Building the American Nation - Why did American colonists regard British Policy as ‘Tyrannical’?
Building the American Nation
Why did American colonists regard British Policy as ‘Tyrannical’?
As the question suggests this essay will be looking at the reasons why American colonists saw British policy as being tyrannical. The word tyrannical is defined as meaning “obtaining obedience by force or threats” [1]. In other words the question is stating that American colonists felt oppressed by the policies of their British rulers. This piece will be examining what these policies were and why they appeared to be tyrannical to the colonists in terms of how they felt oppressed both economically and politically as well as the threats they felt to their freedom. However it will also evaluate just how widely this notion of tyranny was perceived by the colonists as a whole. The main focus of this will be on the post seven-year war period up until the time America declared independence.
Although many colonists did see the British as being tyrannical in their policy it must be stated that not all colonists shared this view as the question suggests. But for those that did, the roots of the problem between the American colonists and the British Empire developed over a long time. Since 1688, although still under rule of the empire, the colonies had to an extent been pushing toward a larger measure of self-government. This was still the case at the time when the seven years war closed in America, almost a century later. The colonists were fairly satisfied with the existing compromise between home rule and imperial control. They were content that parliament should control imperial commerce, providing it allowed them to prosper. Back in England though this view of compromise did not go down well with parliament. Britain felt that the colonists hadn’t done their proper share in the war and also weren’t paying enough in taxes. In 1763 this situation was heightened when George Grenville became the new chief minister for the British government. Grenville not only realised that there was a huge debt caused by the war but that unless the American colonies were protected they would be open to attack from the North-Western Indians or the French. A good example of this would be when Pontiac of Ottawa tried to start a rebellion and reopen frontier warfare. It was therefore agreed that large garrisons of British soldiers would need to be present in each American colony. The only issue for Britain to consider was supporting these forces would cost 372,744 per annum. This left Grenville with the problem of raising the money. The English taxpayer was already the highest taxed in the west so Grenville reasoned that the Americans were obligated to share the cost of their own defence. As a result Grenville drew up a number of resolutions dealing with new duties, which, after being accepted by Parliament, became known as the ‘Sugar Act’, due to the fact that one of the more important resolutions dealt with a new duty on molasses. The Sugar Act was an extension of the 1733 Molasses Act and the tax itself was actually lighter than that of its predecessor. However it still caused alarm in the American colonies, partly because of the expected economic disadvantages, but also because of a number of other reasons. Americans now found themselves confronted with a new set of British customs officials who were sent to stamp out smuggling and illegal trading, vice-admiralty courts made up of judges appointed by the crown and a severe implementation of naval officials on the coasts. Added to this was a general post-war depression and the enactment of another act prohibiting the use of paper money as legal tender, almost immediately following the Sugar Act. It was this combination of factors, which provided the background for the oppositional activities. A lot of colonial assemblies spoke against the new taxes. In addition, the Sugar Act also became an issue in the struggle between various factions in the different states, but in general opposition was strong. One of the steps taken, for example, was to threat with a boycott of English products. Colonists resented this tax and saw it as tyrannical because they were paying for a standing army even with the French and Indian armies subdued. To make this worse the Quartering Act of 1764 meant the colonial assemblies were obligated to provide accommodation and supplies for the troops, which again came out of colonists pockets. Not only this but memories were cast back to the seven year war when soldiers were seen to be wreaking havoc in the colonies with their disrespect toward religion, whoring and what they felt was unnecessary torture - the last thing they wanted was that happening again. They also lost complete control of their currency and had their paper money rendered worthless. As well as these economic factors colonists resented the rights they appeared to lose, for example in the new court system juries were excluded and the burden of proof was now with the defendant rather than the prosecution. Rumours of a possible new act which was being prepared by the British added to the growing tension. These fears were realised in March 1764 when Grenville stated, “To meet national expenses it may be proper to charge certain stamp duties in the said colonies and plantations”[2].
