Colonists Grievances

1468 Words6 Pages
In the years before the Revolution, the American colonists were poorly treated by the British Parliament. After the Parliament closed down the port of Boston, and passed a statute stating, “An act for the impartial administration of justice… or for the suppression of riots and tumults, in the province of the Massachusetts-Bay in New England,” the colonists released a document, the Declaration and Resolves of the First Continental Congress, listing their grievances of the Parliament (U.S. Cong.). The Colonies took steps, after listing their grievances and eventually winning their independence from Britain, to make sure they could and would not mimic the British government’s errors and actions, creating documents like the Constitution of United…show more content…
This action angered the colonists, causing them to take action, listing this in their grievances. They said, “That they are entitled to...property: and they have never ceded to any foreign power whatever, a right to dispose of either without their consent” (U.S. Cong.). This stated that the colonists have right to property, and that they do not have to succumb to a foreign power, and can dispose of them without the power’s consent. This complaint was written so that the colonists could have some say in whether a soldier can be quartered in their house, as they would gain consent to the action. Britain refused, and the quartering continued. After the colonists gained their independence, the governmental body of the United States wanted to make sure that quartering could not occur, and never without the consent of the house owner. They, in Amendment 3 of the Bill of Rights, stated “No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law” (U.S. Cong.). This assured Americans that soldiers could not be forcefully placed in their house by the government, and that if soldiers were to be quartered, it would be lawful, and with the people 's consent. Congress, in doing this, avoided the mistakes of the British Parliament in quartering.…show more content…
These protests were not left to protest peacefully, however, as events like the Boston Massacre occurred at many protests. The British soldiers in the colonies took to violence and even to gunfire to stop the mostly peaceful protests of rights. The colonists took this angrily, and wrote in their grievances, “That they have a right peaceably to assemble, consider of their grievances, and petition the king; and that all prosecutions, prohibitory proclamations, and commitments for the same, are illegal” (U.S. Cong.). Congress, trying to not make the same mistakes as Britain, wrote that all people could protest peacefully without any violent recompense, and that they had the freedom to do so. They said, in Amendment 1 of the Bill of Rights, “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” (U.S. Cong.). This not only meant that Congress gave rights to the people to protest their issues, but also gave them freedom of speech, press, and the ability to petition the government, much as they tried to petition with Britain with their grievances. The colonists lastly complained about the presence of a standing army in the colonies, and petitioned Britain as
Open Document