The history of those times has yet to be written in which due credit must be given to Virginia. Instead of that Colony appearing simply as a supporter and abettor of the acts of Massachusetts, the position hitherto allotted her, she should be accredited, as she deserves, with the leadership. No one more fully appreciated this fact than Bancroft who, notwithstanding his changes of opinion on many other points with each edition of his book, both mentions and accredits nearly every circumstance. But this is done often with faint praise and with the context not always fairly placed, while the deeds of the Bostonian are invariably made most prominent. It is therefore impossible, for the most part, for any one but an expert to arrive at any other impression than that suggested by the bias of the author.
A committee was proposed and organized in Boston, November 3rd, 1772, by Samuel Adams, for the purpose of communicating with the people in the neighboring towns. In March, 1773, Dabney Carr, a young man of great promise, offered certain resolutions in the Legislature of Virginia embodying a plan of Intercolonial Committees of Correspondence, by means of which all portions of the country could be brought into closer relation. This organization was perfected by Richard Henry Lee, who soon became its chief organizer owing to the untimely death of Mr. Carr. The existence of this organization was of incalculable benefit to the cause of the Colonies, and it alone, moreover, made possible a favorable termination to the Revolution. Bancroft, in one portion of his history, pays full tribute to Dabney Carr and writes, regarding the organization, that “In this manner, Virginia laid the foundation of our Union; Massachusetts organized a province, Virginia promoted a confederacy.” And yet, from other portions of Bancroft’s work the only inference suggested is, that to Samuel Adams alone is due the credit for this work; and indeed this is the general impression held, to a great extent to-day, by those who are familiar with our history, as it is written.
The “broadside” here reproduced was issued by the Boston Committee and is signed with the autograph signature of the secretary. The mere fact of this issue, in Boston, of the Virginia Resolutions, urging that the other Colonies should communicate directly with the Virginia Committee, proves that the one in Boston had been simply a local affair up to that date and that the proposed general organization did not originate there.
“THE BOSTON TEA-PARTY”
So soon as the British Government determined upon the shipment of tea to the American Colonies, it was arranged that these ships should arrive at each port very nearly on the same date; thus the people in the different Colonies would be unable to unite together in their resistance. Through the organization of the Committees of Correspondence, however, the people had already become fully united in their determination to prevent the landing of the tea.
Boston Committee of Correspondence Notice
On November 5th, 1773, an alarm was raised in the city of New York to the effect that a tea-ship had entered the harbor. A large assembly of the people at once occurred, among whom those in charge of the movement were disguised as Mohawk Indians. This alarm proved a false one, but at a meeting then organized a series of resolutions were adopted which were received by the other Colonies as the initiative step in the plan of resistence already determined upon throughout the country. Our school books are chiefly responsible for the almost universal impression that the destruction of tea, which occurred in Boston Harbor, was an episode confined to that city; while the fact is, that the tea sent to this country was either destroyed or sent back to England from every sea-port in the Colonies. The first tea-ship happened to arrive in Boston and the tea was first destroyed there; for this circumstance full credit should be given the Bostonians. But the fact that the actors in this affair were disguised as Mohawk Indians shows that they were but following the lead of New York, where that particular disguise had been adopted forty-one days before, for the same purpose.
Previous to the arrival of the ships in Boston, concerted action had been agreed upon, as has been already shown, in regard to the destruction of the tea from Charleston, South Carolina, to Portsmouth, New Hampshire. The people of Philadelphia had been far more active and outspoken at the outset than they of Boston, and it was this decisiveness which caused the people of Boston to act, after they had freely sought beforehand the advice and moral support of the other Colonies.
The first tea-ship arrived in Boston on November 28th, 1773, and two others shortly after, but it was not until the evening of December 16th, that their contents were thrown overboard at the so-called “Boston Teaparty.” The “broadside” here presented is one of a number in the collection of the author, which show fully the feeling of the people of Philadelphia. The other sheets were issued prior to this one but are without date; hence this is selected to prove that Philadelphia was actively engaged in the same purpose, previous to the destruction of tea in Boston.