DBQ - Democracy in Colonial America Essay Due to British political traditions the 13 colonies One democratic feature is the control of the abuse of power, it means that no person/persons can disobey or break our laws and get away with it not even government leaders. For example say our president broke a law he would not get any special treatment he would have the same punishment as as everyone else which is explained in document 6: Engraving of Virginia's House of Burgess's.
The trustees were people that wanted to shake off the British form of class system, because that system tightly grabbed on to a person’s station in life and rarely let go. It was difficult for any person to move around from their societal role. They wanted change. McIlvenna makes a crucial point when she tells that Great Britain saw Georgia as a failure due to the colonists challenging the class system. It was due to self-interested parties that convinced England that Georgia was done for.
Laws passed by the colonial governments could be voided by the Privy Council, though this ability was only used 469 times out of 8,563 laws. In 1767, when New York Legislature refused to abide by the Quartering Act, it was suspended. Royal governors were also assigned to colonies to see that British laws were carried out and the colonies remained in order. The British government played an active role in exercising its control over the American
The government for the most part in both of these regions was self governing. However, some of the colonies in New England and the south had self and King appointed governors. Most of the colonies had lots
Though they came from the same origin, the New England and Chesapeake Regions both separated, and with different goals for each colony. By the 1700s the Chesapeake and New England regions were distinctively different even though both were made from English colonies based on, the people whom settled the land, the governing goals and the religions brought to the new land. After arriving in the New World, the New England and Chesapeake Colonies began to thrive, but from ideas that came from very different people. Though both were trying to escape religious persecution, the differences in the people whom settled the land is noticeable.
Appointed in 1641 by the crown, Sir William Berkeley governed Virginia for most of the following 35 years. He implemented policies that favored the large planters and used dictatorial powers to govern on their behalf. For 15 years, beginning in 1661, Berkeley refused to allow any new election to the assembly, perpetuating his cronies in power. The right to vote was a crucial part of democracy for the colonists, for it meant that the person they elected was the person they felt most responsible to support them. Unfortunately, Berkeley’s government was unresponsive to the colonist’s needs and also denied them social equality.
In the Pennsylvania colony they set their own standards in government. In the year 1775 Pennsylvania was a proprietary colony. The first governor of Pennsylvania was William Markham. William Markham led the fight in abolish slavery. William Penn founded the colony in 1681.
Both of these areas have separate and unique identities. The deviation, was numerous from economically, socially, and politically. Traditionally English viewpoints were formed the foundation for colonial political, economic, and religious policies. Charter of royal colonies (Southern colonies) subjected the government to engineer control the monarchy. Governors and royal councils were appointed by the king.
People could vote and form part of the office but they had to be Christians in order to do so. Gratefully, taxes were not enforced as much. When Penn is in charge, he develops a colonial council made of tax-paying landowners. These would create laws and take over the government, the idea of veto is presented. The southern colonies were ruled by the House of Burgesses.
Colonial government was different but also similar to today’s government. Today’s government had to change a few things the colonial government did but they also kept most of the ways. The government today probably kept most of the colonial government’s ways because they didn’t need to change anything, they knew what they were doing and they knew how to run a colony. It’s different because today we choose our leader and in the colonial government the king/queen would choose the next leader. Also today we have a lot of different parts in the government and back then they only had a few parts in their government.
‘The consolidation of royal authority, in the years 1487-1509, was due to Henry VII’s control over the nobility.’ Explain why you agree or disagree with this view. It can be argued to a certain extent that the consolidation of royal authority for Henry VII, in the years 1487-1509, was a result of control over the nobility. The challenge lied in the ability to decrease their power without alienating them whilst removing their position of threat. However, there were other contributory factors in Henry’s consolidation of his royal authority, such as his diplomatic skills in dealing with foreign powers and the indispensable use of royal finances.
Georgia was charted by King George II in 1732, and was to be governed by a group of trustees for twenty-one years. “The Georgia Trustees were a mix of wealthy merchants, landed gentry, and Anglican ministers.” The Trustees ran their government through James Oglethorpe and supported his ideas fully. “The Trustees adopted the Latin motto Non sibi sed allis (‘Not for self, but for others’) as they crafted rules and regulations to shape the colony into a utopia where there would be no social classes and colonists would succeed by their own efforts and hard word.” The Georgian Colonists were getting upset with the trustees’ laws pertaining to slavery and not being able to seize the rice market fully.
Although they were working out the issues, the colonists had some democratic features that were set and working. The rule of law describes that no person is above the supreme law. Everyone must obey laws; there is no supreme leader that can do anything they want. In Document 3: The Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, it states “they shall have the power to call public officials or any other person into question for any misdemeanor and may with good reason remove or deal
They could not hold meetings and make decisions for themselves. The king decided that they could not hold meetings because, as he felt they were planning to overthrow him during these organized get-togethers. They could not protest his decrees, or they would be killed. Take the Boston massacre, the colonists were protesting and the soldiers started firing on them. “Order quickly broke down, and the frightened soldiers fired into the crowd.
This consists of the Governor General acting on the advice of the Prime Minister for judges of the Supreme Court of Canada and chief and associate chief justices in the provinces; and on the advice of the Minister of Justice for all other superior court judges. (Justice.gc.ca,
