Our Property Is Torn From Us Essay

1913 Words8 Pages

Petition and Protest: "our property is torn from us" 1. Why did men from Massachusetts towns throughout the Connecticut River Valley march to Springfield to close the Supreme Judicial Court scheduled to convene on September 26, 1786? Hundreds of men from Massachusetts, known at Regulators, marched on and forcibly closed several courts throughout Massachusetts in the year 1786. These men fought for reformation within the judicial system and amendments to the 1780 state constitution, vowing that no courts shall convene until their demands were met. On September 26, 1786, hundreds of Regulators, angry about the economic recession and ineffective state government, marched to prevent the Supreme Judicial Court from opening. The government soon …show more content…

Using this definition, the militia were better patriots because they were willing to perform their duty and protect their country from threats. The Regulators may have called themselves patriots, but in reality they anything but. Unhappy with the government’s actions and searching for reform, they actively threatened the country they were supposedly working to protect. The Regulators did not support their country and in fact, they actively worked against it in order to reform it to their standards, neither of which makes them patriots. The militia were better patriots because, while they personally may not have supported or completely agreed with the country’s actions, they did their duty. They fought to protect their country from threats, even if it meant risking their lives. 3. Discuss the differences among the terms that were used to describe Shays and his men; insurgents, regulators, mob, banditti, etc., noting who coined each term and what it meant to …show more content…

Three of the four delegates from Massachusetts fully supported a strong national government because they had experienced firsthand the problems and conflicts that rebellions create, especially without assistance from a national government. The fourth delegate from Massachusetts also knew the issues rebellions could create and agreed that a stronger national government was needed to prevent such problems, but he argued that a bill of rights was also needed to protect the rights of the people. All of the delegates at the convention had heard stories of the events that had been occurring in Massachusetts and, fearful of similar rebellions in their own states, many changed their perspective of a strong national government, arguing that one was necessary to keep the peace. These fears are what led to such drastic changes in the powers of the national government compared to the Articles of