Letter from the Director:

Dear Delegates,

Welcome to TMUN X 1775: The Dawn of Revolution Crisis Committee! I am absolutely

thrilled to have the opportunity to direct this committee and witness the unfolding events of the
American Revolution with all of you.

My name is Skylar Gao, and I will be your director for this exciting journey. Currently, I
am in grade 11 at Satec @ W.A. Porter Collegiate Institute in Scarborough. I started on my
Model UN journey in eighth grade, and over the years, I have developed a deep passion for
diplomacy and debate—especially within crisis committees. There is something uniquely
exhilarating about the fast-paced, energetic, and creative nature of crises that I truly enjoy, and I
aim to bring that same vibrant spirit to our committee sessions together.

Throughout our time in this committee, you can expect to see plot twists and challenges
that will test your critical thinking and collaboration skills. I encourage each of you to embrace
the spontaneity of the crisis and approach every debate with enthusiasm and creativity.
Together, we will explore the motivations and decisions of key historical figures, grapple with
complex issues, and craft solutions that could alter the course of history.

Please feel free to reach out if you have any questions or need guidance as you prepare
for our sessions. My email will be listed at the end of this letter. I look forward to seeing the
unique insights and perspectives each of you will bring, and I am confident that we will create
memorable experiences together.

So, buckle up for an incredible journey through one of the most pivotal moments in
history. I can’t wait to see how each of you will contribute to the unfolding narrative of the
American Revolution!

Best regards,

Skylar Gao
Director, TMUN X 1775: The Dawn of Revolution Crisis Committee
[skylargao11@[Link]]
Committee Description:

The battle of Lexington and Concord on April 19, 1775, sparked the start of a revolution
that will change the course of American history. What began as a mission by British forces to
seize colonial weapon stockpiles quickly escalated into open conflict, as colonial militias,
enraged by years of taxation without representation and growing British oppression, stood their
ground. The first shots were fired, and what was a growing political dispute erupted into the start
of the American Revolutionary War.

The American colonies now face a pivotal moment: will they unite for independence or
reconcile with the British Crown? King George III views the colonies as a threat to his order and
has sent forces to crush the resistance, while the Continental Congress debates its next
move—diplomacy, war, or full independence. In this committee, you'll step into 1775 as Colonial
leaders, navigating alliances, strategy, and key decisions that will shape the American
Revolution. Will you broker for peace, push for war, or fight for independence?
History is watching—are you ready to take command?
Historical Context:

The build-up to the American Revolution was sparked by years of rising tensions
between Britain and its American colonies. The shift really started after the French and Indian
War ended in 1763. Britain, now deeply in debt from fighting the war, needed funds to maintain
its expanded empire and decided to tax its American colonies.1 The British government issued
the Proclamation of 1763, preventing settlers from moving west past the Appalachian
Mountains, hoping this would reduce conflicts with Native Americans and keep the costly
colonial expansion in check. However, many colonists felt that they had earned the right to this
land, which only increased resentment toward British policies.2

To offset the debt, Britain introduced the Stamp Act in 1765, marking the first direct tax
on the colonies. This tax required that almost all printed materials in the colonies carry a stamp
showing that a tax had been paid. Colonists objected, arguing they should not be taxed without
having representatives in Parliament.3 This principle of “no taxation without representation”
quickly gained traction, fueling colonial outrage. The opposition to the Stamp Act was so strong
that it led to the formation of the Stamp Act Congress, and colonial merchants organized a
boycott that hurt British trade, ultimately forcing Parliament to repeal the act in 1766. But in the
same breath, Britain passed the Declaratory Act, asserting its right to legislate for the colonies
"in all cases whatsoever," which only deepened colonial mistrust.4

In 1767, the British passed the Townshend Acts, imposing duties on everyday items like
glass, tea, and paper. While British leaders saw these as reasonable to cover the colonies'
administrative costs, the colonists were furious. This wasn’t just about money—it was about
control and rights. In response, colonists organized more boycotts and smuggling became
rampant.5 The unrest boiled over in Boston, leading to the Boston Massacre in 1770, where
British soldiers killed five colonists during a confrontation. This incident was heavily publicized
by leaders like Samuel Adams, who used it to illustrate British cruelty and fuel anti-British
sentiments across the colonies.6

The Tea Act of 1773 reignited tensions when the British East India Company was given a
monopoly over the colonial tea trade. Colonists saw this as a sneaky way for Britain to force
them to accept British taxes on tea. The anger culminated in December 1773 when a group of

1
Middlekauff, Robert. The Glorious Cause : The American Revolution, 1763-1789. New York, Oxford
University Press, 2007.
2
Bailyn, Bernard. The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution. Cambridge, Mass. Etc., The
Belknap Press Of Harvard University Press, 1967.
3
DuRivage, Justin, and Claire Priest. “The Stamp Act and the Political Origins of American Legal and
Economic Institutions.” Southern California Law Review, vol. 88, 2014,
4
Ibid
5
Chaffin, Robert J. "The Townshend Acts of 1767." The William and Mary Quarterly: A Magazine of Early
American History (1970): 90-121.
6
Middlekauff, Robert.
colonists, disguised as the Mohawk Peoples, boarded British ships and dumped 342 chests of
tea into Boston Harbor, an event that became known as the Boston Tea Party. In retaliation,
Parliament passed the Coercive Acts in 1774, which colonists called the "Intolerable Acts."
These acts restricted colonial self-government, closed Boston’s port, and allowed British officials
accused of crimes in America to be tried back in Britain. The harshness of these laws spurred
the colonies to meet at the First Continental Congress in Philadelphia to discuss a unified
response, pushing them closer to open rebellion.7

The final spark came in April 1775. British General Thomas Gage, stationed in
Massachusetts, was ordered to seize colonial military supplies stored in Concord and to arrest
leaders of the rebellion like John Hancock and Samuel Adams. On April 18, British troops
moved toward Concord but were met by local militias, thanks to warnings from riders like Paul
Revere.8 On April 19, at Lexington, the first shots were fired in what became known as “the shot
heard 'round the world.” This marked the official start of open hostilities, with further fighting that
day at Concord driving British troops back to Boston under relentless colonial gunfire along the
way.9

7
Carp, Benjamin L. Defiance of the patriots: The Boston Tea Party and the making of America. Yale
University Press, 2010.
8
Ellis, Joseph J. Founding Brothers : The Revolutionary Generation. New York, Vintage Books, 2002.
9
Frothingham, Richard. History of the Siege of Boston: And of the Battles of Lexington, Concord, and
Bunker Hill. Also an Account of the Bunker Hill Monument. With Illustrative Documents. Little, Brown, &
Company, 1873.
Timeline:

1763
Proclamation of 1763: British government restricts westward expansion past the Appalachian
Mountains to ease tensions with Native Americans, frustrating colonists eager to settle the
newly acquired land.

1765
Stamp Act: First direct tax on colonies requires stamps on printed materials. Colonists rally
around “no taxation without representation,” sparking boycotts and the Stamp Act Congress.

1766
Stamp Act Repeal & Declaratory Act: Britain repeals the Stamp Act but asserts full authority
over the colonies with the Declaratory Act, deepening colonial distrust.

1767
Townshend Acts: New taxes on glass, tea, and paper intensify protests. Colonists respond with
organized boycotts, especially in Boston.

1770
Boston Massacre: British troops kill five colonists during a confrontation in Boston. The event is
publicized as a symbol of British oppression, fueling anti-British sentiment.

1773
Tea Act & Boston Tea Party: The Tea Act grants a monopoly to the British East India
Company, leading to the Boston Tea Party, where colonists dump British tea into Boston Harbor
as a protest.

1774
Intolerable Acts: In response to the Tea Party, Britain enacts punitive measures that close
Boston’s port and restrict local governance. Colonies convene the First Continental Congress,
uniting in opposition to British policies and organizing militias.

1775
Battles of Lexington and Concord: British troops march to Concord to seize colonial arms and
arrest leaders. Militia intercepts them, leading to the “shot heard round the world” and marking
the official start of armed conflict.
10

10
American Battlefield Trust. “American Revolution Timeline.” American Battlefield Trust, 17 July 2018,
[Link]/learn/articles/american-revolution-timeline.
Topic One: Reconciliation

The recent clash at Lexington and Concord has intensified the divide between the
American colonies and Britain, making reconciliation a more difficult, but not entirely impossible,
path. Though violence has erupted between the two sides, both have reasons to consider a
negotiated settlement. Although the battles have been significant, they are still relatively limited
in scope. As tensions rise, it’s important to understand that despite the violence, both the
colonies and Britain remain invested in preserving the possibility of peace, though the path to
reconciliation is now more challenging than ever.

Reconciliation between Britain and the colonies has been a topic of heated debate for
years. The imposition of taxes like the Stamp Act (1765) and the Townshend Acts (1767), and
the subsequent colonial resistance, significantly strained relations between the colonies and the
British government.11 These events were not isolated, but part of a larger pattern where Britain’s
policies seemed to disregard colonial interests in favor of imperial control. By 1774, with the
passage of the Coercive Acts, which included the closing of Boston Harbor and the revocation
of Massachusetts' charter, tensions reached a breaking point. The colonies’ frustration was not
solely about taxes, but also about their lack of political representation in Britain’s Parliament,
which led to the rally of “no taxation without representation.”12

Throughout these years, the colonies made multiple attempts at reconciliation. The First
Continental Congress in 1774 convened to address these concerns, and it was there that
colonial leaders emphasized a desire for peace and negotiation.13 At the same time, Britain
made few concessions. The British government’s refusal to listen to the colonies’ grievances
only solidified the idea that the colonies were powerless to change their circumstances through
negotiation alone. While many colonial leaders, including George Washington and John Adams,
hoped for a peaceful resolution, their calls for reform fell on deaf ears in London.14

After these years of growing resentment and failed attempts at negotiation, the Battle of
Lexington and Concord on April 19, 1775, became the immediate trigger for wider violence. It
was not, however, the first instance of conflict between the two sides, nor was it necessarily the
point of no return for reconciliation. The shots fired at Lexington and Concord, though historic,

11
“British Acts That Angered the American Colonists.” [Link], 2024,
[Link]/stamp-sugar-intolerable-acts.
12
Galiani, Sebastian, and Gustavo Torrens. Why not taxation and representation? A note on the
American Revolution. No. w22724. National Bureau of Economic Research, 2016.
13
Gish, Dustin. "RECONCILIATION VS. REVOLUTION: Jefferson’s Declaration and Paine’s Common
Sense."
14
Ibid
were a continuation of the struggles that had been brewing for over a decade.15 Even after these
events, both sides still had reasons to negotiate rather than escalate to full-scale war.

The Possibilities and Challenges

In the immediate aftermath of the violence at Lexington and Concord, the idea of
reconciliation still remains a possibility, even though it is difficult to achieve. One of the key
factors in the potential for peace is the fact that, despite the battle, the colonies are still not
united in their calls for full independence. While a growing faction of the population is pushing
for full independence, many remain hopeful that their grievances can be addressed without
completely cutting ties with Britain.16 The colonies' desire to maintain their status as part of the
British Empire, but with greater autonomy, still persists among moderates.

The Continental Congress, still meeting in its early stages, has yet to declare
independence and has been cautious in its demands. Despite the battle, some still view
reconciliation as possible through constitutional reform and the recognition of colonial rights.
Leaders like John Dickinson from Pennsylvania, who had been an advocate for peaceful
negotiation, argue that the colonies should still appeal to the Crown and Parliament for a
redress of their grievances.17 These moderates insist that the colonies do not seek to destroy
their relationship with Britain, but rather to create a new balance of power that respects their
rights.

However, this view is increasingly at odds with a growing number of colonists who now
believe that any form of reconciliation is futile. The battle of Lexington and Concord
demonstrated that colonial forces could stand up to British troops, emboldening the call for
independence.18 Radical leaders like Patrick Henry, Samuel Adams, and others are beginning to
see the conflict as a clear fight for freedom and self-determination. Their influence is swelling,
particularly in places like New England, where the recent bloodshed has turned many against
Britain completely.19

In Britain, there is also division. King George III’s reaction to the battle has been severe.
His insistence on punishing the colonies as rebels suggests little interest in reconciliation.20
However, there are factions within Parliament who understand that pursuing a full-scale war with
the colonies could be disastrous. The costs of such a war would stretch Britain’s military and

15
Daughan, George C. Lexington and Concord: The Battle Heard Round the World. WW Norton &
Company, 2018.
16
Ferling, John. *Almost a Miracle: The American Victory in the War of Independence*. Oxford University
Press, 2007.
17
Gish, Dustin
18
Schwoerer, Lois G., ed. The revolution of 1688-89: Changing perspectives. Cambridge University
Press, 1992.
19
Ibid
20
Conway, Stephen. "The Politics of British Military and Naval Mobilization, 1775-83." The English
Historical Review 112.449 (1997): 1179-1201.
financial resources thin, especially when the empire is already stretched by conflicts in Europe.21
For Britain, maintaining peace with the colonies might be preferable to escalating violence,
though this perspective is in the minority.

The Strategic and Economic Importance of Reconciliation

For both Britain and the colonies, the strategic and economic benefits of reconciliation
could still be significant. The colonies rely heavily on British markets for trade, and a breakdown
in the relationship could devastate the colonial economy.22 As a result, many colonists recognize
that maintaining ties with Britain could offer economic benefits, especially in the form of trade,
while still pushing for reforms and greater self-governance. For them, reconciliation would offer
a way to avoid the economic strain of war while still securing some degree of autonomy.23

For Britain, keeping the colonies under its control is economically important. The
American colonies provide crucial resources, including tobacco, timber, and other raw materials.
If Britain were to lose the colonies, it would also lose access to these resources.24 Moreover, the
colonies provide a vital market for British goods. A peaceful resolution that grants the colonies
greater autonomy while maintaining British economic dominance could allow Britain to preserve
its strategic interests without resorting to war.

However, the desire for peace must also be weighed against the larger political stakes.
For Britain, losing the colonies could send a signal to other parts of the empire that rebellion is
an acceptable course of action. For the colonies, accepting British rule without addressing their
grievances would undermine their struggle for greater self-determination. These competing
interests make reconciliation more difficult, but not impossible.25

The Road Ahead

Though the prospects for reconciliation are fading as the violence grows, they are not
entirely gone. The path to peace will require both sides to make difficult choices and to be willing
to compromise. For the colonies, this might mean accepting some form of British oversight, but
with greater autonomy in local governance and economic matters. For Britain, it might involve
recognizing the colonies' right to self-government in exchange for continued economic ties and
political loyalty to the Crown.

Yet, as the colonies move further from reconciliation and closer to full independence, the
question becomes whether the benefits of staying within the British Empire outweigh the costs
of rebellion. Both sides must consider the long-term consequences of their actions. The next

21
Conway, Stephen. "The Politics of British Military and Naval Mobilization”
22
Wood, Gordon S. The American revolution: a history. Modern Library, 2002.
23
Ibid
24
Ibid
25
Middlekauff, Robert.
steps will be crucial in determining whether a peaceful resolution is still possible or if the road to
full independence is inevitable.

Guiding Questions:

1. How can the colonies encourage Britain to enter into negotiations, given the recent violence
at Lexington and Concord?

2. What economic benefits could both Britain and the colonies stand to gain from reconciliation,
and how can these be achieved in negotiations?

3. How do radical and moderate colonists affect the chances for peace, and what role do they
play in the overall conflict?

4. What would the long-term consequences be for both Britain and the colonies if reconciliation
is not pursued and full independence is declared?
Topic Two: Independence

In the wake of recent events, the prospect of independence has become a rallying point
for those envisioning a new, self-determined future for the American colonies. While
reconciliation with Britain remains an option, the case for independence grows stronger as
colonists reflect on their grievances, shared identity, and potential as a sovereign nation. For
advocates, independence represents an opportunity to protect their rights, establish a
government of their own design, and escape the long history of perceived British exploitation.

A Vision of Self-Governance

Achieving independence for the colonies is not a simple or immediate process, but it is
becoming increasingly clear that it is the only viable path forward. Following the recent conflicts,
including the events at Lexington and Concord, the need for decisive action grows more urgent.
The colonies must take several crucial steps to break free from British control, and these steps
involve coordination, military strategy, diplomacy, and public persuasion.26

The first challenge is to unify the colonies, which, despite their shared grievances, have
often acted independently and may hold differing views on what independence should look
like.27 The Continental Congress has been central to bringing these diverse colonies together.
By working through the Continental Congress, leaders like John Adams and Benjamin Franklin
aim to develop a shared vision for independence, focusing on their common desire to establish
a government free from British influence.28 Although regional differences remain, there is
increasing recognition that independence is the only way to protect colonial interests and rights.

Another critical step is the formation of a continental army. While militias have been
effective in local battles, such as the one at Lexington and Concord, they are not organized or
equipped to take on the British military in a prolonged conflict.29 Under George Washington's
leadership, the Continental Army must be strengthened and properly supplied to face the might
of Britain’s professional forces. This task requires significant coordination among the colonies to
raise funds, recruit soldiers, and organize the army in a way that ensures it can defend the
colonies and eventually challenge British forces.30

Securing international support is also essential to the success of an independence

movement. France, which has long been an adversary of Britain, could prove to be a valuable
ally. By sending representatives to France, the colonies should seek to gain military and
financial support, as well as recognition from other foreign powers. While France is cautious, the

26
Gish, Dustin.
27
York, Neil L. "The First Continental Congress and the Problem of American Rights." The Pennsylvania
Magazine of History and Biography 122.4 (1998)
28
Ibid
29
Wright, Robert K. The Continental Army. Washington, DC: Center of Military History, United States
Army, 1983.
30
Ibid
prospect of weakening Britain’s hold on its colonies offers clear strategic benefits. Securing this
support is vital to tipping the balance of power in favor of the colonies.

Finally, the colonies must address public sentiment and build widespread support for
independence. While some remain loyal to Britain, many are beginning to question whether the
Crown will ever honor their rights.31 Pamphlets like “Common Sense” by Thomas Paine have
been instrumental in shaping public opinion by presenting independence as not only possible
but morally right. Local assemblies and town meetings provide opportunities to strengthen the
case for independence and unite the public behind this goal. As the colonies face the prospect
of war, it is essential that a majority of the population is behind the cause of independence,
ensuring a sustained effort against British rule.

Breaking Away From British Control

Breaking away from Britain would free the colonies from restrictive trade policies, such
as the Navigation Acts, which required them to trade primarily with Britain and its territories.
These regulations stifled economic growth by limiting the colonies’ ability to seek competitive
markets for their goods.32 The Proclamation of 1763 restricted westward expansion, frustrating
colonists eager to settle and profit from newly acquired lands after the French and Indian War.33
Taxation measures, such as the Sugar Act and the Stamp Act, were imposed to pay for Britain’s
debts and global ambitions, not to benefit the colonies themselves.34 These actions have left a
lasting impression that the colonies are being used to serve British interests, rather than their
own. An independent America could forge trade relationships with other nations, including
France and Spain, potentially boosting its economy and fostering growth in industries like
agriculture, shipbuilding, and manufacturing.

Independence would also allow the colonies to keep revenue generated within their
borders, rather than sending a portion of it to Britain in the form of taxes.35 This financial
autonomy could be used to develop infrastructure, fund local governments, and support the war
effort, laying the groundwork for long-term prosperity.

Independence would allow the colonies to prioritize their own needs and ambitions,
rather than serving as a financial and geopolitical resource for an empire that seems indifferent
to their well-being. It would also eliminate the threat of future punitive measures, such as those
seen after the Boston Tea Party, which punished the entire colony of Massachusetts for the
actions of a few.36

31
Frothingham, Richard.
32
Fiske, John. The American Revolution. Vol. 1. Library of Alexandria, 1894.
33
Monroe McCutchen, Jennifer. “Proclamation Line of 1763.” George Washington’s Mount Vernon, 2024.
34
DuRivage, Justin.
35
Fiske, John.
36
Carp, Benjamin L.
The Challenges
​
While independence presents undeniable opportunities, it also carries risks. The
colonies lack the centralized authority and resources necessary to wage a prolonged war
against Britain’s formidable military.37 Securing alliances with foreign powers like France or
Spain would be crucial to balancing the scales, but these partnerships could come with
demands that might limit the colonies’ newfound sovereignty.38

Internally, divisions among the colonies and their populations pose a challenge.
Loyalists, who remain committed to the Crown, could undermine efforts toward independence
and create conflicts within communities.39 The colonies must address these divisions carefully,
ensuring that the pursuit of independence does not lead to lasting fractures.

Independence is more than a practical necessity; it is a stand against tyranny. Many

colonial leaders believe that staying under British rule conflicts with the core values of liberty
and justice. With lives already lost in the growing conflict, they question whether reconciliation
would truly fix the deeper issues. For many, the only answer is a new path that rejects
oppression and builds a society based on freedom and equality.40

On a practical level, independence would give the colonies control over their own trade,
laws, and governance. It would free them from policies made by a distant government that
prioritizes its own interests. Independence is not just about breaking ties; it is about building a
future that better serves the colonies and their people.

Guiding Questions

1. How can the colonies ensure unity in their push for independence?

2. What strategies can be employed to secure foreign support for the independence movement?

3. How might the colonies address the concerns of Loyalists while pursuing independence?

4. What steps should the colonies take to build a sustainable government and economy after
independence?

37
Fiske, John.
38
Middlekauff, Robert.
39
Ferling, John. *Almost a Miracle: The American Victory in the War of Independence.* Oxford University
Press, 2007.
40
Middlekauff, Robert.
Current State of Affairs:

The day after the Battle of Lexington and Concord, tensions are at a breaking point, but
full-scale war has not yet been declared. British troops, numbering about 4,000 in Boston, are
regrouping after being forced to retreat by colonial militias, who have swelled to around 15,000
from surrounding towns.41 While the colonists showed they could stand up to the British, they
remained untrained and poorly supplied compared to the professional British soldiers.

Support for the revolution is strongest in New England, but many Loyalists remain in
New York, parts of the South, and some coastal cities. Roughly 20% of the population is loyal to
Britain, while others are unsure whether to support independence or seek peace. This division
makes it hard for the colonies to present a united front.42

Britain’s navy, with over 130 warships, controls the coast, threatening colonial trade and
supplies.43 Internationally, France and Spain are watching closely but have not offered help yet.
They might support the colonies if it weakens Britain, but only if they see clear unity and
determination.

The colonies are not yet at war as a whole, but the fighting has made peace much
harder to imagine. Delegates at the Continental Congress now face critical decisions about
whether to push for reconciliation or prepare for independence. What happens in the next days
and weeks will shape the future of the colonies.

41
Conway, Stephen
42
Middlekauff, Robert.
43
Ibid
Research Guide:

Researching the American Revolution can be an intimidating task, but a focused and strategic
approach will make it manageable. Here are some tips and things to keep in mind:

●​ Start broad: Begin with general overviews to get a sense of the time period. Wikipedia,
online encyclopedias, youtube videos, and summaries can help establish a basic
understanding of what you are working with.

●​ Once you have a general sense of the period, dive deeper into specific topics. Focus on
researching your character, but don’t overdo it, since it is a crisis, and things will be
changing constantly

●​ Research enough to feel confident discussing the issues in debate, but don’t aim to
master every detail.

If there are any questions or concerns, feel free to contact the email linked in the Letter from the
Director.

Starting Links:

[Link]

[Link]

[Link]

[Link]
Character Guide:

1. George Washington

George Washington, a respected Virginian and experienced soldier, was chosen to lead the
Continental Army. He believed the colonies had to stand together to defend their rights. While
he hoped for peace at first, Washington understood that preparing for war was necessary after
the British refused to back down. His calm and steady leadership made him a unifying figure,
and his focus on discipline was important for the army’s success.

2. John Adams

John Adams, a lawyer from Massachusetts, strongly supported independence. He believed the
colonies had no choice but to break away from Britain to protect their freedoms. Adams often
spoke out against British policies and worked to convince others to support the idea of
independence. His clear thinking and ability to argue made him a key voice in the committee.

3. Samuel Adams

Samuel Adams, John Adams’ cousin, was a passionate leader in the fight against British rule.
He believed the colonies had to take strong and immediate action to win their freedom. Samuel
organized protests like the Boston Tea Party and worked to get people angry about British taxes
and soldiers. In the committee, he would push for bold moves and encourage others to stand
firm against Britain.

4. John Hancock

John Hancock was a rich merchant from Massachusetts and the president of the Continental
Congress. He was a public supporter of the revolution, using his money and influence to help
fund the Patriot cause. After the British tried to arrest him at Lexington, Hancock became more
committed to independence. In the committee, his leadership and resources would help
organize the colonies’ efforts.

5. Benjamin Franklin

Benjamin Franklin, from Pennsylvania, was a famous inventor, writer, and diplomat. He believed
the colonies had to unite to win independence. Franklin was skilled at convincing others to join
the cause and had experience working with British officials before the war. His wisdom and
ability to negotiate would be helpful in planning the colonies’ next steps.

6. Joseph Warren

Joseph Warren was a Boston doctor and an early leader of the revolution. He was involved in
organizing resistance and played a key role in warning of the British advance on Lexington and
Concord. Warren believed strongly in the colonies’ right to govern themselves. As someone who
worked closely with many key figures, his advice and bravery were highly respected.

7. Nathanael Greene

Nathanael Greene, a self-taught military leader from Rhode Island, believed that the colonies
needed to fight hard to win their freedom. Though he had little formal training, Greene quickly
became one of Washington’s most trusted generals. His strategic thinking and determination
would be valuable to the committee as they discussed how to organize their forces.

8. Paul Revere

Paul Revere, a silversmith from Boston, was a member of the Sons of Liberty and famous for
his midnight ride to warn colonists of the British advance. Revere believed in taking swift action
to resist British rule. His ability to organize communication and spread information quickly made
him an important part of the revolutionary effort.

9. Thomas Jefferson

Thomas Jefferson, a lawyer and plantation owner from Virginia, believed strongly in liberty and
self-government. He thought the colonies had to break away from Britain and was known for his
skill in writing. Jefferson’s ability to clearly explain the reasons for independence would help the
committee gain support for their cause.

10. Henry Knox

Henry Knox, a Boston bookseller with a deep interest in military strategy, believed the colonies
needed to prepare for a long fight against Britain. He helped bring cannons to Boston after the
battles at Lexington and Concord, which became a turning point for the Continental Army.
Knox’s knowledge of artillery and his commitment to the cause would help the committee with
military planning.

11. John Dickinson

John Dickinson, a lawyer from Pennsylvania, hoped to avoid war and believed in trying to make
peace with Britain. He thought the colonies should prepare to defend themselves but still try to
negotiate. His careful and thoughtful approach could help the committee balance calls for
independence with efforts to gain more support from undecided colonies.

12. Alexander Hamilton

Alexander Hamilton, a young immigrant from the Caribbean, was already a rising figure in New
York. He believed in a strong, united effort to resist British rule. Hamilton’s skill as a writer and
speaker helped rally support for the revolution. His ideas about strategy and organization would
help the committee plan for the future.
13. Abigail Adams

Abigail Adams, wife of John Adams, was a strong supporter of independence and believed in
equal rights for women. She often wrote letters advising her husband, offering thoughtful ideas
on politics and society. While she wasn’t directly involved in the fighting, her voice reminded
leaders to think about the future they were creating.

14. Aaron Burr

Aaron Burr, a young and ambitious lawyer from New York, supported the Patriot cause and
believed the colonies had to fight for their rights. Though not yet a major leader, Burr’s military
skill and determination would soon make him a key figure. His ideas and drive would help push
the committee to take decisive action.

15. Martha Washington

Martha Washington, wife of George Washington, was known for her support of the troops. She
believed in her husband’s mission and spent time at army camps, helping boost morale. Though
not directly involved in decisions, her presence symbolized the importance of unity and
resilience.

16. Benedict Arnold

Benedict Arnold, a skilled military leader from Connecticut, believed in fighting hard for
independence. He led successful early campaigns, such as the capture of Fort Ticonderoga.
However, Arnold was ambitious and often clashed with other leaders. His military experience
made him an important figure in planning battles, though his loyalty was sometimes questioned.

17. Mercy Otis Warren

Mercy Otis Warren, a writer and political thinker from Massachusetts, used her talents to
support the revolution. She wrote plays and pamphlets that criticized British rule and
encouraged colonists to fight for their rights. Her ability to spread ideas and rally support made
her a valuable voice for the Patriot cause.