|
Crisis II
The Townshend Duties
1767-1770
|
Background: After the
repeal of the Stamp Act and the passage of the Declaratory Act (March 4,
1766) there was a general sigh of relief in the colonies despite the
ominous implication of the Declaratory Act.
In London there was a shift in the government:
| New Ministry: In July,
1766, the King dismissed Rockingham and invited
William Pitt
to form a government.
George III detested Pitt for his long career of criticizing royal
policies. But he considered Pitt the only person who could handle
America effectively. Pitt's coveting of a peerage led him to make
the mistake of accepting the King's offer of a title, Earl of Chatham,
removing him from Commons. In addition, Pitt for the next two years
suffered from gout and depression, causing him to be away from London
for long periods. Pitt turned to a friend,
the Duke of Grafton,
young and inept, to
serve as both prime minister and first lord of the Treasury.
The
Chatham (William Pitt)/Grafton
Ministry, Aug.,1766- Jan. , 1770
| Chatham, Lord Privy Seal |
| Grafton, Prime Minister and First
Lord of the Treasury |
| Charles Townshend, Chancellor of the
Exchequer (until death in 1767), effectively became the leader of
the government. He has been described as "able but truculent."
|
|
New Tax Policy & Colonial
Administration Department
| The 1766 depression led
landed gentry to call for tax relief, a request
Grenville supported while
demanding another American
tax to replace the repealed Stamp Act.
In Feb.,1767 Parliament reduced land tax, forcing
the ministry
to look for new revenue.
| A symbol of the empire's dilemma: In spring,
1767 NY Assembly refused to vote provisions for British troops, even
after the army had obligingly subdued Hudson Valley tenant farmers who
were rioting against the high rents charged by the very landlords who
controlled the Assembly.
|
|
| Townshend, without consulting Chatham, proposed
new revenue legislation based on a distinction between internal and
external taxes, a distinction Pitt and Americans had made
earlier in speaking on the Stamp Act. Townshend wanted to levy customs
duties on good imported into America.
| The
Townshend Act: June, 1767 a levy on
British goods imported into the colonies - glass, lead, paint,
paper, and tea. This was clearly not a regulation of trade in the
mercantilist tradition of the Navigation Acts.
Again, a constitutional issue was raised.
| Revenue raised would be put in a special
fund to pay royal officials in the colonies. Royal governors would
no longer rely on the colonial assemblies for their income.
reducing the effective powers of the assemblies. |
| Establishment of Board of Customs
Commissioners in Boston |
| New Vice Admiralty Courts in Boston,
Philadelphia, Charleston |
|
|
| Change in Administration of the Empire: January,
1768 Parliament created a new office for colonial affairs, Secretary of
State for the Colonies. Lord Hillsborough,
President of the Board of Trade, became colonial secretary. |
American Reaction: Crisis II
| Constitutional Issue Revived
| John Dickenson’s “Letters from a Farmer in
Pennsylvania” moved to new constitutional ground. Newspaper series
started in Philadelphia in December, 1767, widely circulated in pamphlet form
by March, 1768
|
|
| Boycott and Protests Revived
| Boston popular leaders and the
Boston Gazette call for non-importation. They are in control of lower house but the
Mass radicals face steep opposition. Merchants fear for their pocketbooks and a revival of mob action.
For a year in Boston Town Meeting and the Assembly they delayed any
radical action.
| February, 1768 the Popular Party in an
Assembly session with many absentees passed a
Circular Letter drafted by Samuel Adams, stating objections to
the Townshend duties and asking other colonies to organize a
protest. |
| April, 1768, Hillsborough receiving the
Mass. Circular Letter, write Gov. Bernard in Boston to demand the
Assembly retract it. He
orders colonial governors to stop their own assemblies from
endorsing Adams' circular letter. Hillsborough also orders the
governor of Massachusetts to dissolve the general court if the
Massachusetts assembly does not revoke the letter. By month's end,
the assemblies of New Hampshire, Connecticut and New Jersey have
endorsed the letter. |
| Commissioners of
Customs radicalize merchants who approach Otis-Adams faction again and
they develop the device of BOYCOTT. |
|
| July, 1768 John Hancock heads a “standing committee”
to draft a new agreement prohibiting import of all British goods for a
year beginning January 1, 1769. Huge meeting in
Faneuil Hall approves
it. Most signers were artisans who benefited from lack of British
goods. |
| Bernard dissolved Assembly and towns,
upon request or Boston selectmen,
move for a convention in Faneuil Hall –
pointing way to extra-legal organization |
| Although Boston merchants were the
first merchants in America to call for economic
moves against Britain, even in Boston
the boycott came mostly from patriot leaders. Merchants were more
reluctant |
| Obstructionist
tactics towards Commissioners led them in late winter,
1768 to
request military
support. |
| June, 1768 –
Riot over seizure or the Liberty |
| Oct 1, 1768
Hillsborough orders regiment to Boston because of treatment of Customs
Officials. Town refuses quartering help and officers have to rent
quarters for men with own money. |
|
Summer, 1769, Bernard
ordered home for briefing and Hutchinson becomes governor.
|
|
September, 1769,
James Otis gets into brawl with soldiers and is badly injured.
S Adams becomes more central to radical movement.
|
|
During winter, 1769
Adams newspaper propaganda and legal harassment mounted. Sons of Liberty
ambush patrols with sticks an stones.
|
|
“Boston Massacre”
March 5, 1770
|
| In NY and Phil
merchants were more reluctant. Not until a year after the law took effect
did the Nonimportation Agreement became a reality. Hillsborough Letter
played a part in moving to radicalize the merchants.
| Finally NY merchants adopt more radical
agreement – open-ended until Townshend Acts were repealed. |
| Signers were mostly artisans and small
shopkeepers and agreed to boycott non-cooperative merchants as an
enforcement mechanism.
|
|
| Philadelphia: merchants resisted until March,
1769 and then agreed to exclude abut 20 items.
|
| Merchants in South were also both frightened and
encouraged to cooperate.
| Virginia: non-importation got linked to
planters’ debt issue. May, 1769 Burgesses resolved that Parliament
did not
have power over Americans and asked the King to intervene. The
Governor. then dissolved Burgesses who reassembled in
the Apollo Room of
Raleigh Tavern. |
| New radicals joined Patrick Henry and
Richard Henry Lee, i.e.
Washington and Jefferson (then 26). They went beyond non-importation
agreement and added a list of luxury items.
|
|
|
| Crisis Ends
| Ministerial Change and Repeal of Townshend
Acts
| Grafton
resigned January, 1770; Lord North forms
new ministry based mostly on King’s Friends |
| March 5, moved to
repeal all Townshend acts except tea. Repeal to take effect Dec. 1, 1770 |
|
| Non Importation then
collapsed immediately the news of repeal was heard. In cities where Sons
of Liberty were the enforcers the system was fairly effective:
| Phil – by 1770 imports were
a fourth of 1768 |
| NY only a fifth |
| Boston imports dropped only
by half despite publishing names of violators in the Boston Gazette. |
| “Suffering in their
pocketbooks and mistrustful of one another, merchants became increasingly
annoyed at the menacing manners of the Sons of Liberty and alarmed by the
assaults on British troops in Boston and NY. Popular leaders like Samuel
Adams wanted to continue the restrictive system as a protest against the
remaining tea duty, but the merchants flatly refused.” (Risjord, 76) |
| By 1770 the radical movement was in trouble
throughout the colonies.
| This along with the North ministry’s desire
to reduce tensions meant a return to normalcy. |
| Peaceful trial of Boston Massacre
soldiers. Preston not guilty; two soldiers convicted and both got
light sentences of burning on the hand.
| Two members of the radical club defended
them – John Adams and John Quincy. Motivation not clear – sense of justice
or wish to avoid embarrassing cross-examination.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|