Stamp Act of 1765: A Pivot Point In Our History. (Vanity:History Question)

me | 06/15/2009 | me

[devane617]

Recently, with the Tea Parties taking center stage, I revisited my very old and dusty history books to take a look at that period of our history. Stepping back in time a few years to 1765 we have the incident that I feel was one of our major pivot points in history: The Stamp Act of 1765.

From what I can find, the taxes that were to be levied via the required tax stamps were inconsequential if you consider the downside to not going along with England. The stamps were required on documents, so probably did not affect the common man. Yet, it started an uprising that probably led to the revolution and independence.

Why? What was it that stirred the people at that time?

The colonies lacked representation at the time and had little say in their governance, so maybe that was it. England's rule was 'czar' like to the people--much like we see from the current admin. Whatever occurred, it stirred the passions of the people that were already facing hard times.

I certainly hope one of our learned scholars can give me a quick lecture on the subject. Are there comparisons we can draw with today's czar like rule? Could the people be stirred once again to demand change?

[LS]

Don't forget the rest of our argument in PHUSA, namely that because this essentially involved a tax (indirectly) on paper documents associated with every transaction, including playing cards, the fear bubbling beneath the surface was that somehow the English (Anglicans) were trying to reinstitute control over the American (mostly Puritan/Congregational) churches and their primary requirement that man read the Bible for himself. In other words, there was an element of an assault on religious freedom in this as well.

We see this again in the so called "Intolerable Acts," which placed the colonies under the North American administrative control of CANADA, (i.e., the Catholics). These PERCEIVED anti-religious initiatives by the English have been long ignored or overlooked, yet many American historians today admit that the Revolution was a "religious" event as well as a political event.

[LS]

BTW, it’s also interesting to note that HAD a revolution brewed in 1766 and HAD the English not backed down, we probably would have lost big time. The level of animosity toward England in 1766 was nowhere near what it was nine years later; the colonies had a smaller population; and the arguments and rhetoric weren’t as advanced.

[LachlanMinnesota]

It was levied on paper used for official documents. If you bought or sold anything needing paperwork to complete, it required a tax. Real Estate, imports, exports...

But it was much more...there were several acts in addition to the stamp act that during those times resulted in unrest...

One example, certain imports had to pass through England, or pay fees to England to be sold or purchased in the colonies, such as tea.

Why could the colonists sell their goods wehereever they wanted?

It is if avery sale overseas had to pay governor Shwartzenegger a tax of a certain percentage, even if you were from New York. They paid this tax to the King, even to buy rum from Jamaica, if they were being legal about it.