CHAPTER I.EARLY HISTORY.
The history of Tea is intimately bound up with that of China, that is, so far as the Western world is concerned, its production and consumption being for centuries confined to that country. But, having within the past two centuries become known and almost indispensable as an article of diet in every civilized country of the globe, it cannot but prove interesting to inquire into the progress, properties and effects of a commodity which could have induced so large a portion of mankind to abandon so many other articles of diet in its favor, as well as the results of its present enormous consumption.
Although now to be found in a wild state in the mountain-ranges of Assam, and in a state of cultivation through a wide range from India to Japan, the original country of Tea is not definitely known, but from the fact of its being in use in China from the earliest times it is commonly attributed to that country. Yet though claimed to have been known in China long anterior to the Christian era, and even said to have been mentioned in theSao-Pao, published 2700B. C., and also in theRye, 600B. C., the exact date or manner of its first discovery and use in that country is still in doubt. One writer claims that the famous herb was cultivated and classified in China 2000B. C., almost as completely as it is to-day, and that it was used as a means of promoting amity between Eastern monarchs and potentates at this early period.Chin-Nung, a celebrated scholar and philosopher, who existed long before Confucius, is claimed to have said of it: “Tea is better than wine, for it leadeth not to intoxication, neither does it cause a man to say foolish things and repent thereof in his sober moments. It is better than water, for it doth not carry disease; neither doth it act as a poison, as doth water when the wells contain foul and rotten matter,” and Confucius admonishes his followers to: “Be good and courteous to all, even to the stranger from other lands. If he say unto thee that he thirsteth give unto hima cup of warm Teawithout money and without price.”
A Chinese legend ascribes its first discovery to one Darma, a missionary, famed throughout the East for his religious zeal, who, in order to set an example of piety to his followers, imposed on himself various privations, among which was that of forswearing sleep. After some days and nights passed in this austere manner, he was overcome and involuntarily fell into a deep slumber, on awakening from which he was so distressed at having violated his vow, and in order to prevent a repetition of allowing “tired eyelids to rest on tired eyes,” he cut off the offending portions and flung them to the ground. On returning the next day, he discovered that they had undergone a strange metamorphosis, becoming changed into a shrub, the like of which had never been seen before. Plucking some of the leaves and chewing them he found his spirits singularly exhilarated, and his former vigor so much restored that he immediately recommended the newly discovered boon to his disciples.
Tradition, on the other hand, never at a loss for some marvelous story, but with more plausibility, claims that the use of Tea was first discovered accidentally in China by some Buddhist priests, who, unable to use the brackishwater near their temple, steeped in it the leaves of a shrub, growing in the vicinity, with the intention of correcting its unpleasant properties. The experiment was so successful that they informed the inhabitants of their discovery, subsequently cultivating the plant extensively for that express purpose. While another record attributes its first discovery about 2737B. C.to the aforementioned Chin-Nung, to whom all agricultural and medicinal knowledge is traced in China. In replenishing a fire made of the branches of the Tea plant, some of the leaves fell into the vessel in which he was boiling water for his evening meal. Upon using it he found it to be so exciting and exhilarating in its effects that he continued to use it; imparting the knowledge thus gained to others, its use soon spread throughout the country.
These accounts connected with the first discovery of the Tea plant in China are purely fabulous, and it is not until we come down to the fourth century of the Christian era that we can trace any positive allusion to it by a Chinese writer. But, as the early history of nearly every other ancient discovery is more or less vitiated by fable, we ought not to be any more fastidious or less indulgent towards the marvelous in the discovery of Tea than we are towards that of fire, iron, glass or coffee. The main facts may be true, though the details be incorrect; and, though the accidental discovery of fire may not have been made by Suy-Jin in the manner claimed, yet it probably was communicated originally by the friction of two sticks. Nor may it be strictly correct to state that Fuh-he made the accidental discovery of iron by the burning of wood on brown earth any more than the Phœnicians discovered the making of glass by burning green wood on sand, yet it is not improbable that some such accidental processes first led to thesediscoveries. Thus, also, considerable allowances are to be deducted from the scientific discoveries of Chin-Nung in botany, when we read of his having, in one day, discovered no less than seventy different species of plants that were poisonous and seventy others that were antidotes against their baneful effects.
According to some Chinese authorities, the Tea plant was first introduced into their country from Corea as late as the fourth century of the present era, from whence it is said to have been carried to Japan in the ninth. Others again maintaining that it is undoubtedly indigenous to China, being originally discovered on the hills of those provinces, where it now grows so abundantly, no date, however, being named. While the Japanese, to whom the plant is as valuable as it is to the Chinese, state that both countries obtained it simultaneously from Corea, about A. D. 828. This latter claim not being sustained by any proof whatever—Von Siebold, to the contrary—who, relying on the statements of certain Japanese writers to this effect, argues in support of their assertions, the improbability of which is unconsciously admitted by Von Siebold himself when he observes “that in the southern provinces of Japan the tea plant is abundant on the plains, but as the traveler advances towards the mountains it disappears,” hence inferring that it is an exotic. The converse of this theory holding good of China, a like inference tends to but confirm their claim that with them the plant is indigenous. That the Japanese did not originally obtain the plant from Corea but from China is abundantly proven by the Japanese themselves, many of whom admit that it was first introduced to their country from China about the middle of the ninth century. In support of this acknowledgment it is interesting to note, as confirming the Chinese originof tea, that there is still standing at Uji, not far from Osaka, a temple erected on what is said to have been the first tea plantation established in Japan, sacred to the traditions of the Japanese and in honor of the Chinese who first introduced the tea plant into the Island empire. Another more authentic account states that the Tea-seed was brought to Japan from China by the Buddhist priest Mi-yoye, about the beginning of the thirteenth century, and first planted in the southern island of Kiusiu, from whence its cultivation soon spread throughout that country.
Some English writers go so far as to claim that Assam, in India, is the original country of tea, from the fact thata specieshas been discovered there in a wild state as well as in the slopes of the Himalaya mountains. But though found in both a wild and cultivated state in many countries of the East at the present time, all its Western traditions point to China, and to Chinaonly, as theoriginalcountry of Tea, and that the plant is native and indigenous to that country is indisputably beyond question.
It was not known to the Greeks or Romans in any form; and that it could not have been known in India in very early times is inferred from the fact that no reference to the plant or its product is to be found in theSanscrit. But that the plant and its use, not only as an agreeable and exhilarating beverage, but as an article of traffic worthy of other nations, must have been known to the Chinese as early as the first century of the Christian era, the following extract from an ancient work entitled the “Periplous of theErythræan Sea,” may serve to prove. The author, usually supposed to be Arryan, after describing “a city called Thinæ,” proceeds to narrate a yearly mercantile journey to the vicinity of “a certain peoplecalled Sesatæi, of short stature, broad faces, and flat noses”—evidently natives of China—adds “that the articles they bring for traffic outwardly resemble vine leaves, being wrapped in mats, which they leave behind them on their departure to their own country in the interior. From these mats the Thinæ pick out a haulm, calledpetros, from which they draw the fibre and stalks; spreading out the leaves, they double and make them up into balls, passing the fibre through them, in which form they take the name ofMalabathrum, and under this name they are brought into India by those who so prepare them.” Under any interpretation this account sounds like a remote, obscure and confused story. Still one of the authors of the able “Historical Account of China,” published in 1836, has ventured to identify this Malabathrum of the Thinæ with the Tea of the Chinese. Vossius Vincent and other authors, while admitting the difficulty of understanding why it should be carried from Arracan to China, and from China back to India, unhesitatingly assert that Malabathrum was nothing more than the Betel-leaf, so widely used in the East at the time as a masticatory. Horace mentions Malabathrum, but only as an ointment. Pliny refers to it both in that sense and as a medicine. Dioscorides describing it as a masticatory only. While the author of the “Historical Account” prefers to consider the passage in the Periplous as a very clumsy description of a process not intelligently understood by the describer, but as agreeing far better with the manipulation of Tea than with that of the Betel-leaf, and his conjecture, unsupported as it is, merits citation if only for its originality.
The first positive reference to Tea is that by Kieu-lung in the fourth century, who not only describes the plant, but also the process of preparing it, of which thefollowing is a free and condensed translation: “On a slow fire set a tripod, whose color and texture show its long use, and fill it with clear snow-water. Boil it as long as would be sufficient to turn cray-fish red, and throw it upon the delicate leaves of choice Tea. Let it remain as long as the vapor arises in a cloud and only a thin mist floats on the surface. Then at your ease drink the precious liquor so prepared, which will chase away the five causes of sorrow. You can taste and feel, but not describe the state of repose produced by a beverage thus prepared.” It is again mentioned by Lo-yu, a learned Chinese, who lived during the dynasty of Tang, in 618, who became quite enthusiastic in its praise, claiming that “It tempers the spirits, harmonizes the mind, dispels lassitude and relieves fatigue, awakens thought and clears the perceptive faculties,” and according to theKiang-moo, an historical epitome, an impost duty was levied on Tea as early as 782 by the Emperor Te-Tsing, and continued to the present day.
McPherson, in his “History of European Commerce with India,” states that Tea is mentioned as the usual beverage of the Chinese by Solieman, an Arabian merchant, who wrote an account of his travels in the East about the year 850. By the close of the ninth century, however, Tea was found in general use among the Chinese, the tax upon it at that time being a source of considerable revenue as recorded by Abuzeid-el-Hazen, an Arabian traveler cited by Renaudot in a translation of his work. There is also independent evidence furnished by two other Arabian travelers in a narrative of their wanderings during the latter half of the ninth century, admitting their statements to be trustworthy as to the general use of Tea as a beverage among the Chinese at that period. Moorish travelers appear to have introducedit into Mohammedan countries early in the tenth century, and other travelers in China in the seventeenth give most extravagant accounts of its virtues, which appears to have been in very general use throughout the greater part of Asia at that time.
Father de Rhodes, a Jesuit missionary, who entered China in 1633, states that “the use of Tea is common throughout the East,and begins, I perceive, to be known in Europe. It is in all the world to be found only in two provinces of China, where the gathering of it occupies the people as the vintage does us.” Adding that he found it in his own case to be an instantaneous remedy for headache, and when compelled to sit up all night to hear confessions its use saved him from drowsiness and fatigue. Adam Olearius, describing the travels of an embassy to Persia in 1631, says of the Persians: “They are great frequenters of taverns, called Tzai Chattai, where they drink Thea or Cha, which the Tartars bring from China, and to which they assign extravagant qualities, imagining that it alone will keep a man in perfect health, and are sure to treat all who visit them to this drink at all hours.” These strong expressions as to the use of Tea, applying as they do to a period not later than 1640, are sufficient to prove that the ordinary accounts place the introduction of that beverage as regards Europe, particularly the Continent, as too late.
The earliest European notice of Tea is that found in a work by Ramusio, first printed in 1550, though written several years prior to that year. In it he quotes Hazzi Mohamed in effect, “And these people of Cathay (China) do say that if these in our parts of the world only knewof Tea, there is no doubt that our merchants would cease altogether to useRavino Cini, as they call rhubarb.” Yet no accounts at present accessible establish the date of its first introduction into Europe, and it is also a difficult matter to determine to which of the two nations—Portugal or Holland—the credit of first introducing it belongs. Some writers claiming that the Dutch East India Company brought Tea to Amsterdam in 1600, while the Portuguese claim the honor of its first introduction prior to that year. An indisputable argument in favor of the latter is the notice given of it by Giovani Maffei in his “History of India,” published in 1559. “The inhabitants of China, like those of Japan,” he writes, “extract from an herb calledChiaa beverage which they drink warm, and which is extremely wholesome, being a remedy against phlegm, languor and a promoter of longevity.” While Giovani Botero, another Portuguese, in a work published in the same year, states that “the Chinese have an herb from which they press a delicate juice, which they use instead of wine, finding it to be a preservative against these diseases which are produced by the use of wine amongst us.” Taxiera, also a native of Portugal, states that he saw the dried leaves of Tea at Malacca some years prior to 1600, and the article is also mentioned in one of the earliest privileges accorded to the Portuguese for trading in 1558; yet it was not until nearly a century from the beginning of that trade that we find the first distinct account from a European pen of the use of Tea as a beverage.
In a “Dissertation upon Tea, by Thomas Short,” printed in London, in 1730, the author gives the following account of its first introduction into Europe: “The Dutch East India Company on their second voyageto China carried thither a good store of Sage and exchanged it with the Chinese for Tea, receiving three to four pounds of the last for one pound of the first, by calling it a wonderful European herb possessed of as many virtues as the Indians could ascribe to their shrub-leaf. But because they exported not such large quantities of Sage as they imported of Tea they also bought a great deal of the latter, giving eight- to tenpence a pound for it in China. And when they first brought it to Paris they sold it for thirty livres the pound; but thirty years ago the Chinese sold it at threepence, and never above ninepence a pound at any time, frequently mixing it with other herbs to increase the quantity.” Macaulay also states in the history of his embassy to China that “early in the seventeenth century some Dutch adventurers, seeking for such objects as might fetch a price in China, and hearing of a general use there of a beverage produced from a plant of the country, bethought themselves of trying how far a European plant of supposed great virtues might also be appreciated by the Chinese; they accordingly introduced to them the herb Sage, the Dutch accepting in exchange the Chinese Tea, which they brought back with them to Holland.” These statements but tend to confirm the Portuguese claim, the efforts of the Dutch to open up trade with the Chinese in Tea being evidently made many years subsequent to its introduction by the former; in still further support of which the following may be noted:—
In 1662Charles II.married the Portuguese princess, Catharine of Braganza, who, it is said, was very fond of Tea, having been accustomed to it in her own country. Waller, in a poem celebrating the event, ascribes its first introduction to her country in the appended lines:—
“Venus her myrtle has—Phœbus her bays;Tea both excels, which she vouchsafes to praise.The best of Queens andbest of herbs we oweTo that proud nation which the way did show.”
“Venus her myrtle has—Phœbus her bays;Tea both excels, which she vouchsafes to praise.The best of Queens andbest of herbs we oweTo that proud nation which the way did show.”
“Venus her myrtle has—Phœbus her bays;Tea both excels, which she vouchsafes to praise.The best of Queens andbest of herbs we oweTo that proud nation which the way did show.”
“Venus her myrtle has—Phœbus her bays;
Tea both excels, which she vouchsafes to praise.
The best of Queens andbest of herbs we owe
To that proud nation which the way did show.”
The earliest mention made of Tea by an Englishman is that contained in a letter from a Mr. Wickham, agent of the East India Company at Firando, Japan, and dated June 27, 1615, to a Mr. Eaton, another officer of the Company, resident at Macao, China, asking for “a pot of the best Cha.” How the commission was executed does not appear, but in Mr. Eaton’s subsequent account of expenditures occurs this item, “Three silver porringers to drink Tea in.” The first person, however, to advocate the use of Tea in Europe was Cornelius Bottrekoe, a professor of the Leyden University, who, in a treatise on “Tea, Coffee and Chocolate,” published in 1649, strongly pronounces in favor of the former, denying the possibility of its being injurious even when taken in immoderate quantities.
Tea was evidently known in England previous to its direct importation there, small quantities having been brought from Holland as early as 1640, but used only on rare occasions. The earliest mention made of it, however, is that contained in a copy of the “Mercurius Politicus,” at present in the British Museum, and dated September, 1658, in which attention is called to “that excellent, and by all Physitians approved, China drink, called by the Chineans Tcha, by other nations Tay, sold at the Sultaness Head, a Cophee-house by the Royal Exchange, London.” The most famous house for Tea at this early period, however, was Garway’s, more popularly known for upwards of two centuries as “Garraway’s,” being swept away only a few years ago by the march of improvement. Defoe refers to it as being “frequentedonly by people of quality, who had business in the city and the wealthier citizens”; but later it became the resort of speculators, and here it was that the numerous schemes which surrounded and accompanied the “Great South Sea Bubble” had their centre, and, appropriately enough, “Garraway’s” was also the headquarters of that most remarkable but disastrous Tea speculation of 1842.
A singular handbill issued by its founder is still extant, being discovered by accident in a volume of pamphlets found in the British Museum, where it may still be inspected. Although the document bears no date, there is ample internal evidence to prove that it must have been printed about 1660. It is a quaint and extraordinary production, purporting to be “An exact description of the leaf Tea, made according to the directions of the most knowing merchants and travelers in those Eastern countries, by Thomas Garway,” setting forth that:—
“Tea is generally brought from China, growing there on little shrubs, the branches whereof are garnished with white flowers of the bigness and fashion of sweetbriar, but smell unlike, and bearing green leaves of the bigness of myrtle or sumac, which leaves are gathered every day, the best being gathered by virgins who are destined for the work, the said leaves being of such known virtues that those nations famous for antiquity, knowledge and wisdom do frequently sell it among themselves for twice its weight in silver. That it hath been used only as a regalia in high treatments and entertainments, presents being made thereof to grandees.”
Proceeding at considerable length to enumerate its “virtues,” many of which are decidedly apocryphal, and attributing to the beverage, among its other properties, that of—
“Making the body active and lusty, helping the headache, giddiness and heaviness, removing the difficulty of breathing, clearing the sight, banishing lassitude, strengthening the stomach, causing good appetite and digestion, vanishing heavy dreams, easing the frame, strengthening the memory, and finally preventing consumption, particularly when drank with milk.”
Many other remarkable properties being credited to this wonderful “Chinese herb,” the advertiser closes his great encomiums by suggesting—
“That all persons of eminence and quality, gentlemen, and others who have occasion for tea in the leaf may be supplied. These are to give notice that the said Thomas hath the same to sell from sixteen to fifty shillings the pound.”
If the article had possessed but a tithe of the virtues and excellencies accorded to it by the celebrated Garway it must have been recognized at the time as the coming boon to man.
Up to 1660 no mention is made of Tea in the English statute books, although it is cited in an act of the first parliament of the Restoration of the same year, which imposed a tax of “eightpence on everygallonmade and sold, to be paid by the maker thereof.” This was subsequently increased to five shillings per pound in the Leaf, which at the time was stated to be “no small prejudice to the article, as well as an inconvenience to the drinker.” Ever since that year the duty on Tea has been one of the hereditary customs of the Crown, though Parliament has at sundry times, by different acts, fixed divers duties upon it.
Pepys alludes to Tea in his Diary, under date of September 25, 1661, the entry reading: “I did send for a cup of Tee, a China drink, of which I never drank before”; and again, in 1667, he further mentions it. “Home, and there find my wife making of Tee, a drink which Mr.Pelling, the Potticary, says is good for her cold.” But that it still must have continued rare, is very evident, as in 1664, it is recorded that the East India Company made the king what was then considered “a brilliant present of 2 lbs. of Tea, costing forty shillings,” and two years later another present of 22 lbs., both parcels being purchased on the Continent for the purpose.
It was not until 1668 that the East India Company is credited with the direct importation of Tea into England, which, although chartered in 1600, for the first time considered Tea worthy their attention as an article of trade. The order sent to their agents in that year was: “for 100 lbs. of the bestTeythey could procure to the amount of £25 sterling.” Their instructions must, however, have been considerably exceeded, as the quantity received was 4,713 lbs., a supply which seems to have “glutted the market” for several years after. Up to this time no alarm had been excited that the use of Tea was putting in peril the stalwarthood of the British race. But in the very year of this large importation we find Saville writing to his uncle Coventry, in sharp reproof of certain friends of his “who call for Tea, instead of pipes and wine,” stigmatizing its use as “a base, unworthy Indian practice,” and adding, with an audible sigh, “the truth is, all nations are getting so wicked as to have some of those filthy customs.” Whether from sympathy of the public with these indignant reprehensions or other causes, the whole recorded imports for the six following years amounted to only 410 lbs., the quantities imported continuing small and consisting exclusively of the finer sorts for several years thereafter.
The first considerable shipment of tea reached London about 1695, from which year the imports steadily and rapidly increased until the end of the seventeenth century,when the annual importations averaged 20,000 pounds. In 1703 orders were sent from England to China for 85,000 pounds of Green Tea and 25,000 pounds of Black, the average price at this period ranging from 16 to 20 shillings ($4 to $5) per pound. The Company’s official account of their trade did not commence before 1725, but according to Milburn’s “Oriental Commerce” the consumption in the year 1711 had increased to upwards of 142 million pounds, in 1711 to 121 millions, and in 1720 to 238 million pounds. Since which time there has been nothing in the history of commerce so remarkable as the growth and development of the trade in Tea, becoming, as it has, one of the most important articles of foreign production consumed.
For above a century and a half the sole object of the English East India Company’s trade with China was to furnish Tea for consumption in England, the Company during that period enjoying a monopoly of the Tea trade to the exclusion of all other parties. They were bound, however, “to send orders for Tea from time to time, provide ships for its transportation, and always to keep at least one year’s supply in their warehouses,” being also compelled to “bring all Teas to London, and there offer them at public sale quarterly, and to dispose of them at one penny per pound advance on the gross cost of importation, the price being determined by adding their prime cost in China to the expenses of freight, insurance, interest on capital invested, and other charges.” But in December, 1680, Thomas Eagle of the “King’s Head,” a noted coffee-house in St. James, inserted in theLondon Gazettethe following advertisement, which shows that Tea continued to be imported independently of the East India Company: “These are to give notice to persons of quality that a small parcel of most excellentTea has, by accident, fallen into the hands of a private person to be sold. But that none may be disappointed, the lowest price is 30 shillings in the pound, and not any to be sold under a pound in weight.” The persons of quality were also requested to bring a convenient box with them to hold it.
The East India Company enjoyed a monopoly of the trade in Tea up to 1834, when, owing to the methods of calculation adopted by the Company, and the heavier expenses which always attend every department of a trade monopoly, the prices were greatly enhanced. Much dissatisfaction prevailing with its management, this system of importing Teas was abolished, the Company being deprived of its exclusive privileges, and the Tea trade thrown open to all.
In all probability Tea first reached America from England, which country began to export in 1711, but it is claimed to have been previously introduced by some Dutch smugglers, no definite date being given. The first American ship sailed for China in 1784, two more vessels being dispatched the following year, bringing back 880,000 pounds of Tea. During 1786-87, five other ships brought to the United States over 1,000,000 pounds. In 1844, the “Howqua” and “Montauk” were built expressly for the Tea trade, being the first of the class of vessels known as “Clippers,” in which speed was sought at the expense of carrying capacity, and by which the average passage was reduced from twenty to thirty days for the round trip. The trade in tea was entirely transacted at Canton until 1842, when the ports of Shanghai, Amoy andFoochow were opened by the treaty of Nankin, the China tea trade being mainly conducted at the latter ports. As late as 1850, all vessels trading in tea carried considerable armament, a necessaryprecaution against the pirates who swarmed in the China seas during the first half of the last century.
The progress of this famous plant has been something like the progress of Truth, suspected at first, though very palatable to those who had the courage to taste it, resisted as it encroached, and abused as its use spread, but establishing its triumph at last in cheering the world, from palace to cottage, by the resistless effect of time and its own virtues only; becoming a beverage appreciated by all, as well as an agent of progress and civilization.
Although Tea may be claimed to be in all its associations eminently peaceful, growing as it does on the hill-sides of one of the most peaceful countries in the world, coming to us through the peace-promoting ways of commerce, until it reaches its ultimate destination, that centre of peace—the family table—and like peaceful sleep, “knitting up the raveled sleeve of care,” yet it has been the occasion of several wars and political problems, the latest of which is the precipitation of the great Chinese exodus, which at present threatens such vital results, not only to our own country, but possibly to the world at large.
It was destined—as in all social and political affairs, the greatest and most important events are curiously linked with the smallest and most insignificant—to be the final crisis of the American Revolutionary movement. Think of it!The birth of the greatest nation of all time due to a three-penny tax on tea!It was the article chosen above all others to emphasize the principles that“all men are born free and equal,” and that “taxation without representation is tyranny,” and for the establishment of which principles a war was fought, that when judged by the law of results, proves to have been the most important and fruitful recorded on history’s pages. Who, in looking back over the long range of events conserving to create our now great country, can fail to have his attention attracted to what has been termed, with a characteristic touch of American humor, “The Boston Tea Party of 1773”? Who could have then predicted the marvelous change that a single century of free government would have wrought? Who could have dreamed that Tea would have proved such an important factor in such a grand result? What a lesson to despotic governments! A dreary November evening; a pier crowded with excited citizens; a few ships in the harbor bearing a hated cargo—hated not of itself, but for the principles involved; on the decks a mere handful of young men—a few leaders in Israel—urged on by the fiery prescience of genius, constituting themselves an advance guard to lead the people from out the labyrinth of Remonstrance into the wilderness of Revolution.
It is true that previously other questions had been factors in the dispute, but a cursory glance at the history of the time will show that heated debates had been followed by periods of rest, and acts of violence by renewed loyalty. The “Navigation laws” had caused much indignation and many protests, but no violence to mention. As early as 1768 the famous “Stamp Act” was passed and repealed. The period intervening between its passage and repeal gave opportunity for public opinion to crystallize and shape itself. It sifted out of the people a modern Demosthenes, gifted with the divine power of draping the graceful garment of language round the firm body ofanIDEA! George III. would not profit by the example of Cæsar or of Charles, and while North had avowed his willingness to repeal the tax on all other articles, he promised the king that “he would maintain this one tax on Tea to prove to the Colonists his right to tax.”
The trade in Tea at this time was a monopoly of the English East India Company, which just then had acquired an immense political prestige, but lost heavily by the closing of the American market, the Company’s warehouses in London remaining full of it, causing their revenue to decline. North was induced to offer them a measure of relief by releasing from taxation in England the Tea intended for America, but he still persisted in maintaining the duty of threepence to be paid in American ports, and on the 10th of May this farcical scheme of fiscal readjustment became a law. The Company obtained a license for the free-duty exportation of their Tea to America in disregard of the advice of those who knew that the Colonists would not receive it. Four ships laden with Tea were despatched to the ports of Boston, New York, Philadelphia and Charleston. The Colonists prepared for their expected arrival, public meetings being held in Philadelphia and Boston, at which it was resolved thatthe Tea should be sent back to England, and so notified the Company’s agents at these ports. The Boston consignees refused to comply with the popular demand, all persuasion failing to move them. The matter was then referred to the Committees, who immediately resolved to use force where reason was not heeded. When the vessels arrived, a meeting was held in the Old South Church, at which it was resolved, “come what will, the Tea should not be landed or the duty paid.” Another appeal was made to the Governor, which was also denied! Upon this announcement Samuel Adamsarose, saying, “This meeting can do nothing more to save the country.” The utterance of these words was a preconcerted signal; the response, an Indian war-whoop from the crowd outside. A band of young men, not over fifty, disguised as, and styling themselves, “Mohawks,” rushed down to the wharf where the vessels lay; the ships were boarded, the Tea chests broken open and emptied into the river.From the moment that the first Tea-leaf touched the water the whole atmosphere surrounding the issues involved changed! In that instant, with the rapidity of thought, the Colonies vanished and America arose!
When the news of these proceedings reached England, it provoked a storm of anger, not only among the adherents of the government, but also among the mercantile and manufacturing classes, they having suffered heavy losses by the stoppage of trade with America. The commercial importance and parliamentary influence of the East India Company swelled the outcry of indignation against which they termed the outrage of destroying its property. All united in the resolve to punish the conduct of Boston for its rejection of the least onerous one of an import duty on tea. What followed has been told in song and story—Lexington and Concord, Bunker Hill, Valley Forge and Yorktown. A new nation sprang into existence, taking its stand upon the pedestal of “EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL,” under a new government “OF THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE.”