Home  ›  what is it called when great britain refused to enforce colonial trade laws

what is it called when great britain refused to enforce colonial trade laws

Written By Friday, April 8, 2022 Add Comment Edit

United kingdom legislation

Navigation Act 1660

Parliament of England
Long championship An Act for the Encourageing and increasing of Aircraft and Navigation.
Citation 12 Cha. Ii. c. 18
Territorial extent Kingdom of England and English overseas possessions
Dates
Beginning various, 1 December 1660 to 1 September 1661
Other legislation
Repeals/revokes An Act for increase of Aircraft, and Encouragement of the Navigation of this Nation, 9 October 1651

Status: Repealed

The Navigation Acts, or more than broadly the Acts of Trade and Navigation, was a long series of English language laws that adult, promoted, and regulated English ships, shipping, merchandise, and commerce between other countries and with its ain colonies. The laws also regulated England's fisheries and restricted foreigners' participation in its colonial trade.[1] While based on before precedents, they were first enacted in 1651 nether the Commonwealth. The system was reenacted and broadened with the restoration by the Deed of 1660, and further developed and tightened by the Navigation Acts of 1663, 1673, and 1696.[two] Upon this footing during the 18th century, the Acts were modified by subsequent amendments, changes, and the addition of enforcement mechanisms and staff. Additionally, a major change in the very purpose of the Acts in the 1760s – that of generating a colonial revenue, rather than but regulating the Empire'south merchandise – would assist lead to major rebellions,[3] and meaning changes in the implementation of the Acts themselves.[4] The Acts generally prohibited the utilize of foreign ships, required the employment of English and colonial mariners for 75% of the crews, including East India Company ships. The Acts prohibited colonies from exporting specific, enumerated, products to countries other than United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland and those countries' colonies, and mandated that imports be sourced only through Britain. Overall, the Acts formed the footing for English (and later) British overseas trade for nearly 200 years, merely with the development and gradual credence of free trade, the Acts were eventually repealed in 1849. The laws reflected the European economical theory of mercantilism which sought to proceed all the benefits of trade within their corresponding Empires, and to minimize the loss of gilt and silver, or profits, to foreigners through purchases and trade. The system would develop with the colonies supplying raw materials for British industry, and in exchange for this guaranteed market, the colonies would purchase manufactured goods from or through Uk.

The major impetus for the get-go Navigation Act was the ruinous deterioration of English merchandise in the aftermath of the Eighty Years' War, and the associated lifting of the Spanish embargoes on merchandise betwixt the Castilian Empire and the Dutch Commonwealth. The finish of the embargoes in 1647 unleashed the full ability of the Amsterdam Entrepôt and other Dutch competitive advantages in European and world trade. Within a few years, English merchants had practically been overwhelmed in the Baltic and Due north body of water trade, equally well every bit merchandise with the Iberian Peninsula, the Mediterranean and the Levant. Even the trade with English colonies (partly still in the hands of the royalists, equally the English language Ceremonious State of war was in its final stages and the Commonwealth of England had not withal imposed its authority throughout the English colonies) was "engrossed" past Dutch merchants. English direct merchandise was crowded out by a sudden influx of bolt from the Levant, Mediterranean and the Spanish and Portuguese empires, and the West Indies via the Dutch Entrepôt, carried in Dutch ships and for Dutch account.[5]

The obvious solution seemed to be to seal off the English markets to these unwanted imports. A precedent was the Act the Greenland Visitor had obtained from Parliament in 1645 prohibiting the import of whale products into England, except in ships owned by that visitor. This principle was now generalized. In 1648 the Levant Visitor petitioned Parliament for the prohibition of imports of Turkish goods "...from Holland and other places but directly from the places of their growth."[half dozen] Baltic traders added their voices to this chorus. In 1650 the Continuing Council for Trade and the Council of State of the Democracy prepared a full general policy designed to impede the flow of Mediterranean and colonial commodities via Holland and Zeeland into England.[seven]

Following the 1696 act, the Acts of Trade and Navigation were mostly obeyed, except for the Molasses Act 1733, which led to extensive smuggling because no effective means of enforcement was provided until the 1760s. Stricter enforcement under the Sugar Deed 1764 became one source of resentment of Uk past merchants in the American colonies. This, in turn, helped push the American colonies to rebel in the late 18th century, even though the consensus view amid modern economic historians and economists is that the "costs imposed on [American] colonists past the trade restrictions of the Navigation Acts were small."[8]

Historical precedents [edit]

Some principles of English mercantile legislation pre-date both the passage of the Navigation Act 1651 and the settlement of England's early foreign possessions. A 1381 Act passed under King Richard II provided "that, to increase the navy of England, no goods or merchandises shall exist either exported or imported, only simply in ships belonging to the King's subjects." The messages patent granted to the Cabots by Henry Seven in 1498 stipulated that the commerce resulting from their discoveries must be with England (specifically Bristol).[9] Henry Eight established a second principle by statute: that such a vessel must be English language-congenital and a majority of the coiffure must be English-born. Legislation during the reign of Elizabeth I as well dealt with these questions and resulted in a large increase in English merchant shipping.[10] Before long after bodily settlements had been made in America, these early on requirements illustrate the English theory then held regarding the governmental control of maritime commerce.[11]

With the establishment of overseas colonies a distinct colonial policy began to develop, and the principles embodied in the early Navigation and Trade Acts also had some more than firsthand precedents in the provisions of the charters granted to the London and Plymouth Company, in the various royal patents later bestowed by Charles I and Charles II, besides every bit in the early regulations apropos the tobacco trade, the first profitable colonial consign. An Order in Council of 24 October 1621 prohibited the Virginia colony to export tobacco and other bolt to strange countries.[12] The London Company lost its lease in 1624; the same year a proclamation, followed by Orders in Council, prohibited the apply of strange ships for the Virginia tobacco merchandise.[10] These early companies held the monopoly on trade with their plantation; this meant that the commerce developed was to exist England's. The Crown's purpose was to restrict to England the future commerce with America; information technology is well shown in the patent granted past Charles I to William Berkeley in 1639, past which the patentee was "to oblige the masters of vessels, freighted with productions of the colony, to give bail before their departure to bring same into England ... and to forestall all trade with foreign vessels, except upon necessity."[11]

Equally early equally 1641 some English merchants urged that these rules be embodied in an deed of Parliament, and during the Long Parliament, move began in that direction. The Ordinance for Free Trade with the plantations in New England was passed in November 1644. In 1645, both to conciliate the colonies and to encourage English shipping, the Long Parliament prohibited the shipment of whalebone, except in English language-built ships;[13] they later prohibited the importation of French vino, wool, and silk from France.[14] More than more often than not and significantly on 23 January 1647, they passed the Ordinance granting privileges for the encouragement of Adventurers to plantations in Virginia, Bermudas, Barbados, and other places of America; information technology enacted that for three years no consign duty exist levied on goods intended for the colonies, provided they were forwarded in English vessels.[ten] Adam Anderson noted that this law also included "security existence given hither, and certificates from thence, that the said goods be really exported thither, and for the but utilize of the said plantations". He ended: "Hereby the foundation was laid for the navigation acts after, which may be justly termed the Commercial Palladium of Britain."[15]

The English language were well enlightened of their junior competitive trading position. Three acts of the Rump Parliament in 1650 and 1651 are notable in the historical development of England's commercial and colonial programs. These include the first Commission of Trade to be established by an Act of Parliament on i August 1650, to accelerate and regulate the nation'due south trade.[16] The instructions to the named commissioners included consideration of both domestic and strange trade, the trading companies, manufacturers, free ports, customs, excise, statistics, coinage and exchange, and fisheries, but also the plantations and the best ways of promoting their welfare and rendering them useful to England. This act's statesmanlike and comprehensive instructions were followed past the Oct human action prohibiting trade with pro-royalist colonies and the beginning Navigation Human activity the post-obit October. These acts formed the showtime definitive expression of England's commercial policy. They represent the first attempt to establish a legitimate control of commercial and colonial affairs, and the instructions bespeak the beginnings of a policy which had the prosperity and wealth of England exclusively at center.[17] The 1650 Act prohibiting trade with royalist colonies was broader, withal, because it provided that all strange ships were prohibited from trading with whatever English plantations, without license, and it was made lawful to seize and brand prizes of any ships violating the act. This Human activity, sometimes referred to as the Navigation Deed of 1650, was hastily passed as a war measure during the English Civil Wars, but it was followed past a more than carefully conceived Act the post-obit year.[11]

Navigation Act 1651 [edit]

The Navigation Act 1651, long titled An Act for increase of Shipping, and Encouragement of the Navigation of this Nation, was passed on 9 October 1651[18] past the Rump Parliament led by Oliver Cromwell. It authorized the Democracy to regulate England's international trade, likewise as the trade with its colonies.[19] Information technology reinforced long-standing principles of national policy that English merchandise and fisheries should be carried in English vessels.

The Deed banned foreign ships from transporting goods from Asia, Africa or America to England or its colonies; only ships with an English language owner, master and a majority English language crew would exist accustomed. It allowed European ships to import their own products, but banned foreign ships from transporting appurtenances to England from a tertiary country elsewhere in the European sphere. The Act also prohibited the import and export of salted fish in foreign ships, and penalized foreign ships carrying fish and wares between English posts. Breaking the terms of the deed would result in the forfeiture of the transport and its cargo.[xx] These rules specifically targeted the Dutch, who controlled much of Europe'due south international trade and fifty-fifty much of England's littoral shipping. Information technology excluded the Dutch from essentially all directly trade with England, as the Dutch economy was competitive with, non complementary to the English, and the two countries, therefore, exchanged few commodities. This Anglo-Dutch trade, even so, constituted merely a small fraction of total Dutch trade flows.

Passage of the act was a reaction to the failure of the English diplomatic mission (led by Oliver St John and Walter Strickland) to The Hague seeking a political union of the Democracy with the Democracy of the Seven United Netherlands, after united states of america of Kingdom of the netherlands had made some cautious overtures to Cromwell to counter the monarchical aspirations of stadtholder William Ii of Orangish.[21] The stadtholder had suddenly died, notwithstanding, and u.s.a. were now embarrassed by Cromwell taking the idea too seriously. The English proposed the articulation conquest of all remaining Castilian and Portuguese possessions. England would accept America and the Dutch would take Africa and Asia. But the Dutch had merely ended their war with Espana and already taken over most Portuguese colonies in Asia, so they saw trivial advantage in this grandiose scheme and proposed a free trade agreement equally an alternative to a full political matrimony. This over again was unacceptable to the British, who would be unable to compete on such a level playing field, and was seen by them as a deliberate affront. The Human activity is frequently mentioned as a major cause of the First Anglo-Dutch War, and though there were others,[22] it was only function of a larger British policy to engage in war after the negotiations had failed. The English naval victories in 1653 (the Battles of Portland, the Gabbard and Scheveningen) showed the supremacy of the Commonwealth navy in home waters. However, farther afield the Dutch predominated and were able to close down English commerce in the Baltic and the Mediterranean. Both countries held each other in a stifling comprehend.[23]

The Treaty of Westminster (1654) ended the impasse. The Dutch failed to have the Act repealed or amended, but information technology seems to have had relatively little influence on their trade. The Act offered England just limited solace. It could non limit the deterioration of England'south overseas trading position, except in the cases where England herself was the principal consumer, such as the Canaries wine merchandise and the merchandise in Puglian olive oil. In the trade with America and the West Indies, the Dutch kept up a flourishing "smuggling" merchandise, thanks to the preference of English language planters for Dutch import appurtenances and the improve deal the Dutch offered in the sugar trade. The Dutch colony of New Netherlands offered a loophole (through intercolonial trade) wide plenty to drive a shipload of Virginian tobacco through.[24]

Post-restoration navigation acts to 1696 [edit]

Like all laws of the Commonwealth period, the 1651 act was declared void on the Restoration of Charles 2, having been passed by 'usurping powers'. Still, with benefits of the deed widely recognized, Parliament soon passed new legislation which enlarged its scope. While the act of 1651 applied merely to shipping, or the sea carrying business concern, the 1660 act was the almost important slice of commercial legislation equally it related to shipbuilding, to navigation, to trade,[xi] and to the do good of the merchant class.[25] The 1660 human action is generally considered to exist the ground of the "Navigation Acts", which (with later amendments, additions and exceptions) remained in force for near two centuries. The navigation acts entitled colonial aircraft and seamen to enjoy the full benefits of the otherwise exclusively English language provisions. "English language bottoms" included vessels built in English plantations, particularly in America. There were no restrictions put in the manner of English colonists who might wish to build or trade in their own ships to foreign plantations or other European countries too England, provided they did not violate the enumerated commodity clause.[26] Some of the nigh important products of colonial America, including grain of all sorts and the fisheries of New England, were always non-enumerated commodities.

Navigation Human activity 1660 [edit]

The Navigation Act 1660 (12 Cha. 2 c. 18), long-titled An Act for the Encourageing and increasing of Shipping and Navigation, was passed on 13 September by the Convention Parliament and confirmed by the Cavalier Parliament on 27 July 1661.[27] The act broadened and strengthened restrictions under Cromwell's earlier act. Colonial imports and exports were now restricted to ships "every bit doe truly and without fraud belong onely to the people of England ... or are of the built of and belonging to" any of the English possessions.[28] Additionally, ships' crews now had to exist 75% English, rather than just a majority, and ship captains were required to post a bond to ensure compliance and could recoup the funds upon arrival.[2] The penalty for non-compliance was the forfeiture of both the ship and its cargo. The deed provides that violations of the navigation act were to be tried in "any court of record," but information technology as well authorizes and strictly requires all commanders of ships of war to seize non-English language ships and deliver them to the Court of Admiralty.

The act specified seven colonial products, known as "enumerated" commodities or items, that were to be shipped from the colonies only to England or other English language colonies. These items were tropical or semi-tropical produce that could not be grown in the mother country, but were of higher economic value and used in English competitive manufacturing. The initial products included sugar, tobacco, cotton wool, indigo, ginger, fustic, or other dyeing woods. Previously only tobacco consign had been restricted to England. Additional enumerated items would be included in subsequent navigation acts, for example the cocoa bean was added in 1672, afterwards drinking chocolate became the style.[ citation needed ]

In a significant bow to English merchants and to the detriment of numerous foreign colonists, section two of the act alleged that "no alien or person non born within the fidelity of our sovereign lord the King, his heirs and successors, or naturalized or made a free citizen, shall... exercise the merchandise or occupation of a merchant or factor in any of the said places" (i.due east. lands, islands, plantations, or territories belonging to the King in Asia, Africa, or America), upon pain of forfeiting all goods and chattels.[ citation needed ]

Passage of the Navigation Act 1660 act was immediately followed by the Community Deed 1660 (12 Cha. 2 c. 19),[29] which established how the customs duties would be collected by the regime, as well as for subsidies (tunnage and poundage) for royal expenses. These acts of revenue, previously established under the Republic, were similarly reauthorized with the restoration. The 1660 customs act was tightened past the Customs Act 1662 (xiv Cha. 2 c. 11). It as well emphatically defines "Englishmen" under the Navigation Acts: "Whereas it is required by the [Navigation Act 1660] that in sundry cases the Chief and three-fourths of the Mariners are to be English, information technology is to be understood that any of His Majesty'southward Subjects of England, Ireland, and His Plantations are to be accounted English and no others."[30]

Other acts relating to merchandise were passed in the same session of Parliament and reiterated previous acts. These include the Exportation Act 1660 (12 Cha. II c. 32), which bans the export of wool and wool-processing materials,[31] and the Tobacco Planting and Sowing Act 1660 (12 Cha. Two c. 34), which prohibits growing tobacco in England and Ireland.[32] The old act was intended to encourage domestic woolen manufacturing by increasing the availability of domestic raw materials; the latter act was passed to limit contest with the colonies and protect the plantations' main crop, too as to protect this regulated royal revenue stream. With the kingdoms of England and Scotland nonetheless separate, passage of the English language act lead to the passage of a like navigation human activity by the Parliament of Scotland.[33] After the Act of Union 1707, Scottish ships, merchants, and mariners enjoyed the aforementioned privileges.

Navigation Act 1663 [edit]

The Navigation Act 1663 (15 Cha. two c.seven), long-titled An Act for the Encouragement of Trade, also termed the Encouragement of Trade Human action 1663 or the Staple Act, was passed on 27 July. This strengthening of the navigation system at present required all European goods, bound for America and other colonies, had to be trans-shipped through England first.[2] In England, the goods would be unloaded, inspected, canonical, duties paid, and finally, reloaded for the destination. This trade had to exist carried in English vessels ("bottoms") or those of its colonies. Furthermore, imports of the 'enumerated' commodities (such as tobacco and cotton wool) had to be landed and taxes paid earlier continuing to other countries. "England", equally used hither, includes Wales and Berwick-upon-Tweed, though those places were little involved in colonial trade. The mercantile purpose of the human activity was to make England the staple for all European products spring for the colonies, and to prevent the colonies from establishing an independent import trade.[34] This mandated change increased shipping times and costs, which in turn, increased the prices paid by the colonists. Due to these increases, some exemptions were immune; these included salt intended for the New England and Newfoundland fisheries, wine from Madeira and the Azores, and provisions, servants and horses from Scotland and Ireland.

The well-nigh important new legislation embedded in this Act, as seen from the perspective of the interests behind the East India Company,[ citation needed ] was the repeal of legislation which prohibited consign of coin and bullion from England overseas.[35] This export was the real issue behind the Human action,[ citation needed ] as silver was the master export commodity past the East Bharat Company into Bharat, exchanging the silver into cheap Indian gilded. This change had major implications for the East Republic of india Company, for England and for India. The majority of silver in England was exported to India, creating enormous profits for the individual participants, but depriving the Crown of England of necessary silver and revenue enhancement. Much of the silver exported was procured by English piracy directed against Spanish and Portuguese merchant ships bringing silver from their colonies in the Americas to Europe. It was later revealed that the Deed passed Parliament due to enormous bribes paid past the Due east Indian Company to diverse influential members of Parliament.[36]

An act tightening colonial merchandise legislation, and sometimes referred to as the Navigation Human activity 1670, is the Tobacco Planting and Plantation Trade Act 1670 (22 & 23 Cha. Ii c. 26).[37] This deed imposes forfeiture penalties of the send and cargo if enumerated commodities are shipped without a bail or customs certificate, or if shipped to countries other than England, or if ships unload sugar or enumerated products in whatsoever port except in England. The human activity requires the governors of American plantations to report annually to community in London a list of all ships loading any commodities at that place, as well equally a list of all bonds taken. The deed states that prosecutions for a breach of the navigation acts should be tried in the court of the high admiral of England, in whatsoever of the vice-admiralty courts, or in any court of record in England, but while the act again hints at the jurisdiction of the admiralty courts, it does not explicitly provide for them. In a move against Ireland, the act additionally repealed the ability of Republic of ireland (in the 1660 act) to obtain the necessary bail for products shipped to overseas colonies.[38] [39]

The specifically anti-Dutch aspects of the early on acts were in full strength for a relatively brusque time. During the Second Anglo-Dutch War the English language had to carelessness the Baltic trade and immune foreign ships to enter the coasting and plantation trade.[forty] Following the war, which ended disastrously for England, the Dutch obtained the right to ship commodities produced in their High german hinterland to England as if these were Dutch goods. Even more importantly, as England accepted the concept of neutrality, it conceded the principle of "complimentary ships make costless goods" which provided liberty from molestation by the Royal Navy of Dutch shipping on the high seas during wars in which the Dutch Democracy was neutral. This more or less gave the Dutch freedom to deport their "smuggling" unhindered as long as they were not caught scarlet-handed in territorial waters controlled by England. These provisions were reconfirmed in the Treaty of Westminster (1674) afterward the 3rd Anglo-Dutch War.[41]

Navigation Act 1673 [edit]

The so-chosen Navigation Act 1673 (25 Cha. two c.7), long-titled An Act for the incouragement of the Greeneland and Eastland Trades, and for the better secureing the Plantation Trade became enforceable at various dates in that year; the human action is brusque titled the Trade Deed 1672. The human activity was intended to increment English adequacy and product in the northern whale fishery (more accurately in Spitsbergen), as well as in the eastern Baltic and North Bounding main trade, where the Dutch and Hansa dominated commerce and trade. The act also closed a significant loophole in the enumerated goods trade as a result of the agile inter-colonial trade.[ commendation needed ]

To promote whaling and production of its oil and whalebone etc., the act relaxed the 1660 human action's restrictions on foreigners, allowing up to half the crew, if on English language ships, and dropped all duties on these products for the side by side ten years. It also immune foreign residents and foreigners to participate in this trade if imported to England in English language ships. Colonial ships and crews engaged in this trade had to pay a low duty, with foreign ships paying a high duty. To promote the eastern trade then monopolized by the chartered and poorly performing Eastland Company, the act opened their trade with Sweden, Denmark, and Norway to foreigners and English language alike. It also immune any Englishman to exist admitted into the Eastland Company on paying a pocket-size fee. The act was a mortal blow to Eastland's regal charter.[42]

To amend secure their ain plantation trade from considerable illegal indirect trade in enumerated products to Europe, by way of legal inter-colonial merchandise, the act instituted that customs duties and charges should be paid on departure from the colonies, if traveling without first obtaining the bond required to carry the appurtenances to England. The purpose of the act was to stop the carrying of plantation goods to another plantation with their subsequent shipment to a strange country on the grounds that the 1660 act's requirements had been fulfilled. This change was a considerable accelerate toward the systematic execution of the previous acts, and increased much needed purple revenue[11] given the recent Stop of the Exchequer. To amend collect the customs revenue the human action established that these were now to exist levied and collected past the Commissioners of Customs in England. Besides, if a transport arrived with insufficient funds to pay the duties, customs official could have an equivalent proportion of the appurtenances as payment instead.

Navigation Act 1696 [edit]

The then-chosen Navigation Act 1696 (7 & 8 Volition. iii c. 22), long-titled An Deed for preventing Frauds and regulating Abuses in the Plantation Trade, became effective over in the next few years, due to its far reaching provisions; the act is brusk-titled the Plantation Merchandise Act 1695. It contains new restrictions on colonial trade, and several different authoritative provisions to strengthen enforcement and consolidate the before acts.[43]

In tightening the wording of the 1660 act, and after noting the daily "corking abuses [being] committed ... by the bamboozlement and cunning of ill disposed persons", this human action now required that no goods or merchandise could exist imported, exported, or carried between English possessions in Africa, Asia and America, or shipped to England, Wales, or Berwick upon Tweed, except in "what is or shall bee of the Built of England or of the Built of Ireland or the said Colonies or Plantations and wholly owned by the People thereof ... and navigated with the Masters and 3-Fourths of the Mariners of the said Places onely". To enforce this change, the act required the registration of all ships and owners, including an oath that they have no foreign owners, before the ship would be considered English-built. Exceptions were introduced for foreign-built ships taken equally prize, or those employed by the navy for importing naval stores from the plantations. The deadline for the registration of ships was extended by the Registering of Ships Human activity 1697 (9 Will 3 c. 42)[44] In a significant tightening of the navigation enforcement system, section 6 of the deed establishes that violations are to exist tried in any of His Majesties Courts att Westminster or [in the Kingdome of Republic of ireland or in the Court of Admiralty held in His Majesties Plantations respectively where such Offence shall bee committed att the Pleasance of the Officer or Informer or in any other Plantation belonging to any Subject of England]...[45] Revenue generated was to be split in thirds between the King, the Governor, and the one who informed and sued.

Previously, most of the customs collection and enforcement in the colonies was performed by the governor or his appointees, usually known every bit the "naval officer," simply evasion, corruption and indifference were common. The 1696 act now required all electric current governors and officers to take an adjuration that all and every clause contained in the act be "punctually and bona fide observed according to the true intent and meaning". Governors nominated in the future were required to accept this oath earlier bold office. To tighten compliance amongst colonial customs officials, the act required that all current and future officers give a security bail to the Commissioners of the Customs in England to undertake the "true and faithfull operation of their duty". Additionally, the human action gave colonial customs officers the same ability and authority every bit of customs officers in England; these included the ability to board and search ships and warehouses, load and unload cargoes, and seize those imported or exported goods prohibited or those for which duties should have been paid under the acts. Commissioners of the treasury and of the customs in England would at present appoint the colonial customs officials. Due to colonial "doubts or misconstructions" concerning the bond required nether the 1660 act, the 1696 act now mandated that no enumerated goods could be loaded or shipped until the required bond was obtained.[46] The act was followed past a special educational activity most the oaths and proprietary governors who weren't directly under royal control to post a bond to comply; this was considered by the Board of Trade and issued on 26 May 1697.[47]

Since the colonies previously had passed much of their own legislation and appointments, the act included several sections to tighten English language control over the colonies more often than not. The human action mandated that all colonial positions of trust in the courts or related to the treasury must be native born subjects of England, Ireland or the colonies. It as well enacted that all laws, bylaws, usages or customs in current or hereafter use in the plantations, which are found to be repugnant to the navigation acts in any way, are to be declared illegal, null and void. The human action additionally declared that all persons or their heirs challenge any right or property "in any Islands or Tracts of Land upon the Continent of America past Charter or Messages Patent shall non in the future alienate, sell or dispose of any of the Islands, Tracts of Country, or Proprieties other than to the Natural Built-in Subjects of England, Ireland, Dominion of Wales or Town of Berwick upon Tweed without the License and Consent of His Majesty". Colonial-born subjects were non mentioned. Such a sale must be signified by a prior Society in Council.[ citation needed ]

With this human action the government did offset to constitute admiralty courts and staff them in more than and new places; this established "a more full general obedience to the Acts of Trade and Navigation." John Reeves, who wrote the handbook for the Board of Trade,[48] considered the 1696 human activity to be the last major navigation act, with relatively pocket-size subsequent acts. The system established past this act, and upon previous acts, was where the Navigation Acts all the same stood in 1792,[49] though there would be major policy changes followed by their reversals in the intervening years.

Navigation Acts 1696–1760 [edit]

Molasses Human action 1733 [edit]

The 1733 Molasses Act levied heavy duties on the merchandise of sugar from the French West Indies to the American colonies, forcing the colonists to buy the more expensive saccharide from the British West Indies instead. The police was widely flouted, but efforts by the British to prevent smuggling created hostility and contributed to the American Revolution. The Molasses Act was the get-go of the Sugar Acts. The Deed was set to expire in 1763, but in 1764 it was renewed as the Sugar Human action, which caused farther unrest amongst the colonists.

Repeal [edit]

The Navigation Acts were repealed in 1849 under the influence of a free trade philosophy. The Navigation Acts were passed under the economical theory of mercantilism, nether which wealth was to be increased by restricting colonial trade to the mother country rather than through gratuitous trade. By 1849 "a central office of British import strategy was to reduce the cost of food through inexpensive foreign imports and in this way to reduce the cost of maintaining labour power" (van Houten). Repealing the Navigation Acts along with the Corn Laws somewhen served this purpose (towards the end of the century).

Effects on Britain [edit]

The Acts caused Britain'south (before 1707, England's) aircraft industry to develop in isolation. However, information technology had the advantage to British shippers of severely limiting the ability of Dutch ships to participate in the carrying trade to Uk. By reserving British colonial trade to British aircraft, the Acts may accept significantly assisted in the growth of London as a major entry port for American colonial wares at the expense of Dutch cities. The maintenance of a sure level of merchant shipping and of merchandise generally as well facilitated a rapid increase in the size and quality of the Royal Navy, which eventually (afterward the Anglo-Dutch Alliance of 1689 limited the Dutch navy to three-fifths of the size of the English one) led to Britain condign a global superpower, which information technology remained until the mid-20th century. That naval might, however, never limited Dutch trading power – considering the Dutch enjoyed enough leverage over overseas markets and shipping resources (combined with a financial power that was only overtaken by United kingdom during the 18th century) to enable them to put enough pressure on Britain to prevent them from sustaining naval campaigns long enough to wrest maritime concessions from the Dutch.[fifty]

Effects on American colonies [edit]

The Navigation Acts, while enriching Britain, caused resentment in the colonies and contributed to the American Revolution. The Navigation Acts required all of a colony's imports to be either bought from United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland or resold past British merchants in Britain, regardless of the price obtainable elsewhere.

Historian Robert Thomas (1965) argues that the impact of the Acts on the economies of the Thirteen Colonies was minimal; the cost was about £4 per £1,000 of income per year. The average personal income was about £100 per year.[51] Nevertheless, Bribe (1968) says that although the net burden imposed by the Acts was small in size, their overall impact on the shape[ clarification needed ] and growth charge per unit of the economy was significant since the Acts differentially affected different groups, helping some and hurting others.[52]

Walton concludes that the political friction acquired by the Acts was more than serious than the negative economic impact, especially since the merchants most afflicted were politically the nearly active.[53] The Navigation Acts were also partially responsible for an increase in piracy during the late 17th and early 18th centuries: merchants and colonial officials would buy goods captured by pirates beneath market place value, and colonial Governors such every bit New York's Fletcher would commission privateers who openly admitted they intended to plough pirate.[54]

Sawers (1992) points out that the political issue is what would take been the hereafter affect of the Acts after 1776[ clarification needed ] equally the colonial economic system matured and was blocked by the Acts from serious competition with British manufacturers.[55] In 1995, a random survey of 178 members of the Economical History Clan found that 89 per centum of economists and historians would mostly agree that the "costs imposed on [American] colonists past the trade restrictions of the Navigation Acts were pocket-sized."[8]

Effect on Ireland [edit]

The acts were resented in Republic of ireland and damaged its economic system, as they permitted the importation of English goods into Ireland tariff-free and simultaneously imposed tariffs on Irish exports travelling in the opposite direction. Other clauses completely prohibited the exportation of certain goods to U.k. or even elsewhere, resulting in the plummet of those markets. The Wool Act 1699, for instance, forbade whatsoever exports of wool from Republic of ireland (and from the American Colonies) and then equally to maximise the English trade.

"Gratis merchandise or a Speedy Revolution" was a slogan of the Irish Volunteers in the late 18th century.

Notes [edit]

  1. ^ 5 Bevan, The Evolution of British Immigration Law (1986), p. 91
  2. ^ a b c Purvis, Thomas L. (1997). A dictionary of American history. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 278. ISBN978-i-57718-099-9.
  3. ^ Francis D. Cogliano, Revolutionary America, 1763-1815: A Political History, p. 23
  4. ^ Reeves 1792,pp. 274–277
  5. ^ Israel (1997), pp. 305–309
  6. ^ State of israel (1997), p. 309
  7. ^ Israel (1997), pp. 309–310
  8. ^ a b Whaples, Robert (March 1995). "Where Is There Consensus Among American Economic Historians? The Results of a Survey on 40 Propositions". The Journal of Economical History. 55 (1): 139–154. CiteSeerX10.1.i.482.4975. doi:10.1017/S0022050700040602. JSTOR 2123771.
  9. ^ "1498 – The letters patent of King Henry the Seventh Granted unto Iohn Cabot and his Three Sonnes, Lewis, Sebastian and Santius for the Discouerie of New and Unknowen Lands; March five"
  10. ^ a b c Charles McLean Andrews, Colonial Self-Government, 1652-1689, p. ten (1904)
  11. ^ a b c d east Chapter Three – The Commercial Policy of England Toward the American Colonies: the Acts of Merchandise [ dead link ] [ ISBN missing ], in Emory R. Johnson, T. W. Van Metre, Yard. G. Huebner, D. Due south. Hanchett, History of Domestic and Strange Commerce of the U.s.a. – Vol. one, Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1915.
  12. ^ Charles Chiliad. Andrews, British Committees, Commissions, and Councils of Trade and Plantations 1622-1675, 1908
  13. ^ 6 May 1645 Ordinance to prevent the importation by foreigners of whale oil, fins or gills, normally chosen whalebone.
  14. ^ 28 August 1649 Act prohibiting the importation of whatever Wines of the Growth of French republic, and all manufacturers of wool and silk fabricated in France.
  15. ^ Anderson 1787, p. 404
  16. ^ August 1650: An Act for the Advancing and Regulating of the Merchandise of this Commonwealth.
  17. ^ Charles M. Andrews, British Committees, Commissions and Councils of Trade and Plantations 1622-1675, Chapter Two, Command of Trade and Plantations During the Interregnum, p. 24 (1908)
  18. ^ Blair Worden (1977). The Rump Parliament 1648-53. Cambridge Up. p. 299. ISBN9780521292139.
  19. ^ Pestana, Carla Gardina (2004). The English language Atlantic in an Age of Revolution: 1640-1661. Cambridge, Massachusetts and London, England: Harvard University Press. p. 120.
  20. ^ October 1651: An Human action for increase of Shipping, and Encouragement of the Navigation of this Nation., in Acts and Ordinances of the Interregnum, 1642-1660, ed. C H Firth and R S Rait (London, 1911), pp. 559-562. British History Online [accessed 7 July 2018].
  21. ^ Godwin, William (1827). History of the Democracy of England Vol. 3. H. Colburn. pps.372-382.
  22. ^ Anderson, (1762), pp. 415–416
  23. ^ Israel (1997), p. 316
  24. ^ Israel (1997), pp. 310–311
  25. ^ Herbert Levi Osgood, The American colonies in the seventeenth century (3 vol 1904-07), pp. 207–209
  26. ^ Craven, p. 35
  27. ^ The Second Navigation Act 1660, via Annal.org
  28. ^ Navigation Act 1660, text
  29. ^ Charles II, 1660: An Act to prevent Fraudes and Concealments of His Majestyes Customes and Subsidyes.
  30. ^ An Human action for preventing Frauds and regulating Abuses in His Majesties Customes.
  31. ^ An Human activity for prohibiting the Exportation of Wooll Woolfells Fullers World or whatever kinde of Scouring Earth.
  32. ^ An Act for Prohibiting the Planting Setting or Sowing of Tobaccho in England and Ireland.
  33. ^ Reeves 1792, p. 57
  34. ^ Andrews, p. 19
  35. ^ Charles Ii, 1663: An Deed for the Encouragement of Trade
  36. ^ "Alexander del Mar (1836-1926)".
  37. ^ An Act to prevent the planting of Tobacco in England, and for regulateing the Plantation Merchandise.
  38. ^ Beer (1893), p. 129
  39. ^ Osgood 1907, p. 208ff
  40. ^ Reeves 1792, p. 276
  41. ^ Israel (1997), pp. 316–317
  42. ^ Anderson 1787, pp. 521–522
  43. ^ .Reeves 1792, pp. 81-91
  44. ^ An Act for enlarging the Fourth dimension for Registering of Ships pursuant to the Act for preventing Frauds and regulating Abuses in the Plantation Merchandise. A collection of the public full general statutes passed in the ... year of the reign of Her Majesty Queen Victoria, p. 385 (1867)
  45. ^ Brackets annexed to the original human action in a carve up schedule.
  46. ^ Hugh Edward Egerton, A short history of British colonial policy (1897), p. 114
  47. ^ Reeves 1792, p. xc
  48. ^ Dudley Odell McGovney, The Navigation Acts as Applied to European Trade, The American Historical Review Vol. 9, No. 4 (Jul., 1904), pp. 725–734
  49. ^ Reeves 1792, pp. 89–91
  50. ^ State of israel (1997), pp. 317–318
  51. ^ Thomas, Robert P. (1964). "A Quantitative Arroyo to the Study of the Effects of British Imperial Policy of Colonial Welfare: Some Preliminary Findings". Journal of Economic History. 25 (4): 615–638. doi:10.1017/S0022050700058460. JSTOR 2116133.
  52. ^ Ransom, Roger L. (1968). "British Policy and Colonial Growth: Some Implications of the Brunt from the Navigation Acts". Periodical of Economic History. 28 (iii): 427–35. doi:ten.1017/S0022050700073149. JSTOR 2116467.
  53. ^ Walton, Gary 1000. (1971). "The New Economic History and the Burdens of the Navigation Acts". Economic History Review. 24 (4): 533–542. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0289.1971.tb00192.ten.
  54. ^ Dow, George Francis; Edmonds, John Henry (1923). The Pirates of the New England Coast, 1630-1730. Salem MA: Marine Enquiry Society. pp. 16–17.
  55. ^ Sawers, Larry (1992). "The Navigation Acts revisited". Economic History Review. 45 (2): 262–284. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0289.1992.tb01301.x.

References [edit]

  • Anderson, Adam (1787). An historical and chronological deduction of the origin of commerce: from the earliest accounts...Vol.2. J.Walker.
  • Beer, George Louis (1893). The Commercial Policy of England toward the American Colonies. New York: Columbia College.
  • Craven, Wesley Frank (1968). The Colonies in Transition . New York, Harper & Row. On North America
  • Clapham, J. H. (1910). "The final years of the Navigation Acts". English Historical Review. 25 (99): 480–501. doi:10.1093/ehr/xxv.xcix.480. JSTOR 549885.
  • Dickerson, Oliver Morton (1951). The Navigation Acts and the American Revolution.
  • Egerton, Hugh Edward (1897). A Curt History of British Colonial Policy. London: London, Methuen & co.
  • Harper, Lawrence Averell (1959). The Consequence of the Navigation Acts on the Thirteen Colonies.
  • Harper, Lawrence Averell (1939). The English Navigation Laws: A Seventeenth‐Century Experiment in Social Technology.
  • Israel, J. I. (1997). "England'south Mercantilist Response to Dutch World Trade Primacy, 1647–74". Conflicts of Empires. Kingdom of spain, the Low Countries and the struggle for globe supremacy 1585–1713. Hambledon Press. pp. 305–318. ISBN978-1-85285-161-3.
  • Osgood, Herbert Fifty. (1907). The American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century, Vol. three. New York: The Macmillan company.
  • Reeves, John (1792). A History of the Law of Shipping and Navigation. Neat Great britain: Thomas Burnside.

Econometric studies [edit]

  • Loschky, David J. (1973). "Studies of the Navigation Acts: New Economic Not-History?". Economical History Review. 26 (4): 689–691. doi:10.2307/2593707. JSTOR 2593707.
  • Ransom, Roger 50. (1968). "British Policy and Colonial Growth: Some Implications of the Brunt from the Navigation Acts". Periodical of Economic History. 28 (3): 427–35. doi:x.1017/S0022050700073149. JSTOR 2116467.
  • Sawers, Larry (1992). "The Navigation Acts revisited". Economical History Review. 45 (2): 262–284. doi:x.1111/j.1468-0289.1992.tb01301.x.
  • Thomas, Robert P. (1964). "A Quantitative Approach to the Study of the Effects of British Royal Policy of Colonial Welfare: Some Preliminary Findings". Journal of Economical History. 25 (four): 615–638. doi:10.1017/S0022050700058460. JSTOR 2116133.
  • Walton, Gary M. (1971). "The New Economic History and the Burdens of the Navigation Acts". Economic History Review. 24 (iv): 533–542. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0289.1971.tb00192.x.

External links [edit]

  • Navigation Act 1651, British History online
  • Navigation Deed 1660, British History online
  • Navigation Act 1663, British History online
  • Navigation Act 1673, British History online
  • Navigation Act 1696, British History online

mccleanprisomany.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navigation_Acts

0 Response to "what is it called when great britain refused to enforce colonial trade laws"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel