Effectiveness of the Tory and Whig Arguments Prior to the American Revolution

Authors Avatar

Effectiveness of the Tory and Whig Arguments Prior to the American Revolution

by

Enoch Lam

Churchill Secondary

IB History SL BLK A

Year One


        In the eighteenth century, the American Revolution played a vital role in determining the future of the American colonies.  Prior to the Revolution, propagandas from both the Tories and Whigs influenced the choices that Americans make.  Both sides exchanged attacks and accusations in their publications, while also presenting realistic evidence and logical reasoning to back their doctrine and arguments.  Two of the many documents preceding the Revolution are especially interesting in terms of their structure of presentation.  Letters of a Westchester Farmer, composed by Reverend Samuel Seabury, offers arguments favouring the Tories’ view and questions the effects the Revolution will have on Americans.  In response, Common Sense, written by Thomas Paine, presents the Whigs’ view of the Revolution and provides strong valid reasons to answer most of the charges made by the Tories.  Both Letters of a Westchester Farmer and Common Sense share similarities and differences in their structure and evidence that affect the degree of their effectiveness.

        The structures of Letters of a Westchester Farmer and Common Sense play a critical role in effectiveness.  In Letters of a Westchester Farmer, the author first describes the current situation of the Americans.  It says, “The American Colonies are unhappily involved in a scene of confusion and discord.  The bands of civil society are broken; the authority of government weakened…”  Samuel Seabury then addresses the depressing signs of the upcoming revolution, and gradually gives reasons for his charge.  For instance, he accuses the Whigs of “taken no one step that tended to peace.”  To support this statement, the reverend discusses the consequential disadvantages of the Non-importation Agreement, the Non-exportation Agreement and the Non-consumption agreement.  He then provides logical reasons for his claims throughout the document, focusing on the issue of those agreements.  This structure is extremely effective, given that the arguments are sequential and connected.  Likewise, Common Sense has a similar structure that also creates a comparatively same degree of effectiveness.  The document first proposes its doctrine, “…as much hath been said of the advantages of reconciliation, which, like an agreeable dream, hath passed away…,” and then answers each of the charges the Tories make.  Unlike the structure of the earlier document, Common Sense poses a question or an accusation from the Tories, and rebuts it with the Whigs doctrine and Paine’s reasoning.  The structure of this document is more effective in terms of impact.  As in the earlier document, the reverend does not counter Whigs’ view, but only express his opinions about them.  Contrary, this document offers a scope of the Tories’ point, and persuades the Americans that the Whigs’ view is more logical by comparing the two sides.  In short, Common Sense is more effective than the Letters of a Westchester Farmer in terms of structure, due to its more comprehensive reasoning behind the doctrines.

Join now!

        Besides the structure, the validity and evidence of arguments presented in both Letters of a Westchester Farmer and Common Sense are also factors of their effectiveness.  The Letters of a Westchester Farmer promotes reconciliation with the British, and states “The first distress will fall on ourselves:  it will be more severely felt by us, than by any part of all his Majesty’s dominions; and it will affect us the longest.”  To provide evidence of this statement, the reverend reasons with the superiority of British fleets, the new schemes of British merchants and the global influence of British trade.  He adds ...

This is a preview of the whole essay