Knollenberg Bernhard. Growth of the American Revolution: 1766-1775
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
Mag. for Jan., XL . No successor was appointed until , Beatson Pol. In-
dex I . “Lord Granby” was a courtesy title accorded John Manners, a com-
moner, as eldest son of the Duke of Rutland.
As to the vitriolic attacks on the Duke of Grafton by “Junius” in letters to the Lon-
don Public Advertiser from Jan. to Dec. , , Wade Junius I –. At least
forty-seven people have been suggested as the author of the famous letter of
Junius, Pargellis Bibliography . See also Cordasco Junius Bibliography. The evidence
marshaled and examined in Leslie Stephens’ biography of Philip Francis in D.N.B.
points to Francis as the probable author.
Grafton resigned Jan. , , Gentleman’s Mag. for Feb., XL . For various
contemporary surmises as to the reason or reasons for his resignation, same ;
Horace Walpole to Sir Horace Mann Jan. , Toynbee Walpole VII –; and
William S. Johnson to Gov. Jonathan Trumbull of Conn. Feb. , Trumbull .
Lord North succeeded Grafton as First Lord of the Treasury Jan. , , Gentle-
man’s Mag. for Feb., XL .
My description of North’s political career before is drawn from Valentine
North I – and Lucas Lord North I –, the sketch of his life in D.N.B., and
the sketch in Namier and Brooke Commons II –.
William S. Johnson to Gov. William Pitkin concerning North, Nov. , , Trum-
bull .
North is listed among those voting in against repeal of the Stamp Act, List of
Voters in Commons against Repeal .
Johnson to Trumbull Feb. , , reporting that North, “now at the head of all
affairs,” said the Ministry would move for repeal of the duties on paper, glass, and
paint, Trumbull –. To same effect, Thomas Pownall to Samuel Cooper Jan.
, , Griffin Junius –. North stated in the House of Commons May
that he was “the only man” in the re-formed Cabinet who was “decidedly for the
repeal,” i.e., partial repeal of the Townshend Act, as promised in , Cavendish
Debates II .
North’s presentation to the House of Commons March , , of the petition
from London merchants and traders described in the text, Journals H. of C. XXXII
–. Benjamin Franklin wrote Charles Thomson March , “The merchants
here [London] were at length prevailed on to present a petition,” but “The man-
ufacturing towns absolutely refused to move at all...,” Smyth Franklin V .
(The addressee is identified in Crane Franklin’s Letters to Press .)
North’s motion March , , for leave to bring in a bill for partial repeal of the
Townshend Act, Parl. Hist. XV –. The present plan for partial repeal
differed from the one adopted by the Cabinet in only in that the earlier plan
contemplated repeal of the duties on foreign, as well as British-made, paper, glass,
and paint.
British policy of encouraging the export of British manufactures was manifested
not only by refraining from levying export taxes on articles of British manufac-
ture, but by offering bounties or the refund of British excise duties on a number of
such articles including sailcloth, spirits, silk, gunpowder, linen, candles, starch,
hides, boots, shoes, and gloves, Saxby The British Customs () –, with sub-
sequent acts extending the bounties listed in Saxby as soon to expire.
Franklin wrote Samuel Cooper on June , , and Joseph Galloway on June that
he had “reason to believe” Lord North favored total repeal, Smyth Franklin V
and Van Doren Franklin’s Writings . But he gave no indication of what reason he
had for this belief, and I have found no evidence supporting Franklin’s supposition.
North’s speech in support of his motion for partial repeal March , , same I
–; Parl. Hist. XVI –, Johnson to Trumbull March , Trumbull –
. The quotation is from Johnson’s letter (p. ). The statements in Schlesinger
Col. Merchants and Van Tyne Causes that the duty on tea was retained “be-
cause the king believed that ‘there must always be one tax to keep up the right’”
is based on a letter from the King written over four years later (Sept. , ), Geo.
III III . I have found no evidence of the King’s having influenced the Ministry’s
decision on the question of repeal in .
Thomas Pownall, popular Governor of Massachusetts from to and
member of the House of Commons from to , Schutz Pownall; Pownall
Pownall; D.A.B.; Namier and Brooke Commons III –; letters to and from him
in Griffin Junius –, A.H.R., VIII –, Bowdoin–Temple Letters –
passim, and M.H.S. Proc. (–) –. His long interest in colonial affairs
can be followed in Knollenberg Origin index entry “Pownall, Thomas,” and in the
many editions of his Administration of the Colonies, discussed in Guttridge “Pownall’s
Administration of the Colonies” and Shy “Pownall.”
As to the East India Company’s curious and apparently vacillating conduct at this
time concerning repeal of the Townshend Act duty on tea, Johnson to Trumbull
Jan. , Feb. , March , and March , , Trumbull –, –, , ,
and Labaree Tea Party –, .
Lord Barrington, member of the House of Commons from to and Sec-
retary at War from to , was an important member of the Ministry, but
was not in the Cabinet. He was an Irish peer and hence, unlike an English or
Scotch peer, was eligible for election to the Commons.
Pownall’s motion March , , for total repeal of the Townshend Act; his, Con-
way’s, and Isaac Barré’s speeches in support of the motion; and the counter-
suggestions of Welbore Ellis and Lord Barrington, Cavendish Debates I –,
–; Parl. Hist. XVI –; Johnson to Trumbull March , Trumbull –
; Edward Montague to Va. Comm. of Corresp. March , Va. Mag. XII ()
–; Charles Garth to S.C. Comm. of Corresp. March , So. Car. Hist. Mag.
XXXI () –.
Pownall’s motion for total repeal defeated March , , to , Cavendish
Debates I ; Parl. Hist. XVI ; Garth to S.C. Comm. of Corresp. March , So.
Car. Hist. Mag. XXXI () . (The statement in Johnson to Trumbull March ,
Trumbull , that the vote was to was erroneous or is a misprint.) The large
vote for total repeal was probably attributable chiefly to the combination of Lord
Rockingham and Chatham’s followers, as to which see Benjamin Franklin to
Charles Thomson March , Smyth Franklin V , with Crane Franklin’s Letters to
Press .
Proceedings in the House of Commons on the bill for partial repeal of the Town-
shend Act March –Apr. , , including passage of the bill on April , Journals
H. of C. XXXII – passim.
The bill was presented to the Lords Apr. , passed the Lords Apr. , and was ap-
proved by the King the next day, Journals H. of L. XXXII , , . The act,
Geo. III ch. (), not only repealed the colonial duties on paper, glass, and
paint manufactured in Great Britain, but restored the drawback (refund) of British
import duties on china exported to the colonies which had been repealed by the
Townshend Act.
N.Y. committee’s circular letter of June , , proposing a meeting at Norwalk,
Conn., to discuss possible revision of the non-importation agreements to apply
only to imports subject to duty under the Townshend Act, New-London Gazette of
June .
Refusal of Philadelphia merchants June , , to consider modification of their
non-importation agreement, Pa. Gazette June ; Jensen Philadelphia , . Simi-
lar action by Boston merchants June , Boston Gazette June ; Andrews “Boston
Merchants” . Conn., R.I., and N.J. merchants also voted not to send delegates
to the proposed meeting at Norwalk to consider modification, Gipson Brit. Empire
XI ; Schlesinger Col. Merchants –.
New York merchants’ decision July , , “to import for the future all kinds of
goods that pays no Duties,” James Beekman to Fludyer, March, and Hudson, July
, White Beekman Papers II . Becker New York states that news of passage of
a British act permitting the N.Y. Legislature to issue paper currency reached N.Y.
“probably late in June” and influenced the decision, citing “New York Col. Doc. VIII
.” The letter printed there does not support this statement. The earliest colo-
nial notice I have found of this news is in the New-York Gazette of July , . As
shown in Mason “Becker” and Klein “Democracy,” many statements in Becker
New York are open to question.
Gen. Thomas Gage to Lord Barrington July , Gage II ; Cadwallader Colden
to Lord Hillsborough July , N.Y. Col. Doc. VIII ; and Alexander Colden to
Anthony Todd July , same –, give the background of the N.Y. merchants’
decision.
Bitter condemnation of N.Y. decision in Albany and in other colonies on receipt
of notification of the decision promptly circulated by the N.Y. merchants,
Schlesinger Col. Merchants –; Andrews “Boston Merchants” –; and
items in the Pa. Gazette, Boston Gazette, South-Carolina Gazette, and Md. Gazette July–
Oct., , excoriating the N.Y. merchants.
Isaac Low, chairman of committee of inspection of N.Y. merchants, to Boston
committee of merchants, headed by Thomas Cushing, Aug. , , justifying
the New Yorkers’ decision, New-York Journal Aug. , reprinted in Stevens Col.
Records Part –. I have not found the Boston letter of protest of July , which
is referred to in same .
Philadelphia merchants vote Sept. , , for modification the same as in N.Y.,
Schleslinger Col. Merchants . Boston merchants follow suit Oct. , same .
Seventy-two were present at the decisive meeting on Oct. , John Rowe’s diary
for Oct. , Rowe , but Rowe does not state how many, if any, voted against the
decision, and I have found no evidence elsewhere on this point. Rowe’s diary
Sept. –Oct. has several entries recording his attendance at meetings of Boston
merchants, but does not state what action was taken, same –.
Baltimore merchants decide early in Oct., , to modify their agreement along
the lines of the revised agreements of N.Y. and Phil. and reaffirm this on Oct. ,
Schlesinger Col. Merchants –.
Modification of S.C. agreement conforming to modification elsewhere Dec. ,
, Gov. William Bull of S.C. to Lord Hillsborough Dec. , McCrady South Car-
olina –. (The statement in Sellers Charleston that “non-importation was
given up except for tea” is inaccurate.)
Though efforts were made to enforce the N.C. non-importation agreement,
Schlesinger Col. Merchants – and Ashe N.C. I , the agreement was ap-
parently not well observed there. Gov. William Tryon of N.C. wrote Hillsborough
Feb. , , “the several ports of this province have been open ever since the re-
peal of the Stamp Act for every kind of British manufactures to the full extent of
the credit of the country,” N.C. Col. Rec. VIII . The little observance of the
agreement in Ga., Coleman Ga. –, –; Historical Statistics .
Modification of the Va. agreement in July, , Va. Gazette (Rind) July , ;
Jensen Founding . The modified agreement conformed to those elsewhere.
(Washington’s letter to William Carey & Co., July , stating that “our Associa-
tion in Virginia for the Non-importation of Goods is now at an end except against
Tea, paper, glass and painters’ Colours of Foreign Manufacture,” Washington III
, is inaccurate: dutied wine imported from Great Britain was still banned.)
The modified Va. agreement of June , , was designed to secure better ob-
servance by, on the one hand, liberalizing the range of articles that could be im-
ported, and on the other hand, providing for the establishment of a committee of
five in every county to inspect invoices of imported goods and publish the names
of any persons found to have violated the agreement, Jefferson I –.
Figures of exports from England to Va. and Md. for indicating continuing
failure of Va. agreement, Historical Statistics . George Mason of Va. wrote an
unidentified correspondent Dec. , , of the “very languishing” of the “non-
importation agreements here,” Rowland Mason , and Nathaniel Savage wrote
John Norton to the same effect Jan. , , Jensen Founding .
John Temple to James Bowdoin Dec. , , as quoted in the text, Bowdoin–
Temple Papers –. Temple believed that Parliament would have repealed the
Townshend Act if the colonists had shown a “little more sincerity & manly firm-
ness,” same . Franklin had written in similar vein March , , predicting
that Parliament would yield if the non-importation agreements were continued
and faithfully observed for “another year,” Smyth Franklin V , identified in
Crane Franklin as having been written to Charles Thomson of Philadelphia.
Ralph Izard to Edward Rutledge Nov. , , as to the breakdown of the non-
importation agreement in having “given wonderful confidence to our ene-
mies” in Great Britain, Izard .
The words tradesmen, mechanics, artisans, artificers, manufacturers, craftsmen all are found
in the colonial press to designate skilled manual laborers, but what selective mean-
ing, if any, each term had is obscure. Bridenbaugh’s classic The Colonial Craftsman,
particularly –, –, –, throws light on the problem. Perhaps craftsman,
the word selected by him, is the best generic term; but tradesman or mechanic seems
to have been the more commonly used in the colonial press in –.
Charleston mechanics and the local non-importation agreement, Walsh
Charleston’s Sons of Liberty –.
Attendance of tradesmen at the meeting in Boston referred to in the text, Boston
Gazette Sept. , .
Opposition of Philadelphia tradesmen (mechanics) in May and June, , to re-
laxation of the local merchants’ non-importation agreement described in the text,
Olton “Philadelphia’s Mechanics” –.
The qualification in the text as to availability of domestic material is necessary be-
cause many of the tradesmen must have suffered from the non-importation agree-
ments through the lack of materials
—for example, silk, thread, and fine woolen
cloth
—not produced in the colonies.
Chapter
Lord Hillsborough, Shelburne’s successor in charge of colonial matters, to Gen.
Thomas Gage June , , enclosing copies of the American Customs Commis-
sioners’ and Governor Francis Bernard’s letters to officials in England as to the
need of troops at Boston and ordering Gage immediately to send forces to Boston,
Gage II –. Statements or implication in Miller Origins and Fisher Struggle
for Independence I – that the Liberty riot of June , , led to the initial send-
ing of troops to Boston are erroneous. This led only to strengthening the garrison
there, Lord Hillsborough to Gage, July , Gage II –.
Gage to Hillsborough Sept. , , reporting the decision to send two regiments
from Halifax to Boston under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel William Dal-
rymple, Gage I , one to be stationed in Boston, the other at Castle William,
Gage to Bernard Sept. , Bowdoin–Temple Papers –. Hillsborough’s letter
was not received by Gage until Sept. , Gage II ; but a duplicate, referred to in
same I , had evidently been received by Aug. , when he ordered his aide-de-
camp to confer with Bernard concerning the troops for Boston, Gage Mss.
Clements Lib.
Bernard to Hillsborough Sept. , , reporting that on Sept. he had let it be
known locally that British troops were ordered to Boston, Letters to Ministry –.
Hillsborough wrote Bernard June that at least one regiment would be sent to
Boston, transcripts of instructions to Provincial Governors VII:– Mass.
Hist. Soc., but this letter apparently did not reach Bernard until Sept. , Bernard
to Hillsborough Sept. , Letters to Ministry .
Talk at Boston of preventing landing of the troops, Bernard to Hillsborough
Sept. , , same ; and evidence cited in Miller “Mass. Convention” –.
Fiery resolves of Boston town meeting. Minutes of meetings Sept. , , Boston
Records (for –) –. The town had asked Bernard Sept. , , to
call a special session of the Mass. Legislature, but Bernard refused to do so, Min-
utes of Boston town meetings Sept. and , same –. Bernard thought that
a letter from Hillsborough to him of Apr. , , implied that unless the Mass.
circular letter (referred to in Chapter ) was rescinded, he was not again to con-
vene the Legislature until instructed to do so, Bernard to Hillsborough Aug. , Let-
ters to Ministry –.
Statement by James Otis, chairman of the town meeting of Sept. , , as to de-
livery of arms, Bernard to Hillsborough Sept. , same –.
Vote of Boston town meeting Sept. , , as to standing army, Boston Records (for
–) .
Vote by Boston town meeting of Sept. , , for its selectmen to call a provin-
cial convention, and choice of Boston’s representatives James Otis, Thomas
Cushing, Samuel Adams, and John Hancock for the convention, same –. A
copy of the selectmen’s circular letter of Sept. to the other towns in the province
inviting them to the proposed convention is in Boston Chronicle Sept. (–)
and M.H.S. Proc. (for –) –.
The Boston Chronicle of Oct. , , reported that committees from towns and
districts attended the convention; the Boston Gazette of Oct. , , said
towns and districts. (Districts were communities not yet having representatives
in the Mass. House of Representatives.) There were about towns represented
at the exceptionally full House of –, Mass. Acts XVIII –.
The convention opened as scheduled on Sept. , , and “sat exactly a week,”
Bernard to Hillsborough Sept. and Oct. , Letters to Ministry , . The con-
vention and its activities, Miller “Mass. Convention ”; Brown Democracy in
Mass. – and, most important, Brown “Mass. Convention of ” –.
The convention’s statements, apparently made near the beginning and end of its
sittings, are in the Boston Chronicle of Sept. and Oct. , (, –). The
convention also addressed a rather plaintive letter to Bernard on Sept. , and
Thomas Cushing, chairman of the convention, wrote a mild letter, dated Sept. ,
to Dennys De Berdt, London Agent for the Mass. House of Representatives, en-
closing a petition to the King, Cushing S. Adams I –.
The troops from Halifax landed at Boston Oct. , , consisted of most of
the Fourteenth and Twenty-ninth regiments under Dalrymple and Lieut. Col.
Maurice Carr, a detachment from the Fifty-ninth and a company of artillery,
Boston Chronicle Oct. and Dec. , , and Gage to Hillsborough May , ,
Gage I . The nominal strength of the Fourteenth and Twenty-ninth was
men each, Journals H. of C. XXXI , but they were evidently much below full
strength, as was characteristic of regiments stationed in America, Shy Tow a rd L e x -
ington .
Bernard to Hillsborough Oct. , , reporting the landing of the troops “not only
without opposition, but with tolerable good humor,” Letters to Ministry . To same
effect, Rev. Andrew Eliot to Thomas Hollis Oct. , , “Eliot Letters” .
Part of the Sixty-fourth and Sixty-fifth Regiments from Ireland reached Boston
on or shortly before Nov. , , Dickerson Boston . The rest of the Sixty-fourth
under Col. John Pomeroy arrived Nov. , Boston Chronicle Nov. , but the trans-
port carrying three companies of the Sixty-fifth, with its commander, Major Gen-
eral Alexander Mackay, did not arrive until Apr. , , Gage I . The full
quota of troops occupying Boston was very formidable considering that its popu-
lation was only about ,, Drake Boston .
Gage wrote Bernard June , , that he had ordered the company of artillery
and the Sixty-fourth and Sixty-fifth Regiments to be sent from Boston to Halifax,
Bernard Papers X , Harv. Coll. Lib. The Sixty-fifth sailed on June , the
Sixty-fourth on July , “Boyle’s Journal” . The detachment from the Fifty-
ninth from Halifax which arrived in Oct., , had been sent back to Halifax in
May, , Gage I .
American Customs Commissioners’ return to Boston without opposition Nov. ,
, Dickerson Boston . As to their subsequent administration and difficulties,
Clark “American Customs Board” –; Clark British Treasury –; Dicker-
son Navigation Acts –; and Dickerson “Commissioners of Customs” –.
Bernard’s request to the Mass. Council Sept. , , to prepare quarters in
Boston for the expected British troops and the Council’s refusal Sept. to do so
on the ground that adequate quarters were available at Castle William on Castle
Island, Bowdoin–Temple Papers – and Bernard to Hillsborough Sept. and
, Letters to Ministry –. As to eventual quartering of the troops, Bernard to
Gage Oct. , Gage Papers Clements Lib. and Gage to Hillsborough Gage I ,
–.
Though within the township (town) of Boston, Castle Island was three miles by
water and, when accessible at low tide, seven by land from the city of Boston, Dr.
Robert Honeyman’s diary for March , , describing his visit to the island
(now a peninsula), Honeyman’s Journal –, and Gage to Hillsborough Oct. ,
, Gage I . For the history of fort Castle William on Castle Island, Shurtleff
Boston, index under “Castle Island” and “Fort William.”
Bernard’s messages to the Mass. House July and , , requesting funds for
the supplies required by the British Quartering Act, and the House’s adverse re-
ply July , Bradford Mass. Papers –.
The reports in the New-York Journal of clashes between British troops and civilians
in Boston from Oct., , through July, , referred to in the text are collected
and reprinted in Dickerson Boston – passim.
The unreliability of the reports from Boston published in the New-York Journal and
the attribution of these reports to William Cooper, Samuel Adams, and others in
Boston are discussed in Schlesinger Prelude –, –. The absolute falsity
or gross exaggeration of the reports of early clashes between the troops and civil-
ians is evidenced by Andrew Eliot to Thomas Hollis, Jan. , , “Eliot Letters”
–, and Richard Cary to an unidentified correspondent, Feb. , that all was
“quiet,” Mass. Papers –.
Michael Corbet, in resisting impressment, harpooned and killed Lieutenant
Henry Panton of H.M. Frigate Rose, April , , Adams Legal Papers –.
The account of John Riley’s knocking down Jonathan Winship, a Cambridge
butcher, in Boston July , , is based on affidavits of Justice of the Peace Ed-
mund Quincy and Peter Barbour, dated July , and an account in the Boston
Evening-Post of Oct. , reprinted in Dickerson Boston –.
Dr. John Loring, a Boston physician, gave an affidavit dated July , , that, on
Winship’s complaining of Riley to Col. Dalrymple, the latter had said, in front of
several soldiers, “You was saucy, they served you right, and I don’t care if they
knock you down again,” Dickerson Boston . To similar effect, affidavit of Ed-
ward Jackson July , same . (This is not characteristic; in general, the higher
officers apparently did their best to prevent collisions.) Further details: Adams Le-
gal Papers II –; Zobel Boston Massacre –, –.
The arrest and fining of Riley and his attack on the constable, Peter Barbour, who
tried (July , ) to take him into custody for refusal to pay the fine are de-
scribed in affidavits of Quincy, Barbour, Jeremiah Belknap, Loring, and Jackson,
dated July , and an undated statement of Stephen Greenleaf, all published in
the Boston Evening-Post of October , and reprinted in Dickerson Boston –.
The soldiers’ side of the affair was presented over a year later in depositions di-
gested in Shy Toward Lexington –.
Zobel Boston Massacre –, – has a full, well-documented account of
James Otis’ clash with John Robinson Sept. , . Several British officers were
present but, so far as is known, did not join in the affray.
Claim by Robert Pierpont, as lessee from the town of Boston of land on Boston
Neck on which the British had built a guard house and stationed a guard of sol-
diers, newspaper report of Nov. , , in Dickerson Boston ; resolution adopted
at a Boston town meeting, Boston Records (for –) ; and Dalrymple to
Gage Sept. , , Gage Papers Clements Lib.
Attack on British detachment under Ensign John Ness Oct. , , including
part played by Captain Ponsonby Molesworth, who took over the command of
the detachment while it was being pelted, and his and Ness’ later legal difficulties,
Zobel Boston Massacre –, . (Some of Zobel’s passages are based on state-
ments of dubious probative value because made long after the event, but his more
important ones are based on contemporary evidence.)
The accounts of the Boston Massacre in the Boston Gazette of March , ,
reprinted in Jensen Hist. Doc. ; the “Case of Thomas Preston,” March ,
same ; and soldiers’ depositions of Aug. and Sept. digested in Shy To w a r d L e x -
ington – and mentioned in Gage to Dalrymple Nov. , Adams New Light
, refer to many squabbles, in the months before the massacre, between the sol-
diers and townspeople
—attributed by Preston to the greater boldness of the lat-
ter after withdrawal of the Sixty-fourth and Sixty-fifth Regiments in the summer
of .
Revised Boston non-importation agreement of Dec. , , described in the text,
Schlesinger Col. Merchants and letters of Thomas Hutchinson to Francis
Bernard and to Thomas Pownall Dec. , cited therein. (On Oct. , a majority of
Boston merchants had provisionally agreed to extend the ban until all British acts
levying duties for revenue on the colonies were repealed, but, on N.Y. and
Philadelphia refusing to go this far, Boston receded, same –.)
The pressure in Dec., , and Jan., , on the Boston holdouts which had
brought some of them, including Gov. Hutchinson’s sons, into line is described in
same –; Boston Gazette and Boston Evening-Post of Jan. and Mass. Gazette of
Jan. ; Rowe’s diary for Jan. , , and , , Rowe –; Samuel Cooper
to Thomas Pownall Jan. , Tuckerman “Cooper Letters” –; Cushing et al.
to Dennys De Berdt Jan. , Mass. Papers –; and Mass. Broadsides .
The final holdouts were four firms of non-natives of the colonies, John Bernard,
James & Patrick McMasters & Co., Anne and Elizabeth Cummins, and John
Mein, and four native Bostonians, Nathaniel Rogers, William Jackson, Theophilus
Lillie, and John Taylor, Drake Boston n.; Greenough New Eng. Almanacs –.
John Rowe’s diary for Jan. , states, “the Lieut. Governor...sent the Sheriff
[Stephen Greenleaf] & ordered them to disperse which they took no notice of,”
Rowe Diary . Lieutenant-Governor Thomas Hutchinson had been Acting
Governor since the departure of Gov. Bernard for England Aug. , , becom-
ing Governor March , , Rowe’s diary for these dates, Rowe , .
Denunciation of holdouts at meeting of Jan. , , Greenough New Eng. Al-
manacs – and Evans Am. Bibliography IV .
The Massachusetts Gazette of January , , published a letter of Lillie, saying: “it
always seemed strange to me that People who contend so much for civil and reli-
gious Liberty should be so ready to deprive others of their natural liberty
—That
Men who are guarding against being subject to Laws which they never gave their
consent [to]...,should at the same time make Laws, and in the most effectual
manner execute them upon me and others, to which laws I am sure I never gave
my consent....I own I had rather be a slave under one Master...than a slave
to a hundred or more....”
The boys’ harassment of Lillie, Thursday, Feb. , , Adams Legal Papers .
Thursday was a customary school holiday, same . Hutchinson wrote Gage Feb.
that the boys had been “set on by Men” to harass Lillie, Mass. Arch. XXVI
, but he does not give the source of this information or suspicion. Lillie’s store
was located “near Mr. Pemberton’s Meeting-house [New Brick Church on pres-
ent Hanover street] North End,” Drake Boston n. William Jackson, another
holdout, also was much harassed, Zobel Boston Massacre –.
Ebenezer Richardson’s being a notorious informer, Hutchinson to Bernard Feb.
, , referring to Richardson, as a person “whose name you must remember
as an informer,” Mass. Arch. XXVI –; also Dickerson “Commissioners of
Customs” –; Boston Gazette, Supplement Feb. , Boston Gazette March ;
William Palfrey to John Wilkes March , Elsey “Wilkes and Palfrey” ; Richard-
son’s petition Jan. , , stating he had given “information of several breeches
of the Acts of Trade,” T::: (P.R.O.) cited in Zobel Boston Massacre n..
The attack on Richardson’s house and his shooting and fatally wounding Christo-
pher Snider and injuring John Gore, Boston Evening Post Feb. , ; Adams Legal
Papers II –. The name of the slain boy is spelled variously Snider, Seider,
and Syder, as, for example, in the contemporary documents quoted in same n.,
, , but Snider is the most usual.
Hutchinson to Commodore Samuel Hood Feb. , , as to the crowd’s threat
to hang Richardson, and his commitment to jail, Mass. Arch. XXVI –. To
similar effect, Hutchinson to Gage Feb. , same XXVI . Death of Snider eight
hours after he was shot, Zobel Boston Massacre n.. Richardson was convicted
of murder in April, , but the court, which thought he was guilty at most of
manslaughter, deferred sentencing him until March , , by which time a par-
don from the King had arrived, and he was discharged and fled, Adams Legal Pa-
pers II –, .
John Adams’ diary entry on or about Feb. , , concerning Snider’s funeral,
Adams Papers I –. John Rowe estimated that , people were in the funeral
procession, Rowe’s diary for Feb. , Rowe .
John Adams’ statement Dec. , , concerning the effect on civilians and British
soldiers in Boston of the report of recent clashes between British soldiers and civil-
ians in New York City, Adams Legal Papers III –. These clashes are described
in the second appendix to this chapter.
The incident on March , , at Gray’s rope-walk, affidavits dated March
–, Short Narrative –, . “Wouldring sticks” or “wolder” sticks are made
of hard wood, generally about
/
to feet in length with a diameter of about
inches in the middle, tapering to about an inch at each rounded end, letter to
the author, July , , from Ralph Weaver, Vice President in Charge of Man-
ufacturing of Plymouth Cordage Company, Plymouth, Mass.
Rumors of preparation for renewal of the fight at the rope-walk, depositions of
John Fisher and three others March –, , Short Narrative –. Capt.
Thomas Preston’s account, March , , Jensen Hist. Doc. . Gage to Hills-
borough Apr. attributes the incident of March directly to the fight at Gray’s
rope-walk, Gage I .
Clashes on night of March , , before the affray at the Customs House, testi-
mony at the trial of soldiers, Kidder Boston Massacre –, –; Boston Gazette
March , , reprinted in Jensen Hist. Doc. –; unpublished depositions of
officers and soldiers, Gay Transcripts of “State Papers” XII – at the Mass.
Hist. Soc.; Fair Account, Appendix –; and Adams Legal Papers III – passim. Ref-
erences to the moonlight, Kidder Boston Massacre , , , . The classic account
of the “Massacre” and ensuing trials, Zobel Boston Massacre –, –.
As to Edward Garrick, a barber’s apprentice, having taunted a British officer,
Captain John Goldfinch, and as to the sentry Hugh White, stationed at the Cus-
toms House, hitting Garrick with the butt of a gun on the night of March , ,
depositions before, and testimony at, the trial of the British soldiers, same , .
An editorial note in Adams Legal Papers III says that the boy’s name was Gerrish.
The testimony at the trial of the soldiers varied greatly as to the size, –, of
the crowd at the Customs House and as to whether or not of boys and youths, Kid-
der Boston Massacre , , –, , , , , , , , , . One
witness testified that some were “in the habits of sailors” Adams Legal Papers III ;
and two others that they had seen a band of twenty or thirty all or most of whom
were “drest in sailors cloaths” or “appeared to be sailors,” a few blocks from the
customs house before the firing, same , .
Garrick denounces White, and the crowd’s threats and throwing things at White,
testimony at the trial of the soldiers, same , –.
Gage wrote Hillsborough April , , that Capt. Preston “detached a Sergent
and twelve Men” and “soon afterwards” followed them, Gage I . But there is
conclusive evidence from various sources that the relief party consisted of seven
men, including a non-commissioned officer, William Wemms, that Wemms was a
corporal, not a sergeant, and that Preston accompanied the party.
Preston’s men marched with fixed bayonets, depositions before trial and testi-
mony at the trial of the soldiers, Kidder Boston Massacre , , , . Their guns
not loaded until after the soldiers arrived at the Customs House, “Case of Thomas
Preston,” Matthews “Preston” , and depositions of Peter Cunningham and
William Wyat March , , Short Narrative , . Cunningham and Wyat swore
they heard the officer in charge of Preston’s party order the men to load, same ,
; Preston said the men loaded without orders from him, Matthews “Preston” .