“Don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.” - John Parker. Revolution is a dynamic process whose consequences no one can anticipate. The American colonies in 1765 were surprised by the new taxes that were being presented from the Parliament. This caused a rebellion that lead to a complete separation from Great Britain that once the colonistshad loved because of their powerful government that viewed them as equals and largely left alone to do what they wanted. Little over a decade, conflict began to occur with the British and Patriots in the Spring of 1775 in Massachusetts.
They raised taxes from 10-50% and starved the populace to get the maximum profits. Nevertheless, the company continued to suffer financially, and influenced Parliament to pass the Tea Act in 1773 to lift import duties on tea shipped to the American colonies, which ultimately lead to the American War of Independence in April 1775. John Hancock was a merchant, statesman, and prominent Patriot of the Revolution. He served as president of the Second Continental Congress and was the first and third Governor of Massachusetts. Hancock began his political career in Boston as a protégé of Samuel Adams, an influential local politician, though the two men later became estranged.
Bernie Bartolome October 22, 2012 A New Nation After much consideration and evaluation between the British and the Colonists, I remain my stance that the Colonists have the more reasonable and convincing position during the intolerable acts of tyranny from the British. With this, I have five arguments to support my opinion. My arguments follow: the Colonists had no representative in Parliament, they had not been under the English influence for generations, they wanted control over the affairs that the Colonists started, and the British enforced irrational taxes upon them. Through this justification, I understand the Colonists’ dispute toward the British through the American Revolution. Each of my arguments revolves around the idea that the British were unfair towards their treatment of the colonists, which compels me to justify the Colonists quarrel against the British.
The Revolutionary War: Why was it fought and was it preventable? Many believe that the trouble started brewing in 1763 at the end of the French Indian War but in all truth the colonist first started feeling discontent with the passing of the Navigation laws in 1650. This law stated that all goods flowing to and from the colonies could only be transported in British vessels. It was aimed to hurt rival Dutch shippers. This law kept money in the empire but hurt the pockets of the wealthy colonists mercantilist that depended on the shipping trade.
John Hughes and Benjamin Franklin came up with the Stamp Act which many people did not like. (DOC G) John Hughes was beggining to run the government down into nothing. Which would cause more taxes for the Americans and whatnot. The Americans would really begin to not like John Hughes and want to separate from Britian even more. So these were some of the reasons tt the American colones separated from the British.
However, some people, such as Jefferson and small farmers opposed his ideas, because they believed in states' rights and a strict interpretation of the constitution, which led to the split of two different political parties. Before Hamilton's plan, America was having financial problems. There were war debts that were unpaid and individual states and even Congress issued worthless paper money. Hamilton created a plan that would first pay down the national debt and then assume the debt of the states. This was called the Assumption Plan.
Many felt the repealing the Stamp tax would be in the best interest of England. However some had felt that the English people had been paying this very same tax for years and thought it was ridiculous that the colonists are enraged over this. Many members of parliament thought that the stamp act was justified, after all Colonists hadn’t been able to raise sufficient funds during the French and Indian War. Great Britain thought that it was only fair that the colonists pay their fair share. However reluctantly to many Parliament repealed the Stamp Act in 1766.
Could a mere pamphlet written by a lowly corset maker named Thomas Pain have been the inspiration of one of our nation’s most precious and highly regarded documents? In 1776 many people had already decided that independence from Great Britain was best for the American colonies but were afraid to speak such a thing out loud. Most were still undecided on the matter or couldn’t separate themselves from what they believed was their mother country. Thomas Pain saw this and anonymously published his pamphlet “Common Sense” in January of 1776. Through this pamphlet he addressed those issues and made it possible for public support of independence to gain ground.
The heavy weighing cost of the war being charged to the 13 colonies brought a feeling of enmity toward Great Britain. Thus unifying the colonies and cutting ties in what was inevitable with England. The 13 colonies declare independence from Great Britain. Although England’s right to regulate trade and tax the colonies was just it was received by the colonies of the America’s as unjust and to gain revenue. The Townshend Acts, a profit gaining tax was written about by an American colonist named John Dickinson in a book Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania.
One of the main reasons that the Revolution started in the first place was because of the Stamp Act that the King(George III) imposed. This made it so people had to pay a tax on all written documents. There was an uproar in the colonies, because the people felt that they were receiving less protection, less governing, and more taxes. People like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Ben Franklin felt that this was unfair, and thus the revolution began. Thomas Paine, a man who spread the ideas of the Revolution around the Colonies, said of the Loyalists: “Interested men, who are not to be trusted; weak men, who cannot see; prejudiced men, who will not see; and a certain set of moderate men, who think better of the European world than it deserves.