Klooster And O'shaughnessy

When examining the events of The Stamp Act, the similarities and differences between Patriot and Loyalists’ perspectives must be considered.

Many colonists were angered because of high taxes England chose to enforce on them. These taxes were a result of the British participation and victory in the French and Indian war. However, what made the colonists even more angry was the fact that they were being taxed without representation in England’s Parliament. The colonists thought that, in order to be taxed by the British, they should have representation in it. They saw it as unfair to be taxed by a government they had no say in. As Patrick Henry said in his speech made to the Virginia House of Burgesses, “We can under law be taxed only by our own representatives...The Stamp Act is against the law. We must not obey it…” (Doc. 1). Since many colonists thought this taxation broke the law, some of them chose to protest by going to the House of Burgesses, boycotting imports, or simply not paying it in response. This response is justified; if

We, the colonists of the Americas, write this letter in hope of change of the unlawful, unfair and unconstitutional act’s. Our rights have been struck by things such as the numerous taxes. The taxes that have been imposed are not approved of by us the people. This includes the stamp act, which brought taxes on all printed items. The sugar act, which imposed taxes on sugars, and such other taxes. We all, as a people, disagree with the Townshend acts taxes, as they are unlawful. We feel as if we should have enough independence to have our own advocate establish taxes instead of the faulty British Parliament. We shall, and will not not deal with the British economic in its current state. We ask that you remove thus taxes

“‘No taxation without representation!’”(Hart,67). This explains the anger in the colonist on how britain was taxing for the lost items without their consent.

The 18th century can be marked as a period of internal and external struggle for the American colonists. From improper representation, to unfair taxes, such as the Stamp Act, to being overall abused by Britain, the colonists were justifiably angry. From this anger, the slogan “No taxation without representation” was born and quickly began to emerge from the lips of almost every colonist all across America. The demand from colonists everywhere for no taxation without representation weighed heavily as a symbol for democracy, as it revealed the mindset of many – Britain was using the hardworking colonists and took their money without even giving them a say – and laid the foundation for the American revolutionary war, allowing more arguments and

Colonial life in America was a time of many victories and failings. It was a learning experience for the people of the time. In a A People’s History of the United States and A Patriot’s History of the United States, Howard Zinn and Larry Schweikart tell contrasting stories of the issues of colonial life.

     The passing of the Stamp Act by Parliament in 1765 caused a rush of angry protests by the colonists in British America that perhaps "aroused and unified Americans as no previous political event ever had." It levied a tax on legal documents, almanacs, newspapers, and nearly every other form of paper used in the colonies. Adding to this hardship was the need for the tax to be paid in British sterling, not in colonial paper money. Although this duty had been in effect in England for over half a century and was already in effect in several colonies in the 1750?s, it called into question the authority of Parliament over the overseas colonies that had no representation therein.

In the chapter Kings, Parliament, and Inherited Rights, starts off with the quote about the revolution. The revolution was in the mind and the hearts of people, a change in their religious sentiments of their duties and obligations. The evolution of the revolution began was an argument over rights that changed into struggle for power of each party to assert their rights as it understood them, then afterward struggle for empire as Americans began to conceive a more ambitious and independent course for themselves. Americans believe that legally of all parliamentary statutes was measured against the constitution; on that basis, being unrepresented in Parliament, they denied the rights of the body to tax them directly according to the principles of constitutional law. A particular act focused on in the chapter is the Stamp Act, which imposed a stamp tax ranging from one shilling to six on various commercial and legal documents such as wills, mortgages, and college degrees, as well as on newspapers, almanacs, calendars, pamphlets, playing cards and dice. Also the Trade and Navigation Acts was a parliamentary revenue raised in America would make England governors and their appointees independent of local pressure and more faithful enforcing British statutes. These made the colonies more united. Colonies wanted to distance

Richter presents North American colonial history as the buildup and intermingling of “six sequential layers” formed through the interactions of six groups: progenitors, conquistadores, traders, planters, imperialists, and

The colonists believed they had a right to be represented in Parliament before being taxed or at least vote for the taxing officials. The phrase “no taxation without representation” began to become popular within the colonies.

These acts then led to the long string of others given out by King. In 1765, Parliament passed the Quartering Act, which required colonists to provide barracks and supplies to British soldier and also the Stamp Act that required stamps to be placed on paper products such as playing cards, pamphlets, almanacs, and newspapers. Unlike the acts before it, the Stamp Act was a direct tax on the colonies and made many believe "the passage of it was not merely an impolitic and unjust law that threatened the priceless right of the individual to retain possession of his property until he or his chosen representative voluntarily gave it up to another; it was to many, also, a danger signal indicating that a more general threat existed" [3]

There were also the people in Britain that liked The Stamp Act. The British Parliament and the King/Queen were a type of people who like the stamp act. They liked The Stamp Act for the same reason that the colonial government did, because they got money from The Stamp Act. They needed money from this tax because they were in debt from the war. The people of Britain did not like it or dislike it, it was more normal for them. They also didn't get any of the money because they had to pay a tax as well. So even in Britain, only the high-class people liked The Stamp Act as

King George took a stance with the government to improve their economic status to gain more power, harming his own people in the long run. He imposed and put resistance in his set of laws but the colonists objected his sudden orders due to the unjust taxation on random products. The Sugar Act, Declaratory Act, Tea Act, Townshend act, and Intolerable Act repress the colonist’s freedom. These acts guaranteed the rights of Parliament and taxed many important items such as tea, sugar and wine. “No Taxation without representation,” (a term the patriots adapted to their revolutionary movement) refers to a situation that involves the government imposing taxes, in this case the British, on a particular group of citizens (American colonists.) The colonies in America were forced to pay a large amount of money without having representation in the British Parliament. This whole situation backfired on the Parliament with rebellions and violent acts such as the Boston Tea Party and the Boston

By 1765, at a Stamp Act Congress, all but four colonies were represented as the “Declaration of Rights and Grievances” was passed. They were determined to let Parliament know that they were equal to British citizens, that there would be no “taxation without representation,” and all efforts to stop tax on colonists would continue (Kennedy, etal 2011.) Although Lord Rockingham, the predecessor of Grenville, sought to repeal of the Stamp Act, this in no way meant Parliament was conceding their control. In fact, while the Stamp Act was repealed, another called the “Declaratory Act of 1766,” gave Parliament the authority to make laws binding the American Colonies, “in all cases whatsoever.” In 1767, George III passed the Townshend Acts to collect tax on glass, lead, paints, paper and, tea. Recognizing that tea was a favorite among the Americans, it ensured greater revenue the British government. Again, the colonists’ rights for representation were ignored and they started to boycott British goods and ultimately, smuggle tea. When the Quartering Act was passed, which specified that colonists were to give room and board to British troops, tension began to rise. For two years, the colonists tolerated British troops on their soil and their dissatisfaction with the British Parliament and King George III became evident through many violent riots, abusiveness of tax collectors and destruction of property. According to Kennedy, etal (2011), Parliament, continually met with

Consequently, the British Parliament imposed taxation on the colonists in the 1760’s. The colonists resented this intrusion, for they felt they were not truly represented in the British government. Taxation without representation became the rallying cry of the colonists.