The Colonists vs. the British

640 Words3 Pages
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. My first argument states that there were no representatives in Parliament. The Colonists refers strictly to the British who moved to the New World, in Daniel Dulany considerations it states that “a tax imposed by Parliament, is a tax with out [the Colonists’] consent” (October 1765) Therefore, no Colonist represented Parliament because all the Colonists were in the New World. However, Jenyns’ rebuttal states “Parliament may have the power to impose taxes on the Colonies [but] they have no right to use it, beause it would be an unjust tax” (1765). I do not think this qualifies as a just statement because Parliament only composed of British representatives, and no Colonist representatives, therefore, no Colonist could back up their viewpoint or dispute any taxes enforced, only the British would have say in what would be a just or unjust tax. In addition, many of the British, who moved to the New World, inherited new ways of life and were no longer under the influence from the English—with a new
Open Document