Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

hatred of the colonists and lost greatly in the estimation of the people at home. In less than a year's time the stamp act was repealed. But the repeal was accompanied by what was called a "declaratory act," which insisted that Parliament had the power to legislate over the colonies "in, all cases whatsoever." The ministry then in power had insisted upon the passage of this "declaratory act" and that it should. accompany the repeal. This circumstance aroused an unfortunate jealousy and distrust of the English Government throughout the colonies. Well it might arouse distrust, for it was but a menace of further oppression in the future. But the great majority of the colonists were so jubilant over the repeal of the obnoxious law that they overlooked the threat contained in its companion act. Exuberant joy was manifested all over the colonies; statues were erected to the king, Pitt and General Conway; loyal addresses were presented by the different assemblies of the several provinces, to King George. But this satisfaction. was short lived, and events soon showed that an evil genius had full possession of all who at that time were influential in the government of England. Further taxation was attempted to be imposed upon the colonists. Revenue must be raised from America, was the cry. The impelling incident which was the direct cause of the new act was this: Charles Townsend, in the turmoil of affairs in Great Britain, had become Prime Minister, succeeding the Marquis of Rockingham. He was a man of brilliant parts but not of sound judgment nor of the firmness of purpose required in those troublous times. Grenville, the former Premier, had had his hatred of the colonies increased by his defeats. Townsend was uttering a boast one day, in the presence of Grenville, that he would find a way in which he could tax America. "You dare not do it" was the sneering reply of the former minister. Stung by the implication that he was lacking in the requisite courage, without reflection, Townsend replied: "I dare tax America." His boast was no mere utterance, for he instantly set about concocting a plan by which he might carry it out. Unfortunately, there had been a change in the sentiments of the members of Parliament A bill was introduced by the ministers providing for the laying of an impost on glass, paper, pasteboard, white and red lead, painters' colors and tea. The most, if not all of these articles which were manufactured, were not produced in the provinces but were absolutely necessary in the ordinary business of the community. The preamble of the act declared that it was expedient to raise a revenue in America and to make more

certain and adequate provisions for defraying the charges of the admin⚫istration of justice in the provinces. One of the clauses in the act empowered the crown to establish a general civil list throughout every colony of any extent in North America, with salaries, pensions and appointments to the whole amount of the new duties. If possible, this was more obnoxious than the hated stamp act. If the object of the bill were attained, -the establishment of a civil list, independent of the legislature, a great advance would be made towards the annihilation of liberty; nevertheless it became a law in the month of June, 1767. Very soon after, two other statutes were enacted which roused the people to a high pitch of indignant fury. The Legislature of New York had refused to comply with a requisition for supplying troops. This and the contumacious conduct of the Massachusetts Assembly gave particular offence to the English ministry and Parliament enacted a statute providing that the Legislature of New York should pass no act whatever until that colony should comply with the requisition. Information of these three acts reached the colonies about the same time. No terms can fully describe the amazement and exasperation felt by the colonists over these continuous attempts of the ministry, especially when it was remembered that the "Grants and Concessions" of Berkeley and Carteret and the "Concessions and Agreements" of the Proprietors of West Jersey expressly provided "that the Governor and Council are not to impose any tax, custom, or subsidy, tollage assessments or any other duty whatsoever, upon any color or pretence, how specious soever, upon the said province and inhabitants thereof without their own consent, first had, or other than what shall be imposed by the authority and consent of the General Assembly." True, the Proprietors had relinquished the right of government to the British sovereign, but, while they had a right to do this, that body could not surrender the rights of the people; those rights were inherent in the whole body of the citizens, had been guarantied to them by the organic law of the land which had been their guardian and protector for a century.

Besides, tax was a mere gift, a gratuity, from the subject to the sovereign, justly due, it is true, for protection given, but, still a free will offering which the ruler could not compel at his volition, which must proceed from the subject through his authorized representative. The colonists were free born, British subjects, entitled to the same rights, the same freedom, the same equality, as though they had been born in

England. Representations in the councils of the government was a privilege inherent in every native born citizen. It was impossible tó. send delegates to the English Parliament; the distance between the two countries was too great, but, a colonial parliament would answer the purpose if the legislatures of the different colonies were unable to make provision for the proper administration of affairs. The colonial legislatures could better judge of the exigencies of any case that might arise, and knew better the wants, the sentiments and the peculiar conditions. of their own immediate fellow citizens with whom they were in daily intercourse, than could a body of men surrounded by entirely different environments.

These were some of the arguments with which the proposed tax was met. The act which enjoined a colonial legislature from passing any law did not admit of any discussion; the mere statement showed its absurdity, its folly and its injustice. If the Assembly of one colony could be thus restrained, the same restraint could be placed upon all and there would be a cessation of legislation throughout the whole land. The Parliament might as well pass a law prohibiting men from breathing; legislation is as necessary to the body politic as breath to the natural body.

The same temper and resentment which impelled resistance to former measures still continued, but was now increased to an intensity never before existing, and only needed an incentive to again arouse the people to renewed and more vigorous opposition.

All through the discussion the colonists claimed only that to which they were entitled as British subjects, and demanded that they should receive at the hands of their sovereign the same consideration-nothing more, nor less—as was given to other subjects of Great Britain.

The discussion continued, circulars were issued by colonial legislatures, by governors, by officers and by individuals in the colonies; by ministers, members of Parliament and Boards of Trade, in England; and were scattered broadcast. Acts of Parliament were met by counter action by the colonial legislature. The Parliament called on the Assembly of Massachusetts to rescind an obnoxious law; the spirited colonists refused obedience. New York put Parliament at defiance and held regular terms of the Legislature to correspond with other similar bodies in the colonies. Its acts, of course, were powerless, for, to make them effective, they must have received the royal assent; and so, they passed no formal laws. The English ministry threatened; the

[ocr errors]

authorities in America kept on their way, coolly and calmly pursuing the course which they marked out for themselves, occasionally presenting moderate and respectful remonstrances, by way of petition, to the English sovereign, in which they set out their grievances in no uncertain manner and claimed that he, as their king, should protect them, his subjects, who ought receive guardianship and care at his hands. The excitement spread from Maine to Georgia. Massachusetts suffered the most, and her sister colonies gave substantial aid and assistance to her.

But while all this turmoil existed, the hated acts were put into operation and troops were quartered in Boston to secure compliance with them by force of arms, if necessary. This produced violence and disorder and the public discontent was largely increased until it swelled into turbulence and blood was actually shed in the streets of Boston.

Then came another outrage from England: Parliament requested the king to require the Governor of Massachusetts to make the most strenuous examination to ascertain who had committed treason and misprision of treason since 1767, and to report the names of the criminals, so that they might be brought to trial in England. This added more fuel to the flame already kindled and the whole people in every colony were incensed beyond degree. The measure was addressed especially against Massachusetts, but every province felt personally interested. The Legislature of New Jersey resolved that all persons charged with these crimes, residing in that colony, could only be tried by the courts of the province, and that "the sending such persons beyond the seas to be tried, is highly derogatory to the rights of British subjects; as thereby the inestimable privileges of a trial by a jury of the vicinage, as well as the liberty of producing witnesses in such trials will be taken away." This resolution gives the whole argument against

the law.

The year 1770 began and Lord North was prime minister, having succeeeded Charles Townshend in 1769, in which, year an attempt was made to repeal the act imposing duties on glass, paper and the other commodities already mentioned. North, on that occasion, declared that though prudence and policy might suggest the propriety of repealing the law, yet he hoped it would not be done until "America was prostrate at their feet." A year had elapsed since that insolent remark was made and Lord North, himself, introduced a bill into Parliament to repeal the obnoxious act. It was repealed, but only in part; the

duties were taken from every article named in the bill except tea. The colonists objected not so much to the fact that certain imported articles were taxed, but, to the principle involved. That was insisted on with the same force after the repeal as before. It made no difference whether the tax was imposed on one article or on a hundred, and, of course, the compromise, for such it was considered, failed to satisfy the colonists, and discontent still reigned.

The malcontents in America had long since banded themselves together by solemn compact to use no goods imported from England which were taxed, and the foreign trade had dwindled to almost nothing. But, notwithstanding this, King George and Lord North persisted in their mad attempt to bring "America prostrate to their feet." The king was a dull, stupid man, with an inflexible will. North was of a generous nature, with good impulses, who appreciated the peril of the situation much better than his royal master. It was ascertained after his death that he was of the opinion that a continuance of the action determined upon by the king against the colonies would eventuate adversely to the crown. But North, although nominally the Premier of the empire, was not Prime Minister; the king governed and overruled his minister. North was a violent Tory, according to the political nomenclature of the day. A boast made by him on the floor of the House of Commons gives an index to his character; "since he had a seat there he had voted against all popular, and in favor of all unpopular measures."

So the perilous plans of the sovereign were followed; the declartory law which accompanied the repeal of the Stamp Act, the "sugar act," the law creating a Board of Commissioners of the revenues, the mutiny act, that for quartering soldiers on the colonies and that restraining the action of the New York Legislature, were still unrepealed. Nothing would satisfy the colonists short of the annulling of all these statutes, and the settling, beyond controversy, of the principle that there should be no taxation without representation.

But the king was not satisfied yet; he purposed to drive the iron still deeper. The Governor of Massachusetts and the Legislature had quarreled about the support of the colonial government and no bill providing for that had been passed. In 1772, it was learned that provision had been made by King George for the support of the government independent of the Assembly. The provision was afterwards extended to the judges of the Supreme Court, by providing independent salaries for these offices.

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »