ipl-logo

Otis Arguments Against The Writs Of Assistance

829 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Otis arguments against the writs of assistance

Otis gave specific reasons for opposing the writs of assistance. For one example Otis stated how the writs of assistance was the worst law to ever be implemented. He believed that the writs of assistance was an abuse of power and it denied the citizens of the colonies their rights. The right that was being denied to the citizens was the right to privacy; Otis thought this would lead to the abuse of power of the British authorities. Also, Otis argued the fact that any low ranking British government official was able to get a writ, which allowed the abuse of power to get out of control. Besides the fact that the writs of assistance denied the colonists basic human rights, these rights then could have been dismissed much more easily; the power …show more content…

The writs of assistance was originally issued to allow authorities to search potential smuggler’s homes without the need for legitimate proof of their crimes. Although, when officials were given this power over the colonists it caused a stir among them, and the writs of assistance soon lead to the abuse of British authority. The writs of assistance was not proposed to the colonists, the British government had total control and implemented the new law without the opinion of the settlers of the colonies. The argument that exclaimed how the writs of assistance completely contradicted the previous law, which upheld that search warrants could only have been issued with probable cause, showed how the power of the British to create laws that trampled on the previous rights that the colonists …show more content…

Otis believed that every human had the right to be comfortable in their own home, and that every person’s house was their own personal domain, their small kingdom that they ruled, and that penetrating that kingdom without probable cause should be illegal. By allowing British officials to enter the homes of colonists for any arbitrary reason the British government was annihilating this privilege. Therefore, the British government was dismissing the basic human rights of the colonists in order to promote their own

Show More
Related
1248 Words | 5 Pages

In the Declaration of Rights and Grievances issued by the Stamp Act Congress, they claimed that Parliament lacked the power to tax the colonies because they had no representation. While the Stamp Act was repealed, the colonists were never given representation in Parliament. In the “Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms”, issued by the Second Continental Congress, this same issue was cited as a justification for fighting. “[The British declare] that parliament can ‘of right make laws to bind us in all cases whatsoever.’ What is to defend us against so enormous, so unlimited power?”

Read More
1044 Words | 5 Pages

This section was all about the laws in the colonies that the British put into place. Samuel Adams is expressing his opinion, and most colonists for that matter, on how they are treated by the king and Parliament. He then goes on to list some liberties, privileges, and rights. The first right he spoke of was the law of all commonwealths or states to establish a legislative power. He says, “All persons born in the British American Colonies are, by the laws of God and nature and by the common law of England,… are declared to be entitled to all the natural, essential, inherent, and inseparable rights, liberties, and privileges of subjects born in Great Britain or within the realm.”

Read More
735 Words | 3 Pages

Imagine of your friend used you to copy off of your homework, and you feel like you are not getting anything in return. How would you feel? That is exactly how the colonists felt with Britain. The angry colonists wanted to start a revolution against Britain because their unalienable rights were being intruded in their own country. They were used to salutary neglect, but the tight control the British had over them angered the colonists.

Read More
783 Words | 4 Pages

So that means they could be tried without a jury in the court which was not fair. Also, the colonists started vehemently resisting. “They insisted that only their representative assemblies could levy direct, internal taxes, such as the one imposed by the Stamp Act. They rejected the British government 's argument that all British subjects enjoyed virtual representation in Parliament, even if they could not vote for member of the Parliament.” This means that the colonists did not enjoy the Parliament so they rejected Britain 's argument because they did not agree with it.

Read More
685 Words | 3 Pages

Soon after the Seven Years’ War, the British and the colonists learned that victory came with a rather expensive price (Kennedy, Cohen, & Bailey, 2010). Great Britain tightened its grip on the colonies in North America, expecting colonists to pay for their financial struggles. In order to make colonists pay for the war, Great Britain reminded the North American colonies who had authority by controlling the colonists to submit to various ordinances ratified by British Parliament. This action only showed that arrogance leads to rebellion socially, economically, and politically. Socially, a lack of communication between Great Britain and the North American colonies was to blame for the Revolutionary War.

Read More
350 Words | 2 Pages

What was the Writs of Assistance? The Writs of Assistance was a law that allowed the army/ police to search your house or business for smuggled goods. It was taking place in the 13 colonies. They didn’t need a warrant or permission they just came in. This made a lot of colonists mad.

Read More
246 Words | 1 Pages

Many of the reasons the American colonies believed they were justified in their rebellion from England lay in trade and taxes. When George III inherited the throne at the end of the Seven Years’ War England’s debt had risen to 145 million pounds and his chief minister believed that the American colonies needed to help shoulder the debt. (Nash, et al., 2007. , p. 134) In attempting to collect these taxes from the colonies to relieve the mounting debt Parliament passed a range of acts, which led to discontent among the colonists as many of them restricted trade, their political maneuverability and left many believing they infringed upon their “right to be taxed only by their own consent.”

Read More
497 Words | 2 Pages

When explorers first voyaged west, new towns sprouted in North America such as; Jamestown, Virginia and Plymouth, Massachusetts. These towns set laws and rights in which to obey on their long trip to the Americas. Eventually in the course of history the thirteen American Colonies we controlled by the English. The English were viewed as the mother country and profited greatly through trade and commerce within the colonies. Although over time the colonist government adopted British rights.

Read More
539 Words | 3 Pages

For the rest of the colonists, they believed they had natural rights: rights they were born with. The three main natural rights thought to have were life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness; these were included in the Declaration of Independence. Personal rights were very important to the colonists and they were determined to display how they felt to the government. Overall, this period of time brought dramatic changes to the way of living. All of these changes were necessary for our country to function in the needs of both the government and the

Read More
1174 Words | 5 Pages

Food is Freedom Food is one of the most important aspects in our lives. Food isn’t just about eating the food, food is more about sharing ideas and socializing. Thomas Jefferson’s philosophy about food and self-sufficiency is shown in many ways throughout the Declaration of Independence. His eclectic views on food and his obsession with the pursuit of freedom and independence is shown in the Declaration of Independence and is the foundation of the United States today.

Read More
1081 Words | 5 Pages

The right to legal representation in Parliament. As result of self- governing there was no need for colonial representative in Parliament but with the changes being enforced without this legal representation the colonists felt there would be no accuracy in the taxes they would be made to pay. According to the “The Rights of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved” by James Otis the 2nd right states “The supreme national legislative cannot altered justly ‘till the commonwealth is dissolved, nor a subordinate legislative taken away without forfeiture or other god cause.” Otis goes on to say “No representation of the Colonies in parliament alone,… It would be impossible for the parliament to judge so well, of their abilities to bear taxes, impositions on trade, and other duties and burthens, or of the local laws that might be really needful, as a legislative here.”

Read More
1106 Words | 5 Pages

Usually, rights for people were written by the government, such as the rights of Englishmen, but the idea of the government protecting rights that were already endowed to humans was supported by American colonists who were against the idea of the numerous violations of the Rights of Englishmen, which included taxation without consent. These taxes later popularized the famous slogan, “no taxation without representation,” first said by James Otis; most colonists believed that

Read More
580 Words | 3 Pages

On the other hand the British deprived the colonists of even the most basic of rights. The American Revolution was more about Civil Liberties because there are three main arguments that support it: Taxation without Representation, the Quartering Act, and the Intolerable (Coercive) Acts. These actions that the British did justified the colonists’ revolution. First of all, one civil liberty that was exempt from the colonists reaches was taxation without representation.

Read More
1367 Words | 6 Pages

The parliament virtually regulated all of the colony trades so the money that was generated by them stays in the hands of the English by eliminating their ability to trade with other countries, but Britain. The Quartering Act forced the colonists to house British troops and provide them with food without expense. The colonists revolted and once they established independence, the Third Amendment of the Constitution clearly forbids the housing troops of any kind into the homes of owners without their consent. The colonists also frequently had their privacy violated whenever general warrants were issued, which allowed officials to search private properties without needing to provide specific details as to when, how, and why their searching in the first place. The Fourth Amendment fixed this by prohibiting unreasonable searches and seizures, and required officials to provide probable cause when requesting a warrant from a judge.

Read More
329 Words | 2 Pages

Colonists were expected to house soldiers in ale houses, inns and in the homes of those who sold wine. This Act also required all colonists to provide food for any British soldiers in the area. The colonists were still housing the British soldiers after the American Revolution came to a close. John Locke argued for natural rights for all, he also thought that the government had the responsibility to protect the citizens’ rights. In his opinion, the government was violating the citizens’ rights.

Read More

More about Otis Arguments Against The Writs Of Assistance

Related Topics

Open Document