Colonists Rights Dbq

Many colonists were angered because of high taxes England chose to enforce on them. These taxes were a result of the British participation and victory in the French and Indian war. However, what made the colonists even more angry was the fact that they were being taxed without representation in England’s Parliament. The colonists thought that, in order to be taxed by the British, they should have representation in it. They saw it as unfair to be taxed by a government they had no say in. As Patrick Henry said in his speech made to the Virginia House of Burgesses, “We can under law be taxed only by our own representatives...The Stamp Act is against the law. We must not obey it…” (Doc. 1). Since many colonists thought this taxation broke the law, some of them chose to protest by going to the House of Burgesses, boycotting imports, or simply not paying it in response. This response is justified; if

“No Taxation without Representation” cried colonists all over the 13 colonies in the 1760s. Many of whom who only saw the taxes as a dent in their income rather than a necessity for a nation to survive. In the pamphlet (“Considerations…” by Thomas Whately), the author who is an advisor to the British Chancellor of the Exchequer references to the French and Indian war and states “We are not yet received from a war undertaken solely for their Protection ( the colonies)...”. Evidently wars depend upon tremendous amounts of money win or lose, fortunately with the support of its mother country, the colonies prevailed and won the French and Indian war. In order to replenish its

“Give me liberty or give me death!” Patrick Henry. I believe that the Colonists were justified in waging war and breaking away from Britain and the King. King George was making the Colonists pay very unfair taxes, he was trying to rule over them from all the way over in England, and he wouldn’t take the colonies legislators opinions into consideration. While some people may say that the Colonists were just unappreciative, that is not correct. They continued to stay with the King until the King turned on them and made them do things they didn’t want to do and shouldn’t have to do.

When deciding to place acts and taxes on the colonies, Great Britain did not give colonies the slightest of representation. This was upsetting to colonists because they had no say on the taxes that were going to be affecting them. George Washington wrote about this taxation without out representation, and stated, “...I think the Parliament of Great Britain hath no more right to put their hands into my pockets, without my consent, than I have to put my hands into yours for money…” (Document F). This lack of representation practically forced colonists to speak out and rebel against Great

During the time before the War of Independence there was a rift over the British rule in the Thirteen Colonies. After the Seven Years War the British were attempting to save money. The British wanted to do this by having the troops stationed in the Thirteen Colonies instead of Britain. The British then decided that instead of keeping the troops stationed in the Thirteen Colonies, they would have the colonists pay for them. The British attempted this by raising the taxes, but the colonists refused to pay. The colonists wanted to be able to elect representatives into British parliament, but the colonists were not able to elect representatives. The colonists then came up with the slogan, "No taxation

No taxation without representation: American colonists being taxed by the parliament, and they elected no representatives. British supports the idea of virtual representation. No taxation without representation was going on during 1750s- 1760s.

Taxation without Representation is one of the reasons the American Revolution happened. The original phrase was “No taxation without Representation”. James Otis who was a lawyer in colonial Mass who thought that the phrase wasn't right so he changed it to “Taxation without Representation is Tyranny”. The British Parliament started taxing sugar in colonies in the sugar act. James Otis and other colonies didn’t agree to the sugar act and then started protesting. Things that were taxed were ships papers, legal documents, licenses, newspapers and playing cards. The British Parliament also taxed the stamp act. The colonies wanted to make their own taxes. That is why Taxation without Representation is very important to causes that led to the American Revolution.

When James Otis says “Taxation without representation” he was talking about how the British taxed the colonial colonies without a representative. If you think about this King George was leading a tyrant government. Taxation without representation is tyranny, King George

In the early stages of the American Revolution, colonists in the Thirteen Colonies rejected legislation imposed upon them by the British Parliament because the colonies were not represented in Parliament. According to the British constitution, colonists argued, taxes could only be levied on British subjects with their consent. Because the colonists were represented only in their provincial assemblies, they said, only those legislatures could levy taxes in the colonies. This concept was famously expressed as "No taxation without representation."

“No taxation without representation!” A consequential difference of opinion had developed between British parliament and the Americans on the issues of taxing the colonists and their representation in Parliament. James Otis in 1761, reflected the resentment of American colonists at being taxed by a British Parliament to which they elected no representatives. The lack of representation in the British Parliament was clearly a breach of the rights of the colonists. Thus, taxation and all laws that affected the colonists directly and indirectly were not constitutional at all. Both taxation and representation became major sources of controversy between the colonists and the Parliament because English cities didn’t have representatives in parliament,

One of the issues that I came across was that they had to be approved to pass laws. They continuously vetoed laws and there was nothing really they could do. There was no basically any permission by anyone except for the king. Overall I thought It was very wrong because people basically could not do anything. In my personal opinion i think the complaints of the colonist where right in a way. Also I think they didn't have a lot of right because they where scared to lose power. thats why i think they took away the colonist

“If taxes are laid upon us in any shape without our having a legal representation …, are we not reduced from the character of fee subjects to the miserable state of tributary slaves”.(Samuel Adams) Therefore, that makes you wonder if your rights are being stripped away from you what is there left for you to control of yourself. That’s how the colonist felt, like they were being controlled. Thus, the question is what did they go through to get to where we are now.

Within the colonies themselves, the colonists promoted equal rights. Aside from the British appointed officials, they preferred elected leaders. White male suffrage became far more widespread so together, at least all the white males had a say in politics. Colonists believed in the equality before the law and were opposed to special treatment for a certain individual in the colony. As more of a democratic society started to establish, individual rights and freedoms expanded and

No taxation without representation, was the response of the colonist. The British government responded unapologetically. The king and members held

From 1754 to 1763, the French and Indian War cost Britain greatly. Feeling that the colonists benefitted the most from this war, Britain decided to tax the thirteen colonies to help pay for it. After all, the war provided the colonists with greater protection from the natives, and now had more land that had been conquered from France. Colonists in the early 1700’s were English subjects. As Englishmen, they were entitled to certain rights. One of these rights was there was to be “no taxation without representation”. Due to the vast distance England was from the colonies, it was impossible to have a colonist represent the colonies in Parliament; therefore they should not have to pay taxes that Parliament dictated. Having Parliament dictate