§ 249] THE BOSTON PORT BILL 207 whom," says Carlyle, "Sam Adams could speak without an interpreter "), and, seizing the vessels before they passed into the hands of the officials, emptied into Boston harbor some ninety thousand dollars' worth of tea (December 16, 1773). 248. The short-sighted English government replied with a series of "repressive acts"1 to punish Massachusetts. Town meetings were forbidden, except as authorized in writing by the governor, and for business specified by him. All courts, high and low, with all their officials, were made absolutely dependent upon his appointing and removing power. So far as the election of the Council was concerned, the charter of 1691 was set aside, and the appointment given to the crown. Most effective in rousing American indignation was another act of this series, the Boston Port Bill, which closed the port of Boston to commerce, with provision for a blockade by ships of war. Since the entire population depended, directly or indirectly, upon commerce for their living, the town was threatened with starvation. Food and fuel at once became scarce and costly, and great numbers of men were unemployed. But all parts of America joined in sending money and supplies. South Carolina gave cargoes of rice; Philadelphia gave a thousand barrels of flour; from Connecticut came Israel Putnam driving before him his flock of sheep. 249. May 12, two days after the arrival of the news of the "Intolerable Acts," the committees of eight near-by towns met at Boston. This gathering sent letters to the correspondence committees of the thirteen colonies suggesting that all America should "consider Boston as suffering in the common cause, and resent the injury inflicted upon her." 1 Classed with these acts, in the minds of the colonists, was the Quebec Act which was passed at the same time. This legalized the Catholic religion, and restored part of the French law, for Canada. The design was to conciliate the French settlers (almost the sole population), and to set up some authority to deal with the existing anarchy in the fur-trade regions. No act of the series, however, caused more bitter suspicion among the English colonies, with their bigoted fear of Catholicism. The same act extended "Quebec" to include the unsettled district west of the mountains between the Great Lakes and the Ohio. The first official response came from Virginia. May 24, 1774, the House of Burgesses set apart June 1 (when the Port Bill was to go into effect) "as a Day of Fasting, Humiliation, and Prayer, devoutly to implore the divine interposition for averting the heavy Calamity which threatens Destruction to our Civil Rights, and the Evils of civil War, and to give us one heart and one Mind firmly to oppose by all just and proper means every injury to American Rights." Two days later the governor dissolved the Assembly with sharp rebuke. On the following day, the ex-Burgesses (influential citizens still) met at the Raleigh Tavern, and recommended an annual congress of delegates from all the colonies "to deliberate on those general measures which the united interests of America may from time to time require." Here was a suggestion for permanent continental revolutionary government. A second meeting of the ex-Burgesses, on May 31, called a Convention of deputies from Virginia counties, to meet at Williamsburg on August 1, in order to appoint Virginia delegates for the proposed continental congress and to consider a plan for non-intercourse with England. During June and July all the counties of Virginia ratified this call in county courts, by authorizing their ex-Burgesses to act for them at the proposed Convention, or by choosing new representatives to do so. Here were the germs of revolutionary machinery for county and state. 250. On this suggestion from Virginia, all the colonies but Georgia chose delegates to a congress, to meet September 1 at Philadelphia. We know this "First Continental Congress" of 1774 only from letters and later recollections of some of its members and from imperfect notes taken at the time by two or three delegates (Source Book). It sat six weeks, and was a notable gathering, — although forty years afterwards John Adams described it as "one third Tories, one third Whigs and the rest Mongrels." The Moderate party (Adams' "Tories") desired still to use only constitutional agitation to secure redress of grievances. This element was led by Joseph Galloway of Pennsylvania, § 251] VIRGINIA CALLS A CONGRESS 209 supported by John Jay of New York and Edward Rutledge of South Carolina. The Radicals insisted that, as a prelude to reconciliation with England, the ministry must remove its troops and repeal its acts. After strenuous debate, Galloway's proposals were rejected by a vote of six colonies to five. The Congress then recommended the Radical plan of a huge universal boycott, in the form of a solemn Association. The signers were to bind themselves neither to import any Το British goods nor to export their own products to Great Britain. enforce this agreement, efficient machinery was recommended. Every town and county was advised to choose a committee, acting under the supervision of the central committee of its province, "to observe the conduct of all persons," and to have all violations "published in the gazette," that the foes to the rights of America might be "universally contemned." CARPENTERS' HALL, PHILADELPHIA, where met the Continental Congress. From a photograph. 251. The "First Continental Congress" was not a legislature nor a The name 66 government. 99 congress was used to indicate its informal character. No governing body had ever held that name. It was a meeting for consultation. It claimed no authority to do more than advise and recommend. The delegates had been elected in exceedingly informal fashion,1-by a part of a legislature, called together perhaps in an irregular way; or by a committee of correspondence; or by a mass meeting of some small part 1 Details are given in West's American History and Government. of a colony, claiming to speak for the whole; or, in six colonies, by a new sort of gatherings known as provincial conventions, similar to that in Virginia (§ 249). None of this first series of provincial conventions sat more than five or six days (most of them only for a day): and none took any action except to appoint delegates to Philadelphia and to instruct them, except that one or two provided for a second convention, to be held after the Continental Congress. EXERCISE. Distinguish between a Continental Congress and a Provincial Congress, or Provincial Convention (both names were used). Note the series of events leading to the First Continental Congress. If you could name only one of those events as the occasion, what one would you select? Distinguish, for this period, between a “provincial convention" and a "provincial Assembly." FOR FURTHER READING. - The Source Book is very full for this and the following chapter. The history of the Revolution in Virginia may be traced, in outline, in that volume, Nos. 120-129. For secondary authorities on the whole period, Howard's Preliminaries of the Revolution and Van Tyne's American Revolution (“ American Nation" series) make together an admirable treatment. Woodburn's Lecky's American Revolution should be accessible, as a scholarly treatment by a great English historian. Fiske's two volumes on the Revolution are delightful reading. Trevelyan's American Revolution is probably the best history of the period, but it is rather bulky for high school students. Though written by an Englishman, it is sympathetically American in tone, and it is brilliant in treatment. Channing's third volume, dealing with the Revolution, is a critical study, but less readable than his earlier volumes. CHAPTER XXII FROM COLONIES TO COMMONWEALTHS, 1775-1776 252. The Assemblies of New York and Georgia refused to ratify the recommendations of the Continental Congress. But within six months all other colonies had adopted the Association - either by their regular Assemblies or by "conventions"; and everywhere "committees of public safety" and mobs were terrorizing reluctant individuals into signing. Tar and feathers and "the birch seal" became common means of persuasion; and Moderates complained bitterly that, in the name of liberty, the populace refused all liberty of speech or action. A great revolution, however righteous, is sure to have its ugly phases. 253. The issue had changed. The question, now, was not approval or disapproval of Parliamentary taxation, but whether resistance should be forcible. The radical "Patriots" were probably a minority; but they were aggressive and organized, and eventually they whipped into line the great body of timid and indifferent people. On the other hand, many earnest "Patriots" of the preceding period now became "Tories" from repugnance to armed rebellion or to mob rule. Thus party lines were drawn more clearly. In the few cities the revolutionary movement fell largely to the democratic artisan class. June 1, 1774, the governor of New York, writing to the English government on the excitement about the Boston Port Bill, says: "The Men who call'd themselves the Committee [in New York] who acted and dictated in the name of the People-were many of them of the lower Rank, and all the warmest zealots. The more con 1 See, in Source Book, No. 140, how even John Adams was disturbed by the glee of his horse-jockey client at the closing of the courts. |