USA > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Lexington > History of the town of Lexington, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, from its first settlement to 1868, Volume I > Part 11
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59
90
HISTORY OF LEXINGTON
and hence that all taxes must be granted by the people them- selves, or by representatives chosen by them; that those natural and constitutional rights were not only inherent in the colonists, but were also secured to them in their Charters, which were sacred compacts that no power on earth could rightfully infringe; that by the fundamental law of the em- pire, taxation and representation were inseparably united, and as the Colonies were not, and from the nature of the case could not be, represented in the British Parliament, so Parlia- ment had no right to impose taxes upon them, especially for the maintenance of the Government at home.
The Colony of Massachusetts may justly claim the honor of being the first to put forth this doctrine. As early as 1634, attempts were made to vacate the Charter of the Colony, rather for non-conformity in religious matters than anything else, and the people of Massachusetts distinctly intimated that they had full powers of themselves to make all needful laws for their own preservation. But in 1646, Parliament having asserted full powers over the Colonies, the General Court of Massachusetts protested against the doctrine, as one calculated to bring them into a state of vassalage. In a me- morial to Parliament they say, "We have not admitted ap- peals to your authority, being assured that they cannot stand with the liberty and power granted to us by our Charter, and would be destructive of all government." In the same spirit, Winslow, the agent of Massachusetts in England, publicly denied the jurisdiction of Parliament over the Colonies. "If the Parliament of England," said he, "should impose laws upon us, having no burgesses in the House of Commons, we should lose the liberties and freedom of Englishmen indeed."
The arbitrary claims of Great Britain being persisted in, the people of Massachusetts declared in 1661 that, under God and their Charter, they had a right to choose their own offi- cers, to exercise "all power and authority, legislative, execu- tive, and judicial, to defend themselves by force of arms against every aggressor, and to reject, as an infringement of their rights, any parliamentary or royal imposition prejudi- cial to the country, and contrary to any just act of colonial legislation."
To punish Massachusetts for her bold and independent opposition to the claims of the King and Parliament, a quo warranto was issued, in 1683, to annul her Charter; the King
91
CAUSES OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
at the same time making a public declaration that pardon would be extended to the colonists in case they would consent to certain modifications of the Charter. The Governor and assistants were persuaded that it was hopeless to resist, and recommended that agents be sent to England "to receive His Majesty's command." This recommendation was sent to the representatives of the people, who returned it with this laconic endorsement, "The Deputies consent not, but adhere to their former bills." ,The Charter, however, was annulled, and the Colony was left to the tender mercy of the corrupt court of Charles II.
The revocation of the Charter was followed by the intro- duction of a despotism more grievous than anything before known in Massachusetts. Sir Edmund Andros, who had been appointed Governor of New England, arrived in Boston, in 1686, empowered by the new sovereign, James II, to appoint and remove his own Council, and with their consent to exer- cise all powers of legislation, to make laws, lay taxes, control the militia, and sustain his authority by force. To carry out this arbitrary and despotic system of government, he re- solved that no printing-presses should be tolerated in the country, and that the people should not be permitted to assemble in town meetings to deliberate upon public affairs. Under his corrupt administration, public schools were neg- lected, religious institutions were impaired, and the personal rights of the citizens were either disregarded or basely tram- pled upon. But a despotism like this was not long to be en- dured. Those who had denied the power of the King and Parliament would not long submit to the imposition of taxes by a subordinate magistrate. And while his monarch was preparing the way for his own overthrow in Great Britain, Andros was laying the foundation for his overthrow in the Colonies. When the news reached Boston, in the spring of 1689, that James II had fled his country, and that the Prince of Orange had ascended the throne, the people were deter- mined to imitate the example of their British brethren and rid themselves of their tyrant. Andros attempted to sustain himself by force; but the people were too sensible of their rights, and of his weakness, to submit. They seized the sheriff, the military commander, and, at last, the Governor himself, and committed them to prison. The whole town of Boston was in arms, and, actuated by what they declared to
92
HISTORY OF LEXINGTON
be their sense of duty to their God and country, completely overthrew the government of Andros.
The Charter of the Colony of Massachusetts, which was annulled in 1685, was restored by William and Mary in 1691, with several limitations; the Crown claiming the right to appoint the Governor, who should have a negative upon the Legislature. The Council, however, were to be chosen by the Legislature. Though this Charter did not restore to the people all the rights and privileges which they had formerly enjoyed, taken in connection with the arbitrary government of Andros, it contained some important provisions. It revived the town meeting, which had been suspended under Andros, and gave the royal construction in favor of what may be denominated the "political rights" of towns. This con- struction of the rights of the people will appear more import- ant in the subsequent part of this narrative. Under this modified Charter the General Court were to provide for the support of the Government and the payment of its officers; and to make these officers responsible to the people, they claimed the right of fixing their salaries annually instead of establishing them by standing laws. This course involved the Colony in a controversy with the Crown, which was re- newed from time to time for nearly forty years, when Gov- ernor Belcher prevailed upon the Crown to accept the annual grant; and so the controversy subsided, leaving the Colony victor in the field.
During the war between England and France for the con- quest of Canada, the controversy between the former and her Colonies was in a great measure suspended; though the at- tempts of Great Britain to quarter her troops upon the peo- ple, without the consent of their legislatures, kept them alive to a sense of their rights and of the injustice of the parent country. But after the close of the war with France in 1763, the British Government turned its attention to the Colonies, and attempted by various means to bring them to subjection. One measure was to make the judges dependent upon the Crown alone; thus making the judiciary the mere creature of the King, and a fit instrument by which to oppress the Colo- nies, and so bring them to submission.
But the darling policy of the Administration was to raise a revenue from the Colonies. Various propositions were pre- sented for some new and direct enactment, which would bear
93
CAUSES OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
upon the Colonies, and do something to supply the British Treasury. It was, however, thought best to revive and en- force some general existing law regulating trade, rather than to adopt a special provision for America. An effort was conse- quently made to carry out this plan, and, to render it effectual, it was thought necessary to clothe the officers of the customs with full power and authority to call to their aid all the execu- tive and judicial officers in the Colony. As Boston was the great mart of trade, and Massachusetts the most perverse Colony, it was deemed advisable to try the experiment there. In 1761, the officers of the customs applied to Hutchinson, who had been raised to the chief justiceship in Massachu- setts, for "Writs of Assistance," to enable them to collect the duties upon various imported articles. The application was resisted, and the case argued before the whole court. Jere- miah Gridley appeared for the Crown, and argued the neces- sity and legality of the writ; but when he had closed, James Otis, a man of ardent feeling, exalted patriotism, and thrilling eloquence, stepped forth in behalf of the colonists. "I am de- termined," said he, "to sacrifice estate, ease, health, applause, and even life itself, to the sacred calls of my country, in oppo- sition to a kind of power, the exercise of which cost one king of England his head and another his throne." He then pro- ceeded to point out the illegality and oppressive character of such a writ. He denounced it "as the worst instrument of arbitrary power, the most destructive of English liberty and the fundamental principles of law." "No Act of Parliament," said he, "can establish such a writ; an Act of Parliament against the Constitution is void."
The court, after some delay and consulting of the English Ministry, granted the writ, which greatly heightened public feeling, and prepared the people for more decisive measures. But the great cause of discontent was the enforcing of the acts of trade by the Courts of Admiralty, - courts entirely independent of the Colonies, and depending upon the Crown alone, - courts in which all cases were decided without the intervention of a jury, and where the pleasure of the Ministry was the paramount law.
While the public mind in the Colonies was thus agitated, and fears were entertained for the safety of their rights, the Board of Trade recommended, in 1763, the passage of an act requiring all the legal instruments in the Colonies, including
94
HISTORY OF LEXINGTON
notes, receipts, orders, certificates, etc., to be written on stamped paper, upon which a duty should be imposed - the agents of the Colonies in England partially assenting to the measure. On the arrival of this intelligence in America, the people of Boston and the Legislature of Massachusetts, ever alive to the rights of freemen, in their instructions to their agent in London remonstrated against the threatened meas- ure, declaring "that the silence of the Province should have been imputed to any cause, even to despair, rather than be construed into a tacit cession of their rights or an acknowl- edgment of a right in the Parliament of Great Britain to impose duties and taxes upon a people who are not repre- sented in the House of Commons." In the same instructions, they endorsed the doctrine of Otis, "that the imposition of taxes, whether on trade or on lands, on houses or ships, on real or personal, on fixed or floating property in the Colonies, is absolutely irreconcilable with the rights of the colonists as British subjects or as men."
In 1765, the worst fears of the Colonies were realized in the passage of the Stamp Act, and the adoption of other measures designed to support the absolute supremacy of Parliament over them. And to insure the execution of these odious and oppressive acts, not only all the civil officers in the Colony were put in requisition, but the whole naval and military force, which was to be increased in America, was to aid in the support of these arbitrary measures; and to render the pill more bitter, the people here were required to support the troops which were sent over to oppress them. To render the tyranny absolute, all cases arising under these acts were to be decided in Courts of Admiralty, without the intervention of a jury, by a single judge created by the Crown, whose sole sup- port was to be drawn from his share of the profits of his own condemnations.
Massachusetts took the alarm. Her people saw in this series of measures a fixed and determined plan to reduce them to subjection, and to bring them to the foot of the throne. Governor Bernard, in his message to the Legislature, assured them that it was the duty and interest of the Colony to submit, for the law "would now be prosecuted to its ut- most completion"; but the representatives of the people ad- dressed letters to the other Colonies, inviting them to choose delegates to meet in a General Congress at New York, to con-
95
CAUSES OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
sult together on the affairs of the Colonies. In the mean time the Stamp Act arrived in Boston, and Oliver, naturally odi- ous to the people, was announced as the officer who was to receive and dispose of the stamps. The Act was universally condemned in Boston, "as arbitrary, unconstitutional, and a breach of the Charter." Oliver, the stamp officer, was hanged in effigy. A few evenings after, the mob assembled near the old State House, seized and burned the records of the Admir- alty Court, and afterwards assaulted the house of the Comp- troller of Customs, and of the Chief Justice, 1 who had rendered himself extremely odious to the people. The demonstration was so strong that Oliver was induced to resign his office, and the stamps were left in the hands of the Governor.
Pitt, Barre, Burke, and others connected with the Govern- ment pleaded the cause of liberty, in the British Parliament, with such distinguished ability and force of argument, that the Ministry, fearing the strength of the opposition at home and the resistance of their subjects in America, consented to the repeal of the Stamp Act. Thus was Great Britain com- pletely foiled in her first attempt at raising a revenue in her Colonies to sustain her burdened treasury. The repeal of the Stamp Act produced a general rejoicing in the Colonies. The Legislature of Massachusetts passed an act remunerating those who had suffered in the destruction of their property in attempting to execute the Stamp Act. But with characteris- tic wisdom, they were careful to state in the bill itself that the sufferers had no just claim, and that the relief was granted of "their own good will" and not from deference to any "requisi- tion made upon them."
In the mean time the Ministry was devising measures of taxation in the shape of duties upon imports into the Colo- nies. In the debates upon the Stamp Act a distinction had been taken between internal and external taxation. It was maintained by the opponents of the Stamp Act that it related to the internal trade of the Colonies and was a proper subject to be regulated by local law. The Ministry thought to avoid this objection by imposing a duty upon imports, which re- lated to foreign commerce - to the general subject of trade. But the colonists were not disposed to acquiesce in any such distinction. They renewed their former declarations that
1 The "one disgraceful riot in Boston" during the ten years preceding the Revo- lution. J. Fiske, The American Revolution, Vol. I, p. 53. Ed.
96
HISTORY OF LEXINGTON
Parliament had no right to tax the Colonies; and they further declared that the creation of new crown officers and the send- ing of a standing army to be quartered upon the people were in fact introducing an absolute government into the Colony which would lead to the most dangerous consequences; for they added significantly, "the laws of God and Nature are invariable." They also addressed a circular to the other Colonies, setting forth their common grievances and asking their cooperation in all such measures as may be found neces- sary for the maintenance of their rights as freemen.
Governor Bernard, with all his professions, was a deadly enemy to the Colony. For while he was pretending to be friendly to the people and assuring them of his cooperation and aid in all their efforts to obtain their rights, he was writ- ing to the Ministry, representing the Colony in a state of re- bellion, and urging upon it the necessity of sending over a naval and military force to reduce them to subjection.1 In May, 1768, the Romney, a ship-of-war, arrived in Boston Harbor from Halifax, being sent at the suggestion of Bernard, and at the request of the Commissioners of Customs, to awe the Bostonians into submission. To strengthen his crew and to show his entire disregard of the feelings of the people and the rights of the colonists, the commander forcibly and inso- lently impressed New England seamen to serve on board his ship. He also seized a merchant ship 2 belonging to John Hancock and anchored her under the guns of his vessel. This created intense feeling among the inhabitants. A town meet- ing was called, and a committee of twenty-one was chosen to wait upon the Governor, and to present an address to the citizens, in which they claimed for the Colony the sole power of taxation. At the same time they condemned in strong terms the practice of impressment, and demanded the re- moval of the Romney from the harbor. The town also declared and put on record their irrevocable determination to assert and maintain their dear and invaluable rights and liber-
1 "Since Machiavelli undertook to teach the Medici how principalities might be governed and maintained, no such body of literature was put on paper as that in which Sir Francis Bernard instructed George the Third and his Ministers in the art of throwing away a choice portion of a mighty Empire." G. O. Trevelyan, The Amer- ican Revolution, Part I, p. 44. Ed.
? The sloop Liberty. The consequent disturbance would not have been considered in England, but all reports were magnified and exaggerated concerning any trouble in America. J. Fiske, The American Revolution, Vol. I, p. 53. Also G. O. Trevelyan, The American Revolution, Part I, p. 36. Ed.
97
CAUSES OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
ties at the utmost hazard of their fortunes and their lives. At the same time they expressed their readiness to maintain loyalty and submission to Great Britain in all things neces- sary to the preservation of the whole empire.
In the midst of this excitement Governor Bernard laid before the Legislature a letter from the British Ministry, calling upon them to rescind their Resolutions denying the power of Parliament to tax the Colonies; and also to recall their Circular addressed to the other Colonies, asking their cooperation and support in defence of their just rights. Under the guidance of Samuel Adams, who was ever ready to meet any emergency, an answer was returned to Lord Hillsborough, justifying the course of the Legislature and refusing to retrace their steps. This bold and independent measure was sustained by the House with great unanimity, there being but seventeen against the measure and ninety-two in its favor. When the Governor was informed by a message from the House that they had refused to rescind and had affirmed their former doings, trembling with fear he first prorogued and then dissolved the assembly.
In the autumn of 1768, hearing that three regiments of troops were to be sent to Boston to reduce them to a state of subjection, and the Legislature having been dissolved by the Governor, the people requested him to order a new election. On hearing of the refusal of Bernard to call a new Legislature, the people of Boston repaired to Faneuil Hall, that cradle of American liberty, and resolved, "That the inhabitants of Boston will, at the utmost peril of their lives and fortunes, maintain and defend their rights, liberties, privileges, and immunities; and that money cannot be granted, nor a stand- ing army kept up in the Province, but by their own free con- sent." They also unanimously requested the selectmen to wait upon the clergymen of the town and request them to set apart the following Tuesday as a day of fasting and prayer. The request was cheerfully complied with and the day kept in a solemn manner.
Shortly after, a Convention of the Province assembled at Boston to consult upon the public safety. One of their first acts was to petition the Governor to summon a constitutional Legislature, to prevent the encroachments of the military upon the civil power. The Governor not only refused to receive their petition, but admonished the Convention to
98
HISTORY OF LEXINGTON
separate, as they should "repent of their rashness." The Convention, however, continued in session six days, and repeated the protest of the Colony against taxation by Par- liament and against a standing army quartered among them.
A few days after the adjournment of the Convention, a squadron from Halifax, with two regiments of troops and a company of artillery on board, arrived in the harbor of Boston. The selectmen being called upon to provide quarters for the troops, taking advantage of an Act of Parliament, refused to grant them "till the barracks were full" at Castle William. The Governor's Council also insisted upon this provision of law, and refused to furnish quarters. They also refused to provide supplies of provisions and fuel without the consent of the Legislature, which had been dissolved by the Governor himself. Thus was the treacherous Bernard caught in his own toils.1 He was greatly perplexed in providing for the troops he had secretly called for; to send them down to the " Castle," as Fort Independence was then called, would be to remove them too far from the point where he wished to station them, that they might awe the people into submission. Great efforts had been made, both in England and in this country, to have Otis, Adams, and other leading patriots sent to Great Britain to be tried for their lives. But after all the endeavors of the corrupt and deceitful Bernard and the administration at home, it was decided by the law officers of the Crown that their acts did not constitute treason, the only crime which by the statute would justify their being brought to England for trial.
The people of Boston were encouraged to persevere in their resolution not to import dutiable articles. Many of the towns in the Province adopted resolutions, assuring the citizens of the metropolis that they would aid them in carrying out that policy. The people of Lexington, as we have already seen, declared in 1769 that they would drink no more tea till the unconstitutional revenue act should be repealed. Such assur- ances from every quarter gave the people of Boston great courage and induced them to persevere. Boston being the seat of oppression was of course the first to complain - the first to speak out -the first to act. And its people per-
4
1 "General Gage came on from New York: but he could do nothing without run- ning the risk of being cashiered." J. Fiske, The American Revolution, Vol. I, p. 59. Ed.
99
CAUSES OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
formed their part nobly. But at the same time it should be understood that the patriots of Charlestown, of Roxbury, of Cambridge, of Salem, and, we may add, of the towns gener- ally, counselled with the patriots of Boston, and whatever was done at Boston was sustained in the interior.
The treacherous Bernard was succeeded by the more treacherous Hutchinson; and the affairs of the Colony were not at all improved by the change. The Ministry had so far yielded to the Colonies as to remove the tax upon tea; but the concessions came too late. The people plainly saw that pay- ing the duty upon one article would be surrendering the great principle for which they had contended; and they boldly declared that they would resist the payment of taxes in any form. On the 18th of October, 1769, the town of Boston published an "Appeal to the World," in which they say, "A legal Meeting in the Town of Boston is an Assembly where a noble freedom of speech is ever expected and maintained; where men think as they please, and speak as they think. Such an Assembly has ever been the dread, and often the scourge of Tyrants. Our Rights are invaded by the Revenue Acts; therefore, till they are all repealed, and the troops re- called, the cause of our just complaints cannot be removed." ยท On the evening of the 2d 1 of March, 1770, a number of Brit- ish soldiers, having collected in State Street, insulted some of the citizens who were passing, which soon drew together a considerable concourse of people. Preston, a British captain, who was officer of the day, soon appeared with a file of men with fixed bayonets and loaded muskets. Preston ordered them to fire upon the citizens, which they did, killing three men,2 and wounding several others.3 The excitement was fearful. At eleven the next day, a town meeting was opened at Faneuil Hall with a prayer by Rev. Mr. Cooper. Samuel Adams and fourteen others were chosen a committee to wait upon the Governor, and, in the name of the town, demand the removal of the troops. The Governor after considerable hesitation consented to remove one regiment to the Castle;
1 5th of March. See E. Chase, Beginnings of the American Revolution, Vol. I, pp. 171-246, using as her authority History of the Boston Massacre, containing the Narrative of the Town, the Trial of the Soldiers, and A Historical Introduction, unpublished documents of John Adams and Notes, Frederic Kidder, Albany, 1870: Joel Munsell. Ed.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.