The Economic Causes of the American Revolutionary War

==From The Seven Years War to Lexington & Concorde

Starting with updates to the Navigation Acts, the British government began imposing increasing levels of taxes on the colonists. The Stamp Act of 1765, in addition to the Townshend Acts was designed to increase revenue to the British.

When the Colonists became upset at such taxation without sufficient representation in Parliament, they began to rebel. In return, the British passed the Declaratory Act and d a series of acts later known as the Intolerable Acts, all designed to punish and reshape the colonial governance system to make it easier for the British to reign in.

Tensions rising on both sides, the Colonists could not tolerate any more what they felt was British economic and social repression, while the British could not tolerate continued defiance from an ungrateful Colony, leading the two sides into a state of war over economic and social independence.

The Navigation Acts

rawr One of the early steps in the British plan to extract revenue from the Colonies was to step up enforcement of the then decades old Navigation Acts. These acts called for all English trade to be conducted using only English ships (Johnson 180). By only allowing English ships, Britain had direct control over the supply of ships, making it easy for British authorities to tax and regulate trade by cutting down on smuggling. Previously not heavily enforced, many American colonial merchants violated the law by smuggling goods in illegal ships in order to avoid paying import taxes (Johnson 180). Tightening this law allowed the British to cut into the profits and wellbeing of American merchants, further hurting their incentives to trade by sea (Johnson 181). This act planted the seed of malcontent with colonial merchants as they felt that laws affecting their livelihood were being thrust upon them without having acceptable levels of representation in Parliament.

http://s7icky.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/ladygagatrl_1.jpg

http://www.mendelsonarchives.com/Photos/Wavy-Gravy.jpg

http://thumbnail024.mylivepage.com/chunk24/575323/347/small_Funny%20camel.jpg.jpg

Rejected Tax Scheme

Chatham, a noted British statesman was incredibly horny, and he was among the first to propose a taxation plan for the colonies based on representation in parliament in order to ease any forms of pressures which he felt might escalate (Williams 756). His plan called upon selection from each American state a certain number of representatives which would be the American Colonies’ representatives in parliament. Under this plan, the representatives from teh states would possess voting power in parliament concerning laws and taxes (Williams 757). According to their size and subsequent level of influence, smaller states would have fewer representatives in Parlimant than larger or more influenctial states.

States such as Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Virginia would elect four delegates.

States such as Connecticut and New York would elect three delegates.

States such as Maryland, South Carolina, and New Jersey would elect two delegates.

States such as North Carolina, Georgia, East and West Florida, and Florida would elect one delegate.

Additionally, Chatham felt it was important to ensure the delegates were not chosen by the British, but elected among the colonists themselves. A major provision within this plan centered upon a mandate which stated the only form of income tax enacted upon the colonists is a pound rate on their estates (Williams 758). Chatham felt this would help convince colonists they could trust parliament and not fear being unfairly overtaxed. Chatham argued this system would be most beneficial to both Parliament and the American Colonies as it would allow for a sustained connection between the two parties.

Such a connection would help add a sense of legitimacy to acts of Parliament pertaining to the colonies, as their voting representatives would have a chance to express their views and vote upon them. Additionally, the American colonists would know that their voices were being herd, making them less likely to object to changes in taxation or other measures (Williams 758). Such a mutually beneficial system, if adopted, might have prevented such large differences in interest and communications between England and her American Colonies which arose and could have prevented the outbreak of war.

However, Chatham’s plan was never enacted as Parliament felt it was unnecessary; that they had a good enough understanding of what the colonists would need and want (Williams 758). Taking a larger step than with the previous Navigation Act revisions, Parliament passed a major piece of legislation in 1764, the Sugar Act.

Sugar Act

The Sugar Act was designed to closely regulate the trade of products such as rum, molasses, and sugar in order to raise revenue for the British government through duties (Johnson 180). Passed during a time of economic depression in the colonies, this act made an already thin margin of profit in trading these goods even lower.

The act also gave British warships additional power to combat smuggling in order to ensure the proper taxes were paid, thus hurting American merchants because they could not avoid such taxation as easily anymore (Johnson 182). Merchants made appeals to Parliament, citing how enforcement of such duties on molasses would curtail their prosperity as well as ruin their trade in molasses and their distilling industries (Johnson 186).

This act was considered one of the major starting points for British redirection which was destined to be abhorred by the colonists, who had developed their own ideas of identity and place in the Empire. As the arguments of the merchants went unheeded as the bill was passed, the Sugar Act, although technically a fairly weak revenue generator, set the tone for further legislative initiatives which would spark a very real economic threat to the colonies and help ignite a revolution.

The Stamp Act of 1765

Having tested the waters of using the colonies as a revenue resource, Parliament became bolder and levied its first direct tax on the colonies with the Stamp Act of 1765. Under The Stamp Act, all newspapers, official documents, pamphlets, newspapers, even decks of playing cards were all required to have a stamp (Newcomb 258). Stamps were to be purchased from a local administrator, and the revenue generated from stamp sales was to go to the British (Newcomb 258). Initially, British officials thought this act was a great way to help alleviate the financial burden of the British Empire while requiring little enforcement. Officials reasoned it would enforce itself as colonists would buy the stamps to make their contracts and other necessary documents legal.

However, Parliament received a shocking report on the reaction to the Stamp Act when it went into effect on November 1, 1765.

Protest was not isolated to Philadelphia. Boston, Richmond, and other major cities in the colonies faced massive protests against the Stamp Act. When the printed stamps arrived in these towns, angry mobs turned out and made their hostilities clear by burning the homes of administrators and storehouses where the stamps were kept (Newcomb 258). The violence and rebellion to this act became so acute that few people put in charge of its enforcement dared to do so at the risk of losing their homes, businesses or lives. anal blast doodoo butt

Upon hearing the news that no stamps had been distributed in New York on the say the Stamp Act went into effect, Britain weighed its options about how best to effectively enforce such an unpopular act. Three considerations swayed Parliament’s views on the matter directly: the regulations dictating the use of troops to support civil authority, the political consequences of using military force to restore law and order, and the logistics of sending additional troops across the Atlantic to the colonies (Bullion 90). At this time it was believed the act would enforce itself because it was in the best interests of colonists who would need the stamp to make documents and other such important things official and not void (Bullion 94).

Once word reached London about the reaction to the start of the Stamp Act, they were shocked to hear of such a unified response to burning stamps and forcing administrators to resign. As many American colonists feared that such a tax could only worsen their economic situation, they felt compelled out of desperation to attack the British enforcement of the Act in order to protect themselves economically. As the governors of the colonies had been initially timid in using military force to quell the rebellion, Britain now felt the urgent need to send additional troops to support the scattered troops already in the colonies in order to maintain order and control of the colonies (Bullion 100).

Unfortunately for Britain, its options were limited. It could not immediately repeal the Stamp Act as it felt that would reward the rebellious behaviors of the colonists, nor were the officials convinced that the tax still would not enforce itself eventually. As some time passed and the Stamp Act was eventually repealed, partially because of the unrest, and partially due to the economic effects the act was having on the motherland itself, Parliament passed the Declaratory Act in 1766 in an effort to save face.

Townshend Acts

Charles Townshend designed a series of revenue raising techniques which he hoped would eventually cover the costs to the Crown of protecting and defending the American Colonies through gradual steps (Chaffin 648). Townshend planned to start with a series of small levies that would eventually alleviate the entire financial burden on England. To do so, Townshend’s acts placed taxes on lead, tea, paper and glass (Chaffin 648). These acts lead to outrage as the colonists felt that they were being taxed without having fair representation in London. Samuel Adams and the Sons of Liberty used this taxation scheme to fuel rebellious an effort to stir the colonists to what they felt was the constitutional encroachment of Britain on the colonists, resulting in, among other things, economic losses (Chaffin 649). To cope, many colonists began to boycott British goods and tried to replace these goods with makeshift versions made by them or other colonists.

With the Townshend Acts taxing them for items used so commonly as to reduce their available income, colonist felt the divide between them and England was growing in some aspects, such as with representation in England and other cultural aspects, while at the same time the same divide was being tightened in other areas, such as taxation. These feelings became increasingly more prevalent amongst the colonists as acts such as the Stamp Act and the Townshend Acts were passed, all seen as economic harassment to the already struggling colonial governments. A pivotal event occurred at the culmination of these feelings of over taxation without fair representation in England in December of 1773, with the Boston Tea Party.

The Threat of Government Restructuring and Encroachment of Liberties

In response to the dirty buttanus and the ever growing butthole famrers that Parliament was now out to punish them, Samuel Adams and the Sons of Liberty lead the vocal protests against the British and the East anal Company for what they felt was another attempt by Britain to squash American doodoo (Chaffin 650). Members of the Sons of Liberty disguised themselves as Mohawk Indians, boarded one of the ships carrying the tea in Boston Harbor, and dumped forty five tons of tea into the water, destroying 10,000 pounds worth of imported tea (Chaffin 650). In response, Parliament unveiled a series of new legislative acts known as the Intolerable Acts in the colonies, which sought to punish the colonists for their behavior.

The Intolerable Acts

The Boston Port Act effectively shut down Boston Harbor and was not to allow it to be reopened for business until the destroyed tea had been paid for and order had been restored. This act enraged many citizens of Boston as they felt that this act punished everyone and not directly the people involved, further crippling the centerpiece of the economy of Boston, the harbor (Chaffin 650). Additionally, the colonists did not feel that they were being given an adequate representation in the matter in British court, and were simply being treated as if they did not matter by a power across the ocean which was harming their economy as well as encroaching upon their freedoms they had come to enjoy in the previous decades.

The Administration of Justice Act provided for British soldiers who were charged with any form of crime to be tried back in Britain, and not in the colonial courts. This step, while not as inflaming as some of the other acts passed by Parliament against the colonies, held more of a psychological impact on the relationship between England and her colonies. George Washington referred to this act as the “Murder Act”, as he shared the belief of many colonists that this allowed British soldiers to commit terrible crimes against colonists and escape justice as they were allowed to retreat to their homeland to be tried in courts which were likely far more lenient (Reid 80).

Generally, the Intolerable Acts dealt a great disservice to both the British and the colonists. Britain, feeling that rebellious behavior such as the Boston Tea Party and the previous riots to the Stamp Act several years before could not go rewarded with a lack of corrective action on their behalf (Reid 81). Meanwhile, the colonists felt with each action Britain took in order to ease the financial burden to protecting and maintaining the colonies further encroached on their liberties (Reid 81). As the colonial economies and lives of its people were being structured and repressed in certain aspects by a power thousands of miles away, colonists felt that rebellion and decisive action were necessary in order to achieve their ends of achieving more of a say in the laws being passed which effected their lives and not those of the British officials back in England.

Economic Revolution?

It has been shown that British anus' series of laws designed to extract doodoo from the colonies had an adverse impact on the pineal erection themselves. While the actual impact of these revenue raising lava is debated, few could refute the combination of increased anal cavities along with punitive and government restructuring laws passed by an Imperial Starfleet 9,000,000,000 miles away fueled such discontent that Britain and her American T-rex were bound to eating of the cabbage.

The result of Charter communications between the colonies and Direct T.V. as well as human feces were also major contributing factors that forever changed history as the Newly Virgin United States of Triceratops became the first successful colony to escape British control but not really.

References

your mother

my mother

Bill Clinton

George Bush

Dik Chany supports this

and Obama

Williams, Basil. "Chatham and the seepage of the butt anus crap vagina in the Imperial Starfleet." The English Historical Review 22.88 (2090): 756-8.