The Stamp Act of 1765 was a new tax that upset many colonists in Virginia, causing the House of Burgesses to stand up for colonist rights and questioning British rule. This act required colonists to buy a stamp for printed items, which they viewed as unfair. The British were in a major debt due to the French and Indian War, decided to tax the colonies to help pay off their debt, increasing prices on imported goods like sugar and tobacco. The colonists believed that these laws undermine their rights, leading them to be angry and wish for independence. Before the Stamp Act was passed, In 1764, Prime Minister Grenville, brought in the Currency Act, which prevented the colonists from printing their own money making the colonists pay British Merchants. …show more content…
Before the stamp act, colonists had to pay taxes to their colonial government, however, many British colonists in America were worried about the stamp act because they saw it as unfair and violated their rights. They believed that only elected representatives could impose taxes on them. Even though Parliament told the colonists that they had a “virtual representation” it still didn’t convince the protestors. This brought different regions and viewpoints into this protest, for example, lawyer James Ortis in Massachusetts argued that “Taxation without representation is tyranny”. Meanwhile, in Virginia Patrick Henry strongly opposed the Stamp Act, claiming that Virginians should only pay taxes decided by their own representatives, meaning that there could be “no taxation without representation.” The House of Burgesses played an important role because they passed resolutions that stated the colonist rights and concerns. By opposing the Stamp Act, they showed that the colonies were beginning to work together. For example, when the Massachusetts Assembly reached out to other colonies, nine colonies met in New York to form the Stamp Act