Describe the punitive clamp-downs imposed on the colonies by the British Parliament and the resistance on the part of the colonies.
Please respond to the below 4 posts with a 100 words or more by 9 PM EST tonight.
In the beginning the Stamp Act caused an uproar in the colonies because wealthy and educated landowners and merchants were going to be taxed on all documents they used on a daily basis. The colonists felt that this taxation was unfair and unjust because colonists saw themselves as British citizens. The colonists had no problem taxing themselves within each colony and as long as it was done “internally” it was accepted. Ironically, the colonies had no problem paying taxes on trade and foreign affairs to England. This was accepted and seen as normal practice. However when it came to the Stamp Act, the colonies wanted to uphold the English Bill of Rights. Since colonists were devoid of representation in Parliament, this was a violation of the the rights of the colonists (Totally History, 2012). Due to the fact that the colonists did not have formal representation in Parliament, per the English Bill of Rights, the colonists had the right to disagree with this taxation.
The fact is the majority of the English population did not have representation. Representation was very limited in Britain with only 3% of men that were allowed with the utmost controlled being done by the local gentry (Totally History, 2012). Parliament assumed they had every right to tax the colonies. With the limited amount of overall representation, the British government passed legislation on behalf of its constituents, By doing this, Parliament argued that the colonies had virtual representation and they could pass any form of tax. This is how Parliament was able to get around the English Bill of Rights.
No Taxation Without Representation, 2012. Totally History. Retrieved from: http://totallyhistory.com/no-taxation-without-representation/
M2D1 – Liz Berroa
Given the fact that voting patterns in England were in no way representative and yet British subjects accepted tax levies by Parliament, is the American argument “no taxation without representation” a valid one?
America’s argument “no taxation without representation” was a valid indeed! Remember they were used to governing themselves. In Rhode Island they had a charter government with 2 fractions and they held elections to assign representative and decided on taxes to be collected (Middlekauff, 2007, p. 101). Connecticut also had a charter government with two fractions, the New Lights and the Old Lights (Middlekauff, 2007, p. 107).
Consider the American question. Did Parliament represent the colonies, and did Parliament have a right to pass taxes on the colonies?
Parliament did not and could not have represented the colonies. Their main goal and objective was to serve the Crown. According to Middlekauff, this translated into maintaining “the king’s peace,”” (2007, p. 16). At the time this covered local policies and foreign policies equal to national security. Local policies could only cover England and national security even though it might benefit the colonies, in the end it was for the protection and benefit of England not America.
The post Describe the punitive clamp-downs imposed on the colonies by the British Parliament and the resistance on the part of the colonies. Please respond to the below 4 posts with a 100 words or more by 9 PM EST tonight. appeared first on My Nursing Paper.