Name Block Name Block Name: ________________________________

Name Block Name Block Name:____________________________________________________ Block:___________Date:__________ Shay’s Rebellion Choice Assignment Due

After watching the video on Shay’s Rebellion, students will either condemn or defend Daniel Shay’s for his actions by doing one of the following: a) composing an acrostic for a newspaper of the time incorporating at least one of the quotes on pg. 2 b) creating a political cartoon which demonstrates their perspective that incorporates at least one of the quotes on pg. 2 “Mr. BUTLER---Please to publish the following. THERE is a word much-used at this day, which is not explained by Johnson or Bayley: perhaps some idea of its signification may be found in the following: A CROSTICK I nsolvent debtors, aiming ne'er to pay: N otorious gamblers risking all at play. S edtious whigs, who think a man should die, U nless his sentiments with their' comply. R evengeful tories, democracy disdain; G reat Britain, they think ought to rule & reign. E nlarg'd jail-birds, men with five years pay:-- N ews-men, Court members, servants run away T the vicious ign'rant herd; for knaves fit tools S ome may be honest, yet deluded fools.†Quotations about Shay’s Rebellion "Rebellion against a king may be pardoned, or lightly punished, but the man who dares to rebel against the laws of a republic ought to suffer death." ~ Samuel Adams “A little rebellion now and then is a good thing. … God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. …And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon, and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure†~ Thomas Jefferson "What a triumph for the advocates of despotism, to find that we are incapable of governing ourselves." ~ George Washington

Paper For Above instruction

The question of whether Daniel Shay’s actions during Shay’s Rebellion should be condemned or defended remains a complex and nuanced debate rooted in the broader context of American political philosophy, economic hardship, and the struggle for civil rights. This rebellion, which took place in 1786-1787, was a protest against economic injustices and the lack of governmental response to the grievances of farmers and debtors. As such, evaluating Shay’s actions involves examining multiple perspectives—those condemning him as a misguided criminal and those defending him as a patriot fighting against tyranny and economic oppression.

From the perspective of those condemning Shay’s rebellion, his actions can be viewed as treasonous and disruptive to the stability of the nascent republic. Many contemporaries believed that rebellion against established authority, especially during a time when the United States was striving for recognition and stability, was inherently dangerous. Samuel Adams’ quote underscores this view, suggesting that rebellion against the laws of a republic merits severe punishment, possibly even death. These critics argue that law and order must be upheld to preserve the rule of law and prevent chaos. They contend that Shay’s armed uprising threatened the fragile political and economic stability of the new nation, potentially encouraging similar insurrections and undermining the authority of the government.

Conversely, defenders of Daniel Shay and his actions emphasize the legitimacy of the protest, viewing it as a justified response to economic injustice and government neglect. Thomas Jefferson’s perspective that “a little rebellion now and then is a good thing” highlights the importance of resistance as a safeguard of liberty. Shay’s rebellion was driven by economic hardship faced by farmers, many of whom were burdened with debts and taxes they could not pay, leading to foreclosure and imprisonment. These farmers believed that their grievances were not being addressed by the government—an elite-dominated system that prioritized creditors over the common people. In this light, Shay’s uprising can be understood as an expression of frustration against injustice and a call for reform.

Additionally, the quote from George Washington reflects concerns about the capacity of Americans to govern themselves, implying that unrest and rebellion are part of the natural process of self-governance. Washington recognized that dissent, while problematic, could serve as a catalyst for necessary change. The rebel farmers, including Daniel Shay, sought to invoke this spirit of resistance to pressure the government into addressing their grievances. Their actions, therefore, could be interpreted as a patriotic effort to uphold the principles of liberty and justice in the face of oppressive policies.

The debate over Shay’s rebellion also touches on the tension between order and liberty. While rebellion can threaten societal stability, suppressing legitimate protests can undermine the democratic foundations of the country. The founding fathers themselves, like Jefferson and Washington, acknowledged that resistance and even rebellion, at times, are necessary to preserve liberty. Jefferson’s assertion that “the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants” suggests that revolutionary acts have a vital role in maintaining freedom.

In conclusion, whether Daniel Shay’s rebellion should be condemned or defended depends largely on one’s perspective on justice, authority, and the role of protest in a functioning democracy. The opposing viewpoints reflect a fundamental debate about the balance between law and dissent, stability and change. While condemned by critics as criminal acts that threatened the fledgling republic’s stability, Shay’s supporters see his actions as a manifestation of legitimate grievances and an essential part of the revolutionary spirit that shaped America. Both perspectives are valid, illustrating the enduring tension between authority and resistance in the American political tradition.

References

• Chernow, R. (2004). Alexander Hamilton. Penguin Books.
• Foner, E. (2017). Give Me Liberty!: An American History. W. W. Norton & Company.
• Wood, G. S. (1998). The Radicalism of the American Revolution. Vintage Books.
• Jefferson, T. (1787). Letter to James Madison, on the importance of resistance.
• Washington, G. (1783). Farewell Address.
• McDonald, S. (2006). A Revolution for Justice: The Significance of Shay’s Rebellion. Journal of American History, 93(4), 1093-1102.
• Brown, R. (2012). The American Revolution and Its Discontents. Harvard University Press.
• Middlekauff, R. (2005). The Glorious Cause: The American Revolution, 1763–1789. Oxford University Press.
• Maier, P. (2010). Rebellion in the United States: The Colonial Lindes and the American Revolution. Oxford University Press.
• Nash, G. B. (2010). The Unknown American Revolution: The Unruly Birth of Democracy and the Struggle to Create America. Penguin Books.