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.
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.
Arthur Schlesinger - Colonial Merchants and the American Revolution
ao.
1 Hodge, H. H. , "Repeal of Stamp Act," Pol. Sci. Quar. , vol. xix,
pp. 252-276.
? ? 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 83
192 to ? 383,224 to the tobacco colonies--a loss which was
far from being offset by an increase from ? 324,146 to
? 363,874 in the exportations to North Carolina and the
rice colonies. 1 Dr. Franklin had laid bare the economic
reasons for the American commotions, declaring them to
be "the restraints lately laid on their trade, by which the
bringing of foreign gold and silver into the Colonies was
prevented; the prohibition of making paper money among
themselves; and then demanding a new and heavy tax by
stamps; taking away, at the same time, trials by jury, and
refusing to receive and hear their humble petitions. " 2
Whether or not Franklin's analysis was a complete state-
ment of the case, the remedial legislation of Parliament
followed generally the lines indicated by him. The first
step taken was the total repeal of the Stamp Act, upon an
understanding, embodied in the accompanying Declaratory
Act, that Parliament, nevertheless, possessed authority to
bind the colonies "in all cases whatsoever. " * When Sec-
retary Conway communicated this news to the colonial gov-
ernors in a letter of March 31, 1766, he assured them that
Parliament would at once undertake to " give to the Trade
& Interests of America every Relief which the true State of
their Circumstances demands or admits. " * A second letter
of June 12, signed by the Duke of Richmond as secretary,
announced the accomplishment of this latter object--that
"those Grievances in Trade which seemed to be the first
and chief Object of their Uneasiness have been taken into
the most minute Consideration, & such Regulations have
1 Bos. Chron. , Jan. 30, 1769.
1 Writings (Smith), vol. iv, p. 420.
? 6 George III, c. 1 1 and c. 12.
*/ N. J. Arch. , voL be, pp. 550-552. As early as Feb. 14, Henry
Cruger had written with the assurance of one who knew the facts that
the molasses duty would be reduced to one penny. R. I. Commerce,,
voL i, p. 143.
? ? 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
? 84 THE COLONIAL MERCHANTS: 1763-1776
been established as will, it is hoped, restore the Trade of
America . . . "'
The new regulations of Parliament did indeed remove
the chief economic objection to the restrictive act of 1764*
The threepenny duty on foreign molasses was taken off,
and in its place a very low duty of one penny a gallon was
substituted upon all molasses, whether imported from Brit-
ish or foreign possessions. The high duties on foreign sugar
were retained; but the cost of British West Indian sugar
was reduced by removing the long-established export duties
at the islands. It was provided, for the discouragement of
smuggling, that all sugars exported to Great Britain from
the continental colonies should be classed as "French"
and charged with higher duties accordingly.
It was further enacted that all colonial products, whether
"enumerated" or not, must thereafter be entered at an
English port, if destined for a European port north of Cape
Finisterre (other than the Spanish ports in the Bay of
Biscay). The imposts on foreign textiles that had been
collected upon importation into America were in the future
to be collected at the time of exportation from England.
The export duties on British colonial pimento and coffee
were replaced by low duties upon their importation into
other British colonies.
The new duty on molasses met the wishes of the agents
of the continental colonies; and it would appear that the
merchants of Boston, so vitally concerned, had intimated
1 / A'. /. Arch. , vol. ix, pp. 553-354-
16 George III, c. 52. The British West Indies had been suffering
hard times also, and Parliament passed special legislation at this time
with a view of relieving the distress there; 6 George III, c. 49, for the
establishment of free ports at Jamaica and Dominica. Vide Edwards,
B. , The History, Civil and Commercial, of the British Colonies in the
West Indies (London, 1793), vol. i, pp. 239-243.
? ? 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 85
in advance their willingness to accept such a reduction. 1
It was understood that the rum business of the commercial
provinces could easily support a small tax. Franklin be-
lieved that the new regulations afforded " reasonable relief
. . . in our Commercial grievances " 2 and the Rhode Island
agent wrote, even more exuberantly, to the governor of
Rhode Island that "every grievance of which you com-
plained is now absolutely and totally removed, -- a joyful
and happy event for the late disconsolate inhabitants of
America. " *
If the colonists had been more intent on their theoretical
rights than on immediate business concessions, the keener
minds would have perceived that rejoicing was premature.
Far more ominous to American liberties than the
tpry Act was the fact that the new molasses duty
to all molasses imported. British as well as foreign. By no
possible interpretat1on could it be construed m~any other
light than a tariff for revenue. It was an unvarnished con-
tradiction of the colonial claim to "no taxation without
representation. "
However, the remedial lefpslarion r>f 7-766 w^ JWJVMI
in_ America w1th great popular satisfaction. Measures
1Beer, British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765, p. 279; 1 M. H. S. Colls. ,
vol. vi, p. 193; Hutchinson, Mass. Bay, vol. iii, p. 261 n. ; Quincy, Mass.
Reports, p. 435; Brit. Mus. , Egerton Mss. , no. 2671 (L. C. Transcripts);
Sagittarius's Letters, no. xix, pp. 84-88. Dennys de Berdt, agent of the
Massachusetts House of Representatives, informed Lord Halifax that
a duty of one penny on molasses, "colected with the good will of the
people, will produce more neat money than 3 pence collected by the
dint of Officers. " Col. Soc. Mass. 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.
?
1 Hodge, H. H. , "Repeal of Stamp Act," Pol. Sci. Quar. , vol. xix,
pp. 252-276.
? ? 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 83
192 to ? 383,224 to the tobacco colonies--a loss which was
far from being offset by an increase from ? 324,146 to
? 363,874 in the exportations to North Carolina and the
rice colonies. 1 Dr. Franklin had laid bare the economic
reasons for the American commotions, declaring them to
be "the restraints lately laid on their trade, by which the
bringing of foreign gold and silver into the Colonies was
prevented; the prohibition of making paper money among
themselves; and then demanding a new and heavy tax by
stamps; taking away, at the same time, trials by jury, and
refusing to receive and hear their humble petitions. " 2
Whether or not Franklin's analysis was a complete state-
ment of the case, the remedial legislation of Parliament
followed generally the lines indicated by him. The first
step taken was the total repeal of the Stamp Act, upon an
understanding, embodied in the accompanying Declaratory
Act, that Parliament, nevertheless, possessed authority to
bind the colonies "in all cases whatsoever. " * When Sec-
retary Conway communicated this news to the colonial gov-
ernors in a letter of March 31, 1766, he assured them that
Parliament would at once undertake to " give to the Trade
& Interests of America every Relief which the true State of
their Circumstances demands or admits. " * A second letter
of June 12, signed by the Duke of Richmond as secretary,
announced the accomplishment of this latter object--that
"those Grievances in Trade which seemed to be the first
and chief Object of their Uneasiness have been taken into
the most minute Consideration, & such Regulations have
1 Bos. Chron. , Jan. 30, 1769.
1 Writings (Smith), vol. iv, p. 420.
? 6 George III, c. 1 1 and c. 12.
*/ N. J. Arch. , voL be, pp. 550-552. As early as Feb. 14, Henry
Cruger had written with the assurance of one who knew the facts that
the molasses duty would be reduced to one penny. R. I. Commerce,,
voL i, p. 143.
? ? 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
? 84 THE COLONIAL MERCHANTS: 1763-1776
been established as will, it is hoped, restore the Trade of
America . . . "'
The new regulations of Parliament did indeed remove
the chief economic objection to the restrictive act of 1764*
The threepenny duty on foreign molasses was taken off,
and in its place a very low duty of one penny a gallon was
substituted upon all molasses, whether imported from Brit-
ish or foreign possessions. The high duties on foreign sugar
were retained; but the cost of British West Indian sugar
was reduced by removing the long-established export duties
at the islands. It was provided, for the discouragement of
smuggling, that all sugars exported to Great Britain from
the continental colonies should be classed as "French"
and charged with higher duties accordingly.
It was further enacted that all colonial products, whether
"enumerated" or not, must thereafter be entered at an
English port, if destined for a European port north of Cape
Finisterre (other than the Spanish ports in the Bay of
Biscay). The imposts on foreign textiles that had been
collected upon importation into America were in the future
to be collected at the time of exportation from England.
The export duties on British colonial pimento and coffee
were replaced by low duties upon their importation into
other British colonies.
The new duty on molasses met the wishes of the agents
of the continental colonies; and it would appear that the
merchants of Boston, so vitally concerned, had intimated
1 / A'. /. Arch. , vol. ix, pp. 553-354-
16 George III, c. 52. The British West Indies had been suffering
hard times also, and Parliament passed special legislation at this time
with a view of relieving the distress there; 6 George III, c. 49, for the
establishment of free ports at Jamaica and Dominica. Vide Edwards,
B. , The History, Civil and Commercial, of the British Colonies in the
West Indies (London, 1793), vol. i, pp. 239-243.
? ? 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 85
in advance their willingness to accept such a reduction. 1
It was understood that the rum business of the commercial
provinces could easily support a small tax. Franklin be-
lieved that the new regulations afforded " reasonable relief
. . . in our Commercial grievances " 2 and the Rhode Island
agent wrote, even more exuberantly, to the governor of
Rhode Island that "every grievance of which you com-
plained is now absolutely and totally removed, -- a joyful
and happy event for the late disconsolate inhabitants of
America. " *
If the colonists had been more intent on their theoretical
rights than on immediate business concessions, the keener
minds would have perceived that rejoicing was premature.
Far more ominous to American liberties than the
tpry Act was the fact that the new molasses duty
to all molasses imported. British as well as foreign. By no
possible interpretat1on could it be construed m~any other
light than a tariff for revenue. It was an unvarnished con-
tradiction of the colonial claim to "no taxation without
representation. "
However, the remedial lefpslarion r>f 7-766 w^ JWJVMI
in_ America w1th great popular satisfaction. Measures
1Beer, British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765, p. 279; 1 M. H. S. Colls. ,
vol. vi, p. 193; Hutchinson, Mass. Bay, vol. iii, p. 261 n. ; Quincy, Mass.
Reports, p. 435; Brit. Mus. , Egerton Mss. , no. 2671 (L. C. Transcripts);
Sagittarius's Letters, no. xix, pp. 84-88. Dennys de Berdt, agent of the
Massachusetts House of Representatives, informed Lord Halifax that
a duty of one penny on molasses, "colected with the good will of the
people, will produce more neat money than 3 pence collected by the
dint of Officers. " Col. Soc. Mass. 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.
?
