The Road to Revolution: (1761-1776)

Was the American Revolution Inevitable??

Theories of Representation Real Whigs Q-> What was the extent of Parliament’s authority over the colonies?? Absolute? OR Limited? Q-> How could the colonies give or withhold consent for parliamentary legislation when they did not have representation in that body??

Rethinking Their Empire British Government took measures to prevent smuggling: 1761  writs of assistance James Otis’ case Protection of a citizen’s private property must be held in higher regard than a parliamentary statute. Writs of Assistance: http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1205.html Writs of assistance were court orders that authorized customs officers to conduct general (non-specific) searches of premises for contraband. The exact nature of the materials being sought did not have to be detailed, nor did their locations. The writs were first introduced in Massachusetts in 1751 to strictly enforce the Acts of Trade, the governing rules for commerce in the British Empire. Merchants in much of New England were skillful at evading the system and many had become masters of smuggling. The powerful new court orders enabled officials to inspect not only shops and warehouses, but also private homes. It quickly became apparent to many colonists that their homes were no longer their castles. In 1761, James Otis represented Boston merchants in their challenge to the renewal of the writs. He failed to convince the court, but gained public prominence in arguing that the writs violated the colonists’ natural rights. The writs of assistance again drew public attention with the enforcement of the Townshend Duties in 1767. Courts continued to uphold the constitutionality of the orders into the 1770s, but as time passed and popular passions heated, few officials had the courage to use them. The writs were one of a list of grievances that the Americans harbored against the Crown and contributed to the process of changing loyal colonists into advocates for independence. James Otis Case: http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1204.html He lost  parliamentary law and custom had equal weight.

George Grenville’s Program, 1763-1765 1. Sugar Act - 1764 2. Currency Act - 1764 3. Quartering Act - 1765 1. Sugar Act (1764) A. Customs duties 1. Revenue Act of 1764 (Sugar Act) 2. Customs service reform and stepped-up enforcement of British trade laws B. Colonial reaction 1. rights of Englishmen 2. no parliamentary power to raise revenue in America 3. "no taxation without representation“ The Sugar Act Online at Founder’s Library: http://www.founding.com/library/lbody.cfm?id=85&parent=17 Currency Act (1764) A. Britain effectively assumed control of the colonial currency system. 1. The act prohibited the issue of any new bills and the reissue of existing currency. 2. Parliament favored a "hard currency" system based on the pound sterling, but was not inclined to regulate the colonial bills. 3. Rather, they simply abolished them. The colonies protested vehemently against this. 4. Another provision of the Currency Act established what amounted to a "superior" Vice-admiralty court, at the call of Navel [sic] commanders who wished to assure that persons suspected of smuggling or other violations of the customs laws would receive a hearing favorable to the British, and not the colonial, interests. B. Results of the Currency Act 1. Colonies suffered a trade deficit with Great Britain to begin with and argued that the shortage of hard capital would further exacerbate the situation. 2. In defiance, many colonies still printed their own bills and/or used the barter system. Currency Act Online at Founder’s Library: http://www.founding.com/library/lbody.cfm?id=84&parent=17 3. Quartering Act (1764)—Passed to address the practical concerns of such a troop deployment. (Amended in 1774) A. Under the terms of this legislation— 1. each colonial assembly was directed to provide for the basic needs of soldiers stationed within its borders. A. Specified items included bedding, cooking utensils, firewood, beer or cider and candles. 2. This law was expanded in 1766 and required the assemblies to billet soldiers in taverns and unoccupied houses. B. British Rationale 1. British motivations for enforcing the Quartering Act were mixed. 2. Some officials were legitimately concerned about protecting the colonies from attack and viewed this law as a logical means to do so. 3. Also part of the calculation, however, was a desire to cut costs. If the colonies were to be protected, why should they not pay for the soldiers? In particular, the British ministry was faced with the prospect of bringing home the French and Indian War veterans and providing them with pay and pensions. If those soldiers could be kept in service in America, the colonies would pay for them and spare a tax-weary English public from additional burdens. C. Colonial Reaction—laregly based upon far of having a standing army during peacetime. 1. Colonists resisted because they felt it violated their civil liberties 2. Cost—colonial assemblies had to fit the bill to pay for standing armies, families feeling pinch in the purse 4. Stamp Act (1765) A. Direct sales tax 1. pamphlets, almanacs, newspapers, newspaper advertisements, cards, dice 2. payment in gold and silver 3. admiralty courts 1. rejection of virtual representation a. Daniel Dulany of Maryland b. Richard Bland of Virginia 4. "real" or "attorneyship" representation B. Virginia Resolves C. Stamp Act Congress (New York) D. boycotts C. Repeal of the Stamp Act (1766) The Stamp Act Online at Founder’s Library: http://www.founding.com/library/lbody.cfm?id=87&parent=17 4. Stamp Act - 1765

Stamp Act Crisis Sons of Liberty – began in NYC: Samuel Adams Loyal Nine - 1765 The Loyal Nine was a group of Boston merchants and artisans that formed during the Stamp Act crisis to lead the public in attempts to drive the stamp distributors from the city. This was one of the first steps toward political organization in the colonies. The Sons of Liberty was a secret organizations formed in the American colonies in protest against the Stamp Act (1765). They took their name from a phrase used by Isaac Barr in a speech against the Stamp Act in Parliament, and were organized by merchants, businessmen, lawyers, journalists, and others who would be most affected by the Stamp Act. The leaders included John Lamb and Alexander McDougall in New York, and Samuel Adams and James Otis in New England. The societies kept in touch with each other through committees of correspondence, supported the non-importation agreement, forced the resignation of stamp distributors, and incited destruction of stamped paper and violence against British officials. They participated in calling the Continental Congress of 1774. In the Civil War, the Knights of the Golden Circle adopted (1864) the name Sons of Liberty.

Stamp Act Congress – 1765 * Stamp Act Resolves Engraving of the Repeal of the Stamp Act Titled "The Repeal or the Funeral Procession of Miss Americ-Stamp" The British government decided it should stop demanding the use of special stamps and cancelled the law in February 1766. While this was cause for celebration in the colonies, the damage had been done. The path to independence from Great Britain had begun. Courtesy Dr. Gary Milan Collection _________________________________________________________________________________ Resolutions of the Stamp Act Congress—October 19, 1765 (http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/D/1751-1775/stampact/sa.htm) The members of this Congress, sincerely devoted, with the warmest sentiments of affection and duty to His Majesty's Person and Government, inviolably attached to the present happy establishment of the Protestant succession, and with minds deeply impressed by a sense of the present and impending misfortunes of the British colonies on this continent; having considered as maturely as time will permit the circumstances of the said colonies, esteem it our indispensable duty to make the following declarations of our humble opinion, respecting the most essential rights and liberties Of the colonists, and of the grievances under which they labour, by reason of several late Acts of Parliament. That His Majesty's subjects in these colonies, owe the same allegiance to the Crown of Great-Britain, that is owing from his subjects born within the realm, and all due subordination to that august body the Parliament of Great Britain. That His Majesty's liege subjects in these colonies, are entitled to all the inherent rights and liberties of his natural born subjects within the kingdom of Great-Britain. That it is inseparably essential to the freedom of a people, and the undoubted right of Englishmen, that no taxes be imposed on them, but with their own consent, given personally, or by their representatives. That the people of these colonies are not, and from their local circumstances cannot be, represented in the House of Commons in Great-Britain. That the only representatives of the people of these colonies, are persons chosen therein by themselves, and that no taxes ever have been, or can be constitutionally imposed on them, but by their respective legislatures. That all supplies to the Crown, being free gifts of the people, it is unreasonable and inconsistent with the principles and spirit of the British Constitution, for the people of Great-Britain to grant to His Majesty the property of the colonists. That trial by jury is the inherent and invaluable right of every British subject in these colonies. That the late Act of Parliament, entitled, An Act for granting and applying certain Stamp Duties, and other Duties, in the British colonies and plantations in America, etc., by imposing taxes on the inhabitants of these colonies, and the said Act, and several other Acts, by extending the jurisdiction of the courts of Admiralty beyond its ancient limits, have a manifest tendency to subvert the rights and liberties of the colonists. That the duties imposed by several late Acts of Parliament, from the peculiar circumstances of these colonies, will be extremely burthensome and grievous; and from the scarcity of specie, the payment of them absolutely impracticable. That as the profits of the trade of these colonies ultimately center in Great-Britain, to pay for the manufactures which they are obliged to take from thence, they eventually contribute very largely to all supplies granted there to the Crown. That the restrictions imposed by several late Acts of Parliament, on the trade of these colonies, will render them unable to purchase the manufactures of Great-Britain. That the increase, prosperity, and happiness of these colonies, depend on the full and free enjoyment of their rights and liberties, and an intercourse with Great-Britain mutually affectionate and advantageous. That it is the right of the British subjects in these colonies, to petition the King, Or either House of Parliament. Lastly, That it is the indispensable duty of these colonies, to the best of sovereigns, to the mother country, and to themselves, to endeavour by a loyal and dutiful address to his Majesty, and humble applications to both Houses of Parliament, to procure the repeal of the Act for granting and applying certain stamp duties, of all clauses of any other Acts of Parliament, whereby the jurisdiction of the Admiralty is extended as aforesaid, and of the other late Acts for the restriction of American commerce.

Declaratory Act – 1766 Parliament passed a law giving it full authority over the colonies. Parliament declared all colonial laws null and void. Parliament denied the right to vote to colonists living in North America. Declaratory Act: Parliament had the full power and authority to make laws and statutes of sufficient force and validity to bind the colonies and people of America, subjects of the crown of Great Britain, in all cases whatsoever. Parliament ruled that all votes, orders, and proceedings, in any of the said colonies or plantations, whereby the power and authority of the parliament of Great Britain, to make laws and statutes as aforesaid, is denied, or drawn into question All previously passed laws were declared to be, utterly null and void to all intents and purposes whatsoever. The Declaratory Act Online at: http://www.founding.com/library/lbody.cfm?id=89&parent=17

Costs of Colonial Resistance

Townshend Duties Crisis: 1767-1770 1767  William Pitt, Prime Minister & Charles Townshend, Secretary of the Exchequer. (Townshend Act) Shift from paying taxes for British war debts & quartering of troops  paying colonial government’s salaries. He diverted revenue collection from internal to external trade. Townshend Act (1767) Summary: http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/E/townshend/dutiesxx.htm Townshend Act Online at Founder’s Library: http://www.founding.com/library/lbody.cfm?id=90 Tax these imports  paper, paint, lead, glass, tea. Increase custom officials at American ports  established a Board of Customs in Boston.

Colonial Response to British Excise Taxes & Duty Collecting —Tar & Feathering The Bostonians Paying the Excise-Man, 1774 British propaganda print referring to the tarring and feathering of Boston Commissioner of Customs John Malcolm four weeks after the Boston Tea Party. The men also poured hot tea down Malcolm's throat as can be seen.

Colonial Response to the Townshend Duties 1. John Dickinson  1768 * Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania. 2. 1768  2nd non-importation movement: * “Daughters of Liberty” * spinning bees 3. Riots against customs agents: * John Hancock’s ship, the Liberty. * 4000 British troops sent to Boston.

many colonists began calling people who joined the non-importation For the first time, many colonists began calling people who joined the non-importation movement, "patriots!"

The Boston Massacre (March 5,1770) Boston Massacre of 1770 by Paul Revere The Boston Massacre (http://www.crf-usa.org/bria/bria16_1.html) On Friday, March 2, 1770, an off-duty British soldier asked a group of Boston rope makers if there was any work. One of the rope makers replied there was. "Go clean my outhouse," he jeered. A fight broke out. The soldier was knocked about and then fled. But a little while later, the soldier returned with friends and a brawl erupted. One of the soldiers, Matthew Killroy, and one of the rope makers, Samuel Gray, would meet again soon in much bloodier circumstances. On the evening of Monday, March 5, a lone British sentry guarded the entrance to the Boston Customs House where officials collected import duties for the king. The sentry got into an argument with a barber's apprentice and swung his musket at him, hitting the boy on the head. Other apprentices gathered, daring the sentry to fight. "Bloody lobster back!" they yelled, taunting the soldier and his red coat. By about 9 p.m., the crowd around the Customs House steps had grown to about 50 to 100 people. Some began to throw snowballs and chunks of ice at the sentry. He loaded his musket. "Fire, damn you, fire, you dare not fire!" the crowd taunted. The sentry finally called for help when a group of about 25 American sailors arrived, yelling, whistling, and carrying wooden clubs. A tall, stout man named Crispus Attucks led this noisy band. Part Indian and black, Attucks pushed his way to the front of the crowd, club in hand. Captain Thomas Preston, officer of the guard, turned out a squad of six privates and a corporal. In the squad was Private Matthew Killroy, who had been involved in the rope-maker brawl. The soldiers marched with their muskets and bayonets to the Customs House to join the beleaguered sentry. They lined up facing the crowd. The corporal then ordered the soldiers to load their muskets with two lead balls per gun. Capt. Preston stood behind his men. From 300-400 people had now gathered. "Lobsters!" "Bloody backs!" "Fire! Why don't you fire?" many shouted. Some threw snowballs, ice, oyster shells, and even lumps of coal at the soldiers. Crispus Attucks and others struck the soldiers' musket barrels with sticks and clubs. Attucks yelled, "Kill them! Kill them! Knock them over!“ Then, someone from the back of the mob threw a club that hit Pvt. Montgomery, knocking him to the ground. "Damn you, fire!" someone shouted. Enraged, Montgomery rose to his feet and fired his musket killing Crispus Attucks. Soon, most of the other soldiers were erratically firing into the mob. When Pvt. Killroy fired, rope-maker Samuel Gray fell dead. As the men began to reload, Capt. Preston ordered, "Stop firing! Stop firing!" Five men lay dead or dying in the bloody snow. Capt. Preston managed to march his men back to their barracks. Acting Governor Thomas Hutchinson, a strong Tory Loyalist, finally arrived to try to calm the people. "Let the law have its course," he pleaded. The next day, Sam Adams led a huge protest meeting demanding that all British soldiers be ordered out of Boston. Reluctantly, Gov. Hutchinson made an agreement with the British army commander to remove the soldiers to a fortified island in Boston Harbor. Boston residents lined the streets to insult and curse the redcoats as they evacuated the town. On March 13, the colony's attorney general issued 13 indictments for murder. There would be three trials. Capt. Preston would be tried first followed by a separate trial of the eight soldiers. Four customs officers, accused of shooting into the crowd from the Customs House windows, would be tried last. (This final trial ended abruptly when the jury found out that the main prosecution witness had falsely accused the officers.)

The Boston Massacre (March 5,1770) Boston Massacre. Henry Pelham, stepbrother of painter John Singleton Copley. Pelham published his design nearly two weeks after Paul Revere's.

The Boston Massacre Trials (1770) Captain Thomas Preston & 8 British Soldiers Tried for Role in “The Boston Massacre” John Adams—Defended Captain Preston & 8 British Soldiers More than 80 witnesses called to the stand to testify. Results of the Trial: Preston was acquitted (Sons of Liberty Surprised & Bitter—seeing John Adams defended him.) Pvts. Montgomery and Killroy guilty of manslaughter, though they committed a capital offense, punishment  they were branded on the thumb. Boston Massacre Trial Home Page http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/bostonmassacre/bostonmassacre.html The Trial of Capt. Preston (http://www.crf-usa.org/bria/bria16_1.html) Before the trials began, a propaganda war of sorts took place. Gov. Hutchinson sent a report to London criticizing Boston for its violence and mob actions against the British soldiers. He later wrote, "government is at an end and in the hands of the people." Sam Adams and the Sons of Liberty took the testimony of witnesses for their own document, which they titled, "A Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre in Boston." But the most effective propaganda piece was Paul Revere's widely printed cartoon, "The Bloody Massacre," an exaggerated misrepresentation of what really happened. The court appointed Samuel Quincy, a strong Tory (British sympathizer), as special prosecutor. Sam Adams persuaded the town of Boston to pay for a second prosecutor, Patriot Robert Treat Paine. Capt. Preston could not get anyone to defend him in court until a Tory merchant persuaded lawyer John Adams to do so. Although he was one of the Patriot leaders in Boston, the 35-year-old Adams believed that it was vital that the British soldiers and their captain receive fair trials. Adams believed that the cause for self-government would be damaged if Boston justice turned out to be little more than lynch law. Joining Adams on the defense team were a a Tory judge, Robert Auchmuty, and a young fiery Patriot lawyer, Josiah Quincy, the younger brother of the special prosecutor. Ironically Tory Loyalist Samuel Quincy had the job of convicting the king's men of murder, while Patriot John Adams led the effort to defend them. Amid continued mob activities and threats of lynching, Capt. Preston's trial began on October 24, 1770. It lasted six days, an extremely long time then for a criminal trial. The court also took the unusual step of sequestering the jury (keeping jury members away from their family and friends). Four judges, wearing red robes that signified a death penalty case, presided at Capt. Preston's trial. The key question was whether he actually gave an order to his men to fire at the mob. Preston denied giving the order, but did not testify. Some witnesses said he gave such a command; most said he did not. Much of the testimony centered on who was shouting the word "Fire!" when the shooting began. In the end, the Boston jury found Capt. Preston not guilty. To Sam Adams and the other Sons of Liberty, Capt. Preston's acquittal was disturbing, but not entirely unexpected. After all, Preston was never accused of shooting at the crowd himself. But the strong feeling in the town remained that someone would have to pay for the five men who died. The Trial of the British Soldiers (http://www.crf-usa.org/bria/bria16_1.html) The trial of the eight British soldiers began on November 27 with a different jury (again sequestered), but before the same four judges as in the Preston case. Samuel Quincy and Robert Treat Paine continued to prosecute. Sampson Blowers joined John Adams and his former Harvard classmate Josiah Quincy for the defense. This trial lasted seven days with more than 80 witnesses testifying. The prosecutors only had to prove that one of the soldiers fired with malice and the intent to kill. All the soldiers would then be equally guilty of murder and would hang. The prosecution tried to show that after months of abuse from the town's people, all the soldiers had revenge in their hearts. In particular, a witness testified that one or two weeks before the shooting, Pvt. Killroy had said that "he would never miss an opportunity, if he had one, to fire on the inhabitants, and that he had wanted to have an opportunity ever since he landed." After Pvt. Montgomery fired the first shot, the prosecution argued, Killroy had his opportunity and shot rope-maker Samuel Gray to death. The defense team had to overcome some major problems. If Capt. Preston did not order his men to fire, as Preston's jury had ruled, then why did the men fire? Adams and the other defense lawyers had to show that the crowd was endangering the soldiers. They would have to persuade a jury that probably held strong anti-British feelings. The defense thus concentrated on the actions of the specific mob that threatened Capt. Preston and his men. Witnesses for the defense described the insults, curses, threats, taunts, and the physical objects that the mob hurled upon the soldiers. Dr. John Jeffries, who treated victim Patrick Carr for 10 days before he finally died, gave especially effective testimony. Dr. Jeffries related that Carr, on his deathbed, said that he believed the soldiers fired to defend themselves and that he did not blame the man who shot him. John Adams spent much of his closing argument educating the jury on the law of self-defense. He recalled the testimony about the "people crying kill them! kill them! knock them over! heaving snowballs, oyster shells, clubs, white birch sticks." Adams then asked the jurors to "consider yourselves, in this situation, and then judge whether a reasonable man . . . would not have concluded they were going to kill him.“ Adams referred to Pvt. Montgomery, the first to fire. "He was knocked down at his station," Adams continued. "Had he not reason to think his life in danger?" As for Pvt. Killroy, Adams pointed out that no one had testified that he had aimed at Samuel Gray rather than at the mob in general. John Adams concluded by stating the law at the time: "If an assault was made to endanger their lives, the law is clear, they had the right to kill in self-defense . . . ." Adams conceded, however, that if the assault "was not so severe as to endanger their lives . . . [then] this was a provocation, for which the law reduces the offense of killing down to manslaughter." Robert Treat Paine concluded the case for the prosecution. He told the jurors that the soldiers had unlawfully assembled in front of the Customs House, loading their muskets with double shot, which inflamed the crowd. The soldiers then opened fire without any order from Capt. Preston. They did this, Paine argued, not to defend themselves, but out of malice. The redcoats sought revenge for all the insults and harassment they had suffered since arriving in Boston. Thus he called on the jury to find the soldiers who fired guilty of murder. After instructions from the judge, the case went to the jury to deliberate on a verdict. The Outcome After deliberating for about three hours, the jurors found all the soldiers innocent of murder, but judged Pvts. Montgomery and Killroy guilty of manslaughter. Although these men were technically convicted of a capital offense, the court permitted them to make a special plea that reduced their penalty to branding on the thumb. Montgomery later admitted that it was he who had shouted, "Damn you, fire!" just before he shot his musket.

The Gaspee Incident (1772) Providence, RI coast The repeal of the Townshend duties in the Spring of 1770 did much to soothe strained relations between the American colonies and the mother country. For the next three years a surface harmony prevailed, but several incidents occurred that served to indicate not all was well. One such event occurred in Rhode Island where local forces resorted to violence and property destruction to oppose the enforcement of unpopular British trade policies. The British revenue cutter Gaspee had served in American waters since 1764 and early on had drawn resentment by impressing a number of American colonists. This uneasy situation became worse in 1772 when the ship was under the command of Lieutenant William Dudingston and was assigned to the New England coast in a crackdown on smuggling. Narragansett Bay was then the center of a thriving illegal trade. Dudingston was so intent on his duties that he needlessly offended an already nervous public by seizing colonial supplies without payment and by stopping many innocent ships. Further harm was done by Dudingston’s tendency to express publicly his contempt for Americans. On June 9, Dudingston pursued a suspect local vessel, the Hannah, under the command of Captain Benjamin Lindsey. The fleeing ship purposely lured the Gaspee into shallow waters off Namquit Point, near present-day Warwick, where it ran aground. John Brown, Joseph Bucklin and other Providence leaders received word of the Gaspee’s plight and organized a raiding party. That night, under a moonless sky, more than 60 men with blackened faces and feathered headdresses boarded longboats and silently approached the stranded vessel. At about 1 a.m. on the 10th, the raiders were spotted by some of the Gaspee’s crew and warned to halt. The Americans ignored the order and opened fire, seriously wounding Dudingston in the arm. Most of the crew had been asleep and were easily rounded up and removed from the ship. The hated Dudingston was initially left to writhe in agony on the deck, but was later taken to a doctor. When all crewmen were removed, the Gaspee was set aflame and over the next few hours burned to the waterline. This destruction of government property was a direct challenge to royal authority. Rhode Island Governor Joseph Wanton, a popularly elected official, felt compelled to issue an arrest proclamation for the unnamed participants in the event and went through the motion of posting a reward. He later submitted an inconclusive report on the incident to London. British officials, realizing that the colony’s commitment to achieving justice was limited, created a Royal Commission of Inquiry comprising Governor Wanton and four judges from other colonies. The commission met in early 1773, had difficulty getting witnesses to testify and, when they succeeded, found their accounts were often contradictory. In the end the commission showed remarkable restraint and issued a report finding that the Gaspee incident was a spontaneous event prompted by Dudingston's numerous provocations. Despite the fact that the raiders' names were well known in the community, they were never divulged to British officials. This act of destruction was the beginning of the end of the quiet period that had existed for more than two years. Radical forces in Rhode Island chose to ignore the fact that the royal commission had striven to avoid controversy, and stressed the negative in a series of newspaper attacks. The greatest immediate fear was that the colony would be punished by seeing its charter revoked and a royal governor installed. A few months later, the focus of activity would switch to Boston where the tea party would force the authorities in London to take actions that had earlier been feared in Rhode Island. Providence, RI coast

Committees of Correspondence Purpose  warn neighboring colonies about incidents with Br.  broaden the resistance movement. In an era before modern communications, news was generally disseminated in hand-written letters that were carried aboard ships or by couriers on horseback. Those means were employed by the critics of British imperial policy in America to spread their interpretations of current events. Special committees of correspondence were formed by the colonial assemblies and various lesser arms of local government. The committees were responsible for taking the sense of their parent body on a particular issue, committing it to a written form and then dispatching that view to other similar groups. Many correspondents were members of the colonial assemblies and also were active in the secret Sons of Liberty organizations. In the early years, committees were formed to address a specific problem, then disbanded when resolution was achieved. The first formal committee of correspondence was established in Boston in 1764 and was charged with rallying opposition to the recently enacted Currency Act and the unpopular reforms imposed on the customs service. The following year, New York took the initiative during the Stamp Act Crisis by summoning its neighbors to join in common resistance to the new taxes. Massachusetts correspondents responded by urging other colonies to send delegates to the Stamp Act Congress that fall. In 1772, at the urging of chief propagandist Samuel Adams, a committee was formed to protest the recent decision to have the Crown, not the colonial assembly, pay the salaries of the royal governor and judges. Adams and his fellow correspondents rallied their neighbors to oppose this measure that had cost the colony its means of controlling public officials. In the following months, more than 100 other committees were formed in the towns and villages of Massachusetts. In 1773, a correspondence committee of the House of Burgesses in Virginia wrote to the other assemblies to suggest that permanent committees be formed, a clear reflection that the crisis between mother country and colonies was deepening. Perhaps the most important contribution provided by the committees of correspondence was the planning done for the First Continental Congress, which convened in the fall of 1774. The Second Continental Congress seized upon this successful idea and created its own correspondence committee to convey the American interpretation of events to foreign powers.

Tea Act (1773) British East India Co.: Monopoly on British tea imports. Many members of Parliament held shares. Permitted the Co. to sell tea directly to colonies without colonial middlemen (cheaper tea!) North expected the colonists to eagerly choose the cheaper tea. The Tea Act Online at Founder’s Library: http://www.founding.com/library/lbody.cfm?id=91&parent=17

The Coercive or Intolerable Acts (1774) 1. Boston Port Act Lord North Boston Port Act Online at Founder’s Library: http://www.founding.com/library/lbody.cfm?id=93&parent=17 The Coercive or Intolerable Acts: (http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h647.html) Properly known as the Restraining Acts, the Coercive Acts, as they were popularly known in England, were introduced in 1774 by the new government of Lord North, who acted with the direct encouragement of George III. Several voices of caution had been raised in Parliament, particularly those of Edmund Burke and Lord Chatham, who feared that stern measures were charting a course no one really wanted to follow; their advice, however, was not heeded. This legislation's purpose was to restore order in Massachusetts, following the Boston Tea Party and other acts of defiance. Boston Port Act (1774) Online at Founder’s Library: http://www.founding.com/library/lbody.cfm?id=93&parent=17 Massachusetts Government Act (1774): http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/related/mga.htm Quartering Act (1774) Online at Founder’s Library: http://www.founding.com/library/lbody.cfm?id=96&parent=17 Administration of Justice Act (http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1243.html) Parliament’s offensive against Massachusetts, the perpetrator of the Boston Tea Party, included an effort to afford legal protections to officials serving in the disobedient colony. The Administration of Justice Act provided that British officials accused of capital crimes in the execution their duties in suppressing riots or collecting lawful taxes in Massachusetts could avoid hostile local juries. The governor, at this time General Thomas Gage, was authorized at his discretion to decide that such cases be heard in England. Angry colonists labeled this particular Coercive Act the “Murder Act,” because it offered a means for accused murderers to escape colonial justice. 2. Massachusetts Government Act 3. New Quartering Act 4. Administration of Justice Act

The Quebec Act (1774) The Quebec Act Online at Founder’s Library: http://www.founding.com/library/lbody.cfm?id=95 The Quebec Act was passed on June 22nd, 1774 by the British government, and became effective May 1st, 1775. It was framed largely by Gov. Sir Guy Carleton, although not all of his policies were incorporated into it. The Quebec Act guaranteed the use of French civil law and British criminal law. It also guaranteed French Canadians the right to practice Roman Catholicism. The Act allowed the Catholic Church in Quebec to collect tax from it's members. Another part of the Quebec Act guaranteed the preservation of the landholding system at the time (the seigneural system). Under the Quebec Act, the colony would be governed by a governor and 17 to 23 appointed counsellors, but an elected assembly would not be provided. The Quebec Act gave Quebec control over much of what is now Quebec, Ontario, and the Midwestern United States. The American settlers became enraged when Quebec acquired Indian Territory, which they believed to be theirs by right. The Americans considered the Quebec Act to be one of the "Intolerable Acts", which may have cotributed to the outbreak of the American Revolution. The Quebec Act was passed to settle questions about the government and law for the French, but the British had a more selfish reason for passing the act. The British had a possible revolution in the Thirteen Colonies, and they wanted to have French support if the revolution began. The British at least wanted to keep the French in Quebec from joining it.

First Continental Congress (1774) 55 delegates from 12 colonies Agenda  How to respond to the Coercive Acts & the Quebec Act? he First Continental Congress convened in Philadelphia's Carpenters Hall on September 5, 1774. The idea of such a meeting was advanced a year earlier by Benjamin Franklin, but failed to gain much support until after the Port of Boston was closed in response to the Boston Tea Party. Twelve of the 13 colonies sent delegates. Georgia decided against roiling the waters; they were facing attacks from the restive Creek on their borders and desperately needed the support of regular British soldiers. The Congress, which continued in session until late October, did not advocate independence; it sought rather to right the wrongs that had been inflicted on the colonies and hoped that a unified voice would gain them a hearing in London. Some of the most prominent figures of the era were among the 55 delegates in attendance, including George Washington, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Patrick Henry, Richard Henry Lee, John Jay and John Dickinson. They were mostly people of social standing and made their livings from trade, farming and the law. Many were initially unknown to one another and vast differences existed on some of the issues, but important friendships flourished. Frequent dinners and gatherings were held and were attended by all except the spartan Sam Adams. Major actions taken by the Congress included the following: Galloway Plan of Union. The first order of business was consideration of Pennsylvania conservative Joseph Galloway's plan of union, which urged creation of an American parliament to act in concert with the existing British body. On matters relating to America, each was to have veto power over the other's actions. Galloway was attempting to reconcile the simmering differences held by England and America. Opinion on this proposal was sharply divided. Suffolk Resolves. Before the Galloway proposal could be decided, Paul Revere rode into town bearing the Suffolk Resolves, a series of political statements that had been forwarded to Philadelphia by a number of Boston-area communities. The resulting discussion further polarized the Congress. The radical elements eventually gained the upper hand; a majority of the colonies voted to endorse the Resolves and against Galloway's plan. The Association. The Congress next adopted the Continental Association, or simply, the Association, which established a total boycott by means of non-importation, non-exportation and non-consumption accords. These agreements were to be enforced by a group of committees in each community, which would publish the names of merchants defying the boycott, confiscate contraband, and encourage public frugality. Declaration of Rights and Grievances. The Congress composed a statement of American complaints. It was addressed to King George III, to whom the delegates remained loyal, and pointedly, not to Parliament. The radical elements were critical of the Declaration because it conceded the right of Parliament to regulate colonial trade, a traditional view long held by most Americans, but one that was losing favor in the mid-1770s. Future Meeting. Finally, the Congress agreed to convene the following spring if colonial complaints had not been properly addressed. That meeting, the Second Continental Congress, was indeed called in May 1775 in the wake of the battles of Lexington and Concord. The First Continental Congress was regarded as a success by both the general public and the delegates. The latter, despite heated and frequent disagreements, had come to understand the problems and aspirations of people living in other colonies. Many of the friendships forged there would make easier the gargantuan task of governing the new nation in the coming years. 1 vote per colony represented.

Boston Tea Party (1775) DECEMBER 16, 1773 "Once vigorous measures appear to be the only means left to bringing the Americans to a due submission to the mother country, the colonies will submit." -King George III On May 10, 1773, the British parliament authorized the East India Co., which faced bankruptcy due to corruption and mismanagement, to export a half a million pounds of tea to the American colonies for the purpose of selling it without imposing upon the company the usual duties and tariffs. With these privileges, the company could undersell American merchants and monopolize the colonial tea trade. Not only did this action create an unfair commerce to the merchants of the colonies but it proved to be the spark that revived American passions about the issue of taxation without representation. To fully understand the resentment of the colonies to Great Britain and King George III, one must understand that this was not the first time that the colonists were treated unfairly. In previous years, the 13 colonies saw a number of commercial tariffs including the Sugar Act of 1764, which taxed sugar, coffee, and wine, the Stamp Act of 1765, which put a tax on all printed matter, such as newspapers and playing cards, and the Townshend Acts of 1767 which placed taxes on items like glass, paints, paper, and tea. The Tea Act of 1773 was the last straw. "If our trade be taxed, why not our lands, in short, everything we posses? They tax us without having legal representation." -Samuel Adams On November 27, 1773, three ships from the East India Co., named the Dartmouth, Eleanor and the Beaver, loaded with tea landed at Boston and were prevented from unloading their cargo. Fearing that the tea would be seized for failure to pay customs duties, and eventually become available for sale, something had to be done. Demanding that the tea be returned to where it came from or face retribution, the Sons of Liberty, led by Samuel Adams began to meet to determine the fate of the three cargo ships in the Boston harbor. On the cold evening of December 16, 1773, a large band of patriots, disguised as Mohawk Indians, burst from the South Meeting House with the spirit of freedom burning in their eyes. The patriots headed towards Griffin's Wharf and the three ships. Quickly, quietly, and in an orderly manner, the Sons of Liberty boarded each of the tea ships. Once on board, the patriots went to work striking the chests with axes and hatchets. Thousands of spectators watched in silence. Only the sounds of ax blades splitting wood rang out from Boston Harbor. Once the crates are open, the patriots dumped the tea into the sea. The silence was broken only by the cry of "East Indian" as patriots caught Charles O'Conner filling the lining of his coat with tea. George Hewes removed O'Connor's coat, threatened him with death if he revealed the identity of any man present, and sent him scurrying out of town. The patriots work feverishly, fearing an attack by Admiral Montague at any moment. By nine o'clock p.m., the Sons of Liberty had emptied a total of 342 crates of tea into Boston Harbor. Fearing any connection to their treasonous deed, the patriots took off their shoes and shook them overboard. They swept the ships' decks, and made each ship's first mate attest that only the tea was damaged. When all was through, Lendall Pitts led the patriots from the wharf, tomahawks and axes resting on their shoulders. A fife played as they marched past the home where British Admiral Montague had been spying on their work. Montague yelled as they past, "Well boys, you have had a fine, pleasant evening for your Indian caper, haven't you? But mind, you have got to pay the fiddler yet!" Montague's words were to be an omen for the patriots. The party was indeed over for Boston. This 1846 lithograph has become a classic image of the Boston Tea Party.

Boston Tea Party (1775) Engraving. Plate by W.D. Cooper

The British Are Coming . . . Paul Revere’s Midnight Ride Summary: http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1261.html Paul Revere & William Dawes make their midnight ride to warn the Minutemen of approaching British soldiers.

The Shot Heard ’Round the World! Lexington & Concord – April 18,1775 Operations began with an attempt to seize a cache of arms reported to be at Concord, a town 16 miles from Boston, past the village of Lexington. Secrecy was lost and when the British reached Lexington at first light on 19 April they found about seventy militia drawn upon in two lines. Heavily outnumbered, the militia began to disperse, although not to lay down their arms, when someone, it is not clear who, fired. The shot was followed by two British volleys and the militia scattered. Concord was not such an easy proposition. The British were able to occupy the undefended town but then withdrew in the face of militia pressure. On their route back to Lexington they suffered grievously from sniping, their flanking maneuvers being insufficient to prevent ambushes. At Lexington a relief column under Brigadier- General Hugh Percy lessened the pressure, although there were renewed attacks on the route back to Boston. Percy reported to Gage the following day: In obedience to your Excellency's orders I marched yesterday morning at 9 o'clock with the 1st brigade and 2 field pieces, in order to cover the retreat of the grenadiers and light infantry in their return from their expedition to Concord. As all the houses were shut up, and there was not the appearance of a single inhabitant, I could get no intelligence concerning them till I had passed Menotomy, when Iwas informed that the rebels had attacked his Majesty's troops who were retiring, overpowered by numbers, greatly exhausted and fatigued, and having expaned almost all their ammunition - and at about 2 o'clock I met them retiring rough the town of Lexington - I immediately ordered the 2 field pieces to fire at the rebels, and drew up the brigade on a height.The shot from the cannon had the desired effect, and stopped the rebels for a little time, who immediately dispersed, and endeavoured to surround us being ery numerous. As it began now to grow pretty late and we had 15 miles to retire, and only 36 rounds, I ordered the grenadiers and light infantry to move of first; and covered them with my brigade sending out very strong flanking parties wch wre absolutely very necessary, as there was not a stone wall, or house, though before in appearance evacuated, from whence the rebels did not fire upon us. As soon as they saw us begin to retire, they pressed very much upon our rear guard, which for that reason, I relieved every now and then. In this manner we retired for 15 miles under incessant fire all round us, till we arrived at Charlestown, between 7 and 8 in the evening and having expended almost all our ammunition. We had the misfortune of losing a good many men in the retreat, though nothing like the number which from many circumstances I have reason to believe were killed of the rebels. His Majesty's troops during he whole of the affair behaved with their usual intrepidity and spirit nor were they a little exsperated at the cruelty and barbarity of the rebels, who scalped and cut off the ears of some of the wounded men who fell into their hands. In fact, no one was scalped and no ears were cropped. Jeremy Lister, who was wounded on the retreat, wrote of ' general firing upon us from all quarters, from behind hedges and walls'. The news of the shedding of blood produced an outraged response throughout New England and a substantial force soon encircled the British in Boston. Poorly organized and supplied, largely dependent on their personal arms , and short of powder and ball, the Revolutionaries nevertheless benefited from the heavy British losses on 19 April, which discouraged Gage from acting until he received reinforcements and ensured that when he did act it would be in order to improve his defensive position, not to end the encirclement or to attack further a field. Meanwhile the Revolutionaries were entrenching their positions, one British observer, writing on 31 May, that they had strongly fortified 'every road, every pass and every hill within ten miles of Boston' so that even if the British attacked successfully their army would be decimated. Lexington & Concord – April 18,1775

The Second Continental Congress (1775) Before adjourning in late October 1774, the First Continental Congress had provided for reconvening at a later time if circumstances dictated. The skirmishes at Lexington and Concord in April 1775, and the gathering of an American army outside of Boston provided sufficient impetus to assemble the delegates at the State House in Philadelphia. The first meeting convened on May 10, 1775, the same date as the American capture of Fort Ticonderoga. The Second Continental Congress was presided over by John Hancock, who replaced the ailing Peyton Randolph, and included some of the same delegates as the first, but with such notable additions as Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson. Joseph Galloway, the Pennsylvania conservative, was not in attendance. All of the colonies sent delegates, although the Georgia delegation did not arrive until fall. As time passed, the radical element that included John Adams, Samuel Adams and Richard Henry Lee began to eclipse the more conservative faction represented by John Dickinson. Nonetheless, many of the delegates expected at the outset, that the rupture between colony and mother country would be healed. Congress lacked the legal authority to govern, but boldly assumed that responsibility. Major contributions included the following: Military Matters. On June 15, Congress assumed control of the army encamped outside of Boston. John Adams labored hard among his fellow Northerners to gain support for George Washington as the commander-in-chief of the Continental Army. Adams realized that many people in the South and wealthy Americans in all areas harbored deep reservations about the new armed conflict, and reasoned that the appointment of a prominent Southerner to head the military effort would generate a broader base of support for the struggle. Washington, present in Philadelphia in full military dress, accepted the responsibility and departed for Boston on June 23. Congress appointed four majors-general to serve under Washington: Artemas Ward, Charles Lee, Philip Schuyler and Israel Putnam. In late May, the Congress addressed the residents of Canada, hoping to ignite the passions of the French and have the province join America as the 14th state. In order to thwart an anticipated invasion from the north, Congress authorized the ill-fated invasion of Canada. Statements of Position. The Congress went to great lengths to offer a philosophical justification for its participation in the war. In early July, approval was given to Dickinson's Olive Branch Petition, a statement of abiding loyalty to the king, but disapproval of the actions of his ministers and Parliament. In July 1775, the Second Continental Congress made a final effort to seek reconciliation with Britain and end the fighting. The chief advocate of this effort was John Dickinson, a conservative delegate from Pennsylvania, who authored the Olive Branch Petition. This appeal was directed to George III personally. It issued a sharp protest against repressive British policies and asked the king to halt the war, repeal the Coercive Acts and bring about reconciliation. While critical of Parliament and the king's ministers, the petition lauded the relationship between the American colonies and the mother country as “the wonder and envy of other nations.” Loyalty to the king was not challenged: Attached to your Majesty’s person, family, and Government, with all devotion that principle and affection can inspire; connected with Great Britain by the strongest ties that can unite societies, and deploring every event that tends in any degree to weaken them, we solemnly assure your Majesty, that we not only most ardently desire the former harmony between her and these Colonies may be restored, but that a concord may be established between them upon so firm a basis as to perpetuate its blessings, uninterrupted by any future dissensions, to succeeding generations in both countries, and to transmit your Majesty’s name to posterity, adorned with that signal and lasting glory that has attended the memory of those illustrious personages, whose virtues and abilities have extricated states from dangerous convulsions, and by securing the happiness to others, have erected the most noble and durable monuments to their own fame. Congress approved this statement on July 5, due more to its respect for Dickinson than as an endorsement of its content. Signatures of 48 delegates were affixed on July 8 and the document was then shipped off to London. Its reception there was frigid. The king refused to receive the petition, perhaps being especially sensitive because word had recently been received that the Americans had launched an invasion of Canada — an act of unbelievable aggression in British eyes. On August 23, George III proclaimed the American colonies to be in rebellion and urged that all efforts should be made “to suppress such rebellion, and bring the traitors to justice.” A stronger statement followed, the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking up Arms, which held out the possibility of independence if American rights were not restored. On July 6, the day following adoption of the Olive Branch Petition, the Second Continental Congress approved the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking up Arms, a statement authored jointly by Thomas Jefferson and John Dickinson. Again the obligatory professions of loyalty to the king were made, but this document contained a thinly veiled threat that if matters were not made right, then independence was the likely consequence: Lest this declaration should disquiet the minds of our friends and fellow-subjects in any part of the empire, we assure them that we mean not to dissolve that union which has so long and so happily subsisted between us, and which we sincerely wish to see restored. — Necessity has not yet driven us into that desperate measure, or induced us to excite any other nation to war against them. — We have not raised armies with ambitious designs of separating from Great-Britain, and establishing independent states. We fight not for glory or for conquest. We exhibit to mankind the remarkable spectacle of a people attacked by unprovoked enemies, without any imputation or even suspicion of offence. They boast of their privileges and civilization, and yet proffer no milder conditions than servitude or death. Financing the War. The Congress attempted to pay for the conflict by issuing paper certificates and by borrowing from domestic and foreign sources. The continental currency, and its state-issued equivalents, depreciated sharply in value and sparked a debilitating inflationary period. The effort to raise money for paying soldiers and purchasing arms and supplies remained a problem for much of the war. Independence.Richard Henry Lee's resolution (June 1776) promoting independence reflected changing public opinion on the matter of retaining ties with Britain. This measure was adopted by Congress and then fleshed out in Jefferson's Declaration. Opening of Diplomatic Channels. In 1776, Silas Deane was dispatched to France, where he successfully secured supplies, arms and the services of a number of experienced European military officers. His mission was later supplemented by Arthur Lee and Benjamin Franklin, and resulted in the conclusion of the Franco-American Alliance (1778). Legislation.The Congress lacked the authority to pass binding legislation, but did approve non-binding resolutions. The delegates could ask the states to provide money, supplies and men for the war effort, but the states were free to accept, reject or modify those requests. The Congress recognized that a successful prosecution of the war necessitated stronger central authority. In July 1776, a proposal, the Articles of Confederation, was introduced and sparked lengthy debate before adoption in November 1777; ratification of the Articles by the states was not completed until 1781. Despite these accomplishments, much of the Congress's time was spent in regional feuding. Infant political parties began to emerge. Usually the states of Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina and Virginia worked together, often in opposition to the wishes of Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island and New Hampshire. The middle states swung from one side to the other, depending on the issue under consideration. Further confusion was added to the deliberations of Congress by recurring military threats; the approach of British armies forced several changes of meeting location during the course of the war. Olive Branch Petition

Was the American Revolution Inevitable??

Thomas Paine: Common Sense Brief Biography of Thomas Paine Online: http://www.ushistory.org/Paine/index.htm Brief Biography On January 29, 1737, Thomas Paine was born in Thetford, England. His father, a corseter, had grand visions for his son, but by the age of 12, Thomas had failed out of school. The young Paine began apprenticing for his father, but again, he failed. So, now age 19, Paine went to sea. This adventure didn't last too long, and by 1768 he found himself as an excise (tax) officer in England. Thomas didn't exactly excel at the role, getting discharged from his post twice in four years, but as an inkling of what was to come, he published The Case of the Officers of Excise (1772), arguing for a pay raise for officers. In 1774, by happenstance, he met Benjamin Franklin in London, who helped him emigrate to Philadelphia. His career turned to journalism while in Philadelphia, and suddenly, Thomas Paine became very important. In 1776, he published Common Sense, a strong defense of American Independence from England. He joined the Continental Army and wasn't a success as a soldier, but he produced The Crisis (1776-83), which helped inspire the Army. This pamphlet was so popular that as a percentage of the population, it was read by or read to more people than today watch the Super Bowl. But, instead of continuing to help the Revolutionary cause, he returned to Europe and pursued other ventures, including working on a smokeless candle and an iron bridge. In 1791-92, he wrote The Rights of Man in response to criticism of the French Revolution. This work caused Paine to be labeled an outlaw in England for his anti-monarchist views. He would have been arrested, but he fled for France to join the National Convention. By 1793, he was imprisoned in France for not endorsing the execution of Louis XVI. During his imprisonment, he wrote and distributed the first part of what was to become his most famous work at the time, the anti-church text, The Age of Reason (1794-96). He was freed in 1794 (narrowly escaping execution) thanks to the efforts of James Monroe, then U.S. Minister to France. Paine remained in France until 1802 when he returned to America on an invitation from Thomas Jefferson. Paine discovered that his contributions to the American Revolution had been all but eradicated due to his religious views. Derided by the public and abandoned by his friends, he died on June 8, 1809 at the age of 72 in New York City. ______________________________________________________ Common Sense Online at Fordham University’s Modern History Sourcebook: http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/paine-common.html

Declaration of Independence (1776) Drafting of the Declaration of Independence http://www.usflag.org/declaration.html The Declaration of Independence (Final Draft): http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm *Note: You can access rough drafts at this website.

Declaration of Independence Duke University’s Declaration of Independence Home Page http://www.duke.edu/eng169s2/group1/lex3/firstpge.htm

Independence Hall

New National Symbols