Friday, December 8, 2023

"They Brought Together Every Ounce Contained in the Town, and Committed it to One Common Bonfire" - The Lexington Tea Burning

This Sunday, the Lexington Historical Society will commemorate the 250th anniversary of the town's tea protest. So what exactly happened that caused the residents of this dairy community to rise up and openly protest English economic policies?

In 1773, Parliament passed the Tea Act to refinance the shaky economic base of the British East India Company. Established in 1709, the East India Company derived over ninety percent of its profits from selling tea. However, by 1772, the company desperately needed a bailout due to severe mismanagement. The company directors looked to Parliament for relief. Parliament’s response was the Tea Act, through which the East India Company was given exclusive rights to ship tea to America without paying import duties and to sell it through their agents to American retailers. American merchants who had for years purchased tea from non-British sources (Dutch tea was a particular favorite of New Englanders) faced the prospect of financial ruin.

Massachusetts immediately opposed the act and began to organize resistance. On November 29, 1773, the tea ship Dartmouth arrived at Griffin’s Wharf in Boston. The Beaver and the Eleanor arrived at the same wharf three days later. Bostonians demanded that Governor Hutchinson order the three ships back to England. On December 16, 1773, the owner of the Dartmouth apparently agreed and went to Hutchinson to beg him to let the ships return to England. Hutchinson refused, and at approximately six o’clock that evening, some 150 men and boys disguised as Indians marched to the three ships, boarded them, and dumped 340 chests of tea into Boston Harbor.


Meanwhile, as tempers boiled over in Boston, the citizens of Lexington assembled three days before the Boston Tea Party to discuss the unfolding events. The matter was referred to the town’s committee of correspondence, which quickly drafted an emotional and stinging condemnation of the Tea Act.

"[It] appears that the Enemies of the Rights & Liberties of Americans, greatly disappointed in the Success of the Revenue Act, are seeking to Avail themselves of New, & if possible, Yet more detestable Measures to distress, Enslave & destroy us. Not enough that a Tax was laid Upon Teas, which should be Imported by Us, for the Sole Purpose of Raising a revenue to support Taskmasters, Pensioners, &c., in Idleness and Luxury; But by a late Act of Parliament, to Appease the wrath of the East India Company, whose Trade to America had been greatly clogged by the operation of the Revenue Acts, Provision is made for said Company to export their teas to America free and discharged from all Duties and Customs in England, but liable to all the same Rules, Regulations, Penalties & Forfeitures in America, as are Provided by the Revenue Act . . . Not to say anything of the Gross Partiality herein discovered in favour of the East India Company, and to the Injury & oppression of Americans; . . . we are most especially alarmed, as by these Crafty Measures of the Revenue Act is to be Established, and the Rights and Liberties of Americans forever Sapped & destroyed. These appear to Us to be Sacrifices we must make, and these the costly Pledges that must be given Up into the hands of the Oppressor. The moment we receive this detested Article, the Tribute will be established upon Us . . . Once admit this subtle, wicked Ministerial Plan to take place, once permit this Tea . . . to be landed, received and vended . . . the Badge of our slavery is fixed, the Foundation of ruin is surely laid."

The committee also issued six resolves pledging to preserve and protect the constitutional rights that Parliament had put into jeopardy, to boycott any teas "sent out by the East India Company, or that shall be imported subject to a duty imposed by Act of Parliament," to treat as enemies anyone found aiding in the landing, selling or using of tea from the East India Company, and to treat the merchants of the East India Company with contempt. Finally, the town expressed its gratitude to Boston for its undertaking in the name of liberty and pledged

"We are ready and resolved to concur with them in every rationale Measure that may be Necessary for the Preservation or Recovery of our Rights and Liberties as Englishmen and Christians; and we trust in God That, should the State of Our Affairs require it, We shall be ready to Sacrifice our Estates and everything dear in Life, Yea and Life itself, in support of the common Cause."

Upon completion, the Town of Lexington unanimously adopted the resolutions. Immediately afterward, an additional resolve was passed, warning the residents "That if any Head of a Family in this Town, or any Person, shall from this time forward; & until the Duty taken off, purchase any Tea, Use or consume any Tea in their Famelies [sic], such person shall be looked upon as an Enemy to this town & to this Country, and shall by this Town be treated with Neglect & Contempt."


That evening, the residents of Lexington gathered all tea supplies and burned them. According to the December 16, 1773 edition of the Massachusetts Spy "We are positively informed that the patriotic inhabitants of Lexington unanimously resolved against against the use of Bohea tea of all sorts, Dutch or English importation; and to manifest the sincerity of their resolution, they brought together every ounce contained in the town, and committed it to one common bonfire."



The resolves of Lexington reflected the general political mood throughout the American colonies on the eve of the revolution. Many colonists believed a set of corrupt and mysterious men had been able to assert control over George the Third, his ministers, and his favorites through bribery and deceit. Most Americans were certain that powerful men were plotting to make the colonists slaves by curtailing their liberties as Englishmen.

The common belief emerged that an immoral British government, having exhausted opportunities for plunder and profit in England and Ireland, was now seeking a dispute with the American colonies as an excuse to enslave and deprive them of their wealth and liberties. Parliament had hoped to accomplish this goal quietly, but the furor aroused in the colonies by England’s economic policies had given the government a temporary setback. Now, these mysterious men, who controlled Parliament and the king’s ministers, were undertaking to openly incite a war, declare American rebels, and enslave them. As early as 1772, Lexington was expressing apprehension that "[Our] Charter Rights & Liberties are in danger, are infringed and upon a most careful, Serious & mature Consideration of them . . . and are comparing them with Acts of the British Parliament, & Measures adopted by the British Court, Ministry & Government . . .some of which have been carried into Execution amongst us, We are clearly of opinion that . . . the Plan of Oppression is begun, & so far carried on that, if our Enemies are still Successful, and no Means can be found to put a Stop to their Career, . . . we have just Reason to fear That the Eyes of the Head of Government being blinded, the Sources of Justice poisoned and Hands of administration bribed with interest, the system of slavery will soon be complete."

The colonists' concerns and fears, evident in letters, journals, and diaries of the period, increased following the Boston Tea Party.

That action was viewed in England as so rebellious an act of defiance that it could not be ignored. As a result, the English Parliament adopted several harsh and restrictive measures aimed at punishing Massachusetts, but particularly Boston. On March 31, 1774, King George the Third signed the Boston Port Bill, intended to reprimand rebellious Boston severely. The port was closed to all seagoing traffic until damages for the destroyed tea were paid in full. The Massachusetts Provincial Charter of 1691, which residents viewed as a sacred guarantee of their liberties, was revoked. Additional regiments of regulars were dispatched to Boston and Major General Thomas Gage replaced Thomas Hutchinson as governor. Gage moved the seat of government from Boston to Salem and the customs office from Boston to Plymouth. The Governor’s Council was replaced with a non-elective Mandamus Council, town meetings were prohibited without the consent of the governor and jury trials were abolished.



To the citizens of Massachusetts, it was clear that the British government had thrown down the gauntlet. The passage of these “Intolerable Acts,” as they became known, was seen as the most blatant of England's attempts to provoke a war with her American colonies. Throughout the colonies, committees of correspondence toiled to spread this message and increase opposition to Parliament. Towns adopted covenants asserting their opposition to the British attempt to crush their rights, while Middlesex and Essex counties ordered its courts to refrain from conducting business.

On September 26, 1774, Lexington voted to form committees whose responsibilities were “to bring two pieces of cannon from Watertown and mount them, to provide a pair of drums for the use of the military company in town . . . [and] to have the militia and alarm list meet for a view of their arms.” On October 5, 1774, Lexington’s Deacon Stone was in Salem along with his fellow representatives to the General Court. There, when General Gage acted to adjourn the General Court arbitrarily, the representatives voted to make the Massachusetts Provincial Congress the governing body of the colony “to promote the true interests of his Majesty, in the peace, welfare and prosperity of the Province.”

Any hope of avoiding a civil war now seemed dashed.

In Boston, Hugh Earl Percy correctly surmised the state of affairs in Massachusetts on the eve of the American Revolution. “Things here are now drawing to a crisis every day. The people here openly oppose the New Acts. They have taken up arms in almost every part of this Province, & have drove in the Gov’t & most of the Council . . . A few days ago, they mustered about 7,000 men at Worcester . . . In short, this country is now in an open state of rebellion.”






No comments:

Post a Comment