The Spirit of ’76, originally titled Yankee Doodle, was painted by Archibald M. Willard, of Cleveland Ohio for exhibit in Philadelphia during the 1876 centennial celebrations.
Three separate issues finally induced Colonial America to declare its Independence from Great Britain.
First, King George declared the colonies in revolt August 23, 1775;
King George declared… “All our officers Civil and Military are obliged to exert their utmost Endeavors to suppress such Rebellion, and to bring the Traitors to Justice and make known all Treason and traitorous Conspiracies which they shall know to be against Us, Our Crown and Dignity”…
King George III
Second, Parliament enacted the Prohibitive Act, December 22, 1775;
This act created a blockade against the 13 colonies cutting off all trade with England, further stating that any colonial ship caught trading would be confiscated as if it were any enemy of Great Britain. As this action is an act of war, the Colonies reacted by issuing letters of marque, allowing Americans to seize British ships. To further drive the wedge between England and the colonies, the act further declared that all American vessels were no longer under the protection of the British Navy.
Third, Thomas Paine’s pamphlet “Common Sense” was released to the American public, January 10, 1776, it was both wordy and lengthy. It not only destroyed the idea that monarchy was a viable form of government for the colonies, but that instead of the benevolent monarch many believed the king to be, he was the architect of the ministries he ruled. His personal views were very much like that of his subjects; narrow, insular and contemptuous of colonists in general.
Thomas Paine
That there remained opposition to Independence from England was true, but the tide of rebellion overwhelmed the reluctant in the American population. John Adams said, “Every post and every Day rolls in upon Us Independence like a Torrent.” By July 1, 1776 the tide of support for Independence finally brought the colonies to the final decision to sever all ties to England and the Continental Congress adopted the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776.
(Authors Note) This brings to an end this treatise on the causes that drove the colonies to sever ties with Great Britain. We Americans are and should be free and to this day, we celebrate the Declaration of Independence with much fanfare and love of this, “Our Country.”
Featured Image: Detail, Congress Voting Independence. The engraving called Congress Voting Independence is the most accurate image of the Assembly Room of Independence Hall during the Revolutionary War era. Artist Robert Edge Pine began his oil painting in 1784 but died before completing the work. Painter and engraver Edward Savage finished the work but died before completing the engraving.
General Gage and some 3,000 troops of the Army returned to garrison the city of Boston in the early summer of 1774. On September 1, 1774, General Thomas Gage orders the confiscation of powder and arms from a magazine near Boston. A rumor that bloodshed occurred at the time brought a large number of patriots toward Boston. The rumor proved to be false, but the militia continued to gather arms and ammunition in rural Massachusetts.
The British government declared the colony to be in a state of rebellion in February of 1775. British spies continued to ferret out colonial military stores around the colony. General Gage received orders to confiscate the arms and ammunition and arrest several prominent patriot leaders. Patriot leader Doctor Joseph Warren dispatched Paul Revere, William Dawes and Samuel Prescott to warn of the coming confiscation raid on the night of April 18, 1775.
Top row L-R; Paul Revere, William Dawes and Samuel Prescott. Bottom row L-R; Joseph Warren, General Thomas Gage
Approximately 700 hundred British Troops under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Francis Smith began a night march towards Concord where the military stores were hidden. Doctor Warren’s messengers alerted the countryside, Samuel Adams, John Hancock and other patriot leaders escaped the British as they approached Lexington.
Under 80 militia men under the command of Captain John Parker were spread across Lexington Green as the sun was rising on the morning of April 19, 1775 to confront the British advance force under the command of Major John Pitcairn. Captain Parker commanded his men to, “Stand your ground, don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.” Where the first shot came from is still debated, but 8 militia men lay dead while the British force had one man slightly wounded.
Battle of Lexington Green and Attack on Concord by Amos Doolittle. Doolittle (1754-1832) was a New Haven CT based engraver and silversmith. He was known as the “Revere” of Connecticut.
Colonel Smith ordered the march to continue to Concord where according to information the stores were hidden. The British troops were fired on before they could destroy all the military stores the patriots had hidden in the surrounding area. The forced march back to Lexington became a nightmare for the British as the minute men used tactics that denied the British the chance to form up and charge as they were trained. Upon reaching Lexington, a rescue force of approximately 1,700 arrived from Boston under the command of General Earl Percy. The entire force was then forced to retreat under continuous fire from the patriots.
Charges of atrocities were exchanged by both sides, the patriots claiming that homes were burned for no reason whereas the British claimed they burned homes when they were fired upon. Claim and counter claim of cruelty and murder, of robbery and rape, many of these claims could not be proven to either sides satisfaction.
When the British reached safety, they found that the patriots had sealed them within the confines of Boston and its harbor. As hundreds of patriots arrived, the British realized the siege of Boston had begun; it would continue until March of 1776.
On May 10, 1775, Ethan Allen and Benedict Arnold captured the Fort of Ticonderoga and the Fort at Crown Point the next day.
1758 map of the layout of Ft. Ticonderoga. The fort had been captured from the French in 1759. It was called Ft. Carillon by the French. It is an example of a type of fort called a ‘star’ fort. This type of fort was designed to maximize bith protection from and the use of gunpowder weapons.
In May of 1775, the Second Continental Congress was convened, the New England troops around Boston were adopted as the Continental Army. General Washington was confirmed as Commander in Chief of the Continental Army in June. Before Washington could reach Massachusetts, the Battle of Breed’s Hill had been fought and Doctor Joseph Warren would perish in the battle. The British won the battle but at a terrible cost, one that would haunt the British throughout the entire war as many Junior Officers and Non-Commissioned officers were killed in the carnage on Breed’s Hill.
Washington had grave doubts about the siege of Boston due to the lack of heavy guns to confront the British Army. Colonel Henry Knox was assigned the task of bringing the artillery from Fort Ticonderoga to Washington’s headquarters at Cambridge November 16. 1775. Knox would prove his worth to Washington when he arrived back at Washington’s headquarters with 60 tons of artillery and ammunition, thereby facilitating Washington’s effort to drive the British from Boston in March of 1776; thus ending the siege of Boston by fortifying Dorchester Heights above Boston Harbor with the guns from Fort Ticonderoga.
Two assumptions by the British military said that the Americans would “run” at the sight of British troops and that numerous Tories would come to the aid of the British Army, Neither calculation was correct as the Americans did not run and the loyalists did not come to the aid of Britain. These errors of judgment would prove very costly to the British Empire.
Featured Image: The Robinson half tea chest. It is one of two authenticated surviving tea chests from the Boston Tea Party. It is currently on display at the Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum.
The East India Company had once more fallen into debt and was in danger of default, forcing the English government to come to its rescue once more. Edmond Burke stated that Lord North was seeking to put the company under the umbrella of the Crown, thereby allowing the King to rule without Parliament. This in the eyes of the Americans threatened both the East India Company and the freedom of the Colonies. The Tea Act of 1773 placed a small tax on tea imported into America by the East India Company and was supported by Lord North.
The company reasoned that the repeal of the tax on tea would heal the ailing company and drive the smugglers of other teas from the colonies and restore peace between the government and America. Lord North believed that by giving America cheap tea they would buy tea, tax or no tax. He believed that the tax must be retained for Parliament to retain its authority of the right to tax the colonies. The company was given the right to ship its tea directly to the colonies bypassing the costly regulations that all products bound for the colonies be processed through English ports but the tax on tea was retained.
English East India Company ship the Earl of Mansfield. The Earl of Mansfield is a ship rigged merchant vessel. That type of vessel has square rigged sails on all of its masts. They are designed to move large cargoes long distances fairly quickly.
The East India Company shipped 298 chests of tea to Boston, 257 chests to Charlestown and 698 chests to New York and Philadelphia. Contrary to widely held beliefs by the English, it was not Boston that harbored the most smugglers, but Rhode Island, New York and Philadelphia.
In the eyes of the American patriots, the biggest threat from the tax was the maintenance of an Army in the colonies and a civil list that nullified the colonial assemblies. “What the Parliament could not Fleece from us by Taxes, the Crown will by Monopoly” claimed the merchants of New York. The colonial patriots believed that Lord North was attempting to “take by ruse, what he could not take by storm”. It was believed that once the tea tax had breached American defenses, the King would “enter the Bulwarks of our sacred Liberties, and will never desist, till they have made a Conquest of the whole”!
The dispersal of the East India Company tea was consigned to tea agents appointed by the governors of the colonies. The agents were to see the offloading of the tea but “The Sons of Liberty” paid visits to many of the agents convincing them to renounce their appointment leaving the tea to still be on board the ships. This led to a standoff between the governors and the captains, leaving many of the agents to seek safety on British naval vessels.
Samuel Adams (left) and John Hancock were prominent members of the Sons of Liberty.
Governor Hutchinson believed that the “Sons of Liberty” would allow the tea to be unloaded at the last moment. The patriots came to the conclusion that they had to dispose of the tea before December 17,1773 before it would be seized by customs officials for non-payment of duty and sold to pay the salaries of the governor, Tory judges and customs officials.
The “Sons of Liberty” decided to jettison the tea into Boston Harbor on the night of December 16, 1773. Under the cover of darkness and disguised as Mohawk Indians, they boarded the three vessels carrying the tea and dumped it into Boston Harbor, while the citizens of Boston kept the British Crown officers from being able to identify any of the “Mohawk Indians”.* Years later, George Hewes said that there were several prominent members of the “Sons of Liberty” among the so-called Indians.
The governor of Massachusetts realized the folly of arresting and trying anyone involved in the affair but many of the citizens felt that the wrath of the English government would not fail to punish them as well as the guilty. By contrast, the Whigs called the dumping of the tea a legitimate act of self-defense against tyranny as defined by John Locke.
The “Boston Tea Party” was not the only act of rebellion against the Crown. In New Jersey the tea cargo of the ship Greyhound was burned. In South Carolina several tea chests were thrown into the Cooper River and in New York the tea again was brewed with salt water. The American patriots insisted that tea be forsworn by all Americans in order that NO TAXED TEA be drunk throughout the colonies. As a result of patriotic pressure, tea virtually disappeared from the colonies.
The British government was outraged by the acts of the Boston patriots; what followed was retaliation on a scale not before enacted against the American colonies. The retaliation faced by the colonies would later be called, “The Coercive Acts”.
* Editors note: Whilst searching for illustrations for this piece, I came across an interesting, but somehow obscure, article that stated the Tea Party was blamed on Narragansett Indians rather than the Mohawks as is commonly claimed. This would make sense as the Mohawk homeland was several hundred miles from Boston. The Mohawk were from the eponymous valley in upstate New York and the intervening miles were populated by tribes that were hostile to any native that was part of the Iroquois Confederacy. Meanwhile, the Narragansetts were located in the area between Boston and Rhode Island. Most contemporary local reports referred to the raiders as either indians, natives or Narragansetts. The term Mohawk was used in a single newspaper report and has gained popularity in the intervening years.
Featured Image: Ethan Allen (standing left, foreground) at a meeting of the Green Mountain Boys, wood engraving, 1858.
By the spring of 1770, the pact against the non-importation act had begun to fade leaving the more radical elements of the revolutionary leaders with little more to do than hope that Colonial America would wake up to the dangers to their liberties. This lethargy was mainly due to the fact that things in the colonies were improving with the economy rebounding, roads being constructed and the populace at large was relatively happy.
The Tory population saw that the more radical elements were not able to stir up the common people as they had in the past. This too added to the feeling of complacency that the colonies were feeling much to the dismay of Sam Adams, Patrick Henry and Christopher Gadsden who knew that the Parliament would use this period of relative calm as there was dissent among the rural members of the colonies. The more affluent members of Colonial America were in the act of pushing the common people out of the more productive lands forcing them into lands that were further from the markets driving up their costs to get their products to market. This set up the next series of issues that confronted the less affluent, mainly that the American Oligarchs were more interested in making money than they were in confronting the Crown and Parliament.
The “Regulators” of rural Carolina and the “Green Mountain Boys” of Vermont did not back off and made life for the more affluent less than comfortable. They continued to harass the judges and sheriffs that were in the pockets of the planters and landed gentry, with liberal threats of “Tar and Feathers” and rides on “The Rail”, but eventually the planters in the Carolina’s and the land owners in the Hudson Valley finally prevailed over some of the less strident members of these groups.
L, Drawing of ‘being run out of town on a rail; R, Tarring and feathering. Riding the rail was a painful and humiliating method of being run out of a town. Tarring and feathering involved heating tar or pitch until it was liquid, over one hundred degrees, and smearing it liberally on the offender and then coating them in feathers.
In England, John Wilkes, John Horne Tooke and other radical Englishmen took up the torch of the Colonials and declared that if Americans could not be free, neither could Englishmen. John Tooke stated that, “we are stones of one arch and must stand or fall together”. The sentiment was openly welcomed in the colonies with some going so far as to welcome these English radicals in America should it become necessary for them to flee England. This was not to be, but the fact that some had considered such a move strengthened the resolve of many Americans.
The lull that encompassed America came to a sudden halt in March of 1772 when one Lieutenant William Duddingston appeared in the waters around Rhode Island and began seizing vessels and cargoes he suspected of being contraband. Duddingston made Narragansett Bay his hunting grounds, seizing ships and cargoes, both legal and illegal, stealing livestock and cutting down fruit trees for firewood. The local populace decided they had enough of this haughty individual and when his vessel, the schooner “Gaspee” ran aground in Narragansett Bay, the locals boarded the vessel, put Duddingston adrift in a small boat and burned the Gaspee to the waterline.
The Burning of HMS Gaspee. Gaspee was a schooner, a type of two masted sailing vessel. A schooner is typically fore-and-aft rigged.
A commission was sent to Rhode Island to take testimony against the “scoundrels” with the intent of taking them back to England for trail, but to the dismay of the commissioners, no one ever testified against the perpetrators, leaving all who had participated in the burning of His Majesty’s” ship to go free. This act distressed many of the Officers of the Crown, but little could be done in the absence of credible evidence of wrongdoing.
This signaled an end to the lull of good will between the colonials and Parliament with the enactment of a civil list in Massachusetts to pay the salaries of Crown officials from the customs paid by local merchants. To add to the dispute, letters written by Governor Thomas Hutchinson and acquired by Benjamin Franklin recommending “a diminution of English liberties in the colony of Massachusetts” did great damage to his post as governor to the colony. The radicals demanded the removal of the governor but were refused by the Crown. This action also solidified Franklin’s decision to become one of the radicals seeking freedom for the colonies from the English Crown and driving him to leave England for his home in Pennsylvania.
Lord North, 2nd Earl of Gilford
Frederick North, (Lord North) the second Earl of Guilford was appointed Prime Minister of Great Britain in 1770. His lack of attention to the ongoing dispute between Parliament and the colonies contributed to an already disintegrating situation that continued almost unabated with a tea tax that would precipitate a new and ever more dangerous situation.
Featured image: The Boston Massacre March 5, 1770 by Don Troiani
A lone sentry stood guard (Private Hugh White) in front of the Boston Custom House. The chill wind on the evening of March 5, 1770 caused the young sentry to pull his coat tighter about his body. He heard a group of young colonials coming towards his position and tried to look the part of a British soldier as they approached.
British short land pattern musket or Brown Bess. This was the most commonly issued British firearm during the Revolutionary war.
The pivotal event called “The Boston Massacre” was about to occur.
There had been several minor scuffles between the occupying soldiers and the citizens of Boston, and all he could think of was his supper that awaited him at the end of his sentry duty. The group of young locals began to taunt the young sentry and throw snowballs at his position. As they approached even closer one tried to pull the musket from his hands. As the situation escalated, the young sentry called for reinforcements to come to his aid.
As the altercation became more intense he called out, “Turn out the Guard! Turn out the Guard.” To his relief, he saw an officer (Captain Thomas Preston) with the troops that answered his call for help. The officer ordered Private White to join the formation of troops that arrived. The situation continued to escalate as more of the town ruffians joined the crowd that were harassing the soldiers.
Fruits of arbitrary Power , or The Bloody Massacre by Henry Pelham Text above reads “The Fruits of Arbitrary Power, or the Bloody Massacre perpetrated in King Street Boston on March 5, 1770 in which Messrs SamL Gray, Saml Maverick, James Caldwell, Crispus Attucks, Patrick Carr were Killed Six others wounded two of them mortally.”Bottom text reads “How long shall they utter and speak hard things and all the workers of iniquity boast themselves: they break in peices [sic] they people O Lord and Afflict Thine Heritage: They slay the Widow and the stranger and murder the Fatherless – Yet they say the Lord shall not see neither shall the God of Jacob Regard It. Psalm XCIV.”
A church bell began to ring, the signal that a fire had broken out in the town. The call of “Fire, Fire” began to be called among the gathering crowd and the altercation continued to garner more attention. As the calls of “Fire” continued to be yelled towards the soldiers, all at once, one of the soldiers, unable to control his fear, fired, followed by more of the soldiers firing into the crowd of gathering local townsmen.
Five Boston citizens lay dead in the snow, six more were wounded. The dismay of Captain Preston as he led the small contingent of soldiers away from the awful reality did nothing to calm the citizens, only the bitter cold kept the situation from being more disastrous than it already was.
In the days following the dreadful event, Captain Preston and several of the soldiers were arrested. Claims and counterclaims between the citizens of Boston and the soldiers flowed back and forth.
The prominent young Boston attorneys, John Adams and John Quincy undertook the task of defending Captain Preston and the soldiers. Captain Preston would be acquitted and of the soldiers, two would be found guilty of manslaughter.
L-R; Captain Thomas Preston, John Adams, John Quincy
The acquitted Captain Preston returned to England, the two soldiers who were convicted claimed a plea of clergy that exempted them from further punishment.* A shaky calm came over the city in the aftermath of the trial.
John Adams’ cousin, Sam Adams called for a more stringent punishment for the two soldiers, but was rebuffed by Lieutenant Governor Hutchison. Sam Adams’ demand that all troops be removed from Boston was effective in that the troops were sent to Castle William Island in Boston Harbor but later would return to Boston under the Command of General Thomas Gage.
*Editors note: The claim of Clergy meant the person could read and write and was a holdover in English law from the Middle Ages when most people outside the Clergy could read or write. This editor highly doubts that either Hugh Montgomery or Matthew Kilroy were literate. The claim exempted them from being hung. They were both branded with the letter ‘M’ on the base of their right thumbs. Branding was a common punishment of the era.
The Battle of Golden Hill as depicted in a 19th Century etching.
As George Grenville’s ministry came to an end with the repeal of the hated “Stamp Act”, William Pitt (Lord Chatham) was called to form a new ministry. One of the people he brought to his ministry was the English dandy, Charles Townshend who became the Chancellor of the Exchequer (the British Treasury department).
Townshend claimed to have a plan that would create an income stream the colonies would accept and soften the tax burden that rested on the landed gentry of England. This sounded good to the heavily taxed squires but Townshend did not readily produce his plan driving the squires to believe Townshend could not actually give them the tax relief they were expecting.
When “Champagne Charley” did produce his plan, it called for Parliament to place taxes on glass, paint, paper and tea and gave colonial courts the right to issue “Writs of Assistance” to customs officers to search for contraband and smuggled goods on private property.
Beginning in 1767 Townshend unveiled his long awaited plan that included 4 separate parts, “The Revenue Act of 1767, the Commissioners of Customs Act of 1767, the Indemnity Act of 1767, the New York Restraining Act of 1767, and the Admiralty Court Act of 1768”.
The purpose of the 4 acts were,
To raise a revenue in the colonies to pay colonial governors and judges so they would remain loyal to Great Britain;
Enforce compliance with trade regulations;
Punish New York for not enforcing the Quartering Act of 1765;
Maintain Parliament’s right to tax the colonies.
Before the Townshend Duties as they were known could be fully initiated, Townshend unexpectedly died at age 42 in September of 1767. Repeal of the Townshend Acts officially occurred on April 12, 1770 with the exception that the tax on tea was continued.
“The Revenue Act of 1767” included language for the removal of the “power of the purse” from the colonial legislatures, giving the revenue raised by the act to pay colonial governors and judges for fealty to the British Crown. This deprived the colonials of any kind of leverage or control over the governors and judges in the colonies.
The “Quartering Act of 1765” set the stage for the suspension of the New York Legislature. This act further inflamed the colonials thereby driving even more acts of overt civil disobedience. Rather than direct conflict, the New York assembly simply voted to allocate 1,500 pounds for the British troops by way of a grant, making it appear as a free gift rather than compliance with the Quartering Act. This was a stealthy act of civil disobedience that the English Parliament accepted as compliance to the act instead of retaliating against the colony of New York which would have only exacerbated an already overheated situation.
Raising of the Liberty Pole. The Liberty Pole was erected in “The Fields,” the town common, today’s City Hall Park in New York. It was the center point of the friction between the Sons of Liberty and the British Soldiery in that city.
The “Battle of Golden Hill” on January 19, 1770 would mark the first skirmish between British Troops and American patriots as British troops tried to post handbills in a New York Market. Some sources claimed that an American died but was never confirmed, but it is the first clash between Americans and members of the British Army in what would eventually be “The American Revolution”.
Colonial newspapers were very effective in rousing the rural population to support the “Non-Importation Act”, a pact the colonial assemblies were able to enact in August of 1768 that restricted the import of finished English goods into the colonies. The plight of Ireland and the resulting level of poverty that Parliament’s actions caused the Irish commoner were all the rural Americans needed for them to see the results of British domination. The continuing threat of British troops to enforce colonial acceptance of Parliamentary rule was a deciding factor for many American farmers to support the Non-Importation Act
The arrival of four regiments of British troops in Boston in October of 1768 only reinforced the fear of troop intervention for the purpose of colonial taxation. The lack of total support for the acts of Parliament by its own members did little for the merchants of England, but the removal of two regiments from Boston in 1769 to Halifax gave the farmers the courage to no longer strongly support the Non-Importation Act and by August of 1770, died from lack of rural support.
By this policy of enacting and then rescinding acts of force the British Parliament undermined its own authority in the colonies. The forces that remained in Boston were too few to truly keep order. Numerous scuffles and other acts of civil disobedience and defiance by Boston civilians continued; the inevitable happened on the evening of March 5, 1770 as British troops fired on American patriots killing 5 and wounding 6 others in what would be called “The Boston Massacre”.
In a strange twist of affairs, John Adams, who would be the Second President of the United States defended some of the British soldiers and their commanding officer in the aftermath of the “Boston Massacre”.
Authors note: American patriots were called Whigs and Revolutionaries while the supporters of the Crown were called Tories and Loyalists.
Much of Colonial America breathed a sigh of relief at the news that the Stamp Act of 1765 was repealed; but the more radical elements in America saw the falsehood it revealed as the Declaratory Act attached to the repeal was read. King George demanded the Declaratory Act be part of the agreement that repealed the Stamp Act. James Otis and Samuel Adams of Massachusetts, Patrick Henry of Virginia and Christopher Gadsden of South Carolina realized the dangers this act contained. It declared that the colonies were as bound by Parliaments regulations as the citizens of England. The act closely mirrored the Declaratory Act of 1719 as was applied to Ireland. (The American Colonies Act of 1766 was the official name of the Declaratory Act applied to the American Colonies as part of the repeal of the Stamp Act)
The “Mutiny Act of 1765” was another sore that the colonies found to be untenable as it allowed soldiers to be quartered in private homes. Contrary to the widely held belief, it was not the work of George Grenville, but that of officers due to the lack of barracks to house the soldiers who were posted in colonial seaports. The repeal of this act due to stiff colonial resistance did little to soothe the colonials as they believed it was a ministerial effort to relieve them of their liberty.
19th century painting of British soldiers quartering in a colonists home. Artist Unknown.
Colonial America declared the right to self acts of taxation; Parliament replied that the colonies were represented as they all had agents that represented the individual colonies. To this the colonies replied, yes, we have agents that represent each colony, that the agents could petition and even address Parliament individually, but they could not vote on any legislation that was to be applied to the colonies. To this argument the Parliament turned a deaf ear referring to the Declaratory Act as their right to act for the colonies. This only pushed the more vocal members of the colonial assemblies to deny Parliament the right to act for the colonies in any legislation.
To add insult to injury, the Anglican Church began to demand that they be allowed to levy and demand tithes be paid to the Church of England. This was an affront to all the diverse sects that existed in Colonial America even as the Roman Catholic Church was allowed to resurface in England. The call for an American Bishop to the Anglican Church not only angered the other religious groups in America, but brought out the denial of any church to be the recognized religion of the American colonies.
One of the more stark differences between the English citizenry and Colonial America was the lack of extreme poverty in the colonies. Travelers to the colonies saw the standard of living especially in the southern colonies often rivaled the more affluent members of English society. To the English eye this was an effort on the part of the Americans to state that they were on an equal footing with the English. The colonies were viewed as inferior workmen whose place in society was to furnish England with raw materials and referred to the colonies as “our colonies”. To this many colonials said, “It was not the sweat of the English brow that made the colonies what they are” and were offended that the claim of colonial ownership by England and by extension that the Americans were essentially “degenerate Englishmen”.
High street in Philadelphia from 9th Street 1799, drawn, engraved and published by W. Birch & son
To state that the colonies did not have supporters in England would not give due recognition to many. A number of radicals in England adopted a conciliatory attitude towards the Americans, John Wilkes, John Horn Tooke, Joseph Preistly, Richard Price and Catherine Macaulay among others were sympathetic to the colonial cause. But King George the 3rd and his ministers ruled England and it was their official attitude that the colonies were to be under the rule of Parliament. They contended that the colonies had been protected from foreign incursions by way of the British Army and Navy, therefore they owed fealty to the British Crown.
General Thomas Gage’s stubborn support for the Stamp Act was reflected in his statement,” I think it would be for our own interest to keep the settlers within reach of the Sea-Coast as long as we can and to cramp their Trade as far as it can be done prudentially”. By contrast, Lord Camden (Charles Pratt, first Earl of Camden) prophetically stated, “It is impossible that this petty island can continue in dependence that mighty continent, increasing daily in numbers and in strength. To protract the time of separation to a distant day is all that can be hoped for”.
Charles Pratt, 1st Earl of Camden
The peace that many on both sides of the Atlantic desired was not to be. The colonials were not yet ready to seek separation from England, but neither were they ready to allow Parliament the right to tax the colonies unless some kind of reconciliation could be found. A power sharing agreement had some Englishmen thinking along the lines of an Imperial Federation. This would resolve many of the disagreements that kept the two parties apart, but this too was not to be.
In an Imperial Federation, America would be on an equal footing with England. This chafed many Englishmen as they were not able to accept the idea that the colonies were anything more than British property and the Americans could not and would not accept secondary citizenship within the Empirical Federation. Hope for the Imperial Federation evaporated as the colonies imposed a boycott of English manufactured goods with the “Nonimportation Agreement of 1768”.
The impasse between England and Colonial America would continue.
Featured image: Procession in New York opposing the Stamp Act, depicted in a hand-colored woodcut.
How it all began… Part 3
The furor raised by the Stamp Act was almost universal in the colonies. The Stamp Act was designed and implemented by Minister George Glenville. While the Trade and Navigation Acts affected the more affluent people, the Stamp Act in effect reached all levels of the colonial society.
This was never more evident than the reaction to the passage Patrick Henry’s “Virginia Resolves”, May 29, 1765. Virginia governor Fauquier decided not to recall the House of Burgesses for fear that to do so would add fuel to an already turbulent situation even though the Burgesses only passed 4 of Henry’s 7 resolves.
Period anti-stamp act propaganda.
Newspapers of the time printed all 7 resolves as if the entire body of resolves were passed by the House of Burgesses. This resulted in many calling the resolves treason as did James Otis of Massachusetts, Alexander McDougall and John Morin Scott of New York. Scott would later become one of the most radical of the “Sons of Liberty”.
Many colonial citizens found themselves in accord with the resolves as they expressed the feelings of many colonials but were afraid to voice their opinion. While the Trade and Navigation Acts did not solidify colonial opposition, the Stamp Act galvanized the feelings of most colonials. Instead of driving a wedge between the more affluent colonials and the more common man, the Stamp Act gave them a reason to stand united in opposition to the heavy handed actions of the English Parliament.
Engraving of a Stamp Tax Protest in New Hampshire in which a Stamp Tax collector was burned in effigy.
Colonial opposition boiled over and spread terror among the Officers of the Crown and their Stamp Agents to the effect that most of the Stamp Agents renounced their commission to avoid being targeted by the colonial citizenry. This was not a plebian reaction, but one that was supported and directed by many of the more wealthy men of the colonies. (Plebian; the common people)
James Otis swore that the two main architects of the Stamp Act were Massachusetts’ own Thomas Hutchison and Andrew Oliver, two of the most prominent men in Massachusetts. Benjamin Franklin tried without success to foil the passage of the Stamp Act, but was resigned to its passage. Franklin’s friend John Hughes was appointed a Stamp Agent at Franklin’s request, but was later forced to resign his commission. This did little to enhance Franklin’s popularity in Pennsylvania but he was eventually forgiven for his actions after his return to America.
Thomas Hutchinson, L; Andrew Oliver, R
James Otis proposed a Stamp Act Congress be held in New York in October, 1765 to solidify colonial opposition to the Stamp Act. Conservative infighting would doom the congress to inactivity and several of the delegates would later lose their seat in the colonial legislative bodies. After the demise of the Stamp Act Congress, Otis would beg Americans to stop rioting and petition Parliament and the Crown to stop before America fell into “painful Scenes of Tumult, Confusion and Distress”.
There is little reason to doubt, had Great Britain tried to use force to impose the Stamp Act, as Ben Franklin said, “a British Army would not have found a rebellion in the American colonies in 1765 but it would have made one.” Resistance to the Stamp Act was so strong that some patriots declared they would “fight up to their knees in blood” if Britain tried to force imposition of the hated act.
The weakness of British forces in America at the time forced the British to decline to act against the fury of the American colonies. Many conservatives asked that Parliament be given the time and opportunity to repeal the act in order to fend off the possibility of armed resistance to British Troops trying to force adoption of the Stamp Act.
In order to blunt the Stamp Act, Americans began to boycott English products; coupled with the riots the act prompted many in England to conclude that a full-blown rebellion was under way in the colonies. This would force many English merchants to fear a collapse of the British economy; it was this fear that set the much of the merchant class to support the repeal of the Stamp Act.
Not all Britons favored repealing the act, among the most violently opposed was the Bedford Party, also known as the “Bloomsbury Gang”. They favored using arms against the Americans in order to force the colonials to accept the act. They suggested that all charters of the colonies be abolished, force the colonial assemblies to be replaced with more amenable colonial citizens and spill the blood of the more rebellious in order that the colonies accept ALL acts by Parliament. In the eyes of the Bedford’s, to butcher all Americans that did not bow down to the English Parliament was the most expedient way to end the controversy.
Charles Watson-Wentworth 2nd Marquis of Rockingham
The replacement of Minister George Grenville by the Marquis of Rockingham (Charles Watson-Wentworth) in July, 1765 set the stage for Rockingham’s ministry to begin the repeal of the Stamp Act. A series of strongly worded petitions began to flood Parliament as the merchant class began to see the effects of the Stamp Act as a major loss of trade in the American colonies. The layoff of many workers in the English factories began to spell a danger to the peace and tranquility of the manufacturing centers of England. The merchants claimed repeal of the Stamp Act was needed to bring prosperity back to England.
The Stamp Act was officially repealed March 18, 1766 and the Declaratory Act was enacted as part of the repeal. The Declaratory Act stated that Parliament’s authority was the same in Britain as well as the American colonies; that Parliament’s authority to pass legislation was as binding in America as it was in Britain. In the colonies, James Otis, Samuel Adams and Patrick Henry saw the act as a way to deny colonial rights of “NO Taxation Without Representation”. Although the Declaratory Act passed the English Parliament, no bill of taxation against the American colonies ever came to pass.
Featured Image: The Spirit of ’76 painted by Archibald M. Willard, of Cleveland Ohio for exhibit in Philadelphia during the 1876 Centennial celebrations.The fife and drum played a crucial role during the American Revolution. They were used as tools for commanders to communicate with their troops. Fifes and drums were much easier to use for relaying commands, rather than yelling commands through distance, gun and cannon-fire, smoke, and general confusion. Different tunes composed for fifes and drums meant various commands for soldiers to follow.
Several popular fife and drum tunes during the American Revolution include “Yankee Doodle,” and “The British Grenadiers.”
The benign neglect the colonies experienced in the beginning of American colonization would slowly begin to disappear during the French and Indian War. (May 28, 1754 – October 7, 1763) The Acts of Trade and Navigation may have bothered the American merchant class but had minimal effect on the general population; it was the more affluent citizens who felt the costs of these regulations.
US brig Niagara. Brigs were a type of two masted sailing vessel that had square rigging on both masts. Brigs were popular during the 1700s as both merchant and naval vessels. The original US brig Niagara fought on lake Erie during the war of 1812.
In addition to the Acts of Trade and Navigation, the issuance of “Writs of Assistance” introduced in 1755 allowed customs officials to enter businesses, warehouses and private residences in the search for merchandise considered to be contraband with no recourse in the courts as the courts of record were the Admiralty courts. Needless to say, this did not give the colonials a fair chance as most of the goods seized were then sold to pay the courts and judges.
That the English government had little success in moving the Colonial populace during the war to actively support the war and even the depredations on the frontier did little to entice the Colonies to make sacrifices to protect themselves. Colonial reticence was partially fueled by the fact that England had military forces active in the war and was only superficially concerned after the disastrous defeat of General Braddock’s forces July 9, 1755.
General Edward Braddock marching through the wilderness to Ft. Duquesne
With the exception of Massachusetts, most of the colonies would continue to delay efforts of assistance during the war. This would drive the English Parliament to make further demands of the colonies resulting in the Sugar Act of 1765. The hunt for a source of colonial revenue was on; it would drive the Colonies to even greater acts of resistance. The cry of, “No Taxation without Representation” would begin to be heard throughout the colonies.
(We need to remember that the ideas of liberty, justice and government in general are not a modern train of thought. The basis for our Republic came from the Greeks and Romans.)
John Locke’s writings would set the stage for the colonial argument that colonial legislatures were in fact superior to Parliament. He put forth the argument that taxation could not be levied without the consent of the governed. He maintained that men had created governments to make liberties more secure; that government must respect the laws or forfeit the right to exist. He wrote, “If anyone shall claim a power to lay and levy taxes on the people by his own authority and without such consent of the people, he thereby invades the fundamental law of property, and subverts the end of government.” (John Locke’s “Two Treatises of Government, written in 1690 was instrumental in the mental foundations of much of the American Revolution.) John Locke (August 29, 1632 – October 28, 1704)
John Locke
As the Sugar Act of 1765 did not move the colonials to help pay for the French and Indian War, Parliament moved to implement the Stamp Act of 1765. Little did they know that it would result in even more discord and rancor within the colonies. As Americans examined the Stamp Act the more odious it seemed to them.
The following is from John C. Miller’s book, Origins of the American Revolution, copyright 1943.
”Under the provisions of the act, Americans could not engage in commerce, exchange property with each other, recover debts, buy a newspaper, institute lawsuits or make wills, without paying for a stamp. Every diploma awarded by a college or academy required a stamp of two pounds and – what was more important to the common man – every tavern owner who retailed spirituous liquor was obliged to pay twenty shillings for his license. To crown these hardships, infractions of the Stamp Act were to be tried without a jury in the hated Admiralty Courts.”
The more England’s Parliament pushed for a colonial taxation, the more entrenched the fight against taxation became.
The American Revolution produced a number of historic iconic figures. The Revolution in the southern colonies was both brutal and divisive as it pitted family members and political foes against one another with a vengeance. The divide was not just between the planters of the coastal regions against the less affluent of the inland areas but the planter class dominated the colonial legislatures to a great degree in the southern colonies leaving the less affluent with little to no say in the affairs of the colonies. This divide would exacerbate the war’s hostility between the classes and make for a brutal and destructive affair. Here I will attempt to highlight two of the -better known figures, namely Thomas Sumter and Francis Marion. They both would play a major role in the war against the world’s premier military force in the southern colonies.
Thomas Sumter
Thomas Sumter, born in Hanover County Virginia (August 1, 1734) was the son of a former indentured servant, one William Sumter while his mother was a midwife. Young Thomas was not afforded a formal education but he would over- come his gentle beginnings to become a force in both the Revolutionary War and South Carolina politics after the war.
As a member of the Virginia colonial militia he was part of General Braddock’s overall command when it was attacked by French and Indian forces. General Braddock would not survive the day; he died on July, 13, 1755. Sumter, along with George Washington, would escort the survivors of the battle to safety. In 1761 he would accompany members of the “Timberlake Expedition” in order to bring peace between the Cherokee Nation and settlers during the French and Indian War. As part of that effort, in May 1762 Thomas would accompany three Cherokee leaders to England to meet with the king of England. On his return to North America he became stranded in South Carolina due to financial difficulties and would be jailed for debt in Virginia. Loaned money to buy his way out of jail by Joseph Martin in 1766, Sumter returned to South Carolina where he married Mary Jameson in 1767; becoming a businessman and later a successful planter.
Sumter began his rise in the Revolution in February of 1776, elected Lt. Colonel of the Second Regiment of the South Carolina Line. He would be appointed Brigadier General in 1780. Starting in August of 1780 his regiment would be engaged in 5 engagements. At the Battle of Catawba Ford, (August 18, 1780) Banastre Tarleton would nearly annihilate his regiment. Sumter would raise another force all the while continuing to attack the scattered British outposts and raiding British supply trains. Lt. General Charles Cornwallis ordered Tarlton to break off his pursuit of Brigadier Francis Marion and focus on Sumter and his revitalized regiment. At the Battle of Blackstock’s Farm (November,11,1780) Sumter would once more face Banastre Tarlton, but this time Sumter was the victor though wounded in the battle; later his surgeon would extract a musket ball from under his left shoulder.
Banastre Tarleton would later call Sumter his greatest plague due to his fierce fighting tactics, nicknaming Sumter the “Caroline Gamecock”.
After the war his service to his country continued as he would be elected to the House of Representatives twice and served from March 1789 to March 1793 and from March 4, 1797 to December 5, 1801. Selected to fill the seat vacated by Senator Charles Pinckney, Sumter would resign from the Senate on December 16, 1810.
Thomas Sumter died at his plantation home June 1, 1832, he was 97 years old.
Francis Marion was born in 1732 in Berkeley County, South Carolina on his father’s plantation. Marion came from a well to do family ending up as the plantation manager before entering military service January 1, 1757. Little is known of Marion’s early life but he served in the South Carolina militia during the French and Indian War. As a staunch supporter of the American cause, he enlisted in the Continental Army’s 2nd South Carolina Regiment as a Captain June 21, 1775.
Marion served under William Moultrie in the defense of Fort Sullivan, built to protect the city of Savannah, June 28, 1776. Congress would commission him a Lt. Colonel in September, 1776. Convalescing from a broken ankle, Marion was not in Savannah when the city garrison surrendered to British troops, May 12, 1780.
Spurred by the brutality of Banastre Tarleton’s troops at the Battle of Waxhaws, Marion began to organize a small band of men that at first only numbered between 20 and 70. Men who served without pay and for the most part furnished the majority of their own equipment and horses; all the while, Marion was still hobbling around due to his ankle injury.
July 27, 1780, Major General Horatio Gates dispatched Marion to the interior on an intelligence mission. As a result, Marion was not at the disaster that was General Gates undoing. Marion’s genius for guerilla tactics of hit and run caused British morale to suffer, both in the British Army and the Loyalist population. Marion was not above using terror to keep the Loyalist sympathizers in check. His intelligence network was very effective while that of the British suffered; mainly because of Marion’s tactics of terrorism.
The bravery and audacity of Marion’s irregulars would involve them in 12 battles beginning at Black Mingo Creek, September 28, 1780, concluding at Wabdoo Plantation August 29, 1782.
British General Cornwallis was disturbed by the actions of Marion stating that, “Colonel Marion had so wrought the minds of the people, partly by the terror of his threats and cruelty of his punishments, and by the promise of plunder, that there was scarcely an inhabitant between the Santee and the Pee Dee that was not in arms against us”. Cornwallis would dispatch Colonel Banastre Tarleton to capture or kill Marion in November of1780. Tarleton would pursue Marion but could never catch him; Marion’s escape earned him the title, “The Swamp Fox”…
An unsuccessful attack on Georgetown by Marion and Colonel Henry (Light Horse Harry) Lee III in January of 1781 was followed by successes at Fort Watson and Fort Motte in April; the result being that British communications between the British outposts was severed further hampering British military operations. Marion would receive the thanks of the Continental Congress for his rescue of a small American force August 31.
General Nathaniel Greene recognized Marion’s leadership skills and assigned him the right wing at the Battle of Eutaw Springs September 8, 1781. Both the Americans and the British claimed victory; in a letter to Washington dated Sept. 17, 1781, Greene would write, “The most obstinate fight I ever saw. Victory was ours, and had it not been for one of those little incidents which frequently happen in the progress of war, we should have taken the whole British Army”.
Marion would be elected to the South Carolina General Assembly in January of 1782; he would return to his men in June to put down a Loyalist rebellion. In August, Marion would return to his plantation, Pond Bluff, finding it destroyed during the war. The cessation of hostilities and the British withdrawal from Charleston in December of 1782 brought the end of the war.
Marion would marry at the age of 54, serve several terms in the South Carolina Senate and be named commander of Fort Johnson in 1784. He would die on his plantation in 1795 at the age of 63.
This is but two of the myriad of men to whom we owe our freedom, may we NEVER FORGET!!!!