1774, until the meeting of the first general congress in september.
the responses to the appeals of boston and the proposals of the assembly of massachusetts, for a meeting of congress of all the colonies, were prompt and general and sympathetic beyond what had been anticipated; and in some colonies the expressions of approval and offers of co-operation and assistance preceded any knowledge of what was doing, or had been done, in massachusetts.
in virginia the house of burgesses were in session when the news arrived from england announcing the passing by the british parliament of the boston port bill; and on the 26th of may the house resolved that the 1st of june, the day on which that bill was to go into effect, should be set apart by the members as a day of fasting, humiliation, and prayer, "devoutly to implore the divine interposition for averting the heavy calamities which threatened destruction to their civil rights, and the evils of a civil war, and to give them one heart and one mind to oppose, by all just and proper means, every injury to american rights." on the publication of this resolution, the governor (the earl of dunmore) dissolved the house. but the members, before separating, entered into an association and signed an agreement, to the number of 87, in which, among other things, they declared "that an attack made on one of their sister colonies, to compel submission to arbitrary taxes, was an attack made on all british america, and threatened ruin to the civil rights of all, unless the united wisdom of the whole be applied in prevention." they therefore recommended to[pg 404] their committee of correspondence to communicate with the several committees of the other provinces, on the expediency of appointing deputies from the different colonies, to meet annually in congress, and to deliberate on the common interests of america. this measure had already been proposed in town meetings, both in new york and boston. the colonies, from new hampshire to south carolina inclusive, adopted this measure; and where the legislatures were not in session, elections were made by the people.[339]
while there was a general agreement of sentiment throughout the colonies in favour of a congress or convention of all the colonies to consult on common rights and interests, and to devise the best means of securing them, there was also a corresponding sympathy and liberality for the relief of the inhabitants of boston, who were considered as suffering for the maintenance of rights sacred to the liberties of all the colonies, as all had resisted successfully the landing of the tea, the badge of their enslavement, though all had not been driven by the governor, as in the case of massachusetts, to destroy it in order to prevent its being landed. yet even this had been done to some extent both in south carolina and new york.
the town of boston became an object of interest, and its inhabitants subjects of sympathy throughout the colonies of america. all the histories of those times agree "that as soon as the true character of the boston port act became known in america, every colony, every city, every village, and, as it were,[pg 405] the inmates of every farm-house, felt it as a wound of their affections. the towns of massachusetts abounded in kind offices. the colonies vied with each other in liberality. the record kept at boston shows that 'the patriotic and generous people' of south carolina were the first to minister to the sufferers, sending early in june two hundred barrels of rice, and promising eight hundred more. at wilmington, north carolina, the sum of two thousand pounds currency was raised in a few days; the women of the place gave liberally. throughout all new england the towns sent rye, flour, peas, cattle, sheep, oil, fish; whatever the land or hook and line could furnish, and sometimes gifts of money. the french inhabitants of quebec, joining with those of english origin, shipped a thousand and forty bushels of wheat. delaware was so much in earnest that it devised plans for sending relief annually. all maryland and all virginia were contributing liberally and cheerfully, being resolved that the men of boston, who were deprived of their daily labour, should not lose their daily bread, nor be compelled to change their residence for want. in fairfax county, washington presided at a spirited meeting, and headed a subscription paper with his own gift of fifty pounds. a special chronicle could hardly enumerate all the generous deeds. cheered by the universal sympathy, the inhabitants of boston 'were determined to hold out and appeal to the justice of the colonies and of the world;' trusting in god that 'these things should be overruled for the establishment of liberty, virtue and happiness in america.'"[340]
it is worthy of inquiry, as to how information could be so rapidly circulated throughout colonies sparsely settled over a territory larger than that of europe, and expressions of sentiment and feeling elicited from their remotest settlements? for, as dr. ramsay says, "in the three first months which followed the shutting up of the port of boston, the inhabitants of the colonies, in hundreds of small circles as well as in their provincial assemblies and congresses, expressed their abhorrence of the late proceedings of the british parliament against massachusetts; their concurrence in the proposed measure of appointing deputies for a general congress; and their willingness[pg 406] to do and suffer whatever should be judged conducive to the establishment of their liberties."[341] "in order to understand," says the same author, "the mode by which this flame was spread with such rapidity over so great an extent of country, it is necessary to observe that the several colonies were divided into counties, and these again subdivided into districts, distinguished by the names of towns, townships, precincts, hundreds, or parishes. in new england, the subdivisions which are called towns were, by law, bodies corporate; had their regular meetings, and might be occasionally convened by their officers. the advantages derived from these meetings, by uniting the whole body of the people in the measures taken to oppose the stamp act, induced other provinces to follow the example. accordingly, under the association which was formed to oppose the revenue act of 1767, committees were established, not only in the capital of every province, but in most of the subordinate districts. great britain, without designing it, had, by her two preceding attempts at american revenue, taught her colonies not only the advantage but the means of union. the system of committees which prevailed in 1765, and also in 1767, was revived in 1774. by them there was a quick transmission of intelligence from the capital towns through the subordinate districts to the whole body of the people; a union of counsels and measures was effected, among widely disseminated inhabitants."[342]
it will be observed that the three acts passed by parliament in[pg 407] respect to massachusetts, and the fourth, for quartering soldiers in towns, changed the charter of the province, and multiplied the causes of difference between great britain and the colonies. to the causes of dissatisfaction in the colonies arising from the taxing of them assumed by parliament (now only threepence a pound on tea), the arrangement with the east india company and the courts of admiralty, depriving the colonists of the right of trial by jury, were now added the boston port bill, the regulating act, the act which essentially changed the chartered constitution of massachusetts, and the act which transferred government officers accused of murder, to be removed to england. mr. bancroft justly observes that "the regulating act complicated the question between america and great britain. the country, under the advice of pennsylvania, might have indemnified the east india company, might have obtained by importunity the repeal of the tax on tea, or might have borne the duty, as it had borne that on wine; but parliament, after ten years of premeditation, had exercised the power to abrogate the laws and to change the charter of a province without its consent; and on this arose the conflict of the american revolution."[343]
footnotes:
[339] marshall's history of the american colonies, chap. xiv., pp. 406, 407.
"resolutions were passed in every colony in which legislatures were convened, or delegates assembled in convention, manifesting different degrees of resentment, but concurring in the same great principles. all declared that the cause of boston was the cause of british america; that the late acts respecting that devoted town were tyrannical and unconstitutional; that the opposition to this unministerial system of oppression ought to be universally and perseveringly maintained; that all intercourse with the parent country ought to be suspended, and domestic manufactures encouraged; and that a general congress should be formed for the purpose of uniting and guiding the councils and directing the efforts of north america.
"the committees of correspondence selected philadelphia for the place, and the beginning of september as the time, for the meeting of this important council."—ib., pp. 409, 410.
[340] bancroft's history of the united states, vol. vii., pp. 72-75.
[341] colonial history, vol. i., chap. v., p. 398.
[342] ib., pp. 395, 396.
"it is, perhaps, impossible for human wisdom to contrive any system more subservient to these purposes than such a reciprocal exchange of intelligence by committees of correspondence. from want of such a communication with each other, and consequently of union among themselves, many states have lost their liberties, and more have been unsuccessful in their attempts to regain them after they were lost.
"what the eloquence and talents of demosthenes could not effect among the states of greece, might have been effected by the simple device of committees of correspondence. the few have been enabled to keep the many in subjection in every age from the want of union among the latter. several of the provinces of spain complained of oppression under charles the fifth, and in transports of rage took arms against him; but they never consulted or communicated with each other. they resisted separately, and were, therefore, separately subdued."—ib., p. 396.
[343] bancroft's history of the united states, vol. vii., chap. viii., p. 97.
the authority of this new act was never acknowledged in massachusetts. of the 36 legislative councillors nominated by the crown, one-third of them declined to accept the appointment, and nearly all who did accept were soon compelled, by the remonstrances and threats of their neighbours, to resign. so alarmed was governor gage, that after he had summoned the new legislature to meet him at salem, he countermanded his summons by proclamation; but which was considered unlawful, and the assembly met, organized itself, and passed resolutions on grievances, and adopted other proceedings to further the opposition to the new act and other acts complained of.
even the courts could not be held. at boston the judges took their seats, and the usual proclamations were made; when the men who had been returned as jurors, one and all, refused to take the oath. being asked why they refused, thomas chase, one of the petit jury, gave as his reason, "that the chief justice of the court stood impeached by the late representatives of the province." in a paper offered by the jury, the judges found their authority disputed for further reasons, that the charter of the province had been changed with no warrant but an act of parliament, and that three of the judges, in violation of the constitution, had accepted seats in the new council. the chief justice and his colleagues repairing in a body to the governor represented the impossibility of exercising their office in boston or in any other part of the province; the army was too small for their protection; and besides, none would act as jurors. thus the authority of the new government, as established by act of parliament, perished in the presence of the governor, the judges and the army.—ib., pp. 111, 112.
the english historian, dr. andrews, remarks on this subject:
"the list of the new (legislative) council appointed by the crown consisted of thirty-six members. but twelve of the number declined their commissions, and most of those who accepted were speedily obliged to resign them in order to save their property and persons from the fury of the multitude. the judges newly appointed experienced much the same treatment. all the inferior officers of the courts of judicature, the clerks, the juries, and all others concerned, explicitly refused to act under the new laws. in some places the populace shut up the avenues to the court-houses; and upon being required to make way for the judges and officers of the court, they declared that they knew of no court nor establishment in the province contrary to the ancient usages and forms, and would recognize none.
"the former constitution being thus destroyed by the british legislature, and the people refusing to acknowledge that which was substituted in its room, a dissolution of all government necessarily ensued. the resolution to oppose the designs of great britain produced occasionally some commotions; but no other consequences followed this defect of government. peace and good order remained everywhere throughout the province, and the people demeaned themselves with as much regularity as if the laws still continued in their full and formal rigour." (andrews' history of the war, vol. i., pp. 145, 146.)
