To What Extent Were The Colonists Justified In Declaring Independence

991 Words4 Pages

The colonies were morally justified in declaring independence because many of the things Great Britain did toward the colonies. Great Britain passed many acts and laws that were not always fair for the colonists. Most the acts and laws were against the colonists rights and they were a corrupt government. It states in the constitution that if the government is immoral and corrupt the people have the right to over throw it and revolt. The first major law that the British government passed that was not good for the colonies was the proclamation of 1763. This law stated that the settlers that settled west of the Appalachian Mountains and people already living in that area to return east. This was to try to ease the tensions with the Native Americans. The colonists objected to this law because many people were established in that area. The boundary lines changed because of treaties with the Indians. …show more content…

It was an indirect tax but the colonists were aware of it. It was a tax on imported goods so many of the goods were smuggled into the towns. It affected mostly the merchants and shippers who had to have their things go through the ports so they were taxed. The colonists were not very happy and the two major protesters against this act were Samuel Adams and James Otis. In August 1764, fifty Boston merchants stopped buying imports from Britain. In a few places they increased colonial manufacturing. There weren’t any huge protests over the Sugar Act. The Sugar Act was revoked in 1766 and replaced with the Revenue Act of 1766 which lowered the tax amount. During the war the soldiers needed places to stay so parliament passed the Quartering Act of 1765. This act stated that American colonies had to provide housing and provisions for soldiers. Many of the colonists were very angry by having to house soldiers in their houses and so some colonies refused to house