Critical Analysis Of The Olive Branch Petition

628 Words3 Pages
Critical Analysis of the Olive Branch Petition Because of the tone in which the 2nd Continental Congress adopted in the Olive Branch Petition, I believe if King George III would have read the document he would have acted in a different manner. The 2nd Continental Congress convened in 1775 with all the colonial leaders to talk about what their next course of action would be following the recent Battle of Lexington and the Battle of Concord. Though Congress, as whole, decided that they would try one last time at a last-ditch effort to restore peaceful, yet volatile, relations with Britain. However, many of the leaders were fed up and wanted to take action because they felt that war at this point was inevitable anyway. They were truly ready to secede from Britain and become sovereign by their own right. Nonetheless, John Dickinson felt that a letter to the king will possibly stop the madness and keep them from having to break ties with Great Britain. Therefore the Olive Branch Petition was born. It is said that the Olive Branch Petition was a humble appeal to king George III. I feel that the tone of the document was neither humble nor aggressive. I do, however, believe that the petition was sincere and clear. It was sincere in a sense that John Dickinson was expressing their loyalty to the king and that they wanted to remain loyal to him. He was clear in laying out the facts of what was causing the strife among the colonists and what he felt the king could do to alleviate the situation. I found the document in its entirety to be just full of the same thing over and over again but yet reading it as many times as I had to in order to truly understand it, it was almost like poetry. For instance in the Petition John Dickinson wrote “We beg further leave to assure your Majesty, that notwithstanding the sufferings of your loyal Colonists during
Open Document