Brutal British No Better Than Barbarians During the American Revolution

The Treaty of Paris, February 10, 1763 ended the French-Indian War, giving all of North America east of the Mississippi, other than New Orleans, to the British. Though the European-based war ceased, the Native Americans in the west remained hostile to the British. The Pontiac Rebellion and other Indian hostilities lasted until the end of 1764, at which time peace finally reigned in North America. This peace, however, would last only a decade until a new war, the Revolution, began a new episode in the history of the continent. Although some other influences existed, the American Revolution was primarily an economic rebellion. The spark of the American Revolution was ignited by the oppressive and ineffective nature of the imperial system; especially its taxation.

Even before the French and Indian Wars, Britain had passed two major laws known as Mercantilism and Navigation Acts. "Mercantilism was the theory of trade adopted by the major European powers from roughly 1500 to 1800" (Mercantilism, Us-History, Online). It advocated that a country should import more than it exported. "Trade laws ensured that manufactured exports to North America would have greater value than colonial primary products imported to Britain." (Krawczynski). This was a theory used to raise money for the mother country. "If one nation hoped to grow richer, it had to do so at the expense of some other nation" (Mercantilism, Us-History, Online). The concept of mercantilism affirmed that the sole purpose of the colonies was to provide for Britain and by this theory Americans were restricted economically.

…but in the process of mercantilism, colonial manufacturing was prohibited; colonial currency was manipulated; colonial trade was regulated; colonial expansion was prevented; and colonial markets were threatened by British monopolies. (Historian C, O'Reilly).

Equally important, the Navigation Acts were efforts to put the theory of mercantilism into actual practice. These acts included enumerated lists which could only be exported or imported to/from Britain. "Navigation acts were "economically restrictive, oppressive, injurious and negative" (Krawczynski). The colonists were not even allowed freedom of trade. There was no other way than to smuggle goods. "Northern merchants found the trade restriction so harmful to their profits that it encouraged rampant smuggling among them" (Mega Essays, Online).

Similarly, another act was passed in 1751, before the wars, known as the Writs of Assistance. These were general search warrants, which allowed customs officers to search any building or ship, even without probable cause for suspicion. The colonists considered the writs to be a grave infringement upon personal liberties. Gordon Wood describes the Writs of Assistance as "the abuse of the natural rights of colonists and merchants by customs officials" (6). It showed the intention of the British as to leave no freedom and privacy for the colonists. As the French and Indian Wars came to an end, the British passed the Proclamation Act in 1763. It restricted the colonists to go to the west of Appalachian Mountains. The Proclamation acknowledged that Native Americans owned the lands on which they were then residing and white settlers in the area were to be removed. All this was done for the British to earn from the fur trade with the Natives. Therefore, the British earned money at the expense of the colonists and from the colonists' perspective, risking their lives in the recent war had been rewarded by the creation of a vast restricted native reserve. Moreover, the sugar act was passed in 1764. This act put a three-cent tax on foreign refined sugar and increased taxes on coffee and indigo. This tax affected only a certain part of the population, but most of them were the merchants and some of these merchants were the founding fathers. Due to this act, several of these merchants went bankrupt. Besides, the tax was enacted without the consent of the colonists.

Furthermore, a tax which was one of the major causes for the American Revolution was enacted in 1765. The Stamp Act required Americans to buy taxed stamps for all legal documents. "The Stamp Act forced the colonies to purchase a stamp with prices of upwards of four pounds on all legal papers, advertisements, newspapers, calendars, and playing cards" (123HelpMe, Online). The forthcoming British Prime Minister of Britain, a politician at that time, also complained that the stamp act was oppressive and inefficient.

I beg leave to tell the House…my opinion it is that the stamp act be repealed absolutely… for it was founded on the erroneous principle… At the same time, let the sovereign authority or this country over the colonies be asserted in as strong terms as can be devised… that we may… exercise every power whatsoever except that of taking money out of their pockets without their consent. (William Pitt qtd in Stewart Ross, 31)

The Stamp Act provoked the first truly organized response to British impositions. This act resulted in outrage from the Colonies and led to rioting and the formation of the Stamp Act Congress. Britain couldn't have found a better way to oppose the colonists and make them united (DBQ: Group 8, Online). On October 7, 1765, representatives of nine colonial assemblies met in New York City at the Stamp Act Congress. The colonies agreed widely on the principles that Parliament could not tax anyone outside of Great Britain, and could not deny anyone a fair trial, both of which had been done in the American colonies. Furthermore, the Stamp Act also gave birth to a new party, the Sons of Liberty. The Sons of Liberty was a group of protesters who showed their opposition to the Stamp Act through different protests and riots. The colonists were outraged and therefore, it is not very surprising to see them turning into rebels. Hacker asserts that "…merchants, capitalists- whether land speculators or traders were converted from contended and loyal subjects, into rebellious enemies of the crown" (Hacker). The Sons of Liberty brought a new level of sophistication to the mass demonstrations, "prohibiting their followers to carry weapons and using strict discipline and military formations to direct the protestors" (Spark Notes, Online). This was the group which had leaders such as Samuel Adams, one of the founding fathers of America.

The Sons of Liberty and the colonists raised a cry of "No taxation without Representation" after the stamp act. "Colonists in Boston revolted against the "taxation without representation"- which meant imposing taxes on the colonies without their voice in the parliament" (Risjord, 112). They argued that in order to be taxed by Parliament, the Americans rightly should have actual legislators seated and voting in London. "The American belief in actual representation pointed towards the fullest and most equal participation of people in the process of government that the modern world had ever seen" (Wood, 56). The British, however, supported the concept of virtual representation, which was based on the belief that a Member of Parliament virtually represented every person in the empire and there was no need for a specific representative. It was virtual representation which gave the Parliament its supreme authority (Wood, 57). It was clear that the British intentions were to accumulate as much money as possible from the colonies at the expense of the colonists. Equally important, the Quartering Act was enacted in 1765, requiring colonial assemblies to pay for certain supplies for troops stationed within their respective colonies and provide them with shelters. "Concentration of a standing army in peacetime amid a civilian population blurred the army's original mission in America and raised the colonists' fears of British intentions" (Wood, 62). This was getting too far and the colonists were realizing the importance of achieving their rights. This act outraged many of the colonists as it was a clear threat to their privacy and liberties. Furthermore, the Declaratory Act was passed in 1766 which stated that Parliament could legislate for the colonies in all cases. In other and shorter words, the Declaratory Act is the 1766 act that allowed Parliament to make laws and changes in the Colonial government.

Ministry maintained that it was the sovereign "power" to which colonies must acquiesce. The Declaratory Act in 1766 elaborated this point. It was said that "the colonies and plantations in America have been, are, and ought to be, subordinate unto, and dependent upon the imperial crown and Parliament of Great Britain."(The Declaratory Act, Related Information, Online)

It was clear that the British were trying to control the colonists and later force them into paying off the debts of the French-Indian Wars.

Furthermore, the Revenue Act, commonly known as the Townshend Duties, was passed in 1767 named after the British, Charles Townshend. It taxed glass, lead, paint, paper, and tea that entered the colonies (Mega Essays, Online). The colonists objected to the fact that it was clearly designed to raise revenue and to regulate trade in a manner favorable to the British Empire. "New customs officials were appointed under the Townshend duties… these officials… corrupt agents who, to fill their own pockets, trapped colonial merchants on illegal technicalities" (Historian B, O'Reilly).Similarly Gordon Wood elaborates this point stating "Under this act, absentee customs officials were ordered to return to their posts and were given greater authority and protection" (Wood, 46). This act was another major cause that led to the Revolutionary War or the American Revolution. The result of the Townshend Duties was the resurrection of colonial hostilities created by the Stamp Act. "Crowds mobbed the customs offices forcing the officials to retreat to a British Warship in the Harbor" (US History, Online). The colonists established _non-importation_ agreements that quickly spread throughout the colonies. "British trade soon dried up and the powerful merchants of Britain once again interceded on behalf of the colonies" (US History, Online). This non-importation agreement showed the clear picture.

"It showed that the colonists were not dependent on Britain; instead, it was the other way round. As both the stamp act and Townshend duties were repealed when the colonists boycotted British goods. (Stewart Ross, 14)

The clear picture of the British intentions finally came in 1770. The Boston Massacre was the murdering of five innocent colonists by British soldiers on March 5, 1770. "The Boston Massacre removed all doubts about why these troops were present; they were there to terrify the colonial population into obeying British policies" (Historian B, O'Reilly). After slipping to the ground, one soldier shot at the crowd, and others followed. "The soldier pick up his gun, he fired into the crowd; and encouraged his fellow soldiers to fire also…" (From Revolution to Reconstruction, Online). This event was the culmination of civilian-military tensions that had been growing since royal troops first appeared in Massachusetts in October 1768. After this event, the colonists were more unified than before as they knew that without any decisive action, the British will keep threatening them. "The Boston Massacre exemplifies how the British military measures backfired and allowed the Americans to gain a sense of unity in working towards a common goal of independence."(American History, Online)

The Tea Act, passed by Parliament in 1773, was the final blow. The Tea Act, passed by Parliament in May of 1773, launched the final spark to the revolutionary movement (Tea Act, Related Information, Online). The act was enacted not only to raise revenue in the American colonies, but it was also designed to save the East India Company which was floundering financially and burdened with unsold tea. However, the British gave the monopoly of Tea to the East India Company, undercutting the business of many local merchants.

"The Tea Act inflamed the radicals. If Americans accepted the lower to the process, they will also have to accept the "taxation without representation", as well as put many of the founding fathers out of business" (Tea Act, Related Information, Online).

The colonists realized that once the British gained that kind of monopoly over tea, the same dominance and, in effect, manipulation would begin to appear on other commodities. These taxations made the colonists realize that the British needed to be stopped or they would always have control. The colonists were infuriated and outraged as many of the founding fathers would go bankrupt if an immediate and decisive action was not taken. To prevent the founding fathers from bankruptcy, the Sons of Liberty disguised themselves as the Native Indians and dumped The East India Company's tea into the Boston Harbor. This event became known as the Boston Tea Party. "To let the tea be landed, would be giving up the principle of Taxation by Parliamentary Authority, against which the continent have struggled for 10 year."(Jacob's Libertarian Press, Online).

England could not have ignored such a blatant slap in the face, and in 1774 passed the Coercive Acts. In these acts, the Boston harbor was closed, the colonists were to pay for the tea destroyed in the Boston Tea Party, and the British soldiers were to be quartered by the colonists. Many Americans saw these acts as direct infringements on their civil liberties and the conflict escalated to new heights and therefore called them the Intolerable Acts. "The Intolerable acts mobilized the country and brought it to the brink of war" (DBQ: Group 8, Online).There were many effects of these acts on the colonist. "They convinced the Americans; once and for all, that parliament had no more right to make laws for them than to tax them" (Wood, 52). After these acts were passed, it was sure that a full-fledged war was inevitable.

"The Intolerable acts were directed primarily at Massachusetts; they were violent… colonial rights were being lost, not by direct frontal assault, but by gradual attrition… the need for a united stand was evident as a full-fledged war was inevitable" (Risjord, 111)

Not an Intolerable Act, The Quebec Act was still counted as one of them. This act enlarged the boundaries of the Province of Quebec and instituted reforms generally favorable to the French Catholic inhabitants of the region. The Quebec Act offended a variety of interest groups in the British colonies. It was sure that "the enactment of the Quebec Act was a continuation Britain's new tyrannical system"(Wood, 57) Many feared the establishment of Catholicism in Quebec, and that the French Canadians were being courted to help oppress Americans. The outraged colonists later founded the First Continental Congress which was a set up of representatives of 12 colonies. It wasn't a very important meeting; nevertheless, it led on to the Second Continental Congress which organized the colonists into war against Britain.

The purpose of the American Revolution in the minds of the people was to insure their natural rights as citizens of a country. Unless they fought, they reasoned, they would never permanently insure the right to be represented, the right to prosper economically or the right to advance in society. The idea of a representative democracy was of the most radical of ideas in the world. Yet these were the thoughts of many of the rebels fighting Great Britain. The Intolerable Acts, the Stamp Act, the Townshend Duties, and the Tea Act were all seen as attempts to infringe on the colonists' rights as British citizens. The colonists, however, tried a last attempt to avoid war and sent a petition to the king known as the Olive Branch Petition. "King George 3rd refused to even read the petition, and declared that the colonies come out in open rebellion against the crown and against Great Britain" (Kids Past, Online). In the colonists' eyes, the British represented all of the things stopping them from enjoying a free and just society. Therefore, it is evident that Parliament's colonial laws were to restrict or diminish the fundamental rights of colonists as Englishmen.