Oct 12 2010

Loyalists vs. Colonists

Published by under 8th Grade

You’ve been studying about the loyalists and colonists.  Please browse thr0ugh and read the primary source transcripts below and respond to the following questions.

Loyalist – Stephen Jarvis

Patriot – George Hewes

Answer the following questions,

1.  Explain how easy or difficult it was for Stephen Jarvis to become a loyalist.  What evidence is there to support your thoughts.

2.  Can you sympathize with Stephen Jarvis on being a loyalist?  Is there any arguments that lead you to believe that being a loyalist was ‘not that bad’?

3.  After reading the account of George Hewes, would you consider what the colonists did an act of terrorism?  Give evidence from the reading to support your answer.

4.  After reading both primary sources, what can you conclude about the mindset of each type of person.  Did either have a valid point?  Does one side provide a better argument?

5.  What kind of insight do you receive from reading primary sources such as the ones above?

Please make sure your answers are written in complete sentences.  You do not have to respond to another student’s post for this activity.  Please answer the questions by referencing the numbers.

22 responses so far




22 Responses to “Loyalists vs. Colonists”

  1.   Leonardon 12 Oct 2010 at 9:32 pm

    1. Stephen Jarvis had a complicated time becoming a loyalist. He had to keep it a secret from the patriots. When his father was killed by the patriots, he was determined to become a soldier and fight for Great Britain. 2.In my opinion, when Stephen became a loyalist, he had a great reason to become one. His father got killed by the Patriots and he wanted revenge. If that would have happened to me, I would definitely join the loyalists.

    3.From what i read, I would say it was an act of terrorism. But at the same time, the colonists were just angry. It said that they boarded the ships and threw the tea in the sea.

    4.Both sides have their own reasons on becoming a patriot or loyalist. When becoming one, they usually had a great reason to become one like Stephen. Both sides were nearly the same. They both fought for what they thought was right.

    5. It makes me understand what the people were going through much more clearly.

  2.   Jack pemberon 13 Oct 2010 at 4:28 pm

    1. I think that stephen had to choose wisely when becoming a loyalist and keep it low key because his patriot friends were insulting the loyalists. 2. I think he was right to become one, i mean the patriots KILLED his father which is pretty bad. I would become loyal to britan if that happened to me because i would want the patriots to realize their wrong-doings. 3 I think that the tea party was an act of terrorism, because the british bring in hundreds of crates of cheap and good tea that would be other wise hard for the patriots to come by. But i can see why they did it. They couldnt believe the price of the tea so they tried to rebel in case britan would later raise the price and tax of the tea.

    4 Both sides had similar veiws. Each wanted to be part of a different country and they were both fighting for similar things other wise.

    5. This does give me an insight as to what both sides of the argument were thinking when they were fighting over these things. They both have good reasons to fight

  3.   daniell15on 13 Oct 2010 at 4:53 pm

    1. Stephen Jarvis’ journey to become a loyalist was very odd. His father was part of the british war machine, but his father was slain by partiots and Stephen Jarvis became a lyalist to avenge his father. 2. I can sympothize with Stephen. It would be very difficult to be in the ranks of men that killed your own father, in his sitation a loyaist wasnt that bad because he waas fighting for what he belived. 3. I dont think it was an act of terrorism. They were simply trying to prove and point and make a statment. although there is a very fine line betwwen statement and terror. 4. I think both sides were fighting for what they belived in and wanted to be a part of something larger than them. 5. These kinds of resouces really put you in the time period.

  4.   Josh Solveron 13 Oct 2010 at 5:23 pm

    1 and 2 combined. He had a difficult time on trying to be a loyalist because he had to hide his loyalistity from all the patriots. He became a loyalist because the patriots did in fact kill his father, like leonard said. If I was in that time period I would be a loyalist no matter what so that I could keep my family safe and not risk anything for them.

    3. I don’t think the Boston Tea Party was an act of terrorism, but as an act of rebellion. They didnt have to throw all the perfectly good and payed for tea out into the sea. They could have chosen to not drink it and thats perfectly fine. If they didnt throw it away, maybe other people would maybe drink some of the tea. The colonists were angry as well so that was a problem too.

    4. Each of them had a choice of what they wanted to become to be. It is their choice to become a patriot or loyalist. They each had a different reason why they became one. Steven Jarvis became a loyalist for revenge to the patriots and George Hewes became a patriot for freedom of the king like all the other colonists.

    5. I got to be put in their shoes and I know how it would be like being like them. And what they did and why they did it.

  5.   Anastasiaon 13 Oct 2010 at 5:33 pm

    1. i think it was difficult for him because it sounded like he had a busy life. 2. Yes i sympathize with Jarvis because his father died. I thik becoming a loyalist was not that bad and i say that because he had a pretty darn good reason to join. that was because his father was killed. 3. no i dont think it was act of terroism they were just expressing their feelings. they had to get rid of every box filled with tea of the ships. 4. i think both of the sides patriots and loyalist are just fighting with each other just for what they beleived in and what they had the right to do. 5. My opinion about both of these sides were that they were trying to do the right thing. And for what they thought they had to do that was the good thing.

  6.   Francescaon 13 Oct 2010 at 5:50 pm

    1. I think it was very hard for Stephen Jarvis to become a loyalist his father was killed by one of the Patriots so I think he wanted to get revenge. But it was very hard because he knew a lot of people that were patriots and felt like a trader but he cared much more about his father then about the patriots.
    2. I can sympathize with Stephan it was very hard for him to go through what the patriots did to his father and if that happened to my father I would do what Stephan did.
    3. I do not think it was an act of terriosom I agree with dan that they where just making a statement.
    4. I think both side provide a very good agrugument but I would agree with the colonists I agree with there veiws on taxes and war.
    5. I understood more about what they are going through and it really puts you kind of into there minds.

  7.   Noah Whalenon 13 Oct 2010 at 7:15 pm

    1. He had an easy time becoming a loyalist, he just had to hide it from patriots so he didnt get tarred or hung or something bad
    2. HE WAS NOT RIGHT in joining the loyalists, the patriots did the wrong thing BUT, you cannot side with the loyalists on this because there was mayhem, people where getting shot and buried alive and tarred and all kinds of stuff, this was CHANCE that it happened
    3. The Boston Tea Party WAS NOT an act of terrorism, in fact I dont think that the bostoners went far enough, they should have just burned the ships, they where expressing themselves and telling the Brits to knock it off with the taxes.
    4. I think that the loyalists and colonists where just fighting for their beliefs and what they where allowed to do
    5. I think that both the sides believed what they where doing was right and that they had a right to do certain things and be governed by certain people, and if people really believe certain things they will do insane things for them

  8.   Joseph..BURR.!on 13 Oct 2010 at 7:32 pm

    1. I think it was a struggle for Stephen Jarvis To Become a loyalist. Considering All of his friends Disagreed With the loyalists ideas and Thoughts. And He felt like a Trader.

    2. Yes i can sympathize With Stephen. I think his decision of Becoming a loyalist was smart. Considering the Fact that the Patriots Killed his father.

    3. I do not think it was an act of Terriosom. I agree with anastasia and how they were just trying to express feelings.

    4. I agree with Anastasia and Leonard. They both have different views and fight for their right of what to do.

    5. It makes me experience a little of what they did and what happened in their Minds.

    - Burrrrrrrrr

  9.   Antonioon 13 Oct 2010 at 7:45 pm

    1. I think it was hard becoming a loyalist because his father was a loyalist and his father was never really close to him because it said that Steven would leave to go some where and Steven would say good bye and his dad didn’t say anything. 2. I can sympathize for Steven because when he became a Loyalist it was a rebellious time period then and it takes courage to do that. 3. I think it was an act of terrorism because they took a profit for England and destroyed which was the dumping of tea in the lake. 4. I think both sides had great arguments and I understand both sides because the patriots want independence and Loyalists want the colonists to be part of England. 5. From what I have read is that both sides were tough, England had a stronger military and the Loyalist in the Colonies could have gotten tortured.

  10.   Caseyon 13 Oct 2010 at 8:43 pm

    1. I think it was very hard for Stephen Jarvis to become a loyalist his father was killed by one of the Patriots so I think he wanted to get revenge.What was hard though is that he knew a lot of people that were patriots so he didn’t want to betray them but then he cared way more about his father then the people on the patriot side so he had to do what he had to for his father.
    2. I can feel sorry for Stephan because it was a very hard time for him because he had to go through what the patriots decided to do to his father and I love my dad very much and if that happened to him then i probably would end up doing the same exact thing.
    3. I really don’t it was something against there race I agree with Anastasia that they where just expressing their feelings.
    4. I think both side had very good arguments but I would have to agree with the colonists because I agree that there views on taxes and war are right.
    5. Well now i know how they felt and why they all did what they did and for what rights, like when they did the Boston tea party.

  11.   jakeon 13 Oct 2010 at 8:52 pm

    1. it was hard for him to have to go through what his dad had to go through to.

    2. it was hard for him because he killed his father.

    3. it was all terrorism colonists were just angry.

    4.each side got to pick what they wanted to be

  12.   Kilianon 13 Oct 2010 at 9:42 pm

    1. I think it was easy for Steven Jarvis to become a Loyalist because he repents when his father is upset with him and tells his father he was very sinable and had done wrong.
    2. He did not want to displease his father who was loyal to Great Britain. I think if you believe in something you will stand by what you believe in and will fight to the death for that.
    3. I dont think it was a terroist act it was getting even. Noone was killed.
    4. I think they both believed in what they were doing was right and each fought for a cause. Jarvis believed in Englands rule and Hewes belived england was unfair in taxing tea.
    5. There was a lot to read and understand but what it gives us is a look into someone elses story about history in time.

  13.   Kelly R.on 13 Oct 2010 at 11:24 pm

    1. I think that it was difficult for Stephen to become a loyalist not because he didn’t want to but that his friends were patriots and he didn’t feel comfortable with them.
    2. I do sympathize with him becoming a loyalist because the patriots killed his father and he wanted to get revenge. If that happened to my dad then I would defenitly join the loyalists.
    3. I don’t think that the Boston Tea Party was an act of terrorism it was more of a strike. They were trying to make a point.
    4. The patriots and loyalists were fighting for what they believe in. Both had their reasons for joining which ever side.
    5. I get a different perspective with these resources, it opens new doors and makes it clearer.

  14.   Matton 14 Oct 2010 at 5:21 pm

    1 I think that it wouldnt be very fun being a loyalist in secret, but then having your father killed by patriots that makes it at least ten times worse without some one you have know basically your whole life.

    2 I think that Stephen had a very good reason to be a loyalist for one the patriots killed his father, why would you want to side with people who killed your own blood relatives?

    3 I would definitely without a doubt call this an act or terrorism they are causing fear which is the definition of terrorism, I do not care how mad they were they had no right to do that, they are just poking at a tiger in a small cage who hasn’t been fed in awhile.

    4. They are like children, all they had to do is wait for the horse play to get out of hand and for one of the sides to be in too much pain.

    5. Reading a primary source adds a kind of feeling that you cant get from just some one who is writing about what happened in a text book, the kind of reality of the happenings.

  15.   michael kon 14 Oct 2010 at 5:29 pm

    1. I think that it was not difficult choosing sides since the patriots killed Stephen’s father.
    2. Stephen’s friends were patriots but he cose family over friends and joined the loyalist side.the loyalist side had it’s perks such as a strong army, which is another reason that makes me believe that it was an easy reason to choose the loyalists.
    3. I think that the Boston tea party was more of an act of indepence. It showed that the colonists were not taking anymore of the British Government.
    4. They both had reasonable arguements. Loyalists thought that they could not survive without Britain, while the patriots thought that they should govern themselves.
    5. It showed me good reasons to join both patriots and loyalist and being in both parties shoes.

  16.   Saraon 14 Oct 2010 at 6:56 pm

    1. It was hard for him to become a loyalist because he had to hide it from all his friends who were patriots.

    2. I understand why he became a loyalist since the patriots killed his father so he needed to get his revenge. If I was him, I would do the same thing.

    3. I definitely think it was not an act of terrorism. They were just making a statement.

    4. They both were just fighting what they believe in and what they thought was right. They both had very valid points. Stephen was a loyalist because the patriots killed his father. George was a patriot because he wanted freedom and independence.

    5. Reading things like this helps me to understand a person’s point of view better and put myself in their shoes.

  17.   Clareon 14 Oct 2010 at 7:16 pm

    1) I think it was difficult for Stephen to become a Loyalist, not because he wanted to avenge his father, but since his friends were Patriots like Kelly said.
    2) I sympathize for Stephen and kinda (KINDA) agree with him for becoming a loyalist since the patriots killed his father.
    3) I do not think that the Boston Tea Party was an act of terrorism, but sort of like a warning to Britain saying “Your pushing us to far.” And Josh? I disagree completely, the Patriots, like I said before, were able to fend for themselves just fine after the war, tea and all.
    4) The loyalists and patriots all had their own reasons to fight, and they were able to join whichever side they wanted, like now.
    5) Reading both of these journals answered some questions for me, and showed me both sides of the story. Most textbooks just focus on what happened to the Patriot, not the Loyalists as well.

  18.   Neilon 14 Oct 2010 at 9:06 pm

    1. It was very difficult for Stephen Jarvis to become a loyalist because all of his friends were patriots so they would taunt him and might even loose them for becoming a loyalist.

    2. I do agree with Stephen on becoming a loyalists any of us would have done the same thing if the patriots killed our father.

    3. I agree with Josh it was more of rebelling then terrorism. The patriots were sick of the loyalists bringing goods to their colonies and trying to sell them for more money then there worth so they just wanted to make a point.

    4. They both had lots of valid points and I think that they both had equal arguments.

    5. I learned a lot more about both sides and like Clare said they don’t have all of this in the text book and I learned that both sides each did bad things, but everyone makes it seem like the patriots are the good guys.

  19.   Jesselleon 14 Oct 2010 at 11:06 pm

    1. It was easy for Stephen Jarvis to become a loyalist because his father was already a loyalist. I thought it was hard how he had to hide that he was actually a loyalist while hie friends were partiots.

    2. I was shocked when his father had been killed by the patriots! He has the right to become a loyalist after what the patriots did to his father.

    3. It was an act of terrorism because their threat was throwing the tea overboard and rebelling against the loyalist.

    4. Stephen Jarvis and George Hewes both had good points of view of becoming a patriot or a loyalist. They were pretty similar, like fighting in what they believe in.

    5. While reading these true stories, I could imagine being there and watching everything that happened. It was nice of actually reading it from someone’s point of view.

  20.   Jakeon 15 Oct 2010 at 7:36 pm

    1. It was very vey hard for Stephen to be a loyalist because all of his friends were patriots so they would tell him not to be a loyalist so it was hard for him

    2.it was very crazt how his father was killed buy he patriots. it was so un fair he should have been able to be a loyalist.

    3. this was all and act of terrorism because all they wanted to do was get back at them

    4. all theyy are doing is just fighting with each other for there rights

    5. it made me feel like i was there to with them i was like in there minds!

    jake jake jake

  21.   Nick G.on 17 Oct 2010 at 6:42 pm

    1: I think it was difficult for Stephen Jarvis to become a loyalist because his friends were all patriots. I agree with Leonard that it was a wise choice to keep his choice of becoming a loyalist low-key.

    2: I think the fact that his father was killed by patriots is reason enough to want to be a loyalist. I think from what i have read as well as what we talked about in class that being a Loyalist is not a bad idea.

    3: I think what the colonists did was only a slight act of terrorism. It’s not like they set the docks on fire. I think that throwing tea in the river was not the greatest way to protest taxes. They could have done something a little more creative like steal the tea, when you throw it in the river you waist supplies that all the people can use.

    4: Both sides did a good job fighting for their point (just like in the town hall meeting). I think from the two sources the loyalist had a better point. I felt like the patriots had a more violent way of handling things.

    5: I understand now that both sides were going through a rough time. I also understand that they both felt they were doing right.

  22.   yyyyyon 14 Oct 2012 at 9:38 am

    interesting.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply