Thesis (M.A.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1969. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

No description available.

Au cours de la première moitié du XIXème siècle, la Méditerranée a constitué un espace conflictuel particulier entre la France et La Grande-Bretagne. L’Affaire d’Alger en 1830 marquera à ce titre un nouveau point de désaccord entre Londres et Paris au même moment où l’empire britannique inaugurait une ère de grandes réformes sociales, parlementaires et idéologiques. La diplomatie outre-Manche particulièrement sous les Tories insistera, avec véhémence sur la nécessité du retrait des troupes de l’armée d’Afrique de sa nouvelle acquisition en Afrique du Nord : Alger. Ce dossier de politique étrangère fera l’objet d’un travail parlementaire soutenu et dont les organes de la presse écrite, à l’instar du quotidien The Times, s’en feront l’écho. C’est Aberdeen, diplomate et homme politique de premier ordre, qui est le premier à estimer que l’entreprise échafaudée par Charles X, roi de France, dissimule des intentions néo-impériales. Aussi, le Foreign Office ne ménagera pas ses forces, notamment par la multiplication de ses requêtes, gageant que le nouveau gouvernement de Juillet puisse honorer les engagements des Bourbons. Le refus des Conservateurs du maintien de la colonie d’Alger témoigne ainsi de l’importance de l’espace méditerranéen dans le contexte des rivalités coloniales et des stratégies impériales. Malgré le silence des Whigs après leur accès au pouvoir en novembre 1830 sur l’avenir d’Alger, l’opposition au sein de la Chambre des Lords et la Chambre des Communes s’est illustrée pour exiger que les garanties fournies par les Bourbons soient satisfaites. Le retour des Tories sur ce sujet a de ce fait donné un cachet international à l’Affaire d’Alger. / The Mediterranean Sea was to constitute a key ground of diplomatic struggle between the two traditional rivals, -Great-Britain and France- during the first half of the nineteenth century. If the British officials vehemently demanded a rapid withdrawal of French troops from the newly conquered Algiers, this subject, despite its obvious importance, has been rarely advocated in the historical interest. Hence, the present essay which aims to provide a new approach by examining the British point of view regarding the guaranties given by France to evacuate Algiers after its invasion in 1830. Thus, the work of the Foreign Minister, Aberdeen, will be a particular focus so as to get a better understanding of the British demands, notably the withdrawal of French forces. Moreover, the decision to maintain the North African colony was also a matter of passionate parliamentary controversy reported by the press; that is precisely what we will focus in order to understand British foreign policy towards the Barbary Regencies and the stakes in the Mediterranean. So, the parliamentary opposition introduced the question of Algiers as a matter of international interest. The French troops’ evacuation from Algiers was one the Tories’ examples to criticize British foreign policy under the Whig Governments.

This thesis uses a case study approach to examine loyalism during the American Revolution, by considering the Loyalists of Newburgh, New York. I examine the Loyalist community by exploring its origins before the Revolution, analyzing its composition, examining the Loyalists' wartime experiences, and by considering their post-war exile. Studying Newburgh's Loyalists allows for a nuanced understanding of loyalism both in the Hudson Valley and more generally. I argue that migration, religion, wealth, and geographic location shaped Loyalist communities and their experiences. My thesis is divided into four chapters, the first of which considers the origins of the Loyalist community, which dates to religious conflict in the town during the 1750s and 1760s. Anglicans fought with dissenting Protestants over control of the church glebe, creating a division which split the community along religious lines when the American Revolutionary War began. Anglicans often became Loyalists, while the Presbyterian-led dissenters were almost entirely Patriots. In the second chapter, I examine the size and composition of the Loyalists from Newburgh. The Loyalist population of Newburgh was smaller than average in New York, but was much larger than any Loyalist community in its area. Men loyal to the King were generally Anglican, poorer than their Revolutionary counterparts, and were often related to one another. My third chapter explores the war experiences of the Loyalists, both in Newburgh and behind British lines. In Newburgh, men loyal to the King faced increasing persecution as war progressed, which intensified when there was a military threat from British forces. Persecution peaked in 1777, when the Hudson Valley faced British invasion from New York City to its south as well as from Canada in the north. Patriots in Newburgh were vigilant in rooting out Loyalist dissidents as Newburgh's sizeable Loyalist population was a military liability in case of attack. As a result of their maltreatment, many Loyalists fled to British-occupied New York City. They often joined Loyalist provincial units where they were frequently used as guides and recruiters in the countryside because they had knowledge of the area. My final chapter considers the post-war exile of Newburgh's Loyalists in Canada. Most settled in what became New Brunswick where they tried to recreate aspects of their old society by settling near former neighbors, and continuing to adhere to the Anglican Church. Many of the Loyalists, who had been poor in Newburgh, improved their social status and gained wealth in their new society. This thesis fills a historiographical gap on the subject of loyalism in the Hudson Valley, and also demonstrates the influence of migration, religion, wealth, and geographic location on Loyalist communities and the experiences of individual Loyalists.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1967. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

Historians of loyalism in Virginia during the American Revolution typically characterize supporters of the Crown as a small and unorganized group that had little bearing on the outcome of the war. However, these historians greatly underestimate the extent and nature of Virginia loyalists. Patriots throughout the state feared and loathed outright demonstrations of loyalty to the Crown, sought to identify and remove Tories in their communities, and worked to prevent the reentry of these Loyalists into postwar Virginia. Those loyalists who attempted to return to Virginia realized that continual attention was required to shape and present an image that would eliminate questions about their loyalty and protect interests and property.This study examines how a select group of returning loyalists sought to reestablish their citizenship and membership in the postwar Virginia community. To illustrate how young elites successfully negotiated their return into a hostile environment, the specific cases of Presly Thornton, John and Ralph Wormeley, and Philip Turpin are examined in great detail. As sons of well-to-do members of the community, they embraced Virginia's tradition of deference to elites and utilized social, political, and economic connections to achieve readmission. From studying the lives of these young men in the context of the vigorous anti-loyalist sentiment in Virginia, one can better understand the distinctly Virginian attitudes toward both loyalists and members of a select social class.

ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION PENNSYLVANIA’S LOYALISTS AND DISAFFECTED IN THE AGE OF REVOLUTION: DEFINING THE TERRAIN OF REINTEGRATION, 1765-1800 by René José Silva Florida International University, 2018 Miami, Florida Professor Kirsten Wood, Major Professor This study examines the reintegration of loyalists and disaffected residents in Pennsylvania who opposed the American Revolution from the Stamp Act crisis in 1765 through the Age of Federalism in 1790s. The inquiry argues that postwar loyalist reintegration in Pennsylvania succeeded because of the attitudes, behavior, actions and contributions of both disaffected residents and patriot citizens. The focus is chiefly on the legal battle over citizenship, especially the responses of the disaffected to patriot legislative measures such as treason, oaths of allegiance, attainders, confiscation, and militia service laws that revolutionaries employed to sanction dissent in the state. Loyalists and the disaffected contributed to their own successful reintegration in three ways. First, the departure of loyalist militants at the British evacuation of occupied Philadelphia in June 1778 and later substantially lessened internal political tensions associated with the rebellion. Second, the overwhelming majority of the disaffected who stayed in Pennsylvania adopted non-threatening attitudes and behaviors towards republican rule. And third, the disaffected who remained ultimately chose to embrace the new republican form of government they had earlier resisted. Patriots contributed to the successful reintegration of the disaffected chiefly through the outcome of the factional struggle for internal political supremacy between revolutionary radicals and moderates. Pennsylvania radicals used the rule of law to deny citizenship to opponents of the Revolution and pushed for their permanent exclusion from the body politic. Moderates favored a reincorporation of those who had not supported the rebellion, utilizing the law to foster inclusion. Moderate electoral victories in the decade of the 1780s led to solid majorities in the state assembly that rescinded all repressive measures against former opponents, in particular the 1789 repeal of the Test Act of 1777. The analysis stresses the activities of loyalists and the disaffected, exploring elite loyalist militants such as Joseph Galloway and the sons of Chief Justice William Allen; ordinary loyalist militants like John Connolly and the Rankin brothers of York County; Quaker pacifists such as the Pemberton siblings; loyalists whom patriots perceived as defiant, such as the Doan guerrilla gang and British collaborators Abraham Carlisle and John Roberts; and the Penn family proprietors. Each of these protagonists epitomized a particular strain of loyalism or disaffection in Pennsylvania, ranging from armed resistance to pacifism. Reintegration experiences and outcomes are therefore assessed in relation to these Pennsylvanians’ conduct before, during, and after the Revolutionary War.

The Reflection of the Exclusion Crisis (1678-1683) in Contemporary Literature Kristýna Hoblová abstract This work of literary history analyses the reflection of the Exclusion Crisis (1678-1683) in contemporary literature across genres. It is based on the theory of the rise of the public sphere by Jürgen Habermas and on the theory of Michael McKeon, understanding the ideology of the late Stuarts as a last remnant of aristocratic ideology. The Exclusion Crisis is presented here as a period of unsettling negotiations between the declining Stuart ethos and the Whig ideology of the rising mercantile classes. The interpretation of chosen texts serves to discover creative transformations of the political discourse of the newly emerging political parties of Whigs and Tories, stressing the negotiations between genres, individual authors and political ideologies. The first chapter offers a brief overview of the socio-historical context, Habermas's theory of the rise of the public sphere and Michael McKeon's conception of aristocratic ideology. It also introduces the Tory political theory defending the Stuart divine right of kings on the basis of Robert Filmer's patriarchal household-state analogy and the Whig defence against absolutist tendencies of the Stuarts through asserting the priority of Law over the Royal...