IMAG0124

You are here: Home >> American Archives

On Sunday night, at 8 P. M., the Committee of Observation returned from the Hook. They inform us, that the sailors of the tea ship, being unwilling to proceed with her to London, made a raft of spars and boards, in order to quit the ship with the tide of flood, but were observed by the Captain, and being aided by the Committee, who offered their assistance to him, they desisted from their project.

That on Sunday, at 10 A. M., the ship and the sloop, with the Committee, weighed their anchors and stood to sea; and at 2 P. M. the pilot boat and the Committee's sloop left her at the distance of three leagues from the Hook.

With Captain Lockyer, in the ship Nancy, went passenger Captain James Chambers.

Many persons still suspecting that Captain James Chambers continues privately in this city, they may be assured that he sailed out of the Hook, for London, on Sunday last, on board the Nancy, Captain Lockyer, who afforded him a very hospitable and gentlemanly reception; and whose whole behaviour, during his stay in this city, proved him to be a sensible, discreet, and a very well bred man.*

PENNSYLVANIA COUNCIL.

MEMORANDUM. 16th March, 1774.

The Governor this day received the following letter from Lord Dunmore, Governor of virginia, by express, in answer to his Honor's letter of the 31st of January:

Williamsburg, 3d March, 1774.

SIR: I have been favoured with your letter of the 31st January, 1774, and duplicate of the same, the occasion of which having been the appointment of certain officers by me in a remote district of the county of Augusta, in this Colony, which includes Pittsburg, which having been done, as is always my rule, with the advice of his Majesty's Council, I could not, till I had an opportunity of laying your letter before them, return you an answer, and it is not till now that I am enabled so to do. From the opinion, therefore, of his Majesty's Council of this Colony, I must inform you, that although the calculations on which you rely in the plan accompanying your letter, may possibly be found exact, yet they can by no means be considered, by us, as the observation, on which they were founded, was

*In the same Paper, enclosed by Lieutenant Governor COLDEN to the Earl of DARTMOUTH, in the preceding Letter, was this additional notice of the same transaction

Mr. RIVINGTON: You declare your paper is impartial; as such please to insert the following particulars relative to the idle paragraphs in Mr. Gaines's Gazette of last Monday,

What is the Committee of Observation? By whom were they appointed, and what authority had they to order Captain Chambers, or any body else, to attend them at Mr. Francis's, or any other place whatsoever? Who says, and upon what authority does he say, that the sense of the city was asked, relatively, either to the sending away Captain Lockyer, or the destruction of the tea on board the London? Has not every London Captain brought tea under the same circumstances? And, if so what were the Apostates that informed against the unfortunate man, who was threatened with death for obeying the laws of his country? Who were the persons of reputation that were placed below to keep tally, saving ONE, who acted according to honour and principle? Let us know their names, or else we will dispute their pretensions. What did they get by conducting Captain Lockyer in public through the crowd, but a mortifying disgust in finding he would not even pull oft his hat to the insulting huzzas of ALL the people? ALL, indeed! when I am persuaded that not one twentieth part joined in such outrage: though "the greatest number were collected at and near the Coffee House, that ever was known in this city". Marvellous indeed, and utterly beyond belief! Much like the narrative in the introduction to this noble and authentic history, wherein the historian informs us that the Nancy's. "maintopmast was sprung and the ship thrown on her beam-ends;" or when he says, the tea on board the London was cast into the river without doing any damage to the ship or CARGO. This, too, was undoubtedly effected to the joy of all the friends of liberty and human nature.

But, Mr. Printer, to end the matter for the present. Who says that ALL the bells were rung on this solemn occasion? when it is asserted that several did not ring at all; and that several others did not ring but by means of fellows breaking into churches where they had no business, and for which they ought, and every good man hopes, so far as I know, that they will be prosecuted according to law.

I wish the Printers of public Chronicles would be cautious of disgracing their papers by publishing party relations. While they adhere to matters of fact, 'tis all well; but when they expand their columns to either patriot or ministerial minions, without any known evidence—nay, contrary to the truth of fact—they must not, they cannot, they shall not hope to escape the animadversions of a lover of Constitutional liberty, but a sworn foe to Coblers and Tailors, so long as they take upon their everlasting and unmeasurable shoulders, the power of directing the loyal and sensible inhabitants of the city and Province of New York

NEW YORK, May 5.

NEW YORK, May 12, 1774.

To the Printer of the New York Gazetteer.

SIR: When any man attempts to call the attention of the public to his compositions, under the specious character of an advocate for truth, he should strictly adhere to the principle ho pretends to maintain; otherwise, however loud and artful he may be in his profession, they will consider him as an imposter. I was led to those reflections in perusing the animadversions, published in your Gazetteer, on the conduct of the inhabitants of this city, relative to the dismission of Captain Lockyer, and his tea, and the narrative thereof, in Mr. Gaines's Gazette.

It may justly be expected, that when an anonymous author calls for names to authenticate facts, which ho disputes, he will not be deficient in that kind, of proof to support his assertions or suggestions, which he requires of others; but the contrary is evident to every one, who will be at the trouble to peruse the paper in question. Every man of information in this Colony, knows that it contains gross misrepresentations, to say no worse; for the Assembly, and the inhabitants of this Colony have, more than once, declared their abhorrence of the Revenue Act, and consequently, of the importation of tea, while the Act exists; and therefore, if Great Britain and the other Colonies were fully informed of our sentiments, relative to the obnoxious Act, it would not be necessary to take any notice of the animadverter. He would in that case be left to the just reproaches of his fallow-citizens, of which, I am persuaded he is not ignorant. But as the paper under consideration, was designed to induce a belief in those places, that we are greatly divided in this city upon the Revenue Act, and the point of returning the tea; and that it was done by the approbation only of an inconsiderable number: I shall, therefore, for the information of those who are at a distance from us, and the honour of the Colony, show these representations to be void of truth. This will appear, by a proper attention to the following facts, viz: In the Session of Parliament of 1767, the Commons of Great Britain gave to his Majesty, the property of the Americans, by granting, among other imposts, three pence sterling per pound, "for every pound weight, avoirdupois, of tea," which should be, "imported from Great Britain into any Colony or Plantation in America." The merchants of this city, and a great number of the other inhabitants of all ranks, being alarmed at this attempt to enslave them, on the 27th of August, 1768, signed an agreement to decline the most valuable part of their commerce with Great Britain, until this Act should be repealed; and the violators of this compact were declared to be "deemed enemies of their country." This compact, commonly called the Non-Importation, met with the general approbation of the citizens, which was demonstrated by their conformity to it. In consequence of this, the Captains of our ships, trading to Great Britain were, by standing orders from their owners, forbid to take on board there any of the goods prohibited by the agreement. In order that the sense of the Colony might be known, the General Assembly in their next Session, on the 31st of December, 1768, passed the following resolution, with several others, declarative of our rights and privileges, viz:

"Resolved, nem. con. That it is the opinion of this Committee that no tax, under any name or denomination, or on any pretence, or for any purpose whatsoever, can or ought to be imposed or levied, upon the persons, estates, or property of his Majesty's good subjects, within this Colony; but of their free gift, by their Representatives, lawfully convened in General Assembly"*.

This resolution had evidently the Revenue Act for its object. The opinion of the Colony, in legal consideration, having been thus declared, against the Parliamentary principle of taxing the Colonies, by Parliamentary authority; it was judged of equal importance to the common cause of America, that a declaration should be representatively made of the public sense, on the means which the. merchants and others had adopted, to defeat the execution of that act, which proclaimed to the world, that the Americans had no property they could call their own. Accordingly, on the 10th of April, 1769, Mr. Philip Livingston, an eminent merchant of this city, made the following motion in the Assembly, viz:

"That the thanks of this House be given to the merchants of this city, and Colony, for their repeated, disinterested public spirit, and patriotic conduct, in declining the importation, or receiving goods from Great Britain, until such Acts of Parliament as the General Assembly had declared unconstitutional, and subversive of the rights and liberties of the people of this Colony, should be repealed; and that Mr. Speaker signify the same to the merchants at their next monthly meeting.

"Ordered, That Mr. Speaker signify the thanks of this House to the merchants of this city, at their next monthly meeting accordingly."†

After advice was received in 1770, of the partial repeal of the Revenue Act, a number of the merchants were inclined to import such goods from Great Britain as were not subject to the payment of an American duty; and in order to induce the consent of the citizens to depart from the first form of the non-importation agreement, they, on the 12th of June, 1770, published a paper, which they intended as the basis of the new agreement. It contains, among other stipulations, the following, viz.— "If any goods shall arrive contrary to this and our former agreement, they shall be re-shipped immediately. And any persons, masters of vessels, or others, that shall import or receive a consignment of any dutiablen goods (that is subject to the payment of duties in America,) shall be deemed enemies to the Colonies, and treated accordingly". From this it appears that the old agreement was confirmed, so far as it prohibited the importation of merchandise, subject to an American duty. The importation of goods was resolved upon the 9th of July,