The Proclamation of 1763 was the first to anger the colonist. In order to assure the Indians that settlers would not invade tribal lands, Britain emphasized colonist not to expand to the westward region. Shortly after, the use of writs of assistance, which allowed customs to search anywhere without the used of a warrant, placed a major infringement upon colonial natural rights. The Sugar Act (established at the same time) was an attempt to discourage smuggling by lowering the price of molasses below smugglers cost. It also stated that exports could only go through British ports before being sold to foreign countries.
The Embargo Act of 1807 is perhaps the most contradictory decision Jefferson has made in his presidency. Due to impressments of America sailors into the British Army, as well as Great Britain and France both trying to hinder American trade with the other side, Jefferson passed the act which prohibited all foreign trade, to and from the United States. This obliterated any views he was believed to have of a weak central government. The
To achieve this America first had to rid itself of the Navigation Acts. New England would set the tone; “Massachusetts bay officials regarded the colony as a “free state” subject only to laws of their making” (Lambert31). America’s fight for independence in the Atlantic started with its fight for independence politically first. Parliament enacted acts such as the Sugar and Stamp Act to try and combat these issues of American trade smuggling. But Americans were not backing down; in fact it was the exact opposite.
The merchants were happy to trade with Britain as a policy of Britain was to protect its clients. This protection was given by a fleet of the royal navy which was constantly patrolling the waters of the pacific for any ships that posed a threat to merchants. The British parliament also signed off charters which gave Britain a monopoly of the general market. This included tobacco, string, sugar cane and more. Due to this monopoly, other countries could not produce and manufacture goods.
Spanish American War “The United States had no choice but to keep the Philippines after they won it in the Spanish American War,” is a valid statement. The reasons behind this are, the U.S. wanted to expand the navy by placing a naval station in Philippines in case of an emergency, they wanted to point the country towards a democratic government, and they wanted to modernize the nation. The Philippines became an independent nation on July 4, 1946.By placing a naval station in the Philippine would increase the U.S’s power over the water and be able to act quickly in case of an emergency. Also, trading could be done more and with better countries because new business opportunities would have been available to the U.S. By establishing a democracy for the Philippines, the country would grow stronger and eventually not even need the U.S to provide aid for them anymore. Through successful civilian administration, the Islands were modernized and the nation prepared for eventual independence.
These laws were made to control colonial trade and promote English shipping. Important crops, such as tobacco, and other resources had to be shipped only in British ships. In addition, ships were required to stop in England first when America traded with other nations. This law would have devastated the American economy had the British enforced it. The Molasses Act (1733) was used to control sugar cane sales to the colonies.
Since he obeyed and enforced British law he was rewarded by the English government with higher titles (Hollitz 57). Adams on the other had opposed English rule, and how they were taxing the colonist without consent of the people (Hollitz 54). Adams said in “Instructions of the Town of Braintree to the Representative” that the Acts the British Parliament laid upon the colonies were “restricting, and burdening and embarrassing our trade” (qtd in
China was completely contrary from Central Africa on economic, political, and cultural bases during the 1500-1800. From 1000-1500 China led the world in economic development and there after experiencing the trauma of rule by the Yuan Dynasty, China adopted policies that favoured Chinese political and cultural tradition. On the other hand, the kingdoms of central Africa had initiated commercial relations with Portuguese merchants and diplomatic relations with Portuguese monarchy. Portuguese traded for slaves and slave trade undetermined the authority of the King. The Kings were converts of Christianity just to establish closer relations with Portuguese whereas Chinese has great problems with the exclusivity of Christianity but the Jesuits were respectful of Chinese culture and won a few converts.
Revolutionary Americans resented the economic restrictions, finding them exploitative. They claimed the policy restricted colonial trade and industry and raised the cost of many consumer goods. In his 1774 pamphlet, "A Summary View of the Rights of British America, " Thomas Jefferson asserted the Navigation Acts had infringed upon the colonists' freedom in preventing the "exercise of free trade with all parts of the world, possessed by the American colonists, as of natural right." Yet, as O. M. Dickerson points out, it is difficult to find opposition to the mercantile system among the colonists when the measures were purely regulatory and did not levy a tax on them. The British mercantile system did after all allow for colonial monopoly over certain markets such as tobacco, and not only encouraged, but with its 1660 regulation was instrumental in, the development of colonial shipbuilding.
Britain’s strategic motives in Africa centred on thwarting the growth of rival European powers as well as securing its interests in Africa. However there was a clear symbiotic relationship between strategic and economic concerns, during the expansion period. One of the first incidents in Africa where this was made manifest was when Britain invaded Egypt in 1882. The Suez Canal was of major strategic importance as it allowed ships to access the empires ‘Jewel in the crown’ India faster, through the red sea instead on going around Africa, as well as faster transportation of Arab oil. The canal was also of economic significance as historian Simon Smith reminds us that ‘80% of the Suez traffic was British, and13% of Britain’s trade passed through the canal’ , this is due to most of Britain’s trade with India passing through the Suez.