Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
1. Between 1763 and 1776, many things happened that would have caused me to turn
against my “mother country.” As the owner of a newspaper company from Boston,
Massachusetts, I would have been directly affected by many of the taxes that the British enforced
upon the Americans after the French and Indian War. These excessive taxes and many other
offenses would have led me to revolt against Britain and feel hatred towards the country that I
had once admired and loved.
In the middle of the eighteenth century, the relationship between Britain and the colonies
in America was mostly friendly but some tension was beginning to brew. The British colonies in
America looked to Britain as their superior, yet they were starting to find the authority of their
“mother country” as a nuisance. When British officials collected customs duties, searched
cargoes, and enforced trade regulations, they met with little resistance, although many of the
colonists complied grudgingly (Roark, pg. 149). Resistance was stronger if the British tried to
meddle in the internal affairs of the colonies. Eighty percent of colonial governors were born in
England. Colonists strongly disliked the fact that most of their governors were not born in the
colonies. Many well-meaning colonial governors struggled to establish relationships of trust and
regard with wealthy and respected colonists but relationships were hard to form and maintain
when governors’ terms lasted for only about five years and could be ended at any time (Roark,
pg. 149). These unfortunate colonial governors constantly battled with the colonists’ assemblies
over many political issues. Soon the colonists focused upon the fact that British policies did not
distinctly define the legal powers of the colonists’. Seeing this oversight as a terrific opportunity,
the colonists began to create their own rules. By 1720, the colonists had established a
representative government and gained the power to initiate legislation (Roark, pg. 151). But all
the laws that the colonists produced had to be accepted by the state governor and the Board of
Trade in Britain. Fortunately, the colonists had the distance of the ocean on their side. Oftentimes
it took several years for the colonists’ laws to travel over the Atlantic Ocean and be repealed by
the British government. During this time, the colonists put their laws into action without the
consent of their “mother country” (Roark, pg. 151). Overall, the colonists still considered Britain
as their leader, and for the most part they obeyed Britain’s rules, but the colonists were growing
restless and desired to flex their muscles and start governing themselves.
British success in the French and Indian War led to tensions between the mother country
and the colonies. While Britain came out of the French and Indian War as the victor, Britain
accumulated an unbelievable amount of debt in the process. In order to reduce this huge war
debt, the British began to impose taxes upon the colonists. What resulted was an increase in
colonial resentment against the British attempts to gain more control in the colonies
(history.state.gov. “French and Indian War”). In 1763, the British issued a proclamation that
attempted to block western expansion in order to cease squabbles with the Indians. However, the
colonists continued to settle further west, and battles with the Indians continued to ensue. The
colonists did not believe that the British had any right to stop their settlement of the west.
Colonists grew even more distrustful and wary of their “mother country” as they witnessed
Britain destroy relationships with the Indians, causing the colonists to fear that the Indians would
unexpectedly backfire at any moment (Roark, pg. 167). In the end, while the British won the
French and Indian War, their success came at a huge price. In order to win the war, Britain spent
a huge amount of money and went into a major amount of debt. What resulted was a series of
taxes in the colonies in America that led the colonists to grow increasingly furious. Not only did
the British enforce taxes upon the colonies, but they also forbade colonization of the west, and
they renewed skirmishes with the Indians, causing the colonists to live in fear of impending
Indian assaults. All of these offenses induced the colonists to feel wary and agitated towards their
once beloved “mother country.”
From 1763 to 1776, there were many key changes in British policy towards the colonies.
In 1764, George Greenville, the British prime minister, issued the Revenue Act, or the Sugar
Act. This act was made in response to the unsuccessful Molasses Act of 1733. The Sugar Act
decreased the tax on molasses to three pence and increased the penalty for smuggling. While the
act seemed to have the sole purpose of regulating trade, in reality, the act was meant to raise
revenue in order to pay off Britain’s war debt. Those who tried to avoid the three pence tax on
molasses by smuggling, if caught without proper paperwork, were tried by a vice-admiralty court
in Nova Scotia. In this Nova Scotia court, there was only one judge, and his justice was certain
and severe. However, smuggling continued, and many confrontations ensued when smugglers
were caught by the increasingly vigilant British soldiers. While the Sugar Act caused an ample
amount of resistance, it only affected American shippers, so the rebellion was not enough to
extremely vex the powerful British. But many Americans began to see the Sugar Act as a
violation of the long-recognized colonial right of self-taxation. Benjamin Franklin forebodingly
stated that “two distinct Jurisdictions or Powers of Taxing cannot well subsist together in the
same country” (Roark, pg. 167-8).
When Britain’s debt had still not decreased, Greenville released the Stamp Act in 1765.
This act caused the colonists to question Britain’s authority. The Stamp Act levied a tax on all
paper used for official documents such as licenses, wills, newspapers, pamphlets, ships’ cargo
lists, and court documents. In order to show that the tax had been paid, a stamp was placed on the
paper as proof. Unlike its predecessor, the Sugar Act, the Stamp Act was clearly made for the
purpose of gaining money, and it affected many people (Roark, pg. 169). As the owner of a
newspaper business, I would have been extremely affected by the Stamp Act. I would have had
to pay a tax on all of the paper I used to print articles. The colonists responded angrily to the
Stamp Act by declaring that taxation could not be enforced without consent. In addition, the
colonists argued that they were not properly represented in Parliament (“Stamp Act Congress”).
Greenville simply replied by saying that the colonists were “virtually” represented in Parliament.
The colonists also argued that every British subject who lived in the colonies had the right to a
trial by jury. This declaration was made in response to the portion of the Sugar Act that declared
that every sugar smuggler would be tried by one judge in Nova Scotia. The Stamp Act Congress
also declared that the colonists would not be able to buy British goods if they were taxed so
heavily. Finally, the Stamp Act Congress called for the Stamp Act to be repealed (“Stamp Act
Congress”). In 1766, Britain responded by repealing the Stamp Act but what followed was the
Declaratory Act. This act stated that Britain maintained the right to tax the colonists. The Stamp
Act and the Declaratory Act are examples of key changes in British policy towards the colonies
(Roark, pg. 174).
Following the Declaratory Act was the Townshend duties of 1767. These duties were
imposed upon tea, glass, lead, paper, and paint imported into the colonies. The tax was to be paid
by the importer, but the tax also increased the price of the goods. The colonists responded to the
Townshend duties with anger. While colonists had once considered only internal British taxes as
wrong, the colonists now began to frown upon external British taxes also. Once regarded as a
means of regulating the flow of trade, external taxes were now looked down upon as sneaky
ways for the British to gain money. According to John Dickinson, a Philadelphia lawyer, “We
are taxed without our consent…We are therefore---- SLAVES." Furthermore, Dickinson
