Tailpiece—Peruvian Canoe, &c.
THE REVOLUTION
Objectsproposed in the Settlement of America—Forms of Government conducive to Independence—Influence of Expenses—Colonies obliged to defend themselves, and to defray the Expense of their own Wars and those of the Mother-country—British system of Taxation commenced—Writs of Assistance—Stamp Act—Formidable Opposition to it—Non-importation Act—Arrival of British forces—Boston Massacre—Destruction of the Gaspee—Destruction of Tea—Boston Port Bill—Arrival of General Gage—His obnoxious Measures—Meeting of Congress—Preparations for War—Obstinacy of the King and Parliament—Crisis arrives—Determination of the Colonists.
Objectsproposed in the Settlement of America—Forms of Government conducive to Independence—Influence of Expenses—Colonies obliged to defend themselves, and to defray the Expense of their own Wars and those of the Mother-country—British system of Taxation commenced—Writs of Assistance—Stamp Act—Formidable Opposition to it—Non-importation Act—Arrival of British forces—Boston Massacre—Destruction of the Gaspee—Destruction of Tea—Boston Port Bill—Arrival of General Gage—His obnoxious Measures—Meeting of Congress—Preparations for War—Obstinacy of the King and Parliament—Crisis arrives—Determination of the Colonists.
The Revolution of America was an extraordinary event; and at the time of its occurrence was unlooked for, both by the government and nation of Great Britain. That the colonies had long been dissatisfied with the measures adopted towards them by the parent-country, and that this dissatisfaction was gradually increasing, was well known; but the statesmen on the other side designed, and doubtless supposed,that they should be able to secure the submission of the colonies to whatever line of policy they might please to adopt.
But they little understood the American character. Had they reflected upon the circumstances in which the colonies originated, and their steady progress in wealth and population, they might well have anticipated the final result. Certain it was, that oppressive and coercive measures would only tend to weaken their affection for the parent-country. Kindness and conciliation might have preserved the bond of union—indeed, it was possible to have confirmed the colonies in their regard for the land of their birth; but the line of policy which could alone have effected that object, was overlooked or disregarded by British statesmen; and through their infatuated counsels, they hastened the very event which they so much deplored.
Let us advert to some of the remote and proximate causes, which brought about this Revolution:
1. Objects proposed by the colonies in their settlement of America.—
At the era of the Revolution, thirteen colonies had been planted. These were Virginia, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Maryland, North and South Carolina, and Georgia. Virginia, the first, was settled in 1607, and Georgia, the last, in 1732. Different objects were proposed in the establishment of the different colonies. The leading object of some was pecuniary profit. They were induced, either by associated or individual proprietors, who themselves remained in England, to come to America, with the hope of profitable returns for the advance of their capital. But the more northern colonies came on their own concern, at their own expense, and with reference to the enjoyment of freedom and peace in religion, which they could not find at home.
Now, was it to be expected that those who had left home, and all its endearments, for the sake of enjoying a largerliberty, would consent to have that liberty abridged, especially after having tasted its blessings for years? If the Pilgrim Fathers had such notions themselves, was it to be supposed that their children would cherish less manly and patriotic sentiments? The spirit of liberty does not easily die, where there is aliment to keep it alive. The blood of freemen, or those who aspire to freedom, instead of becoming weaker, as it flows down in successive generations, usually becomes more pure and more excitable. This was verified in the history of the colonies, anterior to the Revolution. They were men of whom the principles of liberty had taken strong hold. Their distance from the mother-country—her neglect of them—the exercise of civil and religious freedom for a number of years—all served to excite and strengthen a desire for independence. Such an event was the natural result of the principles with which the colonies began their career. It was the natural result of the physical courage and strength acquired in felling forests, resisting savages, and in carrying out those plans and enterprises in which a young, ardent, and ambitious people are likely to engage.
2. Their forms of government were conducive to independence.
In the settlement of the colonies, three forms of government were established. These were usually denominated Charter, Proprietary, and Royal governments. The difference arose from the different circumstances under which the colonies were settled, as well as the different objects of the first emigrants. The Charter governments were confined to New England. The Proprietary governments were those of Maryland, Pennsylvania, the Carolinas, and the Jerseys. The others were royal governments, or those which were immediately under the British crown.[28]
As early as 1619, only twelve years from its settlement,a provincial legislature, in which the colonists were represented, was introduced into Virginia. In Plymouth and in Massachusetts, the colonies organized their body, politic and social, upon principles of perfect equality. And, as the Puritans spread themselves over New England, they gave to the distinct communities which they established, constitutions still more democratic. In January, 1639, three years from the commencement of the Connecticut colony, the planters on Connecticut river convened at Hartford, and formed a system of government which continued, with scarcely any alterations, to the year 1818. Of this system, Dr. Trumbull observes: "With such wisdom did our venerable ancestors provide for the freedom and liberties of themselves and their posterity. Thus happily did they guard against every encroachment on the rights of the subject. This, probably, is one of the most free and happy constitutions of civil government ever formed. The formation of it, at so early a period, when the light of liberty was wholly darkened in most parts of the world, and the rights of man were so little understood in others, does great honor to their ability, integrity, and love of freedom."
In Maryland and Pennsylvania, the first assemblies established a popular representation, and in all their political regulations proceeded upon broad views of civil freedom. The same remark, says Mr. Walsh, may be extended to the Carolinas and New York.
The very first principles, then, of the colonists in relation to government were anti-monarchical. In their incipient colonial state, they had the feelings of freemen; and all their institutions, as far as they were allowed to carry them, spoke of liberty and equality.
This spirit was never lost to the colonies. In the variety of fortune which they subsequently encountered—in every change of monarch abroad—in every shift of rulers at home—through royal smiles and royal frowns—in times of war and in times of peace—their love of liberty continued unabated, and even increased. Thus early began thosesentiments of freedom and independence which, uniting in their course with other streams, ended at length in a deep, broad, irresistible current against British oppression.
3. Influence of the expenses incurred by the colonies in their settlements, and in their several wars and those of the mother-country.
"All the thirteen colonies," says Mr. Walsh, "with the exception of Georgia, were established, and had attained to considerable strength, without theslightest aidfrom the treasury of the mother-country."
Neither the crown nor the parliament paid a dollar towards purchasing the soil of the Indians—the original masters of that soil. These purchases were made by the colonists themselves. The settlement of the province of Massachusetts Bay alone cost two hundred thousand pounds—an enormous sum at the era at which it was effected. Lord Baltimore expended forty thousand pounds in his establishment of the colony of Maryland. On that of Virginia, immense wealth was lavished by the first settlers. The first planters of Connecticut consumed great estates in purchasing lands of the Indians and in making settlements.
In like manner, when assailed by fierce and warlike tribes, the mother-country furnished no aid whatever—neither troops nor money. She erected no fortifications; entered into no negotiations, and manifested no sympathy, or even interest, in the fate of her offspring. Some of the most considerable Indian wars in which the colonies were involved, were the immediate result of the rashness and cupidity of the royal governors. That, for instance, which is styled 'King William's War'—memorable in the annals of New Hampshire particularly—was owing to a wanton predatory expedition of Andros, in 1688, against the possessions of a French individual, situate between Penobscot and Nova Scotia.
The testimony of Lord Brougham on this subject isworthy of special notice. In his work on 'Colonial Policy,' he observes:
"The old colonies of North America, besides defraying the whole expenses of their internal administration, were enabled from their situation to render very active assistance to the mother-country upon several occasions, not peculiarly interesting to themselves. They uniformly asserted, that theywouldnever refuse contributions, even for purposes strictly imperial, provided these were constitutionally demanded. Nor did they stop at mere professions of zeal.
"The whole expense of civil government in the British North American colonies, previous to the Revolution, did not amount to eighty thousand pounds sterling, which was paid by the produce of their taxes. The military establishments, the garrisons and the forts in the old colonies, cost the mother-country nothing."
From the foregoing facts, nothing is clearer than that the colonies were obliged, from their earliest existence, to take care of themselves. At first, Great Britain thought little of them, and cared, if possible, still less. They were obliged to repel hostile tribes without aid, and defend themselves against the aggressions of more civilized powers. And, moreover, they were compelled to carry on not only their own wars, but those of the mother-country, and then pay the expenses.
It may well be asked, what was the natural and almost necessary consequence of such treatment? Keep a child in leading-strings, and it will be long ere it walks. Teach him to walk early, and he will soon decline your aid. Let a father send forth his son to take care of himself, and perchance the next he hears of him, he will learn that his fortune is made, and no longer will he wish for parental assistance; and fortunate will it be if the son, under a sense of former parental indifference and unkindness, does not, at length, feel a correspondent alienation from the parent.
But whether these illustrations are apposite or not, certain it is, that the colonists at length learned the important fact,that they could take care of themselves. To this they had been driven. The next natural feeling to this superiority over the difficulties and trials which they encountered in their early settlement of the country, was a willingness, and evenwish, to be independent of the parent by whom they had been so unkindly neglected. Great Britain might, therefore, thank herself for the spirit of independence which at length appeared among the colonies; her line of policy engendered and matured it.
4. Measures of oppression.
"Within little more than a generation from the commencement of the plantations," says Mr. Walsh, "the royal government began those formal inquiries into their population and manufactures, which were so often renewed, until the period of our revolution." The object or occasion of these inquiries was twofold—a jealousy, lest the colonies should grow too fast; and, secondly, a desire to monopolize, for the benefit of Great Britain, all their trade, and the proceeds of their manufacturing industry.
The various acts of monopoly which passed parliament during a series of years, it is not necessary to particularize. They uniformly bore heavily on the commercial and manufacturing enterprise of the colonies, and were designed "to keep them in a firmer dependence upon England"—"to render them more beneficial and advantageous"—"to employ and increase the English shipping"—"to make a vent for English manufactures."
After the peace of 1763, a still more grinding policy was proposed—that oftaxingthe colonies, with the avowed purpose of drawing a revenue into the royal exchequer, and on the plausible, yet unwarrantable ground, that Great Britain had contracted a debt in their defence.
Hitherto, when money was wanted in the colonies, the parliament of England had been content to ask for it by a formal requisition upon thecolonial legislatures, and they had supplied it with a willing hand. But now, it wasthought that a shorter method of obtaining it might be resorted to with better effect.
Before proceeding to notice the measures adopted with reference to the foregoing object, it is necessary to advert to what were denominatedwrits of assistance, which were orders issued by the superior court of the province, requiring the sheriffs and other civil officers to assist the person to whom it was granted, in breaking open and searching every place, even private dwellings, if suspected of containing prohibited goods.
The first application for a writ of this kind was made by the deputy collector at Salem in November, 1760. Doubts being expressed by the court as to the legality of the writ, or the power of the court to grant it, the application was deferred to the next term, when the question was to be argued.
At the appointed time, Mr. Gridley, a distinguished lawyer, appeared for the crown; Mr. Thatcher and Mr. Otis for the merchants. The trial took place in the council chamber of the old Town-house in Boston. The judges were five in number, including Lieutenant-Governor Hutchinson, who presided as chief justice; and the room was filled with all the officers of government and the principal citizens, to hear the arguments in a cause that inspired the deepest solicitude. The case was opened by Mr. Gridley, who argued it with much learning, ingenuity, and dignity; making all his reason depend upon this consideration, "That the parliament of Great Britain was the sovereign legislator of the British empire." He was followed by Mr. Thatcher on the opposite side, whose reasoning was ingenious and able, delivered in a tone of great mildness and moderation. "But," in the language of President Adams, "Otis was a flame of fire; with a promptitude of classical allusion, a depth of research, a rapid summary of historical events and dates, a profusion of legal authorities, a prophetic glance into futurity, and a rapid torrent of impetuous eloquence, he hurried away all before him."
"I will to my dying day," said Otis, among other things—"I will to my dying day oppose, with all the power and faculties God has given me, all such instruments of slavery on the one hand and villany on the other. It appears to me the worst instrument of arbitrary power, the most destructive of English liberty, and the fundamental principles of law, that was ever found in an English law-book."
Otis in the Council chamber.Otis in the Council chamber.
Otis in the Council chamber.
The occasion was intensely exciting—the liberties of the people were in danger—their dwellings, those sanctuaries where every man should feel himself safe, and his effects—all were in jeopardy. And the vast throng gathered on the occasion so thought—especially as their excited feelings became more intense under the thrilling appeals of the eloquent Otis. "Every man of an immensely crowded audience," says President Adams, "appeared to me to go away, as I did, ready to take arms against writs of assistance.Then and there was the first scene of the first act of opposition to the arbitrary claims of Great Britain."
The court postponed a decision of the question until the following term; and in the mean time wrote to Great Britainfor information on the subject. Writs were afterwards granted, but were extremely unpopular. In Connecticut writs of assistance, it is said, were never granted.
The next measure of oppression was the passage of the famousstamp act. Such a project had been suggested during the administrations of Lord Walpole and Mr. Pitt; but they were too sagacious to venture upon a measure at once so odious and unjust. Said Walpole, "I will leave the taxation of America to some of my successors, who may have morecouragethan I have." And said Pitt, "I will never burn my fingers with an American stamp act." To the successor of Mr. Pitt, Lord Grenville, was reserved the honor, or rather the infamy, of such a project.
When the bill was ushered into the House of Commons, petitions from Virginia, Connecticut, and South Carolina, in every way respectful, but in tone firm and decided, were offered in opposition to it. But the house refused even to receive them, on the ground that therightof parliament to tax the colonies was denied; and, secondly, that it was contrary to a rule of the house "to receive any petition against a money-bill."
The debate therefore proceeded. The chief advocates of the bill were the prime minister and Charles Townshend. In the opposition were Mr. Pitt—who, however, was absent by reason of sickness—General Conway, Alderman Beckford, Colonel Barre, Mr. Jackson, Sir William Meredith, &c. Conway and Beckford opposed the bill on the ground of itsinjustice; Colonel Barre and others on the ground of itsinexpediency. The purpose of the minister, however, was fixed; and, rallying his surprised and half-hesitating troops, he took the question—a large majority expressed in favor of the bill—two hundred and fifty for, and fifty against it. On its coming into the House of Lords, it received the entire concurrence of that body, and on the 22d of March obtained the royal assent.
This act, so celebrated in the annals of American history, both as an act of flagrant injustice, on the part of the Britishparliament, and one of theproximate causesof the Revolution, consisted of fifty-five specific duties, laid on as many different species of instruments, in which paper was used; such as notes, bonds, mortgages, deeds, university degrees, licenses, advertisements in newspapers, and even almanacs; varying fromone half-pennyup tosix pounds. As an illustration of the heavy burdens designed to be put upon the colonies by this act, it may be stated, that previous to the passage of the act, a ream of common printed bailbonds cost fifteen pounds—stamped, one hundred. A ream ofstampedpolicies of insurance amounted to one hundred and ninety pounds—of common ones, without stamps, twenty. A piece of paper, or parchment, used as a diploma, or certificate of a degree taken in any university, academy, or college, was taxedtwo pounds. For a piece of paper for a license for retailing spirituous liquors,twenty shillingswere demanded. For one for a license for selling wine only,four pounds; for wine and spirituous liquors,three pounds. For letters of probate, administration, or guardianship,ten shillings. For a common deed, conveying not exceeding one hundred acres of land,one shilling and sixpence. For a newspaper, containing half a sheet or less,one half-penny; one sheet,one penny. Pamphlets,one shillingper sheet. Advertisements,two shillingseach. Almanacs,fourpence.
This act was ordered to take effect on the following 1st of November. Meanwhile, the people in various parts of the country were anxious to express their detestation of the measure, which the lapse of a few months was to bring into operation. One day in the month of August, the effigy of Andrew Oliver, the proposed distributor of stamps in Massachusetts, was found hanging on a tree, afterwards well known by the name ofLiberty-tree, in the main street of Boston. At night it was taken down, and carried on a bier amidst the acclamations of an immense collection of people through the court-house, down King street, to a small brick building, supposed to have been erected for the reception of the detested stamps. This building being soon levelledwith the ground, the rioters next attacked Mr. Oliver's house; and having broken the windows, entered it, and destroyed part of the furniture.
Procession with an Effigy and Stamp-master at Boston.Procession with an Effigy and Stamp-master at Boston.
Procession with an Effigy and Stamp-master at Boston.
The house of Benjamin Hallowell, jun., comptroller of the customs, was next entered; and, elevated and emboldened by liquors found in his cellar, the mob, with inflamed rage, directed their course to the house of Lieutenant-Governor Hutchinson, who, after vainly attempting resistance, was constrained to depart, to save his life. By four in the morning, one of the best houses in the province was completely in ruins, nothing remaining but the bare walls and floors. The plate, family pictures, most of the furniture, the wearing apparel, about nine hundred pounds sterling, and the manuscripts and books which Mr. Hutchinson had been thirty years collecting, besides many public papers in his custody, were either carried off or destroyed. The whole damage was estimated at two thousand five hundred pounds.
Attack, on the Governor's House.Attack, on the Governor's House.
Attack, on the Governor's House.
On the arrival of the 1st of November, on which the stamp act was to go into effect, the day was ushered in at Boston by the tolling of the bells; many shops and stores were shut, and effigies of the authors and friends of that act were carried about the streets, and afterwards torn in pieces by the populace.
Nor was Massachusetts alone; the obnoxious act received similar treatment in the other colonies. On the 24th of August, a gazette was published at Providence, withvox Populi, vox Dei, for a motto; effigies were exhibited, and in the evening cut down and burned. In Portsmouth, New Castle, and other places, the bells were tolled to denote the decease of Liberty. In Connecticut, Mr. Ingersoll, the stamp-master, was compelled to resign. The spirit manifested in New York produced a similar resignation. Offended with the conduct of Lieutenant-Governor Colden, in relation to the stamp act, many of the inhabitants assembled one evening, and breaking open his coach-house, tookout his coach, which, with his effigy, they burned, amid the acclamations of several thousand spectators.
Burning of the Coach and Effigy of Governor Colden.Burning of the Coach and Effigy of Governor Colden.
Burning of the Coach and Effigy of Governor Colden.
In Philadelphia, on the appearance of the ships having the stamps on board, all the ships in the harbor hoisted their colors half-mast high; the bells were muffled, and continued to toll till evening. Similar demonstrations of dissatisfaction were made in numerous other places.
The opposition to the stamp act was so universal and so formidable, as to prevent all hope of its successful operation; had this measure been persisted in, the Revolution in America would doubtless have dated at an earlier day.
Fortunately for the American colonies, the administration of Lord Grenville terminated in July, 1765—that minister being succeeded by the Marquis of Rockingham, while the Duke of Grafton and General Conway were made secretaries of state.
To this new ministry it early became apparent that, in respect to the colonies, a crisis was now at hand; either existing measures must be relaxed, or a resort must be hadto arms. The former being deemed the wiser plan, a repeal of the stamp act was moved in parliament, and, on the 18th of March, passed the House by a majority of two hundred and seventy-five to one hundred and sixty-seven. In the House of Lords, the majority was one hundred and five to seventy-one.
In America, the intelligence of the repeal was received with acclamations of the most sincere and heart-felt gratitude, by all classes of people. Public thanksgivings were offered up in all the churches. The resolutions, which had been passed on the subject of importations, were rescinded, and their trade with the mother-country was immediately renewed with increased vigor. The home-spun dresses were given to the poor, and once more the colonists appeared clad in the produce of British looms.
In July, 1766, the Marquis of Rockingham retired from the cabinet, and a new ministry was formed under the direction of William Pitt—the Duke of Grafton being placed at the head of the treasury, and Charles Townshend made chancellor of the exchequer. In May, 1767, the latter revived the scheme of taxing America, proposing to impose duties on glass, paper, tea, &c., imported into the colonies. The bill passed both houses without much opposition, the Earl of Chatham being confined at that time by sickness.
The news of this measure, on reaching America, produced the greatest possible excitement. Counter-measures were immediately proposed. Resort was had, as at a former day, to non-importation, the effects of which had been so severely felt by the traders in England, under the stamp act. Boston, as before, took the lead. At a town-meeting, held in October, it was voted that measures should be immediately taken to promote the establishment of domestic manufactories, by encouraging the consumption of all articles of American manufacture. They also agreed to purchase no articles of foreign growth or manufacture, but such as were absolutely indispensable. New York and Philadelphia soon followed the example of Boston; and, ina short time, the merchants themselves entered into associations to import nothing from Great Britain but articles that necessity required.
Several events, about this time, served to increase the excitement of the colonies, especially in Boston. Among these may be mentioned the arrival, at the latter place, of a man-of-war and transports, from Halifax, with nine hundred troops on board.
Arrival of the first Man-of-war at Boston.Arrival of the first Man-of-war at Boston.
Arrival of the first Man-of-war at Boston.
Such a proceeding, on the part of the British ministry, was eminently calculated to excite the jealousy and indignation of the colonists. They felt disgusted and injured; and the more so, from the haughty and imperious bearing of the officers and troops. In a few weeks, this force was augmented by the arrival of several more transports from Cork, with the sixty-fourth and sixty-fifth regiments, under Colonels Mackay and Pomeroy.
Another measure, adopted about this time by the British ministry, and one which perhaps struck more vitally at the liberty of the colonists than any which preceded, was an order to the provincial governors to procure informationtouching all treasons, &c., and to transmit the same, with the names of the suspected persons, to England, in order that they might be ordered thither for trial. The design of it was to terrify the patriotic party into submission; but well might it have been foreseen that such an offensive measure would only serve to rouse opposition, and confirm the whole civilized world in the righteousness of the common cause.
Parliament again convened, January 9, 1770, soon after which (28th) the Duke of Grafton resigned his office of first lord of the treasury. Lord Chatham, having recovered from his late illness, had now returned to parliament, and, with his wonted vigor, attacked the system and measures of the administration.
Lord North, chancellor of the exchequer, succeeded the Duke of Grafton; "and from this time commences an administration which forms a momentous era in the history of Great Britain. During his administration, which lasted to the close of the Revolution, Great Britain lost more territory and accumulated more debt than at any former period of her history."
The first measure of North's administration was in part conciliatory—being a motion to repeal the port duties of 1767, with the exception of the duty on tea. This his lordship, in spite of the friends of the colonies, determined to retain.
To this partial repeal, Governor Pownall strongly objected. It would produce nothing but civil discord and interminable contention. Repeal all, or none. Why retain this single duty, as a pepper-corn rent, to show the tenor by which the colonists hold their rights, and, by so doing, jeopardize his majesty's entire interest in the American colonies? "I have lived in America," said he; "I know the character of the people. Depend upon it, with their views, they will never solicit the favor of this house; never more will they wish to bring before parliament the grievances under which they conceive themselves to labor."
While high and angry debate was thus in progress on the other side of the water, on this side, events were transpiring which were giving increasing irritation to already excited feelings, and adding to the force of the gathering storm. Collisions and quarrels, between the soldiers quartered in Boston and the citizens, were not unfrequent; and at length, on the evening of the 5th of March, 1770, resulted in an effusion of blood, called, by way of eminence, "The Boston Massacre."
Boston Massacre.Boston Massacre.
Boston Massacre.
Three men were killed and two mortally wounded, who died soon after. Mutual exasperations preceded. Neither citizens nor soldiers were exempt from the charge of insult and provocation. But a sentinel, who had been brought to the ground by a blow, on rising, fired, as did, at the same time, a sergeant and six men who were with him. Their fire resulted as already stated. Great excitement followed. The murderers were arrested. Captain Preston, to whose company the soldiers belonged, and who was present, was also arrested, and committed to prison.
The following morning the authorities of Boston, urged on by an exasperated people, required the troops to be withdrawn from the town. The lieutenant-governor, for a time, resisted the demand; but on learning that no other course would satisfy or restrain the people, he expressed his willingness that they should be withdrawn to the castle, which was accordingly done.
The funeral of the victims was attended with extraordinary pomp. Most of the shops were closed, all the bells of the town tolled on the occasion, and the corpses were followed to the grave by an immense concourse of people, arranged six abreast, the procession being closed by a long train of carriages, belonging to the principal gentry of the town. Captain Preston and the party of soldiers were afterwards tried. The captain and six of the men were acquitted, and two were brought in guilty of manslaughter; a result which reflected great honor on John Adams and Josiah Quincy, the counsel for the prisoners, and on the jury.
The month of June, '72, furnished a new source of disquietude and animosity. On the 9th of that month, the Providence packet, while sailing into the harbor of Newport, was required, by his majesty's revenue-cutter, the Gaspee, Lieutenant Doddington, to lower her colors. This the captain of the packet deemed repugnant to his patriotic feelings, and the Gaspee fired at the packet, to bring her to; the American, however, still persisted in holding on her course, and, by keeping in shoal water, dexterously contrived to run the schooner aground in the chase. As the tide was upon the ebb, the Gaspee was set fast for the night, and afforded a tempting opportunity for retaliation; and a number of fishermen, aided and encouraged by some of the most respectable inhabitants of Providence, being determined to rid themselves of so uncivil an inspector, in the middle of the night manned several boats, and boarded the Gaspee. The lieutenant was wounded in the affray; but, with every thing belonging to him, he was carefully conveyed on shore, as were all his crew. Thevessel, with her stores, was then burned; and the party returned unmolested to their homes. When the governor became acquainted with this event, he offered a reward of five hundred pounds for the discovery of the offenders.
Burning of the Gaspee.Burning of the Gaspee.
Burning of the Gaspee.
Another fruitful source of mutual ill-feeling between the British ministry and the colonists was the determination of the former to introduceteainto America, and to impose a tax thereon, in opposition to the wishes of the latter. Accordingly, cargoes of tea were sent to New York, Philadelphia, Charleston, and Boston. The fate of these cargoes, thus sent, was different. Those destined for New York and Philadelphia, were sent back by the inhabitants. The citizens of Charleston unloaded the cargo sent thither, and stored it in cellars, where it perished.
On the arrival of the vessel with the tea, in the harbor of Boston, a meeting of the citizens was immediately called. "The hour of destruction," it was said, "or of manly opposition, had now come:" and all who were friends to their country were invited to attend, "to make an united and successfulresistance to this last and worst measure of administration." A great number of people assembled, from the adjoining towns, as well as from the capital, in the celebrated Faneuil Hall, but the meeting was soon adjourned to one of the largest churches in town. Here it was voted, that they would use all lawful means to prevent its being landed, and to have it returned immediately to England.
On the following day, when the citizens assembled to receive the final answer of the factors, as to the course they would pursue in disposing of the tea, a communication was made to the meeting, in which the factors informed them that they must decline sending back the tea; but were ready to have it stored, and remain, until they could hear from the company in England. The citizens continued dissatisfied with the conduct and proposal of the consignees, and again ordered a watch to guard the vessels. It was also again voted, that whoever should import tea into the province, should be considered an enemy to the country.
When it was found that nothing could be effected in a regular way, the meeting was broken up, and a number of men, in disguise, proceeded, late in the evening, to the vessels, then lying at the wharf, which had the tea on board; and, in a short time, every chest was taken out, and the contents thrown into the sea; but no injury was done to any other part of the cargoes.
The inhabitants of the town, generally, had no knowledge of the event until the next day. It is supposed the number concerned in the affair was about fifty; but who they were no one pretended to know. A few of them became known in after years, when it was no longer liable to involve them in trouble.
When intelligence of the destruction of the tea reached Great Britain, and the determined spirit manifested in the colonies, in opposition to all revenue laws, was made known to the ministers, a majority at once resolved on more energetic measures, and found themselves supported byparliament in their plans of coercion, regardless alike of the great principles of the constitution, and of the permanent peace and prosperity of the kingdom. Lord North, it is said, declared "that he would not listen to any complaints or petitions from America, tillshe was at his feet."
Destruction of Tea.Destruction of Tea.
Destruction of Tea.
In a few days, a bill was introduced "for the immediate removal of the officers concerned in the collection of customs from Boston, and to discontinue the landing and discharging, lading and shipping goods, wares, and merchandise, at Boston, or within the harbor thereof." The bill, also, levied a fine upon the town, as a compensation to the East India Company for the destruction of their teas, and was to continue in force during the pleasure of the king. The opposition to this measure was very slight, and it was carried, in both Houses, without a division.
The 1st of June was fixed for the Boston port-bill to go into operation, and the blockade was consequently to commence on that day. On the 13th of May, at a meeting of the inhabitants of Boston, it was resolved to invite the othercolonies to unite in refusing all importations from Great Britain, and to withhold all commercial intercourse with her. To secure their cöoperation, a special messenger was dispatched to New York, Philadelphia, and other places; in every place he was received with great cordiality, and resolutions were immediately adopted, corresponding to the wishes of the people of Boston.
Such was the state of affairs in the colonies generally, in May, when General Gage arrived in Boston, as the successor to Governor Hutchinson, who had been rëcalled. At a former period, he had been, for several years, commander-in-chief of the British military forces in America. Notwithstanding the prejudices of the people to the appointment of a military man, he was received with due honor, and even great ceremony, by the council and citizens, all of whom expressed a hope that his administration would conduce to the peace and welfare of the province.
A short time, however, served to develope the character of General Gage, and his servility to an arbitrary ministry in the mother-country. He threatened to remove the general assembly to Salem—gave his negative to thirteen of the council chosen by the assembly—refused to appoint a day for special prayer, at the request of that body—and, finally, sent a proclamation, by his secretary, to dissolve them.
At this period of increasing turmoil and agitation, the second general congress assembled (September 5, 1774), at Philadelphia, in which all the colonies were represented, excepting Georgia. Peyton Randolph, of Virginia, was elected president, and Charles Thompson, of Philadelphia, secretary.
The most eminent men of the various colonies were now, for the first time, brought together. They were known to each other by fame, but they were, personally, strangers. The meeting was solemn. The object which had called them together, was of incalculable magnitude. The liberties of no less than three millions of people, with that ofall their posterity, were staked on the wisdom and energy of their councils. No wonder, then, at the long and deep silence, which is said to have followed upon their organization; at the anxiety with which the members looked round upon each other; and at the reluctance which every individual felt to open a business so fearfully momentous. In the midst of this deep and death-like silence, and just when it was becoming painfully embarrassing, Mr. Henry arose slowly, as if borne down by the weight of the subject. "After faltering, according to his habit, through a most expressive exordium, in which he merely echoed back the consciousness of every other heart, in deploring his inability to do justice to the occasion, he launched gradually into a recital of the colonial wrongs. Rising, as he advanced, with the grandeur of his subject, and glowing, at length, with all the majesty of the occasion, his speech seemed more than that of mortal man. Mr. Henry was followed by Mr. Richard Henry Lee, in a speech scarcely less powerful, and still more replete with classic eloquence. One spirit of ardent love of liberty pervaded every breast, and produced a unanimity, as advantageous to the cause they advocated, as it was unexpected and appalling to their adversaries."[29]
The congress proceeded with great deliberation; its debates were held with closed doors, and the honor of each member was solemnly engaged not to disclose any of the discussions, till such disclosure was declared advisable by the majority. On the 14th of October, a series of resolutions, regarding the rights and grievances of the colonies, was passed and promulgated. They were couched in strong and undisguised language, and set forth to the world what were considered, by this noble body of men, to be the rights and privileges of the people of America, in defence of which they were ready to peril life, liberty, and fortune.
"A majority of the members of this congress," says Mr.Pitkin, "had little doubt, that the measures taken by them, if supported by the American people, would produce a redress of grievances.
"Richard Henry Lee said to Mr. Adams: 'We shall undoubtedly carry all our points. You will be completely relieved; all the offensive acts will be repealed, the army and fleet will be rëcalled, and Britain will give up her foolish projects.'
Patrick Henry.Patrick Henry.
Patrick Henry.
"George Washington was of opinion that, with the aid of both the non-importation and non-exportation system, America would prevail. Patrick Henry concurred in opinion with Mr. Adams, that the contest must ultimately be decided by force. The proceedings of congress met with the almost unanimous approbation of the people of America. The non-importation agreement, entered into by their delegates, was adopted as their own. Committees of vigilance were appointed in all the towns and districts, and the names of those who disregarded it, were published as the enemies of public liberty."
Before the close of the year, the busy note of preparation resounded through almost every colony. The Massachusetts committee were indefatigable in providing for the most vigorous defence in the spring. They had procured all sorts of military supplies for the service of twelve thousand men, and had engaged the assistance of the three neighboring provinces of New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Connecticut.
While the notes of warlike preparation were thus sounding louder and louder through the country, the British parliament assembled on the other side of the waters. In January, 1775, Lord Chatham having taken his seat, moved "That an humble address be presented his majesty, most humbly to advise and beseech his majesty, that, in order to open the way towards our happy settlement of the dangerous troubles in America, by beginning to allay ferments and soften animosities there; and above all, for preventing, in the mean time, any sudden and fatal catastrophe at Boston, now suffering under daily irritation of an army before their eyes, posted in their town; it may graciously please his majesty, that immediate orders may be dispatched to General Gage, for removing his majesty's forces from the town of Boston, as soon as the season and other circumstances, indispensable to the safety and accommodation of the said troops, may render the same practicable."
Notwithstanding this motion was persuasively urged by Lord Chatham, and ably supported by Lord Camden, Lord Shelburne, and the Marquis of Rockingham, it was rejected by a large majority.
Immediately following its rejection, the minister proposed, in the House of Commons, a joint address to the king, on American affairs. In this address, which was carried by large majorities, parliament declared that Massachusetts was in a state of rebellion; and that this colony had been supported by unlawful combinations, and engagements entered into by several of the other colonies, to the great injury and oppression of his majesty's subjects in GreatBritain. Assuring his majesty of their determination never to relinquish the sovereign authority of the king and parliament over the colonies, they requested him to take the most effectual measures to enforce obedience to that authority, and promised him their support, at the hazard of their lives and property. Opposition to the address was made in both houses, but in vain. The king, in his answer, declared his firm determination, in compliance with their request, to enforce obedience to the laws and authority of the supreme legislature of the empire. His answer was followed by a message requesting an increase of his forces by sea and land.
Thus the determination of king and parliament was formed. Left of God to follow the counsels of a proud, overbearing, and obstinate ministry, they had now made declarations and taken positions, from which there was no retreat but by concessions, which were not to be expected. In due time, "the news"—and, such intelligence had not before been borne across the waters of the Atlantic—so exciting—so appalling—so maddening—"the news arrived of the king's speech at the opening of parliament; of the resolutions adopted by that body; and, finally, of the act by which the inhabitants of Massachusetts were proclaimed rebels. All the province flew to arms; indignation became fury,—obstinacy, desperation.
"'We must look back no more!' said the colonies—'we must conquer or die! We are placed between altars smoking with the most grateful incense of glory and gratitude, on the one part, and blocks and dungeons on the other. Let each then rise, and gird himself for the combat. The dearest interests of this world command it; our most holy religion enjoins it; that God, who eternally rewards the virtuous and punishes the wicked, ordains it. Let us accept these happy auguries; for already the mercenary satellites, sent by wicked ministers to reduce this innocent people to extremity, are imprisoned within the walls of a single city, where hunger emaciates them, rage devours them, death consumes them. Let us banish every fear,every alarm; fortune smiles upon the efforts of the brave!' By similar discourses, they excited one another, and prepared themselves for defence. 'The fatal moment is arrived! the signal of civil war is given!'"[30]
Thus was the way prepared for a contest which king and parliament might, at one time, have easily avoided. Had they listened to the warning voice of Chatham, descending to his grave, or had they regarded the dictates of common political wisdom, America might have been retained, and with all her loyalty and affection, as a dependency. But God designed a better portion for her; and hence he allowed the monarch and the statesmen of England to adopt measures the most impolitic and oppressive—the result of which was—as we shall see—the independence of America, and the loss to the British crown of its brightest jewel.