The Stamp Act of 1765 (short title Duty in the American Colonies Act 1765 <5, is a Parliament of the United Kingdom's Law which imposes a direct tax on the colony -colonial colonies and require that many printed materials in the colony be produced on stamp paper manufactured in London, carrying stamped revenue arises. Printed materials include legal documents, magazines, playing cards, newspapers, and many other types of paper used throughout the colony. Like the previous tax, stamp taxes must be paid in the valid UK currency, not the colonial paper money. The purpose of the tax is to help pay troops stationed in North America after the British victory in the Seven Years War and the North American theater of the War of France and India. However, the colonists never worried about the French invasion to start, and they argued that they had paid their share of the cost. They suggested that it was actually a British patronage problem for British officials and career warriors to be paid for by Londoners.
The Stamp Act is very unpopular among the colonists. A consensus considers it a violation of their rights as British to be taxed without their consent - an agreement that can only be granted by the colonial legislature. Their slogan is "No taxes without representation." The colonial councils sent petitions and protests. The Stamps Law Congress held in New York City was the first significant joint colonial response to all British sizes; it petitioned to Parliament and the King.
One member of the British Parliament argues that colonialism is no different from 90 per cent of Britain's uninsured (and thus non-voting) population, but who remains "in fact" represented by voters and representatives who own the land with the same interests as nonvoters. An American lawyer denied this by pointing out that while voters in Great Britain can have enough in common with non-voting citizens in the country to justify "virtually" representing non-voters, "the relationship between British Americans and the British voter, is a knot too weak to be relied upon. "(Not enough parallels between Parliament and Colonial to justify the application of law without the Colonial consent).
Local protest groups led by traders and colonial landowners established relationships through the Correspondence Committee, creating an extended loose coalition from New England to Maryland. Protests and demonstrations initiated by a new secret organization called Sons of Liberty often turn violent and destructive when the masses are involved. Immediately, all tax distributors of the stamps were intimidated to withdraw from their commissions, and the tax was never effectively collected.
The opposition to the Stamp Act is not limited to colonies. British merchants and manufacturers, whose exports to the colonies were threatened by a colonial boycott, put pressure on Parliament. The law was repealed on March 18, 1766 as a matter of eligibility, but Parliament affirmed its power to legislate for the colony "in all cases" by also passing the Declaration Act. There followed a series of new taxes and regulations, also opposed by the colonists.
This episode played a major role in defining the complaints clearly stated in the text of the George III Indictment section of the Declaration of Independence, and enabled an organized colonial resistance that led to the American Revolution in 1775.
Video Stamp Act 1765
​​â € <â €
The British victory in the Seven Years War (1756-1763), known in America as the War of France and India, has been won only with substantial financial costs. During the war, British national debt almost doubled, up from Ã, Â £ 72,289,673 in 1755 to nearly Ã, £ 129,586,789 in 1764. Postwar costs were expected to remain high as the Bute ministry decided in early 1763 to maintaining ten thousand regular British troops. in the American colony, which will cost around Ã, Â £ 225,000 per year, equal to Ã, Â £ 30 million today. The main reason for maintaining such a force is that the demobilization of the army will make 1,500 officers lose their jobs, many of whom have good connections in Parliament. This made it politically wise to maintain the formation of a great period of peace, but the British did not want to keep the troops standing at home so it was necessary to head most of the troops elsewhere.
Putting 10,000 troops to separate the Indians and the American border is a role. The outbreak of the Pontiac Uprising in May 1763 seemed to strengthen the logic of this decision, as this was an American Indian revolt against British expansion. The main reason for sending 10,000 troops into the wilderness is to provide billets for officers who are part of the British patronage system. John Adams said, "Revenue is still requested from America, and adapted to the maintenance of officers and retired herds in laziness and luxury."
George Grenville became prime minister in April 1763 after the failure of the short-lived Ministry of Bute, and he had to find a way to pay for this great peacetime troop. Taxing in the UK is impossible, because there is a ferocious protest in Britain against taxes 1763 from Bute ministry, with Bute hanging with clothes. Therefore, the Grenville ministry decided that Parliament would increase this income by imposing taxes on American colonists without their consent. This is something new; The previous parliament passed measures to regulate trade in the colonies, but never before directly taxed the colonies to increase revenue.
Politicians in London always expect the American colonists to contribute to their own defense expenses. As long as the French threats exist, there is little problem persuading the colonial legislature to provide assistance. Such assistance is usually provided through the promotion of colonial militia, funded by taxes filed by the colonial legislature. Also, the legislature is sometimes willing to help maintain regular British units defending the colonies. As long as such assistance comes, there is little reason for the British Parliament to impose its own tax on the colonists. But after the peace of 1763, the colonial militia quickly withdrew. The militia officers were exhausted by the humiliation shown to them by ordinary British officers, and frustrated by almost impossible to get an ordinary British commission; they do not want to keep working after the war. However, they have no military role, because the threat of India is very minimal and there is no foreign threat. The colonial legislators did not see the need for British troops.
The Sugar Act of 1764 was the first tax in the Grenville program to increase revenue in America, which was a modification of the Molasses Act of 1733. The Molasses Act has imposed a tax of 6 cents per gallon (equal to Ã, Â £ 3.81 today) on foreign molasses imported into the British colony. The purpose of the Molasses Act is not to increase revenues, but to make foreign molasses so expensive that they effectively provide a monopoly on the molasses imported from the British West Indies. Does not work; colonial merchants avoid taxes by smuggling or, more often, bribing customs officials. The Sugar Act reduces taxes to 3 cents per gallon (equal to Ã, £ 1.63 today) in the hope that lower rates will increase compliance and thereby increase the amount of taxes collected. The law also imposes additional import duties and includes measures to make customs services more effective.
The American colonies initially objected to the Sugar Act for economic reasons, but soon they recognized that there was a constitutional issue involved. The British Constitution guarantees that British subjects can not be taxed without their consent, which comes in the form of representation in Parliament. The colonists did not elect members of Parliament, and therefore were seen as a violation of the British Constitution for Parliament to impose a tax on them. There is little time to raise this issue in response to the Sugar Act, but it becomes a big objection to the Postage Act the following year.
Maps Stamp Act 1765
English decision making
Parliament announced in April 1764 when the Sugar Act was passed that they would also consider stamp taxes on the colonies. The opposition of the colonies will soon come to this possible tax, but both Parliamentarians and American agents in England (such as Benjamin Franklin) anticipate the intensity of protests generated by the tax.
The act of postage has become a very successful tax method in the United Kingdom; they generate more than £ 100,000 in tax revenues with very little in collection costs. By requiring official stamps on most legal documents, the system is almost self-regulating; the document will be null and void under English law without the required stamp. Such taxation on the colonies had been considered twice before the Seven Years' War and again in 1761. Grenville had actually been presented with a colonial stamp action plan in September and October of 1763, but the proposal lacked a special knowledge of colonial affairs to illustrate adequately documents that are subject to postage. At the time of the passing of the Sugar Act in April 1764, Grenville explained that the right to tax the colony was not questioned, and that additional taxes would probably follow, including stamp taxes.
The Great Revolution has upheld the principle of parliamentary supremacy. Trade control and colonial manufacturing expanded this principle across the ocean. This belief has never been tested on the question of colonial taxation, but the British assume that the interests of the thirteen colonies are so different that joint colonial acts are unlikely to occur against such taxes - assumptions that have their origins in failure. The Albany Conference of 1754. By the end of December 1764, the first serious warning of colonial opposition was granted by pamphlets and petitions from colonies protesting both the Sugar Act and the proposed stamp tax.
For Grenville, the first problem is the tax amount. Soon after his announcement of the possibility of tax, he had told American agents that he was not against the Americans suggesting an alternative way to raise the money himself. However, the only other alternative is to ask each colony and allow them to determine how to raise their share. It has never worked before, even during the French and Indian Wars, and there is no political mechanism in place that will guarantee the success of such cooperation. On February 2, 1765, Grenville met to discuss taxes with Benjamin Franklin, Jared Ingersoll of New Haven, Richard Jackson, agents for Connecticut, and Charles Garth, agent for South Carolina (Jackson and Garth are also members of Parliament). This colonial representation has no specific alternative to attendance; they only suggested that the determination be left to the colony. Grenville replied that he wanted to raise money "in the easiest and most unpleasant way for the Colonies". Thomas Whately has compiled the Stamp Act, and he says that the delay in its application "is due to jealousy to the colonies," and that the tax is judged as "the easiest, the most equal and the most certain."
The debate in Parliament commenced immediately after this meeting. The petition filed by the colony was officially ignored by Parliament. In the debate, Charles Townshend said, "and now these Americans, the children grown by our care, are nourished by our luxury until they grow to the level of strength and prosperity, and protected by our hands, will they wish to donate mites to free us from the heavy burdens of the burden we lie to? "This caused Colonel Isaac Barrà © response:
Are they planted by your care? No! Your oppression planted it in America. They escape from your tyranny to a country that is at that time untreated and unkind where they open themselves to almost all the difficulties that are of human nature, and among other things to the savage of the savage enemies, the most subtle, and I take to me for say, the most formidable of every person on the face of the earth....
They are nourished by your pleasure? They grow because of your negligence. As soon as you begin to care about them, the care is done in sending people to govern them, in one department and the other, who may be deputy deputies to some members of this house, who are sent to spy on their freedom. , to misrepresent their actions and prey on them; the man whose behavior has on many occasions caused the blood of the sons of liberty to retreat within them....
They are protected by your arm? They have gloriously taken up arms in your defense, have exerted courage in the midst of a constant industry and exhausted them to defend a borderless country bleeding, its interior has produced all of its little savings for your emolument.... the people who I believe to be absolutely faithful like any subject the king possesses, but people are jealous of their freedom and who will justify them if they are to be broken; but the subject is too soft and I will say no more. "
Tax details
The Stamp Act was passed by Parliament on March 22, 1765 with the effective date of 1 November 1765. It passed through 205-49 in the House of Commons and unanimously in the House of Lords. Historians Edmund and Helen Morgan describe the tax details:
The highest tax, Ã, Â £ 10, is placed... on the attorney's license. Other papers related to litigation are taxed in amounts varying from 3d. up to 10 seconds. Land grants under one hundred hectares are taxed. 6d., Between 100 and 200 acres 2s., And from 200 to 320 acres 2s. 6d., In addition to 2s 6d. for each additional 320 hectares (1.3 km 2 ). Cards are subject to tax shilling packages, ten-shilling dice, and newspapers and pamphlets at one cent to one sheet and shillings for each sheet on pamphlets or paper totaling more than one sheet and less than six sheets in octavo, fewer than twelve in quarto, or less than twenty in the folio (in other words, the tax on pamphlets grows in proportion to their size but stops altogether if they become large enough to qualify as a book).
High taxes for lawyers and students are designed to limit the growth of professional classes in the colony. Stamps must be purchased with hard currency, which is rare, rather than the more colonial paper currency. To avoid draining the currency from the colony, that income should be spent in America, especially for the supplies and salaries of the British Army units placed there.
Two features of the Stamp Act involving the court attracted special attention. Taxes on court documents specifically include courts "exercise ecclesiastical jurisdiction." These types of courts are currently not in the colonies and no bishops are currently assigned to the colonies, who will lead the court. Many of their colonists or ancestors escaped from Britain in particular to avoid the influence and strength of the state-backed religious institutions, and they feared that this was the first step to restoring the old ways in the colony. Some Anglicans in the northern colonies have openly advocated the appointment of the bishop, but they are opposed by both southern and non-Anglican Anglicans who make up the majority in the northern colony.
The Stamp Act allows the admiralty courts to have jurisdiction to try offenders, following the example set by the Sugar Act. However, admiralty courts have traditionally been limited to cases involving the high seas. The Sugar Act seems to fall within this precedent, but the Stamp Act does not, and the colony sees this as a further attempt to replace their local courts with a British-controlled court.
Colonial reaction
Political response
Grenville began appointing Stamp Distributors as soon as the law passed Parliament. Applicants are not hard to come by because of the anticipated income that the position promised, and he pointed local colonies to the post. Benjamin Franklin even suggested the appointment of John Hughes as an agent for Pennsylvania, pointing out that even Franklin was unaware of the turmoil and tax effects that would result in an American-British relationship or that this distributor would be the focus of colonial resistance..
The debate in the colony actually began in the spring of 1764 over the Postage Act when Parliament passed a resolution containing the statement, "That, to further finance the Fees, it may be appropriate to fill a certain Stamp Duty in the Colony and Plantation." The Sugar Law and the Proposed Cap Law are designed primarily to increase the income of the colonists. The Sugar Act, for the most part, is a continuation of past laws relating primarily to trade rules (called external taxes), but a completely new stated objective: to collect direct revenues from the colonists for a particular purpose. The novelty of the Postage Act is that it is the first internal tax (a tax which is entirely based on activities within the colonies) which are levied directly on the colony by Parliament. It was judged by the colonists as a more dangerous attack on their rights than the Sugar Act, because of its wide application potential to the colonial economy.
The immediate theoretical issue is the question of taxation without representation. Benjamin Franklin has raised this as far as 1754 in the Albany Congress when he writes, "That it is undoubtedly the right of the British to be taxed but by their own Agreement given thro 'Their Representation that the Colonies have no Representative in Parliament." Counter against This argument is a virtual representation theory. Thomas Whately puts this theory in a pamphlet that readily recognizes that there can be no tax without consent, but the fact is that at least 75% of British adult males are not represented in Parliament because of property qualifications or other factors. Members of Parliament are bound to represent the interests of all British citizens and subjects, so the colony is the recipient of virtual representations in Parliament, such as those who lost their rights in the British Isles. However, this theory ignores the crucial differences between the unrepresented in Britain and the colonists. The colonists enjoy true representation in their own legislative assemblies, and the problem is whether this legislature, not Parliament, is in fact the sole recipient of the invaders' approval of taxation.
In May 1764, Samuel Adams of Boston composed the following which states the general position of America:
Because if our Trade can be taxed why not our Land? Why not Generate Lands & amp; every thing we have or take advantage of? This we understand the right of our Charter to govern & amp; self-taxes - It attacks our British Privileges, which because we never lost them, we have in common with our Indigenous Subjects from the UK: If Taxes are levied on us in any form without we have Legal Representation to which they are laid , are we not reduced from the Free Subject Character to a State suffering from slave slaves.
Massachusetts appointed five members of the Correspondence Committee in June 1764 to coordinate action and exchange information on the Sugar Act, and Rhode Island formed a similar committee in October 1764. This integrated action measure represents a significant step forward in colonial unity and cooperation. Virginia House of Burgesses sent a tax protest to London in December 1764, arguing that they did not have the speculators needed to pay taxes. Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Connecticut also sent a protest to England in 1764. The contents of the message varied, but they all stressed that the colony's taxation without colonial consent was a violation of their rights. By the end of 1765, all Thirteen Colonies except Georgia and North Carolina had sent a kind of protest passed by the colonial legislature.
Virginia House of Burgesses reunited in early May 1765 after news was received from the passage of the Act. By the end of May, it appears that they will not consider taxes, and many legislators go home, including George Washington. Only 30 of the 116 Burgesses are left, but the only ones left are Patrick Henry who attended his first session. Henry leads a clash with the Stamp Act; he filed a resolution on May 30, 1765, and they were passed in the form of Virginia Resolution. The Resolves states:
It was agreed that the first Adventurers and Settlers of the colonies and Dominion of Virginia brought there, and forwarded to their Posterity, and all other majesty subjects since living in Majesty said Colonies, all the Freedoms, privileges, franchises, and Immunities that each when it has been held, enjoyed, and owned by the Great Britain.
It is agreed that by two royal Charters, given by the First King James, the above Colonists are entitled to all the Freedom, Privileges, and Immunities of the Forested Person and Natural Subjects, for all Purpose and Purpose, as if they had been obedient and born in the Kingdom of England.
Resolved, That the People's own Taxation, or by the People chosen by themselves to represent them, who can only know what the Taxable Person can bear, or the easiest method to raise them, and must themselves be influenced by each Tax laid on the People, is the only Security against the burdensome Tax, and the distinguishing character of the British Freedom, without which the ancient Constitution can not exist.
Resolved, That the liege of His majesty The most ancient and faithful colony without interruption enjoys invaluable Rights is governed by the Law, respects their Internal Politi and Taxation, as originating from their own Agreement, with their Sovereign Endorsement, or its Replacement ; and that the same is never lost or surrendered, but has been constantly recognized by the King and the People of Great Britain.
On June 6, 1765, Massachusetts Lower House proposed a meeting for Tuesday 1 October in New York City:
That it is very important there should be a Meeting as soon as possible, the Committee of the House of Representatives or Burgesses in some Colonies on this Continent to consult together about the Current State of Colonies, and the difficulties in which they are located. and shall be reduced by the operation of a late Parliamentary Deed to collect Import Duty and Taxes on Colonies, and to consider the General and Humble Addresses to His Majesty and Parliament to appeal for Help.
No attempt was made to keep this meeting a secret; Massachusetts immediately told Richard Jackson about the proposed meeting, their agency in the UK and members of Parliament.
Protests in the streets
While the colonial legislature acted, ordinary citizens of the colony also voiced their concerns beyond this formal political process. Historian Gary B. Nash writes:
Both external and internally lit stimulation, fermentation during the years from 1761 to 1766 altered the dynamics of social and political relations in the colonies and moved the flow of reformist sentiment with the force of mountain winds. Significantly for half a decade this is the colonial response to the British Postage Act, more reactions from the occupiers than their alleged leaders.
Both loyal supporters of British authority and established colonial protest leaders underestimated the activation capacity of ordinary colonists. At the end of 1765... the people on the streets were shocked, anxious, and frightened of their social superior.
Massachusetts
The earliest street protests were most prominent in Boston. Andrew Oliver is a stamp distributor for Massachusetts who hung on August 14, 1765 "from a giant elm tree at the intersection of Essex and Orange Streets in the South End of the city." It also hung a green-painted boots at the bottom ("the only green-ville"), a game in both Grenville and Earl of Bute, the two most blamed by the colonists. Lieutenant Governor Thomas Hutchinson ordered Sheriff Stephen Greenleaf to lower the statue, but he was opposed by many. Throughout the day crowds crowded merchants on Orange Street to have their belongings symbolically stamped under an elm tree, which came to be known as the "Liberty Tree".
Ebenezer MacIntosh is a veteran of the Seven Years War and shoemaker. One night, he led a crowd that cut off Andrew Oliver's statue and took him in a funeral procession to the Town House where the legislature met. From there, they went to Oliver's office - which they collapsed and symbolically branded wood. Next, they took the statue to Oliver's home at the foot of Fort Hill, where they chopped him and then burned him - along with Oliver's stable house and coach and chaise. Greenleaf and Hutchinson were stoned as they tried to stop the mob, who then looted and destroyed Oliver's house. Oliver was asked to be released from his duty the next day. This resignation, however, is not enough. Oliver was eventually forced by MacIntosh to be paraded on the streets and openly resigned under the Liberty Tree.
As word spreads about the reasons for resignation, the violence and threats of Oliver Oliver's aggressive actions escalated across the colony, just as organized insurgents did. Throughout the colony, members of the middle and upper classes formed the foundation for these resistance groups and immediately identified themselves as Sons of Liberty. These colonial resistance groups burned stupas of royal officials, forced the Stamp Act collectors to resign, and were able to get businessmen and judges away without the proper use of stamps demanded by Parliament.
On August 16, the mob damaged the home and official letters of William Story, a list of deputies from Vice-Admiralty, who later moved to Marblehead, Massachusetts. Benjamin Hallowell, the customary watchdog, suffered a near total loss of his home.
On August 26, MacIntosh led an attack on Hutchinson's home. The masses displaced the family, destroyed the furniture, knocked down the interior walls, emptied the wine cellar, deployed Hutchinson's collection to a Massachusetts history paper, and lowered the building cupola. Hutchinson has been in the public office for three decades; he estimates his loss at Ã, Â £ 2,218 (in today's money, nearly $ 250,000). Nash concluded that this attack was more than a reaction to the Stamp Act:
But it is clear that the crowd gave years of years of hate to the accumulation of wealth and power by the arrogant prerogative faction led by Hutchinson. Behind every ax swing and every stone thrown, behind every crushed crystal cup and a broken mahogany chair, lay the anger of an innocent Bostonian who has read or heard the recurring references to the poor as "rable" and into the popular caucus of Boston , presided over by Samuel Adams, as "stupid swarms, tools, and synchophants."
Governor Francis Bernard offered a prize of £ 300 for information about the leaders of the masses, but no information was forthcoming. MacIntosh and several others were arrested, but released by the pressure of the merchants or freed by the mass action.
The street demonstrations stem from the efforts of respected public leaders such as James Otis, who leads the Boston Gazette, and Samuel Adams of Loyal Nine of Boston Caucus, a Boston merchant organization. They make an effort to control the people under them on an economic and social scale, but they often do not succeed in maintaining a balance between mass demonstrations and unrest. These people need the support of the working class, but must also establish the legitimacy of their actions so that their protest against the UK is taken seriously. At the time of this protest, Nine Loyal was more than a social club with political interests but, in December 1765, it began to issue a statement as Sons of Liberty.
Rhode Island
Rhode Island also suffered street violence. Crowds built a stake near the City Hall in Newport on August 27, where they took stupas from three officials designated as stamp distributors: Augustus Johnson, Dr. Thomas Moffat, and attorney Martin Howard. The crowd was initially led by merchants William Ellery, Samuel Vernon, and Robert Crook, but they soon lost control. That night, the crowd was led by a poor man named John Weber, and they attacked the houses of Moffat and Howard, where they destroyed walls, fences, art, furniture, and wine. The local Sons of Liberty openly opposed the violence, and they initially refused to support Weber when he was arrested. They are convinced to come to his aid, however, when retaliation threatens their own homes. Weber is released and faded into obscurity.
Howard became the only leading American to openly support the Stamp Act in his pamphlet "Colonialist Colonialist Defense" (1765). After the riots, Howard had to leave the colony, but he was honored by the Crown with the promise of Supreme Court Justice of North Carolina with a salary of 1,000 pounds.
New York
In New York, James McEvers resigned from his distributorship four days after the attack on Hutchinson's home. The stamp arrived in New York Harbor on October 24 for several northern colonies. Placards appearing throughout the city warned that "the first person to distribute or use a patterned paper let him take care of his house, his people, and his influence." New York merchants met on October 31 and agreed not to sell British goods until the law was lifted. Crowds took to the streets during the four-day demonstration, not controlled by local leaders, culminating in attacks by two thousand people at the home of Governor Cadwallader Colden and the burning of two sled and a coach. The unrest in New York City continues until the end of the year, and local Liberty Children have difficulty in controlling mass action.
Other Colonies
In Frederick, Maryland, a court of 12 judges ruled the Postage Act did not take effect on November 23, 1765, and directed that business and colonial officials proceed in all respects without the use of stamps. A week later, the crowd did a fake funeral procession for action on Frederick's streets. The judges have been dubbed "12 Immortal Justices," and November 23 has been designated "Repudiation Day" by the Maryland state legislature. On October 1, 2015, Cardin Senator (D-MD) read a Congressional Record a statement dating back to 2015 as the 250th anniversary of the event. Among the 12 judges was William Luckett, who later served as lieutenant colonel at Maryland Militia in the battle of Germantown.
Other popular demonstrations took place in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, Annapolis, Maryland, Wilmington and New Bern, North Carolina, and Charleston, South Carolina. In Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, the demonstration was conquered but even targeted Benjamin Franklin's home, although it was not tampered with. On November 16th, twelve stamp distributors have resigned. The Georgian distributor did not arrive in America until January 1766, but the first and only official act was to resign.
The overall effect of this protest is to both anger and unite the American people like never before. Opposition to the Act inspired both the political and constitutional forms of literature throughout the colony, reinforcing colonial political perceptions and engagement, and creating new forms of organized resistance. Organized groups quickly learned that they could force royal officials to resign by using violent measures and threats.
Quebec, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, and the Caribbean
The main problem is the British constitutional right, so the French in Quebec do not react. Some English-speaking traders are opposed, but are in a small minority. The Quebec Gazette discontinued publication until the action was revoked, apparently in reluctance to use stamped paper. In neighboring Nova Scotia, a number of former New England residents have objected, but recent UK immigrants and London-based business based in Halifax, the provincial capital, are more influential. The only major public protest was hanging in the seal distributor stamp and Lord Bute. The action was carried out in both provinces, but Nova Scotia stamp distributor resigned in January 1766, struck by uncontrollable fear for his safety. The authorities there were ordered to allow ships carrying papers that were not stepped on in ports, and business continued after the distributors ran out of stamps. The law invited several protests in Newfoundland, and the drafting of petitions against not only the Postage Act, but the existence of the traditional house at St. John's, under a law dated to the reign of Edward VI prohibiting all kinds of duties to import goods related to fisheries.
Hard protests are few in the Caribbean colony. The political opposition is expressed in a number of colonies, including Barbados and Antigua, and by absent landowners living in Britain. The worst political violence occurred at St. Kitts and Nevis. The unrest occurred on October 31, 1765, and again on November 5, targeting the home and office stamp distributor; the number of participants shows that the percentage of the white population of St. Kitts which is matched by Bostonian involvement in the riots. Sending stamps to St Kitts was blocked, and they were never used there. Montserrat and Antigua also managed to avoid the use of stamps; some correspondents thought that the riots were prevented in Antigua only by the presence of a large army. Despite vocal political opposition, Barbados uses stamps, for the pleasure of King George. In Jamaica there is also a vocal opposition, which includes the threat of violence. There were many evacuations of postage stamps, and ships arriving without stamped paper were allowed into the harbor. Nonetheless, Jamaica earns more postage stamps (Ã, Â £ 2,000) than any other colony.
Sons of Liberty
During this street demonstration the locally organized groups began to merge into a similar inter-colonial organization that had not previously been seen in the colonies. The term "children of liberty" was used generally before 1765, but only about February 1766 whose influence extended throughout the colony as a group organized under the official name of "Sons of Liberty", leading to a pattern for future resistance to England brought the colonies to 1776. The historian John C. Miller notes that the name was adopted as a result of the use of the Barre term in his speech in 1765 February.
This organization spreads from month to month after it was started independently in several different colonies. On November 6, a committee was formed in New York to correspond with other colonies, and in December an alliance was formed between groups in New York and Connecticut. In January, correspondence relationships were established between Boston and Manhattan, and in March, Providence had begun ties with New York, New Hampshire, and Newport. In March, the Sons of Liberty organization had been established in New Jersey, Maryland, and Norfolk, Virginia, and local groups established in North Carolina attracted interest in South Carolina and Georgia.
The officers and leaders of the Sons of Liberty "are almost entirely drawn from the upper and upper classes of the colonial society," but they recognize the need to broaden their power base to include "an entire political society, involving all its social or economic subdivisions." To do this, Sons of Liberty rely on massive public demonstrations to expand their base. They learned early on that controlling the crowds was problematic, though they tried to control "the likelihood of violence from extra-legal meetings." The organization expressed its loyalty to the local and British governments, but possible military action as a defensive measure has always been part of their consideration. During the Crisis Stamp Act, the Liberty Children declared constant loyalty to the King because they maintained a "fundamental belief" that Parliament would do the right thing and revoke the tax.
colonial newspaper
Colonial newspapers are a major source of public unrest following the passing of the Stamp Act. Some of the earliest forms of American propaganda appeared in this mold in response to the law. Articles written in colonial newspapers were critical of the act because of the disproportionate effect of the Stamp Act on printers. David Ramsay, a patriot and historian from South Carolina, wrote of this phenomenon shortly after the American Revolution:
Fortunately for American freedom, that newspaper is the subject of heavy duty duty. Printers, when influenced by government, genetically organize themselves on the side of freedom, nor is it too unusual to pay attention to the profits of their profession. Stamp duty, which openly invaded the former, and threatened the last major downturn, provoking their persistent opposition.
Most printers are critical of the Stamp Act, although some Loyalist voices do exist. Some of the more subtle Loyalist sentiments can be seen in publications such as The Boston Evening Post, run by British sympathizers John and Thomas Fleet. The article details a violent protest that took place in New York in December 1765, then described the riot participants as "imperfect" and labeled the group's idea as "against the common sense of the people." This Loyalist belief can be seen in some of the earliest newspaper articles on the Postage Act, but anti-English writings are more general and seem to have a stronger effect.
Many papers took a relatively conservative tone before the action came into force, implying that they might close if not revoked. However, as time passed and violent demonstrations ensued, the authors became even more excited. Some newspaper editors engage with Sons of Liberty, such as William Bradford of The Pennsylvania Journal and Benjamin Edes of The Boston Gazette, and they echo the group's sentiments in their publications.. The Stamp Act took effect in November, and many newspapers published editions with tombstone images and skeletons, stressing that their papers were "dead" and no longer able to print because of the Stamp Act. However, most of them are back in the coming months, challenging to appear without the stamp of approval deemed necessary by the Stamp Act. Printers were greatly relieved when the law was canceled the following spring, and the revocation affirmed their position as a strong voice (and compass) for public opinion.
Stamp Act Congress
The Congress of the Postage Act was held in New York in October 1765. Twenty-seven delegates from nine colonies were members of Congress, and their responsibility was to draw up a series of official petitions stating why Parliament has no right to impose a tax on them. Among the delegates there are many important men in the colony. Historian John Miller observes, "The composition of the Congress Stamp Act is supposed to be convincing evidence for the British government that resistance to parliamentary taxation is not at all limited to the riffraff of colonial harbors."
The youngest delegate is John Rutledge 26 years from South Carolina, and the oldest is Hendrick Fisher, 65 years old from New Jersey. Ten of the delegates are lawyers, ten merchants, and seven farmers or landowners; all have served in some kind of elective office, and all but three were born in the colony. Four died before the colonies declared independence, and four signed the Declaration of Independence; nine attended the first and second Continental Congresses, and the other three were loyalists during the Revolution.
New Hampshire refused to send delegates, and North Carolina, Georgia, and Virginia were not represented because their governor did not call their legislature to the session, thus preventing the election of delegates. Although the composition of the congress, each of the Thirteen Colonies finally confirmed his decision. Six of the nine colonies represented in Congress agreed to sign the petition to the King and Parliament produced by Congress. Delegates from New York, Connecticut, and South Carolina are prohibited from signing any documents without prior approval from the colonial assembly who has appointed them.
Massachusetts Governor Francis Bernard believes that the delegation of the colony to Congress will support Parliament. Timothy Ruggles in particular was Bernard's man, and was elected president of Congress. The Ruggles instruction from Bernard is to "recommend submission to the Stamp Act until Parliament can be persuaded to revoke it." Many delegates feel that the final resolution of the Stamp Act will actually bring Britain and its colonies closer. Robert Livingston of New York emphasized the importance of removing the Postage Act from public debate, writing to colonial agencies in Britain, "If I really want to see America in a state of independence I must want it as one of the most effective ways to end that stamp action should be enforced. "
The Congress meets for 12 consecutive days, including Sunday. No audience at the meeting, and no information was released about deliberation. The final product of the meeting was called the "Declaration of Rights and Complaints", and was compiled by a John Dickinson delegate from Pennsylvania. This declaration raised fourteen points of colonial protest. This confirms that the colonists have all the right of the English people in addition to protesting the Stamp Act, and that Parliament can not represent the colonists because they have no voting rights over Parliament. Only the colonial assembly has the right to collect colony taxes. They also affirm that the extension of the admiralty court's authority to non-marine issues represents abuse of power.
In addition to just debating their rights as British, the congress also affirms that they have certain natural rights solely because they are human. Resolution 3 states, "That it is inseparably important for the freedom of the people, and the unquestioned right of the Englishman, that no taxes are levied on them, but with their own consent, given in private, or by their representatives." Both Massachusetts and Pennsylvania bring this issue into a separate, even more direct resolution when they each refer to "Human Rights rights" and "the common rights of mankind".
Christopher Gadsden of South Carolina has proposed that the Congressional petition should be left only to the king, since the rights of the colony do not come from Parliament. This radical proposal goes too far for most delegates and is rejected. The "Declaration of Rights and Complaints" was sent to the king, and the petition was also sent to both Houses of Parliament.
Retract
Grenville was replaced by Lord Rockingham as Prime Minister on July 10, 1765. News of the mass violence began to reach Britain in October. Conflicting sentiments continued in England at the same time as the resistance was building and accelerating in America. Some want to strictly enforce the Stamp Law on colonial resistance, be wary of precedents to be set backwards. Others felt the economic impact of reduced trade with the Americans after the Sugar Act and the inability to collect debts while the colonial economy suffered, and they began lobbying for the revocation of the Postage Act. Colonial protests have included various non-import agreements among merchants who recognize that most of Britain's industry and trade depend on the colonial market. This movement has also spread through the colony; 200 merchants have met in New York City and agree not to import anything from England until the Stamp Act is lifted.
When Parliament met in December 1765, he rejected a resolution offered by Grenville that would condemn the colonial resistance to law enforcement. Outside Parliament, Rockingham and his secretary Edmund Burke, a member of Parliament himself, organized the London merchants who started a correspondence committee to support the withdrawal of the Stamp Act by urging merchants across the country to contact their local representatives in Parliament. When Parliament reunited on January 14, 1766, the ministry of Rockingham formally proposed revocation. Amendments are considered to reduce the financial impact on the colony by allowing colonists to pay taxes in their own scrip, but this is seen as too little and too late.
William Pitt stated in the Parliament debate that everything the Grenville ministry did was "completely wrong" with respect to the colonies. He further stated, "In my opinion that this Kingdom has no right to impose a tax on the colonies." Pitt still retains "this royal authority over colonies, for sovereign and powerful, in any state of government and legislature whatsoever," but he makes the distinction that taxes are not part of the government but "the Commons' own voluntary gift and grant." rejected the idea of ​​virtual representation, as "the most contemptible idea ever to enter the human head."
Grenville menanggapi Pitt:
Protection and compliance are reciprocal. Britain protects America; America is bound to produce obedience. If, no, let me know when the Americans are released? When they want the protection of this kingdom, they are always ready to ask for it. The protection is always given to them in the most complete and numerous ways. The nation has become a huge debt to give them protection; and now they are asked to contribute a small portion of public expenditure, and the expansions that arise from themselves, they abandon your authority, insult your officials, and come out, I might as well say, into open rebellion.
Pitt's response to Grenville included, "I rejoice that America has fought. Three million people, once dying for all the feeling of freedom as a volunteer to be subjected to slavery, will be a worthy tool to make slaves of others."
Between January 17 and 27, Rockingham turned attention away from the constitutional argument to the economy by filing a petition complaining about the perceived economic impacts across the country. On February 7, the House of Commons rejected resolution 274-134, saying that it would support the King in enforcing the Act. Henry Seymour Conway, the government leader in the House of Commons, introduced the Declaratory Act in an effort to overcome the constitutional and economic problems, which asserted the Parliament's right to legislate for the colony "in all cases" while admitting untruth trying to enforce the Stamp Act. Only Pitt and three or four opposed him. Another approved resolution condemning the riots and demanding compensation from the colony for those who suffered losses due to mass action.
House of Commons heard testimony between 11 and 13 February, the most important witness was Benjamin Franklin on the last day of the trial. He answers the question of how the colonists will react if the Act is not revoked: "The total loss of respect and affection that Americans bear for this country, and all trade that depends on that respect and compassion." A Scottish journalist observes Franklin's response to Parliament and its influence on repeal; he then wrote to Franklin, "For this Examination, more than anything else, you are indebted to the Rapid and Complete Revocation of this Unclean Act."
A resolution was introduced on 21 February to repeal the Stamp Act, and it passed with a vote of 276-168. The king gave royal approval on March 18, 1766.
Consequences
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments