Declaratory Acts of 1766
The Parliament of 1764 - 1768 under Lord Grenville bore a marked resemblance to America’s 110th Congress under Nancy
Pelosi and Harry Reid. Ill-conceived legislation was rushed though without a proper hearing and arguments and warnings
from the opposition were completely ignored. The Stamp Act in particular was passed while disregarding completely
objections, petitions and pleas transmitted from the colonies. The Declaratory Act was passed on the same day as the repeal
of the Stamp Act, after a bitter debate and a cogent testimony on behalf of the colonies by Benjamin Franklin, who had been
summoned to London to testify concerning resistance to the Stamp Act in the colonies.
The importance of the Declaratory Act is often overlooked by historians. It was this act more so than any other that set the
stage for the coming revolution.
This Act, passed on the same day as repeal of the Stamp Act, was nothing more than a “sour grapes” statement by a petulant
Parliament of its intent to subjugate the colonies totally to its will. It was used as the justification for all the following acts
specifically designed to subdue the colonies and stamp out the spark of liberty before it became an inferno. After passage of
the Act, Whitehall, at the behest of Parliament, sent experienced custom agents to the colonies for the first time and began
enforcing trade laws with a vengeance in American waters.
The Townshend Acts
Following the statement of sovereignty contained in the Declaratory Act, Parliament was anxious to establish
definitively its authority over the colonies. Charles Townshend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, proposed a
series of laws to Parliament in 1767 designed to help defray the cost of administering the colonies and remove
the “power of the Purse” from the colonial legislatures. These acts became known as the Townshend Acts.
The Revenue Act of 1767
The Townshend Acts were a series of laws designed to raise revenue and demonstrate the authority of Parliament to tax the
colonies and regulate their internal trade policies pursuant to the Declaratory Act. As previously pointed out, one of the
methods the colonial legislatures used to control the royal governors and other officials was to withhold their pay until the
colony‘s demands were met. With revenue from the Revenue Act of 1767, Parliament hoped to raise enough revenue to pay
the salaries of the British officials in the colonies, bypassing the colonial legislatures and denying to them “the power of the
purse”.
They erroneously assumed the colonies would not object to these new taxes, since unlike the Stamp Act which was an
internal tax; the new taxes were external, levied only on goods imported into the colonies from England. The list of items to
be taxed included, glass, lead, paint, paper, oil and tea. The response of the colonies was to organize a boycott of English
goods and increase the number of goods smuggled into the colonies. Reaction in Boston reached a near revolutionary pitch in
1768 when a sloop owned by John Hancock was seized for violations of trade regulations (smuggling).
The Indemnity Act of 1767
The British East India Company, one of England’s largest mercantile companies and a major supplier of tea, was on the verge
of bankruptcy. An Import tax on tea shipped to England, to be reshipped to the colonies made it uncompetitive with
smuggled Dutch tea. The American colonies were some of the East India Company’s largest consumers of tea, consuming
some 1.2 million pounds per year. The loss of much of that business to Dutch smugglers was a serious blow to the
company’s profits. The Indemnity Act of 1767, passed as one of the Townshend Acts, repealed the tax on tea imported to
England making it cheaper than smuggled tea when re-exported to the colonies. However, the Revenue Act, passed at the
same time, still kept a small tax on the colonies tea imports.
The Commissioner of Customs Act of 1767
The Commissioner of Customs Act created the American Board of Customs Commissioners. Five Commissioners were
appointed and headquartered in Boston. Additional customs agents were soon added and stationed in all the larger ports and
many of the smaller ones throughout the colonies. The job of customs agent quickly became one of the toughest jobs in the
English government as agents were hanged in effigy, “tarred and feathered”, and “rode out of town on a rail” by angry
colonists.
The Customs Act also gave agents the authority to search buildings and vessels without a warrant whenever smuggling was
suspected. One of the tactics used by the agents was the same one later used by U.S. revenue agents during our “prohibition
era”. Fast vehicles used by bootleggers during prohibition were confiscated by revenuers and then used to chase other
bootleggers driving slower cars. British customs agents used the same technique. They would capture and confiscate the fast
ships used by the smugglers and use them in the pursuit of others.
Two of those seized were owned by John Hancock. The first one, The Liberty, seized in Boston Harbor, set off a riot
causing major damage to the customs office and forcing the agents to flee for their safety to a warship anchored in the
harbor. The Liberty, later used by customs agents as a customs enforcement craft was burned in another New England port
by an angry mob. (more on this later)
The Vice-Admiralty Court
The Townshend Acts greatly expanded the authority of the Vice-Admiralty Court established in 1763 to try smuggling cases.
Its jurisdiction was enlarged to cover later acts passed by Parliament involving trade in general. The Vice-Admiralty courts
operated under different rules than regular criminal courts. The rules of evidence were less stringent than in criminal courts,
and defendants could be tried anywhere in the British Commonwealth.
The home base of the court was located in Nova Scotia and suspects accused of violating England’s trade laws were often
tried there, although they might also be taken to England for trial, in violation of the English Constitution. Cases tried in the
Vice-Admiralty courts were tried without the benefit of a jury. This practice eliminated the problem of sympathetic juries
releasing obviously guilty defendants but was an even more egregious breach of the English Constitution. The court became a
major source of resentment among the colonists and was a major factor in the eventual break with England.
The New York Restraining Act of 1767
Another of the Townshend Acts, the New York Restraining Act, imposed penalties on New York for refusing to honor the
Quartering Act of 1765. The Quartering Act required colonial legislatures to provide the “necessities” for British troops
quartered in their area. These necessities included such items as bedding, cooking utensils, firewood, beer or cider and
candles. The New York legislature balked, believing the requirement was unfair due to the large number of troops stationed
there. They appropriated only about half of the amount asked for by British officials. After bickering with the Crown for a
year New York finally cut off all support to the troops. The New York Restraining Act, among other things, suspended the
New York legislature until the troop needs were fully funded.
The boycott by the colonies of English goods in response to the Townshend Acts proved successful. English manufacturers
and merchants suffered major declines in sales and petitioned the Crown for relief. In April 1770, the Townshend Acts were
repealed by Parliament following the Boston Massacre. However they did not wish to relinquish the powers they had asserted
with the Declaratory Act of 1766 so, they left the tax on tea in place. The inevitable result was a continuing decline in the
fortunes of the British East India Company. The company was saddled with a huge inventory which combined with other
factors threatened the survival of the giant mercantile company. To avoid Bankruptcy it appealed to Parliament for assistance.
The Parliament of 1764 - 1768 under Lord Grenville bore a marked resemblance to America’s 110th Congress under Nancy
Pelosi and Harry Reid. Ill-conceived legislation was rushed though without a proper hearing and arguments and warnings
from the opposition were completely ignored. The Stamp Act in particular was passed while disregarding completely
objections, petitions and pleas transmitted from the colonies. The Declaratory Act was passed on the same day as the repeal
of the Stamp Act, after a bitter debate and a cogent testimony on behalf of the colonies by Benjamin Franklin, who had been
summoned to London to testify concerning resistance to the Stamp Act in the colonies.
The importance of the Declaratory Act is often overlooked by historians. It was this act more so than any other that set the
stage for the coming revolution.
- “WHEREAS several of the houses of representatives in his Majesty's colonies and plantations in America, have of
late, against law, claimed to themselves, or to the general assemblies of the same, the sole and exclusive right of
imposing duties and taxes upon his Majesty's subjects in the said colonies and plantations; and have, in pursuance of
such claim, passed certain votes, resolutions, and orders, derogatory to the legislative authority of parliament, and
inconsistent with the dependency of the said colonies and plantations upon the crown of Great Britain: ... be it
declared ...,
…That the said colonies and plantations in America have been, are, and of right ought to be. subordinate unto, and
dependent upon the imperial crown and parliament of Great Britain; and that the King's majesty, by and with the
advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons of Great Britain, in parliament assembled, had,
has, and of right ought to have, full power and authority to make laws and statutes of sufficient force and validity to
bind the colonies and people of America, subjects of the crown of Great Britain, in all cases whatsoever.”
This Act, passed on the same day as repeal of the Stamp Act, was nothing more than a “sour grapes” statement by a petulant
Parliament of its intent to subjugate the colonies totally to its will. It was used as the justification for all the following acts
specifically designed to subdue the colonies and stamp out the spark of liberty before it became an inferno. After passage of
the Act, Whitehall, at the behest of Parliament, sent experienced custom agents to the colonies for the first time and began
enforcing trade laws with a vengeance in American waters.
The Townshend Acts
Following the statement of sovereignty contained in the Declaratory Act, Parliament was anxious to establish
definitively its authority over the colonies. Charles Townshend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, proposed a
series of laws to Parliament in 1767 designed to help defray the cost of administering the colonies and remove
the “power of the Purse” from the colonial legislatures. These acts became known as the Townshend Acts.
The Revenue Act of 1767
The Townshend Acts were a series of laws designed to raise revenue and demonstrate the authority of Parliament to tax the
colonies and regulate their internal trade policies pursuant to the Declaratory Act. As previously pointed out, one of the
methods the colonial legislatures used to control the royal governors and other officials was to withhold their pay until the
colony‘s demands were met. With revenue from the Revenue Act of 1767, Parliament hoped to raise enough revenue to pay
the salaries of the British officials in the colonies, bypassing the colonial legislatures and denying to them “the power of the
purse”.
They erroneously assumed the colonies would not object to these new taxes, since unlike the Stamp Act which was an
internal tax; the new taxes were external, levied only on goods imported into the colonies from England. The list of items to
be taxed included, glass, lead, paint, paper, oil and tea. The response of the colonies was to organize a boycott of English
goods and increase the number of goods smuggled into the colonies. Reaction in Boston reached a near revolutionary pitch in
1768 when a sloop owned by John Hancock was seized for violations of trade regulations (smuggling).
The Indemnity Act of 1767
The British East India Company, one of England’s largest mercantile companies and a major supplier of tea, was on the verge
of bankruptcy. An Import tax on tea shipped to England, to be reshipped to the colonies made it uncompetitive with
smuggled Dutch tea. The American colonies were some of the East India Company’s largest consumers of tea, consuming
some 1.2 million pounds per year. The loss of much of that business to Dutch smugglers was a serious blow to the
company’s profits. The Indemnity Act of 1767, passed as one of the Townshend Acts, repealed the tax on tea imported to
England making it cheaper than smuggled tea when re-exported to the colonies. However, the Revenue Act, passed at the
same time, still kept a small tax on the colonies tea imports.
The Commissioner of Customs Act of 1767
The Commissioner of Customs Act created the American Board of Customs Commissioners. Five Commissioners were
appointed and headquartered in Boston. Additional customs agents were soon added and stationed in all the larger ports and
many of the smaller ones throughout the colonies. The job of customs agent quickly became one of the toughest jobs in the
English government as agents were hanged in effigy, “tarred and feathered”, and “rode out of town on a rail” by angry
colonists.
The Customs Act also gave agents the authority to search buildings and vessels without a warrant whenever smuggling was
suspected. One of the tactics used by the agents was the same one later used by U.S. revenue agents during our “prohibition
era”. Fast vehicles used by bootleggers during prohibition were confiscated by revenuers and then used to chase other
bootleggers driving slower cars. British customs agents used the same technique. They would capture and confiscate the fast
ships used by the smugglers and use them in the pursuit of others.
Two of those seized were owned by John Hancock. The first one, The Liberty, seized in Boston Harbor, set off a riot
causing major damage to the customs office and forcing the agents to flee for their safety to a warship anchored in the
harbor. The Liberty, later used by customs agents as a customs enforcement craft was burned in another New England port
by an angry mob. (more on this later)
The Vice-Admiralty Court
The Townshend Acts greatly expanded the authority of the Vice-Admiralty Court established in 1763 to try smuggling cases.
Its jurisdiction was enlarged to cover later acts passed by Parliament involving trade in general. The Vice-Admiralty courts
operated under different rules than regular criminal courts. The rules of evidence were less stringent than in criminal courts,
and defendants could be tried anywhere in the British Commonwealth.
The home base of the court was located in Nova Scotia and suspects accused of violating England’s trade laws were often
tried there, although they might also be taken to England for trial, in violation of the English Constitution. Cases tried in the
Vice-Admiralty courts were tried without the benefit of a jury. This practice eliminated the problem of sympathetic juries
releasing obviously guilty defendants but was an even more egregious breach of the English Constitution. The court became a
major source of resentment among the colonists and was a major factor in the eventual break with England.
The New York Restraining Act of 1767
Another of the Townshend Acts, the New York Restraining Act, imposed penalties on New York for refusing to honor the
Quartering Act of 1765. The Quartering Act required colonial legislatures to provide the “necessities” for British troops
quartered in their area. These necessities included such items as bedding, cooking utensils, firewood, beer or cider and
candles. The New York legislature balked, believing the requirement was unfair due to the large number of troops stationed
there. They appropriated only about half of the amount asked for by British officials. After bickering with the Crown for a
year New York finally cut off all support to the troops. The New York Restraining Act, among other things, suspended the
New York legislature until the troop needs were fully funded.
The boycott by the colonies of English goods in response to the Townshend Acts proved successful. English manufacturers
and merchants suffered major declines in sales and petitioned the Crown for relief. In April 1770, the Townshend Acts were
repealed by Parliament following the Boston Massacre. However they did not wish to relinquish the powers they had asserted
with the Declaratory Act of 1766 so, they left the tax on tea in place. The inevitable result was a continuing decline in the
fortunes of the British East India Company. The company was saddled with a huge inventory which combined with other
factors threatened the survival of the giant mercantile company. To avoid Bankruptcy it appealed to Parliament for assistance.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
E-mail address
jfm@illinoisconservative.com
jfm@illinoisconservative.com
| Philosophy of Evil Socialism in America "The struggle of History is not between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat; it is between government and the governed." Jerry McDaniel |
Purchase a book for your
library or as a gift
library or as a gift
| Philosophy of Evil Socialism In America By Jerry McDaniel Chapter 7, Cont'd Storm Clouds of Discord |
| In God We Trust |
| Christian Patriots USA |