Shays Rebellion Dbq

I think the farmers and workers were feeling that business and industry were there to take over and destroy them. They felt disrespected and wanted the businesses and industry to know they were important for prosperity. Bryan says, “Burn down your cities and leave

The Whiskey Rebellion in 1794 and the Shay’s Rebellion in 1786 were rebellions protests against the nefarious government. Although the uprising may be separated apart by a couple of years, they did have some similarities and differences. Both the Whiskey Rebellion and the Shay’s Rebellion, demonstrated the difficulties the farmers had to face and what the government came to realize. However, the way both situations were handled in diverse ways and what the government did to the farmers was different. First of all, the Whiskey Rebellion and the Shay’s Rebellion were akin in many ways.

Daniel Shays was a former officer in the Continental Army (Schultz, 2009). After the war, the economy took a turn for the worse, especially the farmers. The farmers’ income had fallen dramatically due and they were at risk of losing their farms, as well as going to jail for failure to pay their debts. In Massachusetts, a tax increase caused additional worries for the farmers. Some small towns in Massachusetts pleaded with the assembly regarding the taxes and lawsuits. However, their request were declined resulting in protests from the people which resulted in Shays Rebellion. He led a group of 1200 male protestors to the federal arsenal anticipating seizing control and cause the government to address the debt issues.

The government proved to be unresponsive to constant demands, which eventually led to thousands of men marching to the footsteps of the courts in protest. Could this have been an early demonstration of Extrinsic Motivation; as described in the Full Range Leadership Development lesson? (Thomas N. Barnes Center, 2012) Perhaps this is true. Daniel Shays finally had emerged as a leader; he took a group of armed regulators (who called themselves Shaysites after Shays last name) to block the courts from convening or conducting any further business until they met the demands of the people. He continually met with other locals during this time to discuss the situation and try to envision other ways to get the government to engage in debt relief policies and reforms. As the government continued to ignore the people, Daniel Shays did what he could to save the protest from turning into violence or bloodshed. However, this blockade did stir the attention of George Washington. But at this point, the government had labeled him a rebel, would his moral ethics guide him to achievement or would they be considered unethical in the government’s eyes?

The actions of Shay’s Rebellion did not go too far. Many farmers in Western Massachusetts were previously soldiers in the Continental Army. These farmers were now being met with unfair demands from Massachusetts merchants. When they could not live up to the demands, their land and possessions were taken and they could be thrown in jail. Many farmers such as Daniel Shay were previous members on the Continental Army, in which they received little pay for their contributions.

What would it be like to rebel against something unfair? What would it be like to go to war with someone who has a higher power? Well John Fries could answer both of those questions because he did them both in July of 1798 (Fries’s Rebellion). He rebelled against John Adams, who was the president of the United States at the time, and he fought to help get the freedom Americans have today. John Fries led a group of farmers in eastern Pennsylvania to rebel against property taxes on buildings, land, and slaves (Miller Center). John Fries was a brave man who led the Pennsylvanian farmers, rebelled against property taxes, and helped win the rights Americans have today.

The Reign of Terror lasted from September 1793 until Robespierre was executed in 1794. The Reign of Terror’s main purpose was to protect France from foreign enemies and eliminate counterrevolutionaries. People who disagreed with the revolution were executed in town square in front of the town’s people. During the Reign of Terror, about 40,000 people were murdered or executed. Was this method of protecting France from external and internal enemies reasonable? The Reign of Terror was not justified because the external affairs were small, the internal affairs were not serious, and the methods of the Terror were too extreme.

Chop! Chop! You hear as they behead large amounts of people using a guillotine also nicknamed the “national razor”. This machine was invented by, Dr. Joseph Ignace Guillotin, which consisted of a heavy weighted angled blade that would slide down and behead the person who was sentenced to death. People liked the invention because it was fast, efficient, and painless. This was the beginning of the eighteen month period known as the Reign of Terror. It started when the horrible leader, King Louis the sixteenth was guillotined at the public square on January 21st of 1793. This era was led by Maximilien Robespierre and he believed that the government was there to protect the peaceful citizens. If anyone said anything negative about the way they

The people's resistance to the growing inequality in America led to them writing poems, essays, novels, and sermons. For instance, “WHen Harriet Martineau, a reformer of the 1830s, wrote Society in America, one reviewer suggested it be kept away from women: ‘Such reading will unsettle the for their true station and pursuits, and they will throw the world back again into confusion’(Page 112). Also, “It was in the 1820s and 1830s, Nancy Cott tells us(The Bonds of Womanhood), that there was an outpouring of novels, poems, essays, sermons, and manuals on the family, children and women’s role”(Page 112). Door’s Rebellion was an attempt by middle-class residents to force broader democracy in the U.S. state of Rhode Island. History leave out ideas

. .. God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed….Let them take arms. …The tree of liberty must be refreshed, from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.” (Jefferson) As we look back we can see two separate sides of the argument, one opposing the rebellion and one supporting it. When looking at the quote previously stated we see an argument in favor of the rebellion. “The people cannot be all, and always, well informed.” Some hardships in this world can go unnoticed by the people that do not experience them, and the hardships of this time were high taxes. With this, a high tax burden to pay off war debts owed to the mercantilists fell hardest on farmers, who were required also to pay in specie. (Jensen 240) Reform did not take place until protests occurred that went beyond the boundaries of legislative requests. The farmers initial protesting began innocently and peacefully. Between 1784 and 1787, yeomen (a landholder) in Massachusetts towns sent petitions to the General Court in Boston. Many farmers went to county conventions to expose their economic grievances (Szatmary 38). Through many conventions and town meetings held from 1784 to 1786, not once was an overthrow of the government in the conversation (Szatmary 43). The farmers made an effort towards reform, peacefully through a legislative process, but no improvement was made. With no reformation or legislative action taking place, farmers turned to other forms of action. This is when attacks began appearing towards the New England Court System (Szatmary 42). These armed attacks on courts led to tyranny, and eventually through losses to militia, the rebellion of Shaysites declined. Although the rebellion ended, the thought of the possibility of another rebellion remained and through this fear reform took place. Not until a rebellion

Some might say that Shay and the farmers were revolutionary heroes, but they were just reckless rebels.

To illustrate, Shay’s Rebellion was nothing like a small argument, if fact it was a riot. Shay’s Rebellion was an event were farmers who are mostly veterans were “fighting for their rights” and their complaints were from the taxes the government charges them. Their belief was that they shouldn’t pay taxes and some took the decision to not pay them. Of course the government acted and so they put farmers who did not pay their taxes in jail. The farmers took these decisions too seriously and their reactions were unacceptable. Although farmers believed that the government was unfair in Shay’s Rebellion, nevertheless farmers in this time were reckless rebels because they destroyed legal systems that cause them to take matters in their own hands, were discourteous for being wasteful, and also for being unfair to themselves.

Farmers were in debt because of the rise of the industry era. Most farmers could not keep up with the debt they wanted some kind of change in order to survive in the industry era. Farmers started to form Alliances. These alliances were like unions addressing the needs of the farmers and finding ways to survive in the market. Like unions the struggle in the beginning because bankers did not want to cooperate with them. The had to seek help from the political parties. Farmers united and became stronger together in numbers by working together. The Alliances helped lower interest rates in banks, lower cost in transporting good in the railroad, and the regulation of money supply. Because the issues were being resolve the populist party was

Eight years of war was not enough for the so called "Regulators," and recently, these organized rebels mobbed courthouses in Northampton, Great Barrington, & Worcester. Farmers led by Daniel Shays, known by his great military conduct and being honored with the Marc Lafayette, were in search for the justice they fought for during the Revolutionary War.

Alexander Hamilton was extremely concerned with this uprising because he wanted to mainly suppress the revolt and the set an example of government authority. Permitting the rebellious farmers to display that behavior would be like an act of anarchy and consequently, an attack on the federal government.