The idea of virtual representation "found little support on either side of the Atlantic" as a means of solving the constitutional controversy between colonists and Britons. Parliament rejected any criticism that virtual representation was constitutionally invalid as a whole, and passed the Declaratory Act in 1766, asserting the right of Parliament to legislate for the colonies "all cases whatsoever." Thus Grenville defended all the taxes by arguing that the colonists were virtually represented in Parliament, a position that had critics on both sides of the British Empire. Grenville and Whately's theory, known as "virtual representation" put forth that, just like the vast majority of British citizens who could not vote, the colonists were nonetheless virtually represented in Parliament. This concept was famously expressed as " No taxation without representation".ĭuring the winter of 1764–1765, British MP George Grenville and his lieutenant, Thomas Whately, attempted to explicitly articulate a theory that could justify the lack of representation in colonial taxation. Because the colonists were represented only in their provincial assemblies, they said, only those legislatures could levy taxes in the colonies. According to the British constitution, colonists argued, taxes could be levied on British subjects only with their consent. In the early stages of the American Revolution, colonists in the Thirteen Colonies rejected legislation imposed upon them by the Parliament of Great Britain because the colonies were not represented in Parliament. Parliament claimed that their members had the well being of the colonists in mind. The Second Continental Congress asked for representation in Parliament in the Suffolk Resolves, also known as the first Olive Branch Petition. Virtual representation was the British response to the First Continental Congress in the American colonies. Virtual representation was the idea that the members of Parliament, including the Lords and the Crown-in-Parliament, reserved the right to speak for the interests of all British subjects, rather than for the interests of only the district that elected them or for the regions in which they held peerages and spiritual sway. Catholic Quebec enjoys peace, Protestant Boston burns, and blinded Britannia approaches a pit. Virtual Representative (standing, clad in brown) gives the Government (with blunderbuss) permission to rob a colonist. Let us run our own affairs.For the usage in representation theory in mathematics, see representation ring. Essentially, "No taxation without representation" really meant, "No taxation by Parliament. Further, the colonists wanted Parliamentary recognition of this perceived right. If taxes were necessary, then the Americans wanted their own assemblies to impose them. London was too far away, too much time would be needed to issue instructions to colonial representatives, and any American representation would be so badly outnumbered as to make it totally ineffectual. Most colonists realized the total impracticability of sending representatives across the Atlantic. Yet the differentiation between actual and virtual representation was really a convenient fiction from the American side. It could also be argued that property-owning adult males in much of colonial America virtually represented non-voting women, slaves and men without property. Legislators in the Virginia House of Burgesses could live in one district while representing another one. In fact, virtual representation was not unknown in America. Soame Jenyns, a member of Parliament, displayed the contempt felt by many in that body towards the American arguments when he wrote, "As these are usually mixed up with several patriotic and favorite words, such as liberty, property, Englishmen, etc., which are apt to make strong impressions on that more numerous part of mankind who have ears but no understanding, it will not, I think, be improper to give them some answers." The British, on the other hand, supported the concept of virtual representation, which was based on the belief that a Member of Parliament virtually represented every person in the empire and there was no need for a specific representative from Virginia or Massachusetts, for example. James Otis argued for this form of representation in the Stamp Act Congress in 1765, but few other delegates supported him. On the surface, the Americans held to the view of actual representation, meaning that in order to be taxed by Parliament, the Americans rightly should have actual legislators seated and voting in London. A fundamental difference of opinion had developed between British authorities and the Americans on the related issues of taxing the colonists and their representation in Parliament.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |