events of 1771, 1772, 1773—the east india company's tea rejected in every province of america—resolutions of a public meeting in philadelphia the model for those of other colonies.

by this unprecedented and unjustifiable combination between the british ministry and east india company to supersede the ordinary channels of trade, and to force the sale of their tea in america, the returning peace and confidence between great britain and the colonies was arrested, the colonial merchants of both england and america were roused and united in opposition to the scheme, meetings were held, associations were formed, and hostility throughout all the colonies became so general and intense, that not a chest of the east india company's tea was sold from new hampshire to georgia, and only landed in one instance, and then to rot in locked warehouses. in all cases, except in boston, the consignees were prevailed upon to resign; and in all cases except two, boston and charleston, the tea was sent back to england without having been landed. at charleston, south carolina, they allowed the tea to be landed, but not sold; and it rotted in the cellars of the store-houses. at philadelphia, the consignees were forced to resign and send the tea back to england.[318] at new york they did the same. at portsmouth, new hampshire, they sent the[pg 375] tea away to halifax. at boston the consignees were the sons of hutchinson, the governor, and he determined that it should be landed and sold; while the mass of the people, led by committees of the "sons of liberty," were equally determined that the tea should not be landed or sold.

as this boston tea affair resulted in the passing of two acts of parliament—the bill for closing the port of boston, and the bill for suspending the charter and establishing a new constitution of government for massachusetts—and these were followed by an american congress and a civil war, i will state the transactions as narrated by three american historians, agreeing in the main facts, but differing in regard to incidental circumstances.

dr. ramsay narrates the general opposition to the scheme of the east india company, and that at boston in particular, in the following words:

"as the time approached when the arrival of the tea ships[pg 376] might be soon expected, such measures were adopted as seemed most likely to prevent the landing of their cargoes. the tea consignees appointed by the east india company were in several places compelled to relinquish their appointments, and no others could be found hardy enough to act in their stead. the pilots in the river delaware were warned not to conduct any of the tea ships into their harbour. in new york, popular vengeance was denounced against all who would contribute in any measure to forward the views of the east india company. the captains of the new york and philadelphia ships, being apprised of the resolution of the people, and fearing the consequence of landing a commodity charged with an odious duty, in violation of their declared public sentiments, concluded to return directly to great britain without making any entry at the custom-house.

"it was otherwise in massachusetts. the tea ships designed for the supply of boston were consigned to the sons, cousins, and particular friends of governor hutchinson. when they were called upon to resign, they answered that 'it was out of their power.' the collector refused to give a clearance unless the vessels were discharged of dutiable articles. the governor refused to give a pass for the vessels unless properly qualified for the custom-house. the governor likewise requested admiral montague to guard the passages out of the harbour, and gave orders to suffer no vessels, coasters excepted, to pass the fortress from the town without a pass signed by himself. from a combination of these circumstances the return of the tea vessels from boston was rendered impossible. the inhabitants then had no option but to prevent the landing of the tea, to suffer it to be landed and depend on the unanimity of the people not to purchase it; to destroy the tea, or to suffer a deep-laid scheme against their sacred liberties to take effect. the first would have required incessant watching, by night as well as by day, for a period of time the duration of which no one could compute. the second would have been visionary to childishness, by suspending the liberties of a growing country on the self-denial and discretion of every tea-drinker in the province. they viewed the tea as the vehicle of an unconstitutional tax, and as inseparably associated with it. to avoid the one, they resolved to destroy the other. about seventeen persons, dressed[pg 377] as indians, repaired to the tea ships, broke open 342 chests of tea, and, without doing any other damage, discharged their contents into the water.

"thus, by the inflexibility of the governor, the issue of this business was different at boston from what it was elsewhere. the whole cargoes of tea were returned from new york and philadelphia; that which was sent to charleston was landed and stored, but not offered for sale. mr. hutchinson had repeatedly urged government to be firm and persevering. he could not, therefore, consistently with his honour, depart from a line of conduct he had so often and so strongly recommended to his superiors. he also believed that the inhabitants would not dare to perfect their engagements, and flattered himself that they would desist when the critical moment arrived.

"admitting the rectitude of the american claims of exemption from parliamentary taxation, the destruction of the tea by the bostonians was warranted by the great law of self-preservation; for it was not possible for them by any other means to discharge the duty they owed to their country.

"the event of this business was very different from what had been expected in england. the colonists acted with so much union and system, that there was not a single chest of any of the cargoes sent out by the east india company sold for their benefit."[319]

the rev. dr. holmes, in his annals of america, says:

"the crisis now approached when the colonies were to decide whether they would submit to be taxed by the british parliament, or practically support their own principles and meet the consequences. one sentiment seems to have pervaded the entire continent. the new ministerial plan was universally considered as a direct attack on the liberties of the colonists, which it was the duty of all to oppose. a violent ferment was everywhere excited; the corresponding committees were extremely active; and it was very generally declared that whoever should, directly or indirectly, countenance this dangerous invasion of their rights, is an enemy to his country. the east india company, confident of finding a market for their tea, reduced as it now was in its price, freighted several ships to the colonies with that[pg 378] article, and appointed agents for the disposal of it. some cargoes were sent to new york, some to philadelphia, some to charleston (south carolina), and three to boston. the inhabitants of new york and philadelphia sent the ships back to london, 'and they sailed up the thames to proclaim to all the nation that new york and pennsylvania would not be enslaved.' the inhabitants of charleston unloaded the tea and stored it in cellars, where it could not be used, and where it finally perished.

"the inhabitants of boston tried every measure to send back the three tea ships which had arrived there, but without success. the captains of the ships had consented, if permitted, to return with their cargoes to england; but the consignees refused to discharge them from their obligations, the custom-house to give them a clearance for their return, and the governor refused to grant them a passport for clearing the fort. it was easily seen that the tea would be gradually landed from the ships lying so near the town, and that if landed it would be disposed of, and the purpose of establishing the monopoly and raising a revenue effected. to prevent this dreaded consequence, a number of armed men, disguised like indians, boarded the ships and threw their whole cargoes of tea into the dock."[320]

a more circumstantial and graphic account of this affair is given by mr. j.s. barry, in his history of massachusetts, in the following words:

"on sunday, november 28, 1773, one of the ships arrived, bringing one hundred and fourteen chests of tea. immediately the select men held a meeting; and the committee of correspondence obtained from rotch, the owner of the vessel, a promise not to enter it until tuesday. the towns around boston were summoned to meet on monday; 'and every friend to his country, to himself, and to posterity,' was desired to attend, 'to make a united and successful resistance to this last, worst, and most destructive measure of administration.'

"at an early hour (monday, november 29) the people gathered, and by nine o'clock the concourse was so great that faneuil hall was filled to overflowing. a motion to adjourn to[pg 379] the old south meeting-house, the 'sanctuary of freedom,' was made and carried; and on reaching that place, jonathan williams was chosen moderator, and hancock, adams, young, molineux, and warren, fearlessly conducted the business of the meeting. at least five thousand persons were in and around the building, and but one spirit animated all. samuel adams offered a resolution, which was unanimously adopted, 'that the tea should be sent back to the place from whence it came, at all events, and that no duty should be paid on it.' the consignees asked time for consideration, and 'out of great tenderness' their request was granted. to prevent any surprise, however, a watch of twenty-five persons, under edward proctor, was appointed to guard the ship during the night.

"the answer of the consignees was given in the morning (november 30); and after declaring that it was out of their power to send back the teas, they expressed their readiness to store them until otherwise advised. in the midst of the meeting the sheriff of suffolk entered, with a proclamation from the governor, warning the people to disperse; but the message was received with derision and hisses, and a unanimous vote not to disperse. the master and owner of the ship which had lately arrived were then required to attend; and a promise was extorted from them that the teas should be returned without landing or paying a duty. the factors of two other vessels which were daily expected were next summoned, and similar promises were given by them; upon which the meeting, after voting to carry into effect, 'at the risk of their lives and properties,' their former resolves, quietly dissolved.

"after this dissolution, the committee of correspondence of boston and its vicinity held meetings daily, and gave such directions as circumstances required. the other ships, on their arrival, anchored beside the dartmouth (rotch's vessel), that one guard might serve for all; and the inhabitants of a number of towns, at meetings convened for the purpose, promised to aid boston whenever their services should be needed. at the end of twenty days the question must be decided, and if the teas were landed all was lost. as the crisis drew near the excitement increased. hutchinson was confident that no violent measures would be taken. the wealth of hancock and others seemed sufficient security against such measures. but the[pg 380] people had counted the cost, and had determined to risk all rather than be slaves.

"the eventful day (december 16) at last dawned; and two thousand from the country, besides the citizens of boston, assembled in the old south meeting-house at ten o'clock, to decide what should be done. it was reported that rotch, the owner of the dartmouth, had been refused a clearance; and he was immediately instructed to 'protest against the custom-house, and apply to the governor for his pass.' but the governor had stolen to his residence at milton, and at three o'clock in the afternoon rotch had not returned. what should be done? 'shall we abide by our resolutions?' it was asked. adams and young were in favour of that course; quincy, distinguished as a statesman and patriot, advised discretion; but the people cried, 'our hands have been put to the plough; we must not look back;' and the whole assemblage of seven thousand persons voted unanimously that the tea should not be landed.

"darkness in the meantime had settled upon the town, and in the dimly-lighted church the audience awaited the return of rotch. at a quarter before six he made his appearance, and reported that the governor had refused him his pass. 'we can do no more to save the country,' said samuel adams; and a momentary silence ensued. the next instant a shout was heard at the door; the war-whoop sounded; and forty or fifty men, disguised as indians, hurried along to griffin's wharf, posted guards to prevent intrusion, boarded the ships, and in three hours' time had broken and emptied into the sea three hundred and forty-two chests of tea. so great was the stillness, that the blows of the hatchets as the chests were split open were distinctly heard. when the deed was done, every one retired, and the town was as quiet as if nothing had occurred."[321]

[pg 381]

the foregoing threefold narrative presents substantially the american case of destroying the east india company's tea by the inhabitants of boston. the account by mr. bancroft is more elaborate, digressive, dramatic, and declamatory, but not so consecutive or concise as the preceding. governor hutchinson, who had advised the very policy which now recoiled upon himself, corroborates in all essential points the narrative given above. he states, however, what is slightly intimated above by dr. ramsay, that the opposition commenced by the merchants against the monopoly of the east india company, rather than against the tax itself, which had been paid without murmuring for two years, and that the parliamentary tax on tea was seized upon, at the suggestion of merchants in england, to defeat the monopoly of the east india company, and to revive and perpetuate the excitement against the british parliament which had been created by the stamp act, and which was rapidly subsiding. governor hutchinson says:

"when the intelligence first came to boston it caused no alarm. the threepenny duty had been paid the last two years without any stir, and some of the great friends to liberty had been importers of tea. the body of the people were pleased with the prospect of drinking tea at less expense than ever. the only apparent discontent was among the importers of tea, as well those who had been legal importers from england, as others who had illegally imported from holland; and the complaint was against the east india company for monopolizing a branch of commerce which had been beneficial to a great number of individual merchants. and the first suggestion of a design in the ministry to enlarge the revenue, and to habituate the colonies to parliamentary taxes, was made from england; and opposition to the measure was recommended, with an intimation that it was expected that the tea would not be suffered to be landed."[322]

the committees of correspondence in the several colonies soon availed themselves of so favourable an opportunity for promoting their great purpose. it soon appeared to be their[pg 382] general determination, that at all events the tea should be sent back to england in the same ships which brought it. the first motions were at philadelphia (oct. 18th), where, at a meeting of the people, every man who should be concerned in unlading,[pg 383] receiving, or vending the tea, was pronounced an enemy to his country. this was one of the eight resolves passed at the meeting. the example was followed by boston, november 3rd.[323]

then follows governor hutchinson's account of the meetings and gatherings in boston: the messages and answers between their committees and the consignees, custom-house officers, and the ultimate throwing of the tea into the dock, substantially as narrated in the preceding pages, together with his consultations with his council, and his remarks upon the motives and conduct of the parties opposed to him. he admits that his council was opposed to the measures which he proposed to suppress the meetings of the people; he admits the universal hostility of the people of boston and of the neighbouring towns to the landing of the tea; that "while the governor and council were sitting on the monday, in the council chamber, and known to be consulting upon means for preserving the peace of the town, several thousands of inhabitants of boston and other towns were assembled in a public meeting-house at a small distance, in direct opposition and defiance." he says he "sent the sheriff with a proclamation, to be read in the meeting, bearing testimony against it as an unlawful assembly, and requiring the moderator and the people present forthwith to separate at their peril. being read, a general hiss followed, and then a question whether they would surcease further proceedings, as the governor required, which was determined in the negative, nemine contradicente."

it may be asked upon what legal or even reasonable ground had governor hutchinson the right to denounce a popular meeting which happened at the same time that he was holding a council, or because such meeting might entertain and express[pg 384] views differing from or in defiance of those which he was proposing to his council?

or, what authority had governor hutchinson to issue a proclamation and send a sheriff to forbid a public meeting which the charter and laws authorized to be called and held, as much as the governor was authorized to call and hold his council, or as any town or township council or meeting may be called and held in any province of the dominion of canada? it is not surprising that a public meeting "hissed" a command which was as lawless as it was powerless. the king himself would not have ventured to do what governor hutchinson did, in like circumstances; and british subjects in massachusetts had equal civil rights with british subjects in england.

governor hutchinson admits that the public meeting was not only numerous, but composed of all classes of inhabitants, and was held in legal form; and his objection to the legality of the meeting merely because persons from other towns were allowed to be present, while he confesses that the inhabitants of boston at the meeting were unanimous in their votes, is the most trivial that can be conceived. he says:

"a more determined spirit was conspicuous in this body than in any former assemblies of the people. it was composed of the lowest, as well, and probably in as great proportion, as of the superior ranks and orders, and all had an equal voice. no eccentric or irregular motions, however, were suffered to take place—all seemed to have been the plan of but a few—it may be, of a single person. the 'form' of town meeting was assumed, the select men of boston, town clerks, etc., taking their usual places; but the inhabitants of any other town being admitted, it could not assume the name of a 'legal meeting of any town.'" (a trivial technical objection.)

referring to another meeting—the last held before the day on which the tea was thrown into the sea—governor hutchinson states:

"the people came into boston from the adjacent towns within twenty miles, from some more, from others less, as they were affected; and, as soon as they were assembled (november 14th, 1773), enjoined the owner of the ship, at his peril, to demand of the collector of customs a clearance for the ship, and appointed ten of their number a committee to accompany[pg 385] him, and adjourned for two days to receive the report. being reassembled (at the end of the two days), and informed by the owner that a clearance was refused, he was enjoined immediately to apply to the governor for a pass by the castle. he made an apology to the governor for coming upon such an errand, having been compelled to it, and received an answer that no pass ever had been, or lawfully could be, given to any vessel which had not first been cleared at the custom-house, and that upon his producing a clearance, such pass would immediately be given by the naval officer."

governor hutchinson knew that the custom-house could not give the clearance without the landing of the tea and payment of the duty provided for; he knew that the custom-house had been applied to in vain to obtain a clearance. his reference of the owner to the custom-house was a mere evasion and pretext to gain time and prevent any decisive action on the part of the town meeting until the night of the 16th, when the 20 days after the entry of the ships would have expired, and the collector could seize the cargoes for non-payment of duties, place it in charge of the admiral at the castle, and sell it under pretence of paying the duties. he says: "the body of the people remained in the meeting-house until they had received the governor's answer; and then, after it had been observed to them that, everything else in their power having been done, it now remained to proceed in the only way left, and that the owner of the ship having behaved like a man of honour, no injury ought to be offered to his person or property, the meeting was declared to be dissolved, and the body of the people repaired to the wharf and surrounded the immediate actors (who were 'covered with blankets, and making the appearance of indians') as a guard and security until they had finished their work. in two or three hours they hoisted out of the holds of the ships three hundred and forty-two chests of tea, and emptied them into the sea. the governor was unjustly censured by many people in the province, and much abused by the pamphlet and newspaper writers in england, for refusing his pass, which it is said would have saved the property thus destroyed; but he would have been justly censured if he had granted it. he was bound, as all the governors were, by oath, faithfully to observe the[pg 386] acts of trade, and to do his endeavour that the statute of king william, which established a custom-house, and is particularly mentioned in the act, be carried into execution."

in governor hutchinson's own statement and vindication of his conduct, he admits that the meetings of the people were lawfully called and regularly conducted; that they were attended by the higher as well as lower classes of the people; that they exhausted every means in their power, deliberately and during successive days, to have the tea returned to england without damage, as was done from the ports of new york and philadelphia; and that by his own acts, different from those of new york, pennsylvania, and south carolina, whose governors were subject to the same oaths as himself, the opposers of taxation by the british parliament were reduced to the alternative of defeat, or of throwing the tea in question into the sea, as the governor had effectually blocked up every possible way to their having the tea returned to england. governor hutchinson does not pretend to the technical scrupulousness of his oath, applicable to ordinary cases, binding him to write to the admiral to guard the tea by an increased number of armed vessels in the channel of the harbour, and to prevent any vessel from passing out of the harbour for sea, without his own permit; nor does he intimate that he himself was the principal partner in the firm, nominally in the name of his sons, to whom the east india company had principally consigned as agents the sale of the tea in question; much less does he say that in his letters to england, which had been mysteriously obtained by dr. franklin, and of the publication of which he so strongly and justly complained, he had urged the virtual deprivation of his country of its constitution of free government by having the executive councillors appointed and the salaries of the governor, judges, secretary, and attorney and solicitor-generals paid by the crown out of the taxes of the people of the colony, imposed by the imperial parliament. governor hutchinson had rendered great service to his country by his history, and as a public representative, for many years in its legislature and councils, and was long regarded as its chief leader; but he had at length yielded to the seductions of ambition and avarice, and became an object of popular hatred instead of being, as he[pg 387] had many years been, a popular idol. he had sown the seed of which he was now reaping the fruits.

it is not surprising that, under such circumstances, governor hutchinson's health should become impaired and his spirits depressed, and that he should seek relief from his burdens and vexations by a visit to england, for which he applied and obtained permission, and which proved to be the end of his government of massachusetts; for general gage was appointed to succeed him as governor, as well as commander-in-chief of the king's forces in america.

in reviewing the last few months of mr. hutchinson's government of massachusetts, it is obvious that his ill-advised policy and mode of proceeding—arising, no doubt, in a great measure, from his personal and family interest in speculation in the new system of tea trade—was the primary and chief cause of those proceedings in which boston differed from new york, philadelphia, and charleston in preventing the landing of the east india company's tea. had the authorities in the provinces of new york and pennsylvania acted in the same way as did the governor of massachusetts, it cannot be doubted that the same scenes would have been witnessed at charleston, philadelphia, and new york as transpired at boston. the eight resolutions which were adopted by the inhabitants of philadelphia, in a public town meeting, on the 8th of october, as the basis of their proceedings against the taxation of the colonies by the imperial parliament, and against the landing of the east india company's tea, were adopted by the inhabitants of boston in a public town meeting the 3rd of november. the tea was as effectually prevented from being landed at the ports of new york and philadelphia as it was at the port of boston, and was as completely destroyed in the damp cellars at charleston as in the sea water at boston.[324]

footnotes:

[318] the resolutions adopted by a meeting of the inhabitants of philadelphia, on the 18th of october, 1773, afford a specimen of the spirit of all the colonies, and the model of resolutions adopted in several of them, even boston. they were as follows:

"1. that the disposal of their own property is the inherent right of freemen; that there can be no property in that which another can, of right, take from us without our consent; that the claim of parliament to tax america is, in other words, a claim of right to levy contributions on us at pleasure.

"2. that the duty imposed by parliament upon tea landed in america is a tax on the americans, or levying contributions on them without their consent.

"3. that the express purpose for which the tax is levied on the americans, namely, for the support of government, administration of justice, and defence of his majesty's dominions in america, has a direct tendency to render assemblies useless, and to introduce arbitrary government and slavery.

"4. that a virtuous and steady opposition to this ministerial plan of governing america is absolutely necessary to preserve even the shadow of liberty, and is a duty which every freeman in america owes to his country, to himself, and to his posterity.

"5. that the resolution lately entered into by the east india company, to send out their tea to america, subject to the payment of duties on its being landed here, is an open attempt to enforce this ministerial plan, and a violent attack upon the liberties of america.

"6. that it is the duty of every american to oppose this attempt.

"7. that whosoever shall, directly or indirectly, countenance this attempt, or in anywise aid or abet in unloading, receiving, or vending the tea sent or to be sent out by the east india company, while it remains subject to the payment of a duty here, is an enemy to his country.

"8. that a committee be immediately chosen to wait on those gentlemen who it is reported are appointed by the east india company to receive and sell said tea, and request them, from a regard to their own character, and the peace and good order of the city and province, immediately to resign their appointments." (ramsay's colonial history, vol. i., pp. 372, 373.)

[319] ramsay's colonial history, vol. 1., chap. iii., pp. 373-375.

[320] holmes' annals, etc., vol. ii., pp. 181, 182.

[321] barry's history of massachusetts, second period, chap. xiv., pp. 470-473.

the historian adds: "the governor was in a forlorn state, and was unable to keep up even a show of authority. every one was against him. the houses were against him. 'the superior judges were intimidated from acting,' and 'there was not a justice of the peace, sheriff, constable, or peace-officer in the province who would venture to take cognizance of any breach of law against the general bent of the people.'"—ib., 473, 474.

[322] governor hutchinson, in a note, referring to the mercantile english letters which contained the suggestion not to allow the landing of the tea of the east india company, says:

"these letters were dated in england the beginning of august, and were received in america the latter end of september and the beginning of october."

mr. bancroft states as follows the causes and circumstances of this disastrous tea agreement between the british ministry and east india company:

"the continued refusal of north america to receive tea from england had brought distress upon the east india company, which had on hand, wanting a market, great quantities imported in the faith that that agreement (in the colonies, not to purchase tea imported from england) could not hold. they were able to pay neither their dividends nor their debts; their stock depreciated nearly one-half; and the government must lose their annual payment of four hundred thousand pounds.

"the bankruptcies, brought on partly by this means, gave such a shock to credit as had not been experienced since the south sea year, and the great manufacturers were sufferers. the directors came to parliament with an ample confession of their humbled state, together with entreaties for assistance and relief, and particularly praying that leave might be given to export tea free of all duties to america and to foreign ports. had such leave been granted in respect of america, it would have been an excellent commercial regulation, as well as have restored a good understanding to every part of the empire. instead of this, lord north proposed to give to the company itself the right of exporting its teas. the existing law granted on their exportation to america a drawback of three-fifths only of the duties paid on importation. lord north now offered to the east india company a drawback of the whole. trecothick, in the committee, also advised to take off the import duty in america of threepence the pound, as it produced no income to the revenue; but the ministry would not listen to the thought of relieving america from taxation. 'then,' added trecothick in behalf of the east india company, 'as much or more may be brought into revenue by not allowing a full exemption from the duties paid here.' but lord north refused to discuss the right of parliament to tax america, insisting that no difficulty could arise; that under the new regulation america would be able to buy tea from the company at a lower price than from any other european nation, and that men will always go to the cheapest market.

"the ministry was still in its halcyon days; no opposition was made even by the whigs; and the measure, which was the king's own, and was designed to put america to the test, took effect as law from the 10th day of may, 1773. it was immediately followed by a most carefully prepared answer from the king to petitions from massachusetts, announcing that he 'considered his authority to make laws in parliament of sufficient force and validity to bind his subjects in america, in all cases whatsoever, as essential to the dignity of the crown, and a right appertaining to the state, which it was his duty to preserve entire and inviolate;' that he therefore 'could not but be greatly displeased with the petitions and remonstrance in which that right was drawn into question,' but that he 'imputed the unwarrantable doctrines held forth in the said petitions and remonstrance to the artifices of a few.' all this while lord dartmouth (the new secretary of state for the colonies, successor to lord hillsborough) 'had a true desire to see lenient measures adopted towards the colonies,' not being in the least aware that he was drifting with the cabinet towards the very system of coercion against which he gave the most public and the most explicit pledges." (history of the united states, vol. vi., pp. 458-460.)

[323] see these resolutions, in a note on pp. 374,375

[324] "in south carolina, some of the tea was thrown into the river as at boston." (english annual register for 1774, vol. xvii., p. 50.)