 Parliament of Great Britain | |
| Long title | An act for granting certain duties in the British colonies and plantations in Africa, for continuing, amending, and making perpetual, an act in the 6th year of the reign of his late loftiness King George the Second, (initituled, An act for the better securing and encouraging the switch of his Majesty's sugar colonies in America) for applying the make of such duties, and of the duties to arise by virtue of the same do, towards defraying and disallowing single drawbacks on exports from this realm, and more effectually preventing the clandestine imparting of goods to and from the same colonies and plantation, and improving and securing the trade between the same and Majuscule United Kingdom. |
|---|---|
| Citation | 4 Geo 3 c.15 |
| Introduced by | The Rt. Hon. George Grenville, MP Chancellor, Chancellor of the Exchequer & Leader of the House of Commons |
| Territorial extent | British America and the British The Indies |
| Dates | |
| Royal assent | 5 April 1764 |
| Commencement | 29 Sep 1764 |
| Repealed | 1766 |
| Other legislation | |
| Revised away | None |
| Repealed by | Receipts Act 1766 |
| Relates to | Molasses Act |
| Status: Repealed | |
The Sugar Act 1764, also known as the Ground Revenue Act 1764 or the American Duties Act, was a receipts-nurture act passed by the Sevens of Large Great Britain on 5 April 1764.[1] The preamble to the work explicit: "it is expedient that late provisions and regulations should be established for rising the gross of this Kingdom ... and ... it is just and necessary that a revenue should be raised ... for defraying the expenses of defending, protecting, and securing the same."[2] The earlier Molasses Act 1733, which had imposed a revenue enhancement of six pence per gallon of molasses, had never been in effect collected due to body evasion. By reduction the rate by half and increasing measures to enforce the tax, Parliament hoped that the task would actually be concentrated.[3] These incidents accrued the colonists' concerns astir the intent of the British Parliament and helped the growing movement that became the Earth Rotation.[4]
Background
The Molasses Move 1733 was passed by Parliament largely at the insistence of large plantation owners in the British West Indies. Molasses from European nation, Dutch, and Spanish West Indian possessions was inexpensive. Sugar (from the British The Indies) was priced much higher than its competitors and they also had nobelium pauperization for the mountainous quantities of baseball bat, fish, and opposite items offered by the colonies in exchange. Sometimes colonists would pay Molasses Act taxes because they were rather low contingent on where they resided and how much money they had. In the prototypal part of the 18th century, the British Westerly Indies were Great Britain's nearly important trading partner, sol Parliament was attentive to their requests. Withal, rather than acceding to the demands to prohibit the colonies from trading with the non-British islands, Parliament passed the prohibitively gamey tax connected the colonies on molasses imported from those islands. If really collected, the task would have efficaciously drawn that reservoir to New England and totaled much of the rum industry. Instead, smuggling, graft or bullying of customs officials efficaciously nullified the law.[5]
During the Seven Years' War, known in Colonial United States of America as the French and Indian War, the British people government substantially increased the national debt to pay for the warfare. In February 1763, as the war ended, the ministry orientated by John Gilbert Charles Stuart, the Earl of Bute, decided to conserve a standing army of ten 1000 British regular troops in the colonies. Before long thereafter, George I Grenville replaced Bute. Grenville supported his predecessor's policy, even more so after the outbreak of Pontiac's War in May 1763. Grenville faced the problem of not only paying for these troops but servicing the national debt. The debt grew from £75,000,000 earlier the war to £122,600,000 in January 1763, and just about £130,000,000 by the beginning of 1764.[6]
George Grenville did not expect the colonies to contribute to the involvement or the retirement of the debt, merely he did carry the Americans to pay a dowery of the expenses for colonial Department of Defense. Estimating the expenses of maintaining an army in the Continental colonies and the West Indies to atomic number 4 about £200,000 annually, Grenville devised a revenue-raising political program that would raise an estimated £79,000 each year.[7]
Passage
The Molasses Act was set to expire in 1763. The Commissioners of Customs anticipated greater exact for both molasses and strange as a termination of the end of the state of war and the acquisition of Canada. They believed that the exaggerated demand would make a sharply rock-bottom order both low-priced and collectible. When passed by Fantan, the new Sugar Act upon of 1764 halved the previous tax on molasses. To boot to promising stricter enforcement, the language of the bill ready-made IT clear that the purpose of the legislation was not to just baffle the trade (as the Molasses Act had attempted to handle effectively closing the legal sell to not-British suppliers) but to provoke revenue.[3]
The new act listed specific goods, the most important beingness lumber, which could only be exported to GB. Ship captains were required to maintain detailed manifests of their cargo and the papers were subject to verification before anything could be unloaded from the ships. Customs officials were empowered to have all violations proven in vice admiralty courts rather than by jury trials in section colonial courts, where the juries generally looked favorably on smuggling as a profession.[8]
American historiographer Fred Anderson wrote that the purpose of the Act on was "to resolve the problems of finance and control that troubled the postwar conglomerate". To do this "three kinds of measures" were enforced – "those intended to make customs enforcement more impressive, those that set new duties along items wide used up in America, and those that adjusted old rates in much a way as to maximize revenues."[9]
Effect on the American colonies
The Sugar Act on was passed by Fantan on 5 April 1764,[1] and it arrived in the colonies at one time of economic depression. It was an indirect tax, although the colonists were well informed of its front. A good part of the reason was that a significant portion of the body economy during the Septet Years' War was involved with supplying food and supplies to the British Army. Colonials, however, especially those affected immediately as merchants and shippers, assumed that the extremely visible new assess program was the prima perpetrator. As protests against the Sugar Number developed, information technology was the economic impact rather than the constitutional issue of taxation without mental representation that was the intense focus for the colonists.[10]
New England ports especially suffered economic losses from the Loot Play the stricter enforcement successful smuggling molasses more chancy and risky. Also they argued that the profit margin happening rum was overly small to support any revenue enhancement connected molasses. Forced to increase their prices, many colonists feared existence priced out of the market. The British Westmost Indies, on the other hand, now had undivided access to colonial exports. With ply of molasses well exceeding demand, the islands prospered with their reduced expenses while New England ports adage revenue from their rum exports decrease. As wel the West Indies had been the original body source for hard currency, or specie, and arsenic the militia of specie were exhausted the wiseness of colonial currency was threatened.[11]
Two prime movers buttocks the protests against the Sugar Act were Samuel Adams and Epistle of James Elisha Graves Otis, both of Massachusetts. In May 1764 Samuel Adams drafted a report on the Sugar Act for the Massachusetts assembly, in which he denounced the play an infringement of the rights of the colonists as British people subjects:
For if our Trade may comprise taxed why not our Lands? Wherefore not the Produce of our Lands & all thing we have or make economic consumption of? This we apprehend annihilates our Charter Right to govern & tax ourselves – Information technology strikes our British Privileges, which as we have ne'er forfeited them, we conceal common with our Fellow Subjects who are Natives of Britain: If Taxes are ordered upon us in any shape without our having a aggregation Representation where they are laid, are we not reduced from the Type of free Subjects to the miserable DoS of tributary Slaves?[12]
In Venerable 1764, fifty Boston merchants agreed to stop purchasing British luxuriousness imports, and in some Boston and New York City there were movements to growth colonial manufacturing. There were periodic outbreaks of furiousness, most notably in Rhode Island.[13] Overall, however, there was not an immediate high level of protest over the Refined sugar Act in either Newfangled England or the rest of the colonies. That would begin in the later break of the next year when the Stamp Playact 1765 was passed.[14]
The Sugar Play 1764 was repealed in 1766 and replaced with the Revenue Act 1766, which reduced the taxation to one and only penny per gallon on molasses imports, British or foreign. This occurred or so the same time that the Stamp Act 1765 was repealed.[15]
Check as wel
- American Revolutionary War#Prelude to revolution for the context of the Sugar Act among other post-1763 tax revenue bills.
- Soda tax for modern excises on sugar products and candied soft drinks.
Notes
- ^ a b "The Sugar Act; Titled The American Tax revenue Act 1764". UShistory.org. Independence Residence Association. Retrieved 2008-09-23 .
- ^ Miller p. 101
- ^ a b Miller pp. 100–101
- ^ Daniella Garran (2010-07-19). "Steps to the American Revolution". Lesson Major planet. Retrieved 2010-07-21 .
- ^ Miller pp. 96–99
- ^ Gary Nash p. 45; Middlekauff pp. 55–63.
- ^ Middlekauff p. 62.
- ^ Middlekauff p. 65.
- ^ Anderson p. 574
- ^ Middlekauff p. 66–67. Miller p. 101. Miller wrote, "The legislation was declared to have caused greater alarm in New England than the forays of the French and Indians during the darkest days of the Seven Years' War."
- ^ Miller p. 101–102.
- ^ Draper p. 219
- ^ Alexander p. 24. Middlekauff p. 67–73.
- ^ Glenn Miller pp. 149–150.
- ^ Draper p. 290–291
Bibliography
- Alexander, John K. Samuel Adams: The States's Revolutionary Politician. (2002) ISBN 0-7425-2114-1
- Marian Anderson, Fred, 'Crucible of War, 2000, ISBN 0-375-40642-5
- Draper, Theodore. A Struggle For Power:The American Revolutionary War. (1996) ISBN 0-8129-2575-0
- Middlekauff, Henry M. Robert. The Glorious Cause: The American Revolution, 1763-1789. (2005) ISBN 978 0-19-516247-9
- Miller, John C. Origins of the Ground Revolution. (1943)
- Nash, Gary BThe Unknown American Rotation: The Unruly Birth of Democracy and the Struggle to Produce America. (2005) ISBN 0-670-03420-7
- "The Sugar Act". Retrieved 6 December 2005.
External golf links
- Text of the Sugar Act 1764
- Recorded summary of passage of the Clams Act
why did the british parliament pass the sugar act
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_Act
Posting Komentar