222 HESITANCY OF GRENVILLE. sisted upon their paying revenue, they would suggest some other method of payment. He would then adopt whatever form the colonists suggested, and thus avoid all further trouble. He said, “If they think any other mode of taxation more convenient to them, and make any proposition of equal efficacy with the stamp duty, I will give it all due consideration." But he resolved that they should pay a revenue to the home government in some shape or form, saying, " if you object to the Americans being taxed by Parliament, save yourself the trouble of discussion, for I am determined on the measure."** According to Botta, many people in England, and undoubtedly the agents of the colonies themselves, attributed this hesitation on Grenville's part to a desire to conciliate the colonists, but the Americans were all agreed in the supposi tion that Grenville's actions were an interested charity. For no matter how civilly he requested the colonists to bring forth their ideas as to the method of levying the taxes, they knew that he would exact to a penny the entire sum he desired; and they thought his attitude that of an accomplished robber. It was known that the sum he desired to raise from the colonists was £300,000 sterling a year. None of the agents of the colonies had been authorized to comply with the demands of Grenville, and only two had declared that Bancroft, vol. iii., p. 74. their provinces were willing and ready to bear their portion of the duty on stamps. Therefore, when the minister received no proposal from the colonies regarding the best method of taxing them, he resolved to impose the tax in his own way. Few of the members of Parliament cared for America, and the majority of them probably knew little of the colonists. All they knew or cared about was that a new source of revenue be opened to the government. On one side it was contended that taxation and representation are inseparable. Those who objected to the Stamp Act declared that its imposition would not only be impractical, but also impolitic and unjust, and was an act to which the Americans would not submit. The ministry claimed that the Americans were as much represented as the majority of the English taxpayers, who themselves enjoyed no vote. They said that the right to tax the colonies was derived from the expense of governing them, and that the colonies must be either entirely dependent upon or entirely separate from England. They pointed out that the Americans were inconsistent in allowing a duty to be placed on their exports while refusing to submit to a duty on stamps, also declaiming upon the various advantages which the colonies would derive from their connection with the mother country.* Burke, in speaking of the right of taxation, said: "It is less than nothing in my consideration. * My consideration is narrow, confined, * * BARRE'S SPEECH; STAMP ACT BECOMES LAW. Charles Townshend, one of the ministers, propounded this inquiry: "And now, will these American children, planted by our care, nourished up to strength and opulence by our indulgence, and protected by our arms, grudge to contribute their mite to relieve us from the heavy burden under which we lie?" To this question, Colonel Isaac Barré arose to make answer as follows: "CHILDREN PLANTED BY YOUR CARE! No; your oppression planted them in America; they fled from your tyranny into a then uncultivated land where they were exposed to almost all the hardships to which human nature is liable, and, among others, to the savage cruelty of the enemy of the country a people most subtle, and, I take upon me to say, the most truly terrible of any people that ever inhabited any part of God's earth; and yet, actuated by principles of true English liberty, they met all these hardships with pleasure, compared with those they suffered in their own country, from the hands of those who should have been their friends. "THEY NOURISHED UP BY YOUR INDULGENCE! They grew by your neglect of them. As soon as you began to care about them, that care was exercised in sending persons to rule over them, in one department and another, who were, perhaps, the and wholly limited to the policy of the question. with me is not whether you have a right to render * Bancroft, vol. iii., p. 100. . 223 deputies of some deputy of members of this House, sent to spy out their liberty, to misrepresent their actions, and to prey upon them men whose behavior, on many occasions has caused the blood of those Sons of Liberty to recoil within them - men promoted to the highest seats of justice; some, to my knowledge, were glad, by going to foreign countries to escape being brought to a bar of justice in their own. "THEY PROTECTED BY YOUR ARMS! They have nobly taken up arms in your defence, have exerted their valor amidst their constant and laborious industry for the defence of a country whose frontiers, while drenched in blood, its interior parts have yielded all its little savings to your enlargement; and BELIEVE ME REMEMBER, I THIS DAY TOLD YOU SO,-that the same spirit which actuated the people at first, will continue with them still;- but prudence forbids me to explain myself any further. GOD KNOWS, I do not at this time speak from motives of party heat. What I deliver are the genuine sentiments of my heart; however superior to me in general know!edge and experience the respectable body of this House may be, yet I claim to know more of America than most of you, having seen and been conversant in that country. The People there are as truly loyal, I believe, as any subjects the king has, but a people jealous of their liberties, and who will vindicate them, if they should be violated. But the subject is too delicate I will say no more." * In spite of Barré's eloquence, however, the bill was passed by a vote of 245 to 49, and as there was no opposition in the House of Lords, the king gave his royal assent to the act March 22, 1765, and thereupon the Stamp Act became law.† Barré's eloquent address had been heard by an Ameri * There are many versions of the exact wording of this speech. We have followed Frothingham in his Rise of the Republic, pp. 175–176, footnote, he copying the version that first appeared in the Boston Post and Advertiser of May 17, 1765. A different version is given in Bancroft, vol. iii., pp. 100-101. See Appendix II., at the end of the present chapter. See also MacDonald, Select Charters, pp. 282-305. 224 SONS OF LIBERTY; QUARTERING ACT. can in the gallery of the House,* who immediately sent a draft of the speech to America. By midsummer Barré's words were familiar in every household in America, and the name "Sons of Liberty" was immediately applied to all those who dared defend their rights and liberties.† Franklin, a few weeks after the passage of the act, wrote to a friend in Philadelphia as follows: "I took every step in my power to prevent the passing of the Stamp Act. But the tide was too strong against us. The nation was provoked by American claims of legislative independence, and all parties joined in resolving by this act to settle the point. We might as well have hindered the sun's setting. That we could not do. But since it is down, my friend, and it may be long before it rises again, let us make as good a night of it as we can. We may still light candles. Frugality and industry will go a great way towards indemnifying us. Idleness and pride tax with a heavier hand than kings and This was Jared Ingersoll of Connecticut, whose original version of the speech is given above. Societies of these Sons of Liberty were organized in almost every colony, composed of the most extreme patriots and constituting the first of the revolutionary committees. They claimed that Parliament had no right to tax the colonies nor to exercise authority over them in any way, that power belonging exclusively to the king to whom they expressed their loyalty. At the same time, however, they were willing to sacrifice their lives in attempts to resist the Stamp Act and promised to aid others who might be in danger from the act or its promoters. See Fisher, Struggle for American Independence, vol. i., pp. 80-81; Gordon, American Revolution, vol. i., pp. 195, 197 (ed. 1788). parliaments."'* Shortly afterward Thomson wrote to Franklin: "Be assured, we shall light torches of a very different sort," doubtless alluding to what would surely happen if the mother country persisted in her unjust and impolitic course. At this time also a clause was inserted in the Annual Mutiny Act intended to carry out another part of the ministerial plans. This referred to the authority to send as many troops to America as were deemed necessary, and, by what was known as the Quartering Act, the colonies in which these troops were to be stationed were required and ordered to furnish them quarters, fire-wood, bedding, drink, soap and candles.† Meanwhile the situation in America was becoming critical, not only among the private citizens, but also among public bodies. Clubs were formed to bring the odious parts of the act to the attention of the public and to unite the people in opposition to the measure. The tax became the subject of popular discussion everywhere. Consequently, the respect which the American people had held for the mother country gradually lessened, and on the other hand their disposition to resistance gradually increased. The ministry, however, failed to profit by the note of warning sounded by the colonists and * Parton, Life and Times of Benjamin Franklin, vol. i., p. 461. See also his letter quoted in Morse, Life of Franklin, pp. 105–106. † See MacDonald, Select Charters, pp. 306–313; Bancroft, vol. iii., p. 105. PATRICK HENRY'S RESOLUTIONS. persisted in their course until they finally foundered upon the rocks. Such numerous petitions, remonstrances, etc., as were sent to the mother county by the Americans were rejected,* and the Stamp act as we have seen, was passed by Parliament. In May, 1765, when the news of the passage of these acts reached Virginia, its Assembly was in session.† A large majority of the Virginians were very much dissatisfied with the course of the ministry, but a great many of the aristocracy hesitated to adopt policies which seemed to them to place so many interests in jeopardy. But at this time there was in the Assembly a man who had courage enough to sound the keynote for all America, and who was a fit champion for the entire mass of the people. This man was Patrick Henry. While the other members of the Virginia assembly hesitated to utter their sentiments regarding the Stamp Act, Henry introduced the following resolutions.‡ "1. Resolved, That the first adventurers and settlers of this, his majesty's colony and dominion of Virginia, brought with them and transmitted to their posterity, and all other his majesty's subjects, since inhabiting in this, his majesty's said colony, all the privileges, franchises and immunities that have at any time been held, enjoyed, and possessed by the people of Great Britain. * Bancroft, vol. iii., p. 102 et seq. A list of the members of the House is given by Henry, Life of Patrick Henry, vol. ii., pp. 646647. See the critical account of the versions of these resolutions by Tyler, in his Life of Patrick Henry, pp. 63, 67, notes. See also Henry, Life of Patrick Henry, vol. i., p. 78 et seq. 225 "2. Resolved, That by two royal charters, granted by king James the First, the colonies aforesaid are declared entitled to all privileges, liberties, and immunities of denizens and naturalborn subjects, to all intents and purposes, as if they had been abiding and born within the realm of England. "3. Resolved, That the taxation of the people by themselves or by persons chosen by themselves to represent them, who can only know what taxes the people are able to bear, and the easiest mode of raising them, and are equally affected by such taxes themselves, is the distinguishing characteristic of British freedom, and without which the ancient constitution cannot subsist. "4. Resolved, That the Majesty's liege people of this most ancient colony have uninterruptedly enjoyed the right of being thus governed by their own assembly in the article of their taxes and internal police, and that the same hath never been forfeited, or any other way given up, but hath been constantly recognized by the king and people of Britain. "5. Resolved, therefore, That the general assembly of this colony have the only and sole exclusive right and power to lay taxes and impositions upon the inhabitants of this colony; and that every attempt to vest such power in any per son or persons whatsoever other than the general assembly aforesaid, has a manifest tendency to destroy British as well as American freedom." * *The five resolutions given above are as found in Tyler, Life of Patrick Henry, pp. 62-63, Tyler having taken them from Patrick Henry's own certified copy, existing in manuscript and at that time in the possession of W. W. Henry. As first drawn and introduced by Henry, there were two other resolutions which as taken by Tyler from the Boston Gazette, of July 1, 1765, were as follows: "6. Resolved, That his majesty's liege people, the inhabitants of the colony, are not bound to yield obedience to any law or ordinance whatever, designed to impose any taxation whatsoever upon them, other than the laws or ordinances of the general assembly aforesaid. "7. Resolved, That any person who shall, by speaking or writing, assert or maintain that any person or persons, other than the general assembly of this colony, have any right or power to impose or lay any taxation on the people here, shall be deemed an enemy to his majesty's colony." See also Henry's Life of Patrick Henry, vol. i., pp. 91-93. 226 HENRY'S SPEECH; RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED. When Henry had taken his seat, a debate ensued and continued for several hours, which Jefferson says was "most bloody." Bland, Wythe, Pendleton, John Randolph, Peyton Randolph, Nicholas and others opposed the resolutions and abused, ridiculed and threatened Henry, who had antagonized the aristocratic leaders by exposing a corrupt financial scheme. which some of them favored.* These imputations of insincerity thoroughly aroused Henry, who arose and, "swinging free of all impediments, launched into the tide of his oration; every eye captivated by the large and sweeping grace of his gesticulation; every ear charmed with the swelling music of his voice; every mind thrilled or stung by the vivid epigrams into which he condensed his opinions." At the end of his speech he exclaimed: "Caesar had his Brutus, Charles the First his Cromwell, and George III."— At this juncture the Speaker arose and cried, " Treason!" and "treason, treason!" echoed from every part of the house. Wirt says, It was one of those trying moments which are decisive of character. Henry faltered not for an instant, but rising to a loftier attitude, and fixing on the Speaker an eye of the most determined fire, he finished his sentence with the firmest emphasis, ' and George III. may profit by their example! If this be treason, sir, make Henry, Life of Patrick Henry, vol. i., pp. 7678; Tyler, Henry, pp. 56–57. the most of it.'"'* As a result of Henry's eloquence, the resolutions were passed, though the last one received a majority of only one vote. The next day however, Henry being absent from the House, the last resolution was rescinded. Nevertheless, they were copied and speedily circulated throughout the colonies as they were originally written and introduced, thus giving a strong impetus to the opposition movement. The bold stand taken by Virginia at this time undoubtedly also influenced a number of the weaker colonies, who only required a leader. Governor Francis Fauquier, deprecating "the very indecent language used by Mr. Henry," immediately dissolved the Assembly,† before it could receive a call from Massachusetts for a general congress.‡ Meanwhile news reached Massachusetts of the action taken by the Assem Tyler *Wirt, Life of Patrick Henry, p. 83. says that Judge John Tyler heard this speech as he stood in the lobby by the side of Jefferson. There are other versions of the speech, but as Tyler heard it and as Jefferson confirms his account of it (see Jefferson's letter of August 14, 1814, to William Wirt in Ford's ed. of Jefferson's Writings, vol. ix., pp. 467-468.) the speech as given above is probably correct. See Tyler, Life of Patrick Henry, p. 65 note. See also L. G. Tyler, Letters and Times of the Tylers, vol. i., p. 56; Henry, Life of Patrick Henry, vol. i., p. 86; James Parton, Life of Thomas Jefferson, pp. 6566; Frothingham, Rise of the Republic, pp. 179181; Howard, Preliminaries of the Revolution, pp. 142-145; Grigsby, The Virginia Convention of 1776; Cooke, Virginia, p. 384 et seq. See Fauquier's letter to the Lords of Trade, in Henry, Life of Patrick Henry, vol. i., pp. 88–89. ‡ Cooke, Virginia, p. 388; Irving, Life of Washington, vol. i., pp. 357-358. |