Britain imposed the Tea Act on its colonies in order to prevent the East India Company from sinking into bankruptcy. It essentially allowed the East India company to monopolize all tea trade. Once the colonists of Boston performed the Boston Tea Party, Britain instantly retaliated with the Coercive Acts, or the Intolerable Acts, which limited the rights of Boston. England’s monarchy controlled the rebellion, but the action eventually backfired because it galvanized the colonists even more, ultimately leading to their independence.
In France, which also had monarchy, had a rebellion called the Great Fear. The Great Fear occurred in response to King Louis XVI’s limitations on the National Assembly. Peasants in the countryside began to ransack manors, stand up to their masters, and burn the contracts that outlined their duties. However, on August 4, 1789, the duke of Aiguillon, one of France’s greatest noble landowners, destroyed the nobles’ privileges, eliminated feudal duties, and enforced equality in taxation. However, the duke of Aiguillon, though he consented to the people’s wishes, was not weak and submissive. In fact, his courageous actions saved the monarchy from even stronger rebellion. If he had sent troops to subdue the people, the repercussions would have been even more violent and crazed, as was the case after the Boston Tea Party.
Overall, though England and France were essentially run the same way, as monarchies, they dealt with two crucial oppositions in completely different ways. These two situations show the fundamental differences between England and France. England’s reaction led to further violence. England made no attempts to compromise with the colonies, such as adopting actual representation or giving people more rights. While they withdrew certain taxes, such as the Stamp Act, they did not make attempts to alter their political philosophy at all. Therefore, the repeals of various acts were only superficial attempts to create peace. On the contrary, France’s reaction delayed violent acts, because the duke of Aiguillon gave the commoners more rights and took away noble privileges, even though he himself was a noble. While France had a much more bloody revolution, the monarchy of France attempted to correct its flaws and become a better government. For example, King Louis XVII actually supported the National Assembly at first for he urged reforms and forced all three estates to meet as one body so that discussion could be facilitated easier. While he cracked down on the assembly later (of course, France’s monarchy made some significant errors which resulted in revolution; they were by no means a perfect nation), the intentions of France were more well-meaning. In all, though England and France were politically similar, but the way they handled opposition ultimately affected their revolutions and relationships with the people.
