AR+Diary+Jennifer+K.


 * Name**: Victoria Elizabeth Whig
 * Age:** 23
 * Gender:** Female
 * Occupation**: Debutante
 * Social Class**: Upper Echelon
 * Financial situation:** under her brother, George James Whig's care, she lives a wealthy, abundant life
 * Appearance:** She has dark brown eyes with shiny, curly black hair. She is well known as the prettiest girl with the most pleasing proportions in Boston.
 * Location**: (show us on a map) Savannah, Georgia


 * Habitual locations:** Mostly her house
 * Daily routine:** She wakes up 6 in the morning everyday and orders the maids making the breakfast. After feeding her dog, she goes off to shop and perform her charity work. When she comes back from shopping, she plans for her salone that happens every first week Friday.
 * Personality/Quirks/Unique Personality Traits:** She is a very nice, wise, and dilligent woman. She is so attractive that many men in the town loves her. She not only has an attractive look, but also has the great fashion sense as a Boston fashion leader.
 * Past/individual-family history:** Her father died of falling on a horse. She was once engaged to the son of the governor, but the marriage was cancelled after she lost her father.
 * Family:** She lives with her brother and mother.
 * Social relations with your own and other classes (people you deal with or know about in other classes, AND your opinions and feelings about them):** She is actively involved in political and social discussions through her salone. She has a great connection with many high class governors. She is often very straight forward even with the men when she comes to talking about her opinions on issues; however, because her honest and firm characteristics, she keeps great relationships with them. She not only keeps the relationship with those in her class, but also with those in other classes. She likes to give hand to the lower class people but she certainly knows the boundary and is very strict.
 * Religion**: Anglican
 * Education**: She has been educated by a governess who was hired by her family since she was young.
 * Portrait:** (create or add your own picture)




 * 2. December 18th, 1762**

I am so tired right now. I have only recently returned from my trip to Boston, where I stayed with my dear cousin, Sir George Lee. While there, I heard a good deal about arguments against parliamentary sovereignty and virtual representation. Not from George, of course, but from pamphlets that were distributed on the street. There was one entitled “Common Sense” by a Mr. Thomas Paine, and it contained the most ridiculous (yet somehow persuasive) foolishness. I simply had to bring it make to my salon and introduce it to my friends and acquaintances as a topic for debate. Their voices, passionately arguing their points, are still ringing in my ears. My fellow loyalists believe in parliamentary sovereignty and argued that only Parliament has the right to make laws. They also pointed out- rightly so- that the parliamentarians represent us colonists virtually, just as they represent all the subjects in the British realm. I mean the colonies – especially Massachusetts! – are going to be in a chaotic situation if they keep on insisting to have their own power. The father of George’s wife – she is the daughter of the governor after all – certainly has his work cut out for him. Most of Britain’s subjects do not even have the right to direct representation; why should we colonists expect more rights than our fellow subjects in the mother country? Parliament represents the interests of all, so why should we colonists be afforded extra consideration? What do those disloyal colonists mean when they say that the members of Parliaments could not possibly ‘think’ like colonists? The representatives always look on both sides and try to understand their economy through their culture. These misguided few constantly refer to John Locke, but in my mind they pervert his treatises. When he writes that “all people possessed natural and inalienable rights?” we must remember that Parliament, not the provincial little colonial assemblies, upholds these rights. Those lost ones must realize that it is just as much their interest to support the constitution and preserve the supremacy of Parliament as it is ours. There is no reason for them to be so ardently against the preservation of parliamentary sovereignty. Did not they agree to be dependent on the authority of Parliament, and is it not automatic for the Parliament to have the supreme authority over them as they agreed to be dependent? I know that I am a young woman and that I should not assert my voice and mind in such matters, but tonight I simply let my tongue run away with me. It must have been the mood – I did work so hard to create the atmosphere of a salon where debate could take place, but it was my intention that the men should debate, not me.

Dear Timothy Johnson,

Hi, I am Victoria Elizabeth Whig. On the way back home from visiting my dear cousin George, I met General Cornwallis in Yorktown. I am writing this because we seem to have a lot in common in our persepctives on the relationship between the British government and the colonies. As you know, the book "Common Sense" has been widely spreading among colonists leading them to rouse up against the British Empire. I heard about you from the general and I wish to share my point of view and hear some of yours. Thomas Paine writes in "Common Sense" that British government is unstable, but "the monarchy has lasted for hundreds of years proving the just nature of its governance." Paine also claims that the British monarchy system does not represent the colonists. We had a few bad Kings, but King is not a postion to be changed due to their taste. It is not like you can change your father because you think he does not represent the family, right? If the country is under control of the representatives elected only, it will only represent a certain group of people and be swayed to the side. By having a King, it allows the country and the colonies to be fairly treated. In this case, the statement that "King does not care about people (colonists)" is not true. Britain fought in the French and Indian War for the country itselt, but the colonies were another big factor taken into consideration. Britain ran into debt due to the financial loss in the war and the colonists are still complaining about the tax they have to pay. Whent the citizens of British Empire pay tax of 26 shillings a year, the colonists only pay an average 1 shilling a year. The colonies should look back to the time of their settlements and thank Britain for having them under control. The colonies benefited enough from Britain in the beginning of their settlements and should not be complaining about their trades getting disturbed due to Britain's breaking of wars. Since other nations take into consideration that the colonies are under Britain's guard, the colonies are protected. The colonies also should not be thinking themselves seperate from Britain. Britain and the colonies should unite to driv other outer forces. All I am saying is that I see a movement in revolution among the colonists, but you should not be discouraged. I am really gald to see you standing against the force. I will wait for your response.

With Warmest and Sincerest Affections, Victoria Elizabeth Whig

Entry # 4

Dear Victoria Elizabeth Whig (to Jennifer)

Before I write, let me introduce who I am. My name is Paul Adams. Right now I am spending my time in Georgia as a politician. Madam, I am writing this letter because I have noticed that you and I have very similar thoughts about this economic and political instability these days. I have read literacy work you wrote in the past weeks, and I have found a part where you stated, “we must remember that parliament not the provincial little colonial assemblies, upholds there rights” I totally agree with your thought. I know that how much the British government supported the colonies during early settlements. I truly don’t understand why the colonists would cry for their sovereignty. I have been deeply thinking about this but it seems like they just want their benefits. I mean we are the ones who tried so much in order to give them a better society and a country, but why are they so displeased at our small favor such as paying taxes? I fairly understand that they could think that the parliament is just taking the colonists' hard earned money, but we are having financial problem here from the French and Indian War. This morning, I read this “common Sense” written by Thomas Paine. And as I read through this, I felt very uncomfortable at how Thomas Paine portrayed the Parliament. I feel very isolated now because I believed until now that the Great Britain is the mother country of these colonists and we are the ones who always supported them. And now they are betraying us because we are imposing them taxes. That really doesn’t make any sense to me. I have never thought that the Americans “escaped” Europe but immigrated. And if they really escaped from our country then why did they depend on us so much in the first place. And because now they don’t think that our help is necessary, they are trying to avoid our power. The colonists might think that we are selfish caring only about our benefits, but colonists are actually the ones who care only about themselves for their own good. Anyhow, I believe our monarch system is great and that the parliament made right choice to make virtual representative in order to keep the colonists organized under the British power. Even though they cry for sovereignty, this is too early for them to be alone. I strongly disagree with Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense” and I hope you do too.

Sincerely, Paul Adams --

Dear Timothy Johnson,

I never had a chance to write back to you since your last Christmas letter. It almost has been a year since I talked you last. By the time you get my letter, it will be Christmas again, so I extend to you my warmest holiday greetings. Merry Christmas! Yet I must admit, there is not much merry about this Christmas. Day after a day, I live in fear for the ever-changing fortunes of my family. One day we are sure of a Loyalist victory, the next we await news of our great sovereign's defeat. Yet I know that you may fare even worse than us; hopefully your situation has improved since this time last year. It must have been a terrible Christmas for you, what with the sudden attack by George Washington's army. Is it not called the Battle of Trenton? Who could have expected that those rebels would attack on a Christmas day crossing Delaware River? They were truly trying times, but we have faced and must continue to face them. I hope that Providence may guide you through your stuggles. Since the Delcaration of Independence, it does seem as if the Judgement Day were upon us; the value of money has drop't like a stone in a pond. First I thought that it is just a temporary phenomenom, but since the battles are getting longer and longer it is now really hard to tell which side is going win the ultimate victory, though I believe in His Majesty's army. On that note, Congratulations of the victory of your Indian allies in the Battle of Oriskany. Yet we must not forget the people suffering from thirst and hunger due to the constant battles; it is a truly disheartening scene to witness, I am told. However, I have heard that the British Army is confiscating food and supplies from farmers! I may stand with King George, but I hope that they are only taking what they need and not all they want. I have heard reports of looters taking advantage of the chaos, and rumors that some of these looters are in fact British soldiers. I often go down town to talk with the farmers and they always seem to be the victims of great suffering. I am sure that you are not perpetrating such offenses, but please keep your eyes on your brethren, and be aware of the looters too. Do write to me again; you know how I worry.

With Warmest and Sincerest Affections, Victoria Elizabeth Whig