CHAPTER VI.

Peace of 1763—An important event to the Colonies-Excites great joy in America— Navigation Acts enforced by writs of assistance-Opposed in Massachusetts— Stamp Duties proposed in Parliament-Opposed in the Colonies as a violation of their rights-Petitions and resolutions against them-Petitions rejected-Stamp Act passed-Excites great alarm in the Colonies-Resolutions of the Virginia House of Burgesses against it—Meeting of a Congress of the Colonies in 1765— Declaration of rights and petitions of this Congress in opposition to the Stamp Act-Resolutions of Colonial Assemblies and associations of individuals-Disturbances at Boston-Act not suffered to be executed-New Ministry-American papers laid before Parliament-Resolutions of Conway declaratory of the right of Parliament to bind the Colonies in all cases-Debate upon them-Passed by a large majority-Examination of Dr. Franklin and others in the House of CommonsStamp Act repealed-Speeches of Lord Chatham and Lord Grenville on the question of the repeal.

THE peace of 1763, which secured to Great Britain all the country east of the Mississippi, and annihilated the French power in North America, constitutes a new and important era in the annals of the colonies.

The colonists were now freed from a deadly enemy along their extensive western frontier; an enemy from whom, in conjunction with their Indian allies, they had, for nearly a century, been subjected to pillage, devastation, and murder. This event produced great joy among the colonists; and was accompanied with feelings of gratitude towards the parent country, and loyalty towards the young prince, under whose reign it was accomplished. These feelings would have continued, but for new encroachments on their rights; and a course of policy soon after adopted by the British ministry towards the colonies; a poliey which finally led to a separation of the two countries, and produced a revolution, which, whether viewed in its immediate or more remote consequences, has been unequalled in the history of modern times.

The precise limits of royal and parliamentary authority over the colonies had never yet been settled.

The acts restraining the trade and manufactures of the colonies, as well as other acts of parliament, to which we have alluded, were deemed, by the colonists, in some instances, a violation of their rights, and in others, an unnecessary and improper sacrifice of their interest, to the supposed interest of the parent country, or some other more favored part of the British empire; and had been little regarded by them. A distinction had been made, between what were called external and internal taxes, and which, whether just or not, had been acquiesced in. The former were considered as imposed, for the regulation of the trade of the empire, and not for the purpose of revenue.

Plans of laying internal taxes and of drawing a revenue from the colonies, had been, at times, suggested to the ministry, and particularly to Sir Robert Walpole and Mr. Pitt, during their administrations. These statesmen were too wise and sagacious to adopt them. "I will leave the taxation of the Americans," Walpole answered, "for some of my successors, who may have more courage than I have, and less a friend to commerce than I am. It has been a maxim with me," he added, "during my administration, to encourage the trade of the American colonies, to the utmost latitude; nay, it has been necessary, to pass over some irregularities in their trade with Europe; for by encouraging them to an extensive growing foreign commerce, if they gain £500,000, I am convinced that in two years afterwards, full £250,000 of this gain will be in his majesty's exchequer, by the labor and product of this kingdom, as immense quantities of every kind of our manufactures go thither; and as they increase in the foreign American trade, more of our produce will be wanted. This is taxing them more agreeably to their own constitution and laws."*

Pitt, in his celebrated speech on the repeal of the stamp act, referring to the conduct of several preceding administrations, says, "none of these thought, or ever dreamed of robbing the colonies of their constitutional rights. That was reserved to mark the era of the late administration: not that there were

* Bissett's History, vol. 1, p, 227, and Botta, vol. 1, p. 52.

wanting some, when I had the honor to serve his majesty, to propose to me to burn my fingers with an American stamp act. With the enemy at their back, with our bayonets at their breasts, in the day of their distress, perhaps the Americans would have submitted to the imposition; but it would have been taking an ungenerous and unjust advantage."

Whatever might have been the views or wishes of any individual of the British cabinet, at any period, relative to drawing a revenue directly from the colonies, no one had been bold enough to make the attempt, until after the reduction of the French power in America. This was deemed a favorable moment, to call upon the Americans for taxes, to assist in the payment of a debt, incurred, as was alleged, in a great measure, for their protection against a powerful enemy, now no longer an object of their dread.

A British statesman should have reflected, that, if the Americans were relieved from a dread of their ancient enemy, they no longer required the protection of the parent country, against that enemy; and that the strongest hold on their dependence was gone, when Canada was gained.* The views of the British cabinet were not limited to internal taxes, but extended to a more rigid execution of the navigation acts, and acts regulating the trade of the colonies, and to a new modification of their governments, particularly the charter governments, rendering them more dependent on the crown.

In 1760, orders were sent to the American custom house officers, and particularly to those of Massachusetts, to take more effectual measures for enforcing the acts of trade, especially the act imposing duties on foreign sugar and molasses; and they were directed, if necessary, to apply to the superior court, of the

* Governor Hutchinson, in a letter to Lord Dartmouth, Dec. 14, 1773, says, " Before the peace, I thought nothing so much to be desired as the cession of Canada."

"I am now convinced, that if it had remained to the French, none of this spirit of opposition to the mother country would have appeared, and I think the effects of it are worse than all we had to fear from the French and Indians."—Almon's Remembrance, for 1776, p. 62.

province, for writs of assistance, as they were called, 'to enable them, by authority of law, to break open and enter houses, shops, &c., to search for foreign goods illegally imported, as well as for those on which the duties had not been paid.

The first application for a writ of this kind, was made by the deputy collector, at Salem, in November, 1760. In this application, the collector stated to the court then sitting at Salem, "that he could not fully exercise his office, in such a manner as his majesty's service required, and therefore prayed the court to grant him a writ of assistance, to aid him in the execution of his duty, according to the usages of the court of exchequer, in Great Britain.*" Mr. Sewall, a distinguished jurist, was then chief judge of the court, and great doubts were expressed by him, as to the legality of the writ, and the power of the court to grant it. The court, therefore directed the question to be argued, at the next term, at Boston, in February, 1761. Before the next term, chief justice Sewall died, and Thomas Hutchinson was appointed in his room. The merchants of Boston as well as Salem, were not a little alarmed at this application. A new state of things was presented. Acts relating to their trade, hitherto in a great measure, suffered to lie dormant, or disregarded and evaded, were now to be enforced with the utmost rigor, and in a manner totally unprecedented.

If these acts were to be rigidly enforced, an extensive circuitous trade of that province, a principal source of its prosperity and wealth, a trade which had enabled the merchants to pay for the great quantity of British manufactures they usually imported, would be destroyed. They resolved to resist the application, and for that purpose engaged Mr. Thacher and Mr. Otis, two of the most distinguished counsellors in Boston. The application was supported by Mr. Gridley, then also, one of the most eminent lawyers in Massachusetts, acting as king's attorney, as authorized by the statute of 7 and 8 of William, passed, as we have before stated, more effectually to enforce the old navigation acts regarding the plantations. It was opposed by Mr. Thacher and Mr.

Minot, vol. 2, p. 80.

Otis, because it prayed for a writ unknown in the history of colonial jurisprudence, and which, if granted, would be an instrument of tyranny and oppression. Mr. Otis was not only an eminent lawyer, but was, also, distinguished for his eloquence and classical learning; and as the aid of the court was required, to enforce laws peculiarly obnoxious to the people of Massachusetts, he took this opportunity to comment on the laws themselves, in a style and manner, calculated to excite the indignant feelings of the colonists against them. He took an extensive view of the policy of the parent country, towards the colonies, as manifested not only by her various acts, but by some of her celebrated political and commercial writers. He not only denied the power of the court to grant the writ, but declared, that most of the acts to be enforced by it, were tyrannical, oppressive, and opposed to the best interests of the colonies; and that those which could be considered as revenue acts, were unconstitutional and void. It is unfortunate for the political annals of America, that the speeches of Mr. Thacher and Mr. Otis, on this occasion, as well as those of many other American statesmen, at the commencement and during the progress of the American revolution, could not have been preserved entire. They would have served more accurately, to show the progress and spirit of public opinion in the colonies, in relation to the great contest with the parent country, as well as more clearly to ascertain the principles by which the actors in that great political drama were governed. Most of these speeches now only remain in the imperfect recollection of a few, very few of those, who yet survive that interesting period. The late venerable patriot, John Adams, after a lapse of fifty seven years, recurring to the scenes then passing in Massachusetts, and the arguments of Mr. Thacher and Mr. Otis, on the interesting question of enforcing the British plantation acts, seems again animated with the spirit of his early years. "Otis," he remarks, "was a flame of fire! with a promptitude of classical allusion, a depth of research, a rapid survey of historical events and dates, a profusion of legal authorities, a prophetic glance of his eyes into futurity, and a rapid torrent of eloquence, he hurri