Events Leading To The American Revolution

During the late seventeen hundreds, many tumultuous events
resulted in Colonial opposition to Great Britain. The conditions
of rights of the colonists will slowly be changed as the
constriction of the parliament becomes more and more intolerable.

During the Seven Years’ War England was not only alarmed by the
colonists’ insistence on trading with the enemy, but also with
Boston merchants hiring James Otis inorder to protest the
legality of the writs of assistance (general search warrants)
used to hunt out smuggled goods. “let the parliament lay what
burthens they please on us, we must, it is our duty to submit and
patiently bear them, till they will be pleased to relieve
us….”. This is a very strong dictum, that in 1764, the
colonists were of a submissive nature, and were weakly pleading
for self-autonomy. This small fire of anger will become a huge
conflagration as the rights are slowly rescinded.

On October 19, 1765 the Stamp Act Congress and
Parliamentary Taxation committee’s passed some laws that
attempted to strengthen the grip of the English crown.

“I.That his Majesty’s subjects in these colonies, owe the same
allegiance to the Crown of Great Britain that is owing from his
subjects born within the realm, and all due subordination to
that august body, the Parliament of Great Britain.”
This statement can be used as a summation of the entire document
that the Stamp Act Congress had initiated. The statement depicts
the colonists has having to be submissive and servile in the view
of Great Britain, this policy angered the colonists very much, and
was another component of the transition of the colonists’
rights and liberties.

When the Declatory Act was passed in March of 1766, many
colonies were attempting to claim that they were “seceding” from
England.

“Whereas several of the houses of representatives in his
Majesty’s colonies and plantations in America, have of late,
against law, or to the general assemblies of the same, the sole
and exclusive right of imposing duties and taxes upon his
Majesty’s subjects in the said colonies….be it declared ….,
that the said colonies and plantations in America, have been,
are, and of right ought to be, subordinate unto, and dependent
upon the imperial Crown and Parliament of Great Britain;”.

The Parliament of course denounced the attempt at independance
and still dogmatilcally passed the following law to show that the
colonists were still british subjects. Again, the colonists were
infuriated and later will resist the british imperialism on the
colonies.

“All before, are calculated to regulate trade, and preserve
prpromote a mutually beneficial intercourse between the several
constituent parts of the empite””, yet those duties were always
imposed with design to restrain the commerce of one part”.

This statement by the colonist (John Dickinson), shows that th
sole rason for new taxes is just for the British gov’t to make
money, at the expense of the economy of the colonies. Dickinson
makes a important distinction between the rights of the colonies
and the authority of the parliament. Dickinson’s comments were
ubiquitous among the colonists, and thus infuriated them to
rebellion, and the seizure of basic democratic rights.

“From necessity of the case, and a regard to the mutual
interest of both countries, we cheerfully consent to the
operation of such acts of the British parliament as are bona fide
restrained to the regulation of our external commerce, for the
purpose of securing the commercial advantages of the whole empire
to the mother country , and the commercial benefits of it’s
respective members excluding every idea of taxation, internal or
external, for raising a revenue on the subjects in America
without their consent ….”
The continental congress had presented it’s colonial rights.

These rights enable the colonies to be more autonomous with
exception to those several states who are under the british
control. One important element of the document, is the idea of
taxation without representation; the said that raising taxes
without consent was illegal and that the commercial benefits of
the colony should be shared within the colonies, instead of
England becoming more and more economically prosperous.

The whole idea of mercantilism was about to be crushed, due to
this idea, of