

The English response to Rockingham’s policy of appeasement was less enthusiastic than the American response. English landowners contended that the government had sacrificed their interests to those of the merchants, and feared that the failure to tax the colonies would mean increased taxes on them. George III at last bowed to these protests and dismissed Rockingham in August 1766. To replace Rockingham, the king called on the capable but aging William Pitt, who was so plagued by illness that he turned the actual administrative duties ...