HIS220 Independence Week 3 Freedom in Workplace Social Equality Memo Letter Week 3 Assignment – Freedom in the Workplace Learning Objectives Covered LO 05

HIS220 Independence Week 3 Freedom in Workplace Social Equality Memo Letter Week 3 Assignment – Freedom in the Workplace

Learning Objectives Covered
LO 05.01 – Explain the concept of political freedom and discuss five ways that it impacts American personal and professional life today
LO 06.02 – Define and explain the importance of “equality of opportunity” in American society
LO 06.03 – Compare the concepts of equity and equality and identify five ways each impacts American workplace culture today
How to write the assignement will be in the template I uploaded. It’ll help with writing it our correctly.

(This is NOT the assignment. Read on to find the memo prompt below.)

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9A04E7D9123FE433A25754C0A9679D946696D6CF (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

Women’s Suffrage: Crash Course US History #31 (Links to an external site.)

Career Relevancy

Political freedom is one of the most important things in a democratic society. On a personal and professional level, it improves our quality of life and gives us freedoms such as freedom of speech and freedom to hold marches and/or meetings. When a group does not feel like they are treated equally, they have the political freedom to exercise their right to express those concerns. In the workplace and in our homes that is essential. Equal opportunity in the workplace must be given with no regard to race, gender, disability, or any other discriminatory practices. This is important and means that everyone is given an equal chance to succeed and be who they want to be. Those in leadership must be particularly careful to treat each worker with the same level of respect and fairness they expect to receive themselves. To make a fair and equal workplace, everyone should follow the Golden Rule of treating others how they would like to be treated themselves.

Background

The online Free Dictionary by Farlex (2018) defines political liberty as “one’s freedom to exercise one’s rights as guaranteed under the laws of the country.” (para. 1). Article 9 of the Human Rights Act provides protection for freedom of thought, belief and religion, so people can exercise their political freedom without fear of recrimination (Equality and Human Rights Commission, 2016).

There are many ways that the concept of personal freedom affects Americans in their personal and professional lives today. Here are just a few:

freedom from oppression;
the absence of disabling conditions for an individual;
the absence of life conditions of compulsion, e.g., economic compulsion, in a society;
freedom from “internal” constraints on political action or speech (e.g., social conformity);
sometimes seen as a negative, freedom from governmental regulation.

Political freedom, in general, is promoted as one of the basic foundations on which America is founded, and one of the freedoms enjoyed by Americans which might not be offered in other countries. Americans are provided the opportunity to participate in elections with the freedom to vote for the candidate of their choice without fear of retribution. On the other hand, they are not required to vote in an election, which also represents freedom of choice. In addition, freedom from oppression guarantees personal liberties such as freedom of religious choice, freedom of speech, and freedom of self-expression. America today places very few constraints on the American public, especially in regard to self-expression and freedom of speech. Political rallies and meetings may be held with no fear of governmental intervention, unless violence becomes an issue, at which point a government entity such as law enforcement may intervene. Freedom from any governmental regulation at all could result in a break in societal interaction; thus, a fine line must be walked by the government to lead and govern without being oppressive.

Equality of opportunity is defined by The Free Dictionary (2018) as, “absence of discrimination, as in the workplace, based on race, color, age, gender, national origin, religion, or mental or physical disability” (para. 1). In essence, equality of opportunity is taken to mean that all things are or should be available to the American people, regardless of their personal circumstances. According to John Goodman (2015), what America promises is only opportunity, not actual equality. Mr. Goodman (2015) cites a CBS News Poll indicating only 4% of Americans “consider income disparities as the most important problem facing the country” (para. 3). Can this be taken to mean that Americans consider only income as an equalizing factor? Current racial discord would indicate this is not the case, as racial discrimination continues to exist, even though great strides have been made in this country to eliminate this type of discrimination. While America is touted as the ‘Land of Opportunity,’ do those opportunities assume that every person is on an equal level, i.e., equal societal standing, equal education, equal income? Equal opportunity to succeed should be available to each person with no regard to race, creed, religious affiliation, or mental or physical disability; however, each person must make the most of the opportunity afforded him/her.

While equity and equality in the workplace are sometimes used interchangeably, there is, in fact, a difference in their meaning. There are numerous situations in the workplace involving equity and/or equality. Some of these situations include:

Gender
Disability
Race
Pay
Age

Gender equality in the workplace does not mean women and men will be treated the same, but that the opportunities available within the workplace will not depend upon whether the applicant is male or female. Gender equity refers to the fairness of treatment, whether male or female. In the same way, equality in regard to disabled workers would mean they are treated the same as employees with no disability; while treating the disabled workers in an equitable manner would require making changes in order to allow fair treatment; i.e. installation of wheelchair ramps or purchasing specific equipment in order to facilitate job performance. While great strides have been made in the American workplace to overcome any type of bias, efforts should be continued in order to phase out any and all discrimination.

REFERENCES

The Free Dictionary by Farlex. (2018). Equality of opportunity. Retrieved from https://www.thefreedictionary.com/Equality+of+opportunity (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

The Free Dictionary by Farlex. (2018). Political liberty. Retrieved form https://www.thefreedictionary.com/Freedom+(political) (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

Equality and Human Rights Commission. (2016). Article 9:freedom of thought, belief, and religion. Retrieved from https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/human-rights-act/article-9-freedom-thought-belief-and-religion (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

Goodman, J. (2015). The Promise of America: opportunity, not equality. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoodman/2015/04/2…

Prompt

Pretend you are the supervisor in a workplace. Write a 600-word minimum memo outlining the differences between social equity and social equality, explain why this is important, and detail how the organization will implement both in the workplace.

This memo should:

Directly address your employees
Define equity and equality
Provide examples and non-examples of each
Provide explanation of why both are important in your workplace
Discuss how you plan to implement these policies in the workplace.

Remember to cite the sources you consult in learning about both equality and equity.

——————-

Rubric

This is what to look for and double check when writing the assignment.

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFollowed Instructions – 1) VeriCite score under 20% 2) Assignment meets required minimum 600 word length and setup expectations.

10.0 pts

Excellent – Met all guidelines

8.0 pts

Satisfactory – Clear effort to meet guidelines but with minor errors.

6.0 pts

Fair – Demonstrated effort to meet guidelines but with major errors.

4.0 pts

Needs Improvement – Met 1 of 2 guidelines

0.0 pts

Unsatisfactory – Failed to meet either guideline

10.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSpelling, Grammar, & Citations – 1) Spelling is correct. 2) Grammar is correct. 3) Sentence and paragraph structure are appropriate. 4) Sources are cited correctly in the text and on the references page.

10.0 pts

Excellent – Met all guidelines

8.0 pts

Satisfactory – Met 3 of 4 guidelines or clearly worked to meet all guidelines with minor errors

6.0 pts

Fair – Met 2 of 4 guidelines or demonstrated some effort to meet all the guidelines but with a few major errors

4.0 pts

Needs Improvement – Met 1 of 4 guidelines or demonstrated some effort to meet all the guidelines though with many mistakes.

0.0 pts

Unsatisfactory – Did not meet any of the 4 guidelines.

10.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAuthor discusses equity

20.0 pts

Excellent – Met all guidelines

15.0 pts

Satisfactory – Writer demonstrates general understanding of equity but with minor challenges.

10.0 pts

Fair – Writer showed moderate understanding of equity

5.0 pts

Needs Improvement – Writer demonstrated minimal effort to describe equity. Section lacks original thought or adequate description.

0.0 pts

Unsatisfactory – Did not meet any of the guidelines and paper fails to demonstrate understanding of equity

20.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAuthor discusses equality

20.0 pts

Excellent – Met all guidelines

15.0 pts

Satisfactory – Writer demonstrates general understanding of equality but with minor challenges.

10.0 pts

Fair – Writer showed moderate understanding of equality

5.0 pts

Needs Improvement – Writer demonstrated minimal effort to describe equality. Section lacks original thought or adequate description.

0.0 pts

Unsatisfactory – Did not meet any of the guidelines and paper fails to demonstrate understanding of equality

20.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAuthor provides examples and non-examples of equity and equality

20.0 pts

Excellent – Met all guidelines

15.0 pts

Satisfactory – Writer provides examples and non-examples of equality and equity but with minor challenges.

10.0 pts

Fair – Writer provides example or non-example of equity and equality but not both

5.0 pts

Needs Improvement – Writer demonstrated minimal effort to provide examples and non-examples of equity and equality. Section lacks original thought or adequate description

0.0 pts

Unsatisfactory – Did not meet any of the guidelines and paper fails to provide examples and non-examples of equality and equity

20.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAuthor provides explanation of why equity and equality are important in the workplace

20.0 pts

Excellent – Met all guidelines

15.0 pts

Satisfactory – Writer provides explanation of why equity and and equality are important in the workplace but with minor challenges.

10.0 pts

Fair – Writer provides explanation of why equity or equality are important in the workplace but not both

5.0 pts

Needs Improvement – Writer demonstrated minimal effort to provide explanation of why equity and equality are important in the workplace. Section lacks original thought or adequate description

0.0 pts

Unsatisfactory – Did not meet any of the guidelines and paper fails to provide explanation of why equity and equality are important in the workplace

20.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAuthor describes how to implement equity and equality in the workplace

20.0 pts

Excellent – Met all guidelines

15.0 pts

Satisfactory – Writer describes how to implement equity and and equality in the workplace but with minor challenges.

10.0 pts

Fair – Writer describes how to implement equity or equality in the workplace but not both

5.0 pts

Needs Improvement – Writer demonstrated minimal effort to describe how to implement equity and equality in the workplace. Section lacks original thought or adequate description

0.0 pts

Unsatisfactory – Did not meet any of the guidelines and paper fails to describe how to implement equity and equality in the workplace

20.0 pts

Total Points: 120.0

PreviousNext Company Name
Memo
To:
Recipient Name
From:
Your Name
cc:
Name
Date:
Date
Re:
Subject
Equality
[Delete this text and type your explanation of what social equality means here.]
Equity
[Delete this text and type your explanation of what social equity means. Remember to
focus on how it differs from social equality.]
Examples of Equality & Equity in the Workplace
[Delete this text and describe some examples of both social equality and social equity in
the workplace here. Remember to describe examples of both. And focus on providing
examples that really demonstrate you understand the difference between the two
concepts.]
Importance of Equality & Equity in the Workplace
[Delete this text and explain why promoting more social equality and social equity in
your workplace is important. In other words, why is this a good thing to do? What do
you hope to accomplish by making policy changes?]
Plans to Implement Equality & Equity in the Workplace
[Delete this text and describe the policies you think should be implemented to promote
more social equality and social equity in your imaginary workplace. Remember: this
assignment requires students to write ‘in character,’ using creativity and imagination.
So, really focus on making your writing sound professional and realistic – as if you are a
supervisor implementing specific workplace changes to generate more equality and
equity in your workplace.]
2
References
3
The Events Leading to Independence
In 1763, few would have predicted that by 1776 a revolution would be unfolding in British
America.
The ingredients of discontent seemed lacking — at least on the surface. The colonies were not in
a state of economic crisis; on the contrary, they were relatively prosperous. Unlike the Irish, no
groups of American citizens were clamoring for freedom from England based on national
identity. King George III was not particularly despotic — surely not to the degree his
predecessors of the previous century had been.
Furthermore, the colonies were not unified. Benjamin Franklin discovered this quite clearly
when he devised the Albany Plan of Union in 1754. This plan, under the slogan “Join, or Die,”
would have brought the colonial rivals together to meet the common threat of the French and
Indians. Much to Franklin’s chagrin, this plan was soundly defeated.
Ben Franklin sketched this cartoon to illustrate the urgency of his 1754 Albany Plan of Union. He unsuccessfully
tried to bring the colonies together to defend themselves against Indian and French threats.
How, then, in a few short years did everything change? What happened to make the American
colonists, most of whom thought of themselves as English subjects, want to break the ties that
bound them to their forebears? What forces led the men and women in the 13 different colonies
to set aside their differences and unanimously declare their independence?
Much happened between the years of 1763 and 1776. The colonists felt unfairly taxed, watched
over like children, and ignored in their attempts to address grievances. Religious issues rose to
the surface, political ideals crystallized, and, as always, economics were the essence of many
debates.
For their part, the British found the colonists unwilling to pay their fair share for the
administration of the Empire. After all, citizens residing in England paid more in taxes than was
asked of any American during the entire time of crisis.
The 1770 Boston Massacre was only one in a series of events that led American colonists to revolt against Britain.
This was not the first time American colonists found themselves in dispute with Great Britain.
But this time the cooler heads did not prevail. Every action by one side brought an equally strong
response from the other. The events during these important years created sharp divisions among
the English people, among the colonists themselves, and between the English and the Colonists.
Over time, the geographic distance between England and the colonies became more and more
noticeable. It took England time to respond to Colonial provocations and to administer the settled
areas of America. Further, some now questioned how it could be that a tiny island nation could
contain and rule the American continent.
Before long, the point of no return was reached.
The Royal Proclamation of 1763
After Britain won the Seven Years’ War and gained land in North America, it issued the Royal Proclamation of
1763, which prohibited American colonists from settling west of Appalachia.
The Treaty of Paris, which marked the end of the French and Indian War, granted Britain a great
deal of valuable North American land. But the new land also gave rise to a plethora of problems.
The ceded territory, known as the Ohio Valley, was marked by the Appalachian Mountains in the
east and the Mississippi River in the west.
Don’t Go West, Young Man
Despite the acquisition of this large swath of land, the British tried to discourage American
colonists from settling in it. The British already had difficulty administering the settled areas east
of the Appalachians. Americans moving west would stretch British administrative resources thin.
Further, just because the French government had yielded this territory to Britain did not mean the
Ohio Valley’s French inhabitants would readily give up their claims to land or trade routes.
Scattered pockets of French settlers made the British fearful of another prolonged conflict. The
war had dragged on long enough, and the British public was weary of footing the bill.
Moreover, the Native Americans, who had allied themselves with the French during the Seven
Years’ War, continued to fight after the peace had been reached. Pontiac’s Rebellion continued
after the imperial powers achieved a ceasefire.
The last thing the British government wanted were hordes of American colonists crossing the
Appalachians fueling French and Native American resentment.
The solution seemed simple. The Royal Proclamation of 1763 was issued, which declared the
boundaries of settlement for inhabitants of the 13 colonies to be Appalachia.
Proclaim and Inflame
But what seemed simple to the British was not acceptable to their colonial subjects. This remedy
did not address some concerns vitally important to the colonies. Colonial blood had been shed to
fight the French and Indians, not to cede land to them. What was to be said for American
colonists who had already settled in the West?
In addition, the colonies themselves had already begun to set their sights on expanding their
western boundaries; such planning sometimes even causing tension among the colonies. Why
restrict their appetites to expand? Surely this must be a plot to keep the American colonists under
the imperial thumb and east of the mountains, where they could be watched.
Consequently, this law was observed with the same reverence the colonists reserved for the
mercantile laws. Scores of wagons headed westward. How could the British possibly enforce this
decree? It was nearly impossible.
The Proclamation of 1763 merely became part of the long list of events in which the intent and
actions of one side was misunderstood or disregarded by the other.
The Stamp Act
One of these was the Stamp Act, which Parliament passed in March 1765, things changed. It was
the first direct tax on the American colonies. Every legal document had to be written on specially
stamped paper, showing proof of payment. Deeds, wills, marriage licenses — contracts of any
sort — were not recognized as legal in a court of law unless they were prepared on this paper. In
addition, newspaper, dice, and playing cards also had to bear proof of tax payment. American
activists sprang into action.
Taxation in this manner and the Quartering Act (which required the American colonies to
provide food and shelter for British troops) were soundly thrashed in colonial assemblies. From
Patrick Henry in Virginia to James Otis in Massachusetts, Americans voiced their protest. A
Stamp Act Congress was convened in the colonies to decide what to do.
The colonists put their words into action and enacted widespread boycotts of British goods.
Radical groups such as the Sons and Daughters of Liberty did not hesitate to harass tax collectors
or publish the names of those who did not comply with the boycotts.
Soon, the pressure on Parliament by business-starved British merchants was too great to bear.
The Stamp Act was repealed the following year.
The crisis was over, but the uneasy peace did not last long.
Playing Monopoly
KTCA-TV
Angry Bostonians rebelled against British taxation and dumped 342 chests of tea into Boston
Harbor.
The British East India Company was on the brink of financial collapse. Lord North hatched a
scheme to deal simultaneously with the ailing corporation and the problem of taxing the
colonies. He decided to grant the British East India Company a trading monopoly with the
American colonies.
A tax on tea would be maintained, but the company would actually be able to sell its tea for a
price that was lower than before. A monopoly doesn’t allow for competition. As such the British
East India Company could lower its prices
British ships carrying the controversial cargo were met with threats of violence in virtually all
colonial ports. This was usually sufficient to convince the ships to turn around. In Annapolis,
citizens burned a ship and the tea it carried. Boston reacted in a similarly extreme fashion.
The Boston Tea Party
Governor Thomas Hutchinson allowed three ships carrying tea to enter Boston Harbor. Before
the tax could be collected, Bostonians took action. On a cold December night, radical
townspeople stormed the ships and tossed 342 chests of tea into the water. Disguised as Native
Americans, the offenders could not be identified.
The damage in modern American dollars exceeded three quarters of a million dollars. Not a
single British East India Company chest of tea bound for the 13 colonies reached its destination.
Not a single American colonist had a cup of that tea.
E Pluribus Unum
Committees of Correspondence
American patriots of the 1770s did not have modern means of communication at their disposal.
To spread the power of the written word from town to town and colony to colony, Committees of
Correspondence were established. The Committees of Correspondence were bold enough to use
the British postal service as the means of communication. For the most part, the pen was their
weapon of choice, but revolutionary sentiment did at times take other forms. For example the
Committee of Correspondence in Boston gave its blessing on the raiding of the Dartmouth and
the destruction of its cargo that became known as the Boston Tea Party. Before the Tea crisis
had passed, each colony had a central committee designed to coordinate discussion with the
other twelve colonies.
First Continental Congress
On September 1774, the First Continental Congress was convened in Philadelphia. A
declaration of colonial rights was drafted and sent to London. Much of the debate revolved
around defining the colonies’ relationship with mother England. Parliament chose to ignore the
Congress, so they reconvened that next May.
Lexington and Concord
Britain’s General Gage had a secret plan.
During the wee hours of April 19, 1775, he would send out regiments of British soldiers
quartered in Boston. Their destinations were Lexington, where they would capture Colonial
leaders Sam Adams and John Hancock, then Concord, where they would seize gunpowder.
But spies and friends of the Americans leaked word of Gage’s plan.
Two lanterns hanging from Boston’s North Church informed the countryside that the British
were going to attack by sea. A series of horseback riders — men such as Paul Revere, William
Dawes and Dr. Samuel Prescott — galloped off to warn the countryside that the Regulars
(British troops) were coming.
Word spread from town to town, and militias prepared to confront the British and help their
neighbors in Lexington and Concord. When the advance guard of nearly 240 British soldiers
arrived in Lexington, they found about 70 minutemen formed on the Lexington Green awaiting
them. Both sides eyed each other warily, not knowing what to expect. Suddenly, a bullet buzzed
through the morning air. It was “the shot heard round the world.”
The numerically superior British killed seven Americans on Lexington Green and marched off to
Concord with new regiments who had joined them. But American militias arriving at Concord
thwarted the British advance.
As the British retreated toward Boston, new waves of Colonial militia intercepted them.
Shooting from behind fences and trees, the militias inflicted over 125 casualties, including
several officers. The ferocity of the encounter surprised both sides.
The Americans surrounded the town of Boston, and the rebel army started gaining many new
recruits. During the battles of Lexington and Concord, 73 British soldiers had been killed and
174 wounded; 26 were missing. Lord Percy, who led the British back into Boston after the defeat
suffered at Concord, wrote back to London, “Whoever looks upon them [the Rebels] as an
irregular mob will be much mistaken.”
Second Continental Congress
By the time this Congress met, the Battles of Lexington and Concord had been fought and won
by the colonists. Now the professional imperial army was attempting to arrest patriot leaders,
and minutemen had been killed in their defense. In May 1775, with Redcoats once again
storming Boston, the Second Continental Congress convened in Philadelphia. The questions
were different this time. First and foremost, how would the colonist meet the military threat of
the British. It was agreed that a Continental Army would be created. The Congress
commissioned George Washington of Virginia to be the supreme commander, who chose to
serve without pay. How would supplies be paid for? The Congress authorized the printing of
money. Before the leaves had turned, Congress had even appointed a standing committee to
conduct relations with foreign governments, should the need ever arise to ask for help. No longer
was the Congress dealing with mere grievances. It was a full-fledged governing body.
Still, in May of 1775 the majority of delegates were not seeking independence from Britain.
Only radicals like John Adams were of this mindset. In fact, that July Congress approved the
Olive Branch Petition, a direct appeal to the king. The American delegates pleaded with George
III to attempt peaceful resolution and declared their loyalty to the Crown. The King refused to
receive this petition and instead declared the colonies to be in a state of rebellion in August. As
the seasons changed and hostilities continued, cries for independence grew stronger. The men in
Philadelphia were now wanted for treason. They continued to govern and hope against hope that
all would end well. For them, the summer of 1776 brought the point of no return — a formal
declaration of independence.
The Declaration of Independence
On June 7, 1776, Richard Henry Lee introduced a resolution to the Congress that declared the
thirteen colonies “free and independent states.” Congress did not act on the resolution
immediately. A vote was set for early July. In the meantime it seemed appropriate that some sort
of explanation was in order for such a bold act. A subcommittee of five, including Benjamin
Franklin, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, was selected to choose the careful wording. Such a
document must be persuasive to a great many parties. Americans would read this and join the
patriot cause. Sympathetic Britons would read this and urge royal restraint. Foreign powers
would read this and aid the colonial militia. They might, that is, if the text were convincing. The
five agreed that Jefferson was the most talented writer. They would advise on his prose.
The declaration is divided into three main parts. The first was a simple statement of intent.
Jefferson’s words echo down through the decades of American life until the present day. Phrases
like “all men are created equal,” “unalienable rights,” and “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness”
have bounced from the lips of Americans in grammar school and retirement. All are contained in
the first section that outlines the basic principles of the enlightened leaders. The next section is a
list of grievances; that is, why the colonies deemed independence appropriate. King George was
guilty of “repeated injuries” that intended to establish “absolute tyranny” in North America. He
has “plundered our seas, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.” It was
difficult for Americans to argue his points. The concluding paragraph officially dissolves ties
with Britain. It also shows modern readers the courage taken by each delegate who would sign.
They were now officially guilty of treason and would hang in the gallows if taken before a royal
court. Thus, they would “pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.”
Debate in the Congress followed. Jefferson watched painfully as the other delegates tweaked his
prose. Jefferson had wanted to include a passage blaming the king for the slave trade, for
example, but the southern delegates insisted upon its removal. Finally on July 4, 1776, the
colonies approved the document. The vote was twelve to zero, with the New York delegation
abstaining. As president of the Congress, John Hancock scrawled his famous signature across the
bottom and history was made. If the American effort was successful, they would be hailed as
heroes. If it failed, they would be hanged as traitors.
The Revolutionary War
When the possibility of a clash with the British became real, New England farmers began to arm
themselves and train for battle. These troops were dubbed “minutemen” because they could be
ready to fight in a minute. This monument to the minutemen stands in Concord, Massachusetts.
How could the Americans ever hope defeat the mighty British Empire in a military conflict?
Americans faced seemingly impossible obstacles. When the guns fired at Lexington and Concord
in 1775, there was not yet even a Continental Army. Those battles were fought by local militias.
Few Americans had any military experience, and there was no method of training, supplying, or
paying an army.
Moreover, a majority of Americans opposed the war in 1775. Many historians believe only about
a third of all Americans supported a war against the British at that time.
Further, the Colonies had a poor track record of working together.
How, then, could a ragtag group of patriots defeat the British?
Early Battles
The early stages of war, in 1775, can be best described as British military victories and American
moral triumphs. The British routed the minutemen at Lexington, but the relentless colonists
unleashed brutal sniper fire on the British returning to Boston from Concord.
In June 1775, the colonists failed to prevail at Bunker Hill, but inflicted heavy casualties on a
vastly superior military force. A year later, in 1776, while the British occupied New York,
Washington led his army to two surprise victories at Trenton and Princeton that uplifted the
morale of the patriots.
Regardless, by 1777 the British occupied Philadelphia, the seat of the Continental Congress, and
sent that body into hiding. The British also controlled New York City and pretty much had their
way in the waters along the Eastern Seaboard. In fact, there was no Continental Navy to speak of
at this time. Meanwhile, the British began mounting a southward attack from Canada into upstate
New York. This threatened to cut New England off from the rest of the Colonies.
Saratoga and Valley Forge: The Tide Turns
The Battle of Saratoga, in northern New York, served as a critical turning point. The British
attempt to capture the Hudson River Valley ended with their surrender to General Horatio Gates
in October. Washington, having lost Ph…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment