Unsuccessful Application: Example Nine
- The paper is very descriptive.
- There is not enough criticism in the work.
- The writing style is not academic. For example, it contains expressions such as "well", "of course" and others that must be avoided in academic essays.
Essay: The Proclamation of 1763
The Treaty of Paris that was proclaimed in the year 1763 has a great deal of significance in the America and has played a significant role in today's society on how some changes with regards to land and history have affected the nation of America. Part of the significance of the treaty was to end the French Indian war, suffice to say that this norm was brought about as a rebellion by the native settlers and the dominant colonialist during that time (Ohio.& Ohio,1912). .
Great Britain in that Era had gained vast acres of land in North America and not just territory, valuable property. During this time the Royal proclamation focused its attention on four central regions which were marked by the Appalachian mountain which in the east and suffice to say the Mississippi River in the west that marked four distinct areas that included west Florida, Quebec, East Florida, Grenada and West Florida. Prime lands which the Britain so best protect in their quest to further their agenda in a foreign territory.
The Funny bit about this whole saga was that the British colonialist strongly advised their kingsmen not to settle in the said area. Although the declaration was made in writing the norm seemed simple from a theoretical point of view and on paper, but in reality, the application and practicality of the proclamation was a nightmare for the British. This norm was right primarily in the administration in the eastern region (Jon, 2006).
Part of the reason why this had proven itself to be a bit of a problem, were the French who had earlier established their dominance in the area by creating trade routes in the Ohio Valley. With there very existence at stake, the French would not easily give up their trade routes to strangers who came in the other day. The French settles were not ignorant of the demise they had foreseen and as a means to protect what they hard so zealously conquered the French revolted and retaliated against the British invasion. This roué impact was almost immediate in that the local Natives joined forces with the French and participated in the resistance against the British an infamous rebellion that lasted for a seven-year period (Stagg & Canada,1981).
This infamous rebellion was better known as the Pontiacs rebellion that continues even after the cease-fire. In a desperate attempt to safeguard their kin and their reputation Great Britain saw it best to withdraw and forsake this quest in that it was going to be very costly on them. The British had foreseen the risk of an American hard and the colonialist teaming up together forming an ungodly alliance that would fuel the resentment of the local Americans towards them.
According to the proclamation, the land became distributed in a way that only favored the New Era Tyrants, a field officer with ranks was to be allocated a significant five thousand acres of land while a captain would have an astonishing three thousand acres at his disposal. That was not all a mere staff officer had a whopping two thousand acres while a small noncommissioned officer had a good two hundred acres at their disposal to add insult to injury a private man had fiery acres to do as he pleased.
Well, this, of course, seemed fair and an excellent package for everyone according to the British, as one would imagine that this dint seat well with the colonial subjects as one would imagine. During this long stalemate the bold shed by the Indians and the French apparently wasn’t accounted for by the proclamation of 1763, in fact, there was nowhere land was ceded to them as severance pay for their misfortunes (Hutchings, 1988).
One cannot ignore the immutable fact the discrepancies of the American settlers from the west were ignored or just merely shoved aside by the British. This proclamation made things even difficult for the British in that the colonists were following in their footsteps. As the British sought out to expand their land so did the colonialist and why not? Why wouldn’t they? No one at that particular period wanted to be under the dictatorship of the so-called imperial thumb (Komar,1971).
The 1763 proclamation was inadvertently a part of the long list of events and actions in history that were misunderstood depending on the pick of the draw there is more than meets the eye. The proclamation in some way defended the rights of the natives as much as they wanted to appear as the victims. The declaration forbade settlement on lands where the Indians settled in fact their territory was significantly considered I order to prevent conflict in the future.
Upon digging more in-depth on the pros of the proclamation we see that the formalization of the land titles was giver birther to during this period since the norm was precise and accurate as it prohibited people from issuing patents on lands owned by a particular tribe (Calloway, 2006).
The above was only exempt if the Indian title had been extinguished using purchase this was done to prevent irregularities and the constant trickery to preserve the good of the natives for a better future.
In summation, though this treaty was violated by men such as Daniel Boone during the Kentucky frontier, the line is drawn by the proclamation by limiting Anglo-Saxon settlement in the Areas after the Pontiacs war the terms made were more acceptable to the colonial settlers. In the end, the declaration managed to settle old scores in diplomatic ways apart from the westward movement who ignored the proclamation
Calloway, C. G. (2006). The scratch of a pen: 1763 and the transformation of North
America. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Proclamation of 1763. (n.d.). Washington: Great Neck Publishing.
Hutchings, P. M. (1988). The argument for the application of the Royal Proclamation of
1763 to British Columbia: Its force and effect. Ottawa: National Library of Canada.
Komar, R. N. (1971). The royal proclamation of 1763: A legal inquiry into Indian
lands in Canada. Ottawa: Indian Claims Commission.
Ohio., & Ohio. (1912). The Constitution of the state of Ohio: And the several
amendments submitted at the election held September 3, 1912, with the proclamation
of the Governor and the vote by counties on each amendment. Columbus,
Ohio: F.J. Heer Print. Co.
Top of Form
Stagg, J., & Canada. (1981). Anglo-Indian relations in North America to 1763 and an analysis
of the royal proclamation of 7 October 1763: Executive summary of an historical
background report. Ottawa: Research Branch, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada.
Proclamation of 1763. (2008). New York: NBCUniversal Media, LLC.
Jon, L. B. (2006). Proclamation of 1763.Bottom of Form