**Please respond to these replies**
Thus was a good introductory answser to the second Discussion Three questions.
1. In reaction to the Stamp Act, did the coloniists organize the Continental Congress or the Stamp Act Congress? What was the difference?
2. How did the colonial merchants pressre Parliament?
3. You stated that if you were living in the late 18th Centory you would comply with the regulations of the colonial governments. If we compare the colonial government to our state governments today and the English government to the national government today are you suggesting that you would obey only state laws?
Keep up the good posts.
Ray F. Broussard
I also don’t understand what Patrick Henry was referring to when he said that Mother countries are free from being taxed. As I talked about in my post, Jensyns brings out that Englishmen in the mother country had just as little freedom as the colonists did. Do you think that Henry was just trying to “rouse the crowd” with his statement?
– Daniel Burkhart
I agree that the stamp act caused great concern for the colonists because it was an internal tax that affected everyone in the colonies. Parliament wanted to reduce the power of the colonies to ensure that the revenues they needed could be raised. The parliamentary acts were very aggressive in that they gave all taxation and legislature power to Parliament. Do you think that the colonist just wanted to be Independent, and that the discrepancies over the parliamentary acts were just a front to cause division with the mother country?
**Then I need you to respond to these two classmates posts.**
First students post
The colonial reaction to the Stamp Act was not only immediate but very aggressive as well. The Sons of Liberty in Boston took action by burning a mock figure of Andrew Oliver, who was the stamp master in Boston. They also destroyed one of his buildings. Also, mobs ransacked the home of Thomas Hutchinson in which he later wrote that “such ruins were never seen in America.” By today’s standards those actions may seem minor, but in the early colonial days doing such things were almost unheard of and undoubtedly sent shock waves throughout the colonies. The Daughters of Liberty got involved as well by boycotting British goods; I believe this, more so than anything else, really got England’s attention because it showed a determined resolve by the colonist not yet seen before. Also, the Stamp Act Congress was formed in which the Declaration of Rights was drafted as well as a petition of grievances to the King.
The reaction to the Stamp Act was different from the reaction to the Intolerable acts in that in the former the colonists became unified in their rebellion. I think this led to violence because England became bolder and more aggressive in their efforts to maintain control, and, consequently, caused the colonists to resist more aggressively.
I think some colonists resisted overt action against their legitimate government because they felt that they were citizens of the mother country even though they lived in the colonies.
I would have reacted in much the same way many colonist back then did; I would have rebelled and ultimately fought for Independence.
First, the colonists were under British rule therefore making the inhabitants of the colonies British citizens. Being British citizens the colonist were extended all of the amenities and protection under England rule. Most people argue that the colonists were justified in saying that the taxes levied by England were unlawful but since the colonist were citizens of England the taxes were legal and justifiable.
Secondly, to address the most common point of taxation without representation, the British believed in virtual representation. Virtual representation, as defined by James Conniff in “The Useful Cobbler: Edmund Burke and the Politics of Progress”, stated that members of Parliament, including the Lords, and the Crown-in-Parliament, reserved the right to speak for the interest of all British subjects, rather than for the interests of only the district that elected them or for the regions in which they held peerages and spiritual sway. Therefore since Parliament saw itself as sovereign over the entire British Empire, and reasoned that what was good for the British Empire was good for all its parts the colonist were virtually represented. This idea of virtual representation was derived from the British mercantile policies, which believed that the good of the colonies would come from the homeland prospering by having a favorable balance of trade, economic self-sufficiency and export surplus all achieved by aid form the colonies. Colonies were expected to supply products which would otherwise have to be obtained from non-imperial sources, generate exports by the production and sale of products in high demand outside the empire, and provide a market for the mother country’s exports. The mother country would provide the colonies with centralized governmental control of the economy, as well as naval and military protection.
The third point in reference to the colonist help financing the war; of course the colonist should have been taxed to alleviate the debt caused from the French and Indian War. The war was sparked by George Washington with the battle of Jumonville Glen. While marching to Fort Duquesne to oust the French and claim the land Washington and his me came upon and massacred a French scouting party. This event and the response by the French started the French and Indian War. Since the colonists were British citizens England came to protect its citizens. The colonist furnished very little aid thus a substantial amount of the burden fell on England to finance the war. England nearly doubled the national debt from 75 million pounds in 1754 to 133 million pounds in 1763. To pay down the debt incurred by the war the British Government decided to tax the colonies for a war they started.
In conclusion, it is my overt position that England had every right to tax the colonies. First they were considered British citizens, secondly they were represented via Parliment, and thirdly they provided little aid to a war that was sparked by the colonist but finance by the mother country.
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.Read more
Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.Read more
Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.Read more
Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.Read more
By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.Read more