The Quartering Act of 1765

Quartering Act passed at the same time as the Stamp Act.

Opposition to the Quartering Act in New York

The Quartering Act of 1765 was an addendum to that year's yearly Mutiny Act which governed the armed forces. The Mutiny Act of 1765 provided that Great Britain would provide barracks or public housing to its troops. The addendum required that the colonists pay for many of the expenses of the British troops living in the colonies, such as for food, housing, ammunition, firewood, beer, fuel, cooking items, etc. If there was not enough public housing available, then "inns, livery stables, ale houses, victualing houses, and the houses of sellers of wine and houses of persons selling of rum, brandy, strong water, cider or metheglin," could be confiscated and used. The Quartering Act was to be renewed every two years and in 1769, an addition was made that would provide other buildings such as barns, outhouses and uninhabited houses, if more space was needed for the troops. 

The problem was that all of these buildings were private property. It is a popular misconception that British troops were allowed to confiscate private homes as a result of the Quartering Act. Instead, they were allowed to use restaurants, inns, bars and the like, and barns and other buildings if necessary, but not homes. 

Of course, the colonists didn't like their private property being used against their will. Not only did the colonies have to provide the facilities, they had to pay for everything too, which is exactly why the colonists refused. 

The colonists were wary of standing armies which they believed could easily be turned into instruments of oppression. After the French and Indian War, which they did help to pay for, the colonists felt that a standing army was no longer necessary. They wanted the British troops to go back home. They believed they could take care of themselves if the Indians provided further threat.The colonists' response to the Quartering Act of 1765 

They also believed it was unjust to ask them to pay for the expenses of the British soldiers. They had no representatives in Parliament so they believed it was wrong for Parliament to pass any taxes on them. It was an age old principle of English law that taxation without representation was tyrannical. 

The Quartering Act forced them to pay a tax for providing for British troops... and they had no say in it. How was this any different from the Stamp Act, which they had recently rebelled against? And the idea that the government could take their inn or their barn and put people in it, without their say in the matter? All this just caused the colonists to stiffen their necks against England even more. 

Most of the colonies resisted the Quartering Act of 1765, but the resistance turned out to be strongest in New York. New York had passed a bill providing for the needs of the troops immediately after the French and Indian War, but as time went on and the peace prevailed, they began to have a change of mind. The reason for this was mostly because New York City had the largest and busiest port where more British soldiers were coming and going. This put a larger burden on the New York Assembly and the citizens of New York to pay for housing and feeding all of these troops than was experienced by the other colonies. The citizens reasoned that there was no threat any more and they didn't believe it was necessary to provide such a large standing army any longer. 

Parliament responded by passing the New York Restraining Act in July 1767, which suspended the Governor and the legislature from any further activities until they agreed to pay for the troops. New York merchants responded with a boycott of British goods.1500 troops arrived in New York City in January, 1766 and the New York Assembly refused to comply with the Act at all. There was no where for the troops to stay and they ended up staying on their own ships. There was great pressure on the Provincial Assembly from both sides and one colonist was killed when a riot broke out. 

The New York Restraining Act was never fully enforced though because the Assembly finally relented and agreed to pay for some of the expenses, though not all. In doing so, the New York Assembly still did not recognize Parliament's authority to tax because they didn't even mention the Quartering Act in their bill. They merely passed a bill providing some expenses for the troops. They also put out a statement declaring that Parliament had no authority to suspend their legislature.