Knollenberg Bernhard. Growth of the American Revolution: 1766-1775
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
As to the other alleged British atrocities, the depositions gathered by the
Second Massachusetts Congress cited only the following: Two old, unarmed
men were stabbed and clubbed to death²³ and one woman in bed with a very
young infant was forced to leave the house with her infant for fear of being
burned to death when the house was set on fire.²⁴ There is no evidence in the
depositions of any children being killed, wounded, or molested. Moreover,
even the adults mentioned—the two unarmed old men and the woman in child
bed—may have been in houses from which the Americans had fired.²⁵
The truth seems to be that, though guilty of much plundering, the British
troops otherwise behaved with remarkable restraint.
:
NOTES
Introduction
The colonial uprising of – is described in many books, including Knol-
lenberg Origin –, –, Morgan Stamp Act –, and Maier Resistance
–.
This act was Geo. III ch. , Pickering Statutes XXVII . (Unless otherwise
stated, my source for all acts of Parliament cited or quoted is Pickering Statutes.) John
Adams wrote in his diary for Dec. , , that this act made “People, even to the
lowest Ranks,...more attentive to their Liberties, more inquisitive about them
and more determined to defend them than...ever before,” Adams Papers I .
The subsequent history of the other disturbing measures is given in the first ap-
pendix to this chapter or will appear in later chapters of this book.
This act was Geo. III ch. (). It remained intact until amended in effect by
the Renunciation Act of , Geo. III ch. , declaring that henceforth Par-
liament would not impose any tax or duty on the American colonies except for
regulation of commerce.
The undocumented statements here and later in this chapter are documented in
later chapters of this book.
My estimate of British voters is based on data in Namier and Brooke Commons I
–, and of British population on sources cited in Knollenberg Origin n.
Evidence of the King’s support of British taxation of the colonies: George III’s
memorandum of March, , Bute –, and letters and memorandum of the
King from to cited in later chapters.
Franklin to Charles Thomson March , , Smyth Franklin V . (Thomson as
addressee is identified in Crane Franklin’s Letters to Press .)
I discuss colonial Whigs and Tories (Loyalists) before and during the Revolution-
ary War in the second appendix to this chapter. Suffice to say here that I classify
as Whigs in the period before the war the colonists who denied the right of Par-
liament to pass acts taxing the colonies and, when colonial petitions for repeal of
the tax acts failed, favored putting commercial pressure on Parliament to secure
repeal.
Conn. Colonial Records XII , –.
Gov. Thomas Fitch to Jackson Dec. , , Fitch II –.
The Petition or Address is published in Bowdoin-Temple Papers –. The circum-
stances of its adoption Nov. , , are described in Knollenberg Origin –
, .
Thomas Cushing, Speaker, to Jasper Mauduit, London Agent, Nov. , ,
Mauduit .
Knollenberg Origin –, , , –, , , –, ; and Mor-
gan Stamp Act passim.
Franklin XIII – at ; –.
Circular instruction of the Crown to colonial Governors, May , , with sub-
sequent modifications, Labaree Instructions I –.
P. . The accuracy of these figures even as rough estimates has been questioned;
but I have found no reason to doubt that they correctly reflect the relative popu-
lation of the several colonies or that the total of around million whites and blacks
in given in the table is roughly correct.
The outline in this chapter deals exclusively with irritants affecting, directly or in-
directly, all thirteen colonies; additional irritants affecting only one or a few colo-
nies are discussed in subsequent chapters or appendixes.
Franklin to William Franklin March , , quoting what he had recently said
to Lord Hyde, Smyth Franklin VI –.
Instruction from the Crown in and subsequent years, Labaree Instructions I
–.
Franklin to William Franklin March , , quoting what he had recently said
to Lord Hyde, Smyth Franklin VI .
Wolfe to Lord George Sackville (later, Germain) May and Aug. , , Willson
Wolfe , .
Percy to Northumberland July , , Pe rcy –.
Grant in the Commons Feb. , , Force I . As to Grant and his important
role in both the French and Indian War and the American Revolution, Grant
James Grant, passim.
Sandwich in the Lords March , , Force I . Though the Duke of Rich-
mond and several other English friends of the colonists predicted they would put
up a stiff fight, I have found no evidence that any member of the Cabinet thought
so, until after word of the Battle of Bunker Hill reached London.
To Lord North Feb. , , Geo. III III . Further evidence of British contempt
of colonial troops and the probable explanation for this are given in Chapter .
Had war been averted at this time, might Great Britain and its North American
colonies eventually have reached a settlement without war? I think not. I believe
Parliament might at some point have relinquished colonial taxation for revenue,
but not restriction of colonial trade, which would have become increasingly vex-
ing as the colonists in North America increased in population, wealth, and a sense
of self-reliance and destiny. But who can say?
Chapter
The Stamp Act, Geo. III ch. (), is published in full in Pickering Statutes
XXVI – and, with important omissions, in Macdonald Documentary Source
Book –, Morgan Prologue –, and other collections of documents relating
to the American Revolution.
Evidence collected in Knollenberg Origin – indicates that George III’s ill-
ness at the time of the passage of the Stamp Act was pleurisy or another respira-
tory illness, not as generally stated, insanity. (Macalpin and Hunter “The ‘Insan-
ity’ of George III” conclude that the King’s illness was porphyria.)
Passage of the Stamp Act and its nullification in the colonies, Knollenberg Origin
– and Morgan Stamp Act –.
The Stamp Act Congress of Oct. –, , Niles Principles –; Morgan
Stamp Act –.
The colonial merchants’ movement including non-importation agreements to put
pressure on British commercial interests to secure repeal of the Stamp Act,
Schlesinger Col. Merchants –; Andrews “Boston Merchants” –; Baxter
Hancock . The N.Y. merchants’ non-importation agreement, Oct. , , is in
Jensen Eng. Hist. Doc. –.
George Grenville’s statement on enforcement of the Stamp Act July , ,
Grenville III –. In a similar vein, Grenville moved in the House of Commons
Dec. to add to a proposed Address to the King words to express the House’s in-
dignation over the “Insurrections” in North America and “assure His Majesty
that his faithful Commons...will firmly and effectively support...Measures...
for enforcing...Obedience to the Laws....”
Sketch of Lord Rockingham’s career to , Guttridge Rockingham –.
Three years earlier, in a talk with Cumberland, Newcastle had mentioned his
age as an objection to his heading a new Ministry, Newcastle’s memorandum of
Oct. , , covering a recent talk with Cumberland, Namier England . He had
also at that time told his friend the Duke of Devonshire that if he was to have
office again he would prefer “the Privy Seal,” Newcastle’s memorandum of
Aug. , , covering a recent talk with Devonshire. The latter, rather than Rock-
ingham, might well have been chosen head of the new Ministry if he had been liv-
ing and in good health, but, after a long illness, he had died in October, .
As to the new Ministry’s hope of securing Pitt’s support, Newcastle to White,
June , , Newcastle , Duke of Grafton to Pitt Aug. , , Grafton .
Pitt had had a bitter political dispute with Newcastle in and was later
offended with him on other grounds. As to the dispute in , sources cited in
Knollenberg Origin ; as to later grounds of offense or supposed offense, Pitt to
Newcastle Oct. , , Pitt II ; Newcastle to White June , , Add. Mss
:–; and Pitt to Newcastle Oct. (no day) , Pitt II .
Sketch of Henry S. Conway in D.N.B. A biography of him is much needed. As to
his Leadership in the House of Commons, Conway to Lord Hertford Nov. , ,
speaking as “Leader of the Commons,” Lewis Coll.; correspondence between
Conway and the King Dec. , , to June , , Geo. III I – passim. As
to the responsibility of the Secretary of State for the Southern Department for co-
lonial affairs, Knollenberg Origin .
Conway’s opposition to the proposed stamp tax, speech of Feb. , , Jared
Ingersoll to Gov. Thomas Fitch of Conn. March , Fitch II ; Boston Gazette
June ; Maryland Gazette June ; Georgia Gazette Aug. .
I assume that the persons named were of the Cabinet because their offices cus-
tomarily carried Cabinet rank, but a letter of Newcastle to White Dec. , , in-
dicates that Winchilsea was not included in the Cabinet at that time, Newcastle .
William Dowdeswell, Chancellor of the Exchequer, Charles Yorke, the Attorney-
General, and Charles Townshend, Paymaster-General, were important members
of the Ministry, Guttridge Rockingham –, but I have found no evidence of their
having been members of the Cabinet in the Rockingham Ministry.
Grafton later said that Cumberland “was present at all our Council’s” Grafton .
Contemporary evidence of his participation: Rockingham to Newcastle July ,
, “R.R.H. [His Royal Highness] will come up for Monday’s Conciliabulum,”
Add. Mss. :; Cabinet meetings to be held at his house, Aug. and ,
same : and ; Rockingham to Cumberland Oct. , asking for his “di-
rections,” Rockingham I ; and Augustus Hervey to Grenville Nov. , stating that
Cumberland was to have attended a “Council...about American affairs” the
night he died, Grenville III .
Conway’s pacific letter of Oct. , , to Gov. Francis Bernard of Mass. con-
cerning calling for military aid, Barrington–Bernard Corresp. –, and the similar
circular letter to Governors other than Bernard, e.g., Conway to Gov. Fitch of
Conn. Oct. , Fitch II –. On the same day Conway wrote Gen. Thomas
Gage and Admiral Lord Colville, commanding the British land and naval forces
in North America, in a similarly pacific strain, Gage II ; Barrington–Bernard
Corresp. .
Decision at meeting of the Privy Council Committee on Plantation Affairs
Oct. , , foreshadowing the tenor of Conway’s letter of Oct. , P.C. ::
(P.R.O.) digested in Acts P.C. IV . As to Grantham (Thomas Robinson) and
his relations with Newcastle, D.N.B. Newcastle to Rockingham Oct. , regret-
ting his, Newcastle’s, inability to attend “our” meeting tomorrow night, the ob-
ject of which he supposed was “upon the American Disputes,” presumably refers
to a Cabinet meeting. I have found no evidence of what occurred there.
George Cooke to Pitt Dec. , , concerning Newcastle’s statement as to the
Ministry’s disposition favorable to the colonists concerning the Stamp Act, Pitt II
–. The King, too, at this time favored a conciliatory policy toward the col-
onies, as appears from a letter of his to Conway, Dec. , , stating that dealing
with the colonial opposition to the stamp tax “requires more deliberation, can-
dour [charity] and temper [good temper] than I fear it will meet with,” Rocking-
ham I –.
Pitt to Cooke, Dec. , , rejecting Newcastle’s overture and refusing to disclose
his position as to repeal of the Stamp Act, Pitt II .
As to the Ministry’s perplexity caused by news of the outbreak at New York, New-
castle to Rockingham Dec. , , George Onslow to Newcastle Dec. , and
Rockingham to Newcastle Dec. , Add. Mss. : , , and ; William
Bollan to Hutchinson Dec. , Mass. Arch. XXV –a; Charles Garth to S.C.
Comm. of Corresp. Dec. , Garth Papers, S.C. Hist. Soc.
Letters of Gen. Gage of Nov. and , , reporting the outbreak in New York
City from Oct. to Nov. , were received Dec. and , Gage I , .
Lord Northington to the King Dec. , , concerning the discussion of what to
do about the Stamp Act at a meeting which he considered to be a Cabinet meet-
ing the night before, Geo. III I –. Northington was in favor of enforcement,
the others “seemed to be” against, same .
The King’s speech and the proposed noncommittal replies of the two Houses of
Parliament, Dec. , , Journals H. of C. XXX . (The King’s speeches and
the Houses’ replies were known to be prepared by, and reflective of, the policy of
the Cabinet.)
Grenville’s motion Dec. , , to amend the proposed Commons’ reply to the
King’s speech, same –. The fact that Grenville proposed the amendment is
stated in Conway to the King Dec. , Geo. III I –.
Discussion and withdrawal of Grenville’s motion, same.
Motion by Lord Suffolk in the House of Lords Dec. , , and its support by
the Duke of Bedford and his supporters, including Lords Gower and Sandwich,
Hugh Hamersley to Gov. Horatio Sharpe of Md. Dec. , Sharpe III ; Rock-
ingham to the King Dec. Geo. III I , with Namier Additions ; and Journals
H. of L. XXXI . Grafton, Lord Dartmouth, President of the Board of Trade,
and Lord Shelburne, a follower of Pitt, spoke against the amendment, Hamersley
to Sharpe Dec. , Sharpe III , Rockingham to the King Dec. , George III I ,
and Shelburne to Pitt, Pitt II –.
Suffolk’s motion defeated to , Rockingham to the King Dec. , , Geo. III
I , with Namier Additions .
Northington’s statement in the House of Lords Dec. , , Hamersley to
Sharpe Sharpe III , .
Charles Townshend’s statement in the House of Commons on Dec. , ,
Hamersley to Sharpe Dec. , same , and Cooke to Pitt Dec. , Pitt II .
Newcastle to Rockingham Jan. , , concerning the meeting of Rockingham,
Lord Egmont, and others on Dec. , Add. Mss. : –. Newcastle’s words
were “the last, or the Two last, I hear, were strongly objected to by Lord Egmont
and Mr. Conway.”
Rockingham to Newcastle Jan. , , as to attendees and developments at a re-
cent political dinner, same –.
As to the Declaratory Act relating to Ireland, Geo. I ch. (), Knollenberg
Origin, , , –.
As to the proposed amendment, Benjamin Franklin stated in an undated memo-
randum that the proposal was to restrict the stamp tax “to a stamp on commis-
sions for profitable offices and on cards and dice,” Smyth Franklin X , but I have
found no confirmation of this. As to suspension, Franklin had suggested to Dart-
mouth Nov. , , “to suspend the execution of the act for a term of years...,
then drop it on some decent pretence,” Franklin to William Franklin Nov. , Niles
Principles .
Rockingham to Newcastle Jan. , , as to division in the Ministry and sending
Thomas Townshend to talk with Pitt, Add. Mss. : –. Though Rocking-
ham mentioned only Charles Yorke and Lord Northington as initially opposed to
repeal, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, William Dowdeswell, was also reputed
to have favored modification rather than repeal, Harris “Debates,” quoted in
Namier and Brooke Commons II .
Newcastle’s reply to Rockingham Jan. , , favoring repeal on commercial
grounds and deprecating the proposed Declaratory Act, Add. Mss. : . To
same effect, Newcastle to John White June , Newcastle . Newcastle had writ-
ten Rockingham in a somewhat similar vein in a letter of Oct. , , stating “I
see...very little Effect by supporting the Execution of the last act of parliament
for laying on the Stamp Duty, by force...,” Rockingham Papers.
Thomas Townshend’s unsuccessful mission to Pitt, Pitt’s terms, Newcastle’s offer
to resign, and the King’s refusal to treat with Pitt on his terms, Newcastle to John
Page, Jan. , , Add. Mss. : ; the King to Northington Jan. , Geo. III I
–; the King to Lord Bute [ Jan. ] Bute .
The King’s Address and the proposed replies of Jan. , , Parl. Hist. XVI
–.
Speech in House of Commons Jan. , , of Robert Nugent (created Viscount
Clare and Baron Nugent in and Earl Nugent in ), supporting colonial
taxation by Parliament.
Pitt’s reply Jan. , , to Nugent, Parl. Hist. XVI –. It is not entirely clear
from this and other reports of Pitt’s speeches on Jan. precisely where he stood
on the issue of British taxation of the colonies. Apparently he maintained that Par-
liament had no right to levy any kind of tax for revenue on the colonies, but that
duties imposed for the regulation of trade were not taxes and that Parliament had
the right to impose such duties on the colonies.
Grenville’s speech of Jan. , , in favor of the Stamp Act and Pitt’s reply, same
XVI –. Other accounts of Pitt’s speeches on Jan. , Williams Pitt II ;
Garth to S.C. Comm. of Corresp. Jan. , So. Car. Hist. Mag. XXVI () –;
Lord George Sackville to Gen. John Irwin, Jan. , , Stopford I ; Franklin
undated report, Smyth Franklin IV –.
Rockingham to the King Jan. , , as to Pitt’s “amazing power and influence,”
Rockingham I .
Rockingham to Charles Yorke as to the decision to propose repeal of the Stamp
Act and an accompanying Declaratory Act, Add. Mss. : . This letter is
dated “Sunday night, near o’clock, January th ,” but, as pointed out in
Namier & Brooke Townshend , “Sunday” was the th not the th and the let-
ter presumably was written early in the morning of Jan. . The quotation from
the letter in same – is inaccurate but substantially correct.
The proposed resolution (undated) for a Declaratory Act quoted in the text, Rock-
ingham I .
Rockingham to Yorke Jan. , , concerning Yorke’s suggested change quoted
in the text, same . Yorke’s suggestion probably was intended to counteract Pitt’s
statement in the House of Commons Jan. , , that “Taxation is no part of the
governing or legislative power,” Parl. Hist. XVI . A second postscript in Yorke’s
reply, Jan. , to Rockingham’s letter indicates that he still thought his proposed
change in wording on this point should be adopted, Rockingham Papers. (The
partial quotation from this letter in Rockingham I is garbled and misleading.)
Rockingham’s objection to Yorke’s proposed change in wording of the proposed
Declaratory Act, Rockingham to Yorke, same . I suppose an important reason
for Rockingham’s objection was fear that the mention specifically of taxation
would offend Pitt. This is unquestionably true of Rockingham’s objection to a
suggestion by Yorke that the word “undoubted” be inserted before the word
“right” in another of the proposed resolutions, same .
The act as passed differed from the resolution only in dropping the word “a” before
“right” and inserting “Subjects of the Crown of Great Britain” after “America.”
The King’s preference for modification, rather than repeal, of the Stamp Act is
discussed in Chapter . I have found no evidence as to the kind and extent of mod-
ification he had in mind.
The King’s intention to support the Ministry’s plan is indicated in a letter from
him to Rockingham, Jan. , , stating “Talbot is as right as I can desire on the
Stamp Act; strong for our declaring our right but willing to repeal...,” Geo. III I
. “Talbot” was Lord Talbot (William Earl Talbot), Steward of the royal house-
hold. (Talbot later voted against the resolution for repeal, giving as his reason that
“he must in conscience be against repeal,” Newcastle to White in a letter begun
Feb. , Newcastle .)
Chapter
Presentation to the House of Commons Jan. , , by George Cooke, a follower
of William Pitt, of the Stamp Act Congress’ petition, Journals H. of C. XXX –
, with Lord George Sackville to Gen. John Irwin Jan. , Stopford I –. A
memorial of the Congress to the Lords was withheld because “nothing of that Sort
can be presented to them but under the designation of an Humble Petition,”
Joseph Sherwood to Gov. Samuel Ward of R.I. March , Kimball R.I. II ;
Dennys De Berdt to Samuel White Feb. , , Matthews “De Berdt” .
Pitt’s speech in support of the petition and its rejection, Sackville to Irwin, Jan. ,
, Stopford I –; Henry S. Conway to the King Jan. , Geo. III I ;
Charles Garth to Md. Comm. of Corresp. Feb. and March , Md. Hist. Mag. VI
() –; Lord Hardwicke to Charles Yorke Jan. , Rockingham I ;
William Rouet to Baron Mure Caldwell Part , II .
The proposed declaratory resolution Feb. , , Rockingham I . It is not in the
journals of the Houses of this date because their proceedings when sitting in com-
mittee were not officially recorded. The Duke of Grafton introduced the proposed
resolution in the Lords, Lord Rockingham to the King Feb. , same , and Con-
way in the Commons, Garth to S.C. Comm. of Corresp. Feb. , So. Car. Hist. Mag.
XXVI () . (Namier and Brooke Commons II – has a sketch of Charles
Garth, who was a member of Parliament, as well as London Agent for the S.C.
Commons House.)
Lord Camden’s speech Feb. (misdated Feb. ), , against the resolution for
a Declaratory Act on the ground that the authority of Parliament was subject to
constitutional limitations, Parl. Hist. XVI . However, Camden later said that
since Parliament had declared its unlimited authority to legislate for the colonies,
“he did not think himself, or any man else, at liberty to call it in question,” William
S. Johnson to Roger Sherman Sept. , , quoting Camden, Quincy Reports
–.
Lord Chancellor Northington’s statement that “Every government can arbi-
trarily impose laws on all its subjects ...,” Parl. Hist. XVI , put in a nutshell
the view voiced by all those opposing Camden’s position. This doctrine had been
recently popularized by another distinguished member of Parliament in ,
William Blackstone, whose Commentaries (I ) asserted, “So long therefore as the
English constitution lasts, we may venture to affirm that the power of parliament
is absolute and without control.”
Debate and vote in Lords Feb. , , on the proposed declaratory resolution,
Rockingham to the King Feb. , and Grafton to the King Feb. , Geo. III I ,
; report of the debate (misdated Feb. ), Parl. Hist. XVI –; Rouet to
Mure Feb. , Caldwell Part II –; Hugh Hamersley to Gov. Horatio Sharpe
of Md. Feb. , Sharpe III –; Philip Francis to a “Mr. Allen” Feb. , Francis
Letters I –.
The names of the five lords voting against the resolution for the Declaratory Act,
Rockingham to the King, Feb. , , Geo. III I . All were attached directly,
or through Shelburne, to Pitt. Cornwallis was the Cornwallis who surrendered
at Yorktown in . Shelburne, Earl of Shelburne in the Irish peerage, and
Baron Wycombe in the English, was customarily referred to by his higher title, but
in the journals of the British House of Lords was designated by his lower title,
Wycombe.
Conway, in debates on the Stamp Act in , had denied Parliament’s authority
to tax the colonies, Knollenberg Origin , . He now conceded this authority,
but held it should be exercised “in the most extraordinary cases only,” Garth to
S.C. Comm. of Corresp. Feb. , , So. Car. Hist. Mag. XXVI () .
The debates in the Commons Feb. , , on the proposed declaratory resolu-
tion, Conway to the King Feb. , , Geo. III I –; Rouet to Mure Feb. ,
Caldwell Part II ; Grey Cooper’s notes, A.H.R. XVII () –; Nathaniel
Ryder’s notes for Feb. , Gipson “The Great Debate” –; Garth to S.C.
Comm. of Corresp. Feb. , So. Car. Hist. Mag. XXVI () –. Namier and
Brooke Commons has sketches of Isaac Barré, William Beckford, and James
Hewett. Edmund Burke apparently hedged, questioning the wisdom of the bill,
but voting for it, Burke I –, n.
Barré’s motion seconded by Pitt Feb. , , to amend the proposed declaratory
resolution by striking out the words “in all cases whatsoever,” Garth to S.C.
Comm. of Corresp. Feb. , , So. Car. Hist. Mag. XXV () ; Grey Cooper’s
notes for Feb. , A.H.R. XVII () , –; Conway to the King Feb. , Geo.
III I .
Defeat of Barré’s motion and adoption of the proposed declaratory resolution
without a division, Rouet to Mure Feb. , , Caldwell Part II ; Conway to
the King Feb. , Geo. III I . Conway supposed there would not have been as
many as four votes against the resolution if there had been a division. Garth wrote
the S.C. Comm. of Corresp. Feb. , “I believe from the Sound there were not