Video
Grievance #21 of the Declaration of Independence
Watch
Founding Principles
About this video
What happens when a government rewrites the rules without your consent?
In Grievance #21 of the Declaration of Independence, Kelsa Pelletiere, PhD Candidate at the University of Mississippi, explains why colonists were furious when Britain altered colonial governments and revoked key charter rights.
Colonial charters acted like agreements between the colonies and the British Crown, helping define how colonial governments operated and what rights colonists expected to have.
But in 1774, Parliament passed the Massachusetts Government Act and changed those rules unilaterally, without colonial approval.
For colonists, this violated a core principle of self-government: the consent of the governed. If Britain could change colonial governments whenever it wanted, then colonial rights and representation were never truly secure.
This grievance reflected a growing fear that Britain was no longer governing with consent, but through direct control.
This is Part 21 of our 27-part series breaking down every grievance that led to the American Revolution, building toward Independence Day.
0:00 For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our government. To get to the heart of this grievance from the Declaration of Independence, we have to go back to the earliest days of settlement for the American colonies. Colonial charters were the documents that served as contractual agreements between settling groups in the North American colonies
0:21 and British Imperial authority. The Massachusetts Bay colonial charter had been signed in 1629 to establish the Massachusetts Bay Colony on behalf of the British Crown. In 1691, however, following the Glorious Revolution and the installation of William and Mary on the British throne, a new Massachusetts colonial charter redefined their relationship with the British Crown
0:42 under a new system. Among other changes, the new charter exchanged religious requirements for property requirements for access to the vote. This didn’t establish a broad democracy in the modern sense that we are familiar with today, but it did create a society that was freed from some of the religious establishment that had previously been in place. In 1774,
1:03 though, the British Parliament passed the Massachusetts Government Act, making unilateral changes to the charter, meaning only one side got a say in the adjustment. This directly challenged one of the fundamental principles of just government, the consent of the governed. According to that principle, the power of government comes from the people. Any
1:24 violation of that flow of power was a sign of unjust government, which is exactly the charge of the colonists in this particular grievance.
Standards
Related Resources
What if you didn’t get a jury at your trial? In Grievance 18 of the Declaration of Independence, Chris Canty, student at George Washington University, explains how colonists were denied the right to trial by jury in certain cases. Instead, cases like smuggling were sent to admiralty courts, where a single judge decided the outcome. No jury. No peers. Just a ruling from a magistrate. For colonists, this was a serious violation of their rights. Trial by jury had been a core part of English law since the Magna Carta, and losing it felt like losing a key protection against government power. This wasn’t just about one case or one court. It was about a bigger issue: if the government can control the courts, can it also control justice?
What if you could be arrested and sent away without even seeing a judge? In Grievance 19 of the Declaration of Independence, Garrett Jones, Postdoc Fellow at the Thomas Jefferson Center at University of Texas at Austin, explains how colonists were detained and transported far from home without due process. This violated a key legal protection known as habeas corpus, the right to appear before a judge and hear the charges against you. Rooted in traditions going back to the Magna Carta, this right was meant to protect individuals from arbitrary imprisonment. For colonists, losing that protection was a serious warning sign. If the government could detain people without explanation and move them far away, it meant basic legal rights were no longer secure. This grievance highlights a tension that still exists today: how to balance liberty and security, especially during times of conflict. This is Part 19 of our 27-part series breaking down every grievance that led to the American Revolution, building toward Independence Day.
Why were colonists so alarmed by a law passed in Canada? In Grievance #20 of the Declaration of Independence, Dallas Terry from the Kinder Institute at the University of Missouri explains why the Quebec Act of 1774 deeply worried many Americans. The act expanded Quebec’s territory, replaced English common law with French civil law, and created a government that colonists believed lacked meaningful representation. For many Americans, the biggest issue was proximity. Arbitrary government felt far more dangerous when it existed right next door. Colonial leaders feared that if Parliament could establish this kind of system in Quebec, similar policies could eventually spread into the American colonies themselves. The grievance also reflected anxieties over westward expansion, political power, and the future direction of liberty in North America. This is Part 20 of our 27-part series breaking down every grievance that led to the American Revolution, building toward Independence Day.
Primary sources, videos, essays, lessons, and more about what led to the Declaration of Independence
What were the grievances laid out in the Declaration of Independence? Help students define each grievance through modern song lyrics in our interactive quiz leading up to Constitution Day. This Constitution Day, BRI is highlighting the years between the signing of the Declaration of Independence in 1776 and the Constitution in 1787.