Siege of Boston in the American Revolution

Siege of Boston in the American Revolution The Siege of Boston occurred during the American Revolution and began April 19, 1775 and lasted until March 17, 1776. Commencing after the opening battles at  Lexington Concord,  the Siege of Boston saw the growing American army block the land approaches to Boston. During the course of the siege, the two sides clashed at the bloody Battle of Bunker Hill in June 1775. The stalemate around the city also saw the arrival of two commanders who would play a central role in the conflict over the next three years:  General George Washington  and  Major General William Howe. As the fall and winter progressed, neither side proved able to gain an advantage. This changed in early 1776 when artillery captured at Fort Ticonderoga arrived in the American lines. Mounted on Dorchester Heights, the guns compelled Howe to abandon the city. Background In the wake of the Battles of Lexington Concord on April 19, 1775, American colonial forces continued to attack British troops as they attempted to withdraw back to Boston. Though aided by reinforcements led by Brigadier General Hugh Percy, the column continued to take casualties with particularly intense fighting occurring around Menotomy and Cambridge.  Finally reaching the safety of Charlestown late in the afternoon, the British were able to gain a respite. While the British consolidated their position and recovered from the days fighting, militia units from across New England began arriving on the outskirts of Boston. Armies Commanders Americans General George WashingtonMajor General Artemas Wardup to 16,000 men British Lieutenant General Thomas GageMajor General William Howeup to 11,000 men Under Siege By morning, around 15,000 American militiamen were in place outside of the city. Initially guided by Brigadier General William Heath of the Massachusetts militia, he passed command to General Artemas Ward late on the 20th. As the American army was effectively a collection of militias, Wards control was nominal, but he succeeded in establishing a loose siege line running from Chelsea around the city to Roxbury. Emphasis was placed on blocking Boston and Charlestown Necks. Across the lines, the British commander, Lieutenant General Thomas Gage, elected not impose martial law and instead worked with the citys leaders to have private weapons surrendered in exchange for allowing those residents who desired to leave Boston to depart. The Noose Tightens Over the next several days, Wards forces were augmented by new arrivals from Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire. With these troops came permission from the provisional governments of New Hampshire and Connecticut for Ward to assume command over their men. In Boston, Gage was surprised by the size and perseverance of the American forces and stated, In all their wars against the French they never showed such conduct, attention, and perseverance as they do now. In response, he began fortifying parts of the city against attack. Consolidating his forces in the city proper, Gage withdrew his men from Charlestown and erected defenses across Boston Neck. Traffic in and out of the city was briefly restricted before both sides came to an informal agreement allowing civilians to pass as long as they were unarmed. Though deprived of access to the surrounding countryside, the harbor remained open and ships of the Royal Navy, under Vice Admiral Samuel Graves, were able to supply the city. Though Graves efforts were effective, attacks by American privateers led prices for food and other necessities to rise dramatically. Lacking artillery to break the stalemate, the Massachusetts Provincial Congress dispatched Colonel Benedict Arnold to seize the guns at Fort Ticonderoga. Joining with Colonel Ethan Allens Green Mountain Boys, Arnold captured the fort on May 10. Later that month and into early June, American and British forces skirmished as Gages men attempted to capture hay and livestock from the outer islands of Boston Harbor (Map). Battle of Bunker Hill On May 25, HMS Cerberus arrived at Boston carrying Major Generals William Howe, Henry Clinton, and John Burgoyne. As the garrison had been reinforced to around 6,000 men, the new arrivals advocated for breaking out of the city and seizing Bunker Hill, above Charlestown, and Dorchester Heights south of the city. The British commanders intended to implement their plan on June 18. Learning of the British plans on June 15, the Americans quickly moved to occupy both locations. To the north, Colonel William Prescott and 1,200 men marched onto the Charlestown Peninsula on the evening of June 16.  After some debate among his subordinates, Prescott directed that a redoubt be constructed on Breeds Hill rather than Bunker Hill as originally intended. Work commenced and continued through the night with Prescott also ordering a breastwork to be built extending down the hill to the northeast. Spotting the Americans works the next morning, British warships opened fire with little effect. In Boston, Gage met with his commanders to discuss options. After taking six hours to organize an assault force, Howe led British forces over to Charlestown and attacked on the afternoon of June 17. Repelling two large British assaults, Prescotts men stood firm and were only forced to retreat when they ran out of ammunition. In the fighting, Howes troops suffered over 1,000 casualties while the Americans sustained around 450. The high cost of victory at the Battle of Bunker Hill would influence British command decisions for the remainder of the campaign. Having taken the heights, the British began work to fortify Charlestown Neck to prevent another American incursion. Building an Army While events were unfolding in Boston, the Continental Congress in Philadelphia created the Continental Army on June 14 and appointed George Washington as commander-in-chief the following day. Riding north to take command, Washington arrived outside Boston on July 3. Establishing his headquarters in Cambridge, he began molding the masses of colonial troops into an army. Creating badges of rank and uniform codes, Washington also began creating a logistical network to support his men. In an attempt to bring structure to the army, he divided it into three wings each led by a major general. The left wing, led by Major General Charles Lee was tasked with guarding the exits from Charlestown, while Major General Israel Putnams center wing was established near Cambridge. The right wing at Roxbury, led by Major General Artemas Ward, was the largest and was to cover Boston Neck as well as Dorchester Heights to the east. Through the summer, Washington worked to expand and reinforce the American lines. He was supported by the arrival of riflemen from Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia. Possessing accurate, long range weapons, these sharpshooters were employed in harassing the British lines. Next Steps On the night of August 30, British forces launched a raid against Roxbury, while American troops successfully destroyed the lighthouse on Lighthouse Island. Learning in September that the British did not intend to attack until reinforced, Washington dispatched 1,100 men under Arnold to conduct an invasion of Canada. He also began planning for an amphibious assault against the city as he feared his army would break up with the arrival of winter. After discussions with his senior commanders, Washington agreed to postpone the attack. As the stalemate pressed on, the British continued local raiding for food and stores. In November, Washington was presented a plan by Henry Knox for transporting Ticonderogas guns to Boston. Impressed, he appointed Knox a colonel and sent him to the fort. On November 29, an armed American ship succeeded in capturing the British brigantine Nancy outside of Boston Harbor. Loaded with munitions, it provided Washington with much needed gunpowder and arms. In Boston, the situation for the British changed in October when Gage was relieved in favor of Howe. Though reinforced to around 11,000 men, he was chronically short on supplies. The Siege Ends As winter set in, Washingtons fears began to come true as his army was reduced to around 9,000 through desertions and expiring enlistments. His situation improved on January 26, 1776 when Knox arrived in Cambridge with 59 guns from Ticonderoga. Approaching his commanders in February, Washington proposed an attack on the city by moving over the frozen Back Bay, but was instead convinced to wait. Instead, he formulated a plan to drive the British from the city by emplacing guns on Dorchester Heights. Assigning several of Knoxs guns to Cambridge and Roxbury, Washington began a diversionary bombardment of the British lines on the night of March 2. On the night of March 4/5, American troops moved guns to Dorchester Heights from which they could strike the city and the British ships in the harbor. Seeing the American fortifications on the heights in the morning, Howe initially made plans for assaulting the position. This was prevented by a snowstorm late in the day. Unable to attack, Howe reconsidered his plan and elected to withdraw rather than have a repeat of Bunker Hill. The British Depart On March 8, Washington received word that the British intended to evacuate and would not burn the city if allowed to leave unmolested. Though he did not formally respond, Washington agreed to the terms and British began embarking along with numerous Boston Loyalists. On March 17, the British departed for Halifax, Nova Scotia and American forces entered the city. Having been taken after an eleven-month siege, Boston remained in American hands for the remainder of the war.

buy custom Enron essay

buy custom Enron essay Introduction Enron was a giant energy company that was based in Texas, USA. It was the leading company in the provision of electricity and natural gas, and was then named as the most innovative company until the revelation of its substantial financial reporting and systematic fraud of its accounting processes had been highly institutionalized. The revelations of the scandal lead to the fall of its share, which had been considered to be the blue chip stock from over 90 dollars to selling in pennies. Enrons code of ethics issued in July 2000 indicated that the responsibility of conducting affairs of the business in accordance with the law, moral and honest manner was in its officers and employees. The code also stated that an employee should not directly or indirectly behave himself in a manner that was detrimental to the companys interests, thus, basing the codes on respect, excellence, integrity, and communication. The officer of Enron did not follow the codes of conduct, as it was stipulated, le ading to its fall. This paper will analyze the accounting systems that never provided the true face of the firm. Enron revenues grew considerably to 101 billion dollars in 2000 until its revelation that appeared to show its problems being not as a result of some core energy operations, but with other ventures. Reasons for the Collapse of Enron a)Accounting Problems The collapse of Enron was not due to its large size, but it was caused by decentralization of its operations to numerous subsidiaries that made it hard to detect when the company was running on losses. The requirement to make public the financial statements that was traded publicly made Enron craft some imaginary statements with its subsidiaries that were masking its true financial statements (Nicholson, 2011). The accounting records of Enron held back the losses it had been making and only stated the assets of its subsidiaries. Thus, the company gained confidence of market financiers who financed its e-commerce ventures. The over reliance of the special-purpose entities (SPE) made the company heavily indebted, thus leading the company to form the partnership with its financiers because it was not possible to finance their debts. The financiers then had to lend funds to the partnership, which were never revealed in the companys balance sheet. This SPE applied all kinds of ventures ev en selling some assets to these partnerships with the management of the company. The SPE used by this company depicted the recklessness and incompetence of its management team without even disclosing the existence of the SPE. The company used derivatives that did manipuate the results of the companys accounting and the need for full disclosure of the financial statements applying the set standards of accounting that were not followed. The markets, in which Enron traded, were never regulated, and thus, the profitability of the company in its derivatives was higher than the financial statements. The offshore entities of Enron were used for planning and tax avoidance in such a way raising the companys profitability. This, in turn, did provide the movement of funds which necessitated the holding back of the disclosure of losses. These offshore entities made the company looking profitable because of doctoring the financial statements where in the real sense the company was losing funds. b)Top Leadership The top executives of Enron were charged with fraud, money laundering and insider trading which were criminal acts. The management of a company is the one responsible for safeguarding the company shareholders interests. Enron management waived the rules of interests and creating a partnership that do business with the company and managing these partnerships by the same management. These executives raised their credibility and adherence to the code of conduct of the company. In any working environment, there are some established rules of effective working. These rules are implemented so as to ensure that the set goals and objectives are achieved in business. One of the main reasons why these rules exist is so as to guide individuals. These guidelines help different individuals to coordinate activities among themselves so as to achieve the expected results. Since the working environment consists of many personalities, they operate as a team. Within the team, there are the established rules on how the team operates. This is extremely vital since it helps in the attainment of these set goals. It also prevents random decisions. The management of Enron engaged into business activities that violated the companys code of ethics. The activities involved trading the volatile earnings not rewarded on the stock market. The management of Enron was the one to bear the responsibility for the collapse of this company as the ethics code stated. They were involved in the creation of partnerships that they managed on their own. Thus, they gave some exceptions from the ethics code of the company and its values, and the visions did not match with the management actions. c)Management culture The collapsing of Enron was not as a result of an accident, but the companys culture of management. This facilitated its downfall through fraud and greed because the company was extorting its consumers. The managementt only focused on the maintenance of values appearance that raised the trading price of its stock instead of relying on the creation of the real value of the company. The company also resulted in replacing employees in their divisions even though the integrity was compromised. It is viewed that the company was leveraging with the administration that allowed the perpetration of frauds. Therefore, the collapse can be attributed as the largest problem of management culture (Nicholson, 2011). d)Auditing issues The federal law requires that auditing a public company should be conducted by an independent auditor. The auditors of Enron were either misled of the actual income of the company which was restated with the losses being reported to be lower than they appeared, or the auditor compromised its independence used in the determination of the nature and the extents of the procedures applied in auditing. Enron did not use an outside auditor and this led to the management not disclosing the real status of the companys assets (Jickling, 2002). The auditor was indicted for the destruction of documents that showed the auditing of Enron. e)Pension Issues Enron was sponsoring its employees benefits. It was later revealed that the retirement stock was even larger than the stock of the company. The companys collapse led to employees losing their values of the retirement benefits. The plan was supposed to allow the participants to have information setting limits on the companys stock that can hold the retirement plan. f)Banking Issues The collapse of Enron was also contributed by the participation of banks as they provided the funding of the offshore ventures. They were also involved in partnering with the company proving funds that were traded off the balance sheet. The banks were also viewed as providing derivatives to other institutions by recommending the companys securities as they were faced with the opportunity of making profits form their deals and the risk avoidance from the bank (Jickling, 2002). Conclusion The management of Enron was never guided by the code of ethics, and, thus, they did not create the ethical environment for the company as the fundamental values of respect, integrity excellence, and communication that were never followed. The collapse of Enron was enhanced by the managements failure to guard the interests of the companys owners. They also used loans to pay the existing loans in supporting the e-commerce ventures. These financiers facilitated the frauds that were being committed to the company. Buy custom Enron essay

Market Microstructure Approach Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Market Microstructure Approach - Essay Example The above factors will therefore be important in answering the discussing whether the market microstructure to exchange rate has been a radical departure from the 1960's, 1970's and 1980's international macroeconomic models. This will involve assessing ach factor against a certain model thus noting the development undergone. For example, the economic growth under the monetary model of the 1960's was slow compared to the economic growth in the recent market microstructure approach. Combining these factors with the market exchange rate expectations will give us the current change value. According to the monetary model argues that relative price levels of any given two countries will provide the determinant to exchange rate. ( Obstfeld, M. and Kenneth, R, 1996) The real output level in a given country will also be a very important factor in assessing the models development; this is because it directly affects the price levels of certain goods and services. For instance, a rise in the United States output level with the other factors remaining constant will lead to a fall in the average prices in the US this will in return lead to the dollar appreciation. Past and future fundamental economic factors will matter a lot since the plays an important role of determining the future market expectations rate. Some of the traditional model of exchange rate includes asset market approach, mundell Fleming model orgarch model among others. They all had a shortcoming of failing to explain exchange rate movement's ion the long run. Mundell Fleming Model This theory was developed by Marcus Fleming and Robert Mundell in the 1960's. It was an extension of the LM model describing a small open economy. It gives the relationship between the nominal exchange rate and output of an economy in the short run. The model assures that under fixed rate regime an increase in government expenditure will shift the cure to the right. (Hamilton, 1994) This shift will increase the interest rate with the resultant effect being an appreciation of the exchange rate. In the fixed system framework the exchange will be controlled by the local momentary authority. The momentary authority stabilizes the exchange rate by using local currencies to purchase foreign currencies. This will in turn shift the LM curve in line with the direction of the IS shift, a thing that helps in lowering the exchange rate by increasing the supply of local currency in the market. However, a decrease in the government expenditure will shift the IS curve to the right. The shift will lead to a decline in the level of interest rate resulting to a depreciation of the exchange rate. (Hamilton, 1994) The central bank or relevant monetary authority will vary the money supply so as to realize a constant exchange rate level. Local authority adds its foreign reserves through increased purchase of foreign currencies using the local currency. this will lead to exchange rate appreciation.Incase it wants to depreciate the exchange rate the authority will use the foreign reserves to purchase its own currency to