stamp act—its effects in america—virginia leads the opposition to it—riots and destruction of property in boston—petitions against the stamp act in england—rejoicings at its repeal in england and america—the declaratory act.

the intensity of the flame of colonial dissatisfaction, and which caused it to burst forth into a conflagration of complaint and resistance in all the colonies, was the announcement of a measure to raise a revenue in the colonies, by act of parliament, on the very day, march 10th, 1764, that the bills which bore so hard on the trade currency of the colonies were passed. mr. grenville, chancellor of the exchequer, introduced sundry resolutions relative to the imposition of stamp duty in america. these resolutions affirmed the right, the equity, the policy, and even the necessity of taxing the colonies.

"the resolutions were not followed this year by any bill, being only to be held out as an intention for next year. they were proposed and agreed to, in a thin house, late at night, and just at the rising, without any debate." a year from that date, march 10th, 1765, mr. grenville introduced his long-expected measure for raising a revenue in the colonies by a duty on stamps—a measure prepared by fifty-five resolutions (in committee of ways and means), on which were based the provisions of the stamp act, which provided among other things that a tax should be paid on all newspapers, all law papers, all ships' papers, property transfers, college diplomas, and marriage licenses. a fine of ￡10 was imposed for each non-compliance with the act, the enforcement of which was not left to the ordinary courts and juries, but to courts of [pg 285]admiralty without juries, the officers of which were appointed by the crown, and paid fees out of the fines which they imposed—the informer receiving one-half. the year's notice[267] of this bill had given the opportunity of discussing the merits of it on both sides of the atlantic. the king, at the opening of the session, had presented the colonial question as one of "obedience to the laws and respect for the legislative authority of the kingdom;" and the lords and commons, in reply, declared their intention to pursue every plan calculated for the public advantage, and to proceed therein "with that temper and firmness which will best conciliate and ensure due submission to the laws and reverence for the legislative authority of great britain." as it was a money bill, no petitions were allowed to be presented to the commons against it. several members spoke against it, of whom general conway and colonel barré were the principal, both of whom had served in america; but the bill was passed by a majority of five to one. in america, the old, loyal church of england colony of virginia led the way in opposition to the bill, the general assembly of burgesses being in session when the news of its having been passed by the british parliament reached america; and the resolutions which that assembly passed covered the whole ground of colonial opposition to the stamp act. the assembly of virginia sent copies of its resolutions to the other colonies, and several of their legislatures adopted the same or similar resolutions. two days after adopting the resolutions, the governor dismissed the legislature and ordered new elections; but at the new elections all who voted for the resolutions were re-elected, and all who opposed them were rejected; so that the newly-elected assembly was even more unanimous against the stamp act than the assembly which had been dismissed. it was said "the fire began in virginia;" "virginia rang the alarm bell;" "virginia gave the signal for the continent." the petition from the assembly of new york was stronger than that from virginia—"so bold that when it reached london no one would present it to parliament." the remonstrance of massachusetts was feebler, it having been modified by the lieutenant-governor, hutchinson, and the governor, barnard. rhode island followed new york and virginia. the legislature of connecticut protested at once against the stamp tax, and sent decided instructions to their agent in london to insist firmly upon their rights of taxation and trial by jury. when the news of these things reached england, and the colonial agents made their remonstrances, it was asked, "will the colonies resist?" that was not believed to be possible even by franklin; but though no physical resistance was thought of in any part of america, yet the opposition to the stamp act became increasingly intense among all classes, from the first announcement of it in may to the prescribed time of its going into operation, the 1st of november; and armed resistance seems to have been viewed as a possible alternative in the future. it was as yet looked upon as a contest between the colonists and the parliament and advisers of the king, and not with the king himself, to whom ardent loyalty was professed and no doubt felt. it was at length proposed that a general congress of representatives of all the colonies should be held to confer on the measures necessary to be taken.

the massachusetts legislature met the latter part of may, and recommended, on the 6th of june, the calling of a congress, to be composed of "committees from the houses of representatives or burgesses in the several colonies," to meet at new york on the first tuesday of october following, there to consult "on the difficulties in which the colonies were and must be placed by the late acts of parliament levying duties and taxes upon them, and to consider of a general and humble address to his majesty and the parliament to implore relief." a circular letter was prepared and sent to the speakers of the legislative assemblies of other colonies; and a committee was chosen for massachusetts. on the 7th of october a congress met at new york, consisting of 28 delegates from the assemblies of massachusetts, rhode island and providence plantations, connecticut, new york, new jersey, pennsylvania, the delaware counties, maryland, and south carolina. the session of this convention or congress lasted three weeks; the members were found to be of one opinion on the principal subjects discussed. a declaration of the rights and grievances of the colonies was agreed to, in which all the privileges of englishmen were claimed as the birthright of the colonists, including the right of being taxed only by their own consent. a petition to the king and memorials to each house of parliament were prepared and adopted. the assemblies of virginia, north carolina, and georgia were prevented by their governors from sending representatives to the congress; but they forwarded petitions to england similar to those adopted by the congress. it is worthy of remark, that, with the exception of boston, the proceedings of the populace, as well as of the conventions and legislative assemblies, against the stamp act, were conducted in a legal and orderly manner, such as to command respect in england as well as in america. but in boston there had always been a mob, which, under the direction and auspices of men behind the scenes, and opposed to british rule in any form, was ready to come forth as opportunity offered in lawless violence against the authority of the crown and its officers. in england, eighty years before, mobs were employed to intimidate the court, lords, and commons in passing the bill of attainder against strafford, and against bishops and episcopacy. the rev. dr. burgess, the most popular puritan minister in london at that time, called them his "band-dogs," to be let loose or restrained as occasion required. such men as the "band-dogs" of boston,[pg 289] who found a good opportunity for the exercise of their vocation during the discussions of the local legislature and public meetings against the stamp act, not content with the harmless acts of patriotism of hanging lord bute and mr. andrew oliver (the proposed distributors of the stamps) in effigy and then making bonfires of them, they levelled mr. oliver's office buildings to the ground, and broke the windows and destroyed most of the furniture of his house. some days afterwards they proceeded to the house of william story, deputy registrar of the court of admiralty, and destroyed his private papers, as well as the records and files of the court. they next entered and purloined the house of benjamin hallowell, jr., comptroller of the customs, and regaled themselves to intoxication with the liquors which they found in his cellar. they then, as mr. hildreth says, "proceeded to the mansion of governor hutchinson, in north square. the lieutenant-governor and his family fled for their lives. the house was completely gutted, and the contents burned in bonfires kindled in the square. along with hutchinson's public and private papers perished many invaluable manuscripts relating to the history of the province, which hutchinson had been thirty years in collecting, and which it was impossible to replace." the universal and intense [pg 291]opposition of all ranks in all the colonies (except a few of the office-holders) was re-echoed and strengthened by opposition and remonstrances from the merchants and manufacturers in england and scotland connected with the american trade. parliament met the 17th december, 1765, when one reason assigned in the[pg 292] royal speech for calling parliament together earlier than usual was the importance of matters which had occurred in america, all papers connected with which would be laid before them. after the christmas recess, the parliament met the 17th of january, 1766, when american affairs were again commended in a speech from the throne as a principal object of parliamentary deliberations. both houses, in their replies to the king, showed that they regarded american affairs in the same important light as his majesty; and for more than two months those affairs constituted the principal subject of parliamentary debate, and the leading topics of conversation among all classes. the application of the commons was unwearied; their sittings continued until after midnight, and sometimes even until morning; the number of petitions they received, the multitude of papers and the witnesses they had to examine, occupied much time, accompanied by continual debates. the authors of the stamp act were now in opposition, and made most strenuous efforts in its justification. the debates turned chiefly on two questions: 1. whether the legislature of great britain had, or had not, a right of taxation over the colonies; 2. whether the late laws, especially the stamp act, were just and expedient. in the ultimate decision of the first question both parties agreed, and the house affirmed, without a division, "that the parliament of great britain had a right to bind the colonies in all cases whatsoever," without any distinction in regard to taxation. as to the second question, parliament decided, after very warm and protracted debates, in favour of the total repeal of the stamp act. accordingly two bills were brought in, pursuant to these resolutions: the one, a declaratory bill, entitled "an act for securing the defence of the american colonies of great britain," and asserting the right of parliament to bind the colonies in all cases whatsoever; the other, for the total repeal of the stamp act.

[colonel barré's celebrated reply to charles townsend, and review of it, on the passing of the stamp act, will be found in appendix a. to this chapter; and lord chancellor camden's opinion, and the great commoner pitt's memorable sayings in the discussion on the repeal of the stamp act, will be found in appendix b.]

the declaratory act, though avowing the absolute power of parliament to bind the colonies in all cases whatsoever, and rescinding, as far as an act of parliament could, all the declarations and resolutions which had been adopted by the colonial assemblies and public meetings against the authority of parliament, attracted very little attention amid the absorbing interest centred in the stamp act, and the universal rejoicings on both sides of the atlantic at its repeal. the declaratory act, as it was called, passed the commons the beginning of february; and on the 18th of the month, after a vehement discussion, closed by the speeches of messrs. grenville and pitt, the house of commons, at three o'clock in the morning, repealed the stamp act by a majority of 275 to 167. the house of lords, after warm and protracted discussions, voted for its repeal by a majority of 100 to 71; and three days afterwards, the 18th of march, the royal assent was given to the act—"an event," says the annual register for 1766, "that caused more universal joy throughout the british dominions than perhaps any other that can be remembered."

"ships in the river thames displayed their colours, and houses were illuminated all over the city. it was no sooner known in america, than the colonists rescinded their resolutions, and recommenced their mercantile intercourse with the mother country. they presented their homespun clothes to the poor, and imported more largely than ever. the churches resounded with thanksgivings; and their public and private rejoicings knew no bounds. by letters, addresses, and other means, almost all the colonies showed unequivocal marks of acknowledgment and gratitude. so sudden a calm after so violent a storm is without a parallel in history. by the judicious sacrifice of one law, great britain procured an acquiescence in all that remained."