USA > New York > New York City > The Memorial History of the City of New York: From Its First Settlement to the Year 1892, Volume II > Part 39
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 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70
On March 9, 1763, Townshend introduced the first part of the scheme for taxing America by act of parliament. The supplies de- manded for the first year of peace alarmed the House of Commons, and they were eager for any method of relief. It was shown that the duty on the trade of the American colonies with the French and Spanish West Indies was ineffectual because prohibitory; and in a general way that VOL. II .- 22.
338
HISTORY OF NEW-YORK
the collection of a colonial revenue of two thousand pounds cost the customs department in Great Britain between seven and eight thousand a year. The fact was lost sight of that this difference passed into the pockets mainly of the government officers who held these sinecures. Indeed it may be here asserted that the system of British colonial government was a system of plunder by the officials of each home ad- ministration in turn. Townshend's plan was to reduce the duty, but rigidly to enforce its collection. Although the plan of an act further to raise revenue by stamps was at this time indubitably in the minds of the ministry (the amount to be raised to be sufficient to support the army establishment in America), it was not as yet declared. It was Grenville's share to bring forward a bill for the enforcement of the navigation laws, authorizing the employment of ships of the navy and turning its officers and seamen into customs authorities and informers.
These arrangements were supplemented by an act of parliament establishing a standing army in America. The Commons, Bancroft informs us, "listened with complacency to a plan which at the ex- pense of the colonies would give twenty new places of colonels that might be filled by members of their own body." News reached the colonies in June to the effect that ten thousand men were to be em- ployed on the American continent and the British West India islands, to be paid the first year by Great Britain, and every article of expense thereafter to be defrayed by the colonies. Pitt was present when the report of the committee was read, but made no opposition. He dis- trusted the continuance of the peace which he had opposed, and de- plored that more troops had not been retained in service. There is no means of judging whether he misjudged or disregarded the effect of the act on the colonies.
This was the last important act of Bute's administration. In April the seals were given to George Grenville, and the administration of affairs fell into the hands of a triumvirate of which he was the head, as chancellor of the exchequer, while Egremont and Halifax were secre- taries of state. Jenkinson, Bute's efficient assistant, became principal secretary of the treasury. The business of the session was pressed, the navigation act was signed and hurried into effect, and the tax bills laid over because of some local differences on home taxation. On the resignation of Townshend, and his chief, Lord Bute prompted by personal rivalry with Grenville, Shelburne was appointed first lord of trade, and to him Egremont, who still managed the affairs of the colonies as secretary of state for the southern department, applied for advice as to the government of the Canadas and other newly acquired territories, the amount and method of the military establishments in the colonies, and their several quotas of expense.
THE PART OF NEW-YORK IN THE STAMP ACT TROUBLES 339
Meanwhile Grenville showed his disposition in an order to the commander-in-chief of the forces in America to withdraw the allow- ance for victualing the regiments stationed in the cultivated settle- ments in America. This charge was in the future to be met by the
New York, 10 th Aug och 5/63.
Ar Jam Fitting out come Transports for Immediate Service , & that the Carpenters Employed on them will and Venture 6 Work tomorrow without a diverse from Your ; Schonberg glad you would give them Permision, as it is of real "Consequence to the King's Service , that there Vefalls are got . Keary with the utmost Coperchiom.
Iam,
To Isha bruger taps
E: Am huset
fourmat@shewants Self: Amherst.
Thayor-
Johan Cruger Eng! - Mayor ofthe City frawyork &
THE AMHERST LETTER.
colonies, and thus on both sides of the water the issue was closing. Attorney-General Murray proposed to make a military colony of Canada, and to include the West in its jurisdiction : a plan by which the older colonies would be overawed. But Shelburne, perhaps fore- seeing in this an expensive military system the charges of which could in no manner be laid on the colonies, preferred a restriction of the
340
HISTORY OF NEW-YORK
government of Canada within more narrow limits; and his plan, in spite of the opposition of Egremont, for the time prevailed. Nor yet was Shelburne willing to declare himself in favor of any plan for taxing America.
The king soon wearied of the inefficiency of the triumvirate, and, much to the disgust and mortification of Grenville, but in conformity with the views of Bute, invited Lord Hardwicke to enter the cabinet as president of the council. That illustrious man declining unless his friends came in with him, Pitt was again called upon to form a ministry, but consented only on terms which the king would not accept. Pitt stood by his friends and his princi- ples as stoutly as the king on his pride and his prerogative. The issue of the political di- lemma was the union of Gren- ville and the Duke of Bedford, who was at odds with all but OLD BLUE BELL TAVERN. his own faction. The union, said Pitt, was a "treaty of connivance." But the union proved more compact than was supposed ; and one element of discord was taken from it by the withdrawal of Lord Shelburne, who was too much of a friend of Pitt and of liberty to support the extreme views held by Gren- ville as to colonial government. The details of American administra- tion now fell to Halifax, whose experience was large, and the new mnea- sures were rapidly brought forward. On the morning of September 22, 1763, three lords of the treasury, with George Grenville at their head, held a meeting at their council-board in Downing street, and adopted a minute directing Jenkinson, the first secretary of the treasury, to " write to the Commissioners of the Stamp Duties to prepare the draft of a bill to be presented to Parliament for extending the stamp duties to the colonies." This order was at once executed. Mr. Bancroft, in his account of this period, asks the question, "Who was the author of the American Stamp Act?" Jenkinson said later in the House of Commons that "if the Stamp Act was a good measure the merit of it was not due to Grenville; if it was a bad one the ill policy did not belong to him." But he never informed the house, nor indeed any one else during his life, who was its author. Bancroft relieves Bute from the charge; but Lord North, who supported the act, said in the House of Commons that he took the propriety of passing it from Grenville's authority. In point of fact, the first proposition to tax the colonies by means of stamped paper was made by Lieutenant-Governor
THE PART OF NEW-YORK IN THE STAMP ACT TROUBLES 341
('larke of New-York, in 1744, to the lords of trade; but Governor Clinton, in a letter to the Duke of Newcastle on December 13 of that year, doubted the expediency of the measure, as being contrary to the spirit of the people, " who are quite strangers to any duty but such as they raise themselves." This was the first overture to the home government; but it appears that Governor Cosby had suggested in // 1743 to the assembly of the province "a duty upon paper to be used in the law and in all conveyances and deeds of every denomination." This is quite a different matter from the imposition of a general stamp act by the British home government.
Whatever the responsibility of Grenville in the matter of originating the stamp act, certain it is that to him must be ascribed the alienation of the affections of the American colonies from the mother-country. He never swerved from his determination to impose a tax through parliament, and to enforce its collection by all the forces at the disposal of the administration. Severe as was the injury to American trade caused by the stringent enforcement of the navigation acts, which checked the lucrative commerce with the West India Islands,-the natural outlet for New England lumber and the product of the fish- eries,-the colonists submitted without more than a murmur. They saw in these legislative acts no infringement of their rights. If the burden were onerous, they found their compensation in their relief from the charges of border protection against the power of France. Though among the far-sighted leaders there were a few who doubted the wisdom of a close connection with Great Britain, and a still smaller number who already looked to and foresaw independence, the mass of the people were still loyal.
Grenville's proposal, made on March 9, to draw a revenue from America by stamps, and his notice that a bill would be introduced at the next session, crystallized public opinion on both sides of the ocean. On his challenging the opposition in the Commons to deny the right of parliament, no voice was lifted in reply, and the next day it was resolved that such right existed and that its exercise was proper. It is true that the house was thin and the hour late, and that the decla- ration of the minister was only of intention. Moreover, Grenville ex- pressly stated that he was "not absolutely wedded to a Stamp Act if the colonies would provide some more satisfactory plan." A letter from London published in the "New-York Mercury " of June 4 states that the "well wishers of America have used their utmost endeavors to lessen the taxes first proposed ; in which they have in a measure partially succeeded and in other respects fallen short of what they attempted. In regard to the 15th resolution relating to the Stamp duty it will certainly pass next session unless the Americans offer a more certain duty. . .. All the well wishers of America are of the
342
HISTORY OF NEW-YORK
opinion that as the Tax in itself is an equitable act and the least in- jurious that can be proposed, the several Assemblies should signify their assent to that Tax under the present exigencies of the State and the necessity of the case, by which they avoid any appearance of an infringement of their liberty and show their inclination to pay obedi- ence to the British Parliament, which has the power to make every part of its dominions submit to such laws as they may think proper to make; by this means they will prevent a precedent from internal taxes being imposed without their consent, which will inevitably be the case next Session if they withhold their assent from the Stamp Act." From this same London letter it appears that the act would have been forced through the Commons without delay but for the remonstrances of Chief Justice William Allen of Pennsylvania, who was then in England, and personally intervened with the leaders of the Commons.1
But if the crystallization of opinion in England united all parties, including the friends of America, in defense of the right of parliament to impose taxes on the colonies, that same process united all parties in America in the denial of that right, and in the assertion of the doctrine which had been claimed in the New-York colony since 1683, that taxa- tion without representation was a wrong and an injustice to which no freeman would submit. Nor yet, in view of the menace of the twenty regiments of British soldiers to be sent over and quartered in the chief cities, were they willing to avoid the issue or postpone it by assenting in advance to the proposed act, as was suggested by their "well wishers" abroad. There was still a faint hope that by earnest repre- sentation of the agents of the colonies abroad and by respectful peti- tion to the king and parliament the blow might be averted.
The assembly of New-York was the first to petition the king and parliament in a respectful representation, on October 18, 1764. After a declaration of inviolable fidelity, they recited "that in the three branches of the political frame of Government established in the year 1683, viz., the Governor, a Council of the Royal appointment, and the representatives of the People, was lodged the legislative authority of the Colony, and particularly the power of taxing its inhabitants for the support of the Government; that the people of the Colony consider themselves in a state of perfect equality with their fellow-subjects in Great Britain, and as a political body enjoying like the inhabitants of that country the exclusive right of taxing themselves; a right which whether inherent in the people or sprung from any other source has received the Royal Sanction, is at the basis of our Colony State, and
1 This was the William Allen whose wife was a daughter of Andrew Hamilton, of Pennsylvania. the famous advocate who defended the printer
Zenger in the great trial (mentioned in a previous chapter) which established the freedom of the press in the New-York province.
THE PART OF NEW-YORK IN THE STAMP ACT TROUBLES 343
become venerable by long usage; that the Representatives for the Colony of New-York cannot therefore without the strongest demon- strations of grief express their sentiments on the late intimation of a design to impose taxes on the Colonies by laws to be passed in Great Britain and they invite the King to interpose his prerogative on the unconstitutional law." On the same day, and by the same resolution in which the transmission of these memorials was ordered, the assembly created a committee Tim Bayard to correspond with the several assemblies on the American continent upon the several objection able acts of parliament lately passed with relation to the trade of the northern colonies, and also on the subject "of the impending dangers which threaten the Colonies of being taxed by laws to be passed in Great Britain." William Bayard, a member of this committee of cor- respondence, visited Boston to confer with the Massachusetts assem- bly, which on the 22d of the same month adopted a petition in the same direction but less vigorous in text and spirit. These documents were transmitted through the foreign agents of the colonies to the Board of Trade at London, and were laid before the privy council on December 11 following. The privy council advised the king to order that they be laid before parliament. Whether of his own motion or by the advice of others is not now known, but they were never placed before parliament : they were suppressed.
Early in the year 1765 Grenville introduced his bill into the House of Commons. It contained fifty-five articles relating to stamp duties in America, and passed the house on February 7. Previous to its pas- sage the American agents were advised that if the colonies would propose any other means of raising the required revenue the stamp duty would be deferred or laid aside. To this they had no authority to make answer. The bill was approved by the House of Lords in March, without debate, and on March 22 received the king's signature. Though not authorized to submit any substitute for the obnoxious act, the agents were not remiss in their opposition. They went to the House of Commons with petitions and protests, but no one of that body could be found who would present a petition impugning the right of parliament; no one even of the opposition, no one even of those immediately interested in the affairs of the colonies, would support their agents in urging this point.
The news of the passage of the act reached New-York in April, and aroused a storm of indignation-a storm tempered by the consoling information that there was a large body in England whose sympathies were with the colonies. The English advices of May brought word that "without doors we hear every person at all qualified to form any judgment of the matter seemed in favor of the Colonies." When the
344
HISTORY OF NEW-YORK
S
0
THE RATZER MAP
OF
1707.
.Delaicy, Fe
Delancy's
dgeare
SHIP YARDS
R
T
S
1. stip
gip
E
RIVER
S
osann
news reached New-York, the assembly was in recess. In Virginia the House of Burgesses was sitting. On May 29 they replied with a series of resolutions, firm in expression, declaratory of their rights and of the unconstitutionality of the measure. It was during the debate on this occasion that Patrick Henry used the memorable words which electrified the continent and in their bold utterance sufficed to make his name immortal. The people of Pennsylvania showed themselves no less jealous of their rights. On April 14 the great guns at the
NEW YORK CITY
A H I FER
Herm.
THE PART OF NEW-YORK IN THE STAMP ACT TROUBLES 345
fort and those at the barracks in New-York were spiked: a sufficient declaration of the popular temper. And now each incoming packet brought accounts of the growing strength of a sentiment in England in favor of the bold attitude of the colonies. The news arrived of the stirring words of Colonel Barre, the brave companion of Wolfe at the capture of Quebec, in answer to the assumption of Town- shend that the colonists were "children of England's planting." "The Americans are Sons of Liberty," retorted Barre in a tone which shook the house.
In comment on this and declarations similar in nature if less vigor- ous in expression, the press of the colonies took up the phrase. On May 30 the author of the "Sentinel " series of letters in the "New- York Gazette" took Liberty as his text. Interspersed among the di- dactie phrases which were the fashion of the day are some strong, homely sentiments. "In proportion as Liberty is precious to us should we hold them dear who lift up their hands in defence of it and abhor those who impiously dare attempt to rend it from us." It closed with some verses more patriotic than poetical, but which are a fair sample of the popular rhyme of the period:
Cursed be the man who e'er shall raise His sacrilegious hand To drive fair liberty, our praise ! From his own native land.
O may his memory never die, By future ages curst ; But live to lasting infamy, Branded of traytors worst.
The "New-York Gazette and Weekly Post Boy" was edited by John Holt, a consistent friend of America, and from this time forward was the acknowledged organ of the advanced patriots. Colden complained of it to Monckton, then absent from his government, as "a licen- tious, abusive, weekly printed paper." And later he charged it to the board of trade as "filled with the vilest and most abusive invectives which malice could invent," in order to render himself, as lieutenant- governor, odious to the people; and he added, it is "universally be- lieved that these scurrilous abusive and malicious papers [the articles of "Sentinel"] were written by two or three distinguished lawyers in the city." These could have been no other than Livingston, John Morin Scott, and Smith. But in style they are not worthy of such high source, though the inspiration may have been theirs.
The history of revolutions shows the power of a phrase. That of Barré struck the strongest chord in the colonial heart. Associations sprung up instantly in every colony under the magic name of Sons of
346
HISTORY OF NEW-YORK
Liberty. The word independence was not as yet breathed aloud, but that the idea was already in the germ appears from a London letter of February 18, 1765, published in Charleston, South Carolina, on April 24, and repeated in New-York in May: "Several publications from North America have lately made their appearance here [London] in which the independency of the Colonies is asserted in pretty round terms." Dawson, in his valuable tract on the Sons of Liberty, claims that the New-York Association of the Sons of Liberty had existed since 1744, when the profession of the law entered into an associa- tion to free the judiciary from the exercise of the king's prerogative; and Colden, who is Dawson's authority for this part of his assertion, in a letter to the Earl of Halifax, February 22, 1765, complains of "the dangerous influence which the profession of the law has ob- tained in this province, and that by their association they proposed nothing less to themselves than to obtain the direction of all measures of government by making themselves absolutely necessary to every governor by assisting him when he complied with their measures, and by resisting him when he did otherwise." He closed the complaint by saying: "Their power is greatly strengthened by enlarging the powers of the popular side of government and by depreciating the powers of the crown." He added that he had never received the least opposition in his administration except when he opposed the views of this faction.
This faction, as Colden terms it, was led in the beginning by the great jurists James Alexander and William Smith the elder, whose mantle of judicial and popular leadership had fallen in the next generation upon William Livingston, William Smith the younger, and John Morin Scott; the last named of whom was already in close touch with the liberal or what Colden would have called the malcon- tent element. These three gentlemen, whom Jones styles the young triumvirate, were educated at Yale College; they "served regular clerkships to the law in the same office at the same time and under the wings and guidance of William Smith the elder, were all at this time Presbyterians by profession and republicans in principle." De- termined as early as 1752 to pull down church and state, continues Jones, in his savage anathema, and to raise their own government and religion upon its ruins, the triumvirate formed a club, under the appel- lation of the Whig Club, which met once in each week at the popular tavern of the King's Arms.1
1 Contemporary authority places the tavern under this sign in Broad street near the Long Bridge, under the management of Richard Cooke in 1750. In 1754 the sign was hanging at the same place, then described as opposite the Royal Ex- change. In 1757 the tavern kept by Cooke appears in the public prints as the Gentlemen's Exchange
Coffee House. This building was on the northeast corner of Broad and Dock (now Pearl) streets, op- posite the well-known Fraunces' Tavern, and was pulled down in 1890. In 1764 the old sign was carried by Edward Barden to the upper end of Broadway, facing the Commons. The King's Arms was evidently the great Whig resort.
THE PART OF NEW-YORK IN THE STAMP ACT TROUBLES 347
At this Whig Club, says Jones also, the usual and customary toasts drunk were "the immortal memory of Oliver Cromwell, of Hugh Peters, of General Ludlow," and others of the regicides. They had an organ in the "Independent Reflector." Returning to Dawson's asser- tion that the Sons of Liberty were identical with or the continuation of the association ruled by the triumvirate of the previous decade, it will be found difficult to accept this statement. There was nothing violent or revolutionary in the characters of either Livingston or Smith. Their in- terests lay with the large proprietor and conservative class. They were moderate men, sage of counsel, delib- erate in action. Neither in tempera- ment nor in character were they at all akin to Scott or McDougall, who later led the advance-guard of the oppo- sition and who were from the outset the moving and aggressive spirits of the Sons of Liberty.
From an early date (1760) there had been a resolute resistance by the sea- Arch. Lablie men of the colonies to the nefarious practice of impressment from the market and wood boats, and from the merchantmen which visited our harbors, nowhere more de- termined than at the port of New-York.1 In 1764 four fishermen were pressed from their vessels and carried on board a tender from a man-of-war on the Halifax station. Next day, the captain of the tender venturing on shore, the boat was suddenly seized and dragged through the streets to the middle of the green in the Fields (City Hall Park), where it was burned and destroyed. Meanwhile the captain was escorted quietly to the coffee-house which stood on the south- west corner of Wall and Queen (later Water) streets, where he dis- claimed all responsibility for the seizure and gave an order for the release of the fishermen. From the suddenness of the appearance, the orderly determination, and the equally sudden disappearance of the crowd or mob or gathering, which are noted in the recital of this affair, Dawson claims, and not unfairly, that they were an organized body; "minute men," he calls them. But the Sons of Liberty was an institution of a more permanent character and a
1 In that year the crew of the Samson of Bristol refused to obey the signal-guns of H. M. S. Win- chester to bring to; and. firing upon the man-of- war's barge on attempting to board her, a number of men were killed. The Samson fortunately
got into harbor, and the men escaped ; the people protecting and concealing them from the reach of the sheriff and the detachment of militia or- dered to his assistance.
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.