Stability, Survival, and Success - Katie

All stories have one thing in common: instability. Often, as in Pride and Prejudice, instability takes the form of inadequate parenting. In other works, instability in a marriage, job, or country troubles the hero and forms the basic conflict. Since this instability always causes the hero’s problems, the story focuses on restoring stability and, consequently, the hero’s ability to function correctly in society. Stability’s importance is not limited to stories, but is a key factor in real relationships, as well as agriculture, economics, and politics. During the turn of the century, European nations joined the Industrial Revolution because they had relatively stable governments and economies, capable of supporting such a huge movement. Although a young and inexperienced nation, America was able to enter the Industrial revolution because she possessed stability, manpower, and natural resources.

Stability in the government and the economy prevented revolutions, protected businessmen, and freed capital. Before the industrial revolution could begin, America needed a stable government to protect her people. Obviously, the Industrial Revolution could not have begun during the Revolutionary War because citizens were more worried about winning the war than industrial advancement. After America had established herself as a nation, she was able to turn to internal matters, building roads, establishing government, and punishing lawbreakers, forming a stable foundation for society. Just as importantly, America’s stable economy freed capital to fund businessmen and their projects. Since bankers were not worried about financial crises or governmental turmoil, they were confident enough to loan the capital needed to start the Industrial Revolution. The stability in the government and the economy provided protection and capital, enabling entrepreneurs to build the factories that characterized the Industrial Revolution.

Though Americans lacked manpower to work in factories, they came up with two solutions. Industrial growth requires manpower to work in factories. Although there were many people in America, they were more interested in farming their own land than in working in someone else’s factory. In order to solve this problem, Samuel Slater developed the Rhode Island system which employed children for 33 cents a week. This solved the manpower problem by providing cheep, available labor. However, Francis Cabot Lowell objected to child labor and proposed that unmarried women be employed instead. Though the Lowell system was more expensive, $3 a week, many adopted it. Together the Rhode Island and Lowell systems solved the labor problem, providing workers who powered the Industrial Revolution.

America needed natural resources to fuel the factories, to make products, and to offer inexpensive goods. Wood, coal, and water were America’s greatest assets in the Industrial Revolution, providing seemingly endless supplies of energy. At first the factories burned wood from America’s bountiful forests and then coal from mines to operate the machines. Many factories also used water power to turn huge wheels that then powered the machines. Cotton also proved essential to American industrialism, forming the basis for the textile industry. Metal was used, not only to manufacture exports, but also to replace the wooden parts in machines. Most importantly, America’s natural resources allowed businessmen to sell inexpensive goods since they did not need to import essentials like wood, metal, and coal. America’s bountiful natural resources provided the material that constructed the Industrial Revolution.

Available capital, cheap labor, and the abundance of wood, coal, and metal in America enabled her to enter the Industrial Revolution. Fundamentally all these things were possible because America had a stable foundation. Capital was available because bankers were confident in the economy; labor, because people were not fighting wars to stabilize the government; natural resources, because a stable agricultural system efficiently provided for the populous. This stability begins on the most basic level: the ordinary citizen’s stability. Modern governments cannot afford to eradicate religion because religion stabilizes society by stabilizing individuals. Our societal turmoil, most clearly seen in the current economic crisis, is the result of the instability of the individual. Since ordinary citizens did not have a religious foundation that instructed them to fight greed, save money, and strive for something greater than wealth, they made foolish, greedy choices that plunged, not only themselves, but the entire world into financial crisis. Since the stability of individuals determines the stability of society, reestablishing religion as the foundation of individuals and societies is imperative to success and survival of our nation.

-- Katie (grade 12)

A Step Towards War - Chloe

To be the president of the United States is to have power coursing through you veins. All eyes are on you as laws are signed and bills are passed; money is spent and officials are appointed. Few in the world would pass up the opportunity to receive the capabilities that come with the title of President. One aspect of the presidency that is not often explored by the people as they dream of the day when they will bear this honor, is the possibility that they might make a mistake. Even though they are the president, these mere men still have their blunders, large and small. James Madison experienced what it felt like to be in the highest political position in the nation, and making a blunder for all American to see. This occurred when James Madison allowed the United States to go to war with Europe. Warfare between these two factions in 1812 was a detrimental move because of relational harm, economic harm, and because of the small inexperienced army thrown into a full-fledge war.

James Madison thought he was taking a step towards the better well-being of the United States when he started the War of 1812. All the disadvantageous that resulted were nothing like the United States had expected. As with all wars, and all conflicts in general, the relationship between the two fighting parties because extremely strained. The War of 1812 was no different. Notions that Britain and America had weak ties were reaffirmed as soon as the battles began. Another characteristic of wars that remained predominant throughout it all was that of economic pressure. Arms cost money, imports and exports fall, and inflation increases all because the United States goes to war with another country. American citizens felt the effects of this conflict as the economy began to suffer during this time. Soldiers of the United States Army felt the blows of war the most, as it is in any war. Inexperienced, unready, undersupplied and at the very least, afraid, the men were thrust into war against the British for the second time.

All wars have their advantages and their disadvantages. The decision to go to war with Britain produced respect for the United States, and many other benefits; however it did prove to cause harm to the country in other respects. Not only in terms of its relations with other countries, but also in the economic sense, and in terms of its soldiers. James Madison took a step towards war with Britain, but that step caused a slew of problems to be thrust upon his great country.

-- Chloe (grade 8)

Corruption and Early America - Brad

The people’s faith in their government is directly proportional to the perceived amount of corruption in the government. Throughout the twentieth Century, the American people’s awareness of government corruption has greatly increased. Scandals have been zealously reported by the media, and the people have lost faith in the integrity of politicians. However, shortly after the creation of the American government, many politicians kept their integrity and acted for the good of the people. Three events during Adam’s presidency, the XYZ Affair, the Alien and Sedition Acts, and Adam’s decision to remain neutral, reveal three important factors in early American government.

Resulting from corruption in the emerging French government, the XYZ affair reveals the public’s attitude towards corruption. In 1797, the French seized neutral American vessels, and in the following year, President John Adams sent a committee to France to negotiate a treaty. Talleyrand, the French foreign minister, would not speak to the committee, but rather sent French agents who told the Americans that if they wanted to open up negotiations, they must bribe Talleyrand with two hundred and fifty thousand dollars and loan the French government ten million dollars. Outraged, the committee returned to America and the press published the story. When Americans read the story, they as well became outraged at the corruption and audacity of the French. The public response to the XYZ Affair shows their hatred of corruption and their standard for government officials.

Installed for the good of the country but repealed for the good of the people, the Alien and Sedition Acts show the American level of experience in handling their new government. After the XYZ Affair, the government pursued a more hostile policy towards France. For many months, the government fought the Quasi-War against France, both governments sinking the other’s vessels. At the same time, Americans grew suspicious of French and Irish immigrants. To protect the people and the government, Congress passed the Alien and Sedition Acts, which gave the President the authority to deport any foreigners he deemed dangerous and also limited freedom of the press. By 1802, Congress had deemed most of the acts unconstitutional. Most of those that had not expired were repealed[1]. The installing and repealing of the Alien and Sedition Acts shows the inexperience of the American government in placing laws that protected the people and respected their rights.

Adam’s decision to remain neutral in the Napoleonic wars exposes the role of conscience in early American government. During the Quasi-War, an undeclared war fought against France after the XYZ Affair, President Adams faced an important decision: whether to fight a full-scale, declared war against France, or to reopen negotiations and strive for neutrality. Fighting a war would be good for his party: when wars come, the people rally around the president and he becomes popular. As long as the president remains popular, the party remains popular. When popular, the party can run the country. Although fighting a war would have been better for him and his party, Adams chose to remain neutral, thus preventing the deaths of Americans and making his decision for the good of the country. The decision to remain neutral shows that the president acted largely for the good of the people and did not allow himself to become corrupt.

As shown in the XYZ Affair, the Alien and Sedition Acts, and Adam’s continuing neutrality, morals, inexperience, and conscience influenced the government in its early years. Public outrage at corruption during the XYZ Affair discouraged corruption in American politicians. Despite some inexperience at governing, the government could effectively lead and protect the people. However, as corruption infiltrated the government, the people lost faith in their leadership. Only by maintaining his integrity can a leader guide his followers, for by maintaining integrity man leads by example.

[1] One Act, the Act Respecting Alien Enemies, remains today

-- Brad (grade 10)

Political Wars - Mark

Political parties form when a group of government officials with similar convictions work together to promote their agenda. In recent years the two dominant political parties have been the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. This was not always so. During the late 1800’s and early 1900’s the two parties fighting for political power were the Federalists and the Democratic Republicans. The Federalists’ leader and founder was Alexander Hamilton. Thomas Jefferson served as the leader of the Democratic Republicans. Both parties and both men were bitter rivals. Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson fought one another over three issues: how much the British government system would influence the American government, how the U.S. economy would move forward, and if it was constitutional to have a national bank.

To begin, Hamilton and Jefferson had opposite opinions about the British government. Alexander Hamilton admired the British government, saying it was the best political system in the world. His desire was for the American government to model after the British. Thomas Jefferson, however, despised the British government. He called it corrupt and evil. He fought to make the American government different from the British government.

Next, Hamilton and Jefferson’s views on how the U.S. economy should move forward differed. Hamilton wanted to industrialize America with cities built around factories. The industrial revolution was beginning to take place in Europe and Hamilton saw this route as the best way for America to have a strong economy. Jefferson, on the other hand, feared the growth of cities. He believed that cities turned good farmers into hardened thugs. Cities, he said, only created problems. His vision for the American future was a people of farmers; landowners who loved nature and the natural world.

Finally, Hamilton and Jefferson debated on if America should have a national bank. Hamilton saw a nation bank as the best way to get America out of the financial debt it was in from the Revolutionary War. The bank was seen as a help for the commercial north but unnecessary to the agricultural south. This was why Jefferson opposed the national bank. He said it was unconstitutional because the Constitution didn’t mention anything about a bank. Hamilton’s argument was that a national bank would be "necessary and proper". The phrase comes from the Constitution which gives the federal government power to do anything “necessary and proper”. Hamilton won the argument and the national bank was created on February 25, 1751.

Even though both Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson were Founding Fathers, they had quite different views on the degree of influence the British political system should have on America’s, how the U.S. economy should grow and if it was to right have a national bank. It’s these parties and their debates in Congress that shaped the laws of our nation. Political wars can be ugly things, but in the end the fact that many views are heard and considered is a wonderful thing.

-- Mark (grade 10)

Washington’s Cabinet - Josh

Usually people try to surround themselves with viewpoints similar to their own. Though you may be able to achieve general agreement, you cannot have an exchange of varying ideas. George Washington filled his presidential cabinet with men who did not always agree with him. In fact some of them despised him, but he listened to their input. By surrounding himself with men like Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, and Henry Knox, Washington was able to give himself a variety of opinions to consider and act on.

Alexander Hamilton had similar views to George Washington, and was instrumental in the policy making for early America. Washington appointed Hamilton as his Secretary of the Treasury. Being Treasury Secretary did not stop Hamilton from influencing a myriad of policy decisions. Coming from a federalist mindset, Hamilton believed in a centralized government, a national bank, and increased taxes. Many of these policies were enacted with varying results. Some of Hamilton’s policies were enacted by Washington and some were not, but his input was vital to our new nation.

Henry Knox constructed military infrastructure of the fledgling United States. Being a new country, America needed to establish it’s military. By creating a standing navy and a national militia as Secretary of War, Knox was able to secure America. Know however thought that Indian tribes should be treated as their own sovereign nation. Washington disagreed, and continued to press the Indians farther and farther off their land. Even though Knox and Washington disagreed on some issues, Henry Knox was and invaluable resource to Washington.

Thomas Jefferson differed greatly from Washington’s, but his presence in the cabinet helped give perspective on policy decisions. Many of the disagreements Jefferson had were with Alexander Hamilton. Conflicts arose because Hamilton was a Federalist, and Jefferson was a Democratic- Republican. Hamilton’s ideas of large government reminded Jefferson to much of the tyrannical governmental system in England. This caused the two to butt heads on several occasions. Even though Washington usually sided with Hamilton, having a representative of the opposition party helped Washington see both sides of an issue.

Though each had differing views Alexander Hamilton, Henry Know, and Thomas Jefferson were all important parts of George Washington’s cabinet. Washington knew that having differing views in his cabinet would allow him to see a wider spectrum of ideas. He also knew that it would better represent the people by have varying viewpoints shown during his presidency. If we want to better understand an issue we should look at it from all sides instead of simply sticking dogmatically to one viewpoint.

-- Josh (grade 10)

President George Washington - Danny

Heroes often emerge when they are needed most. George Washington was such a hero, and he greatly benefited the United States in a time of crisis. George Washington was a successful and valuable president because of his wisdom in organizing the United States Cabinet and executive branch, in helping to overcome the United States’ economic crisis, and in keeping the United States out of unnecessary European wars.

George Washington was pivotal in organizing the United States Cabinet and the executive branch. Washington wisely chose cabinet members of differing ideas and political parties even when he could have surrounded himself with members from his own party. Many subsequent presidents followed his example. Washington’s organizing of the cabinet not only set a standard for future cabinets but also served his own administration in the midst of difficult situations.

Washington’s wisdom and the advice of members of his cabinet contributed significantly to resolving the economic crisis. The recent war with England had generated many debts and caused inflation, resulting in a severely damaged economy for the United States. Members of Washington’s cabinet, Alexander Hamilton in particular, helped him to restore the United States’ economy. Hamilton suggested many brilliant ideas that would revive the economy, such as the Report on Public Credit and the creation of a national bank.

George Washington also helped the United States remain neutral during European wars that could prove harmful to the burgeoning nation. Washington realized that the new country was still recovering from the War of Independence and was not ready to entangle itself in foreign wars. Even though many Americans opposed Washington in this arena, he was willing to stand up to them because of what he knew was best for the United States.

Because of Washington’s wisdom and perception, he knew that his presidency would set the standard for future presidents. He was conscientious about his decisions because he knew his choices would influence those of many presidents in years to come. By setting discerning standards and serving his country through solving some of its most pressing problems, George Washington proved to be the hero that the United States needed.

-- Danny (grade 9)

Developing Democracy - Katie

One-thousand, nine hundred, seventy-six; one-thousand, nine-hundred, seventy-seven; one-thousand, nine-hundred, seventy-eight. By 1879, Thomas Alva Edison had spent years trying to find a long-lasting filament for the incandescent light bulb. When, after 2,000 attempts, he finally discovered the carbonized cotton-thread filament, his invention changed the entire world. Similarly, America seemed to light up the world when it achieved independence from Britain in 1781 and began to set up the first democracy the world had seen since the Roman Republic. Sometimes America’s success dominated the historical stage, but, in reality, America succeeded because it built on the shoulders of the Greeks, Romans, and British, learning from their victories and defeats. The United States of America continued the rich tradition in democracy developed by the Greeks, Romans, and British.

Over 2,000 years before America achieved independence, the ancient Greeks introduced the idea that everyone can, and should, participate in government. In 500 B.C., several Greek cities, most-notably Athens, had adopted a form of government in which ordinary citizens came together to rule themselves. They called this new form of government “democracy,” meaning “rule of the people.” Together they decided how to protect their city, stimulate trade, and punish criminals. To express his opinion on an issue, each man marked a piece of pottery supporting or opposing the proposition at hand. After all the votes had been cast, an official would count the votes and proclaim the majority the winner. As the cities grew, they discovered that it was impractical to have every citizen contribute to the plethora of issues that arose. Accordingly, they created a Council of 500 men to oversee the everyday business of their city. Surprisingly, men were not elected to the Council of 500, but chosen by lot, proving how sincerely the Greeks believed that every man could, and should help to govern.

The Roman Republic adapted Greek ideas in order to practically govern a large group of people, introducing representative government. Unlike their Greek contemporaries, Roman cities were all unified, making direct democracy incredibly unpractical. To remedy this problem, the Romans divided the administration of the state into two bodies: the executive and the legislative. In order that no one man would have too much power, the executive branch was shared by two Consuls who together administrated the judicial and legislative aspects of the government and also commanded the army in time of battle. They were elected by the Comitia Centuriata, a gathering of all Roman soldiers, through representation, each Century voting once. As the other branch in the Roman Republic, the Senate controlled taxes, gave orders to the Consuls, and dictated foreign policy. Senators were appointed after having been elected as magistrates by the people of Rome. Thus the Roman people, instead of directly governing themselves, elected others to govern on their behalf.

One-thousand years later, the British struggled to win the right to a trial by jury of peers, to control taxes, and to have a say in the government. After the Roman Republic collapsed, Europe, and the entire known world, reverted to absolute monarchies. However, the British were not content to submit to the whims of their kings and, over the centuries, fought to regain their rights. Under Henry II, they gained the right to a trial by jury of peers, instead of being tried by the king’s friends. Henry II also introduced common law, the promise that all Britons would be held to the same standard, no matter what their position. After defeating John of England at the Battle of Runnymede in 1215, British nobles forced him to sign the Magna Charta, a document limiting the king’s power, protecting citizens from unlawful imprisonment, and giving the nobles the power to approve or reject taxes. In an attempt to raise money, Edward I sold “shares” of the government to burghers who formed Parliament, which, in time, would trump the king’s power and rule England.

The Greeks, Romans, and British provided a solid foundation for American democracy. Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and the other Founding Fathers built on the democratic concepts handed down through the ages. Like the Greeks, they believed that ordinary men could and should participate in the government, making it possible for any citizen to become a president, senator, or Supreme Court justice. In order to restrict power, they divided the government into branches, as the Romans did. They treasured justice and equality as much as their British forefathers, and set up the government to protect the people’s rights. Though some might suppose that we have reached the epitome of democracy, there is still room for growth. Just as modern engineers have continued to perfect Edison’s light bulb, inventing cheaper, cleaner ways to light our homes, so democracy will continue to develop, building on the foundations set over 2,000 years ago.

-- Katie (grade 12)

John Paul Jones - Chloe

No army can hope to win the war without brave men on its side. From the trenches of the World Wars, to the seas of Cuba, each battle has had nuggets of greatness. The Revolutionary war in the 18th century showcased one of these heroes. His ship was his tool for victory, and his swagger emanated with valor. Because of his commitment, courtesy, and courage, John Paul Jones proved to be a great figure in the Revolutionary War.

There weren’t many men like this John Paul Jones. He took risks that no one had even dreamed of. What they viewed as suicide, Jones viewed as an opportunity; what they were sure was foolish, Jones used to show his bravery. One such situation occurred in September of 1779 when the Pallas and the Bonhomme Richard, under John Paul’s command squared off against the Serapis and Countess of Scarborough. Three hours past before the American’s captain realized the only way they could possibly win this battle was by grappling with the stronger and more excessively armed British ships. Another two bloody hours past; the two sides poured ammunition onto each other, hoping the battle would soon end. Finally, an American grenade exploded below the Serapis deck, and instantly, the British surrendered. As Jones raise the American flag upon the two ships, the Bonhomme Richard sunk slowly into the sea behind him. The fiery Scottish captain was very determined to win his battles, but also was very courteous, even to his enemies. He sent a contingent of his men to capture a British lord in order to receive ransom money in return, however the trip was not planned as well as Jones had hoped; the lord had left home. Thus, the American men came back, not with the British man, but with his lady’s tea set. Their captain was so infuriated, he bought back every piece of the set and returned it to the lord’s household. Above all other qualities, courage was on full display in John Paul Jones’ life as he fought under the American name. One of his finest moments was when he, and forty other soldiers with him, sailed in a small boat in the dead of night to burn some of the British ships. None of the men were motivated to help in this mission, so Jones went in alone. Because the soldiers thought what their captain was doing was so foolish, one of them went and proclaimed to the British that their ships were in trouble. Only enough time remained for one boat to be lit, but even with the enemy hot on his heals, Jones managed to escape un-singed.

As the Revelotionary War came to a close, many men had come forward as greats, showing character qualities that are worthy of praise. John Paul Jones showed commitment, courtesy and courage, leading his American men to victory in many battles. As it should be with all other great men such as this, they should be honored for what they’ve done. Just as the Americans were aided so much by Jones, so are all armies aided by courageous fighters.

-- Chloe (grade 8)

The Importance of the Seven Years War - Danny

The United States of America has a history that was influenced and defined by the Seven Years War. This particular war was crucial in the shaping of America’s future. The rise of British power, the accumulation of English debts, and the fall of French-controlled Canada were all important factors.

The Seven Years’ War was important because of British Power, debts, and Canada being no longer part of the French empire. At the end of the Seven Years’ War, the English, who previously did not have as much power as France had in the New World, possessed much more control of the colonies. As a result, the English would not only eventually control all the colonies, but would also become the most powerful country in the world. Also, because the Seven Years’ War was so expensive, the English government taxed the colonies, which would eventually lead to the American Revolution. Another important detail was that the French would no longer control Canada. This would make English troops unnecessary, which led to the colonists’ realization that they didn’t need English protection against the French. This realization was an idea which helped trigger the Revolutionary War.

The Seven Years’ War was very significant because ultimately it led to the American Revolution. It led to something that had not previously been seen: the transformation of a British colony to an independent democracy. Everyone desires freedom, and this desire led the American colonists to break away from England.

-- Danny (grade 9)

The Revival Preacher - Mark

Religious men of great influence have come and gone, leaving the world better informed about the religion they sought to promote. The New World was a place of religious freedom creating great numbers of hearers open to new ideas. Evangelists saw this as a great opportunity to spread the Christian faith in the New World. George Whitefield was one of these evangelists; his fame was seen early in his preaching career, in America and also in Europe.

From the start of his preaching ministry George Whitefield captivated audiences. After graduating from Pembroke College he set his mind to the New World to preach his new found Methodist faith. The voyage was delayed so while he waited the Anglican Church ordained him a deacon. He soon after began preaching in London and was surprised that wherever he preached large crowds gathered and listened closely to every word he spoke. These sermons were not the type London was accustomed to. Part of his success was due to his energetic preaching style in which he often danced around the pulpit, cried and screamed to make his point. Whitefield was able to captivate hearers’ imagination by portraying the lives of biblical characters with realism.

George Whitefield took his preaching style to the New World in 1739. The churches in the New World could not hold the large crowds, often larger than the population of the town in which he spoke, so Whitefield began preaching outdoors. Whitefield’s preaching reached all classes of society, though not in abolitionist he sought to reach the black and poor population of the New World.

Though George Whitefield was famous in America he never neglected his home continent of Europe. He was especially active in Scotland, making a total of fourteen trips in his life to the country. George was pleased with the same results as in the New World. Large crowds flooding into the small towns he would preach in. His sermons often went late into or even through the night. One morning after Whitefield had preached to approximately twenty thousand people he remarked that everywhere in town you would have heard people praying to and praising God.

George Whitefield’s affect on the New World and Europe was enormous. He was a large part of the Great Awakening that happened in the New World during his preaching career. Whether in London or Scotland, his preaching sparked revival wherever he traveled in Europe. Though he was often opposed by many who despised his preaching style he reached millions with the Gospel. Many preachers of his day aspired to match his preaching. Even today many look back to him for inspiration and knowledge in the Christian faith.

-- Mark (grade 10)

Mercantilism, Regulations and Greed - Josh

When anyone lets the want of more things become their main focus, conflict usually ensues. Greed produces problems that are not easily fixed. In early colonial America, the greediness of the English government and some traders caused the smuggling of goods. This smuggling created a conflict to arise between colonists and English government. Eventually greed led to mercantilism, regulations on trade, and financial gain in smuggling.

A want for money and power led to mercantilism and ultimately large scale smuggling. The theory of mercantilism states that trade cannot increase or decrease, and that there is a set level of global commerce. Thus a government should seek to obtain as much gold as possible, and that it should excel in exporting and try to import as little as possible. These ideas all revolve around a want for money. England wanted to be the largest player on the global stage, and to do this they had to control import and exports through their government. Americans were not happy with this doctrine, because it raised prices. Eventually mercantilism caused England to several acts that narrowed trade.

Several navigation acts were passed to restrict many foreign imports to America and bring more money to England. These navigation acts also meant that the Americans were forced to receive their goods from English traders. The English were able to further mercantilism by putting harsh limits on what other countries could import to America. A want of more money and power caused the English government to ignore their people and focus on their own gain.

Mercantilist ideals and harsh regulations of the English government eventually made smuggling financially profitable. Traders began to see that a large profit could be made if they went outside of the government. Some merchants were able to sell goods for twenty percent less than what the government sanctioned traders were charging. The English government started passing laws to restrict trade even further in attempt to curb smuggling. A mindset of greediness was most important to both sides. Smugglers disobeyed the law in order to make a profit, and the English government ignored its people in a quest for money and power.

Mercantilism, regulations, and profit all led to colonial smuggling, but all of those sprung from greed. Wealth and prestige on a global stage were put on a pedestal before the welfare of the people and obedience to the government. Greed can be extremely destructive when not held in check. When it is not, chaos and conflict ensues.

-- Josh (grade 10)

Witch Hysteria - Brad

Since Creation, man has feared the unknown, the dark, the mysterious. For man, the unknown is thought of as dangerous; children have feared the dark of their rooms, men have feared the unknown outcome of a battle, settlements have feared foreigners and isolated people, sometimes as witches. Fear of witchcraft climaxed in Salem, Massachusetts, in 1693 with the dread of demons and people under their influence. Some may have falsely accused neighbors, some plead guilty, knowing that if they admitted guilt when innocent they would be released. The Salem witch hysteria resulted from the beliefs of the people, their circumstances, and their response to their circumstances.

Widespread belief in witches prepared Massachusetts for the witch-hunt. Witches were believed to exist by all in Salem, not just the Puritans. Some in Salem did practice at least one of two kinds of witchcraft. Possibly the witchcraft practiced was superstitious, such as mixing potions to cure ailments; However, it could have been demonic, in which witches called upon the devil or demons for their power. Furthermore, Cotton Mather, a respectable and religious man and leader, was deeply concerned with exposing and defeating witchcraft. The existence of witches was accepted by all and debated by none, for all in Salem believed the Bible to affirm their existence.

Given their beliefs, the people of Salem searched for an explanation of their strange circumstances. Salem’s wise leader, Increase Mather, had left the leadership of the colony to his son Cotton while he went to England to fight for the colony’s interests. Also, at the time of the Salem witch trials, the colonial governmental structure was changing and it became less well-defined. Then, in 1693, two girls began acting strangely. Many believed that they were bewitched. Thus began the Salem witch hysteria, a blend of beliefs, circumstances, and their results.

Confronted with the circumstances, the people of Salem acted according to their beliefs and judged those accused of being witches. For the case of the bewitched girls, three women were tried, but afterwards the problems did not stop. Rather more children appeared bewitched, and more people were tried. A special court was set up for the purpose of trying witches. The special court existed only as long as witches could be found; perhaps the innocent were accused merely to justify the court’s existence. Spectral evidence was allowed in court, thus anyone could claim to have seen another using demonic powers and the court would consider it as a verifiable indication. Salem spiraled until someone accused the governor’s wife, but not until then was the court disbanded.

The beliefs, the circumstances, and the response of the people of Salem caused the witch hysteria. Superstition could have obscured people’s faith in God. Perhaps the allowance of spectral evidence clouded the judgment of the court. Maybe the blend of religion and justice blurred the verdict. Fear of the unknown over faith in God for what man cannot see underlies the Salem affair. Until man is perfected he must be on his guard for lack of faith and fear of the unknown.

Brad (grade 10)

Nothing At All - Chloe

Without a firm foundation set deeply in stone, the mightiest building is as good as rubble. Whether that building is a science theory, a dream of becoming a famous athlete, or a new colony, everything will fail without the base it needs. Often times, when man wants to reach something, he is focused on that goal, not the grounding he needs to establish before striving further. Sometimes the foundation is simply assumed to be strong, when it isn’t by any means. Several hundred years ago, many European countries were in a race with each other to colonize in the New World. Certain settlements thrived and survived, but others crumbled to the ground. One colony that falls in the latter category was that of New Amsterdam. The Dutch settlement failed because, with little vigor, weak authority tried to lead disloyal settlers and expected it to blossom into Holland’s first lasting colony.

Neither the Dutch government, nor the settlers going to the New World seemed to care very much if the colony survived very long. They had already forfeited their establishment in Connecticut to the English with hardly any resistance at all. They had also tolerated many English attacks which came without warrant, while they populated the Hudson. It seemed as if they felt lazy and didn’t want to fight off anyone, or really do anything but have fun in the New World while it lasted. Even if this wasn’t their intent, how they acted supported this attitude. When the English decided to take over New Amsterdam, the Dutch’s little motivation seemed to play out more than ever. Constantly irritable because of an ill-fitting wooden leg, the last governor of New Amsterdam called for the help of his people when the English demanded surrender. However, none of them settlers wanted to fight the invaders. In fact, many of the settlers themselves were from England. And besides, they were not very hesitant to abandon their inept Dutch leaders.

With all of these factors playing out, the settlement of New Amsterdam fell to the ground very quickly after faced with opposition from the English. All of a sudden, when hardships came they abandoned it all. Without the foundation of solid perseverance, strong leaders and loyal colonists, the New Amsterdam settlement fell right into the hands of the English. But what can the Dutch, or anyone for that matter, expect if they forget the foundation when trying to reach something. As it is with so many situations today, without the firm grounding they need, the mightiest buildings melt away to nothing at all.

-- Chloe (grade 8)