Slike strani
PDF
ePub

80

JAMES OTIS CONGRESS AT NEW YORK.

taxes on the colony, were carried against the sense of the older and more prudent members.

The Legislature was forthwith dissolved by the Governor, but the resolutions' were soon diffused by the newspapers throughout all the colonies, were virtually adopted by the American people, and formally adopted by some of the Legislatures.

2

In Massachusetts the proposition made in its Legislature by James Otis, one of the most prominent for zeal and ability in vindicating colonial rights, to call a general congress of the colonies to meet in New York in October, was adopted.3

In consequence of this recommendation, deputies chosen by the Legislatures of Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island; Pennsylvania, Maryland and South Carolina, and by inferior authorities in New York, New Jersey, and Delaware, assembled at New York; and, after a declaration of their exclusive right to tax themselves, they, with equal temper and decision, addressed the king and each House of Parliament on the subject of their grievances. They adjourned on the 25th of October, after a session of eighteen days.

5

New Hampshire, though not averse to their purpose, had not thought it prudent to send deputies; and the Legislatures of Virginia and North Carolina were not in session when the circular letter of Massachusetts was issued. Georgia sent an express to obtain a copy of the proceedings of the Congress.

At the same time associations were formed throughout the colonies to abstain from the use of British

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

fabrics; to wear homespun; to encourage domestic manufactures; to dispense with the ordinary badges of mourning; and to use all their means of increasing the number of their sheep.

So effectual had been the opposition to this hated act, that on the 1st of November, 1765, when it was to go into operation, it is said there was neither a stamp, nor a stamp officer, to be found throughout the colonies.

A change of the British ministry took place in the summer of 1765, unconnected with American affairs, but in consequence of some personal dislikes of the king. The Marquis of Rockingham was placed at the head of the treasury, and though he and some others of the ministry were opposed to the stamp act, there was then no intention of repealing it. But at the ensuing session of Parliament, Pitt, whose support the ministers had courted, and whose opposition they felt themselves not strong enough to encounter, made a powerful speech in favor of an instant and unconditional repeal of the stamp act, denying that America, being unrepresented in Parliament, could be legally, constitutionally or reasonably taxed by that body, but at the same time asserting its unlimited right to regulate their trade and manufactures

adding that if this power were denied, he would not permit them to manufacture a lock of wool, or make a horseshoe or hobnail. He was warmly and ably opposed by Grenville, and by the favor of the House was permitted, or rather called upon to make a second speech. His eloquence, backed by his popularity, by the seeming impossibility of executing the law in America without force, and by the clamor of the merchants and manufacturers of Great Britain, proved decisive. After some time spent in discussing the question of hearing the petitions of Congress, in reading papers relative to riots in VOL. I. — 6

82

STAMP ACT REPEALED.

New York and Rhode Island, and in the examination of witnesses, among whom was Dr. Franklin, the repeal was carried by two hundred and seventy-five votes against one hundred and sixty-seven; and in the Lords, where the repeal was supported by Lord Camden, it was carried by one hundred and five to seventy-one, on the avowed ground that the act would be "productive of consequences greatly detrimental to the commercial interests of these kingdoms."

A declaratory act was at the same time passed, asserting in the most unqualified terms the rightful power of Parliament to bind the colonies in all cases whatever, and that all declarations of the colonial Assemblies to the contrary were null and void.

The repeal diffused joy and exultation throughout the colonies. Yet it soon appeared that the reconciliation between them and Great Britain was not cordial, or likely to be lasting. The Declaratory Act was indeed little heeded, it being at first regarded as the abstract assertion of a right against an actual surrender of it; but the duties on imports remaining unrepealed, so far as they were prohibitory, they deprived the colonies of a most gainful traffic; and so far as they were operative, they were viewed by the more intelligent colonists as real taxes under the form of regulations of trade.

Great Britain, on the other hand, was offended by the bold denial made by some of the colonial Legislatures of her right to tax the colonies in any case. Nor was this all. Those Legislatures had been requested by their respective Governors to compensate such individuals as had suffered in their attempts to execute the stamp act; and Massachusetts, in her act of indemnity, gave “a free pardon to all offenders," and used other expressions equally offensive to the asserters of British supremacy.

CHARLES TOWNSHEND.

83

The Legislature of New York had also given great offence. It had refused to pass such laws for the accommodation of quartered troops as were required by act of Parliament. There was also a partial opposition to the same act in Massachusetts, New Jersey and Georgia.

With these causes of mutual irritation, and when the colonies openly and unanimously denied the right of Great Britain to tax them, while a large majority of the British nation insisted on the right, and believed it to be essential to secure the dependence of the colonies, a question deemed so momentous by both parties was not likely to remain long unsettled.

The ministry was again changed, and assigned to men whose sentiments towards America were more in accordance with those of the king. The new chancellor of the exchequer was Charles Townshend, of shining parts rather than a wise statesman, and who had been among the foremost in resisting the claims of the colonists. He brought in a bill for laying duties on tea, glass, paper, and painters' colors imported into the colonies; which passed without much opposition the duties not being very heavy, and being moreover regarded as regulations of trade.

But the distinction which had been made between internal and external taxes both in England and the colonies, was no longer recognised in Massachusetts, where the subject had been more fully discussed. That colony showed the same opposition to these new duties that they had shown to the stamp act, and, at the first meeting of the General Court after they had received intelligence of the passage of Townshend's bill, they addressed a circular letter to all the colonies, and proposed that they should unite in adopting the best modes of defending their rights; and for that purpose should

[blocks in formation]

have a mutual correspondence. They at the same time sent a petition to the king, a representation to the ministry, and instructions to their provincial agent in England.

These occurrences in Massachusetts having been the subject of free animadversion by Governor Bernard to the ministry, Lord Hillsborough, the secretary of state, instructed Bernard to require of the Legislature of Massachusetts to rescind the resolution which had authorised the circular letter to the colonies, and he at the same time wrote to the governors of the other colonies censuring the Assembly of Massachusetts. The Governor accordingly called upon the General Court to rescind the offensive resolution; but they replied that they had no power to rescind the act of a former Legislature ; which act, moreover, they openly justified.

A riot took place in Boston in consequence of the seizure of a vessel from Madeira belonging to John Hancock, in which the officers of the customs were insulted, and their lives endangered. The commissioners of the customs recently appointed to execute these new measures, alarmed for their safety, took flight. Bernard dissolved the Assembly.

But another occurrence influenced the public mind yet more. On the arrival of the troops sent to Boston to intimidate the colonists, and if necessary, to compel their submission, the people of Boston lost no opportunity of showing their hatred and ill-will towards these troops. On some act of unusual provocation, a portion of a company under Captain Preston fired on the townsmen, and three men were killed. This affair, which was called the "Boston massacre," was diligently improved into the means of inflaming the passions of the people to the highest pitch.

« PrejšnjaNaprej »