Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump · ¶177

More importantly still, whatever the views in Britain may have been, American revolutionaries hardly shared some universal conviction that all manner of tariffs were a matter of the King's prerogative, or even something Parliament, lacking colonial representatives, could freely impose on them. Though in the mid-1760s some colonists distinguished between “ `internal' ” and “ `external' taxation” and “conceded [Parliament's] right to raise revenue through duties on trade,” “the inadequacy of [that] much overstrained distinction” soon “became obvious.” B. Bailyn, The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution 212–213, 215 (1967). Illustrative of the point, John Dickinson came to “repudiat[e]” the distinction “fatly and formally” in his Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania, id., at 215, contending instead that laws aimed at raising revenue, but enacted without representation, were…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.