The Tea Act of 1773 reinstated the issue of Britain’s right to tax the colonies. The Parliament and the colonies disagreed on a system of government in which the colonies would share the same rights and control as Parliament over their colonial affairs. Between 1773 and 1776, enormous amounts of tension between the center and the peripheries regarding the right to control the colonies led to the disintegration of the empire. The colonies and Parliament continued their dispute about the supremacy of the colonies that began with the Stamp Act of 1765.
In the Declaration of Rights and Grievances issued by the Stamp Act Congress, they claimed that Parliament lacked the power to tax the colonies because they had no representation. While the Stamp Act was repealed, the colonists were never given representation in Parliament. In the “Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms”, issued by the Second Continental Congress, this same issue was cited as a justification for fighting. “[The British declare] that parliament can ‘of right make laws to bind us in all cases whatsoever.’ What is to defend us against so enormous, so unlimited power?”
Imagine living without representation in the government; a world where people are treated like objects without natural rights. This is how the American colonists lived from the mid-1760’s to the mid-1770’s as taxes and acts were placed upon them without any representation in Parliament. This caused tension between England and the colonies, which consequently, after several failed treaties and negotiations, kicked off the American Revolution. On 23 March 1775, Patrick Henry gave his “Speech to the Second Virginia Convention.”
The people of the colonies in America found that “by creating a nation, a symbol, a legal unity called the United States, they could take over land, profits, and political power from favorites of the British Empire.” The first of many uprisings and riots that led towards overthrowing the English government of the colonies was Bacon’s Rebellion in Virginia in 1760. The strong new leadership class supported these rebellions against England. While on the other hand, the lower classes remained resentful and turned their non-approval to the colonial elite. Consequently, the poor started plundering the houses of the rich.
Why Did the Colonist Protest and How Did They Protest? In this document we will be going over why the colonist protest against the British and how they protested against them. Right now I have two reasons on why the colonist protested and two methods on how they protested. The two reasons on why they protested was, one, The Quartering Act, which allowed soldiers to live in people’s house if needed, and two, The Stamp Act, which it taxed every piece of used printed paper.
At the dawn of the 1770s, American colonial resentment of the British Parliament in London had been steadily increasing for some time. Retaliating in 1766, Parliament issued the Declaratory Act which repealed most taxes except issued a reinforcement of Parliament’s supremacy. In a fascinating exchange, we see that the Parliament identifies and responds to the colonists main claim; Parliament had no right to directly tax colonists who had no representation in Parliament itself. By asserting Parliamentary supremacy while simultaneously repealing the Stamp Act and scaling back the Sugar Act, Parliament essentially established the hill it would die on, that being its legitimacy. With the stage set for colonial conflict in the 1770s, all but one
This rebellion's result was divided, Indians compromised Britain's power, but Britain needed to change their policy. This rebellion was violence. Two hundred warriors died because of this rebellion. Epidemics also killed indigenous people during and after Pontiac's rebellion. The famous story of this rebellion is one of British army officers of Fort Pitt sent smallpox infected blankets to First Nations that tried to infect smallpox to Indians.
Next, is the motivation of the colonists in this region. They would seem to be in pursuit of land to expand their plantations onto. If your council could possibly offer contracts that would allow further exploration and territory control to the colonists in order to get them to fight. Also, they are certainly not stupid enough to go to war without decent weapons and protective armor. This could pose a problem due to the high prices of manufacturing.
In the year 1837, a radical movement in the British colony of Lower Canada participated in an armed rebellion to seek by force what they had failed to secure by legal political action. The principle objective towards which the uprising was directed had been given various names by historians such as political freedom, democracy and representative government. The rebels took arms in an effort to end the appointed minority's domination of the colony's governing institutions and to establish a responsible government. The Lower Canadian Rebellion was prosecuted on the advancement of liberty and republicanism. Within the North American context, these broad tenets articulated the importance of a sovereign, educated and virtuous citizenry as well as the standards of an effective government constitutionally constrained in its authority.
In this unit, we had learned about the American Revolution. Some of the major topics we covered were the role of women, the role of slaves, the role of Native Americans, the roles of France, the life as a soldier and some of the major battles. The woman often held and engaged in boycotts, they were cooks/nurses in the army, some were spies and one woman named Deborah Sampson dressed up as a man to help fight in the army. The slaves ran away from their colonial masters to join as a Britain soldier because if they did they were promised freedom after the war. The free Africans had tried to promote that colored people should be freed by joining the colonist's side.
The colonists no longer considered it be a virtuous government. As Thomas Paine said, “Government is, or at least should be, designed to “supply the deflect of moral virtue”. It is evident that in the years 1774 to 1776 that British government had become corrupt and they were forcing laws upon the colonists that they did not have the authority to do. By enforcing these laws without giving the colonists proper representation in Parliament the British government had infringed on the colonist’s rights to life, liberty, and
American Revolution Suppose the British had not taxed the colonies to raise money to pay for the wars. Would there still have been an American Revolution? Taxes were not the only problem between the colonists and Britain. The colonists were used to governing themselves. The 13 colonies were too far away and would have become too large for England to control.
5.2 The violent and nonviolent reactions to the crown’s authority on the brink of war The rallies of the American Patriots were a successful rebellion that led to the end of the European colonial invasion. Nevertheless, the success of a republic needed more efforts and support, along with leadership and social order.
DBQ Between the years 1750 and 1776, England was locking down on the colonies, imposing lots of taxes against the colonists such as the Stamp Acts and Townshend Acts. Tensions were high between England and the colonies and the idea that a Revolution might take place wasn’t out of the question. And it was between those 25 years that colonists in America began to find a sense of unity and a sense of their own individual identities.
Tensions were high in Boston between the British and the Colonists. Between the Boston Massacre in 1770 and the Boston Tea Party in 1773, Britain was very upset with Boston. King George III, the Lord North- led British government and many of the British citizens were very upset and irritated when they found out that the Boston colonists had made “Tea with salt water”. Once the parliament heard of their escapade, they began thinking of a way to insure that there would be no more uprisings in the Massachusetts colony.
