The rejoicing, however, was only of short duration. The Declaratory Act made known the principle of action which it was intended to pursue towards the colonies, and accordingly the following year its operation commenced. Again the ministry was changed; and though Pitt, now Earl of Chatham, was at the head of affairs, and Lord Camden had a seat in the cabinet, advantage was taken of Chatham’s illness, and Charles Townshend, now Chancellor of the Exchequer and a former member of Grenville’s ministry, brought in a bill for taxing all tea, glass, paper and painters’ colours, imported into the colonies. This bill being supposed less objectionable than the Stamp Act, passed the two houses with but little opposition. Nor was this all; a standing army was to be maintained in the colonies, and permanent salaries provided for the governors and judges, so as to make them independent of the colonial assemblies; while a third act empowered the naval officers to act as custom-house officers, armed with authority to enforce the trade and navigation acts. Punishment was also inflicted on New York and Georgia for their disregard of the late Quartering Act; the legislative assembly of New York was suspended until his majesty’s troops were provided with supplies at the expense of the colony, and the troops were withdrawn from Georgia for the same cause, leaving her exposed to the incursions of Indians and the insurrection of negroes, which soon brought her to submission.

The passing of these bills in such quick succession left the Americans no longer in doubt of the line of policy which it was intended by England to adopt towards them, and the excitement and indignation which they occasioned equalled that produced by the Stamp Act. The colonial assemblies met, and the strongest dissatisfaction was expressed. Pamphlets circulated briskly, and the newspapers, now about five-and-twenty in number, entered boldly on the subject of colonial rights. The “Letters of a Pennsylvanian Farmer to the Inhabitants of the British Colonies,” written by John Dickinson, flew from one end of the colonies to the other. Franklin caused an edition to be published even in London. The object of Dickinson’s letters was to show how dangerous was the precedent of allowing parliamentary taxation in any form or to any extent whatever.

Again meetings were held and associations formed for the support and encouragement of home manufactures, and against the use and importation of British goods. This movement, which commenced in Boston, extended throughout the province, and the example was followed in Providence, New York and Philadelphia. In New Hampshire the non-importation agreement was not so warmly seconded, owing to the influence of the governor, Wentworth, while in Connecticut, under William Pitkin, the governor and an ardent patriot, it met with universal acceptation.

The assembly of Massachusetts invited by circular the co-operation of the other provinces for the maintenance of colonial rights; the prime movers in this measure being Thomas Cushing, the speaker of the House of Assembly, James Otis, Samuel Adams, John Hancock, and Joseph Hawley, all men of character and great influence. Otis was a lawyer; Cushing, descended from an old Puritan line in the colony; Adams, a stern Puritan likewise, educated for the ministry, but forced by circumstances to become a merchant—he had, however, been unsuccessful as such, and after various reverses and changes was now an active politician and patriot, a man though poor, and whose wife by her industry supported the family, yet who exercised an extraordinary influence upon the fate of his country. Hancock, the youngest of this patriot band, was a wealthy merchant, descended from a line of merchants, “young, gay, of winning manners, with a strong love of popular approbation.” “Hancock,” says Hildreth, “acted very much under the guidance of Adams, who saw the policy of putting him forward as a leader.” Hawley was a member of Northampton County, a lawyer by profession, a man of sound judgment, religious feeling, and unimpeachable character. The leader in the House of Representatives at this time was James Bowdoin, the grandson of a French Huguenot, whose father from the smallest beginnings had become the most opulent man in Boston, his immense wealth being inherited by his son and only child at one-and-twenty; he, too, acted under the direction of Adams.

The revenue officers no sooner began to enforce the collection of duties, than, as might be expected in the existing state of public feeling, they found themselves violently opposed by the merchants. Before long, also, the sloop Liberty, belonging to Hancock, being seized on the charge of having smuggled goods on board, the smothered fires burst into open flame. The populace rose, and the terrified revenue officers fled for their lives to the barracks on Castle Island, at the mouth of the harbour.

About the same time orders were received from England that “the Circular,” issued by the last court, and which had given great offence, should be rescinded, and great disapprobation was expressed in his majesty’s name of “that rash and hasty proceeding.” But the circular had already gone forth, and by a vote of ninety-two to seventeen the House of Assembly refused to rescind. Orders had also been received by all the other colonies, desiring them to pay no attention to this offensive circular; but Connecticut, New Jersey, Virginia, and Georgia, had already committed themselves to it; and Maryland and New York, instead of obedience, now put forth remonstrances of their own.

Still was New York in contention with the governor on the subject of the quartering of the troops, when General Gage, commander-in-chief of the British forces in America, at the request of Bernard, the governor, who had complained to England of the tumultuous and refractory character of the people of Boston, was ordered to establish a military force in the city, to keep the inhabitants in order, as well as to aid the revenue officers in performing their duties. Two additional regiments were in consequence sent over from England. Late in September they arrived, and with muskets charged, and fixed bayonets, marched in as to a conquered town. The people, however, remained refractory; nor, though ships of war were in their harbour, and 1,000 armed men in their streets, would they submit to find them quarters. At length the discomfited governor was compelled to yield; one regiment encamped on Boston common, and the State-house was thrown open for the accommodation of the rest. It was Sunday when all this happened, and as the State-house stood opposite the great church, the inhabitants were disagreeably disturbed in their worship by the beating of drums and the marching of the troops, only to find themselves challenged by sentinels stationed in the street on their way home. These were not circumstances calculated to mollify the popular resentment; the most irritating language passed between the soldiers and the citizens, and the public excitement increased daily.

The news of this reception given to the troops, which was transmitted to England both by Gage and Governor Bernard, caused an equally violent excitement in England. Parliament declared the conduct of Massachusetts to be “illegal, unconstitutional, and derogatory to the rights of the crown and of parliament, and urged upon the king, that the governor should be ordered to obtain all information regarding this treason, and to send suspected persons over to England for trial, under an old statute of Henry VIII., for the punishment of treasons committed out of the kingdom.” And a bill to the same effect, spite of the opposition of Barre, Burke, and Pownall, was immediately passed.

Every new step now taken, either by the colonies or the mother-country, increased the distance between them. The news of these instructions called forth immediately the most decisive expression of opinion from the colonial assemblies. The Virginian Assembly, in which Thomas Jefferson now first distinguished himself, and which was sitting when these tidings reached, passed a resolution denying boldly the king’s right, either to tax the colonies without their consent, or to remove an offender out of the country for trial. As soon as Lord Boutetout, the governor, heard of this, he dissolved the assembly, but the members, instead of submitting, resumed their sittings in a private house, and choosing Peyton Randolph as their speaker, passed resolutions, drawn up by Colonel Washington, against the use of British goods. Their example was followed, and the “non-importation agreement” of Boston, Salem and New York, now became general. In North Carolina the assembly was also dissolved, as well as in Massachusetts. In Massachusetts, indeed, the military still occupying the town of Boston and the State-house, the rupture became so violent, that when Sir Francis Bernard communicated to the assembly his intention of going to England, to represent to parliament the disaffected state of the province, the assembly drew up a petition praying that he might be removed for ever from the government of the province, and denouncing, in the strongest terms, the fact of a standing army being maintained among them in a time of peace, and against their express desire. Leaving the administration in the hands of Lieutenant-governor Hutchinson, Bernard departed.

In the following year, 1770, an event occurred at Boston, which caused great excitement throughout America. An affray having taken place between some citizens and soldiers, the populace became greatly exasperated, and on the 5th of March, a crowd insulted the city guard under Captain Preston, and dared them to fire. The soldiers fired, three of the people were killed, and others seriously wounded. At once the whole city was roused, and thousands appeared in arms. After great difficulty, and by promise that justice should be done them on the morrow, the lieutenant-governor succeeded in appeasing the tumult. Captain Preston and his company were tried for murder; two of the most distinguished American lawyers and patriots, John Adams and Josiah Quincy, very nobly volunteering their services in their defence. Two of the soldiers were convicted of manslaughter, the rest were acquitted; but this circumstance only tended to increase the ill-feeling between the citizens and the soldiers.[[13]]