The theory suggests that a nation’s strength is derived from accumulating substantial gold reserves and broadening its trade activities. Britain established the American colonies with the intention of augmenting their gold reserves. The colonizers sought raw materials to manufacture goods for profitable sale, as well as taxation revenue to generate income for Britain. The American colonies, on the other hand, embraced this theory by recognizing the necessity of expanding their trade beyond Britain in order to bolster their own strength. Other countries such as Belgium and France also aimed to enhance their trade opportunities by engaging in commerce with America while increasing their gold reserves through these transactions. However, Britain, desiring exclusive control over American trade to boost its gold reserves, opposed American trade with France, Belgium, and the Netherlands. Consequently, tension arose between Britain and its American colonies.
The Acts of Trade and Navigation were one of Britain’s early attempts to exert control over the American colonies. These acts restricted American trade exclusively to Britain, effectively limiting their options. Enacted between 1650-1660, these acts aimed to uphold the existing mercantile system and prevent the French and Dutch from accessing American goods. Essentially, American shipping was only allowed through Britain, with British merchants selling the goods to other countries instead. Conversely, America was not permitted to engage in producing goods or cultivating crops for profit as it would compete with British industries. Furthermore, any imported goods destined for the colonies had to first go through British middlemen who added a tax, ultimately benefiting Britain financially.
The colonies were expected to purchase more than they sold, resulting in the drain of their currency, which all went to Britain. Prior to 1663, when the Acts of Trade and Navigation were not strictly enforced, the colonists actually benefited from Britain. In the north, colonists engaged in smuggling goods and manufacturing items for profit, evading British laws. The south had a monopoly that guaranteed them a market from the British. Additionally, the colonies benefited from having the British army troops guarding them, facing low taxes, and being shielded by the British navy. Compared to the English, the colonists generally enjoyed greater prosperity, making their illicit activities worthwhile. However, the colonists held a different perspective. They viewed Britain as mostly negative, despite appreciating some of its benefits. They believed that the drawbacks of Britain outweighed its merits. Economically and in terms of strength, they felt that Britain held them back. The British had complete control over American trade, setting prices and making all trade rules.
The people in the New England colonies believed that the British Navy hindered their entrepreneurial pursuits in the free market, rather than providing protection. Similarly, the people in the middle colonies, significant producers of grain, felt limited trade opportunities with Britain restricted their market and potential for monetary gain. The presence of British troops acted as a barrier to progress. Meanwhile, the southern colonies accrued increasing debt because Britain bought their tobacco at lower prices and resold it at higher rates in the free market, benefiting Britain at the expense of the south. Overall, colonists felt that Britain’s actions impeded intellectual and political advancement since they relied on making money under Mercantilism. It is also important to note ongoing difficulties between Britain and America during this time period. The British parliament imposed taxes on America to finance its troops; however, Americans deemed these taxes unjust as they had no representation in parliament.
Britain, however, was making a profit from the Acts of Trade and Navigation, despite the disobedience of the northern colonies. The British had a monopoly over the market, enforced by their Navy to prevent American cheating, and were reaping financial benefits. Consequently, they chose not to enforce these Acts. Furthermore, it was nearly impossible for them to locate one small American ship in the vast ocean. Meanwhile, the colonists were unable to blame the King, as they desired dominion status, nor could they hold Parliament accountable since it appeared to be on their side. Consequently, this oppressive rule was labeled as “ministerial tyranny,” placing blame on the British ministers who had been persecuting them and carrying out the King’s orders. The American socio-economic groups were divided by their social background, economic circumstances, and geographic location. The back-country residents, such as those in the southern Piedmont, faced restrictions on trade due to their geographical isolation—boats or reasonable means of transportation couldn’t reach them. However, they were still angered by Britain’s proclamation of 1763 that limited their expansion into the free land to the west.
The people in the harbors of New England, while not the wealthiest, were also not the poorest. However, they were the most rebellious, as is often the case with those in the middle, due to their larger numbers and louder voice. They engaged in cheating and scheming to outsmart the British and rebelled in every possible way. Conversely, the southerners were mostly loyalists who benefited from Britain’s protection and monopoly on British tobacco merchants. They too grew tired of the unjust taxes and high resale prices imposed by Britain, leading to writing petitions and letters of complaint as acts of “rebellion.” In the middle colonies, the wealthy had an advantage due to having the two largest cities and ports. Nevertheless, they were also upset by British trade regulations. Despite their differences, all these groups, whether poor or rich, loyalist or Whig, or based on geographic location, rebelled against Britain in their own ways. Eventually, they would unite as one group – the Americans – to rebel against the British. As they formed bonds, a government of sorts emerged with the continental congress. Although initially tied to British rules, they gradually split off and established their own independent path.As we initiated our rebellion, we employed various methods that eventually led to the American Revolution, according to our perspective. Our dissent initially arose from the Sugar Act in 1764, whereby Britain imposed a tax on sugar. This marked the first instance of a enforced tax. While the poll tax was never implemented, the British determined that if they were to provide troops to America, they deserved some form of compensation rather than solely relying on Englishmen in Britain to bear the cost.
Then came the Currency Act, in which Britain attempted to drain the colonies of their funds. The subsequent Stamp Act led to a violent protest, although it was not solely against the act itself or British rule. The protest primarily centered around Taxation without Representation, aiming for dominion status instead. Our desire was not for representation in parliament, but for the ability to establish our own regulations. In 1765, Britain introduced the Quartering Act, obligating Americans to accommodate and provide for British troops present in America. This was viewed as contradicting the Rights of Englishmen as outlined in influential documents like the Magna Carta or the Great Charter. The Declaratory Act, passed in 1766, marked a retreat by parliament as a response to American actions, in turn triggered by previous British actions. Following this was the Townshend Act in 1768, imposing a small tax on common goods and restructuring customs to halt American smuggling while closing the port of NY. Consequently, the colonists perceived a divide between “them” and “us,” igniting insurrection and ultimately leading to the Boston Massacre. This violent protest signified yet another step on the “road to revolution,” with Americans actively engaging in combat and causing casualties among British soldiers.At this juncture, the Americans initiated organization and unity, establishing the Commitees of Correspondence to facilitate communication on events occurring across various regions. Those involved in this movement aspired for democracy and independence, which did not align with the desires of other colonies. Nevertheless, it materialized. Consequently, individuals began identifying themselves as Patriots and Loyalists. The occurrence of the Boston Tea Party in December 1773 marked a return to rebellion. The radicals, who identified as the “Sons of Liberty,” opted to protest against tea taxes by unloading substantial amounts of tea from British merchant ships into the water.
Similar events occurred in both New York and Annapolis, albeit with less intensity. The situation escalated when the British demanded that the colonists shoulder the entire cost of the tea. Subsequently, in 1774, the Coercive Acts, also known as the Intolerable Acts, were imposed. These measures included closing Boston’s port, suspending the Massachusetts legislature, prohibiting town meetings, and establishing a military government with 4,000 troops stationed in a city populated by 16,000 people. The colonists had reached their limit by this point.
The passing of the Quebec Act further fueled their discontent as it restricted access to Western lands and granted religious freedom to Catholics – something that troubled the predominantly Protestant population of Massachusetts. Additionally, it maintained non-representative assemblies and jury-free trials for French population which instilled fear among colonists. Throughout this period it became evident that British mercantilism was draining America’s strength.
Thus began a chain reaction of actions and reactions until eventually synthesis unfolded. This cycle intensified over time until it culminated in the American Revolution. The revolution bred an increasing sense of patriotism and a nationalistic identity in America – a belief in our ability to determine our own fate as a sovereign nation.The occurrence of various events influenced by our mercantilist ideas and thoughts led us to confidently believe that we could be independent from British rule and free.
