1. Use the rubric to complete the assignment and pay attention to the points assigned to each section of the paper.  

2. Use the format of the paper to organize your paper.

3.  Use the samples of essay critiques as guidelines when completing this assignment. 

4. Students are asked to critique Jules Ferry’s French Colonial Expansion, not to write a paper about Jules Ferry.

5.  Identify a fact (see rubric) means that you take a sentence or paragraph in the assigned reading that you find very interesting and cite it as highlighted in yellow in the samples of primary papers and analyze it. In other words, you come up with your own interpretation of that fact.

6.  Do not summarize the five facts but instead quote them as written in the assigned reading and highlighted in yellow in the samples of papers.

Title:Three Founding Fathers on the Stamp Act, 1765-1766.

Author: George Washington (Mount Vernon, Letter to Frances Dandridge, London, 20

September 1765)

Source: National Humanities Center

Introductory Statement

The Stamp act of 1765 was a tax on all legal documents, publications, and all printed

material. The colonist thought to themselves that the Stamp act was unfair so, The colonists

hosted angry protests and boycotts that led to the repeal of the Stamp Act. With the repeal, the

British government then issued new taxes to raise revenue and force all colonists to pay for the

cost of colonial administration. When the British issued new taxes, it caused tension in the

colonist that led to the Boston Massacre. British troops opened fire on March 5, 1770, with the

killing of five people. Violence began to occur in the colonies. After the Boston Massacre, more

violence in the American colonies arose. British imposed a tax on tea that led to high tensions to

the Boston Tea Party. The Stamp Act was the main cause of all the acts and taxes that were

represented in the colonies during the American Revolution.

Derived Information

The first point I gained from the letter is that George Washington “looked at the Stamp

act of 1765 as an unconstitutional method of taxation that was direful upon their rights and a cry

out against the violation”. The Stamp act violated the liberties of the people. Every colonist had

to pay on the tax. In my opinion, the tax was a war against the colonist and the tax won until

1766 when the colonist protested that the act was wrong. So, in 1766 the British parliament

ended the act.

The second point that I gained from the letter was that the ‘Mother Country would fall

short of the expectations of the Ministry”. I interpreted that the Mother Country will not meet its

goals for being a stronger colony and world. The Stamp act ruined colonies, colonies were not

able to function better as they did before the Stamp Act was introduced. Taxing on all legal

Title: Three Founding Fathers on the Stamp Act, 1765-1766.

Author: George Washington (Mount Vernon, Letter to Frances Dandridge, London, 20
September 1765)
Source: National Humanities Center

documents, publications, and paperwork was unfair. Yes, I understand that a colony needs

money to operate, but a tax on everything was not right. It ruined people lives. Money was

already rough during the time of the Stamp Act, the act made it worse. I supposed that George

Washington thought it was unfair, so years later after the letter he introduced the Declaration of

Independence, giving rights to the people and not allowing the government to have majority

control over the colonies.

The Third point I gained from the letter was that “substances flowing to Great Britain”;

contributed to shortening the importations and how it was hurtful to their manufactures during

the Industrial Revolution. George Washington was aware of the many luxuries which we lavish

our substances to Great Britain for that he can well distribute knowing the necessaries of life.

What I got from that point is understanding the budget of buying certain imported goods and still

knowing the basic requirements of life that include food and water that are needed. It shows me

that George Washington cared about his people and knowing that imported goods are not as

important as food and water. Maybe that is why George Washington is listed as one of the

greatest presidents.

The Fourth point I gained from the letter is that” if Great Britain loads her (Great Britain)

manufactures with heavy taxes”; will it assist these measures. With that, if Great Britain decided

to tax manufactures with heavy taxes, it will increase the taxes on goods that are being bought.

Maybe, that is why George Washington limited the purchase on imported goods because he

knew the goods would have a hefty tax on the goods. George Washington also believed that

Great Britain would not force him. He knew he was not one of the traders that will part from

them without a beneficial consideration. It is not right to leave somewhere or something

important without a reason why.

Title: Three Founding Fathers on the Stamp Act, 1765-1766.
Author: George Washington (Mount Vernon, Letter to Frances Dandridge, London, 20
September 1765)
Source: National Humanities Center

The fifth and final point I gained from the letter is “where then is the utility of these

Restrictions.” As I read and think about those last eight words, I question myself and ask were

their restrictions for leaving traders, running an Industry, or running a business. Were the

restrictions on wages, women workers, and children workers? The Industrial Revolution was all

about working, growing crops, and bringing money into the society. It also opened many doors

for individuals who were looking for jobs. Jobs that will pay you for your work. From what I

recall on past lectures on the Industrial Revolution many left the rural areas and migrated to the

cities where the Industries were being taken placed at.

Concluding Statement

After reading the letter, I understand a lot more about the views that George Washington

had on the Stamp act of 1765 and the Industrial Revolution, but it did have me slightly confused

when George Washington was talking about the Stamp Act and then suddenly began talking

about the Industrial Revolution. I also understand that the Stamp Act and Industrial Revolution

played A similar role. The Stamp Act had a tax on legal documents, publications, and all printed

material while the Industrial Revolution had A tax on goods that are being exported. Both the

Stamp Act and Industrial Revolution was during a change. It did clear the questions that I had

about both historical events. Overall, the letter had a great understanding about how George

Washington felt about the Stamp Act and the Industrial Revolution.

Malick Watson’s paper

Title: Three Founding Fathers on the Stamp Act, 1765-1766.
Author: George Washington (Mount Vernon, Letter to Frances Dandridge, London, 20
September 1765)
Source: National Humanities Center

Introductory Statement:

The first President of the United States, George Washington, is best known for

commanding Patriot forces to victory during the Revolutionary War. Before the American

Revolution occurring, the British colonies experienced many causes to rebel (such as Frontier

and Tax issues). With a booming population of around 2 million, a booming economy, and the

creation of their currency, the British colonies were thriving on the path to independence.

However, after the Seven Years War, Great Britain was in so much debt that they had to instate

heavy taxes and land ordinances on the colonies to support themselves. The Stamp Act (1765),

was a tax on all legal documents, which ignited an issue that was already on the rise. The Stamp

Act was the beginning of many rejections by the colonists; and later, violent reactions such as the

Boston Massacre (1770) sparked more outrage. The subject of Washington’s letter to his friend

Frances Dandridge is the Stamp Act of 1765, and he expresses clear opposition to it.

Derived Information:

Initially, Washington states, “The Stamp Act Imposed on the Colonies by the Parliament

of Great Britain engrosses the conversation of the Speculative part of the Colonists,…” This first

point sheds light on the fact that many of the colonists were at high risk of loss. The Stamp Act’s

effect on the colonists sparked outrage and opposition as he states next, “who look upon this

unconstitutional method of Taxation as a direful attack upon their Liberties & loudly exclaim

against the violation.” In his second point, he later says, “the Eyes of our People – already

beginning to open,” which signals that the first signs of unrest and revolution are beginning to

form; the support they gave to their oppressors would not last much longer.

Title: Three Founding Fathers on the Stamp Act, 1765-1766.
Author: George Washington (Mount Vernon, Letter to Frances Dandridge, London, 20
September 1765)
Source: National Humanities Center

The third point that Washington makes is that if this heavy taxation continues (among

other forms of oppression), the profit that Great Britain receives will be extremely small

compared to Parliament’s hopes. As stated in lines 3-6, “what may be the result of this & some

other (I think I may add) ill judg’d Measures,… the advantage accruing to the Mother Country

will fall greatly short of the expectations of the Ministry [king’s cabinet].” In his fourth point,

Washington cares to point out that everything they manufacture/ grows already benefits Great

Britain, and lessening imports (etc.) is detrimental to the profits of their manufacturers. As he

states in lines 6-8, “certain it is, our whole Substance does already in a manner flow to Great

Britain and that whatsoever contributes to lessen our Importations must be hurtful to their

Manufacturers.” He says this because the tariffs and taxes imposed on the colonies are sparking

boycotts of British goods.

Concluding Statement:

The last point that Washington makes is that the taxes placed on them will cause much

loss to Great Britain as many colonial manufacturers would abandon trade with them easily,

causing the industry to become crippled. Does he pose the question: that without force, where is

the benefit/usefulness of these Acts? As said in lines 13-15, “they will not compel us, I think, to

give our Money for their exports, whether we will or no, and certain I am none of their Traders

will part from them without a valuable consideration – Where then is the Utility of these

Restrictions?” He says these things as a way to say that Great Britain’s efforts will be useless if

they do not apply force, the irony of this is that he said this is before the Boston Massacre in

1770 (which resulted in the killings of 5 colonists). After the Boston Massacre, colonial unrest

skyrocketed.

Title: Three Founding Fathers on the Stamp Act, 1765-1766.
Author: George Washington (Mount Vernon, Letter to Frances Dandridge, London, 20
September 1765)
Source: National Humanities Center

After reading this letter, I now have a deeper understanding of the issues that many

colonists faced in the escalation towards revolution. Colonists’ livelihoods were threatened at the

imposition of tax systems that weren’t there previously – colonists were expected to export a

majority of their goods to Great Britain and didn’t have to pay taxes. I do appreciate that

Washington cared to point out that the profit from the new taxes was not going to make much of

a difference, as the main use of the colonies were to help Great Britain in the first place. This

letter also provides you with the perspective of Washington, who was at the forefront of the

Revolution as the Commander in Chief of the Continental Army. It allows one to see the issues

as if you were there; it makes you realize that these issues were not petty tax and land issues. The

Stamp Act was the first of many suppressions that Great Britain placed on Colonist’s liberties.

Tuesday Cabang’s paper

Title: Three Founding Fathers on the Stamp Act, 1765-1766.
Author: George Washington (Mount Vernon, Letter to Frances Dandridge, London, 20
September 1765)
Source: National Humanities Center

Introductory Statement:

The Stamp Act was passed by the British Parliament on March 22, 1765. This tax was mainly

imposed on all American colonists and ordered them to pay a tax on every piece of printed paper

they used. The main caused of this act to be passed “no taxation without representation”. This

different act forced colonists to buy a British stamp for every official document they obtained.

Derived Information

The first point that I gained from this excerpt was the first point. It stated, “The Stamp Act

Imposed on the Colonies by the Parliament of Great Britain engrosses the conversation of the

Speculative part of the Colonists, who look upon this unconstitutional method of Taxation as a

direful attack upon their Liberties and loudly exclaim against the Violation”. George Washington

is saying in this point that the act is unconstitutional. He is also saying that this act is not called

for and that he does not see it lasting long. The act did not last long though, only lasted for a

year. George Washington repealed the act in 1766.

The second point that I gained from this excerpt was the second point. It stated “what

may be the result of this and some other (I think I may add) ill-judged Measures, I will not

undertake to determine; but this I may venture to affirm, that the advantage accruing to the

Mother Country will fall greatly short of the expectations of the Ministry [king’s cabinet]; for

certain it is our whole Substance does already, already beginning to open”. George Washington

said that statement because he knows from the start that this new Stamp Act is going to divide

the country up. He also mentions how he wants the same for everybody but the British are

Title: Three Founding Fathers on the Stamp Act, 1765-1766.
Author: George Washington (Mount Vernon, Letter to Frances Dandridge, London, 20
September 1765)
Source: National Humanities Center

opposed to the idea. George Washington for me has to be one of my favorite presidents because

of this. He saw the world differently than many people did at the time.

The third point that I observed in this article is “And the Eyes of our People already

beginning to open”. When George Washington says this he means that Americans are starting to

realize what the British are doing. Taxing on stamps and newspapers was wrong. I do not see

why it took them so long to realize that. He also says that the things the people lavish from Great

Britain will soon be too high for them to buy. This Stamp Act didn’t help the world at all

knowing Americans at that time really didn’t have much control and sometimes had to listen to

the British for things.

The fourth point I liked in this excerpt is “If Great Britain, therefore, Loads her

Manufactures with heavy taxes, will not facilitate these measures’? For me, this was the part of

the excerpt I had time with. With reading this excerpt many times I finally realized what George

Washington meant. He is saying that if Great Britain piles the factories with heavy taxes will the

people still work under the conditions. With Great Britain doing this I also wondered if they

would work until I read the fifth point.

The fifth and final point from this excerpt that I am going to talk about is “they will not

compel us, I think, to give our Money for their exports, whether we will or no, and certain I am

none of their Traders will part from without a valuable consideration”. This point is dating back

to my fourth point. He is saying that even though they are going to heavily tax the factories, they

have a choice to work or not and the manufactures will probably lose money. He also says that

they have a choice to give their money for British exports. George Washington states that the

British traders will not make any money if the Americans stand up and protest the Act.

Title: Three Founding Fathers on the Stamp Act, 1765-1766.
Author: George Washington (Mount Vernon, Letter to Frances Dandridge, London, 20
September 1765)
Source: National Humanities Center

Concluding Statement

After reading this article many times, I realized that George Washington made a great point in

this excerpt. I did not understand why the Stamp Act was passed in the first place. Only lasting a

year and so, it should have been repelled within a couple of days. Reading this excerpt I really

gained a lot of knowledge from George Washington to the Stamp Act.

Avery Brown’s Paper

Title: Three Founding Fathers on the Stamp Act, 1765-1766.
Author: George Washington (Mount Vernon, Letter to Frances Dandridge, London, 20
September 1765)
Source: National Humanities Center
Introductory Statement

George Washington on The Stamp Act was a letter from George Washington to Francis

Dandridge that addressed the colonist issues with the Stamp Act. Washington’s Letter was to try

and persuade the British to possibly rethink imposing it. The Stamp Act was a tax imposed by

the British Parliament on the colonist that required them to pay a tax on all printed paper

including newspapers, licenses, and another legal document. Washington stated in his letter that

those who looked upon the taxation as a dire attack on their liberties exclaimed loudly against the

violation. George Washington wrote the letter in an attempt to salvage what was left of the

relationship between the British Parliament and the colonist by bringing attention to the

downside of possible outcomes for manufactured goods exported by the Parliament.

Derived Information

The first point I derived from the letter was that Washington was not exactly sure what the

colonist would do but he knew that it would not be good for the British. In his letter he stated

“this I may venture to affirm, that the advantage accruing to the Mother Country will fall greatly

short of the expectations of the Ministry [king’s cabinet];” The second point that I derived was

that Washington knew that most of what the colonist had already gone to the British and for the

colonist to lessen their imports from The British would not be beneficial to the British or their

Manufactures. In his letter he states, “our whole Substance does already in a manner flow to

Great Britain and that whatsoever contributes to lessen our Importations must be hurtful to their

Manufacturers.” The third thing point I derived was that the colonist was beginning to realize

that many of the things that they were having imported from the British were not necessary and

could be produced themselves, so the tax

Title: Three Founding Fathers on the Stamp Act, 1765-1766.
Author: George Washington (Mount Vernon, Letter to Frances Dandridge, London, 20
September 1765)
Source: National Humanities Center

made it so that they were less inclined to import from the British Parliament. Washington states

“the Eyes of our People ⎯ already beginning to open ⎯ will perceive that many Luxuries which

we lavish our substance to Great Britain for, can well be dispensed with whilst the necessaries of

Life are (mostly) to be had within ourselves” The fourth thing I derived was that the outcome of

the colonist no longer importing goods from the British Parliament will force them to be more

frugal and subsequently force an imposed tax to be placed upon the manufacturers as well.

Washington states in his letter “this consequently will introduce frugality and be a necessary

stimulation to Industry ⎯⎯ If Great Britain, therefore, Loads her Manufactures with heavy

Taxes, will it not facilitate these Measures?” The fifth and last thing that I derived was that the

traders of the British Parliament would not part from their trading without considering all facts as

it related to the taxes so the colonist not importing goods would be a huge detriment. The letter

states “…certain I am none of their Traders will part from them without a valuable consideration

⎯⎯ Where then is the Utility of these Restrictions?”

Concluding Statement

After reading this letter, I understand that the British had a lapse in judgment as it related

to the Stamp Acts imposed taxes. From the colonist point of view, it only made sense for them to

part ways from importing goods from the British.

Imara Sudah’s paper

Rubricfor critical essay

Header (10 point): Title, Author, Source (Single Spaced only)

Introductory Statement (30): Briefly provides some preliminary information about

the reading.

This should be in the form of an introductory statement which

delineates the basic theme of the reading.

Derived information (40): Identify and discuss 5 specific points/facts that you gained from

the reading.

Concluding statement (20): Provide a personal assessment of the value of the document

relative to advancing your understanding of the History of World

Civilizations Since 1750.

Structural consideration:

• All critiques must be typed written

• All critiques must have a font of 12

• All critiques must be double-spaced

• Standard margins on all sides

Header (Single Spaced)

Introductory Statement:

Derived Information:

Concluding statement:

Your Name:

Jules Ferry (1832-1893):

On French Colonial Expansion

Ferry was twice prime minister of France, from [1880-1881, 1883-1885]. He is especially remembered for

championing laws that removed Catholic influence from most education in France and for promoting a vast extension

of the French colonial empire.

The policy of colonial expansion is a political and economic system … that can be connected to three sets of ideas:

economic ideas; the most far-reaching ideas of civilization; and ideas of a political and patriotic sort.

In the area of economics, I am placing before you, with the support of some statistics, the considerations that justify

the policy of colonial expansion, as seen from the perspective of a need, felt more and more urgently by the

industrialized population of Europe and especially the people of our rich and hardworking country of France: the need

for outlets [for exports]. Is this a fantasy? Is this a concern [that can wait] for the future? Or is this not a pressing

need, one may say a crying need, of our industrial population? I merely express in a general way what each one of

you can see for himself in the various parts of France. Yes, what our major industries [textiles, etc.], irrevocably

steered by the treaties of 18601 into exports, lack more and more are outlets. Why? Because next door Germany is

setting up trade barriers; because across the ocean the United States of America have become protectionists, and

extreme protectionists at that; because not only are these great markets … shrinking, becoming more and more

difficult of access, but these great states are beginning to pour into our own markets products not seen there before.

This is true not only for our agriculture, which has been so sorely tried … and for which competition is no longer

limited to the circle of large European states…. Today, as you know, competition, the law of supply and demand,

freedom of trade, the effects of speculation, all radiate in a circle that reaches to the ends of the earth…. That is a

great complication, a great economic difficulty; … an extremely serious problem. It is so serious, gentlemen, so

acute, that the least informed persons must already glimpse, foresee, and take precautions against the time when

the great South American market that has, in a manner of speaking, belonged to us forever will be disputed and

perhaps taken away from us by North American products. Nothing is more serious; there can be no graver social

problem; and these matters are linked intimately to colonial policy.

Gentlemen, we must speak more loudly and more honestly! We must say openly that indeed the higher races have a

right over the lower races….

I repeat that the superior races have a right because they have a duty. They have the duty to civilize the inferior

races…. In the history of earlier centuries these duties, gentlemen, have often been misunderstood; and certainly

when the Spanish soldiers and explorers introduced slavery into Central America, they did not fulfill their duty as men

of a higher race…. But, in our time, I maintain that European nations acquit themselves with generosity, with

grandeur, and with sincerity of this superior civilizing duty.

I say that French colonial policy, the policy of colonial expansion, the policy that has taken us under the Empire [the

Second Empire, of Napoleon 1111, to Saigon, to Indochina [Vietnam], that has led us to Tunisia, to Madagascar-I say

that this policy of colonial expansion was inspired by… the fact that a navy such as ours cannot do without safe

harbors, defenses, supply centers on the high seas …. Are you unaware of this? Look at a map of the world.

Gentlemen, these are considerations that merit the full attention of patriots. The conditions of naval warfare have

greatly changed…. At present, as you know, a warship, however perfect its design, cannot carry more than two

weeks’ supply of coal; and a vessel without coal is a wreck on the high seas, abandoned to the first occupier. Hence

the need to have places of supply, shelters, ports for defense and provisioning…. And that is why we needed Tunisia;

that is why we needed Saigon and Indochina; that is why we need Madagascar… and why we shall never leave

them! … Gentlemen, in Europe such as it is today, in this competition of the many rivals we see rising up around us,

some by military or naval improvements, others by the prodigious development of a constantly growing population;

in a Europe, or rather in a universe thus constituted, a policy of withdrawal or abstention is simply the high road to

decadence! In our time nations are great only through the activity they deploy; it is not by spreading the peaceable

light of their institutions … that they are great, in the present day.

Spreading light without acting, without taking part in the affairs of the world, keeping out of all European alliances

and seeing as a trap, an adventure, all expansion into Africa or the Orient-for a great nation to live this way, believe

me, is to abdicate and, in less time than you may think, to sink from the first rank to the third and fourth.

Source: Sourcebook.

 

 

1. Use the rubric to complete the assignment and pay attention to the points assigned to each section of the paper.  

 

2. Use the format of the paper to organize your paper.

 

3. Use the samples of essay critiques as guidelines when completing this assignment. 

 

4. Students are asked to critique Jules Ferry’s French Colonial Expansion, not to write a paper about Jules Ferry.

 

5. Identify a fact (see rubric) means that you take a sentence or paragraph in the assigned reading that you find very interesting and cite it as highlighted in yellow in the samples of primary papers and analyze it. In other words, you come up with your own interpretation of that fact.

 

6. Do not summarize the five facts but instead quote them as written in the assigned reading and highlighted in yellow in the samples of papers.