Yahoo Italia Ricerca nel Web

Risultati di ricerca

  1. The Farmer Refuted, pubblicato nel febbraio 1775, fu il secondo lavoro di Alexander Hamilton. Segue il precedente A Full Vindication of the Measures of Congress del 1774. [1] Contenuto. In The Farmer Refuted, [2] Alexander Hamilton si rivolge direttamente a Samuel Seabury, il suo principale antagonista nel precedente lavoro.

  2. 1 gen 2002 · The Farmer Refuted, &c. 1. New-York [February 23,] 1775 2. Sir, I resume my pen, in reply to the curious epistle, you have been pleased to favour me with; and can assure you, that, notwithstanding, I am naturally of a grave and phlegmatic disposition, it has been the source of abundant merriment to me. The spirit that breathes throughout is so ...

  3. The Farmer Refuted, published in February 1775, was Alexander Hamilton's second published work, a follow-up to his 1774 A Full Vindication of the Measures of Congress. Summary. In The Farmer Refuted, Alexander Hamilton addresses directly the main person to whom he was writing in opposition with his first work, Samuel Seabury.

  4. 7 set 2019 · In December 1774, in response to an attack on the Continental Association titled Free Thoughts on the Proceedings of the Continental Congress by “A. W. Farmer” (Reverend Samuel Seabury), Hamilton, writing as a “Friend to America,” published A Full Vindication of the Measures of Congress.

  5. Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted. 23 Feb. 1775 Papers 1:86--89, 121--22, 135--36. I shall, for the present, pass over to that part of your pamphlet, in which you endeavour to establish the supremacy of the British Parliament over America.

  6. The Farmer Refuted, February 23, 1775; Alexander Hamilton; Edited by Carson Holloway, University of Nebraska, Omaha, Bradford P. Wilson, Princeton University, New Jersey; Book: The Political Writings of Alexander Hamilton; Online publication: 13 December 2017; Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108381277.004

  7. Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted. 23 Feb. 1775 Papers 1:100--101. You are mistaken, when you confine arbitrary government to a monarchy. It is not the supreme power being placed in one, instead of many, that discriminates an arbitrary from a free government.