Difference between revisions of "Stamp Act of 1765"
(→Rhode Island: add) |
|||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
==Rhode Island== | ==Rhode Island== | ||
Rhode Island's political and merchant elite organized and manipulated working-class rioters to put pressure on the British | Rhode Island's political and merchant elite organized and manipulated working-class rioters to put pressure on the British | ||
| − | in their commercial conflict with the colonies. | + | in their commercial conflict with the colonies. But the rioters had their own motives as well. of Newport, Rhode Island. Like the merchants, they gave vent to concerns about constitutional issues. They also rioted in response to hardships brought on by economic depression, dislike for the British policy of [[impressment]] of civilians into the Royal Navy, and resentment toward Newport Junto loyalists who belittled the political importance and self-esteem of commoners. |
| + | |||
==Pennsylvania== | ==Pennsylvania== | ||
In Pennsylvania the Proprietary Party, fearful of loss of charter rights, instigated riots to discredit [[Benjamin Franklin]]'s Quaker Party, which favored the Crown's taking over the colony. The Proprietary Party specialized in libel; the Assembly Party, politics. In the election of October 1765, the loss of seats by the Proprietary Party demonstrated that the electorate favored moderate resistance to the Stamp Act enforcement. [[Joseph Galloway]] played a conciliatory role and did not let the conflict get out of hand.. | In Pennsylvania the Proprietary Party, fearful of loss of charter rights, instigated riots to discredit [[Benjamin Franklin]]'s Quaker Party, which favored the Crown's taking over the colony. The Proprietary Party specialized in libel; the Assembly Party, politics. In the election of October 1765, the loss of seats by the Proprietary Party demonstrated that the electorate favored moderate resistance to the Stamp Act enforcement. [[Joseph Galloway]] played a conciliatory role and did not let the conflict get out of hand.. | ||
Revision as of 05:39, September 20, 2009
The Stamp Act of 1765 was legislation passed by the British Parliament which required that all legal documents, permits, commercial contracts, newspapers, wills, pamphlets and playing cards in the American colonies be taxed. They were given a special tax stamp to show the tax was paid.[1] Parliament passed this act to help repay lenders from the expensive French and Indian War.
The Stamp Act outraged Americans because it asserted parliament’s right to tax Americans without their consent. That violated the rights of colonists as Englishmen, and they protested vigorously.
Opposition to the Stamp Act was fierce, and gave rise to the slogan "no taxation without representation." The American colonists threatened to tar and feather the tax collectors so few were willing to collect this tax. [2]
London
In London the government debated whether to send the Army to enforce the Stamp Act. Two issues were involved: collection of the stamp duties and restoration of civil authority. The Duke of Cumberland might have pressed for intervention, but his death removed the strongest advocate for such a course. Most of the cabinet eventually concluded that the American resistance could not be compromised as long as the Stamp Act remained in effect and that the act itself was not worth saving, so they repealed it on March 18th, 1765.[3]
Newspapers
During the French and Indian War (1765063), the fledgling American newspaper industry significantly improved its methods of reporting news. Editors reprinted news and editorials from other papers, thus helping form a sort of national consensus. This made the press an effective voice in opposition to the Stamp Act of 1765 and in support of colonial independence soon thereafter.
New Hampsire
Between January and November 1765, the New Hampshire Provincial Assembly moved from indifference to the intensifying dispute between London and the American colonies to wholehearted endorsement of the colonial resistance. Three events created a climate of change: the exposure of Benning Wentworth's corruption, the Sugar Act, and the transmission of Whig views from other colonies through the press. These events led to a broadly based popular movement against the Stamp Act based not on economics but on the defense of liberty.
Rhode Island
Rhode Island's political and merchant elite organized and manipulated working-class rioters to put pressure on the British in their commercial conflict with the colonies. But the rioters had their own motives as well. of Newport, Rhode Island. Like the merchants, they gave vent to concerns about constitutional issues. They also rioted in response to hardships brought on by economic depression, dislike for the British policy of impressment of civilians into the Royal Navy, and resentment toward Newport Junto loyalists who belittled the political importance and self-esteem of commoners.
Pennsylvania
In Pennsylvania the Proprietary Party, fearful of loss of charter rights, instigated riots to discredit Benjamin Franklin's Quaker Party, which favored the Crown's taking over the colony. The Proprietary Party specialized in libel; the Assembly Party, politics. In the election of October 1765, the loss of seats by the Proprietary Party demonstrated that the electorate favored moderate resistance to the Stamp Act enforcement. Joseph Galloway played a conciliatory role and did not let the conflict get out of hand..
References
- ↑ http://ahp.gatech.edu/stamp_act_bp_1765.html
- ↑ http://virtualology.com/stampactcongress.com/
- ↑ John L. Bullion, "British Ministers and American Resistance to the Stamp Act, October-December 1765." William and Mary Quarterly 1992 49(1): 89-107.