History of Northampton, Massachusetts, from its settlement in 1654;

History of Northampton, Massachusetts, from its settlement in 1654; History of Northampton, Massachusetts, from its settlement in 1654;

13.08.2013 Views

322 HISTORY OF NORTHAMPTON. [ir67. Obnoxious Laws. Writs of assistaiice, search warrants authorizing revenue officers to enter any man's house, day or night, and break open doors, trunks, boxes and packages in search for goods suspected of having been imported without the payment of duties, were among the first of the obnoxious laws tliat paved the way to independence. These laws were first issued in 1761, and though not liable to be put in practice to any great extent in the valley towns, the agitation concerning them was not without its effect upon the population, however remote from the seashore. Then followed the sugar tax, by which a duty of sixpence was levied upon every gallon of molasses imported into the colony. But the Stamp Act, coupled with renewed and vigorous enforcement of the navigation Laws against smuggling, was one of the exciting causes that roused the patriotism of the people. The latter, en- forced by the naval and military forces, was particularly obnoxious. It violated the sanctity of private life, and gave liberty, under the pretence of searching after contraband goods, for an entry into every man's house, against whom an unscrupulous enemy might have sworn an information. Smarting under the effects of these inquisitory .laws, it required but the imposition of the Stamp Act to call out a demonstration on the part of the people that ended in riotous proceedings. The stamp Act. Intelligence of the passage of the Stamp Act reached Boston in May, 1705. The reception it met with may be considered as the opening act of the Revolution, and though the unpopular law was soon repealed, the seeds of liberty were too strongly planted to be afterwards eradicated. In Boston the excitement in- creased, and in August reached the boiling point. Some of the officers, influential in passing the unsatisfactory enactment, were burned in effigy by the citizens, which fury, augmented by what it fed on, soon burst into rioting. The houses of several prominent men were broken open, and their contents destroyed or carried away. The better disposed of the people met at Faneuil Hall the next day, denounced these unlawful proceedings, and called upon the authorities to take measures to prevent further outbreaks. With the repeal of the Stamp Act came a demand from

1766] POLITICAL MATTERS—CENSUS—JAIL—NEW TOWNS. 323 Parliament for compensation from the colony for the losses occasioned by the rioters. This proposition was discussed in the House of Deputies at its midsummer session, and a majority voted against raising- any money by tax to meet these losses. In this debate, Major Hawley, representative from Northampton, was bold and outspoken in opposition. It was on this occasion that he electrified his hearers by the assertion that ""the Parliament of Great Britain has no right to legislate for us," and for which he received then and there the public thanks of his friend and compatriot, James Otis. A bill was presented which proposed a grant to meet these losses, on condition that a free pardon should be given to all persons concerned in the outbreak. In order to feel the pulse of their constituents, this bill was printed and sent to the several towns. The Town acts upon In Northampton, the matter was brought the Bill. before the town, November 24^*^, 1766, by the following article in the warrant : — *' To consider of a Bill now pending in the House of Representatives entitled An Act for granting compensation to the Sufferers & of free & general Pardon, Indemnity & oblivion to the offenders in times & to give Instructions to their representative for his about the same." the late conduct ^ A committee of five persons, consisting of Capt. [Timothy] Dwight, Dea. [Ebenezer] Hunt. Mr. Gad Lyman, Mr. Solomon Stoddard, and Col. Seth Pomeroy, was authorized to consider the subject and report. At the afternoon session the committee presented their conclusions. followed the subjoined action by the meeting — : Then " The Question was put whether they would instruct their represent- ative to give his vote that the Said Bill Should pass to be enacted, & it passed in the negative. Then the Question was put whether they would accept the report of their Said Committee, on the said bill, & it passed in the negative. Then it was moved that the following Question might be put, to wit :— Whether it was the mind of the Town that upon all matters that are or may be under the Consideration of the Said house of representatives during the present Session, Their representative Should Act according to his best Judgment & discretion^ on hearing the debates thereon in that house, whereupon the Said Ques- tion was put & it passed in the affirmative." 1 Barry's Mass., vol. 2, p. 328. 2 The views of Mr. Hawley, then representative, had already been made known by him, at the previous session of the legislature.

1766] POLITICAL MATTERS—CENSUS—JAIL—NEW TOWNS. 323<br />

Parliament for compensation <strong>from</strong> the colony for the losses<br />

occasioned by the rioters. This proposition was discussed<br />

<strong>in</strong> the House <strong>of</strong> Deputies at <strong>its</strong> midsummer session, and a<br />

majority voted aga<strong>in</strong>st rais<strong>in</strong>g- any money by tax to meet<br />

these losses. In this debate, Major Hawley, representative<br />

<strong>from</strong> <strong>Northampton</strong>, was bold and outspoken <strong>in</strong> opposition.<br />

It was on this occasion that he electrified his hearers by the<br />

assertion that ""the Parliament <strong>of</strong> Great Brita<strong>in</strong> has no<br />

right to legislate for us," and for which he received then<br />

and there the public thanks <strong>of</strong> his friend and compatriot,<br />

James Otis. A bill was presented which proposed a grant<br />

to meet these losses, on condition that a free pardon should<br />

be given to all persons concerned <strong>in</strong> the outbreak. In<br />

order to feel the pulse <strong>of</strong> their constituents, this bill was<br />

pr<strong>in</strong>ted and sent to the several towns.<br />

The Town acts upon<br />

In <strong>Northampton</strong>, the matter was brought<br />

the Bill. before the town, November 24^*^, 1766, by<br />

the follow<strong>in</strong>g article <strong>in</strong> the warrant : —<br />

*' To consider <strong>of</strong> a Bill now pend<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the House <strong>of</strong> Representatives<br />

entitled An Act for grant<strong>in</strong>g compensation to the Sufferers & <strong>of</strong> free<br />

& general Pardon, Indemnity & oblivion to the <strong>of</strong>fenders <strong>in</strong><br />

times & to give Instructions to their representative for his<br />

about the same."<br />

the late<br />

conduct<br />

^<br />

A committee <strong>of</strong> five persons, consist<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> Capt. [Timothy]<br />

Dwight, Dea. [Ebenezer] Hunt. Mr. Gad Lyman, Mr.<br />

Solomon Stoddard, and Col. Seth Pomeroy, was authorized<br />

to consider the subject and report. At the afternoon<br />

session the committee presented their conclusions.<br />

followed the subjo<strong>in</strong>ed action by the meet<strong>in</strong>g —<br />

:<br />

Then<br />

" The Question was put whether they would <strong>in</strong>struct their represent-<br />

ative to give his vote that the Said Bill Should pass to be enacted, & it<br />

passed <strong>in</strong> the negative. Then the Question was put whether they<br />

would accept the report <strong>of</strong> their Said Committee, on the said bill, &<br />

it passed <strong>in</strong> the negative. Then it was moved that the follow<strong>in</strong>g Question<br />

might be put, to wit :— Whether it was the m<strong>in</strong>d <strong>of</strong> the Town<br />

that upon all matters that are or may be under the Consideration <strong>of</strong> the<br />

Said house <strong>of</strong> representatives dur<strong>in</strong>g the present Session, Their representative<br />

Should Act accord<strong>in</strong>g to his best Judgment & discretion^ on<br />

hear<strong>in</strong>g the debates thereon <strong>in</strong> that house, whereupon the Said Ques-<br />

tion was put & it passed <strong>in</strong> the affirmative."<br />

1 Barry's Mass., vol. 2, p. 328.<br />

2 The views <strong>of</strong> Mr. Hawley, then representative, had already been made known<br />

by him, at the previous session <strong>of</strong> the legislature.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!