USA > New Jersey > A civil and political history of New Jersey: embracing a compendious history of the state, from its early discover and settlement by Europeans, brought down to the present time > Part 35
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
" Gordon, p. 138.
372
REPFAL OF THE STAMP ACT.
ing the proposition, that taxation is no part of the governing power. but that taxes were a voluntary gift and grant of the people. IIc recommended that the stamp act should be repealed, absolutely, totally and immediately. These views were strongly opposed by the late Ministers, especially by Grenville who manifested the greatest hostility to American interests and clains, and urged the execution of the stamp act at every hazard. He said that the dis- turbances in America were growing to tumults and riots, and if the doctrine he had heard that day, should be confirmed, he feared that instead of riot, there would soon be revolution. He contended that taxation was a part of the sovereign power, and that it might be, and had been exercised over those who were not represented. The administration, with their supporters, resolved upon an inter- mediate course. 'The stamp act was totally repealed, but the repeal was attended by a "declaratory act," in which the power and right of Great Britain to bind the colonies in all cases whatever, was as- serted.Is The repeal and the declaratory act passed the House together on the 5th of March, 1766, and were sent to the House of Lords. In the latter House, the repeal was strenuously opposed. But the measure was strongly supported by Lord Camden. IIc denied the right of Parliament to tax the colonists because unre- presented. ""Taxation and representation," he said, "were in- seperably connected, no British Parliament can separate them; to endeavour to do it is to stab our vitals." 'The two bills passed
18 Although the debates of the House in relation to the stamp act seemed to touch most upon constitutional questions, yet other considerations had scarcely less weight. The merchants and manufacturers exerted themselves in favor of repeal. The non-importation az:cements which had been entered into by the colonists, and the confusion ( .. . V.ted, were found extremely prejudicial to the commercial interests of the country. The condition, disposition, and feelings of the colonists, were also considered. Persons were examined before the House, touching these particulars; Franklin underwent a long examination, and he declared to the House, that the Americans never would pay the stamp duties, however modified, and that the Assemblies would not acknowledge the right of Parliament to tax them, or rescind their resolutions upon that point "unless compelled by force of arms." The petition from the American Congress was rejected, because the meeting had not been called under authority from the Crown, yet this and other petitions on the subject, had their influence.
....
.
-
373
REPEAL OF THE STAMP ACT.
the House of Lords on the 18th of March, and on the following day received the Royal assent. 19
The news of the repeal of the stamp act was received in America with the highest satisfaction. The relief from an immediate evil was deemed of so much importance, that but little attention was paid to the principles and claims that were advanced in the decla- ratory act; indeed that act was considered as being designed rather to save the honor or pride of Great Britain, than to point out the · course to be afterwards pursued.
The Legislature of New Jersey was convened by the Governor on the 11th of June, 1766. His Excellency said that he had de- ferred the meeting until he was enabled to communicate the deter- mination of his Majesty, and of Parliament, respecting the stamp act, and he congratulated the House upon the repeal. He ex- pressed his satisfaction that no act of outrage or violence had been committed in the province, and spoke of the "tenderness, lenity, and consideration, the wisdom, justice, and equity which his Majesty and the Parliament have manifested on this signal occa- sion." An address was afterwards prepared by the Assembly, to the King, in which they expressed their gratitude to his Majesty, his Ministry, and Parliament, for the relief that was experienced by the removal of the burden of an "impolitic law."
" The King himself was opposed to the repeal, as were all his particular favorites, and confidants. The Lords of the Bedchamber, and most of the Bishops, as is said, urged that America should rather be desolated with fire and sword, than pacitied by concession. Griffith's Historical Notes, p. 26.
CHAPTER XIX.
IMPOSITION OF NEW TAXES .- OPPOSITION TO THE NEW TAXES .- THE TEA DUTY .- THE TEA DUTY RESISTED .-- CONGRESS OF THE COLONIES. - PROCEEDINGS OF CONGRESS APPROVED IN NEW JERSEY .- COERCIVE MEASURES OF ENGLAND.
THE joy of the colonists on account of the repeal of the "im- politic law," was not long continued. Measures soon followed that were calculated to dampen satisfaction, and revive distrust. A circular was received in the colonies from Secretary Conway, in which he announced, that the King and Parliament were dis- posed to forgive and forget the marks of an undutiful disposition that had lately been shown, but at the same time required, that full and ample compensation should be made to those who had suf- fered from their deference to the act of the British legislature. This order, though it might bear the semblance of justice, was yet founded upon an assumption of the rightfulness of the act which the people had resisted. This, together with other circumstances, caused it to be but tardily and reluctantly complied with. Yet as this was finally done, no important difficulty arose from this source.1 More serious dissatisfaction was created by the execu- tion of the act for quartering soldiers in the colonies. This act required, that the troops' should be furnished with quarters, fire, bedding, candles, small beer, rum, &c., at the expense of the colo-
1 The compensation required was for injuries done to the property of persons connected with the distribution of stamps. In Boston and New York, especially the former, opposition had been carried to violence, and the houses of some of the officers demolished. The order for compensation was rendered more dis- pleasing in Massachusetts, by the arrogant and positive manner of Governor Bernard in demanding compliance therewith. The compensation was finally made, but was connected with the addition of a free pardon to all offenders. In this form the act was but little acceptable, and was rejected by his Majesty, but the compensation was afterwards furnished to the sufferers.
.
-
-----
-----
375
IMPOSITION OF NEW TAXES.
nies, and thus in effect a direct and unusual tax, was imposed. In Massachusetts the requisition was partially complied with. In New York the Governor applied to the Assembly to make the required provision for the troops that had lately arrived under General Gage, but the House replied, that according to their con- struction of the act, it required, that all the forces that should at any time enter the colony should be quartered during the whole year in a very unusual manner, and that by marching several regiments into the colony, the expense would be ruinous, and that they could not, consistant with their duty to their constituents, put it into the power of any one (whatever might be their confidence in his prudence or integrity,) to impose such a burden. The re- quisition was laid before the Assembly of New Jersey in June, 1766, and the House directed that provision should be made according to the former laws of the colony. The subject was frequently urged by the Governor, who insisted upon full compli- ance; but the unusual requisitions for the accommodation and supply of the officers and troops, were said by the House to be a matter of "surprise and concern," and they informed the Gover- nor that they looked upon the act for quartering soldiers in America to be virtually as much an act for laying taxes, as the stamp act.2
But occurrences of a character still more unfavorable to har- mony soon took place. In July, 1766, the administration of the Marquis of Rockingham terminated, and was succeeded by one composed of men of various political principles and parties. Charles Townsend, a man whose qualities were far more brilliant than solid, became Chancellor of the exchequer, and he presently ventured a boast that he was able to devise a plan for taxing the - colonists. . Grenville, the former Minister, actuated by dislike to the colonists, or by a desire to retrieve in some manner his former defeat, was constantly urging the adoption of plans for this purpose, and at length abruptly charged upon the Ministry, that they were deterred by fear from making the attempt. Townsend, yielding to an excitement but little suited to the place or the occasion, hastily declared: "I dare tax America," and directly proceeded
" Votes. Franklin's letter to Shelburne.
876
OPPOSITION TO THE NEW TAXES.
to vindicate his courage, at the expense it may be of his judg- ment, and certainly at the cost of the best interests of the country. Unhappily, a change had occurred in Parliament that enabled the Minister to carry out his designs; a sense of justice had given way to a feeling of pride, and a desire to reduce the colonists again to subjection, began to prevail. Under these circumstances, the Minister submitted a bill to the House for imposing duties on glass, paper, paste-board, white and red lead, painter's colours, and tea, payable on the importation of these articles into the colonies. The preamble declared that it was expedient to raise a revenue in America, and to make more certain and adequate provisions for defraying the charge of the administration of justice in the pro- vinces.3 This bill passed both Houses of Parliament with scarcely any opposition, and became a law in June, 1767. Very soon afterwards, the conduct of the Assemblies of Massachusetts and New York was brought into notice; the refusal of the latter to comply with the requisitions for supplying the troops, gave par- ticular offence, and an act was passed restraining the Legislature of that province from passing any act whatever, until the late requisitions were complied with. Nearly at the same time, an enactment was made authorizing the King to put the customs and other duties in America, and the execution of the laws relating to trade there, under the management of Commissioners, to be ap- pointed for that purpose, and to reside in the colonies.
These three acts were received in America almost at the same time. The passage of such laws within one year after the strug- gle against the stamp act. excited amazement and indignation throughout the colonies. The act for laying duties on glass and other articles, if somewhat different in form, as it imposed charges to be paid upon imports, was yet in its principle and objects the same as the stamp act. It was still a plan for taxing the people without their consent. The entire suspension of legislation in a
. A provision in the bill empowered the Crown to establish a general civil list throughout. every colony in North America to any extent, with salaries, pensions, or appointments to the whole amount of the new duties. This was the attainment of the object that had been sought by every Minister since the reign of Charles II, the establishment of a civil list independent of the Assem- - blies. It was a great advance toward the destruction of liberty.
6
377
OPPOSITION TO THE NEW TAXES.
colony, was a still further exercise of arbitrary power. Parlia- ment not only assumed the functions which could only be right- fully performed by the provincial Assemblies, but threatened in effect, to destroy the Assemblies themselves. If government could be wholly suspended at the pleasure of Parliament, the colonists were slaves indeed. But the same temper and spirit that had formerly been manifested, were yet in existence in the provinces ; and if resistance to the measures that were now in progress was . not so suddenly exhibited as.on a former occasion, a feeling per- haps still deeper, was gradually awakened. The people began to inquire with closer scrutiny concerning their rights. Able political essays were published, in which the real nature and tendency of the measures of Parliament were .clearly set forth, and. the people were. exhorted to firmness and vigilence.+ Determination in- creased with the light that was elicited by discussion and inquiry.
In December, 1767, the Assembly of Massachusetts convened, and early in the session entered upon a consideration of the recent enactments of Parliament. The Assembly plainly perceived that the former attempt was renewed; and they at once resolved to oppose .it. They advanced anew their claim to all the rights enjoyed by other subjects, and declared, that the late acts of Parlia- ment, as well as those formerly passed, were as much revenue acts . as the land tax, customs, and excises in England. In reference to .- the restraints upon the Legislature of New York, they said, that the extension of such restrictions would be a short and easy way of destroying all Legislative authority in America. . In February, 1768, they adopted a resolution for addressing a circu- · far letter to the other colonies concerning the difficulties that must accrue by the operation of the several acts imposing duties and customs on the colonies. This circular was laid before the As- sembly of New Jersey, by the Speaker, on the 15th of April, 1768, and on the following day it was referred to a committee to
. Among the most able of these papers were the "Letters of a Pennsylvania . Farmer," written by John Dickinson. They obtained a great circulation and wide popularity. : Dickinson warned his countrymen not to be deluded by the moderation of the new duties; declared that there was no solid distinction be- tween the present and the former mode of taxation ; and urged to a resort to the same measures of resistance that had formerly prevailed.
48
1
378
OPPOSITION TO THE NEW TAXES.
prepare and bring in an answer. A suitable reply was accordingly prepared, and was transmitted to the Massachusetts Assembly. Soon. afterwards the House resolved that a dutiful and loyal ad- dress should be presented to his Majesty, humbly beseeching. him to consider the distressed condition of the colonies On the 7th of May the address was agreed to.5
.
* The address set forth that "before that happy period in which the empire of the British dominions was, by the favor of Divine Providence, for the felicity of those dominions, and of Europe in general, established in your illustrious House; our ancestors, with the consent of the Crown, removed from their native land, then abounding in all blessings, but that perfect security of liberty, and that merciful spirit of administration which render your royal family so justly dear to your remotest subjects ; and ventured with their helpless relatives through a vast ocean, and trusted themselves with their tender companions to the un- known wilderness of the New World, the horrors of which no consideration could render tolerable but the prospect of enjoying here that complete freedom which Britons never thought could be purchased at too dear a price. The sub- jects thus emigrating brought with them, as inherent in their persons, all the rights and liberties of natural born subjects within the parent state; in conse- quence of these, a government was formed under which they have been con- stantly exercised and enjoyed by the inhabitants, and repeatedly and solemnly recognized and confirmed by your royal predecessors and the legislature of Great Britain. One of these rights and liberties vested in the people of this colony, is the privilege of being exempt from any taxation but such as is im- posed on them by themselves, or by their Representatives; and this they esteem so invaluable, that they are fully persuaded, no other can exist without it. Your Majesty's signal distinction is, that you reign over freemen, and your peculiar glory, that you reign in such a manner, that your subjects, the disposers of their own property, are ready and willing whenever your service calls upon them,
with their lives and fortunes, to assist your cause. Your people of this colony, who share in the blessings flowing from your wisdom and virtue, most gratefully sensible of their obligations to so excellent a Prince, hope they have never been deficient in duly acknowledging them; whenever it has been necessary that supplies should be levied within this colony, requisition by your Majesty, or by your royal predecessors, conformable to the rights and liberties of this, your people, have been made, and readily complied with. We bescech your Majesty to do them the justice to believe that they can never fail on any future occasion to demonstrate their devotion. With such sentiments, your people observe with the greatest anxiety and concern that duties have been lately imposed on them by Parliament, for the sole and express purpose of raising a revenue. This is a taxation upon them from which they conceive they ought to be protected by the acknowledged principles of the constitution, that freemen cannot be taxed
.
379
OPPOSITION TO THE NEW TAXES.
The circular of Massachusetts to the other colonies, created alarm in the British Cabinet; it was supposed to be preparatory to another Congress, and concert of action among the provinces was dreaded. As a means of prevention, Lord Hillsborough, the Secretary of State for the colonies, addressed-a letter to the Gover- nor of Massachusetts, directing him to require the Assembly, in his Majesty's name, to rescind the resolution in relation to the circular, and to declare their disapprobation of "that rash and hasty proceeding." A letter was also directed to the Governors of the several colonies, to be laid before the respective Assemblies, in which the conduct of Massachusetts in sending the circular, was declared to be "dangerous and factious" in its tendency; and directions were given to the Governors to use their influence to prevent the Assemblies from taking any notice of the circular, that thereby it might be treated " with the contempt it deserved." It is not certain that the warning or direction of the Secretary was made known to the Assembly of New Jersey before action was taken in the case, but if so, no effect whatever. was produced .. ; No greater impression was made in the other colonies." But the Assemblies were generally dissolved upon their refusal to comply with the Secretary's wishes.
In the mean time, the new Board of Commissioners of Customs established by the King, had entered upon the duties of their office at Boston. They soon manifested an intention to enforce the laws relating to trade, in the strictest manner. In May, 1768, the sloop Liberty, belonging to John Hancock, arrived at Boston laden with wines from Madeira. In landing the cargo, the mode of procedure which had hitherto prevailed, was pursued,
but by themselves, or by their Representatives, and that they are represented in Parliament, they not only cannot allow, but are convinced that from their local circumstances they never can be." Votes, vol. 4. Gordon, p. 146.
" The Assembly of Massachusetts decided by a vote of ninety-two to seven- teen, that they would not rescind the resolutions of the former House. The Assembly of New York resolved that they had an undoubted right to correspond and consult with any of the neighboring colonies, or with any others of his Majesty's subjects out of the colonies, on any matter or thing whereby they might conceive their rights or liberties to be affected. Still stronger declarations were made by the Assembly of Maryland.
-
-
.
. 380
OPPOSITION TO THE NEW TAXES.
but the Commissioners declared that a false entry had been made, and an order was given that the sloop should be seized. Whether the allegation of the officers was supposed to be unfounded or not, the resort to force was considered an outrage, and was forcibly met. . Scenes of violence and tumult ensued, in which the pro- hibitions or requisitions of law were but little regarded by any. The measures of coercion which the officers of the Crown had been the first to adopt, were afterwards further pursued, or pre- pared for; two regiments of troops were quartered in the town, for the purpose, as was said, of "giving assistance to the Magis- trates in the preservation of peace, and the officers of customs in the execution of the laws of trade. As might have been expected, increased irritation and excitement was produced.
Whilst these events were passing in America, each session of Parliament was opened with information from the King, that a disposition prevailed in the colonies to refuse obedience to the laws, and to resist the authority of the supreme legislature of the realm. In answer to these representations, joint resolutions of both Houses were adopted in February, 1769, condemning the acts of the Americans, and an address was agreed upon approving the conduct of the Crown, and giving assurances of support for enforcing the laws within the province of Massachusetts. A re- quest was also made to the King, that he would bring to punish- ment the authors of the late disorders, and that he would direct the Governor of Massachusetts Bay, to take the most effectual means for obtaining the fullest information concerning all treasons and misprisions of treason committed within his government since the year 1767, with the names of the persons who had been active in promoting them ; that prosecutions might be instituted against them "within this realin. pursuant to the provisions of the Statute of the 35th, of Henry Viii." The King, in reply, assured Par- liament of his determination to give orders for bringing the authors of the disorders in Massachusetts to "condign punishment."?
Though these proceedings were directed especially against Mas- sachusetts, yet all the colonies considered themselves affected thereby. The threat to transport the colonists to England for trial
' Pitkin's History. Griffith's Notes. Prior Documents.
.
381
OPPOSITION TO THE NEW TAXES.
excited strong indignation. The Assembly of New Jersey, (in accordance with the previous action of the House of Burgesses in Virginia,) passed a resolution, that all trials for treasons or mis- prisions of treason, or any felony or crime whatever, committed by any person residing in the colony, ought to be in, and before, his Majesty's courts in the colony; and that the seizing any per- son residing in the colony suspected of any crime committed there, and sending such person to places beyond the seas to be tried, is highly derogatory of the rights of British subjects ; as thereby the inestimable privilege of a trial by a jury of the vicinage, as well as the liberty of producing witnesses in such trial, will be taken away.8
Notwithstanding the strong resolutions of Parliament already noticed, an attempt was made in the winter of 1769, to obtain a repeal of the act imposing the new duties. But the proposal was resisted at the time; it being represented that it was an improper season to yield to the demands of the colonists ; it would be time enough, it was said, when they had shown a disposition to submit. Lord North declared, that though prudence or policy might here- after induce Parliament to repeal the acts, he hoped it would not be thought of, until America was prostrate at their feet. Yet, in May, after the close of the session, Lord Hillsborough directed a circular to the Governors of the several colonies, in which he gave an assurance, "notwithstanding insinuations to the contrary," that the existing administration had at no time entertained a design to lay farther taxes in America for the purpose of raising a revenue. and that it was their intention to propose, at the next session of Parliament, to take off the duties on glass, paper, and colours, upon consideration that these duties had been laid contrary to the true principles of commerce. But beside the uncertainty as to the final fulfilment of these declarations, they were not such, as to their ground, or their scope, as could give satisfaction.9. Hence the colonists continued their efforts to maintain their claims. Be- side renewed declarations, non-importation agreements were gene-
· Resolution, passed December 6th, 1769.
'The Secretary proposed but a partial repeal, and that upon the ground of commercial policy. No security would thus have been given in regard to the rights of the colonists, and trade would still have been shackled.
-
382
OPPOSITION TO THE NEW TAXES.
rally continued, or new ones formed, by the merchants and traders of the principal cities. New Jersey, from her limited trade, was unable to give decisive support to measures of this description by direct co-operation; but her cordial approval was expressed. In October, 1769, the General Assembly resolved, by an unani- mous vote, " that the thanks of the House be given to the merchants and traders of this colony, and of the colonies of New York and Pennsylvania, for their disinterested and public spirited conduct · in withholding their importations of British merchandize until certain acts of Parliament laying restrictions on American com- merce for the express purpose of raising a revenue in America, be repealed." Meetings of the people were also held, where similar views were expressed, and the violations of the non-im- portation agreements, which had occurred at different places, were severely condemned.10
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.