Stamp Act: Main Idea
Stamp Act: Main Idea
Despite the highfalutin' language, the Stamp Act is a relatively simple doc—a relatively simple doc that led to some very complicated fall out (like the establishment of the United States of America).
Basically, the Stamp Act says this: "Hey, American colonies. Pay some taxes on paper. Love, Britain."
But the subtext of the Stamp Act is this: "What's up, puny colonies. Cough up money to pay for a war we fought. No, we're not going to allow any colonial representatives into Parliament. Yes, we're going to actually send more soldiers to the colonies. And—oh yeah—one of the penalties for not abiding by this law is death. Xoxo, King George."
Huh. No wonder so many formerly placid colonists became fighting mad patriots.
Be forewarned, though: this text is dry. The first chunk of it is just how much tax will be paid on various trade goods. It's ridiculously detailed in this regard…but that's just how tax-related things tend to be. (Also—it's super-helpful to check out inflation charts when you're dealing with this first hunk o' text, so you have a better idea about how much cash money the Brits were actually asking for.) The second part of the act clarifies points, determines what else the law effects, and how violations will be penalized. This is closer to the enforcement arm of the law…and is also super-detailed.
Like we said: dry.
But hey: that's why we're here—to cut through all the 18th Century tax-n'-law shenanigans and show you just why this text made the colonists in what would become the U.S. of A. so crazy-angry.
Questions
- If the colonists had a representative on the British Parliament, would their stance have changed at all? After all, one vote wasn't going to make very much difference.
- Would a different tax have been received better? Was the problem the tax itself or the goods being taxed?
- Is there a right and wrong in this situation, or do both sides have a point? Taxation without representation is wrong, but shouldn't a population be taxed to pay for their own defense?
- What would have happened had the British not enacted the Stamp Act? Would the Revolution have happened? Would it have been won?
Chew On This
The Stamp Act was an act of tyranny, using economic exploitation to stock the colonies with a police force of redcoats.
The Stamp Act was a necessary measure by the British crown to get itself out of debt, relying on those who had used those same resources to stay alive.
Quotes
Quote #1
An act for granting and applying certain stamp duties, and other duties, in the British colonies and plantations in America, towards further defraying the expences [sic] of defending, protecting, and securing the same. (1.1)
The opening paragraph is where a law states its purpose. So this is the party line of what this law was doing to begin with. Basically, this says, "the crown defended the colonies, so the colonies have to pay for it."
Sounds pretty reasonable on the face of it, right? The stamp, incidentally, was a literal stamp. It would look something like a rubber stamp (as opposed to a postage stamp) and functioned as a receipt that the tax had been paid.
Quote #2
For every skin or piece of vellum or parchment, or sheet or piece of paper, on which shall be ingrossed [sic], written or printed, any declaration, plea, replication, rejoinder, demurrer, or other pleading, or any copy thereof, in any court of law within the British colonies and plantations in America, a stamp duty of three pence. (1.3)
This is a standard part of the law from the first part, detailing who pays what. Think of it as standard legal writing of the time.
Quote #3
And for and upon every pack of playing cards, and all dice, which shall be sold or used within the said colonies and plantations, the several stamp duties following. (1.43)
The bulk of the Stamp Act is on paper goods, but here it specifically mentions dice (and later mentions they are to be 10 shillings). Dice were incredibly popular in the colonies, generally used to play a game similar to modern craps. Dice were included in the act—even though they weren't a paper good—because they were already being taxed. This was just an increase.
Quote #4
Or if any such officer shall be of the people commonly called Quakers, he shall take a solemn affirmation to the effect of the said oath. (XIII.2)
Quakers are singled out here because they affirmed rather than swore oaths. The Quakers Act of 1695 made that legal. Essentially, it's against their faith to swear, so the law made sure they wouldn't be compelled to do so. And no, the Quakers have nothing to do with the delicious, delicious oatmeal.
Quote #5
And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That if any person shall forge, counterfeit, erase, or alter, any such certificate, ever such person so offending shall be guilty of felony, and shall suffer death as in cases of felony without the benefit of clergy. (XVIII.1)
Death. That's right, the penalty is death. So maybe the colonists were right about this being tyranny, huh?