Engraving Depicting the Boston Tea Party

The Boston Tea Party was one of the precipitating events of the American Revolution. It occurred on December 16, 1773 as a protest against the Tea Act, which the British Parliament passed that May. This past year, a series of tax protests, known as the Tax Day Tea Party, were meant to spark a conservative revolution in the United States. The protests lasted throughout the year, and a Tax Day Tea Party part two is planned for 2010. In fact, the issue is so popular, that a Google-search of the phrase “tea party” shows no reference to the original event on the first page. Hence, my interest in the Boston Tea Party; the original Tea Party. Here’s a timeline of the events leading up to the Boston Tea Party, and a commentary on whether or not modern protestors deserve to use that term.

Timeline

• Pre-176os: The British began developing a taste for tea in the 17th century. As a result, the British government gave the British East India Company a monopoly on the tea trade and imposed a duty of 25% on all imports. Also, the British East India Company was only allowed to trade directly with Britain, and not with the colonies. This resulted in the popularity of smuggled Dutch tea in the colonies, which was not taxed, and therefore cheaper than British tea. Needless to say, the British East India Company began losing money.
• 1754-1763: The French and Indian War, the North American Theater of the broader Seven Years’ War, took place.  Although technically a victory for the British, the war was very expensive and left the British government in extreme debt. In an effort to raise revenue, the British government began floating the idea of taxing the American colonies for the first time.
• 

  Charles Townshend

  1767: Charles Townshend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, proposes a series of acts, known as the Townshend Acts. There were five acts in all, but the following three were most important:

  1. Revenue Act of 1767: The most important of the Townshend Acts, the Revenue Act taxed imports of paper, paint, lead, glass, and tea in the colonies. These were products that couldn’t be produced in the colonies and therefore had to imported from Britain. It also allowed for broader powers when searching homes and businesses for smuggled goods. Finally, in an effort to take away the power of the purse, the money raised from the Revenue Act was meant to pay the salaries of colonial officials. Prior to the Revenue Act, the colonies paid the salaries of judges and governors, thus they were able to choose their leadership.
  2. Indemnity Act: Removed the tax on tea imported into Britain in an effort to make it more competitive with Dutch tea.
  3. Commissioners of Customs Act of 1767: Meant to enforce trade regulation compliance by creating the American Board of Customs Commissions. This is considered by many to be the beginning of the separation between Britain and the colonies.
• 1768: Customs officials seized the ship, Liberty, on the grounds that it was involved in smuggling activities. John Hancock owned the ship, and was put on trial, but with John Adams as his lawyer, the charges were eventually dropped. Although Hancock was, in fact, a smuggler, Liberty was not involved in smuggling when it was seized and its seizure caused rioting and protest in Boston.
• 

  Paul Revere's depiction of the Boston Massacre

  1770: Britain sent troops to Boston, in response to growing unrest in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. The colonists protested against the occupation and the Boston Massacre occured on March 5, 1770. Ironically, on that same day, Lord North, Prime Minister of Britain, proposedthe Repeal Act, to repeal all of the taxes of the Revenue Act, with the exception of the tea tax.

• 1773: Parliament passed the Tea Act, which made it possible for the British East India Company to export directly to the colonies. This eliminated the duty that the British East India Company had to pay, but the colonists resented the fact that their tea was still taxed under the Revenue Act.

The Boston Tea Party

1846 Lithograph of the Boston Tea Party

In the autumn of 1773, seven ships were sent from Britain to the colonies. Four were headed for Boston, while the others were each headed for New York, Philadelphia, and Charleston. At the time, British law stipulated that cargo had to be unloaded and duties had to paid on imports within 20 days, or else the government could seize the shipment. Thus, when the ships arrived, the colonists protested and they were unable to unload their cargo. In Charleston, customs officials seized the shipment, while in New York and Philadelphia, the ships were returned to Britain. However, in Boston, Royal Governor Thomas Hutchinson refused to turn back the cargo ships until they had been unloaded. Remember how the Revenue Act gave the power of the purse back to Britain? Massachusetts was the only colony that fully implemented the act, and Hutchinson was completely under British control. On December 16, the deadline for the first of the cargo ships to be unloaded, Samuel Adams held a meeting to determine what action should be taken. The meeting became heated, and before an agreement could be reached, protestors left and marched directly to the ships. That night they proceeded to dump every bit of tea into the Boston Harbor. They’d rather the tea were destroyed before the British government got a hold of it.

The Aftermath
The British government was shocked by the Boston Tea Party, and considered it an act of treason. Any goodwill that the colonies had in Parliament was quickly lost, and in 1774, Parliament passed the Intolerable Acts. These acts, meant to restore British dominance in the colonies, only served to generate more revolutionary fervor. In response to the Intolerable Acts, the colonies organized the First Continental Congress, the first legislature of the future United States. The British efforts to control the colonies only served to create a united front, and revolution was unavoidable.

So how do the modern tea partiers match up?
They don’t hold a candle to the original Boston Tea Party. The issue at hand with both groups is the levying of taxes. Everyone knows the popular rallying cry of the colonists, “No taxation without representation.” They had no parliamentary representatives, so the levying of taxes against them was actually a violation of British law and the Rights of Englishmen. On the other hand, every tax appropriated in the modern United States, no matter how reprehensible, has been lawful, and every citizen has a representative in government. The colonists had no other recourse, and their course of action was treasonous and punishable by death.

Ultimately, that is the key: the colonists took action, whereas the modern tea party protestors are just walking around waving a bunch of signs which do nothing but advertise their illiteracy. Don’t get me wrong, I share many of the same issues about the overbearing federal government as they do, but where were their protest signs in 2003 during the creation of Medicare Advantage (the biggest, most-expensive, least helpful medical overhaul in history) or in 2006 when the Military Commissions Act took away habeas corpus? How about when the federal government raided the homes of medical marijuana users in California, which was blatant violation of the 10th amendment. Furthermore, holding up a protest sign or whining on Twitter hardly counts as action. The colonists protested taxation by refusing to pay, and then destroying British property. Are modern tea partiers willing to take it that far? Finally, the most annoying aspect of the modern tea party movement is that is simply a political ploy by conservative Republicans to regain control of the federal government. I say this based on the fact that the modern tea partiers were absent prior to January 20th, 2009. So, on this 236th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party, let’s remember what it was really all about, and not politicize it to death.