Digital List Price: | $29.99 |
Kindle Price: | $16.19 Save $13.80 (46%) |
Sold by: | Amazon.com Services LLC |
Your Memberships & Subscriptions
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Follow the author
OK
The Stamp Act Crisis: Prologue to Revolution (Published by the Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture and the University of North Carolina Press) Kindle Edition
'A brilliant contribution to the colonial field. Combining great industry, astute scholarship, and a vivid style, the authors have sought 'to recreate two years of American history.' They have succeeded admirably.'--William and Mary Quarterly
'Required reading for anyone interested in those eventful years preceding the American Revolution.'--Political Science Quarterly
The Stamp Act, the first direct tax on the American colonies, provoked an immediate and violent response. The Stamp Act Crisis, originally published by UNC Press in 1953, identifies the issues that caused the confrontation and explores the ways in which the conflict was a prelude to the American Revolution.
- ISBN-109780807899793
- ISBN-13978-0807806418
- PublisherOmohundro Institute and UNC Press
- Publication dateJanuary 20, 2011
- LanguageEnglish
- File size2208 KB
Kindle E-Readers
Fire Tablets
Fire Phones
Customers who bought this item also bought
Editorial Reviews
Review
--"Political Science Quarterly"
A brilliant contribution to the colonial field. Combining great industry, astute scholarship, and a vivid style, the authors have sought 'to recreate two years of American history.' They have succeeded admirably.
--"William and Mary Quarterly"
Impressive! . . . The authors have given us a searching account of the crisis and provided some memorable portraits of officials in America impaled on the dilemma of having to enforce a measure which they themselves opposed.
--"New York Times"
Review
About the Author
The late Helen M. Morgan was Eward S. Morgan's wife and collaborator.
Product details
- ASIN : B004IK8A64
- Publisher : Omohundro Institute and UNC Press (January 20, 2011)
- Publication date : January 20, 2011
- Language : English
- File size : 2208 KB
- Text-to-Speech : Enabled
- Screen Reader : Supported
- Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
- X-Ray : Not Enabled
- Word Wise : Enabled
- Sticky notes : On Kindle Scribe
- Print length : 341 pages
- Page numbers source ISBN : 0807806412
- Best Sellers Rank: #457,175 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
- Customer Reviews:
About the author
Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on Amazon-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
This study of the origin of and reaction to the Stamp Act couldn't be better.
The Sugar Act was intended to help close the gaping hole in the British treasury after the long war with France. By lowering the duty on molasses, but strictly enforcing the new law, the crown hoped to increase desperately needed revenue while not interfering with the flow of colonial trade. Colonial resistance was immediate and vigorous, their opposition to the Act bolstered by the effects of a post-war recession and new restrictive monetary policy introduced by Parliament that prohibited the use of paper money, which crippled the colonial economy that was starved of specie. Pamphlets, such as that by James Otis, "The Rights of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved," which denied the right of Parliament to tax the colonies, either internally or by duties on trade, unless they granted the colonies direct representation in Parliament, were generated to defend noncompliance with the Act.
The Morgans pay special attention to the work of Maryland lawyer Daniel Dulany, who, in 1765, after reading pamphlets by Soame Jennings, William Knox and especially Thomas Whitley writing for Lord Grenville, authored an essay, "Considerations on the propriety of imposing Taxes in the British Colonies," which refuted their arguments supporting the rights of Parliament to levy a direct tax on the colonists. Dulany directly challenged the principle of virtual representation the tax proponents in England took as a given. Although such great legal minds as Sydney, Burke and Blackstone supported virtual representation, Dulany argued that it didn't apply to the colonies, because a tax raised in the colonies would lower the tax burden of Englishmen, so there was no shared interest, which was the intellectual basis for virtual representation. But he was careful not to dismiss all Parliamentary authority over the colonies. In fact, he was a champion of Parliamentary authority in legislation, which was different from taxation. The Morgans explain that Dulany simply sought to define Parliamentary authority within a constitutional framework. Thus, representation was only needed for taxation, not legislation. He acknowledged the colonies subservience in matters of economics and trade, and accepted Parliament's right to impose duties and regulate trade in its favor.
Ironically, many of the leading British political leaders of the day on both sides of the Atlantic were sympathetic to the intellectual arguments made by the colonists; Pitt even stood up in Parliament and "rejoiced that America resisted." But British lawmakers also realized that acknowledging their claims put London on a slippery slope that could permanently undermine the sovereignty of Parliament. In the end, the issue wasn't whether or not the Stamp Act would be repealed -- the enormous cost of enforcement and nearly unified resistance of the powerful merchant community in England ensured that the Act would be removed. The issue hinged on the understanding of the colonies claims against taxation, which were fiercely contested. Most agreed that there were some difference between internal taxes (those imposed to raise revenue) and external taxes (those imposed to regulate trade); however, few accepted those made by many colonists, Daniel Dulany especially, that legislation and taxation were two very separate things. The distinction between internal and external taxes limited Parliamentary authority much less than that between taxation and legislation. In his dramatic appearance before Parliament during the crisis, Benjamin Franklin had maintained that the colonists only sought to avoid internal taxes and recognized Parliament's right to tax in general. Those pushing for repeal had to downplay the colonists' arguments against general taxation, which created confusion of what really was at issue. In the end, the powerful merchant class movement against the Act on business terms was given credit for its repeal. The Declaratory Act, which repealed the Stamp Act, was based on the 1719 precedent of authority over the Irish and was left deliberately vague on the issue of taxation. It affirmed Parliament's right to authority over legislation "in all cases whatsoever." Most assumed that included taxes, but an explicit reference to taxation was deliberately left out, thus ensuring ambiguity and getting the repeal through Parliament.
When Pitt was made head of government in 1766, replacing Rockingham, it was believed that the staunch defender of colonial rights would interpret the Declaratory Act the way that the colonists did and that Parliament would never tax them again. However, a few prescient colonists recognized what Parliament had really done with the Declaratory Act: before they claimed Parliament could tax because the colonists were virtually represented; now they were able to claim that Parliament could tax because they officially declared that they could. The stage was set for the final confrontation, one that would determine the political fate of a continent and, ultimately, an empire.
"The Stamp Act Crisis" is likely one of the dozen best, most enduring books on the colonial period and Revolution written in the past century. Not a light, popular history, it is for more serious students of American history rather than the casual crowd, although I would encourage the book to any thoughtful reader.