The Stamp Act of 1765

Nicholas Katers
The Stamp Act of 1765 was imposed by the British government upon the New World colonists in another effort to repay debts that were incurred during the French and Indian War. This act placed a tax on any item marked with a stamp, usually consisting of deeds, papers, and various documents that could be stamped. The colonists saw this act as "unconstitutional," as they were not being properly represented in the British Parliament and were being forced to pay an unjust levy.

This led to many altercations and unruly behavior, to say the least. Mobs of protesters, some belonging to the militant group the Sons of Liberty, would threaten Crown-appointed stamp collectors. The threatening behavior of these mobs soon turned to violence and looting. The homes of prominent British politicians such as Thomas Hutchinson, the vice-governor of Massachusetts, were being destroyed and burnt to the ground.

These tactics, however, were not how the colonial leaders wanted to send their message. Instead, a Congress of colonial representatives decided to send a proclamation of their rights and how the acts of Parliament were denying those very rights. In this proclamation, it is stated that the mother country was not extending the proper civil rights to its peripheral brethren and that the very acts that denied these rights were not to be adhered to by anyone in the colonies as a certain protests to Britain's acts.

A more specific case of the colonists' rejection of the Stamp Act can be seen in the town of Braintree. The constituents of one Ebenezer Thayer composed a letter of their feelings on the matter of Britain's misdeeds. First, objections were risen about the vice admiralty courts, which denied the rights of peer judgement so stated in the colonial charter. The other objection was to the implementation and execution of the Stamp Act. The colonists feared that this act was overstepping the bounds of the British government and would threaten the sanctity of the economy of the American colonies. Overall, the villagers of Braintree wanted to assert to public record their objection to the acts and their freedom to act within their own system of law.

Published by Nicholas Katers

Nicholas Katers is a graduate of University of Wisconsin-Green Bay (BA, 2003) and the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (MA, 2007) in History and currently a freelance writer. You can find his work in the In...   View profile

13 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Natalya Johnson 6/4/2009

    I think the stamp tax axt is great it is so amazinge and I am looking for my sister Natalya i forget her last name we were switched at birth for real no lie.

  • taylor 10/6/2008

    the stamp act is sexy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    haha thats funny

  • ??? 5/1/2008

    The Stamp Act is sexy?

  • caleb 1/16/2008

    this ad really sucks it gave me no help for my project

  • caleb 1/16/2008

    this ad really sucks it gave me no help for my project

  • beautybabe 10/2/2007

    the stamp act is sexy!!

  • AUSSIE 9/19/2007

    ya mum! LOVING AUSSIES

  • Ur Dad 4/5/2007

    i hate u, ur mom

  • ur mom 4/5/2007

    Stamp Act sucks, Tea Act is better
    Stamp Act sucks, it really, really sucks
    Stamp Act sucks, it really, really sucks

  • Tsavong 4/5/2007

    i hate u all

Displaying Comments
Next »

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.