Tea Act

When did the British government introduce the Tea Act?

May 1773

Why did North pass the act?

- designed to save the EIC from near-bankruptcy
- NOT to assert parliamentary sovereignity
- aimed to relieve the financial stresses of the EIC
- Britain would obtain increased duties

Why did North think the Act would not cause a colonial response?

- tea sold by EIC was so cheap that it undercut tea traded legitimately by American merchants and foreign tea that was smuggled in usually by the same merchants
- American consumers would benefit from drop in price

inability to see consequences of actions show the different evolving mindsets of the colonies and Britain

What did the Tea Act do?

- permitted the EIC to export tea to the colonies directly and retail it there, using its own agents
- abolished British duties on the company's tea while obliging Americans to continue paying their tax on tea (Townshend)
- established a monopoly of the EIC on tea

How much did the tax on tea net?

only £400 in 1772
North risking the export of £2m tea and antagonising the Americans for little reward

What was the primary issue with the act?

Americans would not buy the tea until the duty was lifted

What was the American reaction?

- Tea Act was another attempt at parliamentary taxation and the destruction of the independence of their assemblies
- bitterly attacked in newspapers and pamphlets
- violence threatened against merchants importing EIC tea
- tea sent to Philadelphia and NY was rejected and sent back to England
- all major ports, tea agents, faced with severe intimidation, were forced to resign

Why did the colonists dislike the Tea Act?

- fearful that it would set a dangerous precedent by enforcing the Townshend Acts with the intended effect
- seen as a tactic to gain colonial support for the tax on tea
- direct selling of tea by agents of EIC undercut the business of colonial merchants, creating a monopoly
- agents commissioned by the company included a large number of loyalists (e.g. Hutchinson's sons)
- The EIC ruled parts of India with a cruel hand, causing widespread famine and death,
'Their conduct in Asia, for some years past, has given ample proof, how little regard the law of nations, the rights, liberties, or lives of men.' John Dickinson

What resolution did the NY Sons of Liberty publish?

"Whoever shall aid, or abet, or in any manner assist, in the introduction of tea ... shalled be deemed an enemy to the liberties of America"

What happened in Charlestown to tea?

tea was unloaded and stored without paying tax

What did Hutchinson believe about the shipment of tea in Boston?

provided a opportunity to restore order and authority over the Bostonians who had gotten out of hand
turned the commercial transaction into a political transaction

28 November 1773

Dartmouth ship arrives in Boston harbour, bearing 114 chests of EIC tea
Hutchinson determined the tea should be disembarked
most Bostonians equally determined that the Dartmouth should depart
1000s gathered daily to prevent the tea being unloaded

2 December 1773

the Eleanor joined the Dartmouth
2 weeks of discussion between Hutchinson and patriot leaders ended in deadlock

15 December 1773

the Beaver arrived

16 December 1773

Boston Tea Party
60 Sons of Liberty, crudely disguised as Mohawk Native Americans and directed by Sam Adams, boarded the three ships and threw their cargoes - 342 chests of tea worth about £10,000 - into the harbour
crowd watched in silence

How did demonstrators conduct the destruction of the tea?

were very orderly about how to destroy tea
George Hughes said the unloading of the tea led to 'a general huzzah for Griffin's Wharf'
Hughes commanded to go to the captain and 'demand of him the keys to the hatches and a dozen candles'
there was a general unwillingness to damage the ship or other private property, apart form the tea

How did the British troops react to the Boston Tea Party?

Admiral Montagu, the Royal Navy commander in Boston, could have ordered his nearest warship to open fire.
But fearing that it might worsen the crisis, he did nothing as did the troops stationed nearby at Castle William

John Adams on the Boston Tea Party

'the destruction of the tea is so bold, so daring, so firm, intrepid and inflexible, it must have so important consquences and so lasting, that I cannot but consider it as an epocha in history.'

Harlow Unger on the Boston Tea Party

'far from uniting colonists, the Tea Party had alienated many property owners, who held private property to be sacrosanct and did not tolerate its destruction or violation'

Franklin's response to the Boston Tea Party

suggested to Hancock and Sam Adams that they reimburse the EIC for the lost tea
'I am truly concern'd, as I believe all considerate Men are with you, that there should see to any a Neccessity for carrying Matters to such Extremity, as, in a Dispute about Publick Rights, to destroy private Property.'
irony in that the colonists violate the EIC's right to private property while protesting their rights

Franklin on Britain after the Boston Tea Party

'I suppose we never has since we were a people, so few friends in Britain. The violent destruction of the tea seems to have united all the parties against us.'

British response to the Boston Tea Party

It was the response from the British not the event itself that made the Boston Tea Party signifcant
growing fear that colonists would be lions 'whilst we are Lambs' (general Gage)
Coercive Acts

Lord North in debate following Tea Party

"The Americans have tarred and feathered your subjects, plundered your merchants, burnt your ships, denied all obedience to you laws and authority; yet so clement and so long forbearing our conduct been that it is incumbent on us to take a different course. Whatever may the consequences, we must risk something; if we do not, all is over."