Thomas Paine, a political activist and philosopher, was the author of an important document called Common sense. In 1776, this document played a vital role in the American Revolution. In Common Sense, Paine attacked monarchy and hereditary succession in the beginning of his argument because he wanted to gain more support on the revolt against Britain. His approach was straightforward and got right to the point for the independence movement and the rights of all men. He wanted to show that supporting the independence movement instead of remaining loyal to the British Crown was a better idea and would result in happier lives. Freedom was the entire goal here because Paine believed the colonists deserved the right to be free from the British monarchy. If America were to remain under British rule it would only cause more conflict between the countries in Europe because other countries were trying to get a piece of America for themselves. Paine is saying that if America gains independence the fighting will stop among Europe, and America can benefit all countries with trade. On the other hand, some people didn't buy what Paine was trying to get across in Common Sense. Maybe they didn't have any at that time. James Chalmers, a Maryland plantation owner, made a case for the Loyalists. He was on the side for those who opposed American independence. His document Plain Truth, was an instant response to Paine's document Common Sense. "A failure of commerce [would] preclude the numerous tribe of planters, farmers and others, from paying their debts," stated Chalmers. He honestly felt like if they fought for independence from Britain, they would be going backwards in economics and as a "country," if be. He also was clearly stating that if they do gain independence, it would be just like slavery. I think Chalmers equates independence with slavery because he already believed he was