Prior to the Revolutionary War, the British government put forth taxes in order to pay off their debts following the Seven Years War. Many colonists thought of these taxes as unfair and began to look towards independence. Among these revolutionaries was Benjamin Franklin, who saw England’s involvement in the colonies as tyrannous. On the Loyalist side was Benjamin’s son, William, who believed that the colonies reach for more power would eventually lead to anarchy. There were many circumstances, including their personal and political experience with Parliament, that put Benjamin and William on opposing sides of the the revolution.
Before the war, William Franklin was appointed directly by the crown to the Royal Governorship of New Jersey,
…show more content…
These Acts put forth heavy taxes on the colonies in order to help England pay debts after the Seven Years War. These political acts, as well as his personal experiences with Parliament, made Benjamin wonder if the colonies really owed England their absolute obedience. Franklin states, “The person who first projected to lay aside the accustomed method of Requisition, and raise money on America by Stamps, seems not to have acted wisely, in deviating from that method (which the Colonists looked upon as constitutional) and thwarting unnecessarily the fixed prejudices of so great a number of the King's subjects”. Especially following the Tea Act, Benjamin wondered if the new generations in America still owed their compliance. Unlike the settlers who agreed when they come over to the colonies, these new groups of people never approved to those terms. Following the formation of an illegal congress, William Franklin expressed his disapproval in his “Speech to the New Jersey Assembly”. He says an act of rebellion would “destroy that Form of Government which it is your Duty by all lawful Means to preserve”. His position under the crown in New Jersey made him strongly identify as a Loyalist, fearing colonial independence would lead to anarchy. As an elected official he believed that he, along with his peers, deserved certain rights and privileges
The British were facing economic difficulties after the French and Indian war; therefore, they passed taxes on the colonies to help repay the debt. Initially, the British introduced the Sugar Act in 1764. The colonists did not approve of the British taking control over them. The colonists opposed the Sugar Act because they had to pay three cent tax on sugar. In addition, the Sugar Act increased the taxes on coffee, indigo, and wine. This act was the start of colonist frustration. Subsequently came the Stamp Act the following year in 1765. The Stamp Act was the mind changer for many colonists known as the Patriots. The Patriots started forming as a result of England enforcing acts. The patriots believed the colonies should go to war and separate
Gordon S. Wood delves into Benjamin Franklin’s philosophical, political, and personal legacies in the biography, The Americanization of Benjamin Franklin. The book travels through Franklin’s experiments, his travels in Europe, and his role in the American revolution. The book begins when Franklin retires from business and becomes a gentleman. It was when he became a gentleman, it allowed him to analyze the world around him. “Indeed, he could not drink a cup of tea without wondering why the tea leaves at the bottom gathered in way rather than another,” a quote from Edmund S. Morgan’s book, Benjamin Franklin. Franklin spent a great deal of time in Britain before returning to America. When he returned, he threw himself into the American revolution, which sent him to France. After he accomplished his duties in France, he returned back home to America where he ran for public office.
Benjamin Franklin, one of the Founding Fathers to the United States, was not a patriot but a mere loyalist to England before the dissolution between England and the colonies occurred. Sheila L. Skemp's The Making of a Patriot explores how Benjamin Franklin tried to stay loyal to the crown while taking interest in the colonies perception and their own representation in Parliament. While Ms. Skemp alludes to Franklin's loyalty, her main illustration is how the attack by Alexander Wedderburn during the Privy Council led to Franklin's disillusionment with the British crown and the greater interest in making the Thirteen Colonies their own nation. Her analysis of Franklin's history in Parliament and what occurred on the night that the council convened proves the change behind Franklin's beliefs and what lead to his involvement in the Declaration of Independence and the American Revolution. Benjamin Franklin was the colonial agent representing Massachusetts in Parliament in Britain.
The American Revolution was caused by a series of attempts from the British to tax American colonists. After a war against France, Britain ruled an enormous overseas empire. Britain however faced war debt and was in need of money to administer the overseas empire. The crown decided that since the colonists were the primary beneficiaries of this empire, it was time to have them contribute to the empire’s revenue by paying taxes.
In defending his disownment of William, Benjamin bitterly noted, “the part he acted against me in the late war, which is of public notoriety, will account for my leaving him no more of an estate he endeavoured [sic] to deprive me of.” The conflict between Benjamin Franklin and his only living son is a microcosm of the little-understood clash between those Americans who strived for independence from British occupation and those that felt the country was either not or never would be ready for self-governance. Benjamin Franklin felt strongly enough about his son’s actions to label them betrayal; William Franklin felt strongly enough about the foolhardiness of the Revolution to suffer his father’s wrath. The actions of the loyalists are understood by Americans to constitute treason, but this is a simplification. Many loyalists felt that rebellion against the Crown was imprudent and would lead to chaos.... ...
“Give me liberty or give me death!” This statement from Patrick Henry’s “Speech to the Virginia Convention,” delivered to the House of Burgesses, has been quoted by many, becoming almost cliché. However, the declaration is truly understood by a select few. The unjust Stamp Act passed by the British crown in 1765, brought fame and notoriety to Henry as he spoke out against the unjust taxation without representation. Ten years later on the eve of revolution, Henry calls upon the Colonial government of which he is part, to act for the betterment of the people. Patrick Henry attempts to persuade the House of Burgesses to revolt and declare war against Britain by logically convincing them that it is their natural right to be free and calling on their patriotism and pride as leaders of colonial America.
(140) It was during this time period that “the government in London concerned itself with the colonies in unprecedented ways…to help raise funds to pay for the war and finance the empire.” (Forner 141) The British government was heavily in debt after fighting the Seven Years War on several fronts. The need to raise funds was paramount and the colonies were a ready source. The British government started imposing taxes on the colonies as a means of income. This was a change in the relationship between America and the mother country. Many Americans opposed these taxes. (Forner 142- 143) According to Forner, “Opposition to the Stamp Act was the first great Drama of the revolutionary era and the first major split between the colonist and Great Britain over the meaning of freedom.” (142) This act was eventually repealed by Parliament in 1766 after great opposition by Americans. (Forner 144) The Stamp Act was just the beginning of several events and taxes on the colonist leading up the Boston Tea
...t over you, in all administration of it, for your good”. Benjamin Franklin's view of government is completely opposite to Winthrop's. Benjamin Franklin was part of the group who created the “Declaration of Independence”. He believed that, “whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.”
... his diary "...and though we be Englishmen born, we are debarred Englishment's liberty (Document D).” Benjamin Franklin also recognizes this difference, and, in reference to Britain's new taxes on the colonies, warns that this treatment may cause rebellion.
The American revolution was a reaction to unfavorable tax policies from the King of England. When the King of England began to infringe on the colonists’ liberties, leaders inspired by the enlightenment grouped together to defend the rights of the American colonies. As Thomas Jefferson writes in the Declaration of Independence, “History of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries ad usurpations,
During the mid-1700s, the colonies were well established and fairly prosperous. There was no unemployment, no income tax, and the price of goods was generally stable. When Benjamin Franklin traveled to London in 1763, he saw a completely different situation. "The streets are covered with beggars and tramps," he wrote. (Binderup 1941) He was dismayed to find England, with all its wealth, suffering with poverty and unemployment. He was informed that England had too few jobs to employee greater numbers. The business owners were overtaxed, and were unable to pay their employees better wages. In a meeting with merchants and bankers at the British Board of Trade, members asked Benjamin Franklin how the American colonies managed to maintain sufficient funds to support their poor. Franklin replied,
There were many factors that led up to the American Revolutionary War, one of these factors were the laws and acts being passed at the time. The British Parliament attempted to limit the power the American Colonist had at the time by taking away from their income. How they did this one may ask? The simple answer is taxes. One of the many taxes imposed was the stamp act. During this time the American colonies were being oppressed by the British one of the first signs of this was the Stamp Act. The act stated that almost anything written had to be stamped and tax...
The most fundamental reason for the American Revolution was the colonist’s outrage over taxation which led to a tax revolt launched by people who were tired of the burden of paying unfair taxes. The king placed taxes known as Townsend Acts, on the colonist’s tea, paper, paint, lead, glass, and many other items that were used daily and the colonists were against this taxing. The purpose of the Townsend Acts was to help pay the cost of government in America. Lawyer James Otis and other colonist rebels referred to King George as a tyrant. As stated by James Otis in The Rights of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved (1763), . . . “The very act of taxing exercised over those who are not represented appears to me to be depriving them of one of their most essential rights as freemen, and if continued seems to be in effect and entire
The colonists believed that England was wrongfully taxing them in order to pay off the debt that was accrued by the French and Indian War. This issue became widely known as “Taxation without Representation.” Parliament had implemented various acts that taxed the American colonists on tea, stamps, oil, lead, paper, etc. In response to these taxes being imposed on the colonies, a group of colonists called “The Sons of Liberty” rebelled on the evening of December 16, 1773 (Boston Tea Party, 2016). Their rebellion consisted of destroying 342 chests of tea distributed by the East India Company (Boston Tea Party, 2016). The American Colonists accused King George III of tyranny and soon after insisted upon independence from
The Movie, The Patriot, was a rousing and vigorous Revolutionary War epic from the view point of a family full of revenge and strong wills. This movie began with the majority of colonists angered. This part of the movie caught my attention and intrigued me to keep watching until the last minute. I especially enjoyed the heartbreaking moments and the realistic war scenes in the movie. Although I liked those aspects of the movie, the storyline was exceptionally good as well. To understand this historical fiction movie, a historical background is needed. If a person does not understand what is meant by “Taxation without representation,” then the subject of conflict will not be understood. The plot of the movie began to develop when Benjamin Martin’s son, Gabriel, was captured by British troops. Benjamin Martin was a former hero of the French and Indian War, but he renounced fighting so that he would be able to raise his family in peace. Attempting to save his brother, Benjamin’s other son stood up to the British soldiers, but was killed in the process. Benjamin, only wanting to save Gabriel, ended up fighting in battle, rescuing Gabriel, and killing the murderer of his other son. After all of this happened Benjamin realized the importance of being involved in the war, so he sent his other children to live with their aunt in order for he and Gabriel to join the army. Once they became part of the army, Benjamin became a general and lead his colonial militia, including Gabriel, into trifling battles. During battle Gabriel was killed, which deeply depressed Benjamin and made him so distraught that he does not feel like fighting anymore. His feelings stayed this way until (while at the camp) he saw the Brit that killed Gabriel. Benjamin then killed that man and understood at that moment why so many men had been dieing. Because of this, Benjamin became extremely patriotic and decided to move on with the Americans because he then had something to fight for. Everything that happened kept me on the edge of my chair wanting to know what was going to happen next. Overall, I thought that this movie was very moving and vigorous.