Pros And Cons Of The Thirteen Colonies

543 Words3 Pages

The French and Indian War ended in 1763, resulting in a British victory and British control of all previously French land, besides Louisiana, in North America. However, the British government was in massive debt following the war, and could not pay off the debt without procuring more funds from their citizens. This debt and future misunderstanding of specifically the colonists of the thirteen colonies is what led to the aforementioned colonists to desire independence. The British controlled much more besides the thirteen colonies. India, much of the Caribbean, several outposts in Africa, Canada, and many islands in the Pacific, as well as Australia. But these colonies were much different in nature than the thirteen. These colonies were crown colonies, while the thirteen were charter colonies. Crown colonies were paid for and established by the ruling government and the King of England or Britain. Because of this, crown colonies were expected to be much more subservient to and controlled by the king or parliament. The people living in these colonies were often people trying to get rich by working in the trading business, and in about five years of increasing their wealth they would leave the crown colony and sail back to England to live. …show more content…

An MP would want to raise taxes on the colonies in return for being rescued from the French by the British army. They would talk to colonists in England, but these people were the ones who came back rich from crown colonies, who did not care how much they were taxed because the king had complete control over them regardless. The MPs had never talked to any colonists from the thirteen charter colonies. Furthermore, the British had left their army in the thirteen colonies after the French and Indian war, so they could enforce taxation. The colonists of the charter colonies did not appreciate the army being left

Open Document