English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

History Help

2007-11-27 12:37:12 · 4 answers · asked by sportsfan4545 1 in Arts & Humanities History

4 answers

The Boston Tea Party was a MAJOR turning point on the road to war.

The whole thing actually started much like several other colonial responses to unpopular British taxes -- as a boycott. The hope was, as with the Stamp Act, to pressure Parliament to rescind the measure. And, as with earlier successful boycotts, the colonies were united. ALL the major port cities (not only Boston, but New York, Philadelphia and Charlestown, SC) promised NOT to allow the tea to be landed and sold.

But in Boston's case, something went wrong. While the other port cities mostly succeeded in turning the ships away (Charlestown ended up allowing the tea to be warehoused, but not distributed), Governor Hutchinson REFUSED to allow the ships out of the harbor. This was probably partly motivated by the fact that members of his family were to be the distributors of the tea, but also likely because of his great desire to prove he could keep control of Massachusetts (considered the heart or rebellion, with the likes of patriot leaders Sam Adams and John Hancock stirring up trouble).

At any rate, a quirk in the law provided that, even if a ship remained in harbor, the duty eventually HAD to be paid. The deadline was midnight Dec 16, 1773. And it was at THAT point that the Sons of Liberty finally acted -- to prevent the payment of the tax, which the colonists opposed on principle.

That's when things got ugly! The Tea Party so greatly angered much of Parliament and the King that they passed a series of PUNITIVE measures against Massachusetts, beginning with the closing of Boston Harbor and closing down of the colonist-elected state assembly.. THESE "Coercive Acts" (dubbed "Intolerable Acts" in America) brought the sympathy of the other colonies, and led to the calling of the "First Continental Congress" in the fall of 1774, which sought to take steps to force Britain to rescind these acts (principally a full boycott).

Meanwhile, Boston -- full of British troops there to enforce the Acts and to watch for rebellion -- was a tinderbox. The colonists prepared for possible war. In response, the British clumsily sent out a sizable expedition to take control of a stash of gunpowder and to seize Hancock and Adams. This set off colonial alarms (the minutemen), and the confrontations at Lexington and Concord.

From all this it is clear that the more-or-less AD HOC Tea Party (not part of the colonists' original boycott strategy) played a major role in raising tensions to set up the REVOLUTIONARY confrontation.

2007-11-28 09:00:37 · answer #1 · answered by bruhaha 7 · 0 0

The Boston Tea party was a catylistic event serving to rachet up tensions between the King of England and the colonists, and intrestingly was one of the first false flag operations historically in the US. Also, the motive was not because of the English Tax stamp but, the Kings attempt to curb the use of Colonial Script as currency. Matter of fact, the entire war was basically fought because of Colonial Script.

2007-11-27 13:02:12 · answer #2 · answered by HotDockett 4 · 0 1

As Esoj and Chris H have reported...it twern't approximately tea, in any respect. It replace into approximately tax. And that's in this regard that the concept of Democracy applies. In a Democracy, the government works for the individuals and as such desires their cooperation for its judgements. The British, a loose usa, forgot this little requirement of Democracy. Now admittedly, the British weren't offering their version of freedom to the colonies a nearby they seen their possession. The colonials, on the different hand, demanded slightly Democracy. the region had worsened because of the fact of england's debt after the "Seven Years conflict" and he British did what wide-unfold politicians in many situations do, they indulged of their own incompetence and , as a effect, raised taxes on the Colonialists, as quickly as extra, with out attention as to the conceivable consequences. The "Tea celebration" got here approximately in 1773 yet in 1770, the British killed 5 protesters in Boston. This act replace into stumbled on, at trial, to be a justified taking photographs yet Paul Revere used this incident to create some very effectual propaganda implying that the killings have been unprovoked and the effect of the oppressive English. whilst the "overlords, back raised taxes organizers performed the now wide-unfold, "Tea celebration". The colonies have been something yet prepared and it replace into real looking to think of that they does not act as a cohesive unit. lots to the sorrowful ask your self of the British, those disorganized colonies met in Philadelphia in 1774 at what heritage might call the "First Continental Congress". on an identical time communities of colonialists have been preparation with farm strategies as weapons to stand-up for themselves. In 1775, a unit of the occupation military ventured outdoors Boston to disarm this variety of group and the objective group ambushed the British at a place to flow down interior the heritage of conflict, quite, Lexington and cohesion. A month later yet another such group, this time from Vermont attacked and defeated a British garrison at a place spoke of as fort Ticonderoga and located heavy weapons overlooking Boston inflicting the British to desert that city. something, as they are announcing, is heritage.

2016-10-09 21:06:43 · answer #3 · answered by quintero 4 · 0 0

it inspired moral to the colonials to oppose the British. It was one of the first major acts of rebellion that was public.

2007-11-27 12:41:13 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers