Freeborn Englishmen:
The Constitutional Debate


The American colonists in the 1760s drew on a rich political heritage from their English forebears. The English Civil War and subsequent constitutional struggles of the seventeenth century were important parts of the colonists' political memory. Enshrined in the English Bill of Rights (1689), following the Glorious Revolution, were the rights and guarantees that the colonists, as Englishmen, considered their own.

The Glorious Revolution, which brought William and Mary to the English throne, also began a long period of enmity between England and France-- a rivalry that was played out in several conflicts from 1689 to 1763. The last of these, the Seven Years' War (1754-1763), saw much of the major fighting in North America. Colonists took part, some willingly, some less so. Overall, the result of the war was the acension of England to world-power status, a victory in which the colonists shared and which enhanced their own self-image as freeborn Englishmen.

Despite the great victory, however, England after the Seven Years War faced a number of problems. Foremost among them was a financial crisis stemming from the cost of the war. A closely related concern was the acquistion of vast territories from France that had to be administered. As a solution to these twin problems, the British ministry embarked upon a policy of tighter controls over the Americans

An early signal of the shift in British policy toward closer control was the Proclamation of 1763, issued by King George III in October. The proclamation closed most of the vast new territories gained from France to colonial settlers unless special licenses were purchased.

Americans repeatedly phrased their opposition to these British regulations in terms of a defense of the rights and liberties of Englishmen. In 1775 the New York Association, a group of merchants and civic leaders, wrote London's Lord Mayor and Corporation. Eager to avoid further turmoil, they pledged their loyalty to the King while arguing that imperial policy ran counter to the traditions of English freedom prized in New York no less than in London.

One of the major differences between the American and British conceptions of representation was the colonial instructing their representatives. Daniel Dulany and James Otis asserted this distinction in their replies to British officials trying to justify the Stamp Act.


Back