Why Were The American Colonies Justified

The chapters of our textbook, America: A Narrative History, written by George Brown Tindall and David Emory Shi, takes us on a historical yet comparative journey of the road to war and what caused the American Revolution, an insight into the war itself, and a perception to what life was like in America after the war was over. The essays of the book, America Compared: American History in International Perspective, collected by Carl J. Guarneri gives us a global context and a comparison between the North and South Americas in the dividing issues of labor, slavery, taxes, politics, economy, liberty, and equality.

One of the British wrongdoings against the colonists was that the Parliament instilled a numerous number of heavy taxes on the colonies after the Seven Years War. Those taxes were the Sugar Act, Stamp Act, Quartering Act, Townshend Acts and the Tea Act. These Acts, from the colonial standpoint, were to collect money for the treasury (Boyer et al, 141). Moreover, these taxed placed upon the colonies were an act of taxation without representation, which upset the colonists. “Jefferson argued that the English government had violated its contract with the colonists, there by giving them the right to replace it with a government of their own design.” A government with an emphasis on “equality of all individuals and their natural entitlement to justice, liberty, and self-fulfillment expressed republican’s deepest longing for a government that would rest on neither legal privilege nor exploitation of the majority by the few.” (Boyer et al, 158,

Many Americans and British have different opinions on what went on and who was right in the American Revolution. Americans thought they were right and so did the British. The American Revolution went on from 1775 to 1783. The very first battle, Lexington and Concord, was “a shot heard around the world.” Coming back to our opinions, were the American colonists justified to break off of Britain? The American colonists were justified by taxation, no representation, and the lack of land they owned.

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 Retaliating in 1766, Parliament issued the Declaratory Act which repealed most taxes except issued a reinforcement of Parliament’s supremacy.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

After the French and Indian war, Britain was in heavy debt and needed to acquire as much revenue as possible. Britain was so desperate for money, they did not care how they received the money and whose rights they violated in the process. Because of this unjust mindset, Britain was not merciful when creating ways to collect revenue. The British methods for acquiring money were purposeful but not just.

Settling in the New World provided both the American settlers and the British government with many opportunities. For the colonists, North America provided an opportunity to improve their lives and escape religious persecution. For the British, settlers in North America provided access to raw materials and new markets in which to sell finished goods. This mercantilist relationship continued for several years, until the colonists began to question Parliament’s right to treat them differently than other British citizens. Taxes were imposed on the colonists as a means of helping to pay the debt Britain had incurred fighting the French. Troops stationed in North America were viewed with suspicion by the colonists, often resulting in hostile encounters

The Seven Years’ War was very expensive. The American colonists payed lower taxes than mainland English residents. Money gained from taxing items was used to pay for military defense. Colonies weren’t represented in Parliament and to tax them without giving them that representation was liking taking away their rights.

The colonists were justified in their rebellion, but not really right to say that England's actions were wrong.

Additionally, the American colonists felt that the implemented taxes and laws were unjust. There were many unjust laws and taxes forced upon the colonies. In document two, the author states that Great Britain has the “legal authority to regulate the trade of Great Britain and all her colonies”. He believes that the raising revenue from the trade was never intended, and that the British Parliament never had the intention of implementing duties - duties before the Stamp Act - for the sake of raising revenue. However, the author felt that the Stamp Act and Townshend Act and the other acts from the Stamp Act onwards were unconstitutional. The American colonists were already harboring ill feelings towards the British because of the Proclamation

After the French and Indian war, Great Britain’s control over the colonies tightened because they believed that since they had supreme legislative power over the colonies they could impose taxes on the colonists to help pay the debt after the war (Document 1). One of the many acts imposed in the colonists was the stamp act. The stamp act had placed taxed stamps onto newspapers and pamphlets (Document 6). Colonists who refused

This was a war where the fight was with the New World and France. The British King tried to imposes taxes on the thirteen colonies to help pay for the cost. Thomas Paine talked about these types of “burdensome taxations” in Common Sense as well as in his other writing titled Rights of Man. He talked about these issues because he knew the colonists were angry. Writing about the injustice would appeal to them (Hacht, 178).

The indians decided to keep fighting the british. This war was fought over the british expanding their colonies into land that belonged to the native americans. The british were in no condition to fight with the native americans. The british were low on supplies and their soldiers were in debt. They had to have an agreement to leave and get the colonists off the property of the native americans . The colonists did not to leave the plentiful land. The king of England was furious that the colonist were not obeying his orders.Paragraph #5 The Sugar act 1764 The Sugar act was a way for the british to tax colonist and get more money them. The british got money from the colonist to pay for war damage and protection from the native americans. Colonist suspected that they had no voice in parliament. Samuel Adams established the Committee of Correspondence in March 1773. This made communication better between colonies who disagreed with the british. This made the theme taxation without representation a common catchphrase in the colonies. Colonists were agitated since they presumed that they didn’t begin the battle with the french indians.Paragraph #6 The Stamp act 1765The Stamp act was put taxes on the colonist for the use of newspapers, licenses, and colonial paper. The act was passed by the british parliament on March 22, 1765. The act was an effort by England

Between 1763 and 1775, there were three ‘Imperial Crises’ which occurred between the British and the American colonists. The conflict that was produced during this period arose through an undefined balance of political and economic power between the two parties. In 1763, Britain had just concluded the French and Indian war and was left with an immense and almost crippling debt of around 140 million pounds sterling (“Turning Point In American History”). In Britain’s eyes, the most effective way to reduce this debt was increased taxes. Unfortunately, the people of England were already massively overtaxed, which meant the last option for the British was to tax the American colonists. This required the reinforcement of the Navigation Acts, as well

After seven years of the fighting the French and Indian War, tensions had grown between Britain and its American colonies. In response to the substantial debt Britain was burdened with after the war, they began taxing the colonist with the intent of recuperating their losses. The colonist, who had not been given representation in the British parliament, felt the taxes were unfair. After more than a decade of increased restrictions and taxes, the prominent members of the colonial society were left with a decision to make: pay the taxes willingly or prepare for war ("Patrick Henry’s Speeches"). Although many colonists believed action against the British was necessary, only a few were willing to voice their opinions. On March 23, 1775, Patrick Henry decided it was time that his voice was heard (Kindig). His statements on that day later became known as “Liberty or Death” (Kindig).

At a time when the British Monarchy was establishing itself as the cornerstone of the emerging and dynamic British Constitution, and all British subjects, including those in the North American Colonies, were subjects of the Crown, Price provided the theoretical foundation to justify, and even advocate, the actions of the colonists in severing their ties with Britain. This was a very dangerous thing to do, he was after all lending support to those who were seen by most people as treacherous. However, although he was heavily criticized and was, at one time, fearful of his life, Price resolutely supported the colonists believing that their cause was justified and that the British Government, and the King no less, were guilty of denying these