Hannah Bowling
Homework (ch.5-8)
06/01/2019
Professor Light
Critical Thinking Questions
Chapters 5-8
Chapter 5
1. Was reconciliation between the American colonies and Great Britain possible in 1774?
Why or why not?
● Reconciliation between the American colonies and Great Britain was definitely possible
in 1774 but Britain ignored the possibility, leading them to war and struggle for freedom.
In 1774 American colonists were hopeful that Britain’s parliamentary election would put
forth people who called for peace and liberty in the Americas. Americans were all in
favor of reconciliation until Britain ignored all such possibilities. They decided to fight
which resulted in the Battle of Lexington. During the course of the battle Benjamin
Franklin sent a letter to an American and British friend that highlighted the possibility of
reconciliation as the best measure. Examples of all such events help conclude that it
was definitely possible but the ignorance of the British parliaments and military officials
led to battles rather than peace.
2. Look again at the painting that opened this chapter: The Bostonians Paying the
Excise-man, or Tarring and Feathering
(Figure 5.1). How does this painting represent
the relationship between Great Britain and the American colonies in the years from 1763
to 1774?
● The image in figure 5.1 shows five Patriots tarring and feathering the Commissioner of
Customs, John Malcolm, a sea captain, army officer, and staunch Loyalist. During 1763
and 1764 the Americans were basically held captured by England. They put taxes on all
importing and exporting goods and the colonies did not think that it was fair for them to
be taxed without representation. England had no interest in giving any representation
and refused to stop taxing them. This led to the Boston Tea Party on December 6, 1773.
During this event, colonists protested the tea act and dumped large chests of tea into the
water. The image also shows the Liberty Tree, an elm tree near Boston Common that
became a rallying point against the Stamp Act of 1765. ”When the crowd threatened to
hang Malcolm if he did not renounce his position as a royal customs officer, he
reluctantly agreed and the protestors allowed him to go home. The scene represents the
animosity toward those who supported royal authority and illustrates the high tide of
unrest in the colonies after the British government imposed a series of imperial reform
measures during the years 1763–1774.”
3. Why did the colonists react so much more strongly to the Stamp Act than to the Sugar
Act? How did the principles that the Stamp Act raised continue to provide points of
contention between colonists and the British government?
● The stamp act was much more extreme and sudden allowing colonists to react much
more strongly. The sugar act did not cause much discontent as the tax was placed at a
reasonable rate. The stamp act however was much more costly as it required a tax on all
printed items. “The passage of the Stamp Act meant that starting on November 1, 1765,
the colonists would contribute £60,000 per year—17 percent of the total cost—to the
upkeep of the ten thousand British soldiers in North America.” Protests against British
imperial policy took many forms and raised numerous concerns against many colonists
living in America. It drew many colonists from different viewpoints and areas together to
protest. The stamp act appeared to be an unconstitutional measure that disconcerted
free born british subjects of their liberty and rights. James Otis became the leading voice
of “Taxation without representation”.
4. History is filled with unintended consequences. How do the British government’s
attempts to control and regulate the colonies during this tumultuous era provide a case
in point? How did the aims of the British measure up against the results of their actions?
● The British government intended to take control over the colonies through their taxations
on goods. The outcome however resulted with more unrest and resistance. Even those
