The war myth in United States history — John Shaqi
The war myth in United States historyHamlin, C. H. (Charles Hunter)
History
The war myth in United States history
Hamlin, C. H. (Charles Hunter)
Propaganda, American; United States -- History; War
keep the empire from finding it necessary to buy them from a foreign
nation. These navigation laws aroused New England rather than the
South, for it was the commercial section of the country.
(3) Another cause of friction between the colonies and the mother
country was the British land policy proclaimed in 1763. This policy
ordered the colonial governors to grant no more land to settlers
beyond a certain western border extending south from the New England
States along the western part of New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia,
North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. (See Hockett,
"Political and Social History of the United States," Vol. 1, page
115.) This line extended down just east of the mountains and was to
leave to the Indians the territory west of it. This western land was
then to be purchased from the Indians for the king. After that the
Indians would go further west and their original territory was to be
opened to settlers as soon as it was purchased. This arrangement was
made by Great Britain to avoid conflict between the Indians and the
frontier settlers. The frontier settlers, however, objected,
preferring to drive the Indians back by more ruthless methods even if
it caused trouble. The western land speculators also did not like it
because they could not sell their land until Great Britain had first
pushed the Indians back. The royal government immediately began
making treaties with the Indians for the purchase of their territory.
The policy was wise and humane but the settlers were too impatient to
abide by it. (The Washington family was prominent in these western
land speculations.) A land lobby was kept in London by these
speculators in their efforts to get large grants of western land from
the crown and then to sell it off as the country became more and more
settled.
(4) The next principal cause of trouble was the British financial
legislation regarding the colonies. The colonies had issued fiat
money or colonial bills of credit, which were a form of paper money.
These could not be redeemed, and immediately began to depreciate in
value. Yet they were made legal tender by the colonial legislature,
so that they had to be accepted in payment of debt. Often the
colonies would buy goods from the English and pay them with this
colonial money. The southern planters were especially active in
using it to pay their debts to their British creditors. The
merchants of London soon complained of this practice. Finally, in
1764, Great Britain prohibited all the colonies from issuing these
bills of credit or fiat money as such a procedure was considered
unfair to their creditors. This, of course, aroused great opposition
from those profiting by this currency when paying their debts. Yet
no one now would defend such a financial policy on the part of the
colonies.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account