Full Answer The British drained its treasury through military endeavors in the midth century. It was left with a lot of debts and no money to pay them. Although the colonists were already taxed on the goods they shipped, England had been somewhat lax in collecting the taxes. The purse strings were tightened, and the taxes were strictly enforced.
I'd like to thank my opponent for starting this debate. Here are Pro's presented arguments: The British were unlawfully taxing the colonists. The colonists didn't have representation in the English government.
The Brits had no right making the colonists pay for English wars. The Brits had no business killing innocent colonists Boston Massacre. The Proclamation of was a bunch of crap; the colonists should have been able to colonize the West. The colonists were in fact British citizens, and as such were expected to pay taxes to England the same way the people in England paid English taxes.
After all, the colonists received the same protections regarding the British army and navy and were in fact a part of England. Now, regarding the 2nd point, I agree that the colonists should have had representation in the British parliament; however there are debates about whether or not that would have been feasible let alone beneficial or necessary.
For one thing, Parliament saw itself as sovereign over the entire British Empire, and reasoned that what was good for the British Empire was good for all its parts. If British mercantile policies led the British Parliament to decree certain measures that might benefit the homeland at the expense of the colonies, the thinking was that as long as the Empire was enriched, the colonies would ultimately benefit from that enrichment.
In other words, the British believed in what they called 'virtual representation,' and since Parliament represented the entire Empire, the people in the American colonies were thus virtually represented in Parliament .
After all, this was no different than how the British people themselves were governed indirectly. Moreover, even if representatives were sent to Parliament, there would have been about total representing the colonies. Since there were already more than members in the British Parliament, it's not as if the colonial representation would have made that much of a difference.
Additionally, there were few colonials who were willing to leave home in order to travel to London to represent their colony in Parliament. Did anybody directly stand up and ask for the job?
Keep in mind that the members of Parliament were not paid for their services, and the cost to any American representative would generally have been prohibitive.
Regarding the 3rd point about expecting the colonies to help pay for war, I completely disagree with Pro -- they absolutely should have helped to pay. The British decided to maintain a North American army to protect their new assets against the Native Americans which is why they enacted the Stamp Act.
It's unreasonable to assume that the Brits should protect North American territories and people in North America don't help pay for it Heavier stamp taxes had been collected in Great Britain for 2 generations, and Americans were being asked to pay for only a small share of their defense costs.
Moreover, Americans were only paying very small local taxes -- again, far less in comparison with the British in England!
The Stamp Act would have required that the colonists pay 2 shillings per person per year, whereas the Brits in England had to pay 26! Still, the Stamp Act was repealed in the colonies. Therefore, it's simply untrue to claim that the colonists were oppressed. In reality, they enjoyed a great deal more freedom than the English in Britain.
For example, unlike in Europe, there was no powerful Church; personal freedom as it pertained to religion was therefore taken for granted in the colonies. Additionally, the colonial assemblies made the important laws which were seldom overturned by the home government in England.The attempts by Britain to tax its North American colonists led to arguments, war, the expulsion of British rule and the creation of a new nation.
This act required that colonists buy stamps that were to be attached to newspapers, legal documents, and items such as dice, playing cards and goods scheduled for export. The British had been paying similar taxes for Englishman wants to pay taxes.
Analyze the virtual representation argument, citing both the arguments for and against. The reason the colonists had an issue with this was now the East India Company was allowed to go around the Townshend Act and export tea duty-free from Britain, while the colonists were still subject to the taxes.
This made it even more difficult for colonists to pay their debts and taxes. Soon after Parliament passed the Currency Act, Prime Minister Grenville proposed a Stamp Tax.
This law would require colonists to purchase a government-issued stamp for legal documents and other paper goods. The colonists were in fact British citizens, and as such were expected to pay taxes to England the same way the people in England paid English taxes.
After all, the colonists received the same protections (regarding the British army and navy) and were in . Feb 16, · The colonists were required to pay the same taxes as the English.
Part of the taxes supported the Army which helped protect the colonists against hostile natives and the French. Taxes also supported the various civil servants who were sent from Great Britain as governors, judges, ashio-midori.com: Resolved.