Page images
PDF
EPUB

The

Townshend
Acts, 1767.
Winsor's
America,

VI, 35;
Fiske's
Revolution,
I, 28-32;
*Frothing-
ham's
Republic,
203-206.

Letters of a

Farmer,

Charles Townshend, Chancellor of the Exchequer or minister of finance. Relying on the Declaratory Act, he proceeded to carry out the policy of George Grenville, except as to internal taxes. This led to the passing of several bills (1767), which are usually known from their promoter as the Townshend Acts. (1) One act provided for a colonial revenue, to be raised from a tax on wine, oil, glass, paper, lead, painters' colors, and tea imported into the colonies, the duties to be paid at importation, and the proceeds used (2) to pay the salaries of the governors and judges of the royal provinces, in this way rendering them independent of the votes of the colonial assemblies. (3) Another enactment provided for the appointment of a Board of Customs Commissioners, resident in the colonies, who would be able to exercise effective control of the customs service. (4) Writs of assistance were also declared to be legal, and (5) provision was made for the trial of revenue cases by admiralty courts without juries. (6) At nearly the same time, Parliament suspended the functions of the legislative assembly of New York because it had not made provision for the support of the British regiments stationed in the city of New York, as was required by an earlier act passed during the Grenville régime. These various enactments raised most serious issues: (1) the constitutional relations of Parliament and the several colonial legislatures, (2) the right of trial by jury, (3) the control of the judiciary and executive by the people, (4) the legality of writs of assistance, and (5) the right of Parliament to tax goods imported into the colonies. The answer of the colonists was not long delayed, nor was it easily misunderstood.

-

128. Resistance to the Townshend Acts, 1768, 1769. Pennsylvania Non-importation agreements were again proposed, especially by Virginia, but without much effect, and in the Letters of a Pennsylvania Farmer, John Dickinson, one of the truest-hearted and best men of the revolutionary epoch, pointed out "that any law, in so far as it creates expense,

1767-68. Fiske's

Revolution,

I, 47.

1768]

Resistance in America

151

Circular

is in reality a tax." It was on New England, however, that the new legislation would bear most severely, and it was New England, especially Massachusetts, that took the lead in opposition. In the winter of 1767-68 the repre- Massasentatives voted several petitions and letters, which were chusetts the work mainly of Samuel Adams. Among them was a Circular Letter to be signed by the Speaker of the House 1767-68. and transmitted to the other assemblies, notifying them of the votes of Massachusetts and suggesting concerted action, VI, 41; while disavowing any desire for independence. what it was in this

document that aroused the fears of the British government cannot be definitely stated; but the fact that the Massachusetts leaders felt it necessary to assure the other colonies that they were not aiming at independence might well have alarmed the colonial secretary. At all events, he wrote to Governor

Samuel Adams

Letter,

Winsor's

America,

Precisely Fiske's
Revolution,
I, 47-50;

[graphic]

Bernard of Massachusetts directing him to order the legislature of that province to rescind the letter; and in a Circular Letter to the governors of the other provinces he commanded them to dissolve the assemblies of their respective colonies in case they should act in conformity. with the invitation from Massachusetts. The House of Representatives of the latter province, by an overwhelming majority, refused to rescind its letter, and the other assemblies grasped the first opportunity to make the cause of Massachusetts their own.

*Froth

ingham's

Republic, 209-232.

Seizure of

the Liberty,

1768.

Winsor's
America,

VI, 43;
Fiske's
Revolution,

I, 51-53.

129. Seizure of the Liberty, 1768.-The new Board of Commissioners of Customs (p. 150) established their headquarters at Boston, where there was the greatest need of supervision, but where they were certain to be opposed in the exercise of their duty. Presently arrived the sloop Liberty, owned by John Hancock, a rich Boston merchant and a very popular man. Attempting to evade this payment in the usual manner, by bribing the customs officials,

[graphic][merged small]

the vessel was seized and towed under the guns of the British frigate Romney, which was lying at anchor in the harbor. A riot occurred which frightened the commissioners; they fled to the fort in the harbor and wrote to England demanding soldiers and a larger naval force. Before this supplemental force could arrive, however, the Boston people, in town meeting, requested the governor to summon the assembly; on his refusal, they summoned a convention of delegates from the several towns. It met,

1769]

The Virginia Resolves

153

but accomplished nothing except to provide a precedent for the Provincial Congress of a later day.

130. The Virginia Resolves of 1769.-To the ever- Virginia Resolves, growing list of colonial grievances, there was now added 1769.

a threat which, had it been carried out, would have worked *Frothgreat injury to the colonists. In the days of Henry VIII, ingham's Republic, long before England had a colony or a colonist, Parliament 232-237. had passed an act authorizing the trial, conviction, and punishment in England of an English subject accused of crimes committed outside the realm. The two houses of Parliament now prayed the king to cause colonists charged with treason to be brought to England for trial, in accordance with the provisions of this ancient statute. The Virginia leaders, ever alive to constitutional matters, were thoroughly converted to the opposition. Washington, one of the most influential and prosperous of their number, as well as one of the wisest, wrote: "... No man should hesitate a moment to use arms in defence of so valuable a blessing [freedom]." The Virginia Assembly Analysis of met on May 11, 1769. Five days later, the burgesses resolves. unanimously adopted four resolves, asserting (1) that they, with the council and the king, or his representative, have "the sole right of imposing taxes on the inhabitants" of Virginia, (2) that the inhabitants of the several colonies have the right to petition for redress of grievances, and (3) that it is lawful for them to petition jointly with the people of other colonies. Coming now to the precise matter which had been the occasion of these resolves, the burgesses declared (4) that all trials for any crime whatsoever should be within the colony by known course of law, and asserted that the sending any suspected person beyond the seas for trial is "highly derogatory of the right of British subjects." The Speaker was directed to send copies of these resolves to the other assemblies, and to request their concurrence therein. The governor at once dissolved the Virginia Assembly, but the popular branches of the other colonial assemblies generally adopted similar resolutions

Virginia

proposes

non-importation, 1769. *Frothingham's Republic, 238.

Partial

repeal of the
Townshend
duties.
Fiske's

Revolution,
I, 60-63.

some of them even used the words of the Virginia Resolves.

131. Non-importation Agreements, 1769. — The dissolution of the Virginia Assembly only hastened the crisis. The burgesses met in a neighboring house and signed an agreement binding themselves neither to use nor to import any goods on which a tax was levied by act of Parliament. This document had been drawn up by George Mason; it was presented to the burgesses by George Washington, and among the signatures to it was that of Thomas Jefferson. The other colonies soon adopted similar agreements, and by the end of the year (1769) the non-importation policy was in full operation. The object of the colonists in "boycotting" certain goods, which were either the products of England or were imported through English mercantile houses, was to exert a pressure on English merchants engaged in colonial trade, and through them to influence the government. This policy proved to be effectual; the merchants petitioned for the repeal of the act, and the government acceded to their wishes. In point of fact, the Townshend duties, instead of producing a revenue, had proved to be a source of expense. It was estimated that they had brought into the exchequer only two hundred and ninety-five pounds above the cost of collection; and the opposition to them had necessitated increased expenditures to the amount of one hundred and seventy-five thousand pounds.

Instead, however, of repealing them all, the government, at the express command of the king, retained the duty on tea to serve as a precedent for future parliamentary taxation of the colonists. The tea tax had yielded a total gross revenue of some three hundred pounds, and was retained probably on account of its insignificance, for being unnoticed, it might not be resisted. The Navigation Acts and the trade laws still remained; conflicts with the revenue officers became more frequent, and the colonists regarded with increasing dislike the British soldiers stationed at New York and Boston.

« PreviousContinue »