No More Learning

Pubs. , vol. xiii, p. 430. Dickinron
had said in his powerful arraignment of "the late regulations" that
"we should willingly pay a moderate duty upon importations from the
French and Spaniards, without attempting to run them. " Writings
(Ford), vol. i, p. 224.
1 Writings (Smyth), vol. iv, p. 411.
1R. /. Col. Recs. , vol. vi, pp. 491-493.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:35 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 86
THE COLONIAL MERCHANTS: 1763-1776
against the use ar1^ impm-tati^ nf British goods collapsed.
The w1despread enthusiasm for local manufacturing greatly
diminished or entirely vanished. The New York Society
for the Promotion of Arts, Agriculture and Oeconomy de-
clined temporarily into a comatose state. 1 The majority of
the people again bowed to the custom of expensive funerals
and lavish mourning. At a public entertainment in Phila-
delphia, the citizens resolved unanimously to give their
homespun to the poor and on June the fourth, the king's
birthday, to dress in new suits of English fabrication. 8
When news of the repeal of the Stamp Act reached Boston,
Hancock wrote:
Yo
issu f ha. t
to show their Lovaltv
he promised h1s " best
& attachment to Gjrmr
Tnflni nun ft i mil in in t |n Ihat purrx>se. _ Charles Thorn-
son, of Philadelphia, wrote to Franklin of " a heartfelt joy,
seen in every Eye, read in every Countenance; a Joy not
expressed in triumph but with the warmest sentiments of
Loyalty to our King and a grateful acknowledgment of
the Justice and tenderness of the mother Country. " *
The generality of the merchants in the commercial
provinces were not so unreservedly gratified by the action
of Parliament. Important concessions had beer? jnade in
response to the American propaganda; indeed, the leading
grievances had been removed. Yet trade had not feen re-
stored to the footing which it had enjoyed before the pass-
1N. Y, Journ. , Dec. 17, 24, 1767. During the Townshend Acts, as
we shall see, the society revived its activities, and traces of its proceed-
ings may be found in the Journal as late as Mch. 29, 1770.
1 Pa. Gas. , May 22, 1766; Franklin Bicentennial Celebration, vol. ii,
pp. 58-59. Weyler's N. Y. Gasette, May 26, 1766, suggested that this
action proceeded from the desire of the anti-proprietary party to curry
favor with the king.
1 Brown, John Hancock His Book, pp. 124-125.
4 N. Y. Hist. Soc. Colls. , vol. xi, p. 16.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:35 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? FIRST CONTEST FOR REFORM 87
age of the laws of 1764 and 176=;. To that extent, the
merchants had fallen short of their goal.
In November. 1766. the New York merchants summed
up their outstanding grievances in a petition to the House
of Commons, containing two hundred and forty signatures. 1
In the following January, the merchants of Boston followed
their example. 2 These two papers covered substantially
the same ground. The Bostonians seized this early op-
portunity to deny that rum could be profitably distilled from
molasses that bore a duty amounting to practically ten per
cent ad valorem, as did the one-penny duty. They also
protested against the administrative regulations of 1764,
declaring that one part of them made the proper registra-
tion of a vessel an expensive and tedious process, and that
another part granted naval officers autocratic powers of
seizure, together with protection from damage suits. 8 The
1 Weyler's N. Y. Gas. , May 4, 1767; Pitt, Wm. , Correspondence
(London, 1838), vol. iii, p. 186. Vide also the statement of "Americus,"
copied into Weyler's N. Y. Gas. , Jan. 19, 1767, from a London news-
paper.
1 M. H. S. Mss. : 91 L, pp. 27, 31; Col. Soc. Mass. Pubs. , vol. xiii, pp.
4SI-4S2.
1 The New Englanders had a special grievance, which was of first
importance while it lasted. In 1765 Governor Palliser, of Newfound-
land, had prevented American fishermen from taking cod off Labrador
and in the Strait of Belle Isle. His action was based upon a harrow
interpretation of the statutes relating to the Newfoundland fisheries,
and upon a belief that a smuggling trade was being carried on with the
French of Miquelon and St. Pierre. A petition of the Massachusetts
House of Representatives, presented about this time, asked for an act
of Parliament to prevent such restraints in the future. The ministry
would not concede this; but in March, 1767, they agreed to revise Pal-
liser's instructions so as to preclude any further interruption of the
legitimate fishing-trade. This action apparently settled the matter
satisfactorily. Ibid. , pp. 447-448, 451-452; 4 M. H. S. Colls. , vol. iv, pp.
347-348; 5 M. H. S. Colls. , vol. ix, pp. 219-220; Andrews, " Boston Mer-
chants and Non-Importation Movement," Col. Soc. Mass. Pubs. , vol.
xix, pp. 173-174-
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:35 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? gg THE COLONIAL MERCHANTS: 1763-1776
New Yorkers, on the other hand, stood alone in their conten-
tion that the exclusion of foreign rum from the colonies
was a hardship, averring that it was a necessary article of
exchange at the Danish West Indies particularly.
On most points the two petitions were in essential agree-
ment. The high duty on foreign sugar was said to elim-
inate it as an article of trade, although it was a commodity
frequently used to fill out a return cargo. This excessive
duty, said the New York merchants, " had induced the
Fair Trader to decline that Branch of Business, while it
presents an irresistable Incentive to Smuggling to People
less scrupulous. " The requirement that all sugars exported
to Great Britain from the continental colonies should be
classed as " French " was said to prevent a valuable return
to Great Britain for her manufactures. The high duty
on Madeira wine was objected to as a discouragement to its
importation into America and, therefore, to the exportation
of American foodstuffs and lumber to the Wine Islands.
The requirement as to the importation of fruit and wine from
Spain and Portugal was again held up as a grievance. 1 The
new regulation, which required all outgoing commodities to
be entered at a British port before going on to European
ports north of Finisterre, was said to increase the cost of
voyages unduly and preclude the competition of colonial
merchants in European markets. The exportation of for-
eign logwood and of colonial lumber, provisions and flax-
seed was especially affected by this restriction.
Of the grievances here enumerated, the regulations
against smuggling had already begun to prove less irksome
1 In 1767, Townshend desired to remove this grievance, but was un-
successful. It was urged that a direct trade between Portugal and
America would be a hazardous relaxation of the acts of trade. 5 M.
H. S. , vol. ix, pp. 231, 236; Pa. Gas. , July 16, 1767.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:35 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? FIRST CONTEST FOR REFORM 89
in practice than they appeared on paper. 1 Thus, in 1764,
the Rhode Island legislature had forbidden the governor to
administer the oaths to British customs officials, and the
latter had been forced to suspend operations. In 1765, a
customs collector in Maryland had been violently assaulted;
and in Massachusetts and New York, the officials were
afraid to execute the laws after the Stamp Act riots. For
the future, the necessity for smuggling seemed somewhat
lessened by the radical reduction of the molasses duty.
One grievance had not been included by the petitioners--
the failure of Parliament to provide relief for the currency
situation. The colonial merchants had probably placed
reliance upon the assurance of the London merchants, com-
municated the preceding June, that the government, after
much deliberation, had concluded to postpone a regulation
of colonial paper money until the colonies could be consulted
upon a scheme for a general paper currency upon an inter-
colonial basis. 2 Unfortunately, however, nothing was to
come of this plan ;8 and the money stringency, though some-
1Beer, British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765, pp. 301-302; Arnold, S. G. .
History of Rhode Island (New York, 1860), vol. ii, pp. 257-259; Col-
den, Letter Books, vol. ii, p. 124.
2 Pa. Gas. , Aug. 21, 1766, also Weyler's N. Y. Gas. , Aug. 25; New-
port Merc. , Sept. I; Bos. Post-Boy, Sept. I; N. H. Gas. , Sept. 4.
Franklin had confidently expected action from Parliament on this sub-
ject while revision of the trade laws was being undertaken. Writings
(Smyth), vol. iv, p. 411.
1The dilatory course of the British government in this matter seems
scarcely excusable.
The British merchants in the American trade, with
the backing of the colonial agents, worked for the repeal of the Cur-
rency Act of 1764, and proposed a plan by which colonial bills of credit
should be legal tender for everything except sterling debts payable in
Great Britain. The ministry refused in 1767 to listen to this plan,
partly because of irritation over New York's cavalier treatment of the
Quartering Act. Pa. Gas. , Apr. 9, 1767; Pa. Journ. , Apr. 23, July 30.
In the same year Grenville proposed in Parliament a plan for a gen-
eral paper currency which was intended as a means of increasing the
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:35 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 90 THE COLONIAL MERCHANTS: 1763-1776
what relieved by the reopening of trade with the foreign
West Indies, was to become increasingly distressing in the
next three or four years as the redemption periods of the
outstanding paper money arrived and the volume of legal
tender thereby became greatly contracted. Thus, the real
trial in New York began with the redemption of its paper
money in November, 1768. 1 In these later years, com-
plaints of the scarcity of money came chiefly from the prov-
inces outside of New England, and were voiced by govern-
ors, newspaper writers and legislative petitions. 1 Many
sagacious men of the time believed that the British govern-
ment was guilty of grave injustice, particularly in the case
of those provinces where the power to issue legal-tender
money had never been abused. 1
American revenue. This did not receive serious consideration. 5 M.
H. S. Colls. , vol. ix, p. 231. New York was given relief from the severe
money stringency by a special act of 1770: 10 George III, c. 35. F1n-
ally, an act of 1773 (13 George III, c. 57) permitted colonial paper
money to be received as a legal tender for payment of colonial duties,
taxes, etc. Vide infra, pp. 243-244.
1 Becker, C. L. , The History of Political Parties in the Province of
New York, 1760-1776 (Univ. Wis. Bull. , no. 286), pp. 65-71, 77-79, 88,
95, and references.
1E. g. , N. Y. Col. Docs. , vol. viii, pp. 175-176; I N. J. Arch. , voL xviii,
p. 46; "Mercator" in Pa. Journ. , Sept. 14, 1769; Brit. Papers ("Sparks
Mss. "), vol. ii, pp. 184-186, 220-225, 263-267. Vide also Franklin, Writ-
ings (Smyth), vol. v, pp. 71-73.
* For a statement of the case of New York, vide 4 M. H. S. Colls. ,
vol. x, pp. 520-521; of Pennsylvania, Franklin, Writings (Smyth), vol.
v, pp. 1-14.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:35 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? CHAPTER III
THE SECOND MOVEMENT FOR COMMERCIAL REFORM
(1767-1770)
Although the colonial merchants had won their chief de-
mands in their contest with Parliament, they had yet fallen
short, in several respects, of attaining their ultimate goal,
i. e. a restoration of the commercial system as it existed in
the days before 1764. This purpose was the objective of
the mercantile provinces in the subsequent years, and was
relinquished by them only when it became apparent that
their agitation for commercial redress was unloosing social
forces more destructive to business interests than the mis-
guided acts of Parliament. The typical merchant cared little
about academic controversies over theoretical right; but he
was vitally concerned in securing every practicable conces-
sion he could without endangering the stability of the
empire. Paul Wentworth, in writing his "Minutes re-
specting political Parties in America" in 1778, took care to
differentiate the merchant class from all other groups of
malcontents in the period leading to the Revolutionary War.
After showing their purpose, he made it clear that their
influence controlled a very large majority of the people
throughout the provinces at the outset. 1 The ultimate
success of the merchants depended upon their ability to
retain this position of leadership, to control public opinion
in America, and to direct the course of opposition.
The experience of the years 1764-1766 gave the merchant
class food for sober reflection. Intent on making out a
1 Stevens, Facsimiles, vol. v, no. 487.
91
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:35 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 02 THE COLONIAL MERCHANTS: 1763-1776
complete case for themselves, they had, in their zeal, over-
reached themselves in calling to their aid the unruly elements
of the population. These unprivileged classes had never
before been awakened to a sense of their muscular influence
in community affairs; and, under the name of "Sons of
Liberty," they had instinctively stretched out for alliance
with their brethren in other cities. 1 Dimly the merchants
began to perceive the danger of an awakened self-conscious
group of the radical elements; well might they be apprehen-
sive, as Colden recorded, "whether the Men who excited
this seditious Spirit in the People have it in their power to
suppress it. " * Men of large propertied interests were un-
doubtedly more sensitive to the danger than were the smaller
merchants; some of the former had exhorted the people of
New York city against " mob government " while the Stamp
Act riots were still under way. *
The violence of the colonial propaganda had alienated
from the mercantile side such influential men as Governor
Bernard and Lieutenant Governor Hutchinson, of Massa-
chusetts,* and had cooled the ardor of such important fig-
ures as Dulany, of Maryland, and Joseph Galloway, of
1 Ramifications of the Sons of Liberty were to be found in New
York, Albany and other New York towns, in Philadelphia, Boston,
Providence, Portsmouth, several towns of Connecticut and New Jersey,
and in Baltimore and Annapolis. Becker, N. Y. Parties, pp. 46-48.
'Letter Books, vol. ii, p. 99. Vide also p. 111. Even Charles Thom-
son, the Philadelphia merchant, hoped that the whole people would not
be credited with the "acts of some individuals provoked to madness
and actuated by despair. " N. Y. Hist. Soc. Colls. , vol. xi, p. 16. The
merchants of Brunswick, N. J. , apologized to the Committee of Mer-
chants of London for the "riots or tumults" as being "the follies of
less considerate men" than themselves. I N. J. Arch. , vol. xxv, pp.
235-237.
* Becker, N. Y. Parties, chap. ii.
* An excellent modern example of the same type of mind may be
found by reading Peabody, A. P. , "Boston Mobs before the Revolu-
tion," Atl. Monthly, vol. Ixii, pp. 321-333.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:35 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? COMMERCIAL REFORM 93
Pennsylvania. 1 For the future, the merchants as a class
were resolved to rely upon orderly methods of protest--
memorials and the boycott. A first step had been taken by
the merchants of New York and Boston, in accordance with
this new policy, by the sending of petitions to Parliament
for trade redress in the winter of 1766-17672
Such was the situation when Parliament made its next
attempt to reorganize British imperial policy. The new
plan found its justification in the fact that colonial theorists
had, as yet, discovered nothing "unconstitutional" or
"tyrannical " in revenue duties collected at American ports.
The recent molasses duty was the best, but not the only, ex-
ample of the willingness of Americans to pay an "external
tax " without protest. 8 Charles Townshend was, thus, act-
ing within the best traditions of British practical statesman-
ship, when he prnpr. <;fH tn, hnilH a revenue act based upon
the cnlrmkts' own views of the powers of Parliament.
Towr|shend's policy, enacted ag {ftp will of Parliament
about the middle of 1767, not only dealt with taxation, but
also nronosyd to s,trongrrhp? r the customs service where re-
cent experience had shown it to be inadequate. A third
measure, designed to meet a temporary emergency, was the
suspension of the legislative--functions_tif_ thp T^gyv Vnrtr
Assembly until that bodv should CQHIP! ^--utith_all thp r>rr>-
visions_iif_the Quartering Act. 4
1 Galloway's biographer analyzes the character of his propertied in-
terests and then adds: "He feared the tyranny of mob rule more than
the tyranny of Parliament. " Baldwin, E. H. , "Joseph Galloway," Pa.
Mag. , vol. xxvi, pp. 163-164, 289-294.
2 Vide supra, pp. 87-88.
* The colonists also paid revenue duties on enumerated goods im-
ported from another British colony (25 Charles II, c. 7), on coffee
and pimento imported from British possessions (6 George III, c. 52),
and on imported wines (4 George III, c. 15).
* It is not necessary to recount here this familiar episode. The mer-
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:35 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 94 THE COLONIAL MERCHANTS: 1763-1776
The revenue feature of Townshend's policy was accom-
plished by adding a list of port duties to those already in
force. The following articles were to be taxed at the time
of their landing in America: five varieties of glass, red and
white lead, painters' colors, sixty-seven grades of paper, and
tea. 1 All these articles were British manufactures, except
tea, which was handled by the greatest British monopoly of
the times, the East India Company. The imposition of
the three-penny tea tax in America was accompanied by the
remission of the duty paid at the time that the tea was im-
ported into Great Britain, the object being to enable dutied
tea to undersell any tea that was smuggled into the colonies. 2
One portion of the revenue act was designed " for more
effectually preventing the clandestine running of goods. . . "
With this purpose in view, it was provided that the revenue-
produced by the duties should be used to free the judges and
civil officers in such colonies as " it shall be found neces-
sary" from financial dependence on the local legislatures.
More immediately to the point, express legalization was
given to the hitherto questionable practice of the colonial
supreme courts in issuing writs of assistance to customs
officials. By means of these writs, customs officers were to
receive power to search for contraband goods in any house
or shop, and, in case of resistance, to break open doors,
chests, etc. , and seize the goods in question.
Other regulations were designed to strengthen the ad-
ministrative side of the customs service. 8 These made
chant class were not interested in this act of Parliament; and in the
various non-importation agreements adopted later, this law was not
once named for repeal.