Tuesday, December 16, 2008

On this night, December 16th/17th, 1773


Yes, it's a famous night. Two hundred and thirty-five years ago, our forefathers decided to hold a tea party.

In Boston harbor.

Using tea on which they refused to pay the punitive taxes levied by their colonial 'masters' in England.

Opposition to the new taxes was vociferous and angry. The contemporary pamphlet below illustrates the colonists' feelings (click to enlarge).




A mass meeting was held in Boston on December 16th, 1773, to discuss the taxes. The consignee of the tea on the ships was willing to send it back to England, rather than flout the colonists' wishes, but Governor Hutchinson refused to allow the ship to leave, ordering British warships to blockade the harbor to prevent any compromise. He was determined that the tax should be levied.

When this news reached the meeting, it sparked a revolt - one that had clearly been anticipated and prepared for. According to a contemporary newspaper account:


Just before the dissolution of the meeting, a number of brave and resolute men, dressed in the Indian manner, approached near the door of the Assembly, gave the war whoop, which rang through the house and was answered by some in the galleries, but silence being commanded, and a peaceable deportment was again enjoined till the dissolution. The Indians, as they were then called, repaired to the wharf where the ships lay that had the tea on board, and were followed by hundreds of people to see the event of the transactions of those who made so grotesque an appearance.

They, the Indians, immediately repaired on board Captain Hall's ship, where they hoisted out the chests of tea, and when upon deck stove the chests and emptied the tea overboard; having cleared this ship they proceeded to Captain Bruce's and then to Captain Coffin's brig. They applied themselves so dexterously to the destruction of this commodity that in the space of three hours they broke up 342 chests, which was the whole number in those vessels, and discharged the contents into the dock. When the tide rose it floated the broken chests and the tea insomuch that the surface of the water was filled therewith a considerable way from the south part of the town to Dorchester Neck, and lodged on the shores. There was the greatest care taken to prevent the tea from being purloined by the populace. One or two, being detected in endeavouring to pocket a small quantity, were stripped of their acquisitions and very roughly handled.




It is worthy of remark that although a considerable quantity of goods were still remaining on board the vessels, no injury was sustained. Such attention to private property was observed that a small padlock belonging to the captain of one of the ships being broke, another was procured and sent to him. The town was very quiet during the whole evening and night following. Those persons who were from the country returned with a merry heart; and the next day joy appeared in almost every countenance, some on occasion of the destruction of the tea, others on account of the quietness with which it was effected. One of the Monday's papers says that the masters and owners are well pleased that their ships are thus cleared.


The Boston Tea Party, as it soon became known, is considered to be a major precursor of the American War of Independence (1775-1783).

(Or, as an English acquaintance of mine observed, tongue firmly in cheek, on being unable to find her favorite brand of tea while on a visit to this country: "Well, ever since the Boston Tea Party, Americans have been utterly revolting!")



Peter

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

While I enjoy history, I cannot help when faced with the f-pronounced-as-s character think of the gargoyle pressed into service as a doorknocker in Terry Pratchett's "Mort," lisp and all. :)

Anonymous said...

Ooooh! "Chairman of the Committee for Tarring and Feathering." Now there's a job that I want!

Loren said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLbmn7Z_h_c

dave said...

The bit about the padlock is fascinating and inspiring. Details such as that move the event from an indiscriminate revolt to a precisely-targeted protest--a surgical strike, if you will. The "Indians" made a bold stand, but kept the moral high ground.

Compare this to, say, Timothy McVeigh, who lashed out against (among other things) the Waco siege by committing mass murder against people who were uninvolved. Yes, he targeted "the Feds," but he killed innocent people, including children.

While his anger was righteous, he forfeited the moral high ground.

It's an important point to remember: if you let your act of protest exceed the scope of the offense, you taint your message to the point that you do more harm than good. It's a lesson many would do well to remember.