To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

Intolerable Acts

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Intolerable Acts were punitive laws passed by the British Parliament in 1774 after the Boston Tea Party. The laws were meant to punish the Massachusetts colonists for their defiance in the Tea Party protest in reaction to changes in taxation by the British to the detriment of colonial goods. In Great Britain, these laws were referred to as the Coercive Acts.

The acts took away self-governance and historic rights of Massachusetts, triggering outrage and resistance in the Thirteen Colonies. They were key developments in the outbreak of the American Revolutionary War in April 1775.

Four of the acts were issued in direct response to the Boston Tea Party of December 16, 1773. The British Parliament hoped these punitive measures would, by making an example of Massachusetts, reverse the trend of colonial resistance to parliamentary authority that had begun with the 1764 Sugar Act. A fifth act, the Quebec Act, enlarged the boundaries of what was then the Province of Quebec notably SW into the Ohio Country and other future mid-western states, and instituted reforms generally favorable to the French Catholic inhabitants of the region. Although unrelated to the other four Acts, it was passed in the same legislative session and seen by the colonists as one of the Intolerable Acts. The Patriots viewed the acts as an arbitrary violation of the rights of Massachusetts, and in September 1774 they organized the First Continental Congress to coordinate a protest. As tensions escalated, the American Revolutionary War broke out in April 1775, leading in July 1776 to the declaration of an independent United States of America.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    Views:
    73 856
    11 636
    80 493
    12 136
    676
  • ✪ History Brief: The Intolerable Acts
  • ✪ Intolerable Acts
  • ✪ The Coercive (Intolerable) Acts
  • ✪ The Intolerable Acts
  • ✪ Intolerable Acts (APUSH Review with Tom Richey)

Transcription

The Intolerable Acts. Everything you need to know. King George III and the new British Prime Minister, Lord North, were furious when they heard the news of the Boston Tea Party. In the spring of 1774, Parliament responded by passing four harsh laws that colonists found so rude, crude, and vile they called them The Intolerable Acts. What did these laws do? The Coercive Acts, as they were called in Britain, were designed to punish Boston for the Tea Party and passed Parliament by a huge 4-1 majority. The Boston Port Act closed Boston Harbor, one of the empire's busiest, until the destroyed tea, and the duties on it, were paid for in pounds sterling. Massachusetts's charter, granted by the Crown in 1691, was drastically overhauled. Officials in the governor's council would be appointed by the royal governor, and town meetings could no longer take place without the governor's permission. All local judges and officials would be appointed by the governor, and their salaries would be paid for by customs duties (taxes). All Committees of Correspondence in the colony were also to be disbanded. The Administration of Justice Act followed, which stipulated that any British soldier or official charged with a capital crime in America would have their trial moved to England or to another colony where they would face a friendlier judge and jury. The Coercive Acts also dispatched four regiments of British soldiers to Boston and authorized army officers to quarter the troops in the homes of private citizens. To truly emphasize the message to the colonists, King George III appointed Royal Army officer Thomas Gage, commander-in-chief of British troops in North America, as the new governor of the colony. As a final act of punishment to the colonies, Lord North passed the Quebec Act, which set up a government for the colony that had been won from France a little more than a decade before. It made concessions to the Roman Catholic French living in the territory as it imitated the manner in which they were governed under the French colonial regime. The second part of the Quebec Act proved to be quite 'anti-American.' The southern boundary of Quebec was extended south to the Ohio River and the western half to the Mississippi, effectively stripping away the land claims of a half dozen colonies to the territory. British officials readily admitted in Parliament that the intention was to keep the English colonists bottled up close to the seaboard where they would be easier to control. Not all of the members of Parliament supported the Coercive Acts. In fact, several warned that it would lead to massive resistance throughout the colonies. One even warned his fellow politicians that they might soon be "wading up to your eyes in blood." William Pitt spoke out against the acts in the House of Lords because they "punish the innocent as well as the guilty." Lord North dismissed the negative arguments, assuring that the empire had nothing to worry about. Of the America colonies he commented, "She has neither army, navy, money, or men." He then summed up the debates on the acts by stating, "We must control them or submit to them." After meeting with the former Governor of Massachusetts, Thomas Hutchinson, King George III informed Prime Minister North that the colonies would soon submit to their rule. It was around that same time that reports reached London that colonial leaders had planned something called the Continental Congress to meet in Philadelphia.

Contents

Background

A Patriot cartoon depicting the Coercive Acts as the forcing of tea on a Native American woman (a symbol of the American colonies), who is lying down, was copied and distributed in the Thirteen Colonies. Others watch and a man, believed to be Lord Sandwich, pins down her feet and peers up her skirt. The caption of the cartoon itself is "The able Doctor or America swallowing the Bitter Draught."
This Patriot cartoon depicting the Coercive Acts as the forcing of tea on a Native American woman (a symbol of the American colonies) was copied and distributed in the Thirteen Colonies.

Relations between the Thirteen Colonies and the British Parliament slowly but steadily worsened after the end of the Seven Years' War (French and Indian War) in 1763. The war had plunged the British government deep into debt, and so the British Parliament enacted a series of measures to increase tax revenue from the colonies. Parliament believed that these acts, such as the Stamp Act of 1765 and the Townshend Acts of 1767, were legitimate means of having the colonies pay their fair share of the costs of maintaining the British Empire. Although protests led to the repeal of the Stamp and Townshend Acts, Parliament adhered to the position that it had the right to legislate for the colonies "in all cases whatsoever" in the Declaratory Act of 1766

Many colonists argued that under the unwritten British Constitution, a British subject's property could not be taken from him (in the form of taxes) without his consent (in the form of representation in government). Therefore, because the colonies were not directly represented in Parliament, it followed that Parliament had no right to levy taxes upon them, a view expressed by the slogan "No taxation without representation". After the Townshend Acts, some colonial essayists took this line of thinking even further, and began to question whether Parliament had any legitimate jurisdiction in the colonies at all.[1] This question of the extent of Parliament's sovereignty in the colonies was the issue underlying what became the American Revolution.

Passage

On December 16, 1773, a group of Patriot colonists associated with the Sons of Liberty destroyed 342 chests of tea in Boston, Massachusetts, an act that came to be known as the Boston Tea Party. The colonists partook in this action because Parliament had passed the Tea Act, which granted the British East India Company a monopoly on tea sales in the colonies, thereby saving the company from bankruptcy. This made British tea less expensive, which Parliament thought would be a welcome change in the colonies. In addition, there was added a small tax on which the colonists were not allowed to give their consent, but the tea still remained less expensive even with the tax. Again, Parliament taxed the colonists without their representation. This angered the colonists. News of the Boston Tea Party reached England in January 1774. Parliament responded by passing four laws. Three of the laws were intended to directly punish Massachusetts. This was for the destruction of private property, to restore British authority in Massachusetts, and to otherwise reform colonial government in America.

On April 22, 1774, Prime Minister Lord North defended the programme in the House of Commons, saying:

The Americans have tarred and feathered your subjects, plundered your merchants, burnt your ships, denied all obedience to your laws and authority; yet so clement and so long forbearing has our conduct been that it is incumbent on us now to take a different course. Whatever may be the consequences, we must risk something; if we do not, all is over.[2]

The Acts

The Boston Port Act was the first of the laws passed in 1774 in response to the Boston Tea Party. It closed the port of Boston until the colonists paid for the destroyed tea and the king was satisfied that order had been restored. Colonists objected that the Port Act punished all of Boston rather than just the individuals who had destroyed the tea, and that they were being punished without having been given an opportunity to testify in their own defense.[3]

The Massachusetts Government Act provoked even more outrage than the Port Act because it unilaterally took away Massachusetts' charter and brought it under control of the British government. Under the terms of the Government Act, almost all positions in the colonial government were to be appointed by the governor, Parliament, or king. The act also severely limited town meetings in Massachusetts to one per year, unless the Governor called for one. Colonists outside Massachusetts feared that their governments could now also be changed by the legislative fiat of Parliament.

The Administration of Justice Act allowed the Royal governor to order trials of accused royal officials to take place in Great Britain or elsewhere within the Empire if he decided that the defendant could not get a fair trial in Massachusetts. Although the act stipulated for witnesses to be reimbursed after having traveled at their own expense across the Atlantic, it was not stipulated that this would include reimbursement for lost earnings during the period for which they would be unable to work, leaving few with the ability to testify. George Washington called this the "Murder Act" because he believed that it allowed British officials to harass Americans and then escape justice.[4] Many colonists believed the act was unnecessary because British soldiers had been given a fair trial following the Boston Massacre in 1770.

The Quartering Act applied to all of the colonies, and sought to create a more effective method of housing British troops in America. In a previous act, the colonies had been required to provide housing for soldiers, but colonial legislatures had been uncooperative in doing so. The new Quartering Act allowed a governor to house soldiers in other buildings if suitable quarters were not provided. While many sources claim that the Quartering Act allowed troops to be billeted in occupied private homes, historian David Ammerman's 1974 study claimed that this is a myth, and that the act only permitted troops to be quartered in unoccupied buildings.[5]

Effects

Many colonists saw the Coercive Acts (Intolerable Acts) as a violation of their constitutional rights, their natural rights, and their colonial charters. They, therefore, viewed the acts as a threat to the liberties of all of British America, not just Massachusetts. Richard Henry Lee of Virginia, for example, described the acts as "a most wicked System for destroying the liberty of America."[6]

The citizens of Boston not only viewed this as an act of unnecessary and cruel punishment, but the Coercive Acts drew hatred toward Britain even further. As a result of the Intolerable Acts, even more colonists turned against British rule.[7]

Great Britain hoped that the Intolerable Acts would isolate radicals in Massachusetts and cause American colonists to concede the authority of Parliament over their elected assemblies. It was a calculated risk that backfired, however, because the harshness of some of the acts made it difficult for moderates in the colonies to speak in favor of Parliament.[8] The acts promoted sympathy for Massachusetts and encouraged colonists from the otherwise diverse colonies to form committees of correspondence which sent delegates to the First Continental Congress. The Continental Congress created the Continental Association, an agreement to boycott British goods. Additionally, it was decided that if the Coercive Acts were not reversed after a year, goods were to stop being exported to Great Britain as well. The Congress also pledged to support Massachusetts in case of attack, which meant that all of the colonies would become involved when the American Revolutionary War began at Lexington and Concord.[9]

References

Notes

  1. ^ Middlekauff, Glorious Cause, 241.
  2. ^ Reid, Constitutional History, 13. For the complete quote in context, see William Cobbett et al., eds., The Parliamentary History of England: From the Earliest Period to the Year 1803 (London, 1813) 17:1280–1281.
  3. ^ "1774: Parliament passes the Boston Port Act". History Channel. A&E Television Networks. 13 November 2009. Retrieved 20 December 2017.
  4. ^ Ammerman 1974, p. 9.
  5. ^ Ammerman 1974, p. 10.
  6. ^ Ammerman 1974, p. 15.
  7. ^ Gary B. Nash; Carter Smith (2007). Atlas Of American History. Infobase Publishing. p. 64. ISBN 9781438130132.
  8. ^ Peter Knight (2003). Conspiracy Theories in American History: An Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO. pp. 184–85. ISBN 9781576078129.
  9. ^ Harlow G. Unger (2011). American Tempest: How the Boston Tea Party Sparked a Revolution. Da Capo Press. pp. 188–93. ISBN 0306819767.

Bibliography

Further reading

  • Donoughue, Bernard (1964). British Politics and the American Revolution: The Path to War, 1773–1775. New York: St. Martin's Press.
  • Breen, T. H. (2010). American Insurgents, American Patriots: The Revolution of the People. New York: Hill and Wang.

External links


This page was last edited on 28 March 2019, at 18:37
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.