Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?

Subject: RE: Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?
From: GUEST,Steve
Date: 13 Feb 00 - 06:13 PM

Ickle Dorritt asked, "More importantly - was it Earl Grey or Darjeeling????"

FWIW. I was told long ago that it was Lapsang Souchong. Steve

Subject: RE: Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?
From: Pelrad
Date: 13 Feb 00 - 05:03 PM

We should simply have switched to coffee. I can guarantee at least one of my ancestors dumped Banjer's poor auntie overboard. ;-)

Interesting discussion; in classrooms in the States there is no hint of smuggling as part of the colonial history.

Subject: RE: Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?
From: raredance
Date: 12 Feb 00 - 09:50 PM

I think the "war whoops" reference in the Boston paper a week after the event makes the Indians from India idea improbable. Besides India is a mostly warm country, this was Boston in December. That broadside is such a collection of overwrought metaphors that I would be very reluctant to try to logically explain a lot of the phrases. One could say that the dressed up colonists came from distant shores, i.e. England, but maybe the author was just trapped in his own rhyming scheme.

Liam, your expanded point is well put.

It should be "hearts of steel" in the last verse.

rich r

Subject: RE: Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Feb 00 - 07:09 PM

On the other hand dressing up in costume when you are doing something which you could be arrested for is quite a good idea. That's still the case whether you are protesters on the streets of Seattle or wherever, or the man who dressed up as Father Christmas to rob a bank, orb tghe Klu Klux Klan, or the traditional Whittlesea Bear.

Interesting to note those lines in the contemporary ballad :

Though you were INDIANS, come from distant shores,
Like MEN you acted ----not like savage Moors.

If the partygoers were dressed as Mohawks (as then Encyclopedia says, what's with the "distant shores". Is itn possible they were actually supposed to be Indian Indians, which was where the tea came from, and people got confused?

Didn't the Mohawks side with the British in the war, logically enough seeing them as less of a threat?

Subject: RE: Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?
From: JedMarum
Date: 12 Feb 00 - 06:40 PM

rich r - my apologies for being unclear. I mean that if their purpose was simply the destruction of the shipment, to remove it from the market, thereby increasing their own access to sell black market tea, they would not have needed the drama. I mean the almost ritualistic act of dressing up, and performing their act in front of an audience was clearly designed for political impact.

Certainly the protesters meant to destroy the tea, but do so in a way that was seen as extremely insulting.

Subject: RE: Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?
From: Linda Kelly
Date: 12 Feb 00 - 05:08 PM

More importantly - was it Earl Grey or Darjeeling????

Subject: RE: Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?
From: Banjer
Date: 12 Feb 00 - 05:03 PM

It is said that I may have an ancestral tie to that famous event in our history....It seems my great-great-great-great-aunt was one of the last old bags thrown overboard!! ***BG***

Subject: Lyr Add: TEA DESTROYED BY INDIANS
From: raredance
Date: 12 Feb 00 - 05:01 PM

Liam, I am not quite sure exactly what you mean "The destruction of a shipment was obviuosly not the intent." True, the primary purpose was a very public demonstration of protest against British policies, but heading to the ship with tools that could open the cases of tea, then actually splitting them open and tossing them overboard seems to me to be rather "intentional" and not an unfortuante accident that happened to coincide with a public display of disapproval of the tax laws.

In my post above, I clearly ommitted, the 5th Boston Tea Party related song in the DT, "Revolutionary Tea". This song was very popular in the middle part of the ninteenth century. The apparent first publication was in 1860, but it was well-known before that. Like "The Tea Tax" is seems to be a good song that was put together long after the event it memorialized.

Below is the text of the broadside sheet that appeared shortly after the event. The tea party is included in the song, but it is much more of a political manifesto complete with overuse of upper case letters (which I left in).

TEA, DESTROYED BY INDIANS

YE GLORIOUS SONS OF FREEDOM, brave and bold,
That has stood forth ----fair LIBERTY to hold;
Though you were INDIANS, come from distant shores,
Like MEN you acted ----not like savage Moors.

CHORUS.
Bostonian's SONS keep up your Courage good,
Or Dye, like Martyr's, in fair Free-born Blood.

Our LIBERTY, and LIFE is now invaded,
And FREEDOM's brightest Charms are darkly shaded;
But, we will STAND---and think it noble mirth,
To DART the man that dare oppress the Earth.

CHORUS

How grand the Scene!----(No Tyrant shall oppose)
The TEA is sunk in spite of all our foes.
A NOBLE SIGHT ---to see th' accursed TEA
Mingled with MUD ----and ever for to be;
For KING and PRINCE shall know that we are FREE.

CHORUS

Must we be still ---and live on Blood-bought Ground,
And not oppose the Tyrants cursed sound?
We Scorn the thought --- our views are well refin'd
We Scorn those slavish shackles of the Mind,
"We've Souls that were not made to be confin'd."

CHORUS

Could our Fore-fathers rise from their cold Graves,
And view their Land, with all their Children SLAVES;
What would they say! How would their Spirits rend,
And, Thunder-strucken, to their Graves descend.

CHORUS

Let us with hears of steel now stand the task,
Throw off al darksome ways nor wear a Mask.
Oh! may our noble Zeal support our frame,
And brand all Tyrants with eternal SHAME.

CHORUS

rich r

Subject: RE: Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?
From: JedMarum
Date: 12 Feb 00 - 11:20 AM

The protest in the US over taxation was real. That is a historical fact. The obvious 'drama' that was used by the protesters at the Boston Tea Party demonstrates their intent; they meant to make a loud, outrageous and stinging comment with the actions. The destruction of a shipment was obviuosly not the intent.

Historical events such as the Boston Tea Party typically gather legend and Apocryphal embellishment, as time passes. Both sides add their twists to the tale. It is not surprising that some would have us believe the event had sinister beginnings, but as I point out above - the drama of the event and the volume of info we have about how the rest of the nation responded to taxation and British rule in general, make this an easy story to accept as read.

Subject: RE: Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?
From: raredance
Date: 12 Feb 00 - 11:18 AM

McGrath, I am not certain which of the DT songs you are referring to. I found four that might be considered related to the episode in Boston harbor. The first of these "Young Ladies In Town" probably predates the Boston event. Two sources I found indicated that it was written to reinforce protest of the Townsend Act of 1767 that placed numerous import taxes on the colonies including textiles. This song was intended to discourage the purchase and use of the imported textiles and may date from as early as 1768. A second song "The Tea Tax" was written well after the event, although it may have been the most popular of the lot. It appeared around 1829 over 40 years after the famous tea dump. A third song in the DT "Ballad Of The Tea Party" is described as having come from the 1953 Burl Ives Song Book and uses an old tune from around 1730 so it could have been sung contemporaneously with the tea tossings, but probably wasn't sung this way at that time (Historical note: after the Boston event, "tea parties" became sort of fashionable and were given in some other ports, and tea was pretty widely boycotted). The reason being is the fourth song called "A Tea Party Song". That song was published in the Philadelphia Packet on Jan 3, 1774 under the heading "A New Song, To the plaintive tune of Hosier's Ghost". Since the Boston Tea Party was on December 16, 1773, this song is about as current to the event as one was likely to get at that time, less than three weeks removed. A comparison of these lyrics with those of the song from the Burl Ives book quickly reveals that 11 of the 16 phrases in "Ballad of the Tea Party" are directly lifted from the text printed in the Philadelphia Packet. So "Ballad of the Tea Party" is clearly derivative, obviously later than Jan 4, 1774 but probably much later than that since it seems unlikely that a tune change, an abridgement, and a few new words would have been put into circulation so soon after the original. I also have the text of another broadside printed around the same time called "Tea, Destroyed By Indians". I will type that in off line and submit it later.

And additional historical note comes from an article printed in the Massachusetts Gazette: And The Boston Weekly on Dec 23, 1773. It reported that on the night of the Tea Party "just before the Disolution of the [town] Meeting, a Number of brave and resolute Men, dressed in the Indian Manner, approached near the Door of the Assembly, gave the War-Whoop.....[then]repaired to the Wharf where the Ships lay that had the Tea onboard....they were followd by Hundreds of People, to see the Event... the Indians immediately repaired onboard Capt. Hall's Ship...and emptied the Tea overboard..." So the affair was not a secret even before it happened. It was almost a spectator, social event. Reminds me of the firts battle of Bull Run (Manassas Junction)in the American Civil War. Party Time!

rich r

Subject: RE: Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?
From: GUEST,flattop
Date: 12 Feb 00 - 10:29 AM

(While I wrote this off-line while Abby posted.)

There's a truth behind the historical question that you raised, McGarth, but to take such a narrow view of the issues may be picking fly feces out of tea dust. My view, from Canada, is that American history was more complex and more interesting than your question suggests.

The niggling truth is that the tea that protesters dumped into Boston harbour would have been cheaper for consumers than smuggled tea. After a prolonged fight over taxation, the British had rigged it so that the tea would be cheaper than smuggled tea in an attempt to prove that they had the right to tax the colonies. They were not successful in exercising that right.

I believe Sam Adams organized the Tea Party not John Hancock. As far as I can tell from the history books, Sam Adams organized the American revolution more than any other individual. His family made malt that was used in brewing but not beer. Sam Adams beer is brewed by a German family who immigrated to America in the 1920s.

John Hancock inherited a huge smuggling operation from his uncle Thomas. Thomas had no children. John Hancock often funded Sam's activities. John was also the first to sign the Declaration of Independence - with a flourish, with the largest signature and with a statement like, 'I trust the king can read this.'

Thomas Jefferson wrote most of the Declaration of Independence in a dry political style. Ben Franklin, a rabid author and newspaper write among other things, spiced it up starting with the opening humour, 'We hold these truths to be self-evident.' Franklin knew that science had already proved truths to be tenuous (if not often untrue) and not at all self-evident.

So technically, you could say that the tea was dumped into the harbour to protect smuggling interests.

Subject: RE: Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?
From: jets
Date: 12 Feb 00 - 09:50 AM

Abby Sale's reading of the tea party is right on target.I would like to add that the 3 ships mentioned ,were American whale ships that had brought oil to Europe and were looking for a cargo for the return trip to the colony.

Subject: RE: Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?
From: Abby Sale
Date: 12 Feb 00 - 09:14 AM

Citing Ency. Brit. - generally reliable in a conservative sort of way (but useless on folk song):

Boston Tea Party

(Dec. 16, 1773), incident in which 342 chests of tea belonging to the British East India Company were thrown from ships into Boston Harbour by American patriots disguised as Mohawk Indians. The Americans were protesting both a tax on tea (taxation without representation) and the perceived monopoly of the East India Company.

The Townshend Acts passed by Parliament in 1767 and imposing duties on various products imported into the British colonies had raised such a storm of colonial protest and noncompliance that they were repealed in 1770, saving the duty on tea, which was retained by Parliament to demonstrate its presumed right to raise such colonial revenue without colonial approval. The merchants of Boston circumvented the act by continuing to receive tea smuggled in by Dutch traders. In 1773 Parliament passed a Tea Act designed to aid the financially troubled East India Company by granting it (1) a monopoly on all tea exported to the colonies, (2) an exemption on the export tax, and (3) a "drawback" (refund) on duties owed on certain surplus quantities of tea in its possession. The tea sent to the colonies was to be carried only in East India Company ships and sold only through its own agents, bypassing the independent colonial shippers and merchants. The company thus could sell the tea at a less-than-usual price in either America or Britain; it could undersell anyone else. The perception of monopoly drove the normally conservative colonial merchants into an alliance with radicals led by Samuel Adams and his Sons of Liberty.

In such cities as New York, Philadelphia, and Charleston, tea agents resigned or canceled orders, and merchants refused consignments. In Boston, however, the royal governor Thomas Hutchinson determined to uphold the law and maintained that three arriving ships, the Dartmouth, Eleanor, and Beaver, should be allowed to deposit their cargoes and that appropriate duties should be honoured. On the night of Dec. 16, 1773, a group of about 60 men, encouraged by a large crowd of Bostonians, donned blankets and Indian headdresses, marched to Griffin's wharf, boarded the ships, and dumped the tea chests, valued at 18,000, into the water.

In retaliation, Parliament passed the series of punitive measures known in the colonies as the Intolerable Acts, including the Boston Port Bill, which shut off the city's sea trade pending payment for the destroyed tea. The British government's efforts to single out Massachusetts for punishment served only to unite the colonies and impel the drift toward war.
----
So likely both (or All) are true - like most revolutions self interest impelling (sometimes instigating) genuine outrage plus in this case, possibly a bit of drunkenness. I know they met in a tavern & that those indian disguises so often touted were pretty crude & fooled no one. But the radical end of the rebels were true radicals in the best tradition. I believe the Bolshevics learned many tactics from what they (Reds) pointed out as the first Western economic revolution.) Nothing's simple.

Subject: RE: Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 12 Feb 00 - 08:31 AM

Forgive me for intruding on the historical discussion; but I thought you all might find this amusing. I recently sent some tea as a gift to a dear friend in the USA. The tea is a special blend from England. (RNLI Lifeboat tea) There are only two places that I know of that you can order this tea from in North America, the one I use is a company in Boston. I could not help but note the irony of; a Canadian/Brit. ordering a gift of imported British tea, to be sent to an American, from a distributer in Boston. How history changes, ebb and flow... Yours, (tickled by this) Aye. Dave

Subject: RE: Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?
From: GUEST,Marc
Date: 12 Feb 00 - 08:03 AM

The "Boston Tea Party" according to legend, was organized by John Hancock and the Sons Of Liberty.Although there is a fine line between a "shipping merchant" and a "smuggler" as far as 18th century standards are concerned. None of the men involved with the Sons earned their fame through smuggling as far as I know.

Subject: RE: Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Feb 00 - 03:26 AM

Liz - That's more or less the story book version I mentioned, when I asked whether the true one might be a bit less creditable.

kat, had a browse round Scarce songs, which is amazing. No luck so far.

Subject: RE: Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 12 Feb 00 - 03:08 AM

There used to be this great story in my history book at school about how several people were massacred and a war was started over this Boston Tea party - I was so disappointed when I found out what it really was! My understanding of it was that it was chucked into the sea as a protest about the very high charges for it, and its handling. But then, I'm in the UK, and we are very good at twisting history to suit our own propaganda......

LTS

Subject: RE: Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?
From: katlaughing
Date: 11 Feb 00 - 11:37 PM

Kevin, have you checked Bruce Olson's Scarce Songs site? Here's a link for you:click here.

katlaughing

Subject: Boston Tea Party - lie or myth?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Feb 00 - 09:28 PM

I was browsing through an old Burl Ives songbook I'd dug out to find a song someone had asked about, and I started thinking about a story I'd heard that the Boston Tea Party wasn't actually people protesting about the imposition of a Tea Tax, but Tea Smugglers concerned that Tea was being imported that they hadn't smuggled. Bootleggers getting rid of the competition, so to speak.

So I thought I'd check with the songs, and both of the ones in the book tell it the way it is in the storybooks (and they are both in the DT, though in rather different versions) - but then I noticed that according to Burl Ives "they were both written long after the event".

So two questions - one is "which is the true story?" - and the other is, anyone come across any songs about the incident written at the time? I can't believe nobody wrote a broadsheet about it - I mean, there are dozens on the Mudcat alone who would write a song about it if it happened today. Áine would issue it as a challenge, for a start.