And to you joining us for the first time and with the wide range of programs please turn off your cell phones during the program. Mary beth norton the author of five books and cowat it one call author several others and it has been published ten additions over 500,000 copies. As a Pulitzer Prize finalist and present of the Historical Association she is a professor america of American History at cornell and her new book it is available for purchase following the program please join me to welcome mary beth norton. [applause]. I want to show you the cover briefly because if you are a colonial historian on dash i dont know if anybody recognizes it but in the Massachusetts Historical Society the claims on the label but it contains t from the Boston Harbor the day after the party this is quite well known object in colonial america. Now i want to start with this verse from a poem that i discovered in the new york journal that coordinated with the sons of liberty in new york. That this is the kind of things historians have to make up so read the first two lines you will crown 74 the most glorious year. Yet 1774 has commonly been shorted with the coming of the revolution that those books, and the stress the events after the seven years war 1763 stopping the opposition through the king street riots known as the boston massacre in 1770 at which point the Boston Tea Party 1773 so why is this . I might answer the question is that all the books written about this. Except mine focus on radical leaders and their actions. That means a primary almost exclusive focus is on boston and massachusetts but the coming of the revolution is generally told by historians of leaders of the coming revolution these books i would argue are ideological that historian authors know how the story comes out and their purpose is to explain why they want but they dont give much attention to the centers of any kind in fact in many of these books no context is ever established for those dissenters for books like this now there is a whale is to is being persecuted or somebody is arguing you have no idea where theyre coming from or why that person says what they are saying because you have been given no background so the long year of revolution it is to understand and interpret what happened as contemporaries would have understood it to give voice not only to the radicals those men and women who were critics or radicals were moderate and conservative supporters for these eventual loyalist and in short to present american dialogue in 1774 evenhandedly and i dont forecast the outcome in fact i like the readers of the book to forget how the story comes out when they read the book. To that end with the 1774 which is the 16 month. December 1773 with a short preface for october. Mid april 1775 to show how economist all thought of themselves as loyal subjects of king george the third and as part of the empire. I just want to underscore that. People saw themselves loyal to the king and those columnist one of those groups have been persuaded and that loyalty. Persuaded and that loyalty. They begin to pride themselves and there are also those people who began to favor independence. The book, i deal with all the colonies that eventually during to the united states. I dont deal with the caribbean or the canadian but i do deal with the 13 colonies that eventually joined the united states. The book also focuses intensively on america. Both these things differentiate the book from other books about this. One because i try not to focus on massachusetts and boston to a greater extent than i have to but also because i do i never move the focus across the atlantic and talk about whats happening in parliament. Many times in a book, talks about the coming of the revolution, will switch the focus for me american colonies across the atlantic into london to have a chapter or two about the dialogue that were occurring the parliament our Parish Ministry about the polish. Instead of doing that, i introduce in each chapter, a section called advices from usually london, in one case, from house but almost always london that conveys the colonists the things they heard about what was happening in england. The section is always called advices from because if any of you are familiar with colonial newspapers from across the heading the newspapers use when they were talking about material coming in from somewhere else. I introduced the material, the information about whats happening overseas to the colonists themselves as they would have learned, although other times they would have learned, at the time it was happening. Obviously in such a short time, this evening, i cannot discuss, but i can just summarize, you have a timeline in that handout, it helps reveal these developing visions and the increasing radicalism a populace. Only one of these is known to the public and that is the first one, the Boston Tea Party. Its not just about the Boston Tea Party, its about the incident of late 1770s. The story is of the tea in boston, it was referred to at the time, it wasnt until 1826. My colleague is the one who found out thats when it began to be referred to as the Boston Tea Party. More cities than boston were involved in this is very little known. North america in 1773, and 12 new york, philadelphia. Its necessary to explain whats going on. In parliament, the spring of 1773, the members of parliament adopted the tx. The purpose was to get the company out of the financial crisis. They have the monopoly of biggest trade with the far east, china, asia and general and it was bankruptcy in 1773. Two reasons, one was mismanagement of the company into, rampant smuggling. There was smuggling everywhere. The colonies, into the home islands and so forth. The british and they were being undercut in terms of the crisis, especially by the smugglers. Not surprising, many members of parliament in the east India Company so they didnt want to go bankrupt, they wanted to preserve it financially. American settlers at the time, a term used contemporary, provisions tea drinkers. The problem they put it in perspective, they were mostly drinking smuggled tea. It was known as a dutch tea and referred to dutch tea, even though it didnt always come from the Dutch Company or the Dutch Caribbean islands. It made its way in many ways and particularly, through the isla island. This is a contemporary view. In the northeastern caribbean, let me just say, its called space i went there specifically because i had heard so much about it but it was a big smuggler in the caribbean, i had to know about it. Its a tiny island, its not on anybodys radar these days. It doesnt have any good beaches, it doesnt have enough water, i can have a golf course. It cant have our resort but what it does have is this wonderful anchorage, which is protected by these extinct volcanoes, would you see here in the bathroom. Background. A production that anchorage on the eastern side from the prevailing wind. As a result, literally, sometimes we had information about 1000 ships being anchored off this tiny island. They were trading goods, selling goods, buying goods and it was the best known smuggler haven in the caribbean. This was driving east India Companys crazy. They were losing all their goods, all their money to items being smuggled through other places in the caribbean. Especially there. It was very complex, its hard to understand. It is very hard for people at the time to understand it should not surprise people in washington to discover something written by a legislative body was complex and difficult to understand. That was certainly true. The key was too lower the tax on legal east India Company t to be able to undercut the smugglers. Smuggled tea was about half or two thirds the price of legal duty and the idea was to get the lower tax paid on the tea, then it could approach the class being charged by the smugglers. The american t objection was the symbolism of the tax. They argued that accepting it would be accepting the authority of parliament to tax them. By this time, by late 1773, pretty much they were in agreement. Parliament should not have the power to tax them. The irony is, in our current image of the Boston Tea Party is not it was higher taxes. No, it was protecting lower taxes. The problem was, lowering the tax of these companies to make people by legal tea instead of smuggled tea. In october 1773, and this is my preface, when the colonists learn that seven chips are coming to america with tea directly from east India Company, in new york city and philadelphia, they suggested three different tactics to fight the teacher. One idea was to persuade, i put that into quotation marks because of that. It was to be sent to resign information, not to except for tea. If you dont have people to accept this tea officially, and you cant have any legal tea and you dont need to worry about it. I was one of the arguments, or proposed the appearance of the arrival of the east India Company. Another tactic was to promote agreements for people not to buy or consume 30 but everybody has consumption agreement and it doesnt matter, all they need to do is just not buy it. The third argument, a very well known patriot and a doctor in philadelphia, we have to prevent the tea from landing in the first place because if it lands, it doesnt matter what happens, it doesnt matter how many people dont buy it, they would buy it and drink it. Got to keep them from that by preventing fatigue from landing. The tactics in 1773 and throughout 1774 in various locations, its not widely known and companies kept coming and asking for these. We all know about the Boston Tea Party, when the landing of the teeth was opposed by the chops in boston. Talk about that in the books but im not going to talk about it now. Im happy to answer questions about it later on. I do want to show you one slide into this is, it looks like its in the foreground, i would be happy to answer questions but the crucial points here, what happens up there in this corner, that is the closest thing we have in the station of whats happening in the Boston Tea Party. We dont know whether the artists of this people in london by the time he drew it, who have witnessed the Boston Tea Party and the parliament, but this is his drawing of what happened. Thats the closest thing we have to a contemporary view of the Boston Tea Party. Parliament, as you may remember, retaliated against the Boston Tea Party with the boston port act which closed the port until fatigue was paid for. Officially closed it on the first of june of 1774. They removed that and it did not arrive in north america until may 10, 1774 so the rest of america had little opportunity to get accustomed to the idea before the port was officially closed. But what about the other cities . Charleston to new york and philadelphia, its not well known, in fact, i didnt know it. Until i started researching this book, i didnt realize that charleston was exactly the same as boston was. I have a slide of charleston harbor, a ship arriving in charleston and this building right here, it plays a major part in the story in charleston. So what happened in charleston . One of the things i do in the first chapter of the book is back and forth, its happening in charleston. They know whats happening, they do not was happening in charleston. Its very vague terms and by the end of the process, there were a few little bits of information that dribbled along up and down the coast. But very little was known. There wasnt any communications and they were making it up as they went along. Charleston did something very different from boston. They met and agreed and charleston met twice. In large meetings in the Exchange Building they could not make up their minds what to do. They could not confront this. So what they did was instead of reaching out, they basically pondered. What ponting meant was facilitating the customs officers of South Carolina to confiscate the tea. That was because the time, one ship entered a harbor, they had to pay duty within 20 days or else the cargo would be confiscated. In charleston, they couldnt make up their mind what to do so they just let the offices confiscate after 20 days in it was clearly coercive. I found out john adams learned that in his essays and after 1775, he indicates he knows that what happened in charleston between the locals and the customs offices, the Continental Congress when he was there in 1774. So always confiscated in the basement of the Exchange Building, it was not the driest place and some of it is reported to be destroyed but what was left a couple of years later was to support the war effort. That was by colleague of mine whos working on a project is a political issue in this period. So i dont claim to have found out but he found it in the South Carolina newspaper indicating the tea was imminent. So then what happened . Thats what happened in boston in charleston. Its what happened in philadelphia and new york . Well, because paul revere, the messenger of the boston chronicles road immediately after the Boston Tea Party to philadelphia to new york and then philadelphia, by the time the teak ship went to philadelphia, coming off delaware but philadelphians knew what happened in boston. They didnt know what happened in charleston but they knew what happened in boston. So they figured out that what we do, we just dont let the teak ship entered the harbor. If it doesnt enter the harbor, then we are not confronted with this headline in the people in charleston. Basically they intercepted the teacher after it came in, whatever you do, dont let this come to philadelphia. In fact, they intercepted the ship, they persuaded the captain that he was smart not to come into the harbor and he didnt. He resupplied the ship and he turned around and headed back. The same thing happened with the ship going to new york, although it happened much later because the teak ship headed to new york was blown off course and ended up there which im sure many would like to do but this is the teak captain there and what happened in all the areas in north america when the tea chips came in from so they wrote a letter to new york saying well, i will show up but i will not head back to england. So everybody welcomes him, they know is not going to try to enter the harbor and he re supplies the ship and its a wonderful story in the new york paper about how everyone is saying what a wonderful gentleman him he is. He wished him a good voyage. One of my favorite stories about this but if you look at that timeline, there is a ship that went to boston and some of the tea ships were damaged and while most of the others were in the headquarters in Boston Harbor. They discovered that tea was eventually sold but by the british, not the americans. I discuss what happened in the book, in short, what happened was chaos. Some people wanted to buy the tea from the west. After all, it didnt pay a tax. You could buy it without admitting Parliament Like the taxpayer. Others said no, we have to stop everybody from buying the teeth because even if it had paid a tax. What ended up on the case, which i talk about in the book, there are competing town meetings that vote in different ways that are months of disagreement and allowing the teeth to be sold by the man who salvaged it. No one has ever written about this before. The british and parliament didnt but in these communities, they primarily focused their punishment on boston by adopting an act which already talked about. What that did was to lead not to defiant unity but rather lead positions from the town about what to do about how to respond to the act and thats my second snapshot. It consisted of newspapers and boston town meetings that occupied three full days. Mid to late june when people argued about what boston should do to respond to the port act. They argued a lot about what they should do. One newspaper quoted this accurately, they are the opinions of those in this town. That was exactly correct. Some people said lets pay for the tea. Other people said how do we do that . We accept from the wealthy people . They already volunteered to make contributions to pay for the teeth. So they collected them all in massachusetts and from others and theres a lot of disagreement of the people about how we are going to pay for the tea. Samuel adams, the head of the committee of correspondence and you might not realize it, messenger but he appeared in 1774, samuel adams proposed a different response. He said a boycott of all british codes, not just tea. He spoke out with massachusetts and spread to other colonies. This was economic, adopt a strategy by dish products. This comes to the emma consent of how important they were to furnish markets to overseas merchants. They really werent as important as i thought but they boycotted all British Goods and also anything from brian, they could forge the markets to then have a parliament to return, not the best one but the other ones. They committed when covertly non consumption agreement thats trying to get people out of the country side to sign them up, if nobody qualify it, then nobody will buy it once its in america, they will not important. They did this without consulting the boston town meeting first. It caused another controversy, but they argued for centuries, adams and his committee to ask about authorizations in the town. So these are the two issues paying for the teeth, we are going to pay for the tea, how to pay for the tea and what they did without authorization. These are the authors that led to this town meeting in middle and late june of 1774. Then the town voted to support the committee with a substantial minority over people there, about 25 walked out of the meeting and later published their objections to the majority decision in the newspapers. They argued that equity required that the company be compensated and it would also create boston of the boston port act. They are very focal points. Its a little known fact that americans continue to argue about whether or not to pay for the tea until the first Continental Congress and seven december 1774. We still had people arguing that the tea should be paid for until september, until they finally decided its not a good idea to do that. What happened, how hard it would be to persuade people to stop the tea. Even if you stopped buying it, they had stores filled with tea, people had teeth so how do you stop people from drinking it even if you stop them from buying it . For going tea smuggled and they had a great symbol as an opposition to britain. The argument became that nobody could be sure where the tea originated, it could be snuggled or legal so its important to stop off tea from britain. So my snapshot is a campaign to get people, especially women to stop buying and drinking tea. Women were known to socialize over tea with their friends in the afternoon. They went to taverns and socialized with their friends over ale. Women socialized over tea, it was said. They did actually do that. So how . Well, you go to the center. The stories in the newspaper had comments about why think women pledging not to drink tea in their households. So you get stories that say 300 matrons of boston signed a statement saying they would not serve any tea in their household. Notice, university those statements. I had no idea they existed, whether the numbers were correct or not but the stories filled the newspapers at this time, all kinds of prominent nameless people think they wont drink any tea. Newspapers also start to carry tea substitutes. How do you make tea out of Something Like sassafras or even growing tea . How do you growth tea bushes in america . There were public burnings of tea to which crowds were invited and crowds attended and of course, but was happening to those, as people were burning their teas publicly, they were being served booze by the people who were selling off the public tea burning. There were palms in newspapers, there were essays about how bad tea was for ones health. Various towns, including maine, adopted policies for tea drinking in town. This leads to another of my favorite anecdotes that i discovered, john adams was writing in maine in the summer of 1774 and hed been on horseback about 30 miles, pulls into an in and asked the landlady, can i have any teeth thats been honestly smuggled . That was his phrase. [laughter] the landlady said no, i cant serve tea because the town had forbidden the service of tea in town but i will serve you coffee. So he drinks coffee in a few days there, he writes to abigail and says, yes, im not Drinking Coffee and im bearing it very well. [laughter] so i wanted to read to you from one of the essays about why you shouldnt drink tea. This is written by doctor who wrote a sermon on tea, a short pamphlet, is not a minister but hes called it a sermon on tea. He cited a doctor and other medical authorities contending that he rendered habitual, gradually facts the constitution. The impact was slow but sure. A slow consuming poison. It was a handiwork box that affected both sexes, he rendered europeans shorter and weaker in the european continent century earlier. He said the beverage has reduced the robust vascular habit of men to a feminine softness. Thus returning men into women and, women into god knows what. [laughter] i have to say, im a tea drinker so i especially like this. Physically the younger women, he informed them that drinking tea would make them less attractive to men. It was either using your faces with a deadly paleness or worse, a shallow heel making regular consumption, a regular consumer into a ghostlike pale faced sector and he said, every mother needed to be concerned about her unborn posterity so he predicted a tea drinkers children would die young, a speedy martyr to her ill judged diet. [laughter] some women called him on that, i might add but he is not the only one. There were other people who argued the same thing, that drinking tea would be terrible for women. There is also opposition to the campaign through sapphire. This is a famous cartoon from britain called, is known as officially, its official title is patriotic ladies, unofficially known as Ladies Tea Party because its a response in britain to a letter that reported from america about the meeting of women in North Carolina supporting that resistance. Im not going to hughes this because its hard to seek but heres the details. On the far left hand in the back, you see women who are pouring 30 into receptacles that people are holding from up there giving up their tea but in the far background, theres a woman drinking from a full that does seem to be a full of teeth. In the foreground, you got a woman whose signing a statement, presumably not to drink tea although this group of women did not actually say anything about teeth, as part of a figuration of us have grotesque ladies supervising and in the foreground, at the bottom, the neglected child being licked by a dog that is symbolically kissing on a chest of tea. Theres a lot of symbolism about sapphire for britain in this anti tea campaign in north america. During the summer of 1774, meetings were held throughout the colonies for delegates for congress the first Continental Congress. These meetings adopted resolutions about the current controversy. Alike but sufficiently different to show that they clearly represented local discussions, in my opinion. We dont have any minutes of these meetings, i would have loved to have seen that but we have resolutions that come out of the meetings. Only one of them exquisitely copy another set of resolutions from somebody else. So basically, people are in america, they argued against it is not only the boston but a couple of other ones. Something called the administration of justice act which they called the murder act. They called it that because what it was about, and official shot a communist in maintaining an order. Thats a key piece of legislation. He said this is terrible. This is an act that antagonized people more than others. We do have a few people who commented in corresponded about what happened in some of these meetings. Some wanted to avoid direct complications and brought petitions in in the congress met and fell off you in Early September through mid october in 1774, some colonists were supporting britain and that was shown here. The fourth snapshot, some of you may have heard of this. In 1774, they have written about it, heres what happened. The event with thomas, the military government in russia to shoot ordered government gunpowder taken from a corrective magazine in charlestown massachusetts. I might just intersperse your fat gunpowder tended to be stored in collective magazines because it was so dangerous for people to have it around or it could explode. They were stored in collective places that were properly insulated and so forth for the storage of gunpowder. The government gunpowder was taken out of the collective powder magazine, rumors spread, correct rumors, that he had also taken private owners gunpowders out of that magazine. Crowds gathered the next day outside the powder magazine and then they moved to cambridge and another rumor spread that six men had been killed by the soldiers who took the gunpowder. This is also not true. Minuteman became began to come in from the countryside, huge crowds gathered right in front of the college. The officials, meanwhile as the stories made elsewhere, it spread into connecticut that not only was this happening, not only had six months been killed, not only had the governor taken private gunpowder out of the powder magazine that boston was now being bombarded by naval vessels from the harbor. So this went viral and it didnt need the internet to do it. It could happen even without the internet. It took days and hours rather than just minutes but by the time it was squashed, thousands of men were marching to boston. Then the truth came out, the boston leaders, the radical leaders, samuel adams and his friends on the committee spread the word, this is not true. None of this happened and finally, they stopped all of this but interestingly, they then wrote a stern letter to the guy in connecticut who spread the rumor about the bombardment and said, dont believe anything unless its official. Well tell you whats official. Dont pay any attention to anybody else. Its like on the web today, atp http at the top, dont trust another website. My fifth snapshot says the same thing. It also shows begins at the same time at the end of the summer, 1774 and later in october and november of 1774 because one of my more surprising findings, to me, was this evidence that Major Military preparations began in the late summer as early as august and theres an extreme interesting example here. This is another paul revere, it comes from the royal american magazine in august of 1774 and it accompanies an article about how to make it. Its an important ingredient in gunpowder. To me, this shows how much was already being talked about by the end of august in the colonies about possibly approaching hostilities. Sofi fifth snapshot, messages from the hague, i said earlier that some of the advisors were not from london but from also. In this case, chapter six, from the peg and i want to read from you for you from the book, the evidence that even before the first Continental Congress adjourned in late october 1774, americans were already seeking arms and ammunition in europe. The british were frantically trying to stop them. My story begins in the middle of october, 1774, basically for american ships to have gotten answered and to do what they are doing, they had to have left late august or Early September. October 11, 1774, British Ambassador to the public, one of the secretaries in funding from informing him that american smugglers started to purchase armed and ammunition, not just tea or other traditional contraband items. A vessel from rhode island has come to amsterdam seeking firearms. Reportedly, the snack by one fundament page has already taken on ford 40. Its called the snack. I dont know whether thats its name from a theres a ship called us back so i dont know, but they call it the snack. So thats what i call it. Thats the 11th of october. The 18th of october, seven days later after the dispatch is received, secretary of state for america asked the admiralty to dispatch a cutter to amsterdam immediately to investigate the report and if possible, to stop the snack from leaving the port. October 19, 1 day after lori request to the admiralty, king george the third issues an order in council prohibiting the exportation of any arms any ammunitions from Great Britain from the next six months. Thats not a direct response to dealing with it but it certainly suggests the British Government has gotten extremely worried about americans trying to buy guns and a munition in england. Keep that date october 19 in mind because its going to come up in the next snapshot. October 21, november 18, in a series of detailed letters, every few days, they report on his efforts and those of the coast guard cutter well. First whether the rumors about the cargo of the snack are correct and vent to prevent the departure with that cargo. The sources informed him that the gunpowder in the canon in the hole. Theyve concealed under other items. The two ships maneuver in a game of cat and mouse in the waterways surrounding amsterdam. Until finally, they decide to unload his special and winter there, rather than to risk sailing into the north see directly confronting the wealth. But it seems like the british had been successful but theres dakota. December 9, they informed york that he learned, it doesnt say how, the snacks cargo has been reshipped on a vessel. Which, along with two other ships are preparing to depart port, you know where. Carrying tea, gunpowder and 25 candidates. T, gunpowder and 25 candidates in a ship from dutch harbor to the british camp. So thats my snapshot. My sixth snapshot consists of what happens when the news of george the third order in council october 19 reaches the colonies. That news for george the third, forbidding the export of arms and ammunition arrives in north america, specifically it arrives in Providence Rhode island on december 8. It is accompanied by an order from flora that governors secure all arms and powder that the americans were attempting to import elsewhere. Three colonies showed how dramatically how very dramatically the relationship between the colonies and brings have deteriorated in recent months. Each of them, the order in council set off attacks on local sources by colonial crowds. The news came to rhode island first. As the first to respond, they attacked in newport, they carried 44 cannons in just 36 hour. And a couple of days later, in connecticut, crowds that reacted in the same way. They moved the canon from the port, strength the big guns in three widely scattered locations. Both rhode island and connecticut had locally elected governors under the 17th century charter. There were different from the other colonies. In New Hampshire, it was different. There was a royal government and there he made things different. Those rumors spread that general gage was sending troops to take over the fort there. A crowd decided to attack therefore and take the canon and ammunition that was stored there. They took down the british flag and confiscated 100 mils of gunpowder. This left governor john of New Hampshire very upset, shall we say. The springs of government failed me. He tried to muster the militia to oppose the taking of it. The people taking the fort was militia members. They wouldnt help him. He said no one would help him. He was very deeply affected on the british flag. Against a man who wouldve thought that, he urged other residents to help identify and arrest the perpetrators and return the kings arms because otherwise, they would face dreadful but most turn consequences for your selves and prosperity. But of course, nothing happened. Zero. He was never able to arrest those responsible for the assault on the fort. Never able to restore the kings arms and he was right. The springs of government failed him. After that, everyone expected more in the spring. Everybody. Everybody in america. Maybe not new england. They were right, the book ends with a transcription of general or just pages order to the troops to try to destroy the supplies that americans had their and of course the date was april 19, 1775. Atop the book and in fact how my talk and im happy to answer any questions. [applause] please, questions. Cspan is here, so they are going to bring a microphone around. An audible question. A man in the painting what about the guy . His name was john cochran. Heres a customs collector from maine and he had confiscated ship that had been smuggling stuff. Not just tea but other things. People were really bad and thanks entered him. He went to boston to try to get support. Maine was part of massachusetts at that time. The governor to ask for assistance. People got mad at him and then again in boston. [laughter] the upshot was that his story became, it turns out it went viral and plundered. There were a lot of people who talked about it in london and some americans in london front back and said what are you doing . This is leading people to get more upset than they were already because of the terrible things. There were two different images of john being tattered and that was one of them. Thats not the one in the book. I got a different one in the book. Other questions . At the time, the parliament had most of the power in england or did they have the power for the king . Can people hear that question . Was the situation in england and how much was the power of the king versus parliament . It was more than it is today, that is the king was more than symbolic. But nevertheless, parliament had the revolution of 1689, the glorious revolution had much more power from bucking that had been the case before. The king was a real player in this story and george the third was just like he ordered the issue, heres a major player in what was going on. It seems like there might be our relationship between the colonists reaction to the ground taking of the Second Amendment rights written in the constitution. I dont know, i wouldnt say that. There is a long time between this on the adoption of the Second Amendment. They wanted them because they did not want the british to have them. They were not thinking so much of arms for themselves as they were thinking of if we let this happen, the british will turn the guns on us. Thats very explicit and some of the other incidents that happened in the wake in the council but i didnt talk about. There expose. In new york, where theres a ship that arrived, its very interesting, a ship that arrived just before the order in council became known so the customs offices in new york confiscated material from it and focal people said no, this is going to be turned against us so we want it but they couldnt hold on to guns and ammunition. They were held by the customs officers. There is really a concern that guns would be turned against them. Thats what it was. What are you going to do for the canon if youre a columnist . If youre an army, you would want a cannon. Yes, go ahead. You mentioned in the beginning about the term loyal and i was wondering, is it just a term or was it becoming something that people organized themselves around and drink groups . Two people here that . Basically, the question was, did loyalist become organized and start to use that term as a group . They began to be, one of the things that happened, especially when it became clear that there was going to be worth, which became clear in january 75, there was a group of people who called themselves loyalist in massachusetts who organized and tried to set up a royal militia to oppose what was happening as a congress in massachusetts. But mostly, people started to cough themselves loyalist. Later on, it becomes very clear during work, but it just began this period. They did indeed start to organize. Balcony, all right. Can you describe more detail with the relationship between samuel adams [inaudible] samuel adams didnt import tea himself. John hancock was reputed to be a major smuggler. I have not done that research myself, you might have to wait for james book to get a complete answer to that question. Certainly hancock was a important leader of the boston particles and was well known, even though he was very powerful and wealthy, very prosperous, he was an ally of senior adams. He did give a very famous oration in boston on the anniversary of the boston massacre. Its one that john adams said left everyone in the audience weeping. It was so pathetic about the terrible things that happened during the boston massacre. Hancock was definitely an ally of samuel adams and the committee of correspondence. His also a smuggler but how much of it was t . I dont know. He was well known for smuggling madeira. He was well known wine smuggler but whether or not t, i dont know. Other questions. I cannot see you up there at all. Theres a light in my eye. [inaudible question] they didnt react so much to the buildup of troops as they reacted to the closing of Boston Harbor. They definitely reacted to the blockade of boston, they sent money, they sent supplies, some people in connecticut sent a herd of sheep driven into boston so that people could be slaughtered and people could eat mutton. Other colonies were very helpful in helping, and giving boston assistance in the blockade, theyd didnt wasnt really a buildup of troops as it was assistance to boston. I might add, it became controversial because rumors spread, this is a period of great rumors. Boston elite were using, holding onto the money sent to them from other colonies and using it for their own purposes. They were hiring local businesses, local workers to work on their properties instead of doing public works or Something Like that. It became controversial, the Boston Committee did hire people who were thrown out of work because of the blockade of the harbor because the shipbuilding was a major player in the boston economy. So they hired these guys to do public works. They complained and said youre getting benefits out of us who are trying to give people assistance without strings so they replied that isnt it better for people to work them not to work . So a bunch of products happened in boston paid for money that came in from other places. [inaudible question] what was it about the columnist there that they reacted, thought they were the ones where the action of the revolutionary war. Why boston was the most radical . One argument i would make is that they set charleston couldnt make up their minds. Bostonians were accustomed to town meetings. The colonies where people were accustomed to getting together in large groups, having debates, discussing and coming to a consensus. I dont think theres ever been anything like a town meeting in charleston before. There certainly hadnt been in thought of you. Those meanings are more contentious. I think you had a lot to do with the fact that bostonians were accustomed to listening to each other and talking to each other and having this political discourse and coming to an agreement. They are able to come to an agreement. [inaudible] do they reflect their religious beliefs . Yes and no. Yes, it is true a lot of them are congregationalist but by this time, they are long past puritanism. Some of them are anglicans, there is a diversity in boston by this period. A be people who went to congregational churches were accustomed to Church Meetings where these kinds of dialogues occurred, thats entirely possible. Of course, there were different churches so its not clear. It certainly true political effect they had a sense of how to get along, how to reach a consensus that i dont think you see in any other colonies or big cities. [inaudible question] no. The only thing that was relevant was that sometimes tea that was turned away from ports in New Hampshire was telefax. Where it was excessive. It was not turned away. Dont know, they were not involved. They were involved back in the opposition to the stanback in 1765 but they were involved in 1774. Questions over here. Just a minute. Get to you in a minute. 1774, the year that you write about, how pivotal were the arguments in the association . Are critical for the articles of association . They were in fact very critical. Because basically, the association, which was adopted by the first Continental Congress just before they adjourned and october, association calls for the creation of local committees in every county, city and town. To enforce the association. It is the economic boycott against britain. Those who locally elected committees become crucial in the next month because they become in effect, the government of the colonies, people obey what they say. People basically vote with their feet, they stop obeying the government and start upping the local committees. Its not just wentworth, off the governors write letters saying i cannot get people to obey what i am saying. So therefore, ive decided to stop trying because it was only exposing the impotence of a government effected that so yes, the articles of association are critical in the fact that they call for the election of these committees. I might add that they said the people who are able to vote for the committees or qualified voters, it did not expand the voting population for electing the committees but they insisted that people who are qualified to vote will be the people who vote for the associations committee. That was critical. You couldnt get the assembly to take something from the people who voted for the Assembly Said something. Another question . Lincoln theater called the articles the First Institution absolutely. I certainly agree with you. Absolutely. They set up the First American government. Thats what they are. The committee, local committees of the local government. I would go back and say many of the areas of the colonies had never elected anybody before. Other than the people for the assembly, they never elected local people. For example, in virginia parishes, people didnt vote for the vestrys, thinking have a general vote for those members. They didnt vote for their local officials of any sort. These are the first times people were able to vote for local officials and members of the committee. I agree with macon. In my lectures, he would have heard that. [inaudible] yes, the question is, where they considered the National Government . Yes, it was the best thing anybody had at that time. In fact, loyalists complained and governors complained that people were saying, referring to the laws of the Continental Congress even though as far as the people who were saying this, the people making the complaint that these are also, these are statements of opinion or something but local people are calling them the loss think we will obey the laws of the Continental Congress. [inaudible question] if there is already a preexisting tax that was lower, why did that spark cash was at that the british was becoming more effective what happened, i left out a lot of the story, its very complex. When the tax was first imposed, in 1767, 1768, there was a massive boycott, it wasnt just the tax on that, as a tax on other goods like bass and other imported goods. So if the calmness engaged in a major boycott. Parliament repealed all aspects of that law, except for the tea tax. They left the tea tax intact as a symbol of british authority. Fastforward, one of the things that happened was after the other taxes were repealed, people started to import legal team again and began to pay that tax, which they hadnt been doing. This happened in boston and i might add the other calmness got mad at the bostonians because they were not paying the tea tax, this is all pre1773. They started to write in our newspapers and so forth against boston. This happened, it came to the floor again and 73 and 74 went the bostonians destroyed the tea and people said well, boston was paying the tax and we werent because there were a number of people who were continuing to boycott and thats one of the reasons why the smuggled tea was so well in other parts. They began to plane up against the bostonians and they didnt quite trust the bostonians. Its a very complicated story. [inaudible] i cant see. Anything. You mentioned before there were four attempts to have the east India Company and the colonies, was that any other attempts to follow that up . They were not official tea ships sent by the company. One of the issues was, its a very complicated story, one of the issues was, quote individual tea merchants dont buy tea from the east India Company . And import that under their own themes rather than official east India Company tea imports . There were some people who tried to do that. They soon found the communists were opposed to that, too. Some of the tea and the other herders harvest was that kind of tea. Theres privately imported. It was a muddled situation. One of the issues, one of the big issues always was between merchants who sold legal tea and the merchant who sold smuggled tea. In charleston, one of the ways in which they got consensus was by saying okay, well boycott all tea. It doesnt matter whether it smuggled or whether its legal because if we all make boycott Legal Defense all the merchants of smugglers are going to make out like bandits and we dont want that to happen. This was a policy of the new Charleston Chamber of commerce, which was founded specifically to solve this problem. I can answer questions individually later. Theres one in the back there. Since part of the taxes, the calmness are complaining about no taxation without representation, was there every any thought in parliament to giving them representation . No. [laughter] there were people who argued that it should be but it was and never got anywhere. In fact, when the communist said it was more than argument in 1765 that is in 1774. When they said that, they didnt mean we want representatives in parliament because they knew whatever representative they sent what immediately be outvoted. What they meant was, we only want to be taxed by people for whom we have voted. That is our own assembly. Its what they meant. Thank you all very much. Its been great. [applause]