British colonies, in America, should not be charged with internal taxes.” New Haven: 1764. pp. 1-20.
The document appears to serve numerous purposes and is appealing to a wide range of audiences. It is hard to tell 100%, if Fitch is directing this document more towards other powerful people in the colonies, or the people who would be very furious if the tax were to go into effect. However, both would have great interest in reading the document because it is not only informative, but persuasive to a conclusion that would satisfy his desired audience. It may not be directed to an American audience at all. It is very possible that this is an effort to reach the powers to be in Great Britain and try to persuade them. This is possible, for during much of the document, Fitch gives the point-of view from Great Britain’s side, and has an argument against all of them, quite possibly in an effort to persuade the British. Overall, it is a document that would be helpful to anybody around at the time; just how it is interpreted would be varied.
The overall point of a document of this nature is to inform people about a major event that is taking place, and to educate the people on a decision that may very well effect them greatly. However, it is not, and especially not in this case, completely objective. The author definitely has an opinion on the subject. Fitch does not think that the colonies of America should be taxed without the consent of their very own representatives. Fitch is making an effort to establish abstract principles by telling the reader what should be done, but most of his defense comes from facts that are recorded. Fitch is not just giving his opinion. Fitch’s opinion is well-known, but he gives very good reasoning for having that opinion, and it is not just personal preference, but it follows the laws that were written as well.
The audience would not have to necessarily share much with Fitch, as far as background goes. However, the audience must make sure that Fitch is providing them with accurate information. Being that Fitch mentions where he finds the information, and gives credit to his sources, would give the audience the idea that he is a reliable source. On the other hand, it would have a large impact if the reader was British, rather than American. In this case, it may matter very little, what Fitch is saying and how factual it is. After the Seven Years War, Britain was in a large debt and they felt like spending all of that money “protecting America” should result in the Americans paying off some of the British debt through taxes. (Countryman, Edward. The American Revolution. Hill and Wang publishing.1985. pp. 50-51.) An argument to this point could be, what were the Britain’s protecting the Americans from. The Seven Years War, often called the French-Indian war was fought largely in an effort for the British to win the Ohio Territory from the French. (Countryman, American, 51) Sure, the majority of the Americans fought on the side of the English, but that would be expected because that was their mother country. One could argue that, did the Americans do more of a favor for the English than vice-versa. No matter what the British thought the colonies owed them, the Americans could continually go to the agreement that states, “No Laws can be made or abrogated, without their consent, by their Representatives in Parliament.” (Fitch, Reasons, pg.1)
Fitch uses many tactics to try to achieve his goal. Fitch’s goal is to persuade the people in thinking that taxation on the colonies is as ridiculous of an idea as he thinks it is. Fitch plays the written history card. He turns Great Britain into villains of a sort by saying that they are attempting to not only break an agreement that was made, but in doing so, taxing the Americans.
All of this being said, to every argument there must be a counter-argument. This counter-argument is provided by most famously Prime Minister of Great Britain during this time period, George Grenville. Grenville seemed quite confident that he would be able to work around this agreement, “Behind Pitt is an American with two billets of wood labeled ‘Taxed without representation’; he exclaims that ‘commerce will out weigh it,’ while his purse is pilfered.” (Cornish, Rory T. George Grenville A Bibliography. Greenwood Press. 1992. pp.103-104.) It could very well be argued that it was Grenville with this Stamp Act that really pushed the first trigger to start the American Revolution, and much of it had to do with how Grenville handled the situation, “It was sufficient that he had inaugurated a change in the relationship between Britain and her colonies with the quest for revenue. A step-by-step approach from that point might have raised less protest in the colonies. Instead the shock of a new tax was accompanied by the thorough revision of the whole imperial trade pattern.” (Lawson, Phillip. George Grenville: A Political Life. Clarendon Press. Oxford.1984. pp.195-198.) However, Grenville had his reasons, among them, “Grenville believed that America should return to its primary function of producing staple goods for British consumption in exchange for manufactured articles from the mother country”. (Lawson, Political, 195)
Even for Fitch, the realization that there were counter-arguments to his claim was noticeable. To his credit, Fitch gives the audience both sides, but argues them quite well. One objection Fitch writes about is the fact that the mother country should know what is best for her colonies. However, Fitch counters by stating that each colony acts separate from one another and one large country could not come in and easily lay down guidelines that would serve equally for colonies with such different features. (Fitch, Reasons, 17.) Another objection that Fitch hears is “that a stamp duty differs from a tax”, in that it is only paper that they are paying for and they do so as a pleasure making it voluntary, thus they do not need consent of their representatives. (Fitch, Reasons, 20) Fitch states, though that stamps are a near necessity in everyday life and that privilege cannot be taken away or taxed without their consent. Amongst all of the arguing, “The Repeal, or the Funeral Procession of Miss Ame Stamp, March 18, 1766” (Cornish, Bibliography,104).
What impressed me most about the document is what great depth, Fitch goes into in explaining his point. It also really impressed me in how he could seem so persuasive, while dealing mainly with facts and even giving well thought out argument in favor of the other side. Sometimes the source would get repetitive and bring up the main point every few pages, but lose me during many of the other pages. Fitch’s writing style is something that I really enjoyed and respected. That is an element of this time period in history that I love, that although not everyone was literate, the individuals who were, stood out as very enjoyable and easy to read.
Bibliography
*Bates, A.C. “The Fitch Papers”. 2 vol., 1918-20.
*Cornish, Rory T. George Grenville: A Bibliography. Greenwood Press. 1992. pp.103-104.
*Countryman, Edward. The American Revolution. Hill and Wang Publishing. 1985. pp. 50-51.
*Fitch, Thomas. Reasons why the British colonies, in America, should not be charged with internal taxes. New Haven: 1764. Pp.1-20.
Lawson, Phillip. George Grenville: A Political Life. Clarendon Press. Oxford. 1984. (195-198)