Summary Of The Rights Of The British Colonies By James Otis

After the conclusion of the French and Indian War, England attempted to increase control over its American colonies until the colonists began an armed rebellion at Lexington and Concord in 1775. John Adams, however, accurately points out that while Lexington and Concord serve as a beginning of military conflict between the colonists and their British rulers, the actual revolution took place during the previous decade. This view of the 1766 to 1775 colonial reaction to Great Britain’s reorganization of the empire is illustrated by James Otis’ essay, The Rights of the British Colonies, the Stamp Act Congress’ proposed resolutions and Benjamin Franklin’s testimony before the Parliament, and Patrick Henry’s speech to the House of Burgesses. These

Otis contrasts two types of power structure: Oligarchies and aristocracies, where only a select few posses a large amount of power, and democracies, where power is distributed amongst the people. Most successful countries and empires throughout history structure their government to one of the two extremes, leading to corruption, in the case of an oligarchy or aristocracy, or poor decision making, in the case of a complete democracy. From his analysis of these systems of government, Otis proposes “to have those several power properly combined,” calling for the integration of both political systems in American society instead of only following one to an extreme. (Otis 105) The idea of a balance between authoritarianism and republicanism is virtually unprecedented in history; the only civilization resembling Otis’ idea was ancient Rome, but it failed to accurately reflect his vision as there was an inability to maintain balance between the Senate and the Roman people. Furthermore, Otis also

Colonists despised the Stamp Act of 1765 for this reason, as it hindered the liberties they could exercise because of the unjustified financial burden it posed. The colonists peaceful call for reform of English legislation through the means of the Stamp Act Congress and Ben Franklin’s testimony indicated the initial stages of a revolution. Although, at this point, the colonists did not desire the consequence of war with England, the hatred for their mother country was building, and it eventually forced the Parliament to repeal the Stamp Act. Franklin had warned the House of Commons of the colonists displeasure with the Stamp Act by saying “A total loss of the respect and affection the people of America bear to [England],” and furthermore, a loss “of all the commerce that depends on that respect and affection” would occur if England remained stagnant. Colonists largely believed the taxes imposed on them were not only overpriced, but also violated the basic “natural rights’. The degree of colonial displeasure was illustrated when Franklin stated that even if military force were applied to enforcing the Stamp Act, “they cannot force a man to take stamps who chooses to do without them.” Many took Otis’ expression “Taxation without representation