Part 36 (1/2)

Pennsylvania's protest.--The Pennsylvania a.s.sembly considered that parliament had no right to tax the colony. Jackson, the colonial agent, was instructed to remonstrate against the proposed Stamp Act and to endeavor to secure the repeal or modification of the Sugar Act. Franklin was sent over to a.s.sist Jackson.

Maryland and Virginia.--In Maryland the governor prevented the meeting of the a.s.sembly, but the Virginia council and burgesses prepared an address to the king, a memorial to the lords, and a remonstrance to the commons. The Virginians claimed the rights and privileges that their ancestors had had in England and laid down the fundamental principle of no taxation without representation.

The Carolinas.--North Carolina protested strongly and in South Carolina the a.s.sembly appointed a committee which instructed the colonial agent to complain of the laws of trade. The instructions also declared that a Stamp Act would violate the inherent right of every British subject to be taxed only by his own consent or by his representatives. The governor prorogued the a.s.sembly before a vote could be taken upon the committee's action, but the instructions, nevertheless, were sent.

The Stamp Act.--In spite of colonial protests Grenville pursued his policy, the appeals of the colonies being rejected under the rule that pet.i.tions against money bills should not be received, and in March, 1765, parliament pa.s.sed the Stamp Act. By its provisions stamps were to be placed on commercial and legal doc.u.ments, pamphlets, newspapers, almanacs, playing cards, and dice. The enforcement of the act was placed under the management of English commissioners who were empowered to appoint persons to attend in every court or public office in the colonies to see that the law was enforced. For infringements of the law there were heavy penalties which might be collected through the admiralty courts if the informer or prosecutor so elected. Certain cases of forging and counterfeiting were punishable by death. The revenue derived from the Stamp Act was to be paid into the exchequer to be used for colonial defence.

Quartering Act.--The ministry intended to establish an army of 10,000 men in the colonies and the annual Mutiny Act of 1765 authorized the sending of such troops as might be deemed necessary. This was followed by the Quartering Act As ”_the publick houses and barracks, in his Majesty's dominions in America, may not be sufficient to supply quarters for such forces: and whereas it is expedient and necessary that carriages and other conveniences, upon the march of troops ... should be supplied for that purpose_,” it was enacted that, if colonial barracks were insufficient, officers and troops were to be quartered in public hostelries. If more room were needed, vacant buildings were to be rented. Troops were to be supplied with fire, candles, vinegar, salt, bedding, cooking utensils, and small quant.i.ties of beer, cider, or rum.

Persons giving houses for troops and furnis.h.i.+ng supplies were to be reimbursed by the province. The colonies were to furnish conveyances at rates fixed by the act, but if the expense exceeded the rate, the province had to make up the deficit.

Colonial opposition.--To the colonies the Stamp Act, the Quartering Act, and the extension of admiralty jurisdiction were unconst.i.tutional.

Trials in the admiralty courts had always been looked upon with disfavor, as they violated the right of trial by jury. The new regulation allowing alleged violators of the trade laws to be taken to Halifax for trial was looked upon as a dangerous innovation. The Quartering Act was viewed as a violation of the const.i.tutional principle that troops were not to be quartered upon the people. The provisions of the law were especially aggravating to New York which, because of the strategic position of the colony, would have to bear an undue part in the support and transportation of troops. But the Stamp Act aroused the greatest furor. All of the elements of discontent united against an act which encroached upon the right of the a.s.semblies to control taxation.

Indirect taxation was not looked upon as taxation. To the colonial economists the navigation acts were merely trade regulations and the right of parliament to regulate commerce was fully recognized. But a direct tax imposed by parliament to support an obnoxious soldiery set in motion the forces of discontent and produced a unity of opposition which surprised the ministers of George III.

The Virginia Resolutions.--Virginia took the lead in opposition. On May 29, 1765, the burgesses resolved themselves into a committee of the whole to consider the steps necessary to be taken in consequence of the Stamp Act. Patrick Henry, the ”rustic and clownish youth of the terrible tongue,” introduced a series of resolutions which boldly challenged the British government. The preamble stated that, as the House of Commons had raised the question of how far the general a.s.sembly had power to enact laws for laying taxes and imposing duties payable by the people of Virginia, the House of Burgesses, to settle and ascertain the same to all future time, resolved: (1) that the first adventurers and settlers of Virginia brought with them and transmitted to their posterity and to other English subjects who had come to five in the colony all the rights of the people of Great Britain; (2) that these were granted to them by two charters of James I; (3) that taxation of the people by themselves or by their representatives was a distinguis.h.i.+ng characteristic of British freedom without which the ancient const.i.tution could not exist; (4) that the people of Virginia had uninterruptedly enjoyed the right of being governed by their own a.s.sembly in matters of taxes and internal police, a right which had never been forfeited and had been constantly recognized by the kings and people of Great Britain. (5) Therefore it was resolved that the general a.s.sembly had the sole right and power to lay taxes and impositions upon the inhabitants of Virginia, and that every attempt to vest such power in any other person or persons had a tendency to destroy British as well as American freedom; (6) that the inhabitants of Virginia were not bound by any law or ordinance designed to impose any tax upon them other than those imposed by the general a.s.sembly; (7) and that any person who maintained that Virginians were bound to obey such laws not imposed by the a.s.sembly should be deemed an enemy of the colony.

The resolutions precipitated an acrimonious debate in which the democratic members of the western counties supported Henry against the aristocratic leaders. The committee of the whole appears to have adopted the resolutions, but on the following day the burgesses rejected the preamble and the last two resolutions, the other five being pa.s.sed by a slender majority. Henry then left the a.s.sembly and the following morning the conservatives expunged from the record the fifth resolution.

The ma.n.u.script of the entire series, except the third resolution which was omitted by error, was already on its way to the other colonies and was widely published. ”Beyond question the Virginia resolves mark an important crisis in the impending revolution.”

Resistance and violence.--In June the Ma.s.sachusetts general court, at the suggestion of Otis, sent a circular letter to the other colonial a.s.semblies asking them to send delegates to meet at New York in the following October to consider the danger from the Stamp Act. Before the delegates met fierce opposition appeared in nearly every colony.

Remonstrances came from towns, counties, and a.s.semblies. Newspapers and pamphlets inveighed against the act, and non-importation agreements were made in many localities. a.s.sociations called ”Sons of Liberty” sprang up. At first they worked secretly, but they soon announced their committees of correspondence which worked to unify the opposition.

In Boston occurred riots of greater violence than in any other place. On August 14 the stamp distributor's effigy was hung on the ”Liberty Tree,”

and after other demonstrations, that night a mob demolished a building which it was believed the collector was erecting for an office. On August 26 the houses of two of the customs officials were sacked and the house of Chief Justice Hutchinson was pillaged and destroyed. At Newport the stamp distributor and a sympathizer found it necessary to seek safety on a British man-of-war. Scenes of violence occurred in the other colonies and the stamp distributors resigned with more haste than dignity.

REPEAL OF THE STAMP ACT

The Stamp Act Congress.--The Stamp Act Congress met at New York on October 7, 1765. Nine colonies were represented, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, and New Hamps.h.i.+re failing to send delegates.

Prominent among those in attendance were John d.i.c.kinson of Pennsylvania, John Rutledge and Christopher Gadsden of South Carolina, and James Otis of Ma.s.sachusetts. On October 19 a declaration of rights and grievances, originally drafted by d.i.c.kinson, was adopted. In the declaration the argument was presented that the colonies were ent.i.tled to the inherent rights and liberties of native-born Englishmen, one of which was that no taxes were to be imposed upon them except by their own consent or by their representatives. The colonists were not and from their local circ.u.mstances could not be represented in the House of Commons, their only representatives being those in the colonies who alone had the const.i.tutional right to impose taxes upon them. All supplies to the crown being free gifts of the people, it was unreasonable and inconsistent with the principles and spirit of the British const.i.tution for the people of Great Britain to grant to the king the property of the colonists. Trial by jury was an inherent right of every British subject in the colonies, but the Stamp Act and other laws, by extending the jurisdiction of the admiralty courts, had a tendency to subvert the rights and liberties of the colonists. The duties imposed by recent acts of parliament would be burdensome and grievous, and from the scarcity of specie the payment of them would be impracticable. The recent restrictions would make it impossible to purchase the manufactures of Great Britain. The right to pet.i.tion the king or either house of parliament was also a.s.serted. By an address to the king and by applications to both houses of parliament, they endeavored to procure the repeal of the Stamp Act, of clauses in recent acts which increased admiralty jurisdiction, and of recent acts placing restrictions on American commerce.

Repeal of the Stamp Act.--In July, 1765, Grenville fell from power, but not because of opposition to the Stamp Act. The Marquis of Rockingham, a man of moderate ability, was selected to form the new cabinet. The question of the repeal of the Stamp Act came up in parliament early in 1766. During the debate in the commons on February 13, Franklin, then agent for Pennsylvania and Ma.s.sachusetts, was questioned regarding the colonial att.i.tude, and he made it clear that the Stamp Act could not be enforced. The American cause was strengthened by the powerful support of Pitt and by the protests of English merchants and manufacturers who were losing trade through colonial boycotts. After a momentous debate, the act was repealed.

The Declaratory Act.--Although parliament had given ground it did not surrender, for in the Declaratory Act of March 18, 1766, it a.s.serted its right to tax the colonies. The act declared that the colonies were subordinate unto and dependent upon the crown and parliament, and that the king by and with the consent of parliament had full power and authority to make laws to bind the colonies in all cases. All resolutions, votes, orders, and proceedings in the colonies denying the power and authority of parliament to make laws imposing taxes and regulations were declared null and void.

Other legislation.--The Quartering Act was then renewed, but with certain changes to make it more effective. The imposts on textiles which had previously been collected in America were henceforth to be collected at the point of exportation. The duty on mola.s.ses was changed from three pence a gallon on the foreign product to one penny a gallon on all mola.s.ses brought to the continental colonies.

Colonial rejoicing.--The Declaratory and other acts attracted little attention in America, where there was great rejoicing over the repeal of the Stamp Act. The const.i.tutional principles for which the colonists had contended had in no wise been conceded, but to the colonist his point seemed won. He was soon to be rudely awakened.

THE TOWNSHEND ACTS

Townshend.--In July, 1766, Rockingham fell from power and the Pitt-Grafton Ministry was formed. Unfortunately for the colonies, Pitt was in ill-health and took little part in shaping policies. The strong man of the cabinet was Charles Townshend. He was fully in sympathy with Grenville's ideas, and was responsible for a new series of irritating acts.

Suspension of the New York a.s.sembly.--Trouble had arisen in New York over the enforcement of the Quartering Act. In June, 1766, in reply to Governor Moore's request that provision be made for the expected troops, the a.s.sembly excused itself from compliance but intimated that about 4000 then in the treasury might be used. Later the a.s.sembly pa.s.sed an act making provision for one year for a thousand men and one company of artillery. When a request was made for full compliance with the Quartering Act, the a.s.sembly refused. On December 19 it was prorogued, and on June 15, 1767, was suspended by act of parliament.

Colonial customs commissioners.--Another act provided for a board of commissioners of customs to be established in America. The preamble stated that, as the colonial customs officials had found it inconvenient to apply to the commissioners in England for directions when difficulties arose, and as colonial s.h.i.+ppers were greatly delayed in carrying on business, commissioners were to be stationed in America.

Five commissioners were appointed with headquarters at Boston.

Revenue acts.--A new revenue act was pa.s.sed ”for making a more certain and adequate provision for defraying the charge of the administration of justice and the support of civil government, in such provinces where it shall be found necessary, and toward further defraying the expenses of defending, protecting, and securing” the dominions in America. Duties were imposed upon gla.s.s, red and white lead, painter's colors, tea, and paper. Drawbacks were allowed on coffee and cocoanuts, but chinaware was no longer subject to drawback. Writs of a.s.sistance were declared legal.