 |
 |
CHAPTER II The Burden Of Empire
Nothing of note in Parliament, except one slight day on the
American taxes.--Horace Walpole.
There were plenty of men in England, any time before 1763, who
found that an excellent arrangement which permitted them to hold office in the
colonies while continuing to reside in London. They were thereby enabled to
make debts, and sometimes even to pay them, without troubling much about their
duties; and one may easily think of them, over their claret, as Mr. Trevelyan
says, lamenting the cruelty of a secretary of state who hinted that, for form's
sake at least, they had best show themselves once in a while in America. They
might have replied with Junius: "It was not Virginia that wanted a governor,
but a court favorite that wanted a salary." Certainly Virginia could do with a
minimum of royal officials; but most court favorites wanted salaries, for
without salaries unendowed gentlemen could not conveniently live in London.
One of these gentlemen, in the year 1763, was Mr. Grosvenor
Bedford. He was not, to be sure, a court favorite, but a man, now well along in
years, who had long ago been appointed to be Collector of the Customs at the
port of Philadelphia. The appointment had been made by the great minister,
Robert Walpole, for whom Mr. Bedford had unquestionably done some service or
other, and of whose son, Horace Walpole, the letter-writer, he had continued
from that day to be a kind of dependent or protege, being precisely the sort of
unobtrusive factotum which that fastidious eccentric needed to manage his
mundane affairs. But now, after this long time, when the King's business was
placed in the hands of George Grenville, who entertained the odd notion that a
Collector of the Customs should reside at the port of entry where the customs
were collected rather than in London where he drew his salary, it was being
noised about, and was presently reported at Strawberry Hill, that Mr. Bedford,
along with many other estimable gentlemen, was forthwith to be turned out of
his office.
To Horace Walpole it was a point of more than academic
importance to know whether gentlemen were to be unceremoniously turned out of
their offices. As far back as 1738, while still a lad, he had himself been
appointed to be Usher of the Exchequer; and as soon as he came of age, he says,
"I took possession of two other little patent places in the Exchequer, called
Comptroller of the Pipe, and Clerk of the Estreats"--all these places having
been procured for him through the generosity of his father. The duties of these
offices, one may suppose, were not arduous, for it seems that they were
competently administered by Mr. Grosvenor Bedford, in addition to his duties as
Collector of the Customs at the port of Philadelphia; so well administered,
indeed, that Horace Walpole's income from them, which in 1740 was perhaps not
more than 1500 pounds a year, nearly doubled in the course of a generation. And
this income, together with another thousand which he had annually from the
Collector's place in the Custom House, added to the interest of 20,000 pounds
which he had inherited, enabled him to live very well, with immense leisure for
writing odd books, and letters full of extremely interesting comment on the
levity and low aims of his contemporaries.
And so Horace Walpole, good patron that he was and competent
letter-writer, very naturally, hearing that Mr. Bedford was to lose an office
to which in the course of years he had become much accustomed, sat down and
wrote a letter to Mr. George Grenville in behalf of his friend and servant.
"Though I am sensible I have no pretensions for asking you a favour, ...yet I
flatter myself I shall not be thought quite impertinent in interceding for a
person, who I can answer has neither been to blame nor any way deserved
punishment, and therefore I think you, Sir, will be ready to save him from
prejudice. The person I mean is my deputy, Mr. Grosvenor Bedford, who, above
five and twenty years ago, was appointed Collector of the Customs in
Philadelphia by my father. I hear he is threatened to be turned out. If the
least fault can be laid to his charge, I do not desire to have him protected.
If there cannot, I am too well persuaded, Sir, of your justice not to be sure
you will be pleased to protect him."
George Grenville, a dry, precise man of great knowledge and
industry, almost always right in little matters and very patient of the
misapprehensions of less exact people, wrote in reply a letter which many would
think entirely adequate to the matter in hand: "I have never heard [he began]
of any complaint against Mr. Grosvenor Bedford, or of any desire to turn him
out; but by the office which you tell me he holds in North America, I believe I
know the state of the case, which I will inform you of, that you may be enabled
to judge of it yourself. Heavy complaints were last year made in Parliament of
the state of our revenues in North America which amount to between 1,000 pounds
and 9,000 pounds a year, the collecting of which costs upon the establishment
of the Customs in Great Britain between 7,000 pounds and 8,000 pounds a year.
This, it was urged, arose from the making all these offices sinecures in
England. When I came to the Treasury* I directed the Commissioners of the
Customs to be written to, that they might inform us how the revenue might be
improved, and to what causes they attributed the present diminished state of
it.... The principal cause which they assigned was the absence of the officers
who lived in England by leave of the Treasury, which they proposed should be
recalled. This we complied with, and ordered them all to their duty, and the
Commissioners of the Customs to present others in the room of such as should
not obey. I take it for granted that this is Mr. Bedford's case. If it is, it
will be attended with difficulty to make an exception, as they are every one of
them applying to be excepted out of the orders.... If it is not so, or if Mr.
Bedford can suggest to me any proper means of obviating it without overturning
the whole regulation, he will do me a sensible pleasure.
* On the resignation of Lord Bute in April, 1763, Grenville
formed a ministry, himself taking the two offices of First Lord of the Treasury
and Chancellor of the Exchequer.
There is no evidence to show that Mr. Bedford was able to do
Mr. Grenville this "sensible pleasure." The incident, apparently closed, was
one of many indications that a new policy for dealing with America was about to
be inaugurated; and although Grenville had been made minister for reasons that
were remote enough from any question of efficiency in government, no better man
could have been chosen for applying to colonial administration the principles
of good business management. His connection with the Treasury, as well as the
natural bent of his mind, had made him "confessedly the ablest man of business
in the House of Commons." The Governors of the Bank of England, very efficient
men certainly, held it a great point in the minister's favor that they "could
never do business with any man with the same ease they had done it with him."
Undoubtedly the first axiom of business is that one's accounts should be kept
straight, one's books nicely balanced; the second, that one's assets should
exceed one's liabilities. Mr. Grenville, accordingly, "had studied the revenues
with professional assiduity, and something of professional ideas seemed to
mingle in all his regulations concerning them." He "felt the weight of debt,
amounting at this time to one hundred and fifty-eight millions, which oppressed
his country, and he looked to the amelioration of the revenue as the only mode
of relieving it."
It is true there were some untouched sources of revenue still
available in England. As sinecures went in that day, Mr. Grosvenor Bedford's
was not of the best; and on any consideration of the matter from the point of
view of revenue only, Grenville might well have turned his attention to a
different class of officials; for example, to the Master of the Rolls in
Ireland, Mr. Rigby, who was also Paymaster of the Forces, and to whose credit
there stood at the Bank of England, as Mr. Trevelyan assures us, a million
pounds of the public money, the interest of which was paid to him "or to his
creditors." This was a much better thing than Grosvenor Bedford had with his
paltry collectorship at Philadelphia; and the interest on a million pounds,
more or less, had it been diverted from Mr. Rigby's pocket to the public
treasury, would perhaps have equaled the entire increase in the revenue to be
expected from even the most efficient administration of the customs in all the
ports of, America. In addition, it should perhaps be said that Mr. Rigby,
although excelled by none, was by no means the only man in high place with a
good degree of talent for exploiting the common chest.
The reform of such practices, very likely, was work for a
statesman rather than for a man of business. A good man of business, called
upon to manage the King's affairs, was likely to find many obstacles in the way
of depriving the Paymaster of the Forces of his customary sources of income,
and Mr. Grenville, at least, never attempted anything so hazardous. Scurrilous
pamphleteers, in fact, had made it a charge against the minister that he had
increased rather than diminished the evil of sinecures--"It had been written in
pamphlets that 400,000 pounds a year was dealt out in pensions"; from which
charge the able Chancellor, on the occasion of opening his first budget in the
House of Commons, the 9th of March, 1764, defended himself by denying that the
sums were "so great as alleged." It was scarcely an adequate defense; but the
truth is that Grenville was sure to be less distressed by a bad custom, no law
forbidding, than by a law, good or bad, not strictly enforced, particularly if
the law was intended to bring in a revenue.
Instinctively, therefore, the minister turned to America, where
it was a notorious fact that there were revenue laws that had not been enforced
these many years. Mr. Grenville, we may suppose, since it was charged against
him in a famous epigram, read the American dispatches with considerable care,
so that it is quite possible he may have chanced to see and to shake his head
over the sworn statement of Mr. Sampson Toovey, a statement which throws much
light upon colonial liberties and the practices of English officials in those
days:
"I, Sampson Toovey [so the statement runs], Clerk to James
Cockle, Esq., Collector of His Majesty's Customs for the Port of Salem, do
declare on oath, that ever since I have been in the office, it hath been
customary for said Cockle to receive of the masters of vessels entering from
Lisbon, casks of wine, boxes of fruit, etc., which was a gratuity for suffering
their vessels to be entered with salt or ballast only, and passing over
unnoticed such cargoes of wine, fruit, etc., which are prohibited to be
imported into His Majesty's Plantations. Part of which wine, fruit, etc., the
said James Cockle used to share with Governor Bernard. And I further declare
that I used to be the negotiator of this business, and receive the wine, fruit,
etc., and dispose of them agreeable to Mr. Cockle's orders. Witness my hand.
Sampson Toovey."
The curious historian would like much to know, in case Mr.
Grenville did see the declaration of Sampson Toovey, whether he saw also a
letter in which Governor Bernard gave it as his opinion that if the colonial
governments were to be refashioned it should be on a new plan, since "there is
no system in North America fit to be made a module of."
Secretary Grenville, whether or not he ever saw this letter
from Governor Bernard, was familiar with the ideas which inspired it. Most
crown officials in America, and the governors above all, finding themselves
little more than executive agents of the colonial assemblies, had long clamored
for the remodeling of colonial governments: the charters, they said, should be
recalled; the functions of the assemblies should be limited and more precisely
defined; judges should be appointed at the pleasure of the King; and judges and
governors alike should be paid out of a permanent civil list in England drawn
from revenue raised in America. In urging these changes, crown officials in
America were powerfully supported by men of influence in England; by Halifax
since the day, some fifteen years before, when he was appointed to the office
of Colonial Secretary; by the brilliant Charles Townshend who, in the year
1763, as first Lord of the Treasury in Bute's ministry, had formulated a bill
which would have been highly pleasing to Governor Bernard had it been passed
into law. And now similar schemes were being urged upon Grenville by his own
colleagues, notably by the Earl of Halifax, who is said to have become, in a
formal interview with the first minister, extremely heated and eager in the
matter.
But all to no purpose. Mr. Grenville was well content with the
form of the colonial governments, being probably of Pope's opinion that "the
system that is best administered is best." In Grenville's opinion, the
Massachusetts government was good enough, and all the trouble arose from the
inattention of royal officials to their manifest duties and from the pleasant
custom of depositing at Governor Bernard's back door sundry pipes of wine with
the compliments of Mr. Cockle. Most men in England agreed that such pleasant
customs had been tolerated long enough. To their suppression the first minister
accordingly gave his best attention; and while Mr. Rigby continued to enjoy
great perquisites in England, many obscure customs officials, such as Grosvenor
Bedford, were ordered to their, posts to prevent small peculations in America.
To assist them, or their successors, in this business, ships of war were
stationed conveniently for the intercepting of smugglers, general writs were
authorized to facilitate the search for goods illegally entered, and the
governors, His Excellency Governor Bernard among the number, were newly
instructed to give their best efforts to the enforcement of the trade acts.
All this was but an incident, to be sure, in the minister's
general scheme for "ameliorating the revenue." It was not until the 9th of
March, 1764, that Grenville, "not disguising how much he was hurt by abuse,"
opened his first budget, "fully, for brevity was not his failing," and still
with great "art and ability." Although ministers were to be congratulated, he
thought, "on the revenue being managed with more frugality than in the late
reign," the House scarcely need be told that the war had greatly increased the
debt, an increase not to be placed at a lower figure than some seventy odd
millions; and so, on account of this great increase in the debt, and in spite
of gratifying advances in the customs duties and the salutary cutting off of
the German subsidies, taxes were now, the House would easily understand,
necessarily much higher than formerly--"our taxes," he said, "exceeded by three
millions what they were in 1754." Much money, doubtless, could still be raised
on the land tax, if the House was at all disposed to put on another half
shilling in the pound. Ministers could take it quite for granted, however, that
country squires, sitting on the benches, would not be disposed to increase the
land tax, but would much prefer some skillful manipulation of the colonial
customs, provided only there was some one who understood that art well enough
to explain to the House where such duties were meant to fall and how much they
might reasonably be expected to bring in. And there, in fact, was Mr. Grenville
explaining it all with "art and ability," for which task, indeed, there could
be none superior to his Majesty's Chancellor of the Exchequer, who had so long
"studied the revenue with professional assiduity."
The items of the budget, rather dull reading now and none too
illuminating, fell pleasantly upon the ears of country squires sitting there on
the benches; and the particular taxes no doubt seemed reasonably clear to them,
even if they had no perfect understanding of the laws of incidence, inasmuch as
sundry of the new duties apparently fell upon the distant Americans, who were
known to be rich and were generally thought, on no less an authority than
Jasper Mauduit, agent of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, to be easily able
and not unwilling to pay considerable sums towards ameliorating the revenue. It
was odd, perhaps, that Americans should be willing to pay; but that was no
great matter, if they were able, since no one could deny their obligation. And
so country squires, and London merchants too, listened comfortably to the
reading of the budget so well designed to relieve the one of taxes and swell
the profits flowing into the coffers of the other.
"That a duty of 2 pounds 19s. 9d. per cwt. avoirdupois, be laid
upon all foreign coffee, imported from any place (except Great Britain) into
the British colonies and plantations in America. That a duty of 6d. per pound
weight be laid upon all foreign indigo, imported into the said colonies and
plantations. That a duty of 7 pounds per ton be laid upon all wine of the
growth of the Madeiras, or of any other island or place, lawfully imported from
the respective place of the growth of such wine, into the said colonies and
plantations. That a duty of 10s. per ton be laid upon all Portugal, Spanish, or
other wine (except French wine), imported from Great Britain into the said
colonies and plantations. That a duty of 2s. per pound weight be laid upon all
wrought silks, Bengals, and stuffs mixed with silk or herbs; of the manufacture
of Persia, China, or East India, imported from Great Britain into the said
colonies and plantations. That a duty of 2s. 6d. per piece be laid upon all
callicoes...." The list no doubt was a long one; and quite right, too, thought
country squires, all of whom, to a man, were willing to pay no more land tax.
Other men besides country squires were interested in Mr.
Grenville's budget, notably the West Indian sugar planters, virtually and
actually represented in the House of Commons and voting there this day. Many of
them were rich men no doubt; but sugar planting, they would assure you in
confidence, was not what it had been; and if they were well off after a
fashion, they might have been much better off but for the shameless frauds
which for thirty years had made a dead letter of the Molasses Act of 1733. It
was notorious that the merchants of the northern and middle colonies, regarding
neither the Acts of Trade nor the dictates of nature, had every year carried
their provisions and fish to the foreign islands, receiving in exchange
molasses, cochineal, "medical druggs," and "gold and silver in bullion and
coin." With molasses the thrifty New Englanders made great quantities of
inferior rum, the common drink of that day, regarded as essential to the health
of sailors engaged in fishing off the Grand Banks, and by far the cheapest and
most effective instrument for procuring negroes in Africa or for inducing the
western Indians to surrender their valuable furs for some trumpery of colored
cloth or spangled bracelet. All this thriving traffic did not benefit British
planters, who had molasses of their own and a superior quality of rum which
they were not unwilling to sell.
Such traffic, since it did not benefit them, British planters
were disposed to think must be bad for England. They were therefore willing to
support Mr. Grenville's budget, which proposed that the importation of foreign
rum into any British colony be prohibited in future; and which further proposed
that the Act of 6 George II, c. 13, be continued, with modifications to make it
effective, the modifications of chief importance being the additional duty of
twenty-two shillings per hundredweight upon all sugar and the reduction by one
half of the prohibitive duty of sixpence on all foreign molasses imported into
the British plantations. It was a matter of minor importance doubtless, but one
to which they had no objections since the minister made a point of it, that the
produce of all the duties which should be raised by virtue of the said act,
made in the sixth year of His late Majesty's reign, "be paid into the receipt
of His Majesty's Exchequer, and there reserved, to be from time to time
disposed of by Parliament, towards defraying the necessary expences of
defending, protecting, and securing the British colonies and plantations in
America."
With singularly little debate, honorable and right honorable
members were ready to vote this new Sugar Act, having the minister's word for
it that it would be enforced, the revenue thereby much improved, and a sudden
stop put to the long-established illicit traffic with the foreign islands, a
traffic so beneficial to the northern colonies, so prejudicial to the Empire
and the pockets of planters. Thus it was that Mr. Grenville came opportunely to
the aid of the Spanish authorities, who for many years had employed their
guarda costas in a vain effort to suppress this very traffic, conceiving it,
oddly enough, to be injurious to Spain and highly advantageous to Britain.
It may be that the Spanish authorities regarded the West Indian
trade as a commercial system rather than as a means of revenue. This aspect of
the matter, the commercial effects of his measures, Mr. Grenville at all events
managed not to take suffciently into account, which was rather odd, seeing that
he professed to hold the commercial system embodied in the Navigation and Trade
Acts in such high esteem, as a kind of "English Palladium." No one could have
wished less than Grenville to lay sacrilegious hands on this Palladium, have
less intended to throw sand into the nicely adjusted bearings of the Empire's
smoothly working commercial system. If he managed nevertheless to do something
of this sort, it was doubtless by virtue of being such a "good man of
business," by virtue of viewing the art of government too narrowly as a
question of revenue only. For the moment, preoccupied as they were with the
quest of revenue, the new measures seemed to Mr. Grenville and to the squires
and planters who voted them well adapted to raising a moderate sum, part only
of some 350,000 pounds, for the just and laudable purpose of "defraying the
necessary expences of defending, protecting, and securing the British colonies
and plantations in America."
The problem of colonial defense, so closely connected with the
question of revenue, was none of Grenville's making but was a legacy of the war
and of that Peace of Paris which had added an immense territory to the Empire.
When the diplomats of England and France at last discovered, in some mysterious
manner, that it had "pleased the Most High to diffuse the spirit of union and
concord among the Princes," the world was informed that, as the price of "a
Christian, universal; and perpetual peace," France would cede to England what
had remained to her of Nova Scotia, Canada, and all the possessions of France
on the left bank of the Mississippi except the City of New Orleans and the
island on which it stands; that she would cede also the islands of Grenada and
the Grenadines, the islands of St. Vincent, Dominica, and Tobago, and the River
Senegal with all of its forts and factories; and that she would for the future
be content, so far as her activities in India were concerned, with the five
factories which she possessed there at the beginning of the year 1749.
The average Briton, as well as honorable and right honorable
members of the House, had known that England possessed colonies and had
understood that colonies, as a matter of course, existed to supply him with
sugar and rice, indigo and tobacco, and in return to buy at a good price
whatever he might himself wish to sell. Beyond all this he had given slight
attention to the matter of colonies until the great Pitt had somewhat stirred
his slow imagination with talk of empire and destiny. It was doubtless a
liberalizing as well as a sobering revelation to be told that he was the "heir
apparent of the Romans," with the responsibilities that are implied in having a
high mission in the world. Now that his attention was called to the matter, it
seemed to the average Briton that in meeting the obligation of this high
mission and in dealing with this far-flung empire, a policy of efficiency such
as that advocated by Mr. Grenville might well replace a policy of salutary
neglect; and if the national debt had doubled during the war, as he was
authoritatively assured, why indeed should not the Americans, grown rich under
the fostering care of England and lately freed from the menace of France by the
force of British arms, be expected to observe the Trade Acts and to contribute
their fair share to the defense of that new world of which they were the chief
beneficiaries?
If Americans were quite ready in their easy going way to take
chances in the matter of defense, hoping that things would turn out for the
best in the future as they had in the past, British statesmen and right
honorable members of the House, viewing the question broadly and without
provincial illusions, understood that a policy of preparedness was the only
salvation; a policy of muddling through would no longer suffice as it had done
in the good old days before country squires and London merchants realized that
their country was a world power. In those days, when the shrewd Robert Walpole
refused to meddle with schemes for taxing America, the accepted theory of
defense was a simple one. If Britain policed the sea and kept the Bourbons in
their place, it was thought that the colonies might be left to manage the
Indians; fur traders, whose lure the red man could not resist, and settlers
occupying the lands beyond the mountains, so it was said, would do the
business. In 1749, five hundred thousand acres of land had been granted to the
Ohio Company "in the King's interest" and "to cultivate a friendship with the
nations of Indians inhabiting those parts"; and as late as 1754 the Board of
Trade was still encouraging the rapid settling of the West, "inasmuch as
nothing can more effectively tend to defeat the dangerous designs of the
French."
On the eve of the last French war it may well have seemed to
the Board of Trade that this policy was being attended with gratifying results.
In the year 1749, La Galissomere, the acting Governor of Canada, commissioned
Celoron de Blainville to take possession of the Ohio Valley, which he did in
form, descending the river to the Maumee, and so to Lake Erie and home again,
having at convenient points proclaimed the sovereignty of Louis XV over that
country, and having laid down, as evidence of the accomplished fact, certain
lead plates bearing awe-inspiring inscriptions, some of which have been
discovered and are preserved to this day. It was none the less a dangerous
junket. Everywhere Blainville found the Indians of hostile mind; everywhere, in
every village almost, he found English traders plying their traffic and
"cultivating a friendship with the Indians"; so that upon his return in 1750,
in spite of the lead plates so securely buried, he must needs write in his
journal: "All I can say is that the nations of those countries are ill disposed
towards the French and devoted to the English."
During the first years of the war all this devotion was
nevertheless seen to be of little worth. Like Providence, the Indians were sure
to side with the big battalions. For want of a few effective garrisons at the
beginning, the English found themselves deserted by their quondam allies, and
although they recovered this facile allegiance as soon as the French garrisons
were taken, it was evident enough in the late years of the war that fear alone
inspired the red man's loyalty. The Indian apparently did not realize at this
early date that his was an inferior race destined to be supplanted. Of a
primitive and uncultivated intelligence, it was not possible for him to foresee
the beneficent designs of the Ohio Company or to observe with friendly
curiosity the surveyors who came to draw imaginary lines through the virgin
forest. And therefore, even in an age when the natural rights of man were being
loudly proclaimed, the "Nations of Indians inhabiting those parts" were only
too ready to believe what the Virginia traders told them of the Pennsylvanians,
what the Pennsylvania traders told them of the Virginians--that the fair words
of the English were but a kind of mask to conceal the greed of men who had no
other desire than to deprive the red man of his beloved hunting grounds.
Thus it was that the industrious men with pedantic minds who
day by day read the dispatches that accumulated in the office of the Board of
Trade became aware, during the years from 1758 to 1761, that the old policy of
defense was not altogether adequate. "The granting of lands hitherto
unsettled," so the Board reported in 1761, "appears to be a measure of the most
dangerous tendency." In December of the same year all governors were
accordingly forbidden "to pass grants...or encourage settlements upon any lands
within the said colonies which may interfere with the Indians bordering upon
them."
The policy thus initiated found final expression in the famous
Proclamation of 1763, in the early months of Grenville's ministry. By the terms
of the Proclamation no further grants were to be made within lands "which, not
having been ceded to, or purchased by us, are reserved to the said
Indians"--that is to say, "all the lands lying to the westward of the sources
of the rivers which fall into the sea from the west or the northwest." All
persons who had "either willfully or inadvertently seated themselves" on the
reserved lands were required "forthwith to remove themselves"; and for the
future no man was to presume to trade with the Indians without first giving
bond to observe such regulations as "we shall at any time think fit to...direct
for the benefit of the said trade." All these provisions were designed "to the
end that the Indians may be convinced of our justice and determined resolution
to remove all reasonable cause of discontent." By royal act the territory west
of the Alleghanies to the Mississippi, from Florida to 50 degrees north
latitude, was thus closed to settlement "for the present" and "reserved to the
Indians."
Having thus taken measures to protect the Indians against the
colonists, the mother country was quite ready to protect the colonists against
the Indians. Rash Americans were apt to say the danger was over now that the
French were "expelled from Canada." This statement was childish enough in view
of the late Pontiac uprising which was with such great difficulty
suppressed--if indeed one could say that it was suppressed--by a general as
efficient even as Amherst, with seasoned British troops at his command. The red
man, even if he submitted outwardly, harbored in his vengeful heart the
rankling memory of many griefs, real or imaginary; and he was still easily
swayed by his ancient but now humiliated French friends, who had been "expelled
from Canada" only indeed in a political sense but were still very much there as
promoters of trouble. What folly, therefore, to talk of withdrawing the troops
from America! No sane man but could see that, under the circumstances, such a
move was quite out of the question.
It would materially change the circumstances, undoubtedly, if
Americans could ever be induced to undertake, in any systematic and adequate
manner, to provide for their own defense in their own way. In that case the
mother country would be only too glad to withdraw her troops, of which indeed
she had none too many. But it was well known what the colonists could be relied
upon to do, or rather what they could be relied upon not to do, in the way of
cooperative effort. Ministers had not forgotten that on the eve of the last
war, at the very climax of the danger, the colonial assemblies had rejected a
Plan of Union prepared by Benjamin Franklin, the one man, if any man there was,
to bring the colonies together. They had rejected the plan as involving too
great concentration of authority, and they were unwilling to barter the veriest
jot or tittle of their much prized provincial liberty for any amount of
protection. And if they rejected this plan--a very mild and harmless plan,
ministers were bound to think--it was not likely they could be induced, in time
of peace, to adopt any plan that might be thought adequate in England. Such a
plan, for example, was that prepared by the Board of Trade, by which
commissioners appointed by the governors were empowered to determine the
military establishment and to apportion the expense of maintaining it among the
several colonies on the basis of wealth and population. Assemblies which for
years past had systematically deprived governors of all discretionary power to
expend money raised by the assemblies themselves would surely never surrender
to governors the power of determining how much assemblies should raise for
governors to expend.
Doubtless it might be said with truth that the colonies had
voluntarily contributed more than their fair share in the last war; but it was
also true that Pitt, and Pitt alone, could get them to do this. The King could
not always count on there being in England a great genius like Pitt, and
besides he did not always find it convenient, for reasons which could be given,
to employ a great genius like Pitt. A system of defense had to be designed for
normal times and normal men; and in normal times with normal men at the helm,
ministers were agreed, the American attitude towards defense was very cleverly
described by Franklin: "Everyone cries, a Union is absolutely necessary, but
when it comes to the manner and form of the Union, their weak noddles are
perfectly distracted."
Noddles of ministers, however, were in no way distracted but
saw clearly that, if Americans could not agree on any plan of defense, there
was no alternative but "an interposition of the authority of Parliament." Such
interposition, recommended by the Board of Trade and already proposed by
Charles Townshend in the last ministry, was now taken in hand by Grenville. The
troops were to remain in America; the Mutiny Act, which required soldiers in
barracks to be furnished with provisions and utensils by local authorities, and
which as a matter of course went where the army went, was supplemented by the
Quartering Act, which made further provision for the billeting and supplying of
the troops in America. And for raising some part of the general maintenance
fund ministers could think of no tax more equitable, or easier to be levied and
collected, than a stamp tax. Some such tax, stamp tax or poll tax, had often
been recommended by colonial governors, as a means of bringing the colonies "to
a sense of their duty to the King, to awaken them to take care of their lives
and their fortunes." A crown officer in North Carolina, Mr. M'Culloh, was good
enough to assure Mr. Charles Jenkinson, one of the Secretaries of the Treasury,
backing up his assertion with sundry statistical exhibits, that a stamp tax on
the continental colonies would easily yield 60,000 pounds, and twice that sum
if extended to the West Indies. As early as September 23, 1763, Mr. Jenkinson,
acting on an authorization of the Treasury Board, accordingly wrote to the
Commissioners of Stamped Duties, directing them "to prepare, for their
Lordships' consideration, a draft of an act for imposing proper stamp duties on
His Majesty's subjects in America and the West Indies."
Mr. Grenville, who was not in any case the man to do things in
a hurry, nevertheless proceeded very leisurely in the matter. He knew very well
that Pitt had refused to "burn his fingers" with any stamp tax; "and some men,
such as his friend and secretary, Mr. Jackson, for example, and the Earl of
Hillsborough, advised him to abandon the project altogether, while others urged
delay at least, in order that Americans might have an opportunity to present
their objections, if they had any. It was decided therefore to postpone the
matter for a year; and in presenting the budget on March 9, 1764, the first
minister merely gave notice that "it maybe proper to charge certain stamp
duties in the said colonies and plantations." Of all the plans for taxing
America, he said, this one seemed to him the best; yet he was not wedded to it,
and would willingly adopt any other preferred by the colonists, if they could
suggest any other of equal efficacy. Meanwhile, he wished only to call upon
honorable members of the House to say now, if any were so minded, that
Parliament had not the right to impose any tax, external or internal, upon the
colonies; to which solemn question, asked in full house, there was not one
negative, nor any reply except Alderman Beckford saying: "As we are stout, I
hope we shall be merciful."
It soon appeared that Americans did have objections to a stamp
tax. Whether it were equitable or not, they would rather it should not be laid,
really preferring not to be dished up in any sauce whatever, however fine. The
tax might, as ministers said, be easily collected, or its collection might
perhaps be attended with certain difficulties; in either case it would remain,
for reasons which they were ready to advance, a most objectionable tax. Certain
colonial agents then in England accordingly sought an interview with the first
minister in order to convince him, if possible, of this fact. Grenville was
very likely more than ready to grant them an interview, relying upon the
strength of his position, on his "tenderness for the subjects in America," and
upon his well-known powers of persuasion, to bring them to his way of thinking.
To get from the colonial agents a kind of assent to his measure would be to win
a point of no slight strategic value, there being at least a modicum of truth
in the notion that just government springs from the consent of the governed.
"I have proposed the resolution [the minister explained to the
agents] from a real regard and tenderness for the subjects in the colonies. It
is highly reasonable they should contribute something towards the charge of
protecting themselves, and in aid of the great expense Great Britain has put
herself to on their account. No tax appears to me so easy and equitable as a
stamp duty. It will fall only upon property, will be collected by the fewest
officers, and will be equally spread over America and the West Indies.... It
does not require any number of officers vested with extraordinary powers of
entering houses, or extend a sort of influence which I never wished to
increase. The colonists now have it in their power, by agreeing to this tax, to
establish a precedent for their being consulted before any tax is imposed upon
them by Parliament; for their approbation of it being signified to Parliament
next year...will afford a forcible argument for the like proceeding in all such
cases. If they think of any other mode of taxation more convenient to them, and
make any proposition of equal efficacy with the stamp duty, I will give it all
due consideration."
The agents appear at least to have been silenced by this
speech, which was, one must admit, so fatherly and so very reasonable in tone;
and doubtless Grenville thought them convinced, too, since he always so
perfectly convinced himself. At all events, he found it possible, for this or
for some other reason, to put the whole matter out of his mind until the next
year. The patriotic American historian, well instructed in the importance of
the Stamp Act, has at first a difficulty in understanding how it could occupy,
among the things that interested English statesmen at this time, a strictly
subordinate place; and he wonders greatly, as he runs with eager interest
through the correspondence of Grenville for the year 1764, to find it barely
mentioned there. Whether the King received him less coldly today than the day
before yesterday was apparently more on the minister's mind than any
possibility that the Stamp Act might be received rather warmly in the colonies.
The contemporaries of Grenville, even Pitt himself, have almost as little to
say about the coming great event; all of which compels the historian, reviewing
the matter judiciously, to reflect sadly that Englishmen of that day were not
as fully aware of the importance of the measure before it was passed as good
patriots have since become.
There is much to confirm this notion in the circumstances
attending the passage of the bill through Parliament in the winter of 1765.
Grenville was perhaps further reassured, in spite of persistent rumors of much
high talk in America, by the results of a second interview which he had with
the colonial agents just before introducing the measure into the House of
Commons. "I take no pleasure," he again explained in his reasonable way, "in
bringing upon myself their resentments; it is my duty to manage the revenue. I
have really been made to believe that, considering the whole circumstances of
the mother country and the colonies, the latter can and ought to pay something
to the common cause. I know of no better way than that now pursuing to lay such
a tax. If you can tell of a better, I will adopt it."
Franklin, who was present with the others on this occasion,
ventured to suggest that the "usual constitutional way" of obtaining colonial
support, through the King's requisition, would be better. "Can you agree,"
asked Grenville, "on the proportions each colony should raise?" No, they could
not agree, as Franklin was bound to admit, knowing the fact better than most
men. And if no adequate answer was forthcoming from Franklin, a man so ready in
expedients and so practiced in the subtleties of dialectic, it is no great
wonder that Grenville thought the agents now fully convinced by his reasoning,
which after all was only an impersonal formulation of the inexorable logic of
the situation.
Proceeding thus leisurely, having taken so much pains to elicit
reasonable objection and none being forthcoming, Grenville, quite sure of his
ground, brought in from the Ways and Means Committee, in February, 1765, the
fifty-five resolutions which required that stamped paper, printed by the
government and sold by officers appointed for that purpose, be used for nearly
all legal documents, for all customs papers, for appointments to all offices
carrying a salary of 20 pounds except military and judicial offices, for all
grants of privilege and franchises made by the colonial assemblies, for
Licenses to retail liquors, for all pamphlets, advertisements, handbills,
newspapers, almanacs, and calendars, and for the sale of packages containing
playing cards and dice. The expediency of the act was now explained to the
House, as it had been explained to the agents. That the act was legal, which
few people in fact denied, Grenville, doing everything thoroughly and with
system, proceeded to demonstrate also. The colonies claim, he said, "the
privilege of all British subjects of being taxed only with their own consent."
Well, for his part, he hoped they might always enjoy that privilege. "May this
sacred pledge of liberty," cried the minister with unwonted eloquence, "be
preserved inviolate to the utmost verge of our dominions and to the latest
pages of our history." But Americans were clearly wrong in supposing the Stamp
Act would deprive them of the rights of Englishmen, for, upon any ground on
which it could be said that Englishmen were represented, it could be
maintained, and he was free to assert, that Americans were represented, in
Parliament, which was the common council of the whole Empire.
The measure was well received. Mr. Jackson supposed that
Parliament had a right to tax America, but he much doubted the expediency of
the present act. If it was necessary, as ministers claimed, to tax the
colonies, the latter should be permitted to elect some part of the Parliament,
"otherwise the liberties of America, I do not say will be lost, but will be in
danger." The one notable event of this "slight day" was occasioned by a remark
of Charles Townshend, who asked with some asperity whether "these American
children, planted by our care, nourished up by our indulgence to a degree of
strength and opulence, and protected by our arms," would now be so unfilial as
to "grudge to contribute their mite to relieve us from the heavy burden under
which we lie?" Upon which Colonel Isaac Barre sprang to his feet and delivered
an impassioned, unpremeditated reply which stirred the dull House for perhaps
three minutes
"They planted by YOUR care! No; your oppression planted them in
America. They fled from your tyranny to a then uncultivated, inhospitable
country, where they exposed themselves to almost all the hardships to which
human nature is liable .... They nourished up by your indulgence! They grew by
your neglect of them. As soon as you began to care about them, that care was
exercised in sending persons to rule them in one department and another, who
were, perhaps, the deputies of deputies to some members of this house, sent to
spy out their liberties, to misrepresent their actions, and to prey upon them;
men whose behaviour on many occasions has caused the blood of these sons of
liberty to recoil within them.... They protected by your arms! They have nobly
taken up arms in your defense; have exerted a valor amidst their constant and
laborious industry, for the defense of a country whose frontier was drenched in
blood, while its interior parts yielded all its little savings to your
emolument."
A very warm speech, and a capital hit, too, thought the
honorable members of the House, as they settled comfortably back again to
endure the routine of a dull day. Towards midnight, after seven hours of
languid debate, an adjournment was carried, as everyone foresaw it would be, by
a great majority--205 to 49 in support of the ministry. On the 13th of February
the Stamp Act bill was introduced and read for the first time, without debate.
It passed the House on the 27th; on the 8th of March it was approved by the
Lords without protest, amendment, debate, or division; and two weeks later, the
King being then temporarily out of his mind, the bill received the royal assent
by commission.
At a later day, when the fatal effects of the Act were but too
apparent, it was made a charge against the ministers that they had persisted in
passing the measure in the face of strong opposition. But it was not so. "As to
the fact of a strenuous opposition to the Stamp Act," said Burke, in his famous
speech on American taxation, "I sat as a stranger in your gallery when it was
under consideration. Far from anything inflammatory, I never heard a more
languid debate in this house.... In fact, the affair passed with so very, very
little noise, that in town they scarcely knew the nature of what you were
doing." So far as men concerned themselves with the doings of Parliament, the
colonial measures of Grenville were greatly applauded; and that not alone by
men who were ignorant of America. Thomas Pownall, once Governor of
Massachusetts, well acquainted with the colonies and no bad friend of their
liberties, published in April, 1764, a pamphlet on the "Administration of the
Colonies" which he dedicated to George Grenville, "the great minister," who he
desired might live to see the "power, prosperity, and honor that must be given
to his country, by so great and important an event as the interweaving the
administration of the colonies into the British administration."

|
 |
 |