American Revolution

No taxation without representation

When most people think about the American Revolution, images of brave patriots fighting against an unjust government appear.  “No taxation without representation”, the Boston Tea Party, the Stamp Act, and many other common events come to mind.  Many teachers frame the American Revolution as a result of unfair taxation from a government that prohibited representation from those they governed. This is a true but incomplete picture.   

The earliest feelings of disdain towards Britain was through their handling of trade and smuggling.  Trade was essential for the colonies since many materials were not available to them.  Molasses was one of the main imports to the colonies.  There was a lot of trade between the colonists and some of the French colonies.  Part of this mutually beneficial trade agreement was the trade of molasses.  The British were never a huge fan of this mutually beneficial trade, especially during the French-Indian War.  During the war, they prohibited all trade between any French colony.  Molasses was used to make relatively cheap rum and other products.  As such, the disruption of the trade was bad news to the colonies.  The only authorized sources of trade from Britain were not enough to meet the demand from the colonies.  To quote Frederick Wiener in his article “The Rhode Island Merchants and the Sugar Act”, “the path of least resistance lay either in outright smuggling or in bribery of the none-too-efficient customs officials” (Wiener, 465).   

The colonists were no strangers to smuggling goods in order to keep goods coming into the colonies.  The British was largely unhappy with the smuggling because it supported their enemy France.  In retaliation, the Writs of Assistance were declared.  This allowed British officials to search for these smuggled materials without probable cause or search warrant.  This violated the due process that was guaranteed to every Englishman in the Rights of Englishmen.    

It would not be until the Stamp Act of 1765 that the phrase “no taxation without representation” would be used widespread to protest taxes levied by Parliament.  Parliament did not believe that representation was needed because they briefly consider them when making laws.  Eventually the Stamp Act would be repealed due to a widespread boycott of British goods. 

The Townshend Acts that were passed in 1767 would have multiple effects on the colonists.  Most notably, there would be a three cent tax on tea.  This made tea more expensive for personal and medicinal purposes.  This would only incentivize the smuggling of tea into the colonies.  

Most of the previous attempts to handle smuggling were ineffective.  Since the Rights of Englishmen guaranteed a trial judged by your peers and many of the colonists relied on smuggling for their own goods, juries would frequently find them not guilty.  To the British, the only way to prosecute these smugglers would be to send smugglers to a military tribunal in violation of the Rights of Englishmen.

Another part of the Townshend Acts was the Quartering Act, which allowed soldiers to occupy any private citizens' home without their permission.  Many viewed this as a large overstep from the British government. 

When looking at the Declaration of Independence, most of the grievances with Britain are about the overreaches of their government rather than directly about the taxes.  We can see this with some of the lines from the Declaration. For example, the Quartering Act was mentioned in the line “He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.”  The Sugar Act, Stamp Act, and Townshend Acts were described as “imposing Taxes on us without our Consent”.  The section of the Townshend Acts that sent smugglers to a military trial was described as “depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury”.   

Note that only one of these examples mentions taxation directly.  The rest are violations of the Rights of Englishmen.  While unjust taxes was a cause of the American Revolution, to say that it was mostly caused by taxation is a very incomplete picture of the entire situation.  Many of the actions surrounding the taxes and other acts were violating various rights of the people.   

 Wiener, Frederick Bernays. “The Rhode Island Merchants and the Sugar Act.” The New England Quarterly, vol. 3, no. 3, 1930, pp. 464–500. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/359398. Accessed 21 Mar. 2023. 

The Boston Tea Party is often thought of as this grand big event. It was an act of rebellion to dump the tea into the Boston harbor.  Looking at some paintings, you could think that brave patriots rioted together to ceremoniously dump the tea to protest the Tea Act of 1773 and the monopoly it gave the East India Company.  Huge crowds celebrated in support of the tea dumpers.  The truth is much more interesting than our preconceived notions of the event. 

Contrary to what you might believe, the Boston Tea Party was a very quiet event.  Many paintings of the Tea Party (such as the one down below) were made decades after the event itself and very few first-hand accounts exist of the event.  One such citizen, George Hewes, was an active participant in the Boston Tea Party.  In a few different interviews, he discusses what happened on that day.  One thing to keep in mind is that at the time, everyone involved would have been deemed traitors, or at the very least criminals.  It was never really acknowledged among the townsfolk as something that happened.  If you or someone you knew was involved, no you didn’t. Since the consequences of admitting your involvement were so severe, nothing about it was written until many years later. 

In the testimony from Hewes, he states that he does not know who came up with the idea to dump the tea nor how many people were involved.  He was assigned to a commander night-of and never knew the others in charge.  He described it as a very silent night without celebration or chaos.  They were careful to ensure that nothing was destroyed except for the tea in the river.  Hewes caught someone trying to smuggle tea and that person was severely punished since it would defeat the message they were trying to send.   

There were also British warships in the harbor witnessing the event, but they took no action.  Unlike the portrayal in the painting, it was a quiet event.  No one not involved would have wanted to be associated with the citizens dumping the tea. 

Personally, I always imagined the Boston Tea Party to be this huge protest that escalated into the destruction of tea.  After reading the story of George Hewes, I have a better appreciation for the discreteness of the entire event.  If you want to learn more about the Boston Tea Party and where it got its name, I would highly suggest reading The Shoemaker and the Tea Party: Memory and the American Revolution by Alfred Young.   

Young, Alfred Fabian. The Shoemaker and the Tea Party: Memory and the American Revolution. Beacon Press, 1999.