*** Index * < Previous page * Next page > ***
Magnitude of this war was on a scale as such that no man had ever
seen before. The numbers of troops assembled were in numbers larger than
ever seen. The territory that was fought over was more than the Rhineland
it was a broad expanse of territory that not only engulfed North America
but also the world. Quarrels over the Ohio River Valley were the
forerunning and immediate cause of the
French and Indian war. The underlying cause
of the war was a period of more than 100 years of rivalry. The rivalry in
which a scratch or poke can easily turn in to an all out brawl eventually
leading to a severe break in relations between French and Britain. The
strengths of Britain over France might have been thought to be overwhelming
but they actually are not. Although the British resources of money and men
(militarily speaking) was seemingly endless the British did not have an
impeccable image. The French were outnumbered severely in population size,
but the networks of forts that they had built up, as well as the small army
that was already in place, did move the French to earlier easy victories.
French troops received orders easily from a central government and little
confusion provided for great efficiency. Many times British orders were
delayed or out dated by the long travel across the Atlantic from Britain.
The lack of a government contributed to some of the anarchy during the
French and Indian War (Notes 86).
While the Albany
Plan of Union was a promising plan, its disapproval by the colonies for
being too strong quickly made an easy solution of some governmental
problems virtually impossible. The success of both Britain and the
colonies was depending on a very shoddy plan of war. The assumption on
anyone�s part that this victory would be one sided was simply refuted in
the first months of the war. The defeat of
Washington at Fort
Necessity show
the hubris that the British may be starting to develop. The beliefs of the
colonials that as long as the Redcoats were here that they were safe may be
viewed as anything but true. Colonials welcomed the Redcoats with open
arms but soon realized that they weren�t as magnificent and noteworthy as
they were played up to be. The disappointment of the colonials was due to
the simple fact that the Redcoats fought a European war not a new style war
that limited success and sometimes determined failure.
The cost of the war in both men and dollars was great to England. About 10,000 British troops were needed for the defense of North America after the war, costing approximately thirty-five hundred thousand pounds a year (Hafstadter 76). Many colonials were not welcoming the change, and voiced their opinions as such. Officials in New Jersey stated that America could fend for themselves. In Massachusetts one man declared �sending troops to defend America . . . has great appearance of care over but really is as absurd as it is needless (Jennings 463).� Multitudes of people became unhappy and were subordinated by soldiers scourging their tongues at the colonials (Jennings 464). There was also the exorbitant cost of the war that was estimated at about two and a half million pounds (Hafstadter 76). Although the war was fought on many fronts a large portion of it was fought in the Americas, and therefore the British government thought that the colonials should pay their fair share of the cost. The severe debt though was of little concern compared to the thirty-five hundred thousand pounds it would cost to supply and train 10,000 troops for the protection of the colonies. �Facing heavy costs of supporting a standing army in the North American colonies, Britain hoped to shift some of the fiscal burden onto the colonists by imposing a series of taxes without consulting colonial governments (Eliot).� The debt of war was mostly paid for by taxes from in England itself.
*** Index * < Previous page * Next page > ***