No More Learning

2 One tart dissent
was entered to these proceedings. The fair writer expati-
ated on the depravity resulting from " hard drinking," and
then asked " where the Reformation ought to begin, whether
among the Gentlemen at Taverns & Coffee Houses where
they drink scarcely any Thing but Wine and Punch; or
among the Ladies at those useful Boards of Trade called
Tea Tables, where it don't cost half so much to entertain
half a dozen Ladies a whole Afternoon, as it does to entertain
one Gentlemen only one Evening at a Tavern. " *
The committee appointed by the town to propose meas-
ures for employing the poor reported in due time in favor
of the establishment of the manufacture of duck (or sail)
cloth, hitherto imported from Russia. This material could
be made from either flax or hemp and thus held an advan-
tage over linen. The committee proposed that the project
be financed by public subscription; and they were author-
ized by the town to go ahead. Four months later, they had
succeeded in collecting less than one-half of the amount
1 Bos. Gas. , Aug. 29, 1768. "Trahlur" in Bos. Post-Boy, Nov. 30,
1767, held the same view of modern ailments.
1 AT. Y. Journ. , Dec. 14, 1767.
1 Bos. Eve. Post, Dec. 28, 1767; also Newport Merc. , Dec. 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
? I10 THE COLONIAL MERCHANTS: 1763-1776
that was necessary for making a beginning. Further efforts
were unproductive; and the project was given up. 1
Reports filled the newspapers with reference to the in-
crease and perfection of local manufactures. From grind-
stones and precious stones to shoes and shalloons, the gamut
of praise was run. The man who made the paper which the
Boston Gazette was printed on stated that the people of the
province were so intent on saving rags for his mills that he
now received more tons than he formerly did hundreds. 2
The theses of the graduates at Harvard were printed "on
fine white Demy Paper manufactured at Milton" and the
men received their degrees garbed in homespun. * By 17/0
a leading newspaper of the town, declared that: "The ex-
traordinary and very impoverishing custom of wearing
deep Mourning at Funerals is now almost entirely laid
aside in the Province. " *
The Boston plan spread rapidly to other towns of the
province. By the middle of January, 1768. the names of
twenty-four towns had been published, which had voted to
conform to the Boston agreement. 8 Salem alone was re-
corded as having refused to co-operate. " At a town meet-
ing on December 22, 1767, Boston had unanimously voted
instructions to her representatives in the General Court,
recommending bounties for the establishment of domestic
1 Bos. Town Recs. (1758-1769), pp. 226-227, 230-232, 239-240, 240-250.
1 Bos. Post-Boy, Jan. 18, 1768; Bos. Gas. , Jan. 25.
1N. Y. Journ. , Aug. 4, 1768.
4 Bos. Gas. , May 7, 1770.
* Abington, Ashburnham, Bolton, Braintree, Brookfield, Charlestown,
Dartmouth, Dedham, Eastham, Grafton, Harwich, Holleston, Kingston,
Leicester, Lexington, Middleborough, Milton, Mendon, Newton, Ply-
mouth, Roxbury, Sandwich, Spencer, Truro. Bos. Post-Boy, Nov. 23,
Dec. 14, 1767; Bos. Gas. , Jan. 11, Mch. 28, 1768; N. Y. Journ. , Dec, 3,
24, 1767, Jan. 28, 1768; Prov. Gas. , Dec. 26, 1767.
? Bos. Eve. Post, Dec. 21, 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
? COMMERCIAL REFORM m
manufactures, and suggesting a petition to Parliament for
the repeal of the recent duties. 1 On February n, 1768, the
Hm1s^ of Renre. sentatives adopted the famous circular letter
to the other assemblies on the continent, suggest1ng concerted
opposition in the way of constitutional discussions and peti-
tions. In the latter days of the month, other resolutions
were passed, reciting the decay of trade and pledging the
support of all the members against the use of foreign super-
fluities and in favor of Massachusetts manufactures. 2 The
House also sent resolutions of protest against the Town-
shend Acts to the king.
Two other New England provinces followed in the wake
of Boston. The letter of the Boston selectmen, announcing
the non-consumption agreement and suggesting like meas-
ures, convinced towns outside of Massachusetts of The wis-
dom of pursuing a similar course. JThe people of Rhode
Island were in particularly hard straits, due to the dimin-
ished j>ronts ot rum product1on and the tallmg-ott ol the
carrying" trade. 1 rrovidence, the second port of Rhode
Island, was the first town to act . At a town meeting on
December 2, 1767, largely attended by merchants and per-
sons of wealth, a more stringent agreement was adopted
than that of Boston. In place of a resolution of mere non-
consumption, it was agreed not to import, after January I,
1768, a list of articles which exceeded the Boston list by
twelve items. The agreement contained a pledge against
the use of any teas, chinaware or spices, a resolution against
expensive mourning, and one favorable to wool and flax
production. The compact was to be enforced by a dis-
1 Bos. Post-Boy, Dec. 28, 1767; also Bos. Town Reel. (1758-1769"), pp.
227-230.
* These resolutions passed by a vote of eighty-one to one. Bos. Gas. ,
Feb. 20, 1768; also N. Y. Journ. , Mch. 10.
1 E. g. , vide "A Friend to this Colony," Prov. Gas. , Nov. 14, 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
? II2 THE COLONIAL MERCHANTS: 1763-1776
countenancing, " in the most effectual but decent and lawful
Manner," of any person who failed to sign or conform to
these regulations. A few weeks later, the subscription rolls
were reported to be filling rapidly. 1
Two days after the action of Prnvidepc. e. a town meeting
at Newport adopted an agreement of non-consumption,
modeled very closely on that of Boston, save that it was to
become effective one month later. Mourning resolutions
were also adopted. 2 In the following two months, the
Newport agreement was concurred in by other Rhode Island
towns, including Middletown, Little Compton and Tiverton. 1
"Liber Nov-Anglus," writing in the Connecticut Jour-
nal, December 25, 1767, was one of the first to urge the
Boston agreement on the people of Connecticut . The
larger towns soon began to take action, Norwich leading
the way. In the subsequent weeks, non-consumption agree-
ments, patterned more or less after the Boston plan, were
adopted by town meetings at New London, Windham,
Mansfield and New Haven. 4 In both Rhode Island and
Connecticut, the newspapers gave abundant evidence of the
wide drinking of "Labradore or Hyperion tea," and of
increased activity in the production of homespun. 5 The
Newport Mercury inserted, free of charge, all advertisements
of Rhode Island textiles.
Owing perhaps to the fact that the movement in New
England was engineered by town meetings, it did not spread
1 Prov. Gas. , Nov. 14, 28, Dec. 5, 12, 1767; Newport Merc. , Dec. 14.
* Newport Merc. , Nov. 30, Dec. 7, 1767; Prov. Gas. , Dec. 12.
* Newport Merc. , Jan. 25, Feb. 29, 1768.
4Prov. Gas. , Dec. 26, 1767; N. Y. Journ. , Feb. 11, Mch. 17, 1768;
Bos. Gas. , Feb. 15, Mch. 28; Newport Merc. , Feb. 15.
5 Newport Merc. , Dec. 7, 1767, Jan. 11, 18, 25, 1768; New London
Gas. , Dec. 18, 1767; N. H. Gas. , Mch. 11, 1768; N. Y. Joum. , Jan. 28,
Feb. 18.
? ? 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
m its present form to any of the other commercial provinces,
where those potent agencies of local opinion did not exist.
The interest of the people at New York and Philadelphia
was aroused, however.
"A Tradesman," writing in the
New York Journal, December 17, 1767, asked pertinently
why the example of Boston had not been followed by New
York. "Are our Circumstances altered? " he asked. "Is
Money grown more plenty? Have our Tradesmen full
Employment? Are we more Frugal? Is Grain cheaper?
Are our Importations less? " On December 29, 1767, a
public meeting was held, and a committee was appointed to
report on a plan for retrenching expenses and for employing
local tradesmen and the deserving poor. At a meeting on
February 2. 1768, the report of the committee was approved,
and instructions were given for carrying it into execution. 1
Contemporary records do not reveal the nature of the New
York plan; but it is probable that it did not include an
agreement of non-consumption. A public meeting, held at
Philadelphia to discuss the action of Boston, did not ven-
ture further than to vote an expression of sympathy for that
city. 2
By the beginning of spring, 1768, it was apparent to all
interested that the sumptuary regulations of the New Eng-
land towns would fail to secure relief from the hard times.
The non-mercantile elements of the population were not, as
yet, sufficiently co-ordinated or self-conscious to secure
obedience to their mandates; and the merchants hesitated
to lend their support until they had assurance that their
brethren down the coast would unite in the measure. 3
1 N. Y. Journ. , Jan. 23, 28, Feb. 4, 1768.
1 Dickinson, Writings (Ford), vol. i, pp. 400-410.
1" Few of the trading part have subscribed," wrote Andrew Eliot,
of Boston, with reference to the agreement on Dec. 10, 1767. 4 M. H. S.
? ? 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
? THE COLONIAL MERCHANTS: 1763-1776
Without such an understanding, they felt that their own
self-denial would have no other result than to deliver up
their customers to their competitors at New York and
Philadelphia. Meantime, importations continued as before,
though in somewhat lessened degree.
The basis for an appeal for a non-importation plan of a
wider geographical scope was supplied by "XhteiLflttecs
from a Farmer in Pennsylvania," which were published
serially in the newspapers of the various provinces during
December, 1767, and through the first two months of
1768. 1 The author, in language more legalistic than bucolic,
reminded the Americans of the success of the legislative
petitions and non-importation agreements in effecting the
repeal of the Stamp Act. and exhorted them to revive those
agencies of protest. These articles were read everywhere
and helped to prepare the public mind for the mercantile
opposition of the next few years.
The Boston merchants now took active steps to bring
about a non-importation league of the leading ports. The
body of the merchants were moved by the necessity of com-
al reform; but individuals were not unmindful of the
-/V 1act that a. suspension'nf rrane yTM'M ^naMf. ^p^Tt^v ,-Uo"
. ^G^/'*-' ])riAAA out their old stock at monopoly prices. 2 At the instigation
0 I <f of Captain Daniel Jviaicom, a notorious smuggler, and a few
others, the merchants and traders gathered at the British
Coffee-House on the evening of March 1, 1768 " to consult
on proper Measures relative to our Trade under its present
Embarrassments. " 1 At this and several subsequent meet-
Co/If. , vol. iv, p. 418. The leaders of the non-consumption movement
consist "chiefly of persons who have no property to lose," declared "A
Trader" in the Bos. Eve. Post, Oct. 12, 1767.
1 The text has been reprinted in Dickinson, Writings (Ford), vol. i,
pp. 305-406.
1 Bos. Post-Boy, Sept. 28, 1767.
1Bos. Gas. , Feb. 29, 1768. "This may be said to b<< the first Move-
? ? 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 115
ings, an agreement was drawn up and adopted, which
pledged all merchants who should sign it, to refrain for
one year from importing merchandise from Great Britain
(save such as was absolutely necessary for the fisheries) in
case the merchants at New York and Philadelphia should
take like action. This conditional agreement was circulated
about Boston and was almost universally signed by the
merchants. The merchants of Salem, Marblehead and
Gloucester concurred in the same measure. 1
Events now awaited the action of the merchants at New
York and Philadelphia. At the former port, several meet-
ings of the merchants and traders were held early in April
to consider the matter. About the middle of the month,
an agreement was adopted to import no goods shipped from
Great Britain after October 1, 1768 until the Townshend
duties should be repealed, provided that Boston should
continue and Philadelphia adopt similar measures by the
second Tuesday of June. 2
ment of the Merchants against the Acts of Parliament," Governor Ber-
nard told Hillsborough in a letter of Mch. 21, 1768. Bos. Eve. Post,
Aug. 21, 1769.
1 The chief facts concerning this agreement of Boston and the other
towns may be found in: 4 M. H. S. Colls. , vol. iv, pp. 350-351; M. H.
S. Mss. , 9r L, p. 37, 70-74; Bos. Gas. , Feb. 29, Mch. 7, 1768; Bernard
to Hillsborough, Bos. Eve> Post, Aug. 21, 1769. The merchants of
Portsmouth, N. H. , refused'to accede to this agreement. Brit. Papers
{"Sparks Mss. "), vol. i, pp. 7-8.
1 N. Y. Gas. & Merc. , Apr. 18, 1768; N. Y. Journ. , June 28, 1770. The
terms of this agreement had not been formulated without considerable
difference of opinion. Some of the more radical merchants wished to
include the Quartering Act with the Townshend duties as the object
of the non-importation. But this proposal was rejected by the major-
ity. Others insisted that the Boston plan of immediate non-importation
should be followed, for the six months' interval would enable unscru-
pulous men to enlarge their orders and defeat the purpose of the
agreement. This again met with little favor. Article by " G" in ibid. ,,
Apr. 21, 1768.
? ? 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
? 1 I6 THE COLONIAL MERCHANTS: 1763-1776
The agreement was signed by every merchant and trader
in New York, save two or three unimportant ones, within
less than two days. Another outcome of the conferences
of the merchants was the formation of the New York
Chamber of Commerce, with the avowed purpose of en-
couraging commerce and industry and of procuring better
trade laws. 1 The Committee of Merchants at Boston were
informed of the New York agreement; and an answer was
returned that, although the Boston merchants considered the
New Yorkers mistaken in not stopping trade 1mmediately,
nevertheless, for the sake of unanimity, they would accept
their proposal. 8
In Philadelphia, the movement for co-operation with
Boston and New York was devoid of any real vitality, not-
withstanding that the great proponent of non-importation,
John Dickinson, was an influential citizen of that place.
The merchants as a whole did not yet suffer from the trade
embarrassments, which the sea ports farther north were
experiencing or which they themselves had experienced
during the critical years 1764-1766. 8 "A. B. " represented
the. merchants' point of view in a set of queries in the
Pennsylvania Chronicle July 25. 1768. The aribnymous
author, probably Joseph (jalloway, questioned the wisdom
of severing commercial connections with England except in
1 Bos. News-Letter, Jan. 5, 1769; Memorial History of the City of
New York (Wilson, J. G. , ed. ), vol. iv, p. 516.
* Letter of N. Y. Merchants' Committee to Philadelphia Committee,
N. Y. Journ. , June 28, 1770. The Boston meeting to consider the New
York proposal was probably held on May 2. Bos. Gas. , May 2, 1768.
* Dickinson's "Farmer's Letters," in contrast to his pamphlet against
"The Late Regulations" of 1764-1765, made no claim to severe times;
and only a few articles in the newspapers spoke of business stagnation
and currency stringency or advocated local manufactures, thus " Philo-
Patriae" in Pa. Chron. , Dec. 2, 1767; "Lover of Pennsylvania" in
ibid. , Jan. 4, I1, 1768; "Freeborn American" and "Monitor" in Pa.
Gtu. , Feb. 9, Apr. 14, 1768.
? ? 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 117
cases of dire necessity, for he declared that all the wool in
North America would not supply the colonists with hats and
stockings alone . Among his queries were these: Had the
merchants in their letters to England done all they could to
induce the mercantile houses there to agitate for repeal?
If the merchants should take action, ought not non-impor-
tation to be restricted to dutied imports alone? Was the
provincial legislature not the proper body to take cognizance
of the situation, and would anarchy not ensue from the
adoption of other measures? Even' if it were prudent for
New England merchants to resort to non-importation, might
it not be imprudent for Pennsylvania and other provinces
where the circumstances differed widely? Was it consis-
tent with the rights of mankind for one province to insist
that another should adopt its measures, more especially for
a people who called themselves " Sons of Liberty "?
"A Chester County Farmer" claimed that the farmers
would be slow to be inveigled into local manufacturing
again after their experience during Stamp Act days, for
the " ill-timed Resolution," made at the time of the repeal,
to cast aside all homespun, had dealt a staggering blow
to the people who had invested their capital in pastures,
sheep, looms, spinners, etc. 1 The situation was further
complicated by the long-standing local controversy over
the desirability of continuing the proprietary government. 2
A meeting of the merchants and traders of Philadelphia
was held on March 26, 1768, to act upon the proposal of
the Boston merchants. The Boston letter was not favcr-
1 Pa. Ga*. , June 16, 1768. It should be noted that the pseudonym was
another one of Joseph Galloway's, according to Ford in his edition of
Dickinson's Writings, vol. i, p. 435.
1" A. L.