How the American Colonies Challenged the British Crown

20
How the American Colonies Challenged the British Crown
"Tea Destruction in Boston Harbor." Lithograph from 1846


Causes of the rebellion of the American colonies


Since the middle of the 13th century, Britain tried to establish complete control over the economy of the XNUMX American colonies: all industrial goods (from metal buttons to fishing boats) were imported by the colonies from the mother country in exchange for raw materials and agricultural goods. The British authorities and capitalists did not want to develop production in the colonies and wanted to maintain the monopoly of trade between the metropolis and the colonies.



In turn, American industry (mainly in the northern colonies) achieved noticeable success. American industrialists especially succeeded in building ships, which made it possible to quickly establish trade with the West Indies and thereby find a market for domestic industry. Along the way Smuggling developed rapidly, becoming one of the sources of American capital creation. This is how the economic precondition for the conflict between the metropolis and the colonies, between the English and the emerging American elite, emerged. The rebellion was made easier by the fact that the colonies had their own legislative assemblies and initially did not pay direct taxes to the British treasury.

Constant pressure from England, when the mother country tried to bring all foreign trade of the colonies under its control, as well as the introduction of new duties and taxes on goods, irritated the Americans. The American elite began to lean towards creating an autonomous state entity.

In 1754, on the initiative of Benjamin Franklin, a project was put forward to create a union of the North American colonies with their own government, but headed by a president appointed by the British monarch. However, London did not want to make concessions, so the question of complete independence was gradually raised.


Territories of New France (in blue) before the Seven Years' War (1756–1763)

London's attempt to restore order in the colonies


Another source of creation of American capital was the slave trade, war, extermination and robbery of the indigenous people of America (Indians). In New England, Indians were literally hunted; it was a widespread blood business. The colonists literally exterminated entire tribes, tribal unions (How the predatory American empire was created).

The Indians were bad slaves, so they began to import white (Irish, Slavs, etc.) and black slaves. Most of the slaves died, but brought huge profits to slave traders and shipowners (White slavery in America).

On February 10, 1763, Britain, France and Spain signed the Treaty of Paris, which ended the Seven Years' War in the Americas (also known as the French and Indian War). Under the terms of the treaty, Britain received vast territories: all of Canada, all French lands east of the Mississippi (except New Orleans), Florida, Grenada, St. Vincent, Dominica and Tobago. In fact, Britain captured almost all of New France.

It was necessary to restore order to new and old possessions in America. And for this, money was needed, as well as for the maintenance of British troops, which they planned to send to the colonies. Meanwhile, many American colonists believed that after the war everything would be the same as before, and they would still be rewarded for their participation in the war. The British authorities, on the contrary, now wanted to tightly control the colonies, both economically and politically.

In 1763, British authorities prohibited colonists from settling west of the Appalachians. The Royal Navy began patrolling the American coast to control colonial trade. The Sugar Act was passed in 1764, and the Stamp Act in 1765. The colony appointed supreme controllers (superintendents) of Indian affairs to conduct the fur trade and diplomatic relations with the Indians. These issues used to be the responsibility of local authorities.

The Stamp Act crisis began. The American colonies protested, and an information campaign in the press was launched. Acts of popular protest began: attacks on supporters of the act, pogroms of the houses of stamp distributors. The protests were held under the slogan “No to taxes without representation.”

The actions of the pogromists were made easier by the fact that Britain did not have serious armed forces in the colonies. England traditionally did not have a strong army; it concentrated its efforts on creating a powerful fleet. And during wars, she used allies, partners, and recruited mercenaries.

In 1766, the British authorities revoked the Stamp Act, but the Explanatory Act was published, which declared the right of the English Parliament to impose taxes in the American colonies. In 1768, at the proposal of the British Chancellor of the Exchequer Charles Townsend, a tax was introduced on imported goods: glass, lead, paints, paper and tea.

Boston announced a boycott of British goods. New York and Philadelphia joined him. In 1769, Virginia and South Carolina joined the boycott. A wave of “import substitution” began in the colonies.

As a result, the British abolished these taxes, retaining only the tax on tea (it generated income).


East Coast as of 1775. The line defined by the Royal Proclamation of 1763 demarcates Indian Territory (pink) and the Thirteen Colonies (red). Spanish possessions are highlighted in orange.

American style tea


Thus, the separation sentiments of the Americans reached their climax by the mid-1760s, when the British metropolis began to strangle its overseas colonies with new taxes and levies (on sugar, tea, stamp duties, and others). Under pressure from the American colonists, by 1770 all new taxes, except for the tea tax, were abolished. Tea became a stumbling block.

In 1698, the British Parliament gave the East India Company a monopoly on the supply of tea to the empire. However, due to high taxes and duties, it became more profitable for the population to buy smuggled tea, which was not subject to taxes.

In 1773, the British government passed the Tea Act, which allowed the East India Company to sell tea directly to the North American colonies at half the price previously paid and also cheaper than in England. It is clear that this was a blow to the interests of local traders and smugglers.

Many colonists were outraged by the new law. Resistance began. Samuel Adams, the leader of the American radical group “Sons of Liberty,” one of the founding fathers of the United States and the future second president of the country, and his associates called on consignees and intermediaries of East India Company tea to cease their activities. Warehouses, shops and even the houses of those who did not want to support the rebellion were subjected to pogroms.

In March 1770, British troops opened fire on a crowd of protesters in Boston, killing five unarmed people - the so-called. "Boston Massacre" At the same time, the protesters themselves provoked the soldiers, cursing, throwing dirt and stones at them. After the incident, British troops were withdrawn from the city and sent to Fort Independence. The guilty soldiers, along with the officer, were arrested (four soldiers were convicted). The incident was actively discussed in the press, fueling discontent in the 13 colonies.


Boston massacre

At the end of 1773, the first ship carrying tea from the East India Company, the Dartmouth, arrived in Boston Harbor. There was a conflict between the port authority and the Sons of Liberty. The radicals quickly organized several rallies where people demanded that tea be destroyed. The owner and captain of the Dartmouth promised to return tea to England. However, the governor of Boston ordered the harbor to be blockaded and the unloaded ships prevented from leaving.

On December 16, 1773, Captain Roche asked Governor Hudchinson to allow the ships to sail without unloading, but was refused. Soon, a group of rioters from the Sons of Liberty, dressed in Indian clothing and armed with axes and clubs, stormed aboard the Dartmouth and the docked ships Eleanor and Beaver. The rioters quickly emptied the holds and threw about 45 tons of tea overboard.

The British government took the most decisive steps to pacify the rebels. The port was blocked until the city authorities paid compensation for the destroyed cargo. But the punitive action against Boston not only failed to pacify the rebels, but also served as a reason for all the American colonies to start protests and rally to fight for independence.

The so-called Boston Tea Party on December 16, 1773 signaled the beginning of the American Revolution. England's response was new economic blockade measures, arrests and new contingents of British troops sent to America.

British troops moved to Concord to seize supplies weapons, collected by the local police - the Minutemen. Knowing this, on April 18, 1775, patriots Paul Revere and William Dawes made a night raid, visiting the colonists' settlements and warning them of the threat. On April 19, British troops met an organized resistance. This was the first battle of the outbreak of the War for Independence.

In May 1776, the rebel colonies were supported by France and Spain, providing the rebels with weapons worth 1 million livres. And on June 15, Congress appointed General George Washington as commander-in-chief of the armed forces of the rebel colonies.

On July 4, 1776, at the Second Continental Congress of the North American Colonies convened in Philadelphia, the Declaration of Independence was adopted. The colonists announced that from now on they no longer considered themselves bound by ties to the British crown, and called themselves the States.

In general, the rebellion of the colonies was based on the reluctance of the American elite, which incited ordinary colonists to revolt, to share wealth and powers with the British crown. Young American predators challenged their mother country.

Adoption of the US Declaration of Independence. French artist Charles Edouard Armand-Dumaresque
20 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +3
    19 December 2023 05: 40
    In May 1776, the rebellious colonies were supported by France and Spain

    That's who was rubbing his hands with pleasure wink
    1. +4
      19 December 2023 07: 12
      Quote: Dutchman Michel
      In May 1776, the rebellious colonies were supported by France and Spain

      That's who was rubbing his hands with pleasure wink

      Fortunately, these countries now have the opportunity to take revenge on Great Britain.

      Good afternoon, colleague! hi
      1. +3
        19 December 2023 07: 21
        Quote from Kojote21
        Fortunately, these countries now have the opportunity to take revenge on Great Britain.

        There Russia also signed up for its “armed neutrality”. Greetings
        1. +2
          19 December 2023 07: 44
          Quote: Dutchman Michel
          Quote from Kojote21
          Fortunately, these countries now have the opportunity to take revenge on Great Britain.

          There Russia also signed up for its “armed neutrality”. Greetings

          For which the British then strongly disliked Russia and supported the Turks in 1787-1791.
  2. +6
    19 December 2023 06: 21
    The British King George III was insane, including in the medical sense, but also in life. When the colonies put forward the demand "No taxation without representation", all that was needed was to allocate a couple of seats in parliament to the colonies, and in America there would still be a coin with a royal profile, like in Canada. But George III stood his ground - how is it that some colonists are throwing in the tokens??? Him, by God's grace the king??? Yes, crush these cockroaches so that others will be discouraged!!! However, his illness was characterized by unprovoked outbursts of anger, and, apparently, the colonies' request for representation in Parliament occurred during one of these outbursts. Well, what happened next is what is written in the history books. The king was taken to a mental hospital, organized right at home, and his son, the future George IV, was appointed regent under him, but the broken dishes could no longer be glued together. Thus, largely thanks to psychosis, the United States appeared on the world map.
    1. +3
      19 December 2023 06: 42
      Quote: Nagan
      and in America there would still be a coin with a royal profile, like in Canada

      No British coin would circulate there. You forget that Boston, like all of Massachusetts, was inhabited by militant Puritans, gently squeezed out of England, who could not stand the king. If there hadn't been a Boston Tea Party, there would have been something else. Royal power would not last long there
      1. +4
        19 December 2023 07: 13
        Quote: Dutchman Michel
        No British coin would circulate there.

        In Canada, too, it is not the pound that is used, but the Canadian dollar. But I had to hold Canadian money in my hands, and they all had the profile of the late (and at the time of publication, still alive) Elizabeth.
        1. +3
          19 December 2023 07: 19
          Quote: Nagan
          In Canada, too, it is not the pound that is used, but the Canadian dollar.

          I know about this. But the conditions for revolution in Boston and the other 13 colonies were much greater than in the territory now called Canada, where French Catholic colonists lived, who were closer to the English king than to the crazy Puritans
        2. +2
          19 December 2023 07: 20
          Quote: Nagan
          Quote: Dutchman Michel
          No British coin would circulate there.

          In Canada, too, it is not the pound that is used, but the Canadian dollar. But I had to hold Canadian money in my hands, and they all had the profile of the late (and at the time of publication, still alive) Elizabeth.

          Elizabeth II?
          1. +3
            19 December 2023 08: 18
            Quote from Kojote21
            Elizabeth II?

            Yes, exactly her.
            https://www.bankofcanada.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/20_front.jpg
    2. +4
      19 December 2023 07: 57
      Someone said that the main reason for any revolution is the mistake of the authorities. This someone was right.
  3. +4
    19 December 2023 08: 36
    Thus, the separation sentiments of the Americans reached their apogee by the mid-1760s, when the British metropolis began to strangle its overseas colonies with new taxes and levies (on sugar, tea, stamp duties, and others).
    It is not entirely clear why England needed to strangle its colonies with taxes and levies?
    After all, the main goal of creating colonies in the New World for England was:
    Economic interests were the main driving force behind American colonization policies. Colonies were created for the purpose of producing raw materials such as tobacco, cotton and sugar, which were in great demand in Europe. The colonies also provided a market for manufactured goods that were produced in Europe and sold in the colonies.
    The American colonies were also seen as a means of reducing economic dependence on other European powers. By establishing colonies in North America, England hoped to reduce its dependence on Spain and Portugal, which had established colonies in Central and South America. The creation of colonies in North America would provide a new source of income for England and increase its economic power.
    1. +4
      19 December 2023 08: 53
      Quote: Gomunkul
      It is not entirely clear why England needed to strangle its colonies with taxes and levies?

      One XNUMXth century British writer wrote:

      It would be better if we continued to rob India - it would be a more profitable trade
    2. Fat
      +2
      19 December 2023 12: 03
      Quote: Gomunkul
      It is not entirely clear why England needed to strangle its colonies with taxes and levies?

      hi During the Seven Years' War, Britain spent enormous sums on both its own army and subsidies to its allies. In this short time, the UK's national debt doubled and additional taxes were introduced in the UK to cover it. The latest tax, on cider, proved extremely unpopular and many people campaigned for its repeal. Britain also lacked bank loans. Under enormous pressure to curb spending, the British king and government believed that any further attempts to tax the homeland would fail. They seized on other sources of income, one of which was taxing American colonists to pay for the army to protect them.
      It seemed to the British government that the American colonies were greatly undertaxed. Before the war, the colonists' greatest contribution to Britain's income was customs revenue, but it barely covered the cost of collecting it. During the war, huge amounts of British currency flowed into the colonies, and many of those who did not die in the war or in conflicts with the natives prospered. Few in Britain expected the colonists to have the protection of the mother country without having to pay for it themselves.
      As a result, the American colonies provided their own defense in the most radical way. Became independent states.
    3. +5
      19 December 2023 14: 49
      Quote: Gomunkul
      It is not entirely clear why England needed to strangle its colonies with taxes and levies?

      The funny thing is that the trigger was not the strangulation of taxes on tea, but, on the contrary, a multiple reduction in its price, which hit the smugglers who had gained strength. Those. the new “elite”, having found a gold mine of speculation, suddenly saw the danger of losing it. I would not be surprised if these notorious “45 tons of tea” were not actually “thrown overboard”, but simply appropriated.
  4. +5
    19 December 2023 10: 01
    In the movie "Money Masters" the filmmakers point out the main reason for the unrest. First, the colonies initially paid taxes in kind. For example, sugar (which was then produced only in the new world including the Caribbean), cotton, etc. Secondly, there was not enough money in the colonies, so the colonial administrations began PRINTING money. And immediately trade and, accordingly, production picked up. The Bank of England (the private central bank (still) of Britain) found out about this and put pressure on the Prime Minister of the British Empire, who BANned the circulation of non-metallic money in the colonies. In addition, he ordered that ALL taxes to the metropolis be paid not in kind, but in gold and silver. Very soon a crisis broke out in the colonies in excess of production because there were no gold and silver mines in those colonies, and then everything else described in the article followed.
  5. +3
    19 December 2023 12: 15
    It is possible to somewhat complement the economic background of the conflict between the colonies and the metropolis. The principle of operation of the British colonial empire was to regulate prices. Money as a financial management tool came to London from Venice (Genoa) through the Netherlands (Antwerp, Amsterdam). The periphery developed due to loans from the metropolis. At the same time, the terms of the loan determined sales channels and prices (low and only through authorized London companies), the purchase of equipment under the loan also determined the supplier and prices. These conditions were strictly controlled administratively and politically by the management system. Thus, the center of profit in this economic system was formed in London. Due to this, the “workshop of the world” arose and the industrial revolution began to accelerate
    The British monetary system experienced a shortage of silver money in trade with the east (China). Purchases of eastern goods were made for silver, but there were no deliveries in the opposite direction. This forced in the 19th century, through the Opium Wars, to impose opium supplies on China and create a deficit-free trade balance with China (at the expense of the death of millions of people and destroying the Chinese empire).
    The struggle to fill the financial system of the metropolis with silver and gold has always been very acute. Therefore, a kind of double-circuit economy was formed. Separate payment system of the metropolis and separately of the colonies and periphery. Legalization of wealth imported from the colony was possible only in the form of precious metals or British coins.
    1. +1
      19 December 2023 22: 09
      The British monetary system experienced a shortage of silver money in trade with the east (China). Purchases of eastern goods were made for silver, but there were no deliveries in the opposite direction.

      Thank you, Sergey!
      I finally understood the meaning of the Opium Wars.
      The Chinese sold theirs to the British, and stacked the resulting silver. At the same time, without buying almost anything from the British. There was no movement of silver in the opposite direction; it went to China like it was in a hole! And then the British offered the Chinese something they could not refuse - opium! And they demanded their British silver as payment for it.
      Hmmm ...
      1. +2
        19 December 2023 22: 57
        Quote: depressant
        the resulting silver was stacked. At the same time, without buying almost anything from the British.

        This is true. The Europeans had nothing to offer China; everything except guns in China then was of better quality and cheaper.
  6. +2
    19 December 2023 12: 34
    Not everyone loves alternative history, but it's still interesting.
    A world without the USA - future scenarios in Europe and Asia. in the same America.
    Without American cotton, for example. World wars without the Yankees... Interesting...