No More Learning

5, 1774; also 4 Am.
Arch. , vol. i, pp 766-767.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:37 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 384 THE COLONIAL MERCHANTS: 1763-1776
Church Parish, recounted the devious practices of the rad-
icals at the meeting of July 27, and charged that the im-
portant parish of St. Paul was not represented at the meet-
ing of August 10 and that several other parishes had been
induced to send deputies through a misrepresentation of the
purpose of the gathering. It was further alleged that, in
absence of notification to the contrary, all but the select
few in the secret supposed that the second meeting would be
held at the same place as the earlier one, but in fact it " was
held in a tavern, with the door shut for a considerable time,
and it is said twenty-six persons answered for the whole
province and undertook to bind them by Resolution; and
when several gentlemen attempted to go in, the tavern-
keeper, who stood at the door with a list in his hand, re-
fused them admittance, because their names were not men-
tioned in that list. " 1
These charges were elaborated and confirmed by pro-
tests emanating from three other parishes. The burden of
three different protests from St. Paul Parish, signed in all
by two hundred and eighty-seven names, was that the meet-
ing had been secret, small, unrepresentative, and even, ac-
cording to the belief of the Augusta signers, illegal. 2 From
one portion of St. George Parish came the plaint that,
though many of the subscribers had voted to send deputies
to the Savannah meeting, " it was because we were told that
unless we did send some persons there, we would have the
Stamp Act put in force," while the western district of the
same parish announced that they had known nothing of the
1 Ga. Gos. , Sept. 7, 1774; reprinted in incomplete form in Ga. Rev.
Recs. , vol. i, pp. 18-21.
1Protests from 126 inhabitants of the Kyoka and Broad River Settle-
ments, 123 inhabitants of the township of Wrightsborough and places
adjacent, and from 38 inhabitants of the town and district of Augusta;
Ga. Gaz. , Oct. 12, 1774; aUo Ga. Rev. Recs. , vol. i, pp. 22-24, 27-30,
where the Augusta resolves are given inaccurately.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:37 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? CONTEST IN PLANTATION PROVINCES
385
appointment of deputies. 1 In similar strain, a protest from
St. Mathew Parish declared that the signers there had been
told that the meeting would petition the king for mercy for
Boston " as a child begs a father when he expects correc-
tion," and that unless they signed, the Stamp Act would be
imposed on them. 2
The radicals made no effective answer to these apocryphal
accounts. * A publication of the committee in the Gazette
of September 21 called attention to the fact that only about
one-fifth of the effective men in the parish had signed the
Savannah protest; it justified the presence of "transient
and inconsiderable persons " at public meetings, and denied
that the doors of the tavern had been closed, although ac-
knowledging that several persons had been denied admit-
tance without the knowledge of the committee. These facts
were, in any case, non-essential, it was declared, for the
great issue was whether Parliament had the right to tax
America and whether or not Boston was suffering in the
common cause.
The undaunted radicals of St. John's Parish made one
1 Protests from 123 inhabitants of St. George Parish and from 53 in-
habitants of Queensborough and the western district of the parish; Ga.
Gas. , Sept. 28, 1774; also 5. C. & Am. Gen. Gas. , Oct. 7.
'The protest bore 35 signatures to the body of it and 12 others to an
addendum; Ga. Gas. , Sept. 2, 1774; also Ga. Rev. Jfecs. , vol. i, pp.
32-34.
? Apparently it was left for the patriotic historians writing in after
years to discover that the papers of protest had been "placed in the
hands of the governors' influential friends and sent in different direc-
tions over the country to obtain subscribers, allowing a sum of money
to each of those persons proportioned to the number of subscribers they
obtained," and that in some instances the number of signers exceeded
the population of the parishes or were, in part, recruited from those
who had long since passed away. McCall, H. , History of Ga. (1816)
vol. ii, pp. 24 25. For Governor Wright's letters to Dartmouth, stat,
ing that the papers of protest had been written by the people themselves,
vide Parliamentary History, vol. xviii, pp. 141-142.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:37 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 386 THE COLONIAL MERCHANTS: 1763. 1776
more effort to secure the election of delegates to the Conti-
nental Congress, and passed resolutions that they would
join with a majority of the parishes for that purpose. A
meeting was held in St. John's Parish on August 30, at
which appeared deputies from the parishes of St. George
and St. David; and this meager gathering went so far as
to nominate a delegate (Dr. Lyman Hall in all probability)
to go to the Congress, if the other parishes assented. 1 But
that assent was never forthcoming. Georgia was the onlv
one of the thirteen provinces that f illT1 rn h" rppr<>gAnt>>^. ? <?
the First Continental Congress.
In the period intervening between the appointment of
delegates to the Continental Congress in the various prov-
inces and the day of the adjournment of that body, sundry
incidents indicated that the activity and influence of the
radicals was increasing with the passage of the weeks. In
the commercial provinces, the most striking development
was the combination of workingmen of two of the chief
cities to withhold their labor from the British authorities at
Boston. Early in September, 1 774, Governor Gagejaought
workingmen for fortifying . . Boston Neck,
but was met with refusals wherever he turned. The Com-
mittee of Mechanics of Boston, learning that the governor
would now apply at New York, warned their New York
brethren of this fact. 2 Independently of the Boston trans-
actions, the radicals at New York had already begun to
bring pressure to bear on labor contractors to prevent the
exportation of carpenters to Boston, and upon the mer-
chants to prevent the use of their vessels for the transpor-
tation of troops and military stores. 8 The Boston warning
lPa. Journ. , Oct. 5, 1774; also 4 Am. Arch. , vol. i, pp. 766-767.
? JV. Y. Journ. , Sept. 29, 1774; also 4 Am. Arch. , vol. i, pp. 803-804.
1/<<</. , vol. i, p. 782; also AT. Y. Journ. , Sept. 15, 1774.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:37 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? CONTEST IN PLANTATION PROVINCES 387
had the desired effect; and on September 24 the New York
Committee of Mechanics gave a unanimous vote of thanks
to tLthose worthy Mechanicks of this city who have de-
clined to aid or assist in the erecting of fortifications on
Boston Neck . . . " Q
Aidfd bj;_the. f ressure of the widespreajdjfflffnjdoyment,
Gage was successful, a_ little jatert in getting Bpstonjcarpen-
ters and"masons to work onjmrragks for the . soldiers for a
few days. " The apparent change of front caused a joint
committee of the selectmen and members of the committee
oj correspondence _ on September 24 to ypte th<>ir opinion
probaM&jesult of such disloval
tfre withholding of contribution. ;} from Boston jjy. , . Other
j>rpjiiflces^ Two davs la,ter the working-men deserted their
jobs. * In order to seal the labor market of the surrounding
country to the British commander, a meeting, composed of
the committees of thirteen towns, resolved that, should any
inhabitants of Massachusetts or the neighboring provinces
supply the troops at Boston "with labour, lumber, joists,
spars, pickets, straw, bricks, or any materials whatsoever
which may furnish them with requisites to annoy or in any
way distress" the citizens, they should be deemed "most
inveterate enemies" and ought to be prevented and de-
feated. The leading towns represented at the meeting ap-
pointed " Committees of Observation and Prevention" to
enforce the resolves, and the resolves were communicated
to every town in the province. 0 The rural towns took heed;
1 N. Y. Journ. , Sept. 29, 1774; also 4 Am. Arch. , vol. i, pp. 803-804.
1 Ibid. , vol. i, p. 804.
1 Ibid. , vol. i, p. 802; also Mass. Gas. & Post-Boy, Sept. 26, 1774.
4Ibid. , Oct. 3, 1774; 4 Am. Arch. , vol. i, pp. 814-815, 820.
6The committees in attendance were from Boston, Braintree, Cam-
bridge, Charlestown, Dedham, Dorchester, Malden, Milton, Mystic,
Roxbury, Stow, Watertown and Woburn. Ibid. , vol. i, pp. 807-808;
also . M Y. Journ. , Oct. 20, 1774.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:37 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 388 THE COLONIAL MERCHANTS: 1763-1776
and the labor boycott was made effective.
1 The troops did
not get into barracks until November, after Gage had sent
to Nova Scotia for fifty carpenters and bricklayers and had
succeeded in obtaining a few additional ones from New
Hampshire through Governor Wentworth's aid. *
Gage was more successful in dealing with merchants.
Although the merchants at Philadelphia refused contracts
for blankets and. Qther supplies for the troops at Boston,
those_at Ne_w York lent a willing ear. When a mass meet-
ing, called without authority of the " Fifty-One," appointed
a committee to intimidate the merchants in question, the
transactions were repudiated and denounced by the " Fifty-
One," and the merchants completed ttyir nrrfgr^ >> In the
early months of 1775 the same problem arose in slightly
different form. Certain jersons had bgen induced {p supply
the troops at Boston with wagons, entrenching tools and
other equipage for field operations. At the request qf^the
committees of Boston and numerous nthpr rr>wn<^ the ^ro-
hat all such persons should be deemed " inveterate enemies
to America " and oppose^ hy all reasonable means?
Equally significant during these months was the trend
violent "ppoqffion to the tea duty. noticeable i
1 E. g. , the committee of the little town of Rochester, N. H. , found
Nicholas Austin guilty of acting as a labor contractor for the Boston
military. On his knees the culprit was made to pray forgiveness and
to pledge for the future that he would never act " contrary to the Con-
stitution of the country. " N. H. Gas. , Nov. 11, 1774; also 4 Am.
Arch. , vol. i, p. 974.
1 Ibid. , vol. i, pp. 981, 991-992; Mass. Gas. & News-Letter, Nov.
10, 1774; N. Y. Gas. , Nov. 21.
'/Wrf. , Oct. 3, 1774, also 4 Am. Arch. , vol. i, pp. 326-327, 809;
Golden, Letter Books, vol. ii, pp. 366-368.
'Mass. Sfy, Feb. 9, 1775; also 4 Am. Arch. , vol. i, pp. 1329-1330.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:37 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? CONTEST IN PLANTATION PROVINCES 389
tain portions of jthe pfanfction provinces. Although the
people had quietly paid the duty since the partial repeal in
1770, the passage of the coercive acts and the attendant ex-
citement in America had wrought a _change of opinion:
and with the passage of months the lawless element in the
community was more and more getting the upper hand.
This is best shown in the episode of the brig Peggy Stew-
art. 1 This vessel arrived at Annapolis, Maryland, on Fri-
day, October 14, 1774, laden with more than a ton of dutied
tea, consigned to the local firm of T. C. Williams & Com-
pany. The Pegpy Stewart was chiefly owned by Anthony
Stewart, of Annapolis, but his father-in-law, James Dick,
had a financial interest in the venture. These two gentle-
men had achieved unpopularity on a former occasion
when, as importers in the Good Intent, they had sought to
introduce British goods contrary to the will of the people
of Annapolis. 2 The orders for the tea had been sent by
Williams & Company in May, 1774, at a time when other
Maryland merchants were doing the same thing without
arousing disfavor. 8 Immediately upon the arrival of the
brig, Stewart hastened to pay the duty on the tea. When
news of the affair came to the Anne Arundel County Com-
mittee a few hours later, they convened a public meeting
in the evening to consider what measures should be taken.
The consignees and others concerned in the importation
were called before the meeting; and it was unanimously
1 Mr. Richard D. Fisher, of Baltimore, collected the chief source ac-
counts of this episode and published them, with editorial comment, in
the Baltimore News during the years 1905-1907. A scrapbook of these
clippings, entitled The Arson of the Peggy Stewart, is in the Library of
Congress. Some of the less accessible of these papers have been re-
published in the Md. Hist. Mag. , vol. v, pp. 235-245.
1 V1de sufira, pp. 200-201.
* Vide statement of Joseph and James Williams 1n Md. Gaz. , Oct.
27, 1774; also supra, p. 245.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:37 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? THE COLONIAL MERCHANTS: 1763-1776
resolved that the tea should not be landed in America. The
meeting adjourned to Wednesday, the nineteenth, and for
the interim a special committee was appointed to attend
the unloading of the other merchandise on board the brig
and to prevent the landing of the tea. Thus far the inci-
dent did not differ from many similar occurrences. Appar-
ently a concession from the importers to the effect that the
tea should be re-shipped at once or, at most, that the tea
should be cast into the sea would close the incident. Stew-
art sought to explain his action in paying the duty, in a
broadside on Monday, in which he told of the leaky condi-
tion of the vessel, the need of the fifty-three souls on board
to land after a three months' voyage, and the impossibility
of entering the vessel without the tea. He expressed his
sorrow for his unintentional transgression.
From the viewpoint of the orderly elements in the com-
munity, the postponement of final action until the public
meeting of Wednesday proved to be a tactical blunder.
During the interval handbills were dispersed through the
nearby counties containing notice of the meeting, and pop-
ular feeling was aroused to a high pitch. To the meeting
on Wednesday came parties of extremists from various
parts of the province determined upon violence: one group
from Prince George's County, headed by Walter Bowie (or
Buior), a planter: one from Baltimore County, led by
Charles Ridgely, Jr. , member of the Assembly; one from
the town of Baltimore, led by Mordecai Gist and John
Deavor; one from the head of Severn River, led by Rezen
Hammond; and two from Elk Ridge in Anne Arundel
County, headed respectively by Dr. Ephraim Howard and
Dr. Warfield. 1 When the great assemblage were ready
1 Affidavit of R. Caldeleugh, manager of Stewart's rope factory; Jtfd.
Hist. Mag. , vol. v, pp. 241-244. Cf. Galloway's account; Pa. Mag. ,
vol. xxv, pp. 248-253.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:37 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? CONTEST IN PLANTATION PROVINCES
391
for business, Stewart and the Williamses appeared before
them with an offer to destroy the tea and to make such
other amends as might be desired. The Anne Arundel
Committee advised the meeting that this offer should be
deemed sufficient; but the boisterous minority in attendance
would not have it that way. "Matters now began to run
very high and the people to get warm," declared a partici-
pant later; "some of the Gentlemen from Elk Ridge and
Baltimore Town insisted on burning the Vessel" as well
as the tea. 1 Charles Carroll, the barrister, and Matthias
Hammond proposed, as a compromise, that the tea should
be unloaded and burnt under the gallows; but the extrem-
ists were beyond halfway measures. "Old Mr. Dick," one
of the owners of the brig and the father of Stewart's wife,
now gave his consent to the destruction of the vessel, for
fear that the rage of the mob would be directed against the
Stewart home where Mrs. Stewart lay in a critical condi-
tion. "Mr. Quyn then stood forth," averred the observer
already quoted, "and said it was not the sense of the
majority of the people that the Vessell should be destroyed,
and made a motion which was seconded that there should
be a vote on the Question. We had a Vote on it and a
Majority of % of the people; still the few that was for
destroying the Brigg was Clamorous and insinuated that if
it was not done they would prejudice Mr. Stewart more
than if the vessel was burnt; the Committee then with the
Consent of Mr. Dick declared that the . Vessell and Tea
1 Galloway's account. '' Americanus '' declared in the London Pu&lic
Ledger, Jan. 4, 1775, that the bitter feeling against the principals in the
affair was caused by Stewart's earlier activity in opposing the resolution
for the suspension of debt collections, and by the jealousy of other merch-
ants because Williams & Co. had a splendid assortment of merchandise
on board. These charges do not bear close examination. The Anne
Arundel County Committee stigmatized them as "false, scandalous
and malicious. " ,'/. /. Gas. (Annapolis), Apr. 13, 1775.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:37 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 392
THE COLONIAL MERCHANTS: 1763-1776
should be burnt. " l Stewart and the consignees made a
written acknowledgment of their " most daring insult. "
While preparations were being made for burning the ves-
sel, many of the substantial inhabitants began to believe that
undue weight had been given to the threats of the violent
minority, and determined to prevent the injustice; but as
they were going to the waterfront, they were met by " poor
Mr. Dick," who entreated them "for God sake not to
meddle in the matter" or Mr. Stewart's house would be
burnt, which would be a greater loss. The other program
was therefore duly carried out; and the Peggy Stewart,
with sails and colors flying, was consumed in the presence
of a great crowd of spectators. l^. This most infamous
and rascally affair . . . ," commented the observer quoted
before, "makes all men of property reflect with horror on
their present situation to have their Jives and propertys at
the disposal & mercy of a Mob . . . _" \
Such an incident could scarcely have occurred six months,
or even three months, earlier in a plantation province. The
truth was that the leaders of an orderly opposition to Brit-
ish measures were losing their mastery of the situation.
The destruction of the Peggy Stewart involved a monetary
loss of ? 1896 to owners and consignees. The public meet-
ing had, in effect, refused to accept as adequate an act of
destruction similar to that which had served to make the
Boston Tea Party heinous in the eyes of the British home
government. That the act was forced by an ungovernable
minority subtracts in no degree from the seriousness or
significance of the incident. In a word, Annapolis had out-
Bostoned Boston.
1 That this decision was forced by an aggressive minority is also ap-
parent from other contemporary accounts,^, g. : Eddis, Letters from
America, no. xviii; Ringgold's account in Pa. Mag. , vol. xxv, pp.
253-254; letter from Annapolis in London Chronicle, Dec. 31, 1774.
The ingeniously-worded official account does not deny it. 4 Am.
Arch. , vol. i, pp. 885-886.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 01:37 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015011480665 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? CHAPTER X
THE ADOPTION OF THE CONTINENTAL ASSOCIATION
(SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER, 1774)
THE First Continental Congress was the product of
many minds.