While most everyone else around Samuel Adams (and in Boston) celebrated the repeal of the Stamp Act, Adams fretted about the future, and did not relax his vigil. Driven into Boston Harbor by bad weather, two British artillery companies appeared, and Adams wondered who would be responsible for their support while in Boston. Adams wondered if provisioning the artillery companies was actually an indirect tax required by Britain on the Colonies. Adding to the uncertainty were the persistent rumors of British regulars coming to Boston. Adams knew there were many Tories (Loyalists) that were more than happy and pleased to write letters to London in order to tarnish the reputation of MA. And then there was the matter of the Declaratory Act, which to Adams was like a hidden snake, ready to strike at its victim with deadly venom. Adams admitted that when an imagination ran wild, the mind focuses on false dangers.
During the Stamp Act Congress in 1765, Adams met
Christopher Gadsden from SC, who was soon to be the “Samuel Adams of South Carolina”. The two men agreed that the boycotts worked to force Britain to repeal the Stamp Act only by mutual coordinated efforts across the Colonies. Both also agreed that only by future mutual efforts would the Colonies be able to deal with what was coming from Britain. Adams wanted to create a systems network for communication, venturing for the first time beyond New England. In Boston, the Sons of Liberty and other similar groups were not very well organized, and did not have lineal leadership; by that point, Adams belonged to at least a few of those groups. The circles of the various groups in Boston overlapped, and Adams could be found at least at the perimeter of each group. Adams was the “connector” to the groups, and he thrived on collaboration and persuasion; a common cause exhilarated Adams.
During the Stamp Act Congress in 1765, Adams met
Christopher Gadsden from SC, who was soon to be the “Samuel Adams of South Carolina”. The two men agreed that the boycotts worked to force Britain to repeal the Stamp Act only by mutual coordinated efforts across the Colonies. Both also agreed that only by future mutual efforts would the Colonies be able to deal with what was coming from Britain. Adams wanted to create a systems network for communication, venturing for the first time beyond New England. In Boston, the Sons of Liberty and other similar groups were not very well organized, and did not have lineal leadership; by that point, Adams belonged to at least a few of those groups. The circles of the various groups in Boston overlapped, and Adams could be found at least at the perimeter of each group. Adams was the “connector” to the groups, and he thrived on collaboration and persuasion; a common cause exhilarated Adams.
In the MA House, Adams arranged for a public gallery so citizens could see the chamber in action. Adams used the gallery as political street theater, often packing the gallery by inviting specific like-minded people who were at least sympathetic to his ideals. With an audience, of course, most members of the chamber felt the need to perform, using escalated language, “speechifying”. Bernard was shocked to discover that an audience could listen to Otis for two or more hours as he railed against Parliament.
Bernard simply could not get London to listen and understand that in MA, as early as November 1765, disparate groups had banded together that beforehand wanted nothing to do with each other. Bernard wrote to London that instigators such as Adams only needed to be given the slightest nudge, and events such as the riot of 26 August 1765 would occur. Bernard used phrases such as “low and ignorant men” were now in the MA House, and that his Council consisted of “creatures of the people”. Adams, Otis, and others knew how they were being portrayed by Bernard, Hutchinson, et al to London, and bitterly complained about being misrepresented.
During the Stamp Act crisis, the MA House, over Bernard’s objections, hired an agent in London to counter those misrepresentations, and in 1766, the MA House voted to make the position permanent. Doing so did much to muzzle Hutchinson, since the MA House informed him that he was not to criticize the MA House in his letters to London. Hutchinson knew he needed to restrain himself, knowing that the MA House agent in London would discover what Hutchinson wrote.
Bernard simply could not get London to listen and understand that in MA, as early as November 1765, disparate groups had banded together that beforehand wanted nothing to do with each other. Bernard wrote to London that instigators such as Adams only needed to be given the slightest nudge, and events such as the riot of 26 August 1765 would occur. Bernard used phrases such as “low and ignorant men” were now in the MA House, and that his Council consisted of “creatures of the people”. Adams, Otis, and others knew how they were being portrayed by Bernard, Hutchinson, et al to London, and bitterly complained about being misrepresented.
During the Stamp Act crisis, the MA House, over Bernard’s objections, hired an agent in London to counter those misrepresentations, and in 1766, the MA House voted to make the position permanent. Doing so did much to muzzle Hutchinson, since the MA House informed him that he was not to criticize the MA House in his letters to London. Hutchinson knew he needed to restrain himself, knowing that the MA House agent in London would discover what Hutchinson wrote.
All the while, the MA House delayed and obfuscated in dealing with compensating the victims for the 26 August 1765 riot, with Hutchinson topping the list, claiming damages at a whopping 2218 pounds. The MA House was glad and grateful that the Stamp Act had been repealed, but a majority in the chamber was in no way going to be a rubber stamp for London. No one had held as many powerful positions in MA’s history as Thomas Hutchinson, who by 1766 was serving in MA’s judicial and executive branches of government. Adams found the situation horrifying, in that he believed no one should be allowed to have executive power, and at the same time be a judge on the bench. And to make matters worse for Adams and the growing numbers in his fold, Hutchinson was related to many in the MA power structure, and he had his eye on being MA governor.
John Adams in particular seethed at the adoration showered on Hutchinson in 1766, seeing Hutchinson’s admirers comparing him to Alexander the Great or Julius Caesar. However, two decades of grudges, starting with the land bank crisis in the 1740s came hurtling towards Hutchinson in 1766. To both Samuel and John Adams, Otis, et al, Hutchinson and his clan/ilk represented the threat of tyranny, in their mind turning Hutchinson into a potential despot. Colonial rights were the main goal, but revenge on Hutchinson proved to be a Siren’s Song. During late-1766, Hutchinson’s enemies prepared for an election that was still six months away, and at roughly the same time, Hutchinson was fully reimbursed for 26 August 1765 by the MA House (Hutchinson had claimed 2200+ pounds in damages; he actually received over 3000 pounds). While that brought Hutchinson a measure of closure, it certainly didn’t bring tranquility.
John Adams in particular seethed at the adoration showered on Hutchinson in 1766, seeing Hutchinson’s admirers comparing him to Alexander the Great or Julius Caesar. However, two decades of grudges, starting with the land bank crisis in the 1740s came hurtling towards Hutchinson in 1766. To both Samuel and John Adams, Otis, et al, Hutchinson and his clan/ilk represented the threat of tyranny, in their mind turning Hutchinson into a potential despot. Colonial rights were the main goal, but revenge on Hutchinson proved to be a Siren’s Song. During late-1766, Hutchinson’s enemies prepared for an election that was still six months away, and at roughly the same time, Hutchinson was fully reimbursed for 26 August 1765 by the MA House (Hutchinson had claimed 2200+ pounds in damages; he actually received over 3000 pounds). While that brought Hutchinson a measure of closure, it certainly didn’t bring tranquility.
On 28 January 1767, Lt. Governor Hutchinson attended the opening session of the MA House at the request of Governor Bernard. Hutchinson, for the first time in 18 years was no longer a member of the Council, as of Spring 1766. Hutchinson assumed that as Lt. Governor, he would still be a member of the Council, but the opposition led by Adams in the MA House saw his inclusion as a “manifest impropriety” and a blatant power-grab. The exchange between Bernard and the MA House over Hutchinson’s inclusion in the Council was intense. Bernard didn’t see any way the MA House had the power to keep him from including Lt. Governor Hutchinson in the Council. Adams insisted that in the MA’s history, there was no precedent for Hutchinson to be included, since he didn’t hold a seat in either the MA House or the Council. For the sake of tranquility, and to avoid further abuse, Hutchinson left the MA House chamber and did not attend future sessions; the MA House then voted to condemn Hutchinson for dereliction of duty. Hutchinson in essence had a nervous breakdown, and he retreated to his country estate in Milton, where he hoped to recover, relax, refocus, and be out of the spotlight for at least a while.
Bernard became the main focus of abuse from the MA House and the various opposition groups in Boston, and he tried to make himself as inoffensive as possible, especially since there was an upcoming election. Bernard wondered if anyone in London was reading/understanding his warnings of what was going on, and what may happen in MA if Britain did not discipline the ruffians. Bernard was kind of like a nanny trying to rouse the distracted and uninvolved parents (Britain) to deal with the out of control spoiled child. During 1767, Hutchinson published his second volume of the History of Massachusetts, which focused on the years 1692 to 1750, and his account was not exactly objective in nature. Hutchinson sent 16 copies to be bound and then delivered to 16 Colonial agents and British officials in London, including Grenville and Charles Townshend, the new Chancellor of the Exchequer. Bernard’s friends in the MA government fared poorly in the May 1767 elections, and again Bernard was denied a favorable Council. Bernard wanted the official records/minutes of the MA House, but Adams delayed the printing, knowing that Bernard wanted to send them to London.
Bernard became the main focus of abuse from the MA House and the various opposition groups in Boston, and he tried to make himself as inoffensive as possible, especially since there was an upcoming election. Bernard wondered if anyone in London was reading/understanding his warnings of what was going on, and what may happen in MA if Britain did not discipline the ruffians. Bernard was kind of like a nanny trying to rouse the distracted and uninvolved parents (Britain) to deal with the out of control spoiled child. During 1767, Hutchinson published his second volume of the History of Massachusetts, which focused on the years 1692 to 1750, and his account was not exactly objective in nature. Hutchinson sent 16 copies to be bound and then delivered to 16 Colonial agents and British officials in London, including Grenville and Charles Townshend, the new Chancellor of the Exchequer. Bernard’s friends in the MA government fared poorly in the May 1767 elections, and again Bernard was denied a favorable Council. Bernard wanted the official records/minutes of the MA House, but Adams delayed the printing, knowing that Bernard wanted to send them to London.
The arrival of the news that new revenue acts were forthcoming energized Bernard, seeing as it was about time that Britain asserted herself in the Colonies, especially in Boston and MA. Bernard assured London that there would be no more insurrections, thinking Adams et al would be thunderstruck by the knowledge that more revenue acts were in the offing. When Adams heard the same news, he was unsurprised - the news that additional revenue ats were coming from Britain validated his dire predictions. The repeal of the Stamp Act did not sit well in Britain, and the perceived ingratitude of the Colonies made things worse. Hardly a word of thanks for all Britain had done, and was continuing to do, for the Colonies, was heard across the Atlantic. It wasn’t just Boston and MA that vexed Britain, but other colonies such as NJ and NY were uncooperative towards British authority.
Charles Townshend, Chancellor of the Exchequer (the rough equivalent of the US Secretary of the Treasury) spent the first few months of 1767 trying to devise new revenue proposals, finally settling on an import tax on the Colonies that would be levied on many items, from food to finished goods. Townshend’s predicted revenues were as high as 40,000 pounds, which would in essence pay for the cost of paying Colonial governors and judges. All agreed in London that the sovereignty of Parliament and the Crown should be reaffirmed and reestablished, and what would become known as the Townshend Act would provide political cover and protection for Colonial officials and legislatures.
The Townshend Act raced through Parliament, and King George III gave his consent on 26 June 1767. The Townshend Act created a five man board of inspectors in the Colonies, and for some reason, Boston was chosen as the site for the board, perhaps since it was the closest main Colonial port to Britain. In addition to the five customs board members, Boston also expected the British regiment of redcoats from Halifax (Nova Scotia) to arrive soon in the city. While the regiment did not appear in Boston in the short run, Adams’ diatribe in the Gazette against their eventual arrival and presence did arrive in Britain, unbeknownst to Adams.
Charles Townshend, Chancellor of the Exchequer (the rough equivalent of the US Secretary of the Treasury) spent the first few months of 1767 trying to devise new revenue proposals, finally settling on an import tax on the Colonies that would be levied on many items, from food to finished goods. Townshend’s predicted revenues were as high as 40,000 pounds, which would in essence pay for the cost of paying Colonial governors and judges. All agreed in London that the sovereignty of Parliament and the Crown should be reaffirmed and reestablished, and what would become known as the Townshend Act would provide political cover and protection for Colonial officials and legislatures.
The Townshend Act raced through Parliament, and King George III gave his consent on 26 June 1767. The Townshend Act created a five man board of inspectors in the Colonies, and for some reason, Boston was chosen as the site for the board, perhaps since it was the closest main Colonial port to Britain. In addition to the five customs board members, Boston also expected the British regiment of redcoats from Halifax (Nova Scotia) to arrive soon in the city. While the regiment did not appear in Boston in the short run, Adams’ diatribe in the Gazette against their eventual arrival and presence did arrive in Britain, unbeknownst to Adams.
At the end of August 1767, Bernard started sending to London what he called “weekly libels”, organizing them alphabetically, and in a few weeks, he was already up to the letter ”M”. On 7 October 1767, Adams and several MA House colleagues called on Bernard at his home, asking him to convene the MA House into session, given the upcoming revenue acts. Bernard had no interest in allowing/enabling the opposition to inflame MA all over again; he decided to convene the MA House at the latest-possible time in late-January 1768. On 8 October 1767, the official notification of the Townshend Act arrived, as well as rumors that more revenue acts were to follow, with British redcoats to enforce the acts. By then, Bernard was up to “W” on his alphabetical weekly libels missives to London.
With Bernard uncooperative and uncommunicative, and with the MA House still out of session, Adams had to find another way to approach the problem of new revenue acts. Adams decided to organize boycotts on various luxury goods, with sixty Boston merchants agreeing to boycott such items as silk, clocks, and cheese. Appeals to participate in the boycotts spread throughout MA, but at this point Adams was faced with the reality that most in MA didn’t want to go through another disruption in their lives via another boycott. Paul Revere agreed with the proposed boycotts, whereas John Hancock did not, and Otis actually supported the new revenue acts, encouraging submission to the new duties. Adams discovered that there were few objections to Otis’ view towards the Townshend Act. Bernard celebrated, believing that Adams and his crowd were finally dealt with properly, and he expected a quiet session in the MA House when it reconvened in January 1768.
With Bernard uncooperative and uncommunicative, and with the MA House still out of session, Adams had to find another way to approach the problem of new revenue acts. Adams decided to organize boycotts on various luxury goods, with sixty Boston merchants agreeing to boycott such items as silk, clocks, and cheese. Appeals to participate in the boycotts spread throughout MA, but at this point Adams was faced with the reality that most in MA didn’t want to go through another disruption in their lives via another boycott. Paul Revere agreed with the proposed boycotts, whereas John Hancock did not, and Otis actually supported the new revenue acts, encouraging submission to the new duties. Adams discovered that there were few objections to Otis’ view towards the Townshend Act. Bernard celebrated, believing that Adams and his crowd were finally dealt with properly, and he expected a quiet session in the MA House when it reconvened in January 1768.