To what extent was salutary neglect responsible for increasing colonial resistance to imperial power

Beginning with the foundation of Jamestown in 1607, Britain lacked a true policy of economic control over their colonies in America.  Instead English parliament operated under the guidelines of mercantilism throughout the 16th and 17th centuries. Mercantilism was an economic policy designed to take advantage of the natural resources, raw materials, and the collection of gold and silver of colonized lands in order to consolidate economic power and wealth for the home country.  While mercantilist policies vary by country, the basic premise is to collect gold and silver, import raw materials while exporting finished goods, and regulate the trade of your colonies goods to the home country in order to maximize their benefits.

While mercantilist policies vary by country, the basic premise is to collect gold and silver, import raw materials while exporting finished goods, and regulate the trade of your colonies goods to the home country in order to maximize their benefits.

England developed an official trade policy concerning North America in 1651 with the passage of the Navigation Acts. The Navigation Acts were some of the first parliamentary laws to more strictly regulate trade with the American colonies. Originally aimed at controlling the influence of competing European influence, cutting down on colonial smuggling, and tightening control over its imperialistic ventures, the Navigation Acts served as a protection of British business interests in North America. European competition from the French, Dutch, and Spanish challenged English opportunities on the continent. Colonial goods of sugar, indigo, rice, and tobacco were specifically targeted under the series of Navigation Acts due to their popularity and profitability to the mother country.  However, despite passing the Navigation Acts the British government rarely enforced these regulations resulting in a period of time known as ‘salutary neglect’.

Despite passing the Navigation Acts the British government rarely enforced these regulations resulting in a period of time known as ‘salutary neglect’.

Salutary neglect was an unofficial policy of non-enforcement of the trade regulations passed by British Parliament. Along with the economic freedoms experienced by merchants came access to greater political freedoms through the development of local legislatures. This was done with the long term goal of controlling the imperial colonies in America through granting access to limited freedoms. British Prime Minister Robert Walpole (1721-1742) believed the American colonies should be let alone to export raw materials and import various manufactured goods from England. American goods such as timber, fish, tobacco, and rice were highly valuable to England and Warpole believed that American merchants should be free to export raw materials to England for needed finished products. Warpole believed that a certain degree of non-intervention was necessary to ensure the cooperation and obedience of colonists much to the benefit of England.  If the colonist believed that they were able to practice some level of self-determination, then it would serve to keep them more loyal to the crown. Unlike those that may see the crown as being too authoritarian in their governance of the colonies.

However, the policy of ‘salutary neglect’ was seen as a necessary way of easing the fears of colonial merchants who were themselves afraid of royal overreach and looking to maximize economic opportunities.

Though often avoided due to increased smuggling and non-compliance, the regulations imposed by the Navigation Acts became increasingly important to the economic strength and stability of the British Empire because of the access to raw materials found in North America; resources desperately needed in England.  However, the policy of ‘salutary neglect’ was seen as a necessary way of easing the fears of colonial merchants who were themselves afraid of royal overreach and looking to maximize economic opportunities.  Salutary neglect was essential in allowing merchants to independently and freely determine the path of their businesses, which in turn kept them satisfied.

Salutary neglect was essential in allowing merchants to independently and freely determine the path of their businesses, which in turn kept them satisfied.

During this era the colonists began to sow the seeds of economic and governmental self-determination that would eventually set the stage for the American Revolution. Local colonial assemblies formed throughout America. The House of Burgess in Virginia, Delegates in Maryland, or Representatives in Massachusetts were chosen by popular votes. Access to the right to vote was often time restricted to land holding whites, but there was elected representatives none the less. Determining local political and economic policy due to the absence of British influence thanks to salutary neglect shaped American beliefs in self-rule and self-governance.

Following the events of the French and Indian War (1754-1763) the British Empire was left in tremendous financial debt and the continuing practice of salutary neglect was no longer an option.

More frequent conflicts with local Indian tribes due to the colonists’ efforts to push west in an attempt to acquire more land once again put Berkeley at odds with Bacon and his followers. Conflicts with local tribes were expensive and destructive and didn’t support the policies of the emerging planter elite who made up Berkeley’s base of power in Virginia. The established wealthy planters wanted to protect their interests by restricting access to land that would allow for the creation of forced labor camps to rival their own. Bacon and his followers saw these actions as corrupt because Berkeley did not allow them to pursue their own economic interests as others maintained a stranglehold on the tobacco profits.

The established wealthy planters wanted to protect their interests by restricting access to land that would allow for the creation of forced labor camps to rival their own.

Bacon and his followers saw these actions as corrupt.

Bacon and his followers levied charges of political corruption against both Governor Berkeley and the House of Burgesses. These charges ultimately led to a battle for political control between the two strong-willed men. Bacon wanted swift and harsh action to be taken against the native tribes for their attacks on local settlements which Berkeley refused. Berkeley urged for a more cooperative relationship with the natives and a restriction of expansion plans by those in the west. Neither of those options was satisfactory to Bacon and simply furthered the divide between the two men.

By 1670, the Virginia House of Burgesses had restricted the vote of landless free white men who now made up more than half of the population in an effort to quell the growing voices of dissent.

Policy of avoiding strict enforcement of trade laws

Not to be confused with benign neglect, an urban planning policy.

In American history, salutary neglect was the policy of the British Crown of avoiding strict enforcement of parliamentary laws, especially trade laws, as long as British colonies remained loyal to the government of, and contributed to the economic growth of their parent country, England and then Great Britain after the Acts of Union 1707, in the 18th century.

Up to the end of the 17th century, mercantile ideas were gaining force in England and giving general shape to trade policy through a series of Navigation Acts. After the collapse of the centralized Dominion of New England in 1689 to 1763, salutary neglect was employed. After 1763, Britain began to try to enforce stricter rules and more direct management, leading eventually to the American Revolutionary War.[1][2]

Origins

The colonies had a certain level of autonomy early on. During the Establishment of the Dominion of New England which was implemented in part to enforce the Navigation Acts, administration was centralized and the colonies were presided over by the very unpopular Edmund Andros. After the Glorious Revolution, the 1689 Boston revolt[1] and the removal of Andros, the colonies were able to return to an informal state of local ruling bodies insulated by certain boundaries from England.[3] The policy was later formalised by Robert Walpole after he took the position of Lord Commissioner of the Treasury in 1721, working with Thomas Pelham-Holles, 1st Duke of Newcastle. In an effort to increase tax income, Walpole laxed the enforcement of trade laws and decreased regulations, stating: “if no restrictions were placed on the colonies, they would flourish”.[1]

Walpole did not believe in enforcing the Navigation Acts, established under Oliver Cromwell and Charles II, which required goods traded between the United Kingdom and her colonies had to be carried on English ships, as part of the larger economic strategy of mercantilism.[1][2]

The policy went unnamed until the term was coined in Edmund Burke's "Speech on Conciliation with America", given in the House of Commons on March 22 1775. The speech praised the governance of the British America, which "through a wise and salutary neglect", achieved great commercial success.[4][5]

Effects

The policy succeeded in increasing money flow from the colonies to Britain. The lack of enforcement of trading laws meant American merchants profited from illegal trading with French possessions in the Caribbean, which Britain prospered from in turn as American merchants purchased more British goods.[4]

The laissez-faire nature of the policy led to the colonies being de facto independent. The policy helped develop a sense of independence and self-sufficiency and enabled colonial assemblies to wield significant power over the royally appointed governors through their control of colony finances.[1] Additionally, Walpole's willingness to fill the unpopular colonial offices with friends and political allies led to an ineffective king's authority overseas.[4][2]

End of policy

From 1763 Britain began to try to enforce stricter rules and more direct management, driven in part by the outcome of the Seven Years' War in which Britain had gained large swathes of new territory in North America at the Treaty of Paris. The war meant that Britain had accrued large debts and it was decided to deploy troops in the colonies to defend them from continued threats from France.[1]

Prime Minister George Grenville thus proposed additional taxes supplementing the Navigation Acts known as the Grenville Acts: the Sugar Act 1764, the Currency Act 1764 and, the Stamp Act 1765 all aimed at increasing authority in and revenue from the colonies. These were unpopular in the colonies, leading to the Stamp Act riots in August 1765 and the Boston Massacre in March 1770. The Grenville Acts, as well as the Intolerable Acts, were defining factors that led to the American Revolutionary War.[1]

Deliberateness of policy

To what extent "salutary neglect" constituted an actual neglect of colonial affairs, as the name suggests, versus a conscious policy of the British government, is controversial among historians, and also varies with national perspective. While Americans may side with Burke on the "salutary" effect of this policy, emphasizing the economic and social development of the colonies, it was from a British imperial perspective a momentous failure, and debate remains as to its true social, economic, and political effects.

The Board of Trade, which enforced mercantilist legislation in the United Kingdom, was too weak to enforce its own laws until 1748. Thomas Pelham-Holles, 1st Duke of Newcastle, became the relevant Secretary of State in 1724, but took time to learn the duties of his office, and even after that he was not firm in his action, causing historian James Henretta to blame salutary neglect on "administrative inefficiency, financial stringency, and political incompetence".[1]

References

1. ^ a b c d e f g h "What Was the British Policy of Salutary Neglect?". historyofmassachusetts.org. Retrieved 2020-02-09.
2. ^ a b c "salutary neglect | Definition, Significance, & Facts". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 2020-02-09.
3. ^ Chet, Guy (2019). The Colonists' American Revolution. p. 53.
4. ^ a b c "Salutary Neglect". www.encyclopediavirginia.org. Retrieved 2020-02-09.
5. ^ "Burke's Speech, by Edmond Burke". www.gutenberg.org. Retrieved 2020-02-09.
6. ^ Burke, Edmund (1834). The Works of the Right Hon. Edmund Burke: With a Biographical and Critical Introduction, and Portrait After Sir Joshua Reynolds. Holdsworth and Ball. p. 186.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salutary_neglect&oldid=1125167261"