The Stamp Act Of 1765: An Analysis

At the conclusion of the French and Indian war, England realized that there were numerous issues between it and the colonies (Schultz, 2014). However, the foremost issue was one of neglect which had allowed the colonies few taxes and in reality, generalized self-governance. So, the crown decided to attempt to regain control of the colonies by reinstating the Crown’s officiants, preventing smuggling, controlling the settler’s expansion, and increasing taxes (Schultz, 2009). Through the Orders of Council, the Proclamation of 1763, Sugar Act of 1764, the Quartering Act of 1765, and the Stamp Act of 1765 the Crown laid bare its intentions towards the colonies. Although, these acts only served to agitate a population already once removed from an overbearing monarchy. The question remains, how would the colonist react to these new restrictions?
Additionally, the colonist chose to boycott British commodities and even rioted in protest. Although, the boycotting was effective, especially in New York, the coercion of the Crown’s representatives, the vandalism of their homes, and physical violence that showed their resolve (Schultz, 2009). The colonist also worked together to send inscribed objections to this act to Parliaments stating that taxation was unfair since the colonies had no representatives in Parliament. Eventually, economic issues forced the repeal of the Stamp Act by the Crown due to fear of extreme revenue losses, but the quarrel itself was far from resolved. What would the crown do