1770]

CHATHAM IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

311 his full intellectual vigour? If the genius which had advanced his country to the highest pinnacle of greatness still retained its force? His brilliant, heart-stirring, poetically coloured addresses, rarely equalled for pathos and power, were from time to time heard in the house of lords. Is it sacrilege to say they never rise higher than declamation? Nevertheless, it was his words which gave encouragement to the colonists in this revolt; and the deference to his memory shewn in United States histories is attributable to this support of their cause, not to the genius and vigour with which he organized armies, and selected great generals, to relieve the colonies forever from the terrorism of French aggression. He defended even their excesses "as ebullitions of liberty which broke out upon the skin, a sign if not of perfect health, at least of a vigorous constitution," and he described the promoters of agitations, the men who were striving to rend asunder the empire, “as having left their native country and gone in search of freedom in a desert."

When moving his amendment in the house of lords, Chatham received the support of the chancellor Camden. Although remaining a member of the government, Camden declared that he agreed in the opinions expressed by Chatham. Surely, it would have been the proper course to have resigned his position before opposing his colleagues. As a consequence he was dismissed. It was difficult to supply his place. After some days, Yorke was induced to accept the seat. He abandoned his friends at the royal solicitation, and, writhing under the reproaches of his own sensitive mind and the cold looks of his associates, he laid hands on his life. These events caused the downfall of the Grafton government, and the appointment of lord North as first lord of the treasury.

The determination of the American provinces to abstain from importations led to vigorous efforts on the part of those prominently engaged in the trade, who were interested in its re-establishment, in order to assure the adoption of such conciliatory measures as would satisfy the colonial demands. The policy of the Grafton administration was so far deter

mined by this influence, that, at a cabinet meeting the duke proposed the entire repeal of all duties. Lord North opposed this general proposition, and maintained that tea should be excepted, and the tax retained. That view prevailed, for it was well understood that it was in accordance with the king's wish; indeed it is a fair inference that the policy had arisen with him. At the close of the session, lord Hillsborough addressed a short official circular to the governors of provinces.* He stated, that parliament had approved of the measures taken with regard to America, and had given their assurance of support of the due execution of the laws; that both houses concurred in the opinion, that no steps ought to be taken in any way to derogate from the legislative authority of Great Britain over the colonies; that the design for raising taxes for revenues had never been entertained, and it was the intention during the next session to propose the removal of duties upon glass, paper and colours, upon "consideration of such duties having been laid contrary to the true principles of commerce." As nothing was said of tea, the duty upon it would remain. Some commonplaces were added as to the re-establishment "of that mutual confidence and affection upon which the glory and safety of the British empire depend."

From some unexplained cause, two of the four regiments were removed in the spring from Boston. This reduction of the garrison did not lessen the bad feeling generally entertained towards the troops. Single soldiers in the streets were frequently insulted by offensive epithets, and men off duty often met with personal ill treatment. No class of persons are particularly patient under injuries addressed to them on account of their position; certainly, not the British soldier. The men in the garrison were not backward in acting upon a similar sentiment, and on slight provocation in becoming the assailants. The feeling was however repressed, and discipline preserved; no charge has ever been made against the garrison for irregularities or disorder. From the desire to conciliate p. 164.

* 13th May, 1769. N.Y. Doc., VIII.,

the so-called religious feeling of Boston, the troops marched to church with a single fife and drum. At that date the French drum-march* had not been introduced into the service, and even this simple expedient, observed as a matter of discipline to govern the march of the column, was magnified into sabbath desecration.+

In March, 1770, occurred what United States writers still call the "Boston Massacre." The facts of the case are simple in the extreme. There had been a quarrel at a rope-walk where some townspeople attacked a few men off duty. The aggression was on the part of the inhabitants, and, the matter coming to blows, they were badly thrashed by the soldiers, and driven off and pursued. It was an event to excite great anger. Sunday following, nothing was done. On the Monday, towards dusk, a crowd hung about the custom house, on which a guard was placed. The sentry on duty was for some time exposed to the ill-treatment of the mob, who jeered at and insulted him. Finding their violence increasing, and fearing that he would be driven from his post, he gave the alarm by ringing a bell communicating with the main guard. Captain Preston, the officer on duty, hurried to the spot to protect the sentry. On the arrival of the guard, the mob commenced to pelt them with lumps of ice, frozen snow, and pieces of wood lying on the streets, and to threaten them with the heavy sticks which many carried, consequently the guard in selfdefence fired. Three of the rioters attacking the soldiers fell dead, two were wounded, one mortally; a consequence solely attributable to the rioters, who commenced the outrage. A meeting of several thousand people took place; and a deputation headed by Adams waited upon the lieutenant-governor Hutchinson, stating that it was absolutely necessary that the

"Marcher au son de la grosse caisse."

† Masères writes on this point, Canadian Freeholder, I., p. 79, that a respectable merchant of Boston, speaking of the troops, had "commended their behaviour during the time they had been quartered there, notwithstanding the abuse which many of the discontented inhabitants of Boston were continually pouring out against them."

troops should be removed from the town and quartered in the castle.

In the first instance, Hutchinson declined to take any steps, being, as he said, without authority to act. Colonel Dalrymple, the officer in command, offered to withdraw one regiment to which the guard belonged; a concession which removed all ground for refusal to comply, for Adams pointed out that if he could move one, he could move the two regiments. By Hutchinson's account there was great irresolution; every one appeared desirous of avoiding responsibility. When the matter was brought before the council, the members sided. with Hutchinson. Colonel Dalrymple declined to act in opposition to public feeling, unless sustained by those in authority, although perfectly willing to have taken his share of unpopularity and abuse. He signified accordingly to the council that "if they were unanimous in advising the lieutenant governor to desire him [sic] to remove the troops he would do it."

arms.

On the council meeting in the evening, the members agreed in recommending compliance, for the reason that ten thousand of the people in the neighbouring towns were ready to take up Hutchinson tells us that he remained opposed to the departure of the troops. He communicated, however, the decision of the council to Dalrymple, adding that he himself was without authority to act in such circumstances. Dalrymple felt considerable embarrassment, and shrank from continuing the troops in the city on his own responsibility. They were accordingly marched out and quartered in the castle. The whole proceeding was characterized by weakness and want of judgment; and unfortunately it happened at a critical period, when firmness and strong determination should have been shewn. The agitators should have been told the truth, as it was afterwards declared to be; that the quarrel had arisen only from the turbulence of the mob. The real difficulty lay in the want of moral courage in every one concerned. But whatever the error in judgment,

1770]

JOHN ADAMS.

315

the measure was dictated by the desire of avoiding further dissension and by the hope of preserving peace.*

No feeling of this character was entertained by the republican leaders, and the press representing their opinions. Wood-cuts of the coffins, with the names of the killed, placed in a row, appeared in prominence at the head of the newspaper account, which, in strong language, described the self-defence of the guard as a “massacre,” and the men who fired as "murderers."

Every effort was made to excite and pervert public feeling. Preston himself, with the guard, was arrested to be tried by the civil law. As some delay was to intervene before the trial took place, Preston's friends endeavoured to obtain counsel. On all sides the advocates refused to act, either from sympathy, with popular prejudices, or from fear that by taking part in any way with the military, they would be selected as objects of vengeance. John Adams, then a lawyer rising into notice, had the courage to appear for the defence. He was a warm advocate of the opinions of his townsmen, and he risked no little of the estimation in which he was held by his appearance at the trial. The facts of the case were easily proved, and a verdict of "not guilty" was returned. Four judges were present. All concurred in the view of the jury, the senior judge remarking that the evidence had established "the disgrace of every one concerned in the outrage and the shame of the town in general." A verdict of manslaughter was returned against the two soldiers who fired without orders.

The acquittal, however, had little influence upon the aggressive members of the opposite party, who desired to perpetuate bad feeling. The anniversary of this day was long. observed as a solemn ceremony. Orations adapted to the purpose were passionately addressed to the listeners as a fit religious exercise, by which the "massacre" was to be ever kept in hostile remembrance. Adams did not escape the

The diary and letters of Thomas Hutchinson, by Peter Orlando Hutchinson, London, 1883. Vol. I., pp. 79-88.