Before 1754, it could be said that all English colonists saw themselves as English subjects. They were simply Englishmen who have moved to the American continent to seek wealth, religious freedom, and better lives, and thus the terrifying notion of separating for the British Empire would have been abhorred. Industries of the northern colonies, such as lumber and shipbuilding depended on English demands, trade with England was pivotal for the survival of the merchants of the middle colonies, and the planters of the south depended on the British market for their cash crops. Many of the English colonists were devout Anglicans and saw a separation from the English crown as a separation from the Church of England. Given these circumstances, it seemed unlikely that the American colonies would risk so much to protest, rebel, let alone to seek independence. Yet, during the 12 years following the end of the French and Indian War, the colonists went from universal loyalty, to protest, to rebellion, and ultimately to independence from the English crown. The results of the French and Indian Wars, Briti

sh solutions to those problems, and “American” colonists’ responses to British measures explain the progression from loyalty that escalates to full independence.

In their attempt to tackle the war debt and the growing cost of stationing troops to defend colonial settlements, the British only exacerbated the already souring relationships between the colonists. First, to limit the cost of stationing troops to depend the western frontier against Indian attacks, King George III signed the Proclamation Act of 1763, which forbade settlements west of the Appalachian Mountains. This act pacified the Indians, but agitated the colonists. The colonists were livid because gaining access to the lands west of the Appalachians, which were initially impede by French forts, was the main reason why the colonists fought the war in the first place. In addition, many settlers had already settled west of the Appalachian and thought that the British were interfering too much. Second, King George III and his advisors believed that the colonists should bare much of the debt that resulted from the French and Indian War; this reason was justifiable in a sense that royal forces shouldered the brunt of the war and the colonists were often reluctant to join in unless reimbursed. From 1764 up to the Revolutionary War, the British government issued a slew of acts that one way or the other, imposed taxation on the colonies for the sake of seeking revenues, and all of which contributed to the discontent of the colonists. For example, the Sugar Act of 1764, which increased taxes on the importation of sugars from the West Indies, and the Stamp Act of 1765, which covered all legal documents and licenses, were aimed at increasing British revenues from the colonies. The colonists naturally loathed the taxes, but they also felt resentment because the British were removing their rights to determine their own taxes and infringing upon on their court jurisdiction to trial tax violators. The Townshend Act, drafted by Charles Townshend in 1767, placed duties on imports from Britain, weakened colonial governments, and allowe

Some topics in this essay:
Indian War, Virginia British, Continental Congress, Die” Finally, British Empire, Stamp Act, Indian Wars, Charles Townshend, Pontiac’s Uprising, Appalachian Mountains, french indian, french indian war, indian war, west appalachian, western frontier, stamp act, stationing troops, cost stationing troops, american colonies, cost stationing, stationing troops defend, indian wars, british measures, french indian wars, king george iii,