Want this question answered?
read the declaration on independence
Yes, "the king's rights" = "the rights of the king" (the rights of one king).
I'm not sure which "Prince Charles" you're referring to in conjunction with Elizabeth I. Elizabeth I was at one time in negotiations to marry Charles II of Austria, but he was an Archduke, not a Prince. There weren't any close relations of Elizabeth I'm aware of named Charles who would have been viable candidates for the throne ... her cousin James V's brother-in-law was named Charles, but again wasn't a Prince, wasn't in line for the throne, and wasn't even English. He was also a Roman Catholic Cardinal, which presented an even bigger problem than all the above. Neither of them were divorced, anyway.I'm guessing you mean Elizabeth II, who does have a son Charles who is the Heir Apparent. There's no evidence I'm aware of that Elizabeth has any plans for anyone other than Charles to become King when she dies.It may be that you've heard rumors that the next King of England will be George VII. This is possible and perhaps even likely, but not because Elizabeth has disinherited Charles: Prince Charles' full name is Charles Philip Arthur George. Charles I and II were ... unpopular (Charles I was beheaded, and Charles II was rather scandalous, having acknowledged a dozen illegitimate children by seven different mistresses). Philip as a regnal name is more associated with Spain and France, with whom the English haven't always seen eye-to-eye (In particular Philip II of Spain, whose Spanish Armada was defeated by the English), so that's probably out. Arthur has its own problems, and it can't help that one of the most famous works about King Arthur is entitled the Death of Arthur (Charles is already the oldest heir apparent in English history and may not outlive his mother by much). That leaves George, which has a great deal to recommend it: Charles' grandfather, Albert Frederick Arthur George, used his own last given name when he took the throne as George VI and was fairly popular, as was his own father George V.
Assent means "agreement." In this case, Jefferson was asserting that King George III was refusing his agreement with, or giving the okay to, laws that the Colonies had passed, most of which were to benefit the general welfare of the colonial population.
if you lie to a king the punishment is "death"
It happened in Philadelphia on September through October of 1774 when the colonists got irritated with King George's Coercive/Intolerable acts.
The Coercive Acts:· lso known as the intolerable acts or restraining acts, were enforced in the colonies in 1774 from England under the rule of King George III.· These acts are a combination of the following: Boston Port Act, Quartering Act, Admin of Justice Act, and the Massachusetts Act.· With the main port closed, colonies like NY losing gov. power, and the quartering act taking away rights of landowners, the acts urged the colonies to gather and assemble the first continental congress.
1774 by King George III
The Coercive acts
The king did that after the Boston Tea Party. There was no law. A king doesn't need a law he does what he wants.
The Coercive Acts were what prompted colonists to hold the First Continental Congress. The First Continental Congress met on September 5, 1774.
What is the Intolerable Acts? A series of laws that parliament passed to punish the Massachusetts colonies for the Boston Tea Party. When did this event take place? 1774 Fact: The Intolerable Acts were first known as the Coercive Acts but were so harsh that people called it what its called today. What Happened? The colonies were pressed with greater taxes without any representation in Britain. This eventually led to the Boston Tea Party. Then the British passed several punitive acts aimed at bringing the colonies back into submission of the King. What did they do to the Massachusetts colonies? They took away many of its rights of self-government. Almost all positions in the colonial government were to be appointment by the governor or directly by the King. Activities of town meetings were limited.
Coercive acts
The British responded to the Boston Tea Party by making the Intolerable Acts which closed the Boston Ports and destroyed the Massachusetts government. King George the Third passed the intolerable acts because he as well as parliament saw it as a criminal action.
One of the Coercive Acts of 1774, the Boston Port Act, closed Boston Harbor until the East India Company could be compensated for its cargo lost in the Boston Tea Party (1873). However, of greater impact was that the Massachusetts Government Act placed all appointments to positions in the colonial government in the hands of the colonial governor or the king.
because they had no say in laws they were forced to obey
King George does not take well to the Boston tea party, and created the Coercive Acts (Intolerable Acts). This closed down the Boston harbor, forbid all town meetings, and gave the British troops the right to knock on a colonist's door, and stay in the colonist's home.