British Responsibility After 1763

By around the loose of 1760s decade a great controversy arose in the British s stills over whether to maintain the sugar colonies of the Atlantic Caribbean Islands and forfeit Canada or frailness versa. The later had the advantage of a wealthy fur trade, while as mentioned the former was promising in the sugar industry. However, all ended in 1763 by the historic signing of the Peace of Paris which saw the proponents of the Canadian option win. Going by the terms of the treaty, Britain was to benefit from all colonies of northwestward America formerly under France.The regions to the east of Mississippi down to Florida (acquired from Spain) were excessively declared a British possession as per the terms of the treaty. In as much as the treaty favored Britain, it is important to consummate that the cost of maintaining her possession in this area was in turn inflated. The expenses of maintaining, judicature and also defending empurpled wealthy had a negative restore on the econo my of the Britons. This realization had in contrast to the expectation of British policy makers who had thought that the American colonies will be self sustaining.It became costly for the organisation of UK to maintain the defense troops in the Canadian soil. thus in response the political sympathies budgeted to maintain about 8000 troops in northeastern America alone and this was to be well-kept by an parceling of the cost of ? 400000. This responsibility proved a burden to the royal government which was already being overburdened by its defense and war plans. adjacent this, measures to sum up revenue were taken and by the following form (1764) George Grenville, heyday minister then, introduced an act in parliament, dubbed the sugar act seted at bed covering the burden of empirial maintenance to colonies.As expected the compoundists rose in protest against these measures because they image them as a shifted burden. The French and Indian wars provided a study lesson u pon which the British ministry based its policy making in the process of quelling the North American Indians. The Indians who were now becoming a nuisance to the British ministry maintained that that the Ohio state belonged to them. After 1763 the rising resentments in the Ohio prompted the British government to toss out settlement in the region to the west of the Appalachians.Dominion Status Before the year 1763, the empire meant nothing more than a trade region. It provided a wider grocery store and also a source of valuables such as fur from India and Canada, hawkshaw from Liberia of West Africa and sugar from the Caribbean. However, after 1763 it signified dominion as well. The acquirement of empire never came with massive wealthy acquisition as aptitude have been expected. As previously mentioned it brought with it an array of problems in the areas of defense, administration and even finance.The aftermath of the seven years of war (1756-1763) the administration of the empir e and ministers support in England agreed unanimously the supremacy of the legislative parliament should be elevetated to have powers to repeal laws of the empire at large. In addition to this, the virile relation in the empire should be strengthened to facilitate the colonial empire to pay for their maintenance. Augmentation of Imperial Army in Ireland The imperial ideas of the government back in London were clearly envisaged in the proposition by the British parliament to augment Ireland based army.However, with effect of 1763 there arose a problem in the garrison and maintenance of the army, especially in the farthest away colonies. According to the ministers of the government in London, Ireland had the least opportunity of providing soldiers and recruits to the imperial army. The period between 1763 and 1767 saw the empirial demand for soldiers increase and therefore a quick source for more soldiers had to be sought. The British general who was to start Ireland to supply ext ra soldiers had in mind that any indirect hulk through Ireland officials would not by any means succeed.This conclusion by Townsend was as a result of a long and protracted sentiment of the Irish parliament to accept on the object to release recruits to the colonial empire. It was clear that any colonial indirect rule through Irish governors had to be discarded and replaced by the colonial official from England. This last proposal was accepted by the Irish parliament. However, the new system only came with change magnitude responsibilities in terms of military regiments after 1763. French and Indian war The French and Indian wars brought about policy changes in the ministry back in England.The American revolution of 1760 was sparked off by this policy which had its major aim to collect taxes for the empirical governance. Others still suggest that Quebec Act, which was followed by the proclamation of 1763, the return of the stamp act, Townsend activities and duties and also the tea act of Bolton are seen as the major contributor to the rapid turn of events by the British towards the governance of the empire. Others on this least are the major wars against Indians and France, which are said to have financially affected the British ministry.These issues defined the British approach in the coarse North American colony from 1763 to the final dismal of the North American by the independence of America in 1776. Quebec Act of 1774 This act was meant to increase the civil governance in the newly acquired colonies of North America, but as it turned out the act provided in some way for the annexe of the territory under the Quebec government to western side, a territory that had been pass on by the France in 1763. It therefore meant that the act violated the rights the colonists back in Canada considered their natural birthright.References 1. Anderson, Fred. Crucible of War The Seven Years War and the Fate of empire in British North America, 17541766. New York Kn opf, 2000. 2. Marshal, Peter. British Empire The Cambridge illustrated tarradiddle of the British Empire, Cambrigde University Press, 1999. 3. Cootes, John. Britain since 1700 Longman Secondary Histories, Longman Group Ltd, 1968. 4. Raimo, John W. Biographical Directory of American compound and Revolutionary Governors, 1607-1789. Westport, Conn. Meckler, Books, 1980.