The Boston Tea Party

Enquiry question

Investigate the sources

1. Source 1: Starter activity – Engraving of the Boston Tea Party

   This is an engraving from ‘The History of North America’ by Reverend W. D. Cooper, published in London in 1789. The book contained ‘a review of the customs and manners of the original inhabitants: the First Settlement of the British Colonies, and their Rise and progress, from the Earliest Period to the time of their becoming United, Free and Independent States’.

   1. 

   Examine the source

   • What can you see in the image?
   • What does the caption say? How does it contribute to our understanding of the image?
   • How does the image depict the Boston Tea Party?
   • Who do think was the audience for Cooper’s book?
   • How useful is this image for understanding the significance of the Boston Tea Party?
   • After examining all the sources in this lesson, how would you re-evaluate this source as evidence for the Boston Tea Party?

2. Source 2: The Tea Act

   The Tea Act was passed by the British parliament in May 1773. It supported the East India Company, which faced financial difficulties due to unsold tea, by giving it a monopoly on the tea trade with the American colonies, as well as other privileges.

   1. 

   2. 

      An act to allow a drawback of the duties of customs on the exportation of tea to any of his Majesty’s colonies or plantations in America; to increase the deposit on bohea tea to be sold at the India Company’s sales; and to impower the commissioners of the treasury to grant licences to the East India Company to export tea duty-free.

   Examine the source

   • Look at the full document. What do you notice about it?
   • Can you tell how this document is conserved at The National Archives?
   • How was the Tea Act an attempt to assert British control and generate revenue from the colonies?
   • Can you suggest the impact of this Act on the colonists and the business of local traders?

3. Source 3: The earliest British account of the Boston Tea Party

   This letter was written by Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Leslie of the 64th Regiment of Foot to Lord Viscount Barrington, the Secretary at War. Leslie was writing from his barracks at Castle William, on an island in Boston Harbour, on 17 December 1773 – the day after the Boston Tea Party.

   1. 

      Castle William 17th December 1773

      My Lord

      I did myself the honor to write your Lordship last Saturday, since then the Sons of Liberty* have destroy’d [destroyed] 340 Chests of Tea on board three ships, that lay all together at one of the Wharfs.

      The fourth vessel that brought the Tea is strand’d [stranded] near to Cape Cod, but the Tea was got safe on Shore, and it’s expected by this time it has fared the same fate as the rest.

      I had the regiment ready to take their Arms, had they been called upon.

      I am informed the Council would not agree to the Troops going to town, however it must end in that at last. Lenity [gentleness] won’t do now with the People here. The Gentlemen* that took refuge here still continue and likely to remain, for the mob threatens them much if they go to town, in short, they rule everything at present.

      The Governor who is now on the Island, has wrote to My Lord Dartmouth on this late Affair.

      I have the honor to be My Lord
      Your most Obedient
      and most humble Servant
      Alexr. [Alexander] Leslie

   Examine the source

   • Why do you think that Lt. Col. Leslie has been stationed to an island in Boston Harbour rather than in the town of Boston?
   • What does the letter imply about his attitude to these events?
   • What are the strengths and weaknesses of this account for understanding these events?
   • Do you think there is anything surprising/unusual about this letter?
   • Find out and explain how the British military position changed in Boston after the Boston Tea Party.

4. Source 4: An American account of the Boston Tea Party

   1. 

      [Left column] Just before the Dissolution of the Meeting, a number of brave and resolute Men, dressed in the Indian Manner, approached near the Door of the Assembly, gave the War-Whoop, which rang through the House, and was answered by some in the Galleries, but Silence being commanded, and a peaceable Deportment was again enjoined, till the Dissolution: The Indians as, they were then called, repaired to the Wharf where the ships lay that had the Tea on board, and were followed by Hundreds of People, to see the Event of the Transactions of those who made  grotesque an Appearance…….[newspaper damaged]……on Board Capt. Hall’s ship, where they hoisted out the cheats of Tea, and when upon Deck stove [broke] the Chests and emptied the Tea overboard; having cleared this ship, they proceeded to Capt. Bruce’s, and then to Capt. Coffin’s Brig [two masted square-rigged ship]- they applied themselves so dexterously [skilfully] to the Destruction of this Commodity that in the Space of three Hours they broke up 342 Chests, which was the whole number in those Vessells and discharged their Contents into the Dock; when the Tide rose it floated the broken Chests and the Tea insomuch that the Surface of the Water was filled therewith a considerable Way from the South Part of the Town to Dorchester-Neck, and lodged on the Shores. There was the greatest care taken to prevent

      [Right column] the Tea from being purloined by the Populace: One or two being detected in endeavouring to pocket a small quantity were stripped of their Acquisitions, and very roughly handled- It is a worthy Remark, that although a considerable Quantity of Goods were still remaining on board the Vessels, no injury was sustained: Such Attention to private Property was observed that a small Padlock belonging to the Captain of one of the Ships being broke, another was procured and sent to him.- The town was very quiet during the whole Evening and the Night following: Those Persons who were from the Country, returned with a merry Heart, and the next Day, Joy appeared in almost every Countenance, some on Occasion of the Destruction of the Tea, others on Account of the Quietness with which it was effected.- One of the Monday’s Papers says, that the Masters and Owners are well pleased that their Ships are thus cleared.

   Examine the source

   • What does this newspaper extract suggest about the impact of the Boston Tea Party on the people of Boston?
   • Can you explain why ‘there [was] the greatest care taken to prevent the Tea from being purloined by the Populace’?
   • Why does the article point out that no damage was done to the ships carrying the tea?
   • Who would have been the audience for this newspaper article?
   • Why do you think this document exists in The National Archives Colonial Office records series?
   • How does this newspaper account differ from the account given in Source 3?
   • How do both Source 3 and Source 4 compare to Source 1, an illustration of the Boston Tea Party created by British engraver Reverend W.D. Cooper in 1789?

5. Source 5: Correspondence on whether events were 'high treason'

   Sources 5a to 5c are extracts from a letter requesting legal advice on whether the Boston Tea Party constituted 'high treason'. The letter was sent to the Attorney and Solicitor General from William Legge, Earl of Dartmouth, the Secretary of State for the Colonies, in February 1774. It includes a narrative of events and questions concerning the punishment of those involved.

   Source 5d is the Attorney and Solicitor General's reply.

   1. 

      Whitehall 5th February 1774

      Attorney and Solicitor General

      Gentlemen

      I am commanded by the King to transmit to you the enclosed narrative of facts relating to some of the late transactions of Boston in North America, accompanied with the two Questions thereupon. 

      This is the King’s Pleasure that you do take this Case into your immediate and mature consideration and Report to me for His Majesty’s Information your answer to the Questions proposed.

      The state of His Majesty’s Colonies in America, under the Insults that have been offered to the Authority of this Kingdom, requires the most serious deliberation and speedy decision. It is therefore His Majesty’s Pleasure that you should transmit your answer to me with all possible dispatch, to the end that the measures His Majesty may think proper to pursue may not fail of their Effect through any Delay that can be avoided. 

       …

      Dartmouth

   2. 

      …

      Twenty Second

      That this committee repeatedly sent for the owner of the Ship Dartmouth requesting him to comply with the request of the Town and send his ship with the Tea back to England. In excuse for his refusal, he said that he could not obtain a clearance from the Custom house, whereupon notification were again posted up upon the 14th December for another meeting of the Inhabitants, which was accordingly held in the afternoon. That at this Meeting, it was determined that the owner should demand at the Custom house a clearance of the Teas for England, which was accordingly done in the presence of twelve Persons appointed to see it done.

      That, upon the refusal of the Custom house to grant such clearance, the meeting was adjourned to the next day, in order to consider what was to be done, when the said owner was required to demand a Permit from the naval officer to pass the Castle, which was also refused, he was ordered to apply to the Governor in person for such a Permit, which being also refused, he returned and made his report to the meeting, whereupon numbers of People cried out a ‘Mob’ a ‘Mob’ and immediately a body of men disguised like Indians, and encouraged by Mr. John Hancock, Samuel Adams and others repaired to the wharf where three vessels having tea on board, lay aground, took possession of the said vessels, and in two hours, the whole of the tea was destroyed…

   3. 

      Queries

      1. Do the Acts & Proceedings stated in the foregoing case, or any of them amount to the crime of High Treason?
      2. If they do, who  are the persons chargeable with such Crime and what will be the proper and legal method of proceeding against them?

   4. 

      To the Right Honorable

      The Earl of Dartmouth, one of his 

      Majesty’s Principal Secretaries of State, and First Lord of Trade and Plantations

      My Lord,

      Having received Your Lordship’s commands to take into consideration a case transmitted to us etc… and two questions put thereinupon, we have considered the same; and humbly submit to your Lordship the following Answer to the said Questions.

      1. We are of the opinion that the Acts and Proceedings, stated in the above-mentioned case do amount to the Crime of High Treason, namely to the levying of War against His Majesty.

      These proceedings are an attempt, concerted with much deliberation, and made with open force in pursuance of such concert, to obstruct the execution of an Act of the Parliament of Great Britian, imposing a duty upon Tea imported into America; and to put a general restraint upon the exercise of lawful trade, as if it were a publick grievance.

      …

      1.   Methods of proceeding against Them are either by prosecuting them for Their Treason, in the country, in the ordinary course of Justice, or arresting Them there by the Justices of the Peace, or some of Them and transmitting Them hither to tried in some County of England, to be assigned by the King’s  Commission, or by sending over a Warrant of a Secretary of State grounded on sufficient Information upon Oath, to arrest and bring over the Offenders to be tried here.

      We take each of these courses to be legal, and that to be the most proper, which the circumstances of the case absolutely require. In the consideration of which we humbly submit, that a Preference is due to the most ordinary course, if it is to be thought , in other respects, equally sufficient and effective.

   Examine the source

   • Why has George III requested information from the Attorney and Solicitor General?
   • Why has Lord Dartmouth made this request on behalf of the King?
   • How would you describe the tone and attitude in this document?
   • What does it suggest about the British reaction to the Boston Tea Party?
   • How does this description of some of the events relating to the Boston Tea Party differ from the newspaper account in Source 4?
   • What was the role of John Hancock and Samuel Adams in the American Revolution?
   • What is the role of the Attorney General in the British state?
   • Why did George III want the Attorney General to answer these two questions following the events of the Boston Tea Party?
   • How would you define the term ‘high treason’?
   • How was justice administered in the colony of Massachusetts?
   • Could the colony have heard a case of High treason? Explain your answer.
   • What is the opinion of the Attorney General on the case for ‘high treason’?
   • What grounds are offered for the case for ‘high treason’?
   • What are the three ways of carrying out a prosecution for ‘high treason’ according to the Attorney General?
   • What does this document reveal about how was justice administered in the colony of Massachusetts?

6. Source 6: East India Company invoice for destroyed tea

   1. 

   Examine the source

   • Why has this document been created by the East India Company?
   • What are the five types of tea exported to Boston?
   • What is the total value of the tea exported according to this invoice?
   • What does this invoice reveal about the business of the East India Company?
   • How does this source link to the Boston Port Act (Source 7)?
   • Why is this document useful when examining events relating to the Boston Tea Party?

7. Source 7: Extract from Boston Port Act

   With the Boston Port Act of 1774, the British Parliament closed the port of Boston until the colonists compensated the East India Company for the tea destroyed at the Boston Tea Party.  It was one of the 'Coercive Acts', which became known as the Intolerable Acts to the colonists.

   1. 

      An Act to discontinue, in such manner, and for such time as are therein mentioned, the landing and discharging, lading [loading] or shipping, of goods, wares, and merchandise, at the town, and within the harbour, of Boston, in the province of Massachusett’s Bay, in North America.

      Whereas dangerous commotions [disturbances] and insurrections have been fomented [cause trouble to develop] and raised in the town of Boston, in the province of Massachusett’s Bay, in New England, by divers ill-affected persons, to the subversion of his Majesty’s government, and to the utter destruction of the publick [public] peace, and good order of the said town; in which commotions and insurrections certain valuable cargoes of teas, being the property of the East India Company, and on board certain vessels lying within the bay or harbour of Boston, were seized and destroyed: And whereas, in the present condition of the said town and harbour, the commerce of his Majesty’s subjects cannot be safely carried on there, nor the customs payable to his Majesty duly collected; and it is therefore expedient [necessary] that the officers of his Majesty’s customs should be forthwith removed from the said town: May it please your Majesty that it may be enacted; and be it enacted by the King’s most excellent majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons, in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, That from and after the first day of June, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-four, it shall not be lawful for any person or persons whatsoever to lade [load cargo] put, or cause or procure to be laden or put, off or from any quay, wharf, or other place, within the said town of Boston, or in or upon any part of the shore of the bay, commonly called The Harbour of Boston, between a certain headland or point called Nahant Point, on the eastern side of the entrance into the said bay, and a certain other headland or point called Alderton Point, on the western side of the entrance into the said bay… 

   Examine the source

   • Why did the British pass the Boston Port Act?
   • What is the tone and attitude implied in this extract from the Act?
   • How was trade and commerce in Boston affected by this law?
   • How would this Act have affected the people of Boston and other colonists?
   • Find out more about the terms of other Coercive Acts and their impact.
   • Explain the difference between the words ‘Coercive’ and ‘Intolerable’.
   • What does the different labelling for the same laws imply about the colonial relationship?
   • Explain how the Thirteen Colonies responded to the Coercive Acts.

8. Source 8: Letter ordering the rebels to be suppressed

   On 19 April 1775, General Thomas Gage sent out regiments of British soldiers from Boston to Lexington to arrest colonial leaders Sam Adams and John Hancock and then move to Concord to suppress any resistance. The plan failed as the colonists became aware of the plan and Paul Revere and other ‘Minutemen’ warned the local population that the British were coming. This letter provides the King's orders on how to handle the situation that followed.

   1. 

      Whitehall, 5th July 1775

      Governor of New Jersey

      Sir,

      Your ideas of the situation of the King’s Affairs in North America and the fatal effects of General Gage’s attempt at Concord are perfectly just and I really believe that if that unfortunate event had not happened just at the time that my letter of the 3rd of March was received by the Governors of the several colonies separately, or upon some plan of communication less dangerous than a general Congress would have been committed such a consideration of the Resolution of the House of Commons of the 20th of February as would have led to some plan of accommodation.

      That happy moment of advantage is lost and instead of Reconciliation all North Americans, except Quebec, Nova Scotia, Georgia & the Floridas, is in Arms against Great Britian & committed in Rebellion that menaces to overthrow the Constitution.

      In this situation it is the King’s firm resolution that the most vigorous efforts should be made both by Sea and Land to reduce these Rebellious subjects to Obedience & the proper measures are now pursuing not only for augmenting the Army under General Gage but also for making such addition to our Naval strength in North America as may enable Admiral Graves to make such a Disposition of his Fleet as that beside the Squadron necessary for the New England Station, there may be separate Squadrons at New York within the Bay of Delaware in Chesapeake Bay & upon the Coast of Carolina.

      …

      I have only to add that it is His Majesty’s express Command that you do exert every Endeavour & employ every means in your power to aid & support him [Gage] & Admiral Graves in all such operations as they may think proper to undertake for carrying the King’s Orders into full Execution and restoring the Authority of His Majesty’s Government.

      (Dartmouth)

   Examine the source

   • What criticism of General Gage is suggested by this letter to the Governor of New Jersey?
   • What is the attitude of the British Crown towards the North American colonies?
   • What steps are the British going to take to meet resistance to its authority?
   • What does the letter imply about how the British governed its colonies?
   • Find out more context about events at Concord, Lexington, and the role of the ‘Minutemen’.

9. Source 9: Proclamation for Suppressing Rebellion

   In this document, King George III referred to the American colonists as traitors. The proclamation was printed and distributed by William Franklin, the Colonial Governor of New Jersey (1763–1776),  a Loyalist during American Revolutionary War. Benjamin Franklin, his father, however, became one of the most important Patriot leaders of the American Revolution and a Founding Father of the United States.

   1. 

      BY HIS EXCELLENCY

      WILLIAM FRANKLIN, Esq.

      Captain-General, Governor and Commander in Chief and over the Province of New-Jersey, and Territories thereon depending in AMERICA, Chancellor and Vice-Admiral in the same, etc.

      A PROCLAMATION .

      WHEREAS I have received His Majesty’s Royal proclamation, bearing Date at St. James, the twenty-third Day of August last, together with His Majesty’s Commands to cause the same to be made public in such Manner as has been usual on the like Occasions, which Proclamation is in the Words following:

      BY THE KING

      A PROCLAMATION

      For suppressing Rebellion and Sedition

      George R [Rex]

      Whereas many of our Subjects in diverse Parts of or Colonies and Plantations in North-America, misled by dangerous and ill designing Men, and forgetting the Allegiance which they owe to the Power that has protected and sustained them, after various disorderly Acts committed in Disturbance for the public Peace to the Obstruction of lawful Commerce, and to the Oppression of our loyal Subjects carrying on the same, have at length proceeded to an open and avowed Rebellion, by arraying themselves in hostile Manner to with Execution of the Law, and traitorously preparing, ordering, and levying War against Us; AND WHEREAS there is Reason to apprehend that such Rebellion hath been much promoted and encouraged by the traitorous Correspondence, Counsels and Comfort of divers wicked and desperate Persons within this Realm. TO THE END THEREFORE that none of our Subjects may neglect or violate their Duty through Ignorance thereof, or through any Doubt of the Protection which the Law will afford to their Loyalty and Zeal; We have thought fit, by and with the Advice of our Privy Council, to issue this our Royal Proclamation, hereby declaring that not only all our Officers civil and military are obliged to exert their utmost Endeavours to supress such Rebellion, and to bring the Traitors to Justice; but that all our Subjects of this realm and the Dominions thereunto belong are bound by Law to be aiding and assisting in the Suppression of such Rebellion, and to disclose and make know all traitorous Conspiracies and Attempts against Us, Our Crown and Dignity; And we do accordingly strictly charge and command all our Officers as well civil as military, and all other our obedient and loyal Subjects to use their utmost Endeavours to withstand an suppress such Rebellion, and to disclose and make known all Treasons and traitorous Conspiracies which they shall know to be against Us, our Crown and Dignity; and for that Purpose, that they transmit to one of our Principal Secretaries of State , or other proper Officer, due and full Information of all Persons who shall be found carrying on Correspondence with, or in any Manner or Degree aiding or abetting the Persons now in open Arms and rebellion against our Government within any of our Colonies and Plantations in North-America, in order to bring to condign [deserved] Punishment the Authors, Perpetrators and Abettors [accomplices] of such traitorous Designs.

      GIVEN at our Court at St James’, the twenty-third Day of August, One Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy-Five, in the fifteenth year of or Reign.

      I DO THEREFORE,  in Obedience to His Majesty’s Commands, and with the Advice of His Majesty’s Council for this Province, hereby publish the same, to the end that all His Majesty’s liege Subjects in this Province may be fully acquainted therewith and govern themselves accordingly.

      Given under my Hand and Seal at Arms**, in the City of Burlington***, the twenty-fourth Day of November, in the Year of our Lord One Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy-five; and in the sixteenth Year of the reign of our sovereign Lord George the Third of Great-Britain, France and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, etc.

      1. FRANKLIN

      By His EXCELLENCY’S Command

      CCHA. PETTIT, D. Secretary.

      GOD SAVE THE KING

   Examine the source

   • What does the description of William Franklin at the top of the proclamation imply about his role and duties in in New Jersey?
   • Why did George III make this proclamation to his colonial subjects in North America?
   • How does George III explain the reasons for rebellion in the colonies?
   • What does he mean by the ‘obstruction of lawful commerce’?
   • What does the document imply about the colonial relationship with the British Crown?
   • How does the British Crown intend to treat any resistance to its rule in the colonies?
   • What is the difference between ‘rebellion’ and ‘sedition’?

10. Source 10: The Declaration of Independence

    This document is titled 'A Declaration by the Representatives of the United States of America in General Congress Assembled'. This particular copy was printed on the night of 4 July 1776, one of the so-called 'Dunlap Broadsides'. In this document George III is referred to as a traitor and the American colonies declare their independence from Britain.

    1. 

       In Congress, July 4, 1776

       A DECLARATION

       BY THE  REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

       IN THE GENERAL CONGRESS ASSEMBLED

       When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

       We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness –That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

       He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

       He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

       ...

       He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

       ...

       We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

       Sjgned by ORDER and in BEHALF of the CONGRESS

       JOHN HANCOCK, PRESIDENT

       ATTEST

       CHARLES THOMSON, SECRETARY

       PHILADELPHIA: PRINTED BY JOHN DUNLAP

    Examine the source

    • What, according to the Declaration, is the purpose of government?
    • What is the meaning of the terms ‘unalienable right’ and ‘civic duty’?
    • Who was the audience for this document?
    • How did the Declaration criticise and characterise British rule at the time?
    • How had the colonists previously expressed grievances against George III and Parliament?
    • Explain the tone and attitude expressed in the document.
    • Find out about the influence of Thomas Paine’s ‘Common Sense’ on the Declaration of Independence.
    • How did the British Government respond to the Declaration of Independence?
    • What was the significance of the Declaration of Independence for (a) the American Revolution and (b) Slavery?

Extension activities

Further Activities

• Discuss and debate your choice for the most useful/interesting source in this lesson for understanding Britain’s relationship with the North American colonies.
• Curate your own exhibition on the causes of the American Revolution using the sources in this lesson and the external links to further documents.
• Debate the significance of the First and Second Continental Congresses, 1774–75.

Further enquiry questions

• How could you use these documents to understand the causes of the Boston Tea Party?
• How are these documents significant for understanding the American Revolution?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of these documents for understanding how Britain’s relationship with the North American Colonies deteriorated?

Background information

Tea chests destroyed

On the night of 16 December 1773, 340 chests of tea were destroyed in Boston Harbour, an event that has gone down in history as the Boston Tea Party. This political and mercantile protest was one of the key events in the lead up to the American Revolutionary War and, ultimately, American independence.

East India Company

Those involved in the protest were against the British tax on tea in the Americas and the monopoly of the East India Company on tea there, both expressed by the 1773 Tea Act.

Tensions regarding taxation in America had been rising since 1763, when Great Britain signed the Treaty of Paris, ending the Seven Years’ War and making Britain the dominant imperial power in North America. After this date, the British Parliament sought to tax their subjects in America to recover from a costly war with France and to better defend these colonies from future invasion.

British claim right to tax

However, doing so uncovered deeply opposing views regarding the way in which the North American colonies should be taxed. Parliament believed that they had the right to levy taxes upon all subjects within King George III’s dominions. British subjects living in America thought differently. They were not represented in the British Parliament, making decisions thousands of miles away about their livelihoods. They were not against paying taxes to the British Crown and believed that they should set those taxes.

The Stamp Act 1765

Protests in America over the 1765 Stamp Act, which imposed a direct tax on almost every form of paper used in the colonies, showed that Americans would not back down over this issue. Parliament was forced to repeal the intolerable Stamp Act in March 1766. However, to ensure that they would be able to enforce laws and taxes on the colonies in future they enacted the 1766 Declaratory Act, which asserted the government’s right to pass laws in the colonies ‘in all cases whatsoever’.

Response to the Townshend Duties

In 1767 and 1768, Parliament enacted the Townshend Duties – named after the Chancellor of the Exchequer Charles Townshend – which proposed new taxes on all lead, glass, paint, and tea imported into the colonies. Again, Americans protested; in Boston, hundreds refused to purchase any of the taxed British imports. Following protests in Boston, George III authorised the dispatch of troops to the area to deal with this rising lawlessness.

This ultimately resulted in bloodshed, when on 5 March 1770 nine British soldiers fired at a crowd of hundreds of Sons Bostonians, resulting in the deaths of five American colonists. To ease tensions in America, all the Townshend Duties were repealed, except the one on tea. This meant that tea suddenly became a focus of protest in America. The Sons of Liberty and similar groups, initially established to protest the Stamp Act, encouraged Americans to avoid legally importing tea.

This resistance led to a drop in demand for East India Company Tea. The fortunes of this British joint-stock company were closely tied to those of the British State, as they had taken out a significant loan from the Bank of England.

The Tea Act 1773

To save the Company, and to encourage the payment of tea duties in America, Parliament passed the 1773 Tea Act. This act allowed the East India Company to export tea directly to North America, without first going through London. As with the Stamp Act, many in America opposed this for validating Parliament’s right to directly tax American subjects.

Most American colonies simply protested this act by returning the tea to Britain. However, in Boston, Governor Thomas Hutchinson refused to let the ships leave the harbour, and those that opposed the Tea Act in the town refused to let the ships unload.

Boston Tea Party

On 28 November 1773, a ship carrying East India Tea, the Dartmouth, arrived at Griffin’s Wharf in Boston. According to the Townshend Duty, if the tax was not paid within twenty days of the ship’s arrival, then the ship and its cargo was to be seized by the authorities. That meant that the people of Boston had until December 17 to decide what to do. Over the next few weeks, thousands of concerned citizens attended meetings organised by the Boston Committee of Correspondence and the Sons of Liberty, where they decided that the tea should be sent back. Meanwhile, two more ships of tea, the Eleanor, and the Beaver, arrived in Boston. However, Governor Hutchinson still refused to release the ships. On the night of December 16th, following another meeting where Governor Hutchinson had refused to budge, a group of people, some disguised as Mohawks, flocked to Griffin’s Wharf, boarded the three ships, and destroyed the entire shipment of tea.

British response to Boston Tea Party

News of the Boston Tea Party reached London in January 1774. In response, the British Government firstly tried to identify and prosecute the individuals involved. Once that failed, they instead passed a set of repressive acts, colloquially referred to in America as the Intolerable Acts, designed to punish the people of Boston and compel them to compensate the East India Company for the loss of their tea, and to send a message to other North American colonies of the consequences for protests such as the Boston Tea Party. These acts halted trade to Boston, brought Massachusetts under British governmental control, granted immunity to British soldiers and officials to criminal prosecution in the state, and required colonists to house British soldiers.

American response to the Intolerable Acts

The Intolerable Acts only served to bring the American colonies together against Great Britain. In September 1774, representatives from twelve of the thirteen colonies assembled in Philadelphia for the First Continental Congress aimed to settle the concerns and frustrations of the Americans with the British King and Government before relations broke down even further.

The Suffolk Resolves, accepted by the congress on September 17th, encouraged the continued protest of the Intolerable Acts by stockpiling military supplies and boycotting British goods. The Declaration of Rights also developed at this congress, outlining the need for a rebellion if the Intolerable Acts were not repealed.

These attempts at a peaceful reconciliation failed, however, and in April 1775, less than eighteen months after the Boston Tea Party, American Patriot forces went to war with Great Britain.

American Declaration of Independence 1776

On 4 July 1776, when the Thirteen United States of America declared independence from Great Britain, they referenced the Intolerable Acts – passed in response to the Boston Tea Party – when justifying their actions. They no longer wished to be subject to a king who obstructed the Administration of Justice, cut off their trade, and who imposed taxes on them without their consent.

Useful links

Archived page

On the Record: The Boston Tea Party

Episode on The Boston Tea Party from The National Archives’ podcast, On the Record.

Record revealed

Request for compensation for the Boston Tea Party

On 16 December 1773, 340 chests of tea were thrown into Boston harbour by protesting colonists. This letter from the East India Company requests reimbursement.

In pictures

The causes of the American Revolution

What were the key moments that led to the American Revolution? From the Boston Tea Party to the Declaration of Independence.

Teaching resource

Early contact between English colonists and Native Americans

This resource uses journal entries from 1607 that describe what happened between early English settlers and Native Americans in Virginia.