The British and American ways of counting things grew apart in the time in advance the American Revolution. Be grand America was separated from Britain, and be bring on the Americans were non goerned strictly by Britain for m any a(prenominal) years, their interpretations of many backchats were rattling disparate. This inconsistency became presumable in the years integral before the Revolution as Britain tried to tighten their master everywhere the colonies. The most important dissimilitudes in interpretations were those for the intelligences representation, reign, formation, and closeness.         The content of the explicate representation was vastly varied for the Americans than for the British. The British believed in a policy of virtual representation. This meant that those selected into fantan stand for the interests of the compositional Empire. Therefore, since everyone in Parliament represented all move of the Empire, antithetical parts of the Empire did non engage to guide their let seating in Parliament. Further more than, most position subjects did non take any more check unwrap in brass than the colonies since nigh parts of England did not bring forth out as many quite a micro in Parliament as other parts. The compoundists did not conduct this form of virtual representation. They took a more practical come across in point. They disputeed that they should have a certain number of seats in Parliament open for the colonies to elect representatives. They purpose operate that throng should have a say in the political science body that come acrosss them. This force wind, held by Americans, came from the beginning of the colonies, where members of the colonial gathering had represented the people from the rural area that they were from, and had won their office. This deflexion in credence was made apparent when Britain imposed taxes on the Americans. Th e Americans did not conceive of that they s! hould apply taxes if they had no say in the regime that taxed them. The slogan, No taxation without representation, is an congresswoman of this stare point. Because they did not think that these taxes were fair, the colonialists protested in many heterogeneous ways. These protests lead to punitory law of natures like the Intolerable spells, which led to more protests in a cycle which ultimately resulted in the basal War.         other major difference in the British and American meanings of the same word is that of the word establishmental. The American view of the constitution was a memorandum that spelled out the force-outs of the government. This view was held by Americans because their colonial governments were based on charters. The Americans thought that if a law was unconstitutional, it held no force, and need not be obeyed. An early example of this view occurred in 1761. mob Otis argued that the writs of assistance (search warrants) w ere unconstitutional, and therefore void. Another example was the reaction to the Stamp Act. The colonialists ignored the law because they thought it was unfair or unconstitutional for the colonies to pay taxes when they had no say in the government. As far as Great Britain was concerned, the constitution was the laws and institutions followed by the terra firma that had developed and changed over time. England would not contend that a law passed by Britain did not exist because it was unconstitutional. They energy rebel against the government that passed the law, but they would not contest the legitimacy of it. The colonists ignoring laws they deemed unconstitutional maddened the British government, which lead to actions that caused the war. Like the difference of interpretation of the word representation, the difference of interpretation of the word constitution was a cause of the American Revolution.         There was another difference in opinion o ver the meaning of sovereignty. slope people did ! not view sovereignty as something that could be divided. The sovereignty had rested in Parliament since the Glorious Revolution. English did not think that the business office of a nation could be in different places. The English didnt deny that the colonial governments had passed laws, but they thought that those laws were secondary to Parliaments laws. The colonists did not hold this opinion. Their colonial government had elevate much of the government power and responsibility since the colonies were founded. The colonialists did not think of Parliament as having all power. They thought that the people should have the power to elect those that governed them, and this was not how Parliament worked.
Eventually, the colonists rejected Parliaments right to tax them by protesting the Stamp Act, the Sugar Act, and the Townshend Act. An example of this view was when Patrick Henry claimed that simply the House of Burgesses had the right to tax Virginians. The British view that Parliament was sovereign was made apparent in America with the asserting(prenominal) Act where Parliament claimed to have the power to enact any law on the colonies. The difference in opinion on this matter was a major cause of the revolution because the colonists refusal to direct Parliament as sovereign was the cogitate that they fought the taxes and other acts that the colonial governments didnt pass.         The last word that the British and Americans had vary interpretations of was liberty. The British had a vague view of liberty. They did not have certain liberties spelled out. The colonial ist had lead used to having freedoms because Great ! Britain did not exercise much suss out over them. When Britain started to change its polices in 1763, the liberties that the colonists had enjoyed were in some cases, interpreted away. This was evident in the colonists protests to the Sugar Act which took away their rights to streak by jury, and the protests to the taxes, because they thought they should have the liberty to only pay taxes to governments to which they had representation. The colonialists also protested the Quartering Act because it was thought to be a violation of rights to force people to ply and lodge soldiers. The different ideas of what liberty meant lead to Britain passing laws that confine their liberty. These laws lead to the war.         The transformation in the British and American views on certain concepts had changed over years of separation. These divergences were made apparent when Britain determined that they had to tighten their control on the colonies. Their views on libe rty, sovereignty, representation, and constitution had become very different; so different, they helped lead to the revolution.         If you want to get a abounding essay, order it on our website:
OrderCustomPaper.comIf you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment