Boston Tea Party
The occasion is also referred to as destruction of the tea. The party was a protest by citizens of Boston against tea taxes (Allison 5). In 1773, officials from Boston declined to return shipment of taxed tea brought into the colonies. A group of colonist then boarded the ships and threw the tea into the harbor thus destroyed the tea. This incident is an iconic event in the history of America. The party was a climax of resistant of Tea act passed by the British in 1773 (Allison 5). The colonies were against the bill because they saw it as an infringement of their rights. The parliament did not consist of Americans, so they revolution was called no taxation without representation. It was due to of financial difficulties by British East India Company following locals refusing to buy their tea. Another reason for the revolution was about the parliament authority the American wanted to be part of parliament. Boston Tea party was fundamental in American Revolution (Allison 6).
In 1767, Europeans had developed a strong liking for tea, this saw rival companies formed to produce the commodity. Parliament granted a monopoly to British East India Company to import tea in 1698. Tea quickly became popular in British colonies resulting in the elimination of competition through the passage of a law. The law required that all colonies only buy tea from the nations within the Great Britain. The known East India Company remunerated taxes of up to 25% on imported tea to Britain (Furstinger and Nancy 48). The Dutch government, on the other hand, failed to impose levies on the priced tea from Holland. This meant Britons and its colonies could acquire smuggled tea from the Dutch at a lower price. The company is projected to have been losing close to 400,000 pounds to smugglers. In 1767, Britain passed the Indemnity Act requiring tax on imported tea to be lowered. The Britain also gave the company 25% refund on re exported tea from the colonies. In order for Britain, to offset the refund, which was a loss to the government they enacted the Townshend Revenue Act in 1767 (Furstinger and Nancy 48). The act introduced new taxes on products including tea. It did not solve the smuggling problem but heightened a controversy on parliament ability to tax the colonies. Controversy started when Britain parliament started taxing colonies directly. Colonist referred by regions as Whigs disputed the taxation program on the basis that this was against the British constitution. British Americans and The British both accepted that it was improper for colonies to be taxed by the body. The Whigs argued that colonists could be taxed only from within their assemblies. Colonists did not choose members of parliament hence the American Whigs argued the colonies were not liable to taxation by the colonist (Furstinger and Nancy 48). A law was passed in 1764 The Sugar Act, requiring tax be paid for sugar, tea and other commodities by the colonies.
In 1765, the stamp Act followed. The Act did not sit well with the colonist since it required them to pay tax on 50 paper items made in America. They included newspapers, legal documents and other paper products this carried the tax stamp (Walker 50). Local shopkeepers declined to sell any product from Britain and preferred to sell products obtained illegally from other places. This threatened the economy of the British and British East India Company. The women in America also refused to make tea and preferred to boil herbs and make coffee. Americans formed patriotic groups like Sons of Liberty and daughter of liberty. The group protested against the stamp act (Walker 46). They threatened tax collectors and colonist who supported the British with tar. The patriots would pour hot tar on them and roll them on feathers. The officials disappeared from the colonies.
In 1766, the Stamp Act was removed by the Britain. The colonies were then subjected to a new Act before they could celebrate (Walker 47). The Declaratory law was introduced in 1767 taxing all imported items to America including tea. The Colonies reiterated by refusing to buy British goods. This saw troops from British land in America to enforce the law. This did not work as British merchants still experienced loss, leading to removal of the tax except that imposed on tea. The reason the British kept this tax is to prove to colonies they still governed them. Another reason was tax collected was used to pay governors salaries and judges (Allison 18). These officials had before received salaries from colonial assemblies. However, this changed to be paid by Parliament to keep them close to the British Government.
In 1773, seven ships loaded with tea from British East India Company were dispatched to the 13 colonies, four of them destined for Boston. The ships contained tea over 60,000. During the dispatch, the Americans learned of the Tea Act and opposition begun. Sons of Liberty started a campaign to create awareness to the locals and to force the ships to resign as had happened with the stamp officials in 1765. The protest was not a result of high taxes but other issues since the tea legislation created in1773 had reduced taxes (Furstinge and Nancy 23). Colonial merchants, a few of them tea smugglers, contributed significantly to the protests. The Act was a threat to smugglers as it made legal tea cheaper. The merchant supported the colonies because the Act threatened to ruin legitimate appointed consignees. Another concern by the merchants was monopoly given to East India Company; they feared it would spread to the other commodities. Southern Boston succeeded in making tea consignees resign (Furstinge and Nancy 24). In the region of Charleston, the established consignees had resigned by the end of the year and the controversial tea seized by the government. In Philadelphia mass protests were experienced by Benjamin Rush urging civilians to reject the cargo landing. By December, the consignees had resigned. All colonies managed to force the resignation of consignees except Massachusetts.
When the ships arrived in Boston Harbor in November, Samuel Adams requested for a mass meeting at Faneuli Hall. The meeting was attended by thousands of people leading to shift of venue to Old South Meeting House. Dartmouth was required by the British law to pat duties after unloading. The meeting passed a resolution to have the ship sent back without payment of import duty. Twenty-five men were preferred to monitor the ship and report of any activities on the attempt to unload. The then Governor Hutchinson declined to give permission for the ship to leave without first paying the tax (Malaspina 23). Two more ships arrived in Boston Harbor with one destroyed by a storm en route the harbor. Adam got wind of the governor’s refusal and declared there was nothing much the meetings could do in the matter. People who had attended the meeting began to leave with Adam trying to stop them. They then prepared to take the necessary action. People adorned themselves with Mohawk costumes to disguise their face (Malaspina 213). These costumes were symbolic hence the choice. It was crucial for people to disguise their faces due to the illegality of the action they were to take. That night a group of men wearing Mohawk warrior gained access to the three ships. The men dumped all the tea held in chests into the water. However, it is not clear if Adam planned the Boston Tea Party. He took charge, publicized, and defended the move. He described the Tea Party as principled protest that was the only available option.
Works citied
Allison, Robert J. The Boston Tea Party. Beverly, Mass: Commonwealth Editions, 2007.
Print.
Furstinger, Nancy. The Boston Tea Party. Mankato, Minn: Bridgestone Books, 2002.
Print.
Malaspina, Ann. The Boston Tea Party. Minneapolis, MN: ABDO Pub. Co, 2013.
Print.
Walker, Ida. The Boston Tea Party. Edina, Minn: ABDO Pub, 2008. Internet resource.
