Previous post
Next post
250 years ago, on December 16, 1773, a group of colonists boarded three ships in the Boston Harbor and threw British tea overboard.
They came like torches in the night, swarming over the sides of the three ships anchored in Griffin Harbor: the Dartmouth, Eleanor, and Beaver. Their faces were painted black, red, and copper from lamp soot and paint, bodies wrapped in blankets or wearing “old frocks, red woollen caps, gowns, and all manner of like devices.”
Axes pecked away at locks. Three hundred and forty wooden crates were cracked, scalped, and gutted, their 92,000 pounds of black powdered innards thrown into the water, turning it dark. After three hours, it was over. The only piece of personal property destroyed during the exercise was a padlock belonging to one of the captains, and this was replaced the next day.
That action eventually led to the greatest break-up letter of all time, our Declaration of Independence.
But why throw tea into the harbor? It was due largely to the fact that Britain’s Parliament had been arbitrarily imposing taxes, regulations, and rules upon the colonies, without representation. After the massive outcry against the Sugar and Stamp Acts, Parliament imposed the Townshend Acts because they arrogantly stated they can rule the colonies however they want with zero representation from the colonists.
These were revenue-raising duties on lead, paper, paint, glass, and tea. The colonists resisted and boycotted the goods, and in early 1770, these taxes were also repealed, with the exception of the duty on tea, which was retained – like the previous assertion of Parliament’s right to rule – as a marker defending Parliament’s claim of the right to tax the colonists. Repeal broke the boycott, although some colonists tried to sustain the boycott on British tea, preferring smuggled tea instead. Compared to other port cities, Boston’s tea boycott was less solid after 1770.
Keep in mind, that there were two significant reasons for the Boston Tea Party. One, it was a signal to Britain that taxes shouldn’t be imposed without representation. Secondly, Parliament had recently retaliated by lowering the tax on tea in order incentivize colonists to buy tea again, thus rendering the taxation without representation argument moot. Which, in large part, led to the decision to dump 90,000 pounds of tea into the harbor.
What is fascinating to note about this, is the disguises were necessary as many participants were still apprenticed to Tories. If they had been caught, they would’ve been charged with high treason – which meant death.
There were some, including George Washington, who thought this move was excessive. But many, including John Adams, had thought that Britain was gearing up for more, and they were. Parliament quickly passed the “Intolerable Acts.” The Boston Port was shut down, the local government was replaced, and colonists were ordered to house soldiers against their will and PAY the British government as well. That right there is the key reason why we have the Third Amendment to our Constitution.
Britain’s retaliation against the Boston Tea Party had consequences. It led to the Continental Congress and, as I mentioned above, the Declaration of Independence.
It is well worth rediscovering and teaching the history of the Boston Tea Party. Why? Because, 250 years later, we have opinions given through the lens of today that ignore actual history and attempt to paint the event as terrorism and racist.
Yet there’s another version of the event, one less suitable for national mythology. A horde of White men disguised themselves as Native Americans — coppering their faces and donning headdresses in the same tradition that would lead to blackfaced minstrel shows decades later — to commit seditious conspiracy and destroy private property. The riotous mob trespassed on three ships and destroyed goods worth nearly $2 million in today’s money — all because they didn’t want to obey a duly passed law.
~Snip
Benjamin L. Carp, author of “Defiance of the Patriots: The Boston Tea Party & the Making of America,” says that night on the wharf is such a formative myth because it reveals a core tension between two values: democratic protest, and law and order. It was principled and nonviolent, carried out by common folk who believed virtue was on their side. It was also criminal — Carp notes that a comparable event now might be classified as an act of terrorism.
As I wrote above, the disguise wasn’t about racism, it was about keeping their identity hidden from their Tory bosses.
Furthermore, the event happened for a very specific reason. That’s not mythical, that’s just fact. And, not all the participants were white.
The vast majority was of English descent, but men of Irish, Scottish, French, Portuguese, and African ancestry were documented to have also participated. The participants were of all ages, but the majority of the documented participants was under the age of forty. Sixteen participants were teenagers, and only nine men were above the age of forty.
The Boston Tea Party was a significant event that led to the American Revolution and the establishment of the United States of America.
Happy 250th Boston Tea Party anniversary!
— Jenny Beth Martin (@jennybethm) December 16, 2023
Thank you to the modern-day patriots who carry on the legacy of our Founders!
Who here loves America and is thankful for our nation's founding?✋
God bless America! pic.twitter.com/MwXFlb1TmD
The freedoms we enjoy today are because of those men and all those who fought in the war.
In the spirit of the American Revolution let's celebrate the 250th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party. Have some tea today in honor of our patriot ancestors who threw British tea into the harbor symbolizing the cry, "No taxation without representation!" https://t.co/xYJY2dqAgb
— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) December 16, 2023
We. The. People. are here precisely because the colonists wanted to be self-governing instead of answerable to an overreaching intrusive government. It’s a lesson we need to remember, especially during these times.
Feature Photo Credit: Bicentennial Boston Tea Party stamp via iStock, cropped and modified
“— all because they didn’t want to obey a duly passed law.” Duly passed? Nope.
Mr. Carp needs to look at the definition of terrorism just a little closer.
Methinks he does know SFC, but that he’s just twisting it to meet his narrative (as the left ALWAYS does)
in the same tradition that would lead to blackfaced minstrel shows decades later
Uh no. Not “in the same spirit” at all. It was a disguise.
they didn’t want to obey a duly passed law
Actually, the whole point was that it was NOT a duly passed law. Unless, of course, you desire autocracy in America.
It was also criminal
Yeah. Revolution tends to be. And that tension has always underlain the event, as I was taught it.
Have some tea today in honor of our patriot ancestors
And make sure it’s English tea. 😉
3 Comments