UC-NRLF B 3 IID 3TM iipi wsm -iim^ The Trade of the Delaware District Before the Revolution A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of Bryn Ma^r College in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy By MARY ALICE HANNA REPRINTED FROM THE SMITH COLLEGE STUDIES IN HISTORY 1917 Q ijecH CONTENTS PACK Preface 239 CHAPTER I Economic Conditions in the Dei^aware District Before 1763 1. Trade Boundaries 242 2. Products and Industries 248 3. Trade Routes 260 4. Illicit Trade Before 1763 267 CHAPTER II British Legislation, 1763-1773 1. New Trade Regulations 275 2. New Revenue Measures 293 CHAPTER III The Effect of the British Legislation 1 . Manufactures 307 2. Trade Statistics 310 3. Illicit Trade After 1763 320 Conclusion 333 Bibliography 334 Appendices • • 339 3GC5I3 PREFACE During the past decade there have appeared several books, monographs, and articles which treat colonial history from the im- perial and economic points of view.^ In the light of these studies, there has developed a new conception of the British empire in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, in which the colonies have come to be considered primarily as parts of the empire rather than as the beginnings of the United States. The theory of the continuity of colonial policy has been placed beyond dis- pute. The acts of trade and navigation have been traced to their sources and have been given a new meaning and a new import- ance. Many of the acts were passed to prevent imperial disinte- gration and did not at the time impose any hardship upon the colonies, for instance, the wool act of 1699 and the iron act of 1750. Even the measures which seemed to be most prejudicial to colonial interests were often the product of imperial necessity. The molasses act, for example, was intended primarily as a blow at France, and in the controversy over tea the increasing power of the East India Company was a more significant factor than the question of colonial taxation. An analysis of legislation from the economic and imperial points of view and its eflfect upon the trade of the empire sug- gests an interesting field for investigation. Especially is this true of the period immediately preceding the American War of 'Beer, G. L., The origins of the British Colonial System, 1578-1660 (1908). , The Old Colonial System, Part I, Vols. I and II. 1912. , British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765. (1907). Root, W. T., The Relations of Pennsylvania with the British Govern- ment, 1696-1765. (1912). Giesecke, A. A., American Commercial Legislation before 1789. (1910). Andrews, C. M., Colonial Commerce — The American Historical Re- view, October, 1914. Morriss, M. S., Maryland Trade, 1689-1715. (1914). Lord, E. L., Industrial Experiments in the British Colonies of North America. (1896). 240 Smith Coli^ege Studies in History Independence. At that time England, after a long struggle with France for dominion in America, began to take an inventory of her colonial possessions and to reorganize the empire. The trade and navigation acts, which were originally directed against the Dutch, were revised to meet the needs of the time. In addition, other acts were passed in order to put the empire on a more self- sufficing basis. The effect which this reorganization produced is best seen by investigating the economic conditions and the trade of a part of the empire, and, as the American colonies presented the most formidable objections, a study of their trade ought to indicate to what extent the legislation of the period served its purpose. It is with the hope that some light may be thrown upon a few of the commercial and economic problems of the period that the writer ventures to present the results of her in- vestigation of the British trade legislation from 1763, the close of the Seven Years' War, to 1773, when the controversy between Great Britain and the American colonies lost its economic aspect and became more exclusively political in character. This study was undertaken at the suggestion of Dr. William Roy Smith, of Bryn Mawr College, and to him the writer is deeply indebted for assistance at every stage of her progress. It is a pleasure to mention others who have made valuable sug- gestions and criticisms, among whom are Dr. Charles Hull, of Cornell University; Dr. Frances Davenport, of the Department of Historical Research of the Carnegie Institute; Mr. Hubert Hall and Dr. Lilian Knowles, of the London School of Eco- nomics; Dr. A. F. Pollard, of University College, London, and especially Mr. George Louis Beer, who permitted the use of some of his extracts from the Colonial Papers. Thanks are due also to the officials of the Public Record Office, of the British Museum, of the House of Lords, of Devonshire House, of the Bodleian Library, of the Library of All Soul's College, Oxford, and of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, who were unfailing in their courtesy and attention. Trade of the Delaware District Before the Revolution CHAPTER I Economic Conditions in the; Delaware; District Before 1763 In treating the problems of the continental colonies it has been the custom, for the most part, to consider them as a whole, or to place special emphasis upon individual colonies. While this method may be used in political, social, or constitutional investi- gations, it is most inadequate when the subject of trade is under consideration. The thirteen colonies did not constitute an eco- nomic unit, and it is frequently difficult to consider any one colony by itself, because the area of trade and the political area did not always coincide. The export and import district of any given port depended largely upon the means of transportation, which, in the eighteenth century, usually meant river transportation. There were only a few roads stretching out from the main centers of population, and these were not capable of being used for heavy traffic. It was observed by an anonymous English writer that "North American productions are weighty and of great bulk, water carriage is extremely necessary to convey them to the sea- side for exportation and reconvey to the inland country the man- ufactures of Great Britain — a convenience without which such settlement can have little or no communication with the mother country, or be of much utility to it."^ Thus, by using the means of transportation as a basis, the British-American mainland dur- ing the eighteenth century can be divided into trading districts. An economic study should concern itself with these districts rather than with individual colonies. ^ Chatham Papers, Bun. 97, May, 1766. Friends' Collection of Mss. IV. Letters written from Philadelphia by Friends traveling in America in 1757 describe the difificulties of travel over the few poor roads. 242 Smith CoivLSge; Studies in History (1) Trade Boundaries The trade area of Philadelphia, one of the most flourishing ports on the American continent, included part of Pennsylvania, the three lower counties on the Delaware, and a large section of West Jersey. These formed, what, for convenience, might be called the Delaware district. In order to give the exact bound- aries of this district it would be necessary to ascertain to what market each farmer sent his produce and where he bought his supplies. The lack of material at present makes this impossible. Approximate boundaries only can be defined. Within the pro- vince of Pennsylvania the trade was usually confined to the counties of Philadelphia, Bucks, Berks, and Northampton, and the eastern and northern parts of Chester and Lancaster. This area was continually being extended by the opening of new roads, but serviceable roads were not numerous during the colonial per- iod. For example, the principal roads in 1776 connecting the upper Schuylkill and the Susquehannah were a road from Hughes' Saw-Mill, about thirty miles above Reading, to Fort Au- gusta, and the road running from Reading to a point just south of Fort Augusta. In the lower Susquehannah valley there were many more. The Paxton road began near the house of John Harris, Paxton Township, Lancaster County, and ran into the Highroad Kennison in Whiteland, Chester County.^ The King's High- way and the New Castle and Conestoga Whiskey roads crossed the Nottingham and New Garden road near Elk Creek and reached Philadelphia by way of Kennett Square and Chester. There was also one from Harris Ferry (Harrisburg) to Lan- caster and another to Reading.^ By means of these highways, * Smith, William Roy, Sectionalism in Pennsylvania during the Revolu- tion [in The Political Science Quarterly, Vol. XXIV, No. 2; p. 219.] Statutes at Large of Pennsylvania, Vol. VIII, pp. 56-58. Pennsylvania Archives, 1st Series, Vol. IV, pp. 362-363. Colonial Records, Vol. IX, pp. 651, 182-185. 'Colonial Records, Vol. Ill, pp. 419-420. Map of Nicholas Scull, (1759), and William Scull, (1770). [Pennsylvania Archives, 3rd Series, App. I-IX.] H. Frank Eshleman's Map of the Earliest Highways leading from the Deleware and Schuylkill Rivers to the Susquehannah River and its Branches. Trade of the Delaware District 243 traders, who had taken agricultural products to Philadelphia, or to Baltimore by boat or raft, could bring back manufactured ar- ticles from Philadelphia. It is very improbable that the product of the land west of the Susquehannah, or within a radius of a few miles east of the lower part of it, ever reached the eastern part of Pennsylvania. It was easier to take the produce of this section, put it on rafts and send it to Baltimore or Annapolis. There were three main rea- sons why the trade of Pennsylvania west of the district defined in the previous paragraph went to Baltimore. The first was lack of roads. Baltimore had grown up simultaneously with the rapid in- crease of the Scotch-Irish population in the western part of Penn- sylvania. It was a great surprise to the eastern merchants, who were accustomed to an undisputed monopoly of the commerce of Pennsylvania and surrounding colonies, when they first realized that this very lucrative western trade was going to a new port outside the province. All efforts made before the War of Inde- pendence to counteract this tendency were unsuccessful. ** Mer- chants felt the loss of business keenly, but it was difficult to per- suade the assembly to appropriate the funds for building the necessary roads. ^ The second reason why the trade went to Mary- land may be found in the habits and occupations of the people, which made the Susquehannah the only necessary route. The set- tlers in that part of the province were agricultural. They pro- duced in the field or the house all the necessities of life. They had little need for the manufactured articles which were im- ported into the eastern part of the colony. In the third place, po- litical disaffection made them prefer to trade with Maryland. They took great delight in thwarting all the plans of the Quaker assembly to bring the western trade to Philadelphia. It is more difficult to draw the line in New Jersey beyond which the inhabitants ceased to trade with Philadelphia. There * Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. IV, p. 362; IX, pp. 65, 657, 666, 703, 731. Lincoln, C. H., The Revolutionary Alovement in Pennsylvania, 1760- 1776. Chap. IV, passim. " Ibid., p. 64. 244 Smith College Studies in History was no port in that province which had a very extensive trade.^ Consequently, New Jersey depended upon the ports of New York and Philadelphia. The trade of East Jersey went to New York, but it was more convenient to send the products of West Jersey to Philadelphia by the Delaware river and its tributaries, or by road. The assumption that Philadelphia had a trade area which in- cluded West Jersey and the lower counties is further upheld by the divisions made for the vice-admiralty courts in America." The staff of officers stationed in Philadelphia had supervision over the ports of Pennsylvania, the lower counties, and West Jersey. Furthermore, the local commercial legislation proves conclusively that there existed a trade unity among all of the ports on the Delaware.^ Philadelphia was the only port within this district whose har- bors were of sufficient size to allow ships of more than eighty or ninety tons to enter. ^ A very good description was given of it in a report resulting from an investigation of the ports, districts and towns of America in 1770. "It has been taken for granted that the limits of this port begin where a line divides Pennsylvania from New Castle County and extends along the river Delaware on the Pennsylvania side as far as the river is navigable above Philadelphia — makes about twenty-five miles below and thirty miles above that city. Within this district are several creeks, but only navigable for small vessels, the principal are Chester, Darby and Sahykill" [Schuylkill ?]io * Giesecke, American Commercial Legislation before 1789, pp. 103-104. ' New York had objected to Perth Amboy being made an important port. Osgood, H. L., The American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century, Vol. II, pp. 187-190. A discussion of Elizabethtown as a probable port may be found here. 'Admiralty Secretary Out Letters, 2:1058. Colonial Office, 391:10. W. T. Root, The Relations of Pennsylvania with Great Britain, p. 94. 'Pennsylvania Statutes at Large, Vol. II, 105, 384; III, 112, 151, 268, 416. Acts regarding Tonnage Duties and Export and Import duties exempt Delaware and West Jersey. Giesecke, American Commercial Legislation Before 1789, p. 86. ' Pennsylvania Historical Society Memoirs, Vol. II, p. 216. Penn gave careful instructions concerning the location of the chief port in his commonwealth in view of future trade development. " Additional Manuscripts, 15484, taken from Chalmers' Library. Ports, districts, and towns of America. Trade of the Dei^aware District 245 The other ports of the district — Lewes, New Castle, Wihiiing- ton and BurHngton — played little part in any but the coastwise and contraband trade. Lewes extended thirty miles and included many small creeks.^ ^ Although admirably situated to serve as a base of operation for the prevention of illicit trade, it was really used as a convenient place to lie in wait for vessels, in order to smuggle cargoes into Philadelphia by taking them to Reedy Is- land, or some other place and unloading them. Conditions were much the same in the ports of Burlington, New Castle and Wil- mington as at Lewes. There was only one officer at Burlington, and it would have been impossible for him to supervise the num- erous creeks and river entries in that vicinity.^- It would be difficult to outline the local trade policy of this district with any degree of accuracy. There was such a small part of the trade which was not in some way influenced by the British laws, that the tendencies towards a definite provincial policy can only be estimated roughly. It is fairly clear, however, that free trade had gained as little headway here as in England. When the exemptions made in favour of West Jersey and Del- aware are eliminated, and the district is considered as a whole, there is very little which points to a free trade policy in the present use of the word.^-'' Petitions of merchants against taxing trade, discussions in Council, and pamphlets written on the sub- ject, are the only indication of such a tendency.^-* The primary reason for taxing trade was to secure revenue. The annual charge of maintaining and supporting the establish- ment of the province of Pennsylvania was estimated in 1767 at il3,400.i^ This expense was met by various means. The as- " Additional Manuscripts, 15484, taken from Chalmers' Library. Ports, districts, and towns of America. " Ibid. " See Giesecke, American Commercial Legislation before 1789, passim. Pennsylvania Statutes, Vol. II, pp. 105; III, 151, 263, 363, 465. Pennsyl- vania Archives, 4th Series, Vol. II, p. 961. "Colonial Records, Vol. VIII, PP- 30, 31. Pennsylvania Archives, 4th Series, Vol. II, p. 903. '•* Pennsylvania Archives, 4th Series, Vol. Ill, p. 341, Papers of John Penn. 246 Smith College Studies in History sembly annually voted £1,200.^'^ Fees such as licenses for public houses, marriages, pedlars and ships, and fines for ofifences of persons convicted were of uncertain but considerable value. ^^ The sale of new lands brought in an increasing sum as the population grew.^^ A small amount was received from quit rents, but they were always in arrears, and so little care was taken in collecting them that not much was realized from this source.^^ In addition to the sum raised by these methods, it was thought necessary to tax exports and imports which were not subject to English trade laws. The first duties exacted were ad valorem?^ This duty was usually 5%. It was soon supplanted by specific duties on certain articles, such as tobacco, sugar, cocoa, molasses, dye woods and tea; other goods, except salt, iron and munitions of war retained the ad valorem duty of 5%. The early tariff legislation levying specific import duties on sugar, spirits, and wine, gave encouragement to direct trade from place of growth, to home shipping and to provincial production of spirits. 2^ These bills, as well as those regarding tonnage during the first three decades, show clearly that the element of protec- tion was very strong.-- In fact the eagerness to protect home shipping and industries was so great that the provincial tariff legislation interfered at times with the British. -^ Further indi- cations of a protective policy may be found in bounties offered for home production of certain products, and in the system of drawbacks on re-exportation. ^'i "Colonial Office, 5:112. " Ibid. " Pennsylvania Archives. 4th Series, Vol. Ill, 341-2. "C. O., 5:1233. "* Pennsylvania Archives. 2nd Series, Vol. V, 603. Colonial Records, Vol. Ill, p. 63. -'Pennsylvania Statutes, Vol. II, 105; III, 112, 151, 268, 416. James Madison, Letters and other writings (New York, 1899), Vol. I, 226. "" Pennsylvania Statutes, Vol. II, 385, 543; III, 166, 238. ** Giesecke, p. 30. ^Pennsylvania Statutes, Vol. Ill, 115, 154. Votes and Proceedings of the House of Representatives, Vol. Ill, 6, 7, 128, 129, 314, 324. Pennsyl- vania Archives, 4th Series, Vol. I, 674, Papers of George Thomas. Trade: of the De;laware District 247 In two ways this district was more or less isolated from the mother country. It was principally controlled by the govern- ment of Pennsylvania. Since this government was proprietary in form, the deputy governor was appointed by the proprietor and was directly responsible to him. According to a statute of 1696, the appointment had to be approved by the crown and the deputy governor had to take an oath that he would perform his duties in regard to the trade laws. If the laws were not obeyed he was liable to a fine of £1,000, or removal from office.-^ Robert Quary, the first judge of the vice-admiralty in Philadelphia, made complaint against Deputy Governor Markham, who had not been approved, and finally forced William Penn in 1699 to remove him.-^ But that was about as far as any supervision of the deputy governors extended. Almost all the other colonial governors were required to send in detailed reports of the state of manu- factures and trade in their respective provinces. These were in answer to circular letters sent out by the board of trade. By mistake, one was sent to John Penn when he was deputy gov- ernor, and the correspondence which followed between Secretary Shelburne, Thomas Penn and John Penn shows clearly that the Penns considered their province as private property. Thus non- interference had allowed them to develop along independent lines. 2^ A second cause for isolation may be found in the undesirable economic character of the district considered from the mercantil- ist point of view. In the eighteenth century the ideal colony was one which produced raw material to be manufactured in the mother country, supplied food-stuffs which were not grown at home, or brought in bullion. In no way was this standard at- tained in the Delaware district. The products were virtually the same as those of England, so that instead of having an exchange- able commodity for British manufactures, the district was really ^ Root, The Relations of Pennsylvania with the British Government, 1696-1765. p. 49. '"C. O., 5:1288. pp. 98 et seq. " Penn Letter Book, Vol. IX, pp. 109, 241. Penn Manuscript, Vol. X, p. 192. C. O., 5:112, Letter from John Penn to Thomas Penn. 248 Smith Colle;ge; Studies in History a competitor of Great Britain. This state of affairs hindered con- siderably any direct trade, such as existed between England and the southern colonies, or between England and the West Indies. (2) Products and Industries The Delaware district was primarily agricultural. The chief exports were provisions of various kinds and lumber. Of the provisions, the most important were wheat, flour and bread. ^s From the time of the earliest settlements it was realized that wheat could be produced more easily than any other product, and flour milling and bread baking became thriving industries. But the desire to produce something which could be exchanged di- rectly with the mother-country led to experiments with other products, particularly tobacco, which yielded a large revenue to the government, and did not compete with the agricultural in- dustries of England. For these reasons the tobacco colonies held a favoured position in the English colonial system.^^ In 1701, William Penn, who was anxious to encourage tobacco and rice as staples and to promote the cod fisheries and fur trade, wrote to the board of trade that, if such industries were not developed, his colonies would not be at all useful to the mother country.^*^ For a time it seemed that tobacco would become the staple. The quality was very inferior to that produced in Virginia and Maryland, but it sold for a higher price, because there existed before the Act of Union a flourishing illegal trade between traders of this district and merchants in England who smuggled tobacco into Scotland. 2^ "The great price which tobacco yields here," wrote Quary to the board of trade in 1700, "encourages the country to plant more than ever ; it hath been sold here this year "'C. O., 5:1280, Aug. 10, 1765. Letter from H. S. Conway to Governor Penn, in which he explains the competition between England and the Delaware district. ^'C. O., 5:1289, pp. 2034. Little attention was paid to the fact that a great deal of the tobacco was re-exported to foreign countries, and that upon re-exportation all of the duties were drawn back. The main idea was to get the revenue regardless of subsequent drawbacks. ="C. O., 5:1288, pp. 227-234. C. O., 5:1289, pp. 17-31. ^' Beer, G. L., Mss. notes based on Colonial Papers. Trade of the Delaware District 249 for above thirty shillings per hogshead, which is more than the best Virginia and Maryland hath yielded, though the tobacco of this country is not half so good ; the reason is from the advantage of illegal trade here."^^ » In the same letter Quary said that Pennsylvania had determ- ined to plant tobacco in the three upper as well as in the three lower counties. •'^•■^ Before 1700, the amount produced was never more than 300 or 400 hogsheads, but in 1700 and 1701, it had in- creased to 3000 or 4000 hogsheads^^ and the production probably reached its height in 1705-1706, when John Evans, the deputy- governor, wrote that tobacco was of great importance to the peo- ple in general but especially to those of the lower counties. From this time there was a decrease in the production as is indicated by the custom house papers of Philadelphia, 1704-1713, which registered the amount of the penny a pound duty on exportation of tobacco from one colony to another.^^ The trade in tobacco was gradually superseded by trade in wheat, which was the more nat- ural product of the province. Sir William Keith wrote, in 1722, that it was more profitable to grow wheat than tobacco, owing to the trade which had grown up with the other ports on the Ameri- can continent, the West Indies and the southern ports of Europe.^^ As early as 1700, Robert Quary said that the people by their '=C. O., 5:1288, pp. 18-19. ''C. O., 5:1288, pp. 227-234. " C. O., 5 :1288, pp. 26, 471. '=C. O., 5:1265, p. 114. C. O., 5 :390, June 1, 1724, Custom House, London. In 1722, there were 137,721 pounds of tobacco exported from Pennsylvania to England. The amount was small compared with that sent from Virginia — 28,313,336 pounds — and compared with the other exports from Pennsylvania. The Custom House Papers of Philadelphia 1704-1713. Duty of penny a pound on exportation of tobacco from Philadelphia. [This duty was 1704-5 i825 18s. Id. levied on tobacco exported from colony to 1705-6 973 13 10 colony by parliament in the act 25 Chas. II C 7 to "prevent exportation of goods from colony to colony and so to foreign countries in Europe evading the English Customs." See Morriss — Colonial Trade of Maryland 1689-1715, p. 50 Col. S. P. A. W. I. 2306.] C. O., 5:1273, R 42. C. O., 5:1277, pp. 227-234. 1706-7 398 11 6 1707-8 615 1708-9 118 14 4 1709-10 214 6 2 1710-11 95 11 4 1711-12 209 4 4 250 Smith College Studies in History industry had greatly improved agriculture and had made bread and flour a drug on the market in the West Indies.^''' Colonel Thomas, in 1740, pointed out that the production of wheat was of great importance in that the proceeds of the large quantities which were exported from Philadelphia centered in Great Britain. ^^ It was in time discovered, however, that the exportation of flour and bread was more profitable than that of wheat. In the latter part of the colonial period the trade statistics show that consider- able quantities of wheat were imported into Philadelphia from the other colonies, although very little was exported. At the same time there was a large exportation of bread and flour.^^ Grist mills had existed in the district even before William Penn came to America. According to Bishop the first one was built on the Darby road, in 1643, by Colonel John Printz, the governor of New Sweden ; one was built in New Castle in 1658, and another at Trenton in 1680. Germantown possessed the first mill in Philadelphia County, but soon after the founding of Pennsylvania many mills were in operation throughout the dis- trict. The places where they were situated became markets for the grain of the surrounding country, and after the local demand was supplied the surplus was sent to Philadelphia for exporta- tion. The flour and bread industry gradually developed until in time it exceeded all others. The following table will give some idea of its increasing importance r^*^ Year Wheat (Bu.) Flour (Bbls.) Bread (Casks) 1729 74,809 35,438 9,730 1730 38,643 38,570 9,622 1731 53,320 56,639 12,436 1752 125,960 1765 365,522 148,887 34,736 1772 51,699 252,744 38,320 1773 92,012 284,872 50,504 1774 182,391 265,967 48,183 The years 1731-1738 mark the period when the trade in flour ''C. O., 5:1233. '' Ibid. '"Colonial Customs (Record Office) 16:1. *" Bishop, J. L., American Manufactures, 139-144. Trade of the Delaware District 251 and bread became noticeably more important. They were years of unusual harvests both in Europe and America. This worked a great hardship upon the wheat exporting provinces. It brought about a stagnation of currency in Pennsylvania, and threatened her prosperity. Governor Gordon, in his address to the assem- bly in 1731, pointed out that "all possible measures should be taken to recommend them to a greater degree abroad that they may find a readier sale."'*^ He remarked further, "I have understood that, when this colony was young and had but little experience, it exceeded all its neighbors in the fineness of its flour and bread and goodness of its beer, which are the only produce of our grain ; the first two have greatly contributed to their improvement as well as the reputation of the province. And it will still become the legislature to continue their care and concern in a point of such consequence to the whole."^^ As the above indicates care was taken that the flour and bread which was exported should attain a high standard. It was enacted in 1700, "that all biscuits and flour made for transporta- tion shall be well made and honestly and truly packed for the encouragement of our trade and credit: that those who purchase the same may not be cheated or defrauded. And all such persons that make flour or biscuits for transportation shall set their sev- eral brand marks on each cask before shipped, on the penalty of five shillings for every cask by them sold and unmarked as afore- said. And if any bread or flour shall pass out of this province or territories falsely packed and the same happen to be returned, in all such cases the persons offending shall pay to the party wronged double damages for the same."^^ From time to time this act was renewed and additions were made to it. Each addition was more stringent, and was usually passed on the advice of the governor when he noticed a tendency " Pennsylvania Archives, 4th Series, Vol. I, 474. *" Ibid. *^ Pennsylvania Statutes at Large, Vol. II, 96. 252 Smith ColIvEgk Studies in History for the quality to deteriorate.^^ For example, Governor Gordon in addressing the assembly, on November 2, 1738, said: "The better your commodities exported from hence are, the better price they will fetch at markets abroad. Care too ought to be taken that the exporter is not deceived. . . . This consideration ap- plied to your flour trade will induce you to take some further care of it; for though the laws you already have will be of great service if well executed, some further regulations seem necessary, particularly to prevent the mixture of different sorts of grain, which every man sees are now reaped in every field. "•*-'^ Similar care was taken in the preparation of other provisions which were exported from Philadelphia.^^ There was a flourish- ing export trade in cattle, and the packing of beef and pork to be used in the West Indies was very important. Hence we find num- erous laws passed, demanding that these provisions be made mer- chantable and inflicting severe penalties on those who evaded them. Laws of this nature were very easily evaded, and were probably less effective than the force of competition. Not a little profit was realized in the fur trade. The beaver trade was important in the Schuylkill valley before William Penn came, and skins of all kinds in fairly large quantities were ex- ported from Philadelphia during the entire colonial period. In the opening years of the eighteenth century they formed with to- bacco the chief articles of export. From Christmas, 1699, to Christ- mas 1700 the following were sent: 516 pounds of buck in hair, 326 pounds of cat, 1222 pounds of fox, 121 beaver skins, 4921 pounds of raccoon, together with some elk, bear and mink.'*'^ The table of exports from Philadelphia show that there were : " These renewals and additions were made on : May 22, 1722. Penn- sylvania Statutes at Large, Vol. Ill, 321; August 18, 1727, Ibid., Vol. IV, 73; January 19, 1733, Ibid., Vol. IV, 248; March 9, 1745, Ibid., Vol. V, 38; April 21, 1759, Ibid., Vol. V, 400; April 22, 1761, Ibid., Vol. VI, 112; February 21, 1767, Ibid., Vol. VII, 57. ^ Votes and Proceedings of the House of Representatives of Pennsyl- vania, Vol. Ill, 324. ''Pennsylvania Statutes at Large, Vol. II, 96; III, 22, 275; IV, 75; V, 97, 400. " Bean, T. W., History of Montgomery County, p. 120. C. O., 5 :1291, pp. 226-227. Trads of the; Delaware District 253 49 chests of skins in 1759 140 chests of skins in 1760 256 chests of skins in 1761 228J/2 chests of skins in 1762 132 chests of skins in 1763'' Before 1759, the Indian trade in Pennsylvania, where the traders were very numerous and enterprising,^^ was practically unrestricted. Any one could engage in it upon obtaining a li- cense from the governor.^^ After that time regulations were made because of the increasing difficulties with the Indians. This trade was considered of such importance that in 1766 the estab- lishment of a colony in the Illinois country was strongly urged. ^^ Philadelphia was to be one of the chief places for importing Brit- ish manufactures for the numerous Indian tribes which lived near the lakes and the different branches of the Mississippi. Timber as a product for exportation, was almost as import- ant as grain and meat. There was an abundance in Pennsylvania, the lower counties, and West Jersey. The existence of several saw mills in the seventeenth century shows that the industry had developed from the first. ^^ They became numerous along the many rivers and creeks, which were a great advantage, in that they furnished water power to run the mills, as well as the means of transporting logs to the mills and lumber to Philadelphia. Hickory and oak were made into barrels, hogsheads, and staves ; and walnut was considered valuable material for f urni- '* Custom House Papers in the Library of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania. '^ Hanna, C. A., The Trail in the Wilderness, Vol. I, p. 6, taken from the writings of George Croghan. ^ Ibid., Vol. n, p. 325. A full discussion of the fur trade may be found in this book, in which are reprinted extracts from the Journals of George Croghan who was called "The king of the traders." Giesecke, p. 53. Skins and furs were the only commodities upon which export duties were imposed in Pennsylvania. Laws of Pennsylvania, 1682-1700, p. 138. Pennsylvania Archives, 2nd Series, Vol. II, pp. 619-627, for names of Indian Traders in Pennsylvania, 1743-1776. " C. O., 5 :67, Reasons for Establishing a British Colony at the Illinois with some proposals thereon. "Bishop, American Manufactures, Vol. I, pp. 109-112. 254 Smith College Studies in History ture.^3 Unfortunately this lumber, with the exception of that grown in West Jersey, could not be used as a naval store for Great Britain. The surveyor-general in his report on naval sup- plies ignored this district because the quality of its timber was so very inferior to that grown in the southern provinces and New England.^'* Consequently, little benefit was received from the bounty which Great Britain offered on masts imported from the colonies. There seems to be no reason why hemp, which was another valuable naval store, should not have been grown in abundance. In Great Britain, where there was a great demand for it, it could be produced only at a high cost. Joshua Gee wrote to the board of trade, in 1717, that the bounty on hemp should be continued for twenty years. ^^ His advice was taken, but the increase in the crop in no way justified its continuation.^^ Again, in 1731, Gov- ernor Gordon recommended the raising of hemp, because of the lack of products suitable for exportation to Great Britain.^' Be- sides the encouragement of the mother country in the way of bounties, the provincial government of Pennsylvania offered premiums on good and merchantable hemp. An act was passed in 1722, which offered a bounty of one penny per pound on hemp fit for exportation.^^ This act was continued from time to time until 1731, when it was repealed. ^^ The law was much abused, since it was very difficult to detect and punish those who brought in bad hemp for exportation. Furthermore, it was not considered worth while to continue such encouragement when so little was produced. The high price of labor was probably responsible for the failure of this project. ^^ One of the most important industries was that of ship build- ^ Colonial Office, 5:1233. " Admiralty Secretary, I, 4127. '•■C. O., 5:1265, p. 114. "C. O., 5:1266, p. 42. " Ibid. " Pennsylvania Statutes at Large, Vol. Ill, p. 314. "Ibid., IV, pp. 231-2. "C. O., 5:1268, S. 44. Trade of the Delaware District 255 inff.'^i Salem and Burlino^ton were the first to build vessels, but they were soon surpassed by Philadelphia which was a recog- nized center of this industry in 1700. Many vessels built in Sa- lem, Burlington, Newcastle and Wilmington were brought to Philadelphia for registration. The coastwise and West Indian trade offered great encouragement to ship building. Almost all of this trade employed home shipping. Provincial ships were also used in the wine trade. Out of six vessels importing Ma- deira wine, in 1719-20, two were built and registered in Philadel- phia. ""^^ It was considered very important to use vessels built in the district, because they were exempt from the tonnage duties which were imposed on other colonial ships. •'^ Various forces were at work which retarded the development of this industry in all of the continental colonies. British mer- chants and traders, who were interested in ship building at home, looked with increasing alarm upon the development of it in the colonies. As long as the colonists supplied themselves only with coasting vessels, those used in the fisheries, or larger ones which were made to convey timber, they were not considered as danger- ous competitors. But when they began to build ships which riv- alled those made in Great Britain, the merchants complained and urged Parliament through petitions to discourage colonial ship- building.^4 Although there was no direct legislation on this sub- ject it is quite evident that the industry did not fulfill its early promise. While Richard Penn said in 1774 that ships of three hundred or four hundred tons were built very expeditiously in Pennsylvania,*^^ the development of ship building had not kept '^Ibid., C. O., 5:1266, R. 7. '==C. O., 5:1266, R. 18. « Pennsylvania Statutes at Large, Vol. II, p. 384; III, 165; V. 353; VIII, 42. " Chalmers, Revolt of the Colonies, Vol. I, pp. 387, 388. ^' House of Lords Manuscript. Examination of Richard Penn before the House of Lords. 256 Smith College Studies in History pace with the advancement of trade and the increase of popu- lation. 6*^ In New England, ship building was closely connected with the fishing industry. This was partially responsible for her superior- ity in the former. In the Delaware district, fisheries never be- came important. It is true that the first boats and vessels built on the Delaware were used in the fishing trade ;^' and William Penn expressed a hope, in 1701, that the whale fisheries would be developed, so that returns could be made to England in whale oil and whale bone.^^ Furthermore, Cape May and Burling- ton counties were supposed to have a flourishing fishing trade. Governor Cox mentions the products of the former county as consisting of whale bone and whale oil. Nevertheless, com- pared with other districts, the importance of fisheries was negli- gible. It was said that Pennsylvania was allowed to import salt free of duty from southern Europe for a fishery that never ex- isted. ^^ This was scarcely true because there were many acts passed by the provincial assembly of Pennsylvania for the devel- opment of fisheries in the Delaware, Susquehannah, and Lehigh °* The following table indicates the relative increase of population. shipbuilding and trade with England. Approximate Years No. Ships Ton'ge Exports to Exports from Population ] Built in Pa. England England 40,000^ .... 1722 10 458 i4,499 Os. Od.s £22,505 Os. Od.s 1723 13 507 8,332 15,993 19 47 1724 19 959i 4,057 OS 30,324 250,0002 .... 1769 22 1,469 26,111 3 7 199,909 17 11 1770 16 2,354 28,104 5 11 134,881 1771 21 1,307^ 31,615 19 96 728,744 06 IC. O., 5:1266, R. 7. 2 Rossiter, W., A Century of Population, p. 6. i Votes and Proceedings of the House of Representatives of Pennsyl- vania, Vol. Ill, p. 9. 4 Alacpherson, D., Annals of Commerce, Vol. Ill, p. 570. 5 B. T. Commercial Series, Vol. 414. <5 H. of L. Mss., Table of Exports and Imports to England from North American Colonies. 7 Pitkins, T., Commerce, p. 15. s De Bow, J. D. B., The Industrial Review, Vol. I, p. 313. ^' Bishop, American Manufacturers, Vol. I, p. 69. *^C. O., 5:1289, pp. 203-4. "* Chalmers' Revolt of the Colonies, Vol. I, p. 452. Trade of the Delaware District 257 rivers."*^ The river fisheries no doubt contributed to the export trade of Philadelphia, but the amount was probably much less than that imported from New England and Nova Scotia for re- exportation. It was recognized in the beginning of the century that iron ore existed in great abundance in Pennsylvania. Joshua Gee wrote to the board of trade, in 1717, that it would be wise to offer a bounty of £3 on bar iron and il \0s. on cast iron.'^^ He made a further suggestion that " it will be necessary to lay a duty on iron and hemp consumed in that country, that England may not be deprived of the trade they derive from those commodities man- ufactured and sent to the plantations. "'^^ i^ the same year Sir William Keith wrote to the board of trade that he had found in Pennsylvania a great deal of iron ore, which was worked up to such an extent that the importation of iron from Great Britain was discouraged. He sent several samples of this ore to the merchants in London with a description of the places where it was found. '''^ Keith no doubt overestimated the possibilities of manufacturing iron in the province. Several years later Gordon wrote to the board of trade that iron furnaces had been set up, but that they had been used only two years. '^^ The high price of labor made it impossible for them to compete successfully with the Swedish trade in manufactured iron.'^^ The board of trade had been persuaded at an early date that a bounty on iron would be beneficial. The difficulty lay in ob- taining the necessary parliamentary legislation. Finally an act was passed, in 1750, repealing the duties on iron bars, which were imported into London, and on pig iron, which was imported into the out-ports."^ At the same time, it was forbidden to erect mills '" Pennsylvania Statutes at Large, Vol. VIII, p. 467. "C. O., 5:1265, S. 114. "C. O., 5:1266, S. 114, 140. "C. O., 5:1268, S. 34. '' Ibid., S. 44. " Chatham Papers, Bun. 97. Reasons for Allowing the Importation of Bar Iron from America. "23 Geo. II, c. 29. 258 Smith College; Studies in History in the colonies for the making of steel. There were in Pennsyl- vania and Delaware the following plants : 1. A mill or engine for slitting and rolling iron in Thornbury township, Chester County. 2. A pleating forge to work with a tilt-hammer in Byberry township, Philadelphia County. This had not been used for nine months. 3. Two furnaces for making steel in Pennsylvania, both of which were in Philadelphia.'^''' From this it would seem that the manufacturing of iron and steel was not done on a large scale. It has been suggested that it was ''merely an accessory to the ship building industry, which de- manded that certain parts should be made of iron and fitted into the ship. On account of this, these parts could not be imported from Europe because an exact fit was required. "^^ The act of 1750 does not seem to have given the desired stim- ulus. Of the ten forges existing in 1756 all but two or three had been erected before the act was passed.^'' The output of these did not show the increase that might have been expected from such a measure. From the account of William Denny, the deputy gov- ernor, in 1756, it can be seen that the output of eight forges was as follows during the years 1749-1756:^*^ Total Tons 1st Year Average Tons Tons 1. Pine Forge 747 103 124 2. Foot Forge 1749-1754 313 IZ 78 3. Glascow 1750-1756 595 108 119 4. Pottsgrove 1755-1756 64 5. Coventry 1749-1756 339 45 48 6. Windsor 1749-1756 495 90 82^^ 7. Helenshed 1749-1756 480 59 69 8. Minor Forge 1751-1756 342 45 57 The wool act^^ of 1699 brought as little hardship upon the 77 7S 79 C. O., 5:1273. Beer, G. L., Mss. notes based on Colonial Office Papers. Swank, T. W., Iron in All Ages, p. 113. Mantauney Creek Furnace was erected in 1716; Coventry in 1720; and Cornwall and Warwick in 1740. It is also stated that in 1740 many furnaces and other iron works existed in New Jersey. C. O., 5:1275, W. 25. Statutes of the Realm, 1699. 10-11 William III, c. 10. 80, SI Trade of the Delaware District 259 colonies as the iron act. It was primarily intended to affect Ire- land, but the colonies were included, through the fear that in the future the colonists might take to manufacturing their own wool. Conditions at that time did not favour the production of wool and there was no intercolonial trade in this commodity. More- over, the wording of the statute gives no indication that it was desired to discourage the production of wool or the spinning or weaving of it in the various households. It merely prohibited the exportation of the raw or manufactured material from one colony to another. William Penn criticised the act on the grounds that it was geographically impossible for it to be executed. ^^ Jt often happened that a man living near the boundary of one colony, let us say Pennsylvania, found it to his advantage to sell the wool or yarn produced on his farm to his neighbors in ^Maryland in ex- change for tobacco and rice. As this possibility must have oc- curred to those who framed the act, it is hardly possible that they considered such instances of any importance. There was little danger of this act being disobeyed in Penn- sylvania, the lower counties and West Jersey. Sheep were raised and domestic manufacturing was carried on, but there were no serious attempts to establish the business on a commercial basis. This was due partly to the high cost of labor and partly to the fact that it was fashionable to wear English clothing. The distillation of sugar and grain was a very profitable in- dustry. In exchange for the lumber and provisions sent to the West Indies, large quantities of sugar, molasses and rum were brought back to Philadelphia. Although the rum that was made in the West Indies, particularly in Jamaica, was superior to all, there was considerable competition in its production in the conti- nental colonies. Distilleries were multiplied as fast as saw mills and grist mills, and formed with them the basis of the export trade of Philadelphia. There were two classes of manufactories within this district before 1765. Grist mills, saw mills, distilleries, shipbuilding and iron works belonged to the first. The British government never in- ^=C. O., 5:1289, p. 25. 260 Smith ColIvEge Studies in History terfered with the first three of these, and its influence upon the others is doubtful. For the most part they were left free to de- velop as much as the demand for their products allowed. The second class included all household manufactures. They were numerous and developed quite naturally in connection with farm life. There are conflicting statements concerning the extent to which this system prevailed. Coloniel William Hart said that the inhabitants wore the same clothing and had the same utensils as were used in Great Britain. ^^ sjr William Keith claimed that the necessary clothing came from Great Britain and was paid for by means of the export trade in wheat to the West Indies. ^^ These reports were probably the result of observations made in Phil- adelphia or other towns where British goods were in great de- mand. Governor Gordon states clearly that the farmers made clothing of the coarser sort for themselves and that the Irish and German settlers sold linen of their own making to their neigh- bors.^^ It is quite evident, however, that the only reason why manufactures of the second class existed may be found in the colonists' inability to pay for British goods. (3) Trade Routes As the people of the Delaware district became more prosper- ous their demand for European goods steadily increased, but as their own products were unsuitable for direct exchange with Great Britain, they were compelled to develop circuitous routes of trade. By this means the desired manufactures were pur- chased and large profits were realized on a carrying trade, which made Philadelphia of considerable importance as an entreport on the American continent. The great mass of colonial regulations made Philadelphia of considerable importance as an entrepot on trading with certain parts of the world. In spite of these restric- tions, however, many profitable channels of trade were discovered. In order to understand fully the vast net work of the commerce of *'C. O., 5:1266, R. 7. ^Ibid., R. 42. "^Ihid., S. 15. Trade of the: Delaware; District 261 this district in the middle of the eighteenth century every route should be traced, and if possible vessels taking very circuitous routes should be followed closely. Space will not permit such a detailed account, but an examination of the tables of exports and imports will indicate partially the extent of the Delaware com- merce, and its dependence upon non-British trade for its economic justification as a unit of the empire.^^ The chief routes from Philadelphia were those going to the other colonial ports, the West Indies, the Wine Islands, Southern Europe and the British Isles. There was scarcely a port in the continental colonies, with which this district did not have com- mercial relations. The numerous harbors, rivers, creeks and bays along the coast offered many opportunities for trade. In the amount of tonnage employed and as a means for gaining re- mittances to Great Britain these routes were very significant. From the southern ports various commodities were imported, both for home consumption and for re-exportation, such as rice, tobacco, tar, pitch, turpentine, Indian corn, wheat, rye and deer skins. For these the following were sent in exchange : bread and flour made within the district; sugar imported from the West Indies ; rum and molasses of West Indian, New England, or home production; and goods of various sorts imported from the conti- nent of Europe. Although the southern ports enjoyed a profit- able direct trade with Great Britain by which they were able to import European manufactures, nevertheless they import- ed a considerable amount of European goods through Philadel- phia.^''' The trade with Maryland and New York was not at all large. Maryland imported agricultural products from Western Pennsyl- vania by way of the Susquehannah. Her exports were very sim- *° See Appendix II. " C. O., 5 :1499, Shipping Returns of Virginia. Treasury Board Papers, 461, Shipping Returns of Virginia. C. O., 5:511, Shipping Returns of North Carolina. C. O., 5:1228, Shipping Returns of South Carolina. C. O., 5 :710, Shipping Returns of Georgia. C. O., 5 :573, Shipping Returns of Florida. 262 Smith College Studies in History ilar to those of the colonies south of her, which, as we have seen, sent their produce to Philadelphia. The intense jealousy existing between Pennsylvania and Maryland caused their relations to be almost negligible. With New York there was a close competition in the exportation of agricultural products and lumber. ^^ A few exchanges were made in bread, flour and European goods, but the shipping returns show that very few vessels were cleared annually from Philadelphia to New York. The fisheries and peltries were the main features of the import trade from New England^'* and Nova Scotia.^^ The prepara- tion of fish for exportation was a thriving industry in both places, and consequently salt was in great demand. Since salt could be imported into Philadelphia free of duty, it was profitable to ex- change salt for prepared fish.^^ Some flour, bread and locally manufactured articles, such as rum, cabinet ware and soap, were also sent to New England and Nova Scotia. The West Indian trade was the most important of all, being in fact the basis of the commercial life of this district. ^^ f hg in_ habitants of these islands were almost exclusively engaged in pro- ducing sugar, rum, and molasses, together with a little cofifee, cocoa and cotton.^^ They demanded, in return for these products, provisions of all kinds and lumber in large quantities to be used in making barrels, hogsheads, and casks. Naturally England wished to supply the need, since she had provisions for exporta- tion and desired above all to import raw materials ; but the con- tinental colonies were geographically in a better position to meet the demand. Hence, in spite of the close competition with the ''C. O., 5:1228, Shipping Returns of New York. '"C. O., 5:851, Shipping Returns of New England. '" C. O., 5 :221, Shipping Returns of Nova Scotia. "C. O., 5:851, Shipping Returns of New England. 100,000 hhds. of salt were sent to Boston from Philadelphia in one quarter. "'AdmiraUy, 592. C. O., 142:19, Shipping Returns of the West Indies. C. O., 76:4, Shipping Returns of the West Indies. C. O., 33:17, Shipping Returns of the West Indies. Pipe Office, Declared Accounts — Customs, Roll 1265. ''Customs, 16:1. Trade of the Delaware District 263 mother-country, the Delaware district, whose himber was par- ticularly adapted to West Indian uses, controlled a great part of the trade. Of the British West Indies, Jamaica furnished the best market for bread, flour, meat, fish, timber and soap.^^ Joshua Gee, in discussing the importance of Jamaica to the Pennsylvania trade, said, "The Spanish West Indies are reached by way of this island where corn and provisions are sent. ... If this trade be properly nursed up, it may draw the Spanish coast very much to depend on us for a supply of flower, biskets, etc." The imports from Jamaica were not heavy. Many vessels were sent back to Philadelphia in ballast, while some went in ballast to other is- lands, chiefly for sugar, rum and molasses. The Leeward Islands supplemented the trade with Jamaica.^® These islands, especially Dominica, were rich in cocoa and cofifee, besides producing sugar and some cotton. Great Britain in her direct trade with them could supply the necessary amount of food- stuffs, and, consequently, it was difficult for the Delaware traders to make a favorable exchange of products. A demand for lum- ber, however, gave them a foothold and, in time, they began to compete with the mother-country in supplying food stuffs, but, even when the trade was unfavorable, products of these islands were considered of such importance that it was worth while for the traders to sell their goods in Jamaica and then to sail in ballast to the Leeward Islands for a return cargo. Attempts to trade with Barbadoes, Granada, the Grenadines and Tobago met with greater competition.^*^ These had always been Great Britain's prize sugar colonies, with whom she carried on a flourishing trade. The shipping returns indicate that few products were imported directly from the American mainland, although many undoubt- edly came through the neighboring islands. Extensive and profitable as the West Indian trade was, it was not sufficient to dispose of all of the surplus agricultural products "* C. O., 142:19, Shipping Returns of Jamaica. '^ C. O., 16 :4, Shipping Returns of the Leeward Islands. °® C. O., 33:17, Shipping Returns of the Windward Islands. *l^ 264 Smith College Studies in History and lumber. A demand for American grain, during the years of scarcity in Europe had opened a trade with the southern ports of^'^- that continent. The wine trade with Madeira and the Azores had been carried on from an early date, and since these islands were en route to southern Europe this channel became very im- portant. Grain was the basis of the trade, but there was also a market for other products. It was reported, in 1720, that Penn- sylvania traded with Lisbon, Cadiz and Alicante, sending pipe staves, planks, timber and also fish which had been purchased from New England.^' Some vessels returned to the Isle of May and loaded salt, others went to the Madeiras for wine, which they sold in the West Indies. The usual course was to take goods which could be sold in Great Britain, or cash for products, and return by way of England to purchase manufactures. In the early part of the eighteenth century this trade was only casual, since it depended upon the scarcity of grain in Europe. Deputy Gov- ernor Gordon said, in 1731, that, in consequence of the recent poor harvests in Europe, Pennsylvania had shipped 40,000 bushels of grain to Europe — Ireland, Lisbon and the Straits — , "but when there are plentifull crops we ship little or none."^^ In another connection he said that the demand for flour and bread was un- certain, as it depended on the crops in other countries. Later the demand became more regular. The deficit created by the long wars in Europe, which America was called upon to meet, and the years of poor harvests after 1757 put the trade on a firmer foundation. ^^ The wine trade was significant in itself, apart from its con- nection with the trade to southern Europe. Provisions and lum- ber were sent to the Wine Islands and exchanged for wines, and bills of remittances. It was estimated, in 1731, that from 15,000 "C. O., 5:1266, R. 7. ''C. O., 5:1268, S. 34. "'Adm. Papers, II, 3837. A letter from the British Consul, April 10, 1767, in which it is stated that a vessel from Philadelphia was at Leghorn. This is one of many indications that the traders of the Delaware district traded with southern P-urope. Trade of the Delaware District 265 to 20,000 bushels of wheat, some Indian corn, and some bread were annually exported to the Madeiras. ^*^^ Wine from these is- lands had been for a long time a favorite drink in England, and, as its importation into the colonies grew, it enjoyed the same reputation there. Furthermore, since Madeira wine was allowed to be imported directly from the place of growth, there were heavy imports, much of which was re-exported. In some in- stances, the traders took the wine directly to the West Indies, where it found a ready market.^o^ Thus, by means of the trade with other American ports, the British and foreign West Indies, the southern European countries and the wine islands, the traders of the Delaware district man- aged to dispose of the surplus agricultural products and to sup- ply themselves with articles which could be sold in Great Britain, or with cash to pay for European manufactures. In the early days of the eighteenth century, when tobacco was grown in the district, there had been a profitable direct trade with Great Brit- ain, but even at that time part of the cargoes sent from Philadel- phia consisted of goods which had been imported previously from other places. A report of the inspector-general, Charles Dave- nant, dated March 21, 1707, illustrates this point. It gives an account of goods imported into England from Pennsylvania, and the duties thereon, from Christmas, 1698, to Christmas, 1705. ^"2 The total amount of duties paid was £36,598, or an average of £5,227 annually. Of this sum tobacco contributed about 90%, or £32,419. In addition to the tobacco, 226 tons of logwood were imported, paying £1,074 duty. The other articles imported were ""C. O., 5:1266, S. 34. '" C. O., 5:1265, S. 176. Imports into Pennsylvania of Madeira and western island wine from Christmas, 1715 to Cliristmas, 1718: Pipes Hhds. Casks Madeira wine 655 9 18 Fayel wine 83 2 Passado wine 3 Vinegar 3 C. O., 5:1266, R. 18. During the year from Christmas, 1719, to Christ- mas, 1720, there were imported in six vessels, 270 pipes, 7 hhds, and 7 quarter casks. "'C. O., 5:1263, Q. 99. 266 Smith College Studies in History drugs, ginger, rice, sugar, indigo and molasses in small quantities, and a great number of skins of all kinds. Of these commodities only tobacco and skins were native products, the others being the result of trade with other ports, especially those of the West Indies. As tobacco ceased to be cultivated and bread and flour became the staple products, the exports to Great Britain con- sisted more and more of commodities which had been previously imported. ^"^^ A comparison of a list of goods exported to Lon- don in 1765 with an account of goods and merchandise imported into England from Pennsylvania, Christmas, 1699, to Christmas, 1700, shows to what extent re-exportation had increased. ^"^^ Even with the great increase of re-exported goods to Great Britain before 1763, the excess of imports over exports became greater each year. In 1700, the exports almost equaled the im- ports, but, in 1763, they were only 13% of the imports. ^"^ This indicates that the amount of remittances paid down was very large or that the Delaware merchants were continually the debtors of the British. The latter supposition is substantiated by a report which was made in 1791, giving an account of the debts, together with the interest thereon, due to the British merchants before 1776. According to this statement Pennsylvania owed £229,- 452 4s. 4^.100 It is impossible to estimate with any degree of accuracy the value of the legal trade of this district in all of its channels. The early accounts are all more or less vague. Colonel William Hart in 1720 said that the annual produce of Pennsylvania, including the home trade, was £100,000, and that the annual consumption of British manufactures was valued between £50,000 and £60,000. More accurate estimates can be made for the later years because greater demands were made upon the customs officers to send in carefully prepared shipping returns. The exports to England '"'C. O., 5:1268, S. 44. "■'Appendices I, II. "'Appendix IV. "' Chatham Papers, Bundle 343, The sum Total of the Debts due by the respective American States to the Merchants and Traders of Great Britain previous to the year 1776 with interest on the same. Trade of the Delaware District 267 alone in 1763 amounted to £38,228 lOi-. 2d. and the imports from England to £284,152 16^. W.^*'' (4) Illicit Trade Before i'/6s On account of the enormous amount of smuggling during the eighteenth century, it would be incorrect to rely upon the shipping returns of the customs for an accurate account of trade. This practice existed throughout the empire, but there was no place where it prevailed with more impunity than at times in the Dela- ware district. The physical features of the river and bay gave many opportunities for evading the navigation laws.^*'^ In the investigation over the boundary line between Pennsylvania and Maryland this fact was pointed out. A pilot who had served for thirty years said that there were on the east side of the bay "harbours fit for trade and shipping, viz., Morris's River and Co- hansic Creek. i\nd on the east side of Delaware River, Salem Creek, Timber Creek and Ankokus Creek — and that there is on the west side of the said bay Prince Book Bay and on the west side of the said river St. George's Creek, Christian Creek, Derby Creek, and Schuykill River."io9 Besides the difficulties attending the long coast line made by numerous rivers and creeks, there were a few islands, between the provinces of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, which were not included in the bounds of the grants of either province. Petitions to the governors of these provinces indicate that they often served as places of refuge for unprincipled men, committing ofifences in the neighbouring provinces, as well as suitable places for contra- band goods. ^^° From the beginning of the history of the colony traders evaded the navigation laws. In 1699 the board of trade, acting on the advice of Robert Quary, brought serious charges of smuggling "' See Appendix, IV. "" Addit. Mss. 15484, Ports, Districts and Towns of America, 1770. In the discussion of the trade boundaries the lack of supervision was noted. "' Pennsylvania Archives, 2nd Series, Vol. XVI, p. 747. "° Domestic Entry Book, 140. Col. S. P. Domestic Home Office Papers. 268 Smith College Studies in History against Penn's colony. ^ They demanded the repeal of the law passed in 1699 which made all breaches of trade laws cognizable in their common law courts of record, that Colonel William Markham be removed from the office of lieutenant governor, that closer obedience be given to the admiralty courts and greater en- couragement offered to the officer of the customs, and that piracy be suppressed.^12 pgnn decided to go out to the colony and to take charge of the government himself. His presence at first gave great satisfaction. He procured the enactment of a law forbidding trade to Madagascar or Natal, the chief centers of piratical trade,^!^ and another law, obliging the king's officers to weigh all tobacco casks before shipment, in order to do away with frauds in the penny a pound duty.^^^ The trouble was settled for a short time only. Quary accused Penn of encroaching upon the admiralty jurisdiction, and said that illegal trade continued-^^^ For this reason, the board of trade recommended in March, 1701, that the proprietary provinces should be placed on the same level of dependency as the other colonies,^ i<^ without prejudice to the property rights, and in the same year a bill to that effect was introduced and considered in the house of lords. i^'^ Penn answered these charges in several despatches. On December 31st, 1700, he wrote that he had made himself unpopular to some in the colony by his stand on these questions.iis Three months later, he stated that the amount of smuggling in Pennsylvania was very small, and that its prosper- ity was not due to unlawful practices. "For indirect trade I can- not upon my best observations find our peoples much blamable. Some few have, and still visit Curagoa, and this can not be helped, '"C. O., 5:1288, p. 11. ^"^Ibid., pp. 98 et seq. "'C. O., 5:1275, pp. 248-50. In one seizure a parcel of East India Goods from Madagascar was found without a cocket. A valuation of £150 was placed upon it, al- though the goods were worth £1,000. "^C. O., 5:1288, pp. 201-2. "^ Ibid., pp. 413 ct seq. ""C. O., 5:1289, p. 16. "'C. O., 5:1289, pp. 47-48. '''Ibid. Trade of the Delaware District 269 as the coast is 150 miles long and there are no waiters. "^^^ On the 2d of July, 1701, he wrote that the country was improving, not by "piracy or forbidden trade, but honest labour and sobriety, and I wish them that have recommended themselves by their officiousness, or would do so (having little else than shipping to ^ He upon) were half as honest and useful and honourable as those they have faulted."i2o After receiving the report of the board of trade to the house of lords and house of commons, Penn sent another despatch on the 26th of August, 1701, in which he again denied that he had op- posed the admiralty jurisdiction, or that Pennsylvania was guilty of an extensive illegal trade. He strongly opposed the bill, while it was pending in the house of lords. ^-^ A little later he returned to England and, through his influence, the bill was defeated.^-^ At this time the charges of smuggling concerned the trade in tobacco, which was the chief article of export. Large quantities were taken to Scotland and subsequently smuggled into England. It was thought that this was very prejudicial to England, both in defrauding the exchequer of revenue and allowing Scotch manu- factures to be sent back in return. Consequently, vigorous ef- forts were made to counteract the trade. Governor Nicholson, of Maryland, appointed Captain Meech to cruise in the waters adjacent to his colony for the purpose of stopping illegal trade. Some instances connected with his task reveal the amount to which Pennsylvania engaged in this contraband trade. Captain Meech found that a man by the name of Hamilton, who had been a trader in Virginia for a number of years, was now engaged in smuggling tobacco into England via Scotland, and bringing back Scotch merchandise, forging certificates and even going so far as to make false seals of the English customs houses. On one trip he had taken 300 hogsheads of tobacco and brought back a false cocket for 3,000 pounds of Scotch cloth and ticking, 30 ' Ibid., p. 37. 'Ibid., pp. 203-4. 'Ibid., p. 47. C. O., 5:1290, p. 95. 270 Smith ColIve;ge Studies in History dozen of Scotch hose and 30 tons of sea cloth. In reporting this instance, Meech sent in a list of fifteen men engaged in this trade — besides noting that there were others whose names he could not remember. These traders had counterfeit seals of the customs houses of London, Bristol, Liverpool, Whitehaven, Newcastle, Berwick, Plymouth and Bytheford.^-^ Evidence of illegal trade between 1710-1750 is very vague. The loose connection between the colony and the mother country made it difficult to ascertain accurate information. The only sources were the governor's reports and the cases tried in the vice-ad- miralty. The former were usually very unreliable, as the gov- ernors were always eager to report that their provinces were in good order,i24 and when acting as judges of the vice-admiralty, they were especially anxious to make it appear that they were do- ing their duty. A case in 1724 illustrates this last point. Gov- ernor Keith wrote to the board of trade on the 25th of November, that he had made a seizure of the ship Fame, in spite of the negli- gence of the collector. The surveyor general's report, however, made the seizure appear to Keith's discredit. He claimed that the ship Fame, owned by a man named Pellin, a merchant in Rotter- dam, arrived in Philadelphia bringing over immigrants from the Palatinate. It also brought East India and European goods to the value of £20,000, a violation of 15 Charles II, chapter 7. The vessel was seized and the collector left six waiters on board to watch her. The following night, sixty or seventy persons in disguise forcibly boarded her and took the vessel below the town, landing a greater part of the prohibited goods. A few days later, Keith went on board the ship, making a pretence of a new j '''C. O., 5:1287, Journal of Captain Meech. C. O., 5:1266, R. 7. Col. W. Hart said that there were three collectors in Pennsylvania to prevent illegal trade and he believed measures were effectual. Also that Pennsylvania had no trade with foreign Plantations except to Madeira, Cadiz, Alicante and Lisbon. Later, he said that on account of the vigilance of the officers very few seizures were made. Trade of the Delaware District 271 seizure, and the vessel was sold for about £600.i25 The collector protested that he and the king did not get their share of the seiz- ure. Finally, after appealing to the king and the lords justices, the collector was allowed to prosecute in the proper court in Pennsylvania, where he obtained a condemnation.^-'^ Another instance in which 15 Charles II, chapter 7, was violated occurred in 1726, when Joseph Brown was judge of the vice-admiralty. The inventory of this cargo shows plainly what goods were con- sidered useful in contraband trade.^-" 40 pieces of calico in four bales £60 Os. Od. 10 casks of pepper 1200 lbs 80 2 pieces of muslin 5 10 pieces of silk 272 yards 40 16 6 pieces of Holland 21 21 pieces of Holland 63 9 pieces of Holland 31 10 48 pair of silk hose 17 34 pieces of coarse linen 32 12 pieces of ticking 54 9 pieces of osnaburgs 24 06 09 51 pieces of Kenting 30 12 8 pieces of striped linen 27 28 bags, buttons, and bundle of mohair.... 4 12 papers of thread 10 brandy 6 15 cordage 6 15 Another feature of the smuggling was the undervaluation of goods, when the register and cocket appeared to be correct. ^-^ Governor Keith said, in 1719, that one-third of the rum imported was not registered. ^-^ Instance after instance came up to show that this was true. One interesting case was that of Thomas ^'C. O., 5:1266, R. 52. The goods taken in the seizure were : 2 cwt. of East India Tea, 1500 gallons of brandy, 200 gallons of French spirits, 1200 gallons of Burgundy claret and champagne, 70 bis. of gun powder, 30 tons of cordage, 40 tons of iron, 2000 weight of cheese, 200 bolts of Dutch sail cloth. ""C. O., 5:1267, R. 93. "^Ibid., R. 112. '^ C. O., 5 :1267, R. 93. There were a great many cases in which the chief charge was the lack of a register. One came up in 1728. In this instance it was very evident that the vessel was of English build and it was released. ""C. O., 5:1265, Q. 176. 272 Smith ColIvDge Studies in History Hazelwood, in 1750. He was the master of the ship Sandzvich which left Rotterdam with three hundred Palatines bound for Philadelphia. The vessel touched at Cowes and a cocket was produced. When it reached Philadelphia it produced another cocket. It was found that there was a wide discrepancy between the two documents and that the goods were not only greatly un- dervalued, but, under cover of bringing in the personal belong- ings of the immigrants, quantities of East India goods were smug- gled. Peter Randolph entered suit and was upheld by the court. ^^^ The most serious charges, however, brought against the Del- aware district was that of carrying on illicit trade with the enemy in time of war. During the War of the Spanish Succes- sion, a flourishing trade existed with the Dutch and Spanish West Indies via the French West Indies, which nominally obtained their provisions from France.^^^ The northern colonies exported to Curagoa from 1200 to 1500 tons of bread and flour annually, and imported in return quantities of rigging sail, canvas, goods for weaving, cocoa, linen, muslins and silks. ^^^ Monte Christi^^s and St. Eustatiusi^-i were notorious smug- gling centers, where trade with foreign colonies was carried on with as much ease as if it were not prohibited by law. The mar- ket in the northern colonies was so glutted with French sugars, that the honest trader could not import sugars from the British West Indies, except at a great disadvantage and loss.^^^ The "" Pa. Hist. Soc. Mss. Custom House, Vol. I. "^C. O., 5:1288, p. 271. "'C. O., 5:1292, pp. 206-7. '""C. O., 5:1275, W. 3. Letter from Townsend White to London Cor- respondent, October 23, 1755. Beer, G. L., British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765, p. 96-108. A full treat- ment of the trade of Monte Christi is given here — its situation — its commercial insignificance before it was made a free port, reasons for making it a free port, and the illegal trade with the continental colonies. '"* Chatham Papers, Bun. 96. '^ Addit. Mss. 33030 f401. T. L 476. Oct. 1756. Trade; of the; De;laware; District 273 surplus of this illegal importation was re-exported to England and southern Europe, passing as British sugars. ^3g While the trade with the foreign colonies was known before the Seven Years' War, its real significance had not been appre- ciated. This was largely due to the ignorance of the authorities in England concerning the trade between the continental colonies and the West Indies. When this war, which was to decide the struggles between England and France, was begun and every effort was made to injure the trade of the enemy, all of these illegalities were brought clearly to light. The recent excellent treatments of the trade regulations during the war, the colonial trade with the enemy, and the means adopted to check it, make it unnecessary to consider these subjects here.^^? i^ jg sufficient to state that this illicit trade was on such an enormous scale that the British ministry, in 1763, felt justified in making more string- ent regulations concerning it. "'Beer, British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765, p. 100, quoting letter from George Spenser to Amherst, America and West Indies, 95 (C. O. 5:60), and letter from Colden to Pitt, America and West Indies, 72 (C. O. 5:19). T. I. 349. A long petition was presented May 7, 1763, from George Spenser in which there was a statement of the illicit trade with Monte Christi and fictitious clearances. "'Beer, G. L., British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765. Chapters V, VI, VII. Root, W. T., The Relations of Pennsylvania with the British Govern- ment, 1696-1765, passim. CHAPTER II * British Legislation, 1763-1773 The British, ministers of the period immediately preceding the American War of Independence accepted the conventional view of colonial empire. According to this view, the chief aim was to make the empire self-sufficing, and as a means to this end it was thought that the mother country should furnish necessary pro- tection to the colonies, who, in return, should render her obedi- ence. This conception of empire was severely tested at the close of the Anglo-French struggles of the 18th century, when the British Government was confronted with new problems of reve- nue and protection. As a preventive measure against future en- croachments of the French and Indians, it was considered neces- sary to provide an adequate defense on the frontier and in the newly acquired territories. It seemed only fair that the expendi- ture necessary for this purpose should be met in part by the col- onists, inasmuch as they had received, and would continue to receive, the greatest benefits. The experience of the Seven Years' War had proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that the colonies would not voluntarily assume their share of the burden. They had failed to furnish their full quotas^ even under the stress of war, and it was not very likely that they would be more amenable in time of peace. This being the case, the only alternative was compulsion. In order to meet the necessary expense of this new system, efforts were made to obtain a larger revenue from the colonies through a series of laws relating to trade. Since the colonies were considered as parts of the empire rather than en- tities, the increase of the revenue from them was inseparably con- nected with imperial fiscal difficulties. For example, the sugar act was as much a part of the policy adopted towards France as that towards the colonies, and the tea act involved the relations ^H. of L. Mss., Pennsylvania's debt during the war was £234,782, \\s., 3d. sterling. Of this, £91,391, I6s. sterling remained undischarged, to be raised by taxes in 1767, 1768, 1769, 1770, and 1771. Trade of the Delaware District 275 of the East India Company more than those of the colonies. The parhamentary acts of 1763-1773, considered from this point of view, were not oppressive, but were merely stern imperial meas- ures taken at a time when protection and strict economy were essential. The colonists, however, being almost wholly concerned with their own local troubles, could not appreciate this necessity. Anything which interfered with their interests or any law which seemed to benefit another colony to their detriment was received with deep resentment. In addition to holding this narrow pro- vincial view of trade, they were also influenced by their ideas of representative government, which led them to consider the power of legislation at an angle different from that adopted by the Brit- ish ministry. From their point of view, all of these acts were op- pressive to trade as well as a violation of political principles. Since the program of the ministry in 1763 was designed for the purpose of raising revenue, the discussion of the various acts will be limited as far as possible to the economic reasons for their adoption and the resistance to them. An analysis of the colonial trade legislation during this period reveals two methods by which the revenue was to be raised : (1) New trade regulations. (a) Reorganization of the vice-admiralty. (b) Establishment of a customs board in America. (c) Prohibitory measures against foreign trade. (2) New revenue acts. (1) Neiv Trade Regulations The first of these methods was obviously designed to check smuggling. During the late war there had been an excessive amount of illegal trade with the French West Indies to the great detriment of British interests. According to a treasury report of October 4, 1763, the revenue from the colonial customs "is very small and inconsiderable having in no degree increased with the commerce of those countries, and is not yet sufficient to defray a 276 Smith College Studies in History fourth part of the expense necessary for collecting it."^ The treasury board realized that this condition was due to the neglect and connivance which the existing system permitted. It seemed an opportune time for a thorough-going reform, especially as it was necessary to make some provision for the newly acquired territories. (a) The Reorganisation of the Vice- Admiralty The reform began in the vice-admiralty.^ This institution had apparently been established in America before 1696, as a com- mission was given to Fletcher in 1692, to act as judge of a district which included East and West Jersey, Pennsylvania and New Castle.^ Little seems to be known concerning the institution at that date and even in 7 and 8 William III, c. 10, its powers were but vaguely outlined. According to this act it was supposed to try cases which involved breaches of the laws of trade and navigation. The proprietors of Pennsylvania, Carolina, the Bahamas, the Jerseys and the general court of Connecticut 'denied the necessity of such courts and claimed that their char- ters granted them admiralty jurisdiction. They also petitioned that their governors might have the same admiralty powers as the crown governors. It was decided, however, by the attorney-gen- eral that there was nothing in the charters of these colonies which prevented the establishment of vice-admiralty courts.^ A vice-admiralty court was established at Philadelphia which had jurisdiction over Pennsylvania, Delaware and West Jersey, and Robert Quary was appointed judge of the district.^ This court met with opposition from the beginning. The chief ob- ^H. of L. Mss. Adm. Papers, No. 1. Treasury Board Papers, I, 35L Adm. Papers, Out Letters, Bundle 1057. ^ H. of L. Mss. Adm. Papers, Nos. 1-17, The reform in the vice-ad- miralty was extended over three years, 1763-1766. Admiralty Papers, Out Letters, Bundle 1057. ' Beer, G. L., The Old Colonial Policy, Part I, Vol. I, p. 292 n. 1. C. O., 5 :1287, p. 31. Andrews, C. M., Guide to the materials for American history to 1783 in the Public Record Office, Vol. II, p. 35. = C. O., 5:1287, p. 14. 'Ibid., pp. 292-6. Trade of the Delaware District 277 jections were trial without jury and the encroachment of the mari- time courts upon the domain of the civil courts. David Lloyd voiced the sentiment of many when he declared "that all those that did in any way encourage or promote the setting up of the courts of admiralty in this province were greater enemies to the right and liberties of the people than those that promoted the ship-money in King Charles the First's time.""^ The opposition was so great that two laws were passed in the Pennsylvania as- sembly against the courts. One, in 1698, provided that all breaches of the trade laws should be tried under the common law and by a local jury. The other provided that no freeman should be tried or condemned in any case whatsoever, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the laws of the province. Both were disallowed because they were contrary to the statute of 1696.S Although the terms of 7 and 8 William III c. 10, were ambig- uous, the vice-admiralty court acted according to these terms until 1764. During this time various interpretations were made of the duties and jurisdiction of the court at Philadelphia. When- ever the principal offices were held by men from outside of the province, there was considerable friction with the colonial gov- ernment ; while, on the other hand, there seemed to be little diffi- culty when colonists were appointed or when the governor acted as judge. The most trouble occurred during the administrations of Robert Quary, 1696-1713, and Josiah Brown, 1724-1728. Quary, being the first judge appointed, had to face the natural opposition aroused by the introduction of an institution which seemed to curtail the power of the regular colonial officials. Brown was the only other person from outside of the province to hold office for any length of time. The period between these two ad- ministrations and the period from 1728 to 1763 were compara- tively peaceful. This was no doubt due to the presence of col- ' Ibid. ^ Charter and Laws of Pennsylvania, pp. 268-274. Pennsylvania Statutes at Large, Vol. H, pp. 18, 45. 278 Smith College Studies in History onial judges, who were lenient in their administration of the court and allowed the civil officials to encroach upon their jurisdiction.^ The problems which arose after 1696 centered about the method of condemning seizures, the relative jurisdiction of the civil and admiralty courts, absenteeism and the fee system. In the condemnation of seizures, as well as in other questions, the lack of an authority superior to the district courts was most detri- mental. The colonial courts were too remote to be supervised adequately by the English admiralty, and yet it was obvious at times that the purpose of the vice-admiralty was defeated through the absence of such control. In order to establish the authority of the courts the whole system was reorganized. A new court for all America was erected, which had concurrent powers with the district court and could exercise all the powers of the English admiralty except that of appeal. ^^ The statutes concerning the condemnation of seizures from 12 Charles II to 3 George III varied so much in mode and place of trial that the officers were uncertain how to proceed. In 1764, it was decided that offences committed against any law of trade could be prosecuted, sued for, and recovered in any court of record or in any court of the admiralty or vice-admiralty, accord- ing to the wishes of the informer. If either party was not satis- fied with the decision, he could appeal to the vice-admiralty court which had jurisdiction in the district where the offence was com- mitted, and, if that had been the court in which the case originated or a further appeal was necessary, it was taken to the admiralty court in England.^ ^ The limitations of the jurisdiction of the vice-admiralty had also been vaguely defined in the act of 1696. There had been a " For a fuller discussion see Root, The Relations of Pennsylvania with the British Government, Chap. IV. " H. of L. Mss. Adm. Papers, No. 15. Admiralty Papers, Out Letters 1057. The question of appeals had been disputed since 1696. See Root, The Relations of Pennsylvania with the British Government, Chap. IV. C. O., 5.1288, pp. 109-113, 413. " Ibid. Trade of the DeIvAware District 279 dispute between Quary and Penn concerning this matter.^2 Penn claimed that the vice-admiralty had no power on land and that it was necessary for it to go outside of the province to exert its control. On the occasion when a water bailiff was appointed, in the absence of Quary, the latter complained that the rights of the admiralty had been seriously invaded. This was not the case. The appointment was only an emergency measure. Penn defined his attitude clearly in his dispatch of December 10, 1700.^^ He said that the difficulty lay in the fact that the vice-admiralty and civil courts overlapped in their jurisdiction and disputes occurred on the border land. He pointed out further that there was no skilled lawyer in Pennsylvania who could settle disputes of this character. It seemed to him hardly possible that courts, estab- lished for the express purpose of trying offences against the acts of trade and navigation and for piracy, could be supposed to consider cases which arose within the limits of the province, how- ever much they concerned the sale of goods from vessels or work done on vessels. In 1702, Penn made further charges against Quary in this matter, claiming that he was ignorant of the law and that he at- tempted to extend his admiralty jurisdiction to cases which were clearly within that of the common law courts.^'* On account of the disputes which arose, the opinion of Sir Edward Northey, attorney-general, and Sir John Cooke, solicitor-general, wajs asked. They characterized the act 7 and 8 William III as "con- fused and dark" and in general upheld Penn's contention. ^^ From that time it was fairly clear that the jurisdiction of the vice-ad- miralty did not extend to cases on land. The question came up, however, again and again. For this reason the act 4 George III c. 15 stated clearly the limitations of the court. ^'^ When the Earl of Northumberland was made vice-admiral of all America, his power extended "throughout all and every the sea shoals, public streams, ''C. O., 5:1288, p. 413. "C. O., 5:1289, pp. 278-90. « "C. O., 5:1290, pp. 65-70. "^Ibid., pp. 109-113. ''4 Geo. Ill, c. 15, sec. XU. 280 Smith College Studies in History ports, fresh water rivers, creeks, and arms as well of the sea as other rivers, and the coast whatsoever of all America and ter- ritories dependent thereon and maritime parts whatsoever of the same and thereto adjacent as well within the libertys, and fran- chises, as without, to take cognizance, and proceed in all causes civil and maritime and in complaints, contracts, offences, or pros- pective offences, arms, pleas, debts, exchanges, accounts, charters, party agreements, suits, trespasses, injurys, extortions and de- mands, civil and maritime, whatsoever commenced between mer-. chants and proprietors of ships, etc."^'^ In short, the jurisdiction of the vice-admiralty was extended to every case, civil as well as maritime, which had the remotest connection with trade. One of the chief defects of the system was absenteeism.^^ The admiralty officials were not explicitly required by law always to be present in their district, and many of them were very negli- gent. On several occasions this had been considered a serious hindrance. Robert Quary wrote from Philadelphia on July 4, 1698, that the admiralty court was in bad shape. "The register appointed by Randolph lives a hundred miles from Philadelphia, and the marshall also appointed by Randolph is not at present in the colony. Besides, the chief officer, the advocate, is in England, and does not intend to come to Pennsylvania." On this account he was unable to proceed to business. ^^ At another time certain difficulties could have been averted had Quary himself been pres- ent. While he was absent, because of ill health and private busi- ness, some oft'ences were committed in the river at Philadelphia and the water bailiff was instructed to prosecute the case.-° In order that such occasions could not arise, the act of 1764 required all of the officers to remain constantly at their posts of duty.-^ "H. of L. Mss. Adm. Papers, No. 11. " H. of L. Mss. A report concerning the officers of the civil, military and admiralty establishments, delivered in the house of lords on the 20th of January, 1766, shows the amount of absenteeism in the colonies. Adm. Papers, Out Letters, Bundle 1057. "C. O., 5:1287, pp. 228-233. "" Root, Relations of Pennsylvania with the British Government, 1696- 1765, p. 107. -'H. of L. Mss. Adm. Papers, No. 1. Admiralty Papers, Out Letters, 1057. Trade of the; Delaware District 281 The fee system was largely responsible for this difficulty. The English government had always felt that it was out of the ques- tion to provide salaries for all of the officers of the vice-admiralty and in most instances the provincial government was unwilling to assist in any way.22 The fees were never large enough to defray an officer's expenses, and, in times of great opposition, fear of imprisonment somtimes kept them from accepting any at all.-=^ Quary wrote to the admiralty of England that he had "served his majesty for three years at his own cost and charge, and it had cost him a good deal of time, money, labour and haz- ard."-* In order to make up the deficit, the officers were com- pelled to engage in private activities which took them away from their districts.-'^ To obviate these difficulties special provision was made, in 1764, for salaries.26 The vice-admiral of all America and the judge of the court were each to be paid £800 a year. The judges of the new district courts were also to have the same sal- aries as had previously been paid to the judge of the court at Halifax, which had been considered the most important court before the establishment of the one for all America. Thus the principal officers were supposed to be sufficiently compensated for their work and did not need to seek other means of earning a livelihood. ■' C. O., 5 :1288, p. 413. When Roger Mempessen was appointed to succeed Quary, the latter informed the board of trade that Mr. Penn had recommended to his friends here in Pennsylvania that they "do amongst them settle £200 a year on the new judge." ^^ Root, W. T., The Relations of Pennsylvania with the British Govern- ment, 1696-1765, passim. =*C. O., 5:1288, p. 413. =^6 Anne, c. Z7, sec. VII. 13 George III, c. 3. 29 George II, c. 34. The fees were definitely established by act of parliament in cases of prizes taken during a war, but fees in case of vessels condemned in seizures varied in amount. They were usually 10 per cent of the value of the seizure. Keith said, in 1727, that he received 7 1-2 per cent of all condemnations. ^"'H. of L. Mss. Adm. Papers, No. 15. 282 Smith College; Studies in History The treasury board felt that the vice-admiralty in America should be strongly supported by the officials in other departments, civil and military. Therefore they petitioned that all the gov- ernors should be given strict instructions to suppress illegal trade, to exert their authority in protecting the officers of the revenue, and to transmit such observations as might occur to them on the state of trade. The military force was likewise requested to lend its aid in any emergency. The commanders-in-chief of his ma- jesty's ships and troops in America and the West Indies were ask- to give all possible assistance, to make such use of the forces under their respective commands as would be most serviceable in suppressing dangerous practices, and to protect the officers from the violence of any desperate and lawless persons who should attempt to resist the due execution of the laws. Furthermore it was suggested that a sea guard should be instituted to co- operate with the officers of the vice-admiralty, the military and the civil government. The improvement of the sea guard at home had been of great service in suppressing contraband trade, and it was thought that it would insure the obedience to law if one were placed in America.-" (b) Bstahlishment of Customs Board in America A change in the colonial customs house system came soon after the reorganization of the vice-admiralty. The treasury board had suggested, in its report of October 4th, 1763, that the revenue might be increased by the following remedies : (1) All officers belonging to the customs in America and the West Indies should be fully instructed in their duty and should be compelled to remain constantly in their respective stations. (2) Regular and constant correspondence should be required, which would keep the treasury informed about their proceedings. This correspondence should include an account of any difficulties they might meet in discharging their respective duties ; also care- fully drawn up accounts of imports and exports of their district. -' H. of L. Mss., Adm. Papers, No. 1. Admiralty Papers, Out Letters, 1057. Trade of the Delaware District 283 amount of illicit trade, observations on the efficacy or inefficacy of any existing regulations, and suggestions of such alterations as would lead to the further improvement of the revenue.-^ These remedies were adopted, and as a result detailed instruc- tions were sent to all governors, surveyors-general, and custom I house officers.-^ The number of circular letters inquiring about the state of trade and manufacture in each province increased rapidly, but the replies were not at all satisfactory. Some of the reports were unsystematic and unnecessarily long, while others were too meagre to be of any use. For this reason it was impos- sible to ascertain the amount of revenue from the colonies. A report made to the commissioners of the customs at London on the 3rd of April, 1767, concerning the duties in America, pointed out that "distance rendered correspondence with officers of the revenue very tedious and liable to uncertainty and interruption. Instructions and orders of the board could have but little effect — negligent, partial and corrupt officers, made various pretences either to defeat or elude the directions sent them, while the dili- gent and faithful officers, who were willing to do their duty, found great discouragement for want of ready assistance and informa- tion. "The truth of this general observation has been long known and felt, but the oppression which officers of the revenue labour under in America (more especially in some parts of the conti- nent) has lately grown to such an enormous height, that it is be- come impossible for them to do their duty, not only from the out- rages of the mob, but for fear also of vexatious suits, verdicts and judgments in the provincial courts. Assistance from the gov- ernors and the institution of surveyor-general of the customs in America is very inadequate. It would be imprudent at times to act as the guarding of the revenue demands. The variety of busi- ^'H. of L. Mss., Adm. Papers, No. 1. Admiralty Papers, Out Letters, 1057. Treasury Papers, XI, 27, p. 318. ^^ C. O., 5:1233. Instructions to the governor from the secretary of state. It was during this time that John Penn received the letters referred to in the first chapter. ^Treasury Board Papers, I, 459; XXVIII, I. '' Ibid., XI, 28, p. 145. '" The extent to which this board was effective may be found in letters among the Admiralty Papers II 3866; i?i the accounts which were sent to the lords of the treasury from the custom house, Boston, beginning September 8, 1767 — Custom House Establishment Books, Custom House, London ; and in the letters sent by the American board of commissioners to the various collectors and comptrollers of the colonies, — Custom House Miscellanea 16. Register of Letters Outward beginning January 5, 1768. 284 Smith College Studies in History ness arising from the acts of navigation, trade and revenue in America depends almost wholly on the prudence and good con- duct of the surveyor-general, and the distance is too remote for him to be of adequate use."^^ Between April and September, 1767, a careful investigation was made of the custom houses and their officials in America. It was finally decided that it would be economical in the end to establish a general customs board in America which would super- vise all the custom-houses on the continent and in the Bermudas and the Bahamas. A board of this nature was formally inaugu- rated by letters patent on September 8th, 1768.^^ The principal duty of this board was to give information to ' the commissioners of the customs in London concerning the state I of revenue in America. It was to all intents and purposes the colonial branch of the London custom house and the methods of the latter were adopted. ^^ Consequently accounts were more carefully and systematically entered. Mr. Irving, the inspector- I general of imports and exports and register of shipping, made out a table of accounts similar to the one which he meant to follow in his office and sent it to each port with instructions that they should make quoted reports according to this model. As a result, the shipping returns of all the colonies, from 1768 to 1773, were en- tered under the following general heads : (1) Imports and exports to and from Great Britain and Ire- land. (2) Imports and exports to and from Southern European ports ; Africa and the Wine Islands. (3) Imports and exports to and from the West Indies. I Trad^ of the Delaware District 285 (4) Imports and exports coast wise. (5) Account of duties on exports and imports.^^ This was a great improvement on the old hap-hazard method of keeping accounts. Mr. Irving wrote in 1770 concerning the matter : "Previous to the establishment of this board the customs were drawn in a very confused, imperfect and inaccurate manner. The accounts of imports being entirely omitted by reason of the multi- plicity of articles of which said cargoes generally consist, and the imports and exports to and from neighboring colonies (which commonly pass under the denomination of coasting trade) being seldom if ever inserted in the accounts, and even such goods and commodities as were brought into the account were not arranged in any order or method, nor were the real quantities thereof ascer- tained with proper precision, so it was merely impossible for me to keep an account of import and export either for the information of government or to be a check upon illicit trade agreeable to the end and design of my appointment."^^ (c) Prohibitory Measures Against Foreign Trade One of the chief reasons for a more thorough supervision of trade was the enforcement of the "enumerated" policy as out- lined in the navigation act of 1660,35 the staple act of 1663^'^ and the colonial act of 1673. •''" While two of these acts were originally directed against the Dutch, the principle upon which they rested was the economic independence of the empire. The aim was to encourage the production of raw material in the colonies and to make England the center for manufacturing. To offset the dis- advantage to the colonies of requiring them to send their sugar, tobacco, cotton, wool, indigo, ginger, logwood, fustic and other dyeing wood, and cocoa nuts directly to England or to some other British colony,38 an attempt was made, by means of bounties and ^' Customs 16:1. ^ Treasury Board Papers I, 476. ^ 12 Charles II, c. 18. '^MS Charles II, c. 7. 37 3S 25 Charles II, c. 7, sec. 5. Beer, G. L., British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765, Chap. X. passim. 286 Smith Coli^ege Studies in History preferential tariffs, to secure the English market for certain col- onial staples. For a district which enjoyed a direct trade with the mother country, these regulations could work little hardship, but in those districts, such as the Delaware, which depended upon circuitous routes there was little sympathy for such a policy. Before 1764, the only enumerated article which seriously affected the trade of this district was sugar, as tobacco had ceased to be of importance early in the century. In that year,^^ however, the enumerated list was enlarged, the chief additions being lumber and iron. The colonists complained of this legislation, and in order to minimize their distress parliament passed another act, in 1765, providing for the payment of bounties on these products. This relieved the situation to some extent, but it was generally regarded in the northern colonies as inadequate compensation for the hardship of having the articles on the enumerated list. On account of its bulk and smallness of value, lumber could not, as a rule, be sold at a profit if it had to reach its final market by way of England.'**^ The same was true of iron. John Dickinson said, "Indeed, to require us to send all our iron to Great Britain is, in the opinion of some of our most judicious merchants, to require an impossibility. For, as the article is so heavy and such small quantities can be sent on one vessel, they assert that we cannot send freight directly home for one-half of it."'^^ The additions to the enumerated list in the act of 1764 were not so objectionable as the new restrictions placed upon the trade with the West Indies and the minute regulations made for inter- colonial commerce. The traders of the Delaware district had al- ways been vitally concerned in attempts to prevent the continental colonies from using the foreign West Indian markets, and had made protests whenever the matter was brought up. Mr. Paris, agent of Pennsylvania, presented a memorial, in 1731, which gave reasons why the monopoly which the assemblies of the Barbadoes, Antigua and St. Christophers demanded, would be injurious to 'M Geo. Ill, c. 15. '"Beer, G. L., British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765, Chap. X. passim. " Chatham Papers. Bundle 97. Trade of the Delaware District 287 British trade in general. He said that "Pennsylvania may be called one of the bread colony s," and he pointed out that she im- ported more manufactures from Great Britain than the other three colonies together.-*- Furthermore, he said that she obtained means for purchasing merchandise through trade in food stuffs with the West Indies — the foreign as well as the British. Since the latter could not consume the surplus of the bread colonies nor furnish the northern colonies with all the molasses, sugar and rum required, it seemed more correct to promote the trade than to curtail it. In 1733, the West Indies, from the point of view of trade, were by far the most important colonies of the British Empire. Compared with them — especially the sugar islands — the continen- tal colonies were insignificant. On account of this, everything was done to promote their welfare. The molasses act was passed, as the government thought that legislation compelling the continental colonies to purchase their molasses and sugar from the British West Indies would necessarily increase the prosperity of those islands which were already occupied and would strengthen the British in their struggle with the French for the possession of St. Lucia, Dominica and St. Vincent. Conditions, however, changed considerably during the next thirty years. "^^ The con- tinental colonies developed much more rapidly than the West In- dies, and a very flourishing trade sprang up between the northern ^C. O., 5:1267, S. 13. B. T. Commercial Series II, Vol. 414. The statistics given in this volume do not bear out this statement. From Christmas, 1731 to Christ- mas, 1732 the exports from England were as follows : Pennsylvania £41,698 Montserrat £2,075 Antigua 22M(i Nevis 4,666 Barbadoes 60,191 St. Kitts 18,024 Jamaica 132,780 C. O., 5:1267, S. 34. It is hardly possible that the situation was as Mr. Paris presented it because Governor Gordon said in 1731 that Pennsylvania did not have a large trade with the foreign plantation, sending only three or four vessels to Surinam and perhaps one to Curagoa and sometimes one to St. Eustatius, but none to the Spanish or French colonies. " Dickinson, John, Late Regulations. Memoirs of the Historical So- ciety of Pennsylvania, Vol. XIV, pp. 221-2. 288 Smith Coli^ege Studies in History colonies and the foreign islands in violation of the molasses act. The British West Indies were no longer capable of taking all of the goods of the northern colonies or of. furnishing them with sufficient West Indian produce. The Delaware traders were the chief offenders. The small amount of duties collected from this act shows how inadequately it was enforced. Only £600 6s. lOd. were collected on merchan- dise and £141 lis. 9d. on prize goods, from 1733 to 1750. Vio- lations of the act were also brought to light in the proceedings and viva voce evidence taken before the commissioners of trade and plantations in 1750.'*'* In this investigation testimony was given by merchants of London trading with the sugar islands, who thought that it would be prejudicial to their interests, if the illicit trade were allowed to continue. They called attention to the manner and the degree in which the northern colonies, more particularly Rhode Island and Pennsylvania, had evaded the law. In times of war, "it was done by flags of truce, sometimes with only one, two or three prisoners, and sometimes purchasing pris- oners for that purpose, and, since the war, in an open and regular course. It was a known fact that the northern colonies consumed great quantities of French and foreign rum, sugar and molasses^ and it was well known that they never paid any duties for it. Vessels have cleared from Rhode Island to Jamaica, have gone to some other British settlement, have sold their lumber for specie, refusing rum and molasses, and have gone to some foreign settle- ment and bought a cargo of rum and molasses with that specie and, sometimes, linen, silks. East India goods and other pro- hibited merchandise." In this investigation some of the reasons for trading with the French were brought out. In the first place, the lumber pro- duced in the French colonies on the continent was not so useful for their puncheons and hogsheads as that grown in the northern English colonies, and it was less difficult to import it from the northern colonies than from Canada or Louisiana. Secondly, ** C. O., 5 :38. Proceedings and Viva Voce Evidence Taken Before the Commissioners of Trade and Plantation in 1750. Trade of the Delaware District 289 provisions and specie were very scarce in these plantations and, if the merchants could not exchange their West Indian products for lumber and provisions, they were reduced to extreme neces- sity. Thirdly, since lumber alone was sometimes sent, and a cargo of it was not always sufficient to purchase the required amount of rum, molasses and sugar in the French colonies, specie was demanded in the British sugar islands instead of products, to make up the balance. ^^ The British West Indian merchants suffered considerably from this trade as it took away most of their specie and prevented them from selling their products in North American markets. Consequently, they petitioned for an act which would prohibit the trade more effectively. They suggested a more thorough-going supervision of ports and certification of goods. The act which resulted from these petitions was clearly in line with the reforms in the vice-admiralty. The detailed regulations in respect to the loading and unloading of goods presuppose an active vice-admiralty court and the co-operation of a water-guard, a military force and the civil government. The aid of these in- stitutions was necessary to enforce such provisions as : (1) that, before any vessel could take on its enumerated goods the owner must take out bonds to the value of the goods and certify that they were going to Great Britain or to some British plantations ; (2) that no ship should be cleared from Great Britain or the colonies unless the entire cargo was laden and shipped to one destination; (3) that the certificate for entry and discharge must be under the hand and seal of the customs officer, comptroller, collector of customs and four of the commissioners in London or three in Edinburgh. Careful provision was made for damage suits. An officer could not be sued for damage in case of seized goods, the owner could not recover costs, and persons who claimed seized goods were obliged to deposit security to cover the costs of the suit.*^ *' Ibid. *'4 Geo. Ill, c. 15, sec. XII, XXVII, XXX, XLIV. C. O., 5:1233. Orders and Instructions to Thomas and Richard Penn, April, 1767. 290 Smith College Studies in History The sugar act was not merely a revenue measure, but, like the molasses act, it was also intended to direct trade into certain chan- nels. New duties were imposed upon foreign coffee and pimento, oriental and French goods, and wine from Spain and Portugal. Madeira wine re-exported from Great Britain was allowed a drawback of £3 per ton. Since the duty upon the direct importa- tion was ilO per ton, it was thought that this would cause the trade to go by way of the mother country. The molasses act was made perpetual, with the duty on foreign molasses and syrups reduced to 3d. a gallon, the duty on foreign sugars raised to il 7s. per cwt. and the importation of foreign rum or spirits absolutely prohibited. The two and one-half per cent duty on foreign goods re-exported from Great Britain w^as not paid, nor was any part of the old five per cent subsidy drawn back.'*'^ These were all significant changes which were meant to benefit certain parts of the empire by giving preference to their in- dustries. Beside this, every effort was made to make Great Brit- ain the entrepot for the whole empire, with the hope that the duties paid into the British exchequer would be increased thereby and that smuggling would be decreased by a more careful supervision of exports and imports. This measure was very unpopular in the northern colonies. In the first place they felt that it was unjust to promote the in- terests of some of the dominions at the expense of others. John Dickinson, writing to William Pitt in December, 1765, said con- cerning the matter: "In this light the restrictions laid on their trade to the foreign plantations in the West Indies are regard- ed and will be regarded. The natural consequences of these re- strictions are to impoverish the continental colonies, to render them dissatisfied, and gradually to break off their connection with Great Britain by lessening their demands for manufactures. "^s One argument, given in support of this view in a paper en- dorsed "Mr. Huske's Scheme for Free Ports in North America," "4 Geo. Ill, c. 15. "Chatham Papers, Vol. 97. Letter from John Dickinson to William Pitt, 1765. Tradi; of the Dui^aware; District 291 has a very modern ring. After pointing out that it ought to make Httle difference what foreigners did, since the West India planters were unable to supply the markets of the continental colonies, he said, "setting aside its not injuring our sugar planters, do not these supplies to foreigners and the advantages made of the re- turns also give support to our northern plantations ? Does it not make them more useful and beneficial to the mother country and does not the supplying foreign colonies with what they want and taking from them that they produce, so far as this extends make them colonies of Great Britain, and this too, without the expense of supporting and defending them? "France and Spain, fully sensible of the immense advantages we reap from trading with their colonies in the West Indies, have done and continue to do all in their power to prevent it, except for articles which their colonies occasionally want. And we have, ever since the late peace, done their business for them more effec- tually than they could have done it for themselves, when from all considerations and in every point of view we ought to have done the reverse. "^^ Secondly, the increased list of enumerated goods and the pro- viso that even non-enumerated goods should not be sent to ports north of Cape Finisterre, unless they had touched at Great Brit- ain, were considered very harmful. One pamphleteer said con- cerning sugars, and this would apply to other articles as well, "if we go to Great Britain first and land them there, it will prove so expensive by the delay and charges of loading and unloading and reshipping, and also a double freight insurance, that the trade cannot be carried on to any advantage, especially in time of war. If we carry these sugars direct to a foreign market by license from Great Britain, the difficulties and embarrassments are still greater, as the vessel in which any sugars are to be shipped must first go to Great Britain and the master enter into bonds there, before a license can be procured, during which time the sugars are to re- main in the king's stores here, and after they are delivered in a *"Addit. Mss., 33030, f. 318. Mr. Huske's Scheme for Free Ports in North America, 1765. 292 Smith Colle;ge Studies in History foreign port, the vessel must return to Great Britain to cancel the bonds, before she can proceed in any other voyage — though the liberty granted to carry these sugars directly to foreign ports by license, might be intended as an encouragement to the trade, the regulations and restrictions are such as will effectually defeat this very design."^° The multiplicity of bonds and cockets and the tedious delays which they caused constituted a third objection. Besides the bonds required for enumerated goods, the master of the vessel was not allowed to take in any more enumerated goods without first giving another bond with surety. By this act, bonds were also required for the coasting trade. Before a cocket could be taken out, oath had to be made stating when, by whom, and in what vessel the article was intended to be exported. At times information could not be obtained at once and the delay was apt to cause embarrassment.^^ An extract from a letter written by an American concerning the British legislation from 1765-69, gives a very good example of the general feeling: "Pardon me, honorable sir, when I say that it is the opinion of most of us in North America, that the British legislature for the last two years have been entirely misinformed of the true state of these colonies, — and the real advantage accruing from their com- merce with their mother country. For (exclusive of the stamp act) the duties upon foreign sugars, molasses, wine, etc., not only lessen the number of shipping, but in a great measure pre- vent the merchants from means of making remittances home for the incredible quantities of woollen, cutlery, and other British manufactures. Besides, every dollar or pistol paid in duties takes off so much from the sums remitted for British manu- factures; because nine-tenths of the specie imported amongst us from the Dutch free ports, the Spanish Islands and Main, have constantly in peace been sent home, and we not having one-quarter ^ Pamphlet. Observations on the Several Acts of Parliament by a Boston Merchant. =' Ibid. Trade of the Delaware District 293 enough of our own produce in this and neighboring provinces for the necessary remittances. Specie and foreign sugars have ever made up the deficiency. But those not being any longer to be had, new methods must be fallen upon to clothe us."^^ He also pointed out that there was not enough specie in the colonies to pay for such duties as the stamp act demanded for one year. (2) New Revenue Measures The first act passed for revenue alone was the one which granted and applied certain duties in the form of stamps on pa- pers, documents, pamphlets, etc., for the purpose of defraying the expenses of protecting the colonies. As in the case of the vice- admiralty reforms, means were provided for collecting these duties. Six thousand pounds were to be paid out of the sinking fund for meeting the necessary expenses of carrying the act into execution. ^3 This sum was to be used in salaries to the various officers who would be in charge of collecting the duties. The fol- lowing were the salaries granted : £10 additional per annum to the chamber keeper ; i40 additional per annum to the receiver general; £50 additional per annum to the comptroller; £100 to a new secretary to the comptroller; £20 to a second clerk to the comptroller; £50 to the packer and messenger of the American stamp warehouse; £100 and eight per cent of monies collected to the distributors of stamps and 20.y. per day for their traveling charges when out upon their inspection.^'* This act was the result of a plan which had been proposed a long time before. ^^ To the British statesmen of the period it was clearly within the limits of parliamentary jurisdiction, as was shown by the vote in both houses. The commons passed it by a " Chatham Papers, Vol. 97, Proposal signed by an American Farmer. °' H. of L. Mss. Paper marked Treasury Chambers, 9 July, 1765. "H. of L. Mss. Paper marked Stamp Office, 27 April, 1765. Mr. Bretell, Secretary to the Commissioner of Stamps, to Mr. Jenkin- son, Secretary of the Treasury. ^^ Addit. Mss., 33030, f. 2)76. "Reasons humbly offered in support of a proposal lately made to extend the duties in stamp paper and parchment all over the British Plantations." Beer, G. L., British Colonial Policy, pp. 38-41. 294 Smith Coi^lege; Studies in History vote of 250 to 49, and it passed the lords without a division. It appeared to do away with the many difficulties inseparably con- nected with port duties and appropriations. To the colonists it represented all that they had grown to feel was tyrannical and unjust. They saw in it a violation of an abstract principle which those responsible for the measure did not recognize. On account of this wide difference of opinion concerning taxation, the oppo- sition to the act in America was predominantly political. The resistance, however, had also an economic basis. The act was economically untenable on account of the scarcity of coin, and would no doubt have been a hindrance to trade, if it had been enforced. ^^ The small amount of specie in this district was for the most part Spanish coin which came through the West Indian trade or by smuggling. Paper currency was the usual medium of exchange. While this answered the purposes of the trade within the district, its depreciation rendered it useless outside. ^'^ It could not be used for remittance to Great Britain and was not accepted in payment of duties. Thus any bill such as the stamp act, which demanded sterling in payment was not only a hard- ship, but impossible of execution because there was no metallic money available.^^ In the examination of merchants before the house of lords this point was clearly brought out. A merchant was asked if he thought that a modification of the stamp act, so as to permit the colonies to pay in goods instead of specie, would make it reason- able. He answered in the affirmative. To the question, "If the stamp act had been executed without opposition, would you have usually answered orders," he replied, 'T should have considered them disabled to the amount of the tax and would therefore shorten my credit." The same merchant also said that, if the act ^"Addit. Mss., 33030, f. 163. Franklin said, in his examination before the house of lords, that the act was impracticable because the posts did not go back into the country. "C. O., 5:1289, pp. 17-31. ='C. O., 5:1270. T., I, 471. Paper Currency was worth 35 per cent exchange on London, in 1723, but rose to 70 per cent before the close of the colonial period. Trade; of the; De;laware; District 295 continued and was submitted to, he would decline to send goods, except when they were paid for in advance.^'' As the act was never enforced in Pennsylvania, hardship of this sort was not felt ; but the determination not to obey it ob- structed trade in such a way that many feared its consequence. The date set for the enforcement of the measure was November 1st. In spite of the lateness of the season nothing was done for a month. In the meantime vessels were not allowed to clear with- out stamped paper, and the distributors, fearing the violence of the mob, did not distribute the stamps. On December 1st, 1765, the collector and comptroller wrote to the commissioners of the customs : "We make no doubt that your honours will have heard, long before this reaches you, of the opposition made in all parts of America to the stamp act and that the papers are arrived in the different colonies [and that] the people will not receive them nor suffer them to be used. We have been ever since the first of November (when the act was to commence) and for a long time before deliberating about what part would be proper for us to act, or rather whether it would be prudent of us to act at all, as offi- cers of the customs without stamp paper. And we still are at a loss how to determine. We have not yet done anything since the 1st of Novemebr, but people, who have vessels loaded, begin to be very uneasy and clamorous. The winter is near at hand and we may expect in a short time that our navigation will be stopt by ice. The harbour is full of vessels and, if we don't begin soon to permit them to depart they will probably be shut up all winter, which will occasion great distress, and perhaps ruin to many of His Majesty's subjects, and at the same time be a means of lessen- ing the revenue of customs. "What we have said above is on a supposition that it is in our power to detain them ; but that is not the case. We dare not do it if we would. People will not sit and see their interest suffer and perhaps ruin brought upon themselves and families when ="Addit. Mss., 33030, f. 163. Examination of Merchants before the House of Lords, 1765. 296 Smith College Studies in History they have it in their power to redress themselves. What has lately happened at New York (and the same spirits prevail as strongly here) is sufficient to convince us that it is in vain for us to contend against the general voice of a united people. We have not the least hopes of enforcing the act by anything that we can do, at present. The people of all ranks are so averse to it that we do not know whether they had rather see the city laid in ashes than submit to it. We may lessen ourselves in the esteem of the people and expose the weakness of your power to put this or any other law into execution, if at this time we obstinately refuse to comply with their requests; and we can see no good conse- quences that can possibly ensue from it, so that upon the whole we are of opinion that it will be best to let the business of the custom house to go on as usual till we receive instructions to the contrary. The surveyor general is of this opinion, but he does not choose to give us any orders as he cannot undertake to indemnify us against the penalties of an act of parliament. As this is an unprecedented case, we have no rule to walk by and, therefore hope the most favourable construction will be put on our con- duct. We have waited thus long in order to be at a greater cer- tainty whether the stamps were to be had or not. As there is not the least possibility of getting them, we must submit to necessity and do without them, or else in a little time people will learn to 'do without them, or us, as no custom-house officer in America dare venture to seize a vessel, even if she came without any papers at all."^^ Seven days later, Charles Stuart, surveyor-general in America, wrote to the commissioners of the customs thus : "All of the distributors of stamps between Halifax and St. Augustine have been compelled to resign their commissions, and no stamp paper can be obtained in all these countries. This has thrown them into great confusion. The courts of law are shut, redress for injuries cannot be obtained, debts recovered nor property secured nor transferred. But the evils necessarily occasioned by a stop to the ""H. of L. Mss., 1, December, 1765, Extract of a letter from the col- lector and comptroller of Philadelphia to the commissioner of the customs. Tr.\de of the Delaware District 297 internal business and police of the colonies, are not equal to the consequences of shutting up their ports at this season of the year. Permit me briefly to enumerate a few of them. Thousands of seamen and others, whose sole dependence is on navigation are not only rendered useless to their country, but deprived of the means of subsistence ; provisions, for which at this time there are large orders, particularly for corn for France and Spain, Portu- gal, the Mediterranean, etc., must perish on hand, while famine may spread through our West Indian Islands, by being suddenly cut off from their usual supplies; Ireland would be greatly dis- tressed for want of flax seed from hence on which her linen manufacture depends ; other articles of produce by which remit- tance may be made are detained in this country, the revenue les- sened, and trade and navigation, the source of wealth and the support of the maritime and commercial nation, entirely stopped, which must be attended with ruin to multitudes and distress to all. These are weighty considerations, but a stronger induce- ment for proceeding to business here and at New York still re- mains. "The officers at both places have by their address and prudence evaded for a full month granting clearances, in hopes that some way would be opened by which they might be extricated out of their difficulties; that time did not pass without strong applica- tion and even threats, which they had great reason to believe would soon become very serious. It is supposed there are now in this port 150 sail of vessels. The frost generally sets in about Christmas, and continues upward of two months. Nothing is more certain than that so great a number of seamen shut up for that time in a town destitute of all protection to the inhabitants, even of militia, would commit some terrible mischief, or rather they would not suffer themselves to be shut up, but would com- pel the officers to clear vessels without stamps. This would un- doubtedly have been the consequences of a few days longer delay, and I need not add it would have been highly imprudent to have hazarded the event. The least evil attending it would in all proba- 298 Smith Coi.i.e;ge; Studies in History bility have been the loss of about five thousand pounds belonging to the revenue of the custom house. """'^ The political opposition became so great that the act was re- pealed in 1766. At the same time changes were made in the sugar act of 1764 which had caused so much discontent. The duty on molasses was lowered to Id. per gallon. Export duties were im- posed upon oriental and French goods, and the colonial import duties on these articles were repealed. Coffee and pimento were charged with import duties when coming into Great Britain, in- stead of the former export duties. *^2 The repeal of the stamp act completely defeated the British ministry in their attempt to raise revenue. There is little doubt but that they were at a loss to find some way to meet the large expense of the elaborate machinery set up in the colonies. Fur- thermore, in spite of the fact that men like Chatham and Burke were pointing out the fallacy of their method, the ministers did not seem to grasp the distinctions which the colonists drew be- tween internal and external taxation. Thinking that he was mak- ing a difference Charles Townshend drew up the act which im- posed duties on glass, paper, painters' colors, red and white lead, and tea.f'"^ It seems strange, if his motive was purely economic, that articles such as glass, paper, painters' colors and lead should be chosen. They were not necessities and the manufacturers of these articles depended largely upon the colonial market. The objections raised against this act were also principally political. It would have meant a slight hardship to pay the duties on account of the lack of specie, but that consideration was in- significant compared with the desire to defeat the underlying principle of taxation. The belief that taxation without repre- sentation was unjust was becoming more widely accepted, and by 1770, had completely eclipsed the economic motive for resistance. " H. of L. Mss., Letter from Charles Stuart, surveyor-general in America to the commissioner of the customs. "=6 Geo. Ill, c. 52. ''7 Geo. Ill, c. 56. Trade of the Delaware District 299 In that year the ministry were compelled to repeal all the duties imposed in 1767 except that on tea."^ The tea duty has received a great deal of attention in accounts of this period of colonial history. It has always been considered as the supreme test of the ability of the colonies to maintain their principles of taxation, and as such has held an important place in their political annals. From the point of view of imperial trade the issue was more complicated. The East India Company and its relation with the home government between 1767 and 1773, gave rise to numerous troublesome questions. ^^ Moreover, the problem demands attention here because the colonial trade was deeply concerned. In order to present the real position of the government and the economic reasons why the act was passed, it is necessary to discuss the fiscal difficulties which arose between the government and the East India Company. In the early part of the eighteenth century the East India Company had become the sole legal carrier of tea to England and her colonies. ^^ The use of tea had become very prevalent, and as a result the company was making enormous profits. In 1767, when it was taken as one of the articles upon which a duty was imposed, the company, in order to extend the home consumption and exportation of tea, applied to the house of commons, "to take ofif for a limited time the inland duty of one shilling per pound weight on all black and single teas consumed in Great Britain, and to allow a drawback on all custom house duties''^ upon tea exported to Ireland and the British dominions in North America for a limited time, and they declared themselves willing to indem- nify the public in respect to the said drawback and inland duty ** 10 Geo. Ill, c. 17. ■^C. O. 5:1283, p. 59. Alaryland Gazette, 25 January, 1770, American opinion concerning the repeal of the revenue act. ** Treasury Solicitor Papers. Bundle 3321. "'Farrand. M., The Taxation of Tea 1767-1773— [Am. Hist. Review, Vol. 3, p. 266.] The custom duties "consisted of the Old and New subsidies, and other subsidies granted at various times, which amounted, in 1767, to £23, 18.y. 7\-2d. on every ilOO of the gross price, or about 24 per cent. Baldwin, Survey of British Customs (London, 1779) Part II, pp. 26-31. 300 Smith College Studies in History taking the said inland duty and the duties of customs so to be drawn back at a medium of five years. "^^ The petition was granted, and, on the first of September, 1768, the treasury appHed for the sum of £57,419 5s. 6d., which according to their account was due from the East India Company. Their method of reckoning was as follows : The net produce of all the duties of customs upon teas for five years ending the 5th of July, 1767 $1,333,346 14^. 9d. The net produce of all the excise duties upon teas for five years ending the 5th of July, 1767 2,261,483 10 5 Total £3,594,830 5^. 2d. Average £718,966 \s. Od. The net produce of all the duties of customs upon teas for the year ending 5th July, 1768.... £382,981 Us. 4d. The net produce of all the duties of excise upon teas for the year ending 5th July, 1768 310,867 5 8 Total £693,849 Os. Od. The net produce of all the duties of customs upon the importation of teas which were exported to Ireland and the British colonies in America for five years ending July 5, 1767, amounted to £161,511 2s. 6d. Average £32,302 4s. 6d. £661,546 15:?. 6d. Amount due from the East India Company £57,419 15.y. 6d. The 'director of the company objected to the accounts on the ground that the duties of customs for the year ending the 5th of July, 1768, were understated. The account drawn up accord- ing to the directors stood thus : °* Treasury Solicitor Papers. Bundle 3321. The company promised to pay the deficit within forty days after the 5th of July in each year, if, after the deduction of the average amount of duties of customs on tea exported from England to Ireland and America, the amount in the exchequer was not equal to the previous average amount. Trade of the Delaware District 301 The net produce of all the duties of customs upon teas for five years ending 5th July, 1767 £1,333,346 Us. 9d. The net produce of all the duties of excise upon teas for five years ending the 5th July, 1767 2,261,483 10 5 Total £3,594,830 5s. 2d. Annual Average £718,966 \s. Od. The net produce of all the duties of customs upon teas for the year ending 5th July, 1768 £441,063 2s. lOd. The net produce of all the duties of excise upon teas for the year ending the 5th of July, 1768 £310,867 5s. 8d. Total £751,930 8s. 6d. The net produce of all the duties of customs upon the importation of teas which were exported to Ireland and the British colonies in America for five years ending the 5th July, 1767, amounted to £161,511 2s. 6d. Average £32,302 4s. 6d. £719,628 4s. Od." Amount due from East India Co 662 3s. Od. The treasury pointed out that the sum of £441,063 2s. lOd. was made up of two parts, duties on importations of teas consumed at home, £382,981 14^-. 4d., and duties upon importation of teas afterwards exported, £58,081 8s. 6d. The company held that since the sum equal to the average annual net produce of the duties paid upon the importation of teas exported to Ireland and America were to be deducted, no other amount ought to be. They considered that, if they had to pay £58,081 8s. 6d., then they were paying twice for the drawback, and to support the argument they quoted the clause beginning "so as the money to be paid by the said company shall not exceed the annual net produce during the five years." To this, the treasury replied : "Suppose the customs upon teas were appropriated to pay annuities and the net produce di- rected to be kept distinct and apart from the other public revenue ''Ibid. 302 Smith College Studies in History for that purpose. In this case it is manifest that the sum of £382,981 2s. lOrf. and not the sum of £441,063 2s. \^d. would be deemed the net produce applicable to the payment of such an- nuities. Examine the books of the customs, excise or salt offices, you will find that drawbacks are not included in the net produce of any revenue. Common sense indeed will teach us that the sum of money which never comes to the use of the public but is returned almost as soon as levied cannot with any propriety of language be called a net produce."'*^ The spirit of the act went against the company as well as the letter. It was evident that the public was in no event to be the loser, but was to receive, during the term of the act, the same in- come from tea, which, the quantities of tea sold continuing the same, it would have received had not the inland duties been dis- continued and had the drawback not been allowed. The test sum which was annually to be made good to the public was a fifth part of five years' receipts of money actually paid into the exchequer and never drawn back."^ The treasury pointed out further that it would be natural to expect the company during the time of the act not only to import an amount sufficient to supply the Irish and American markets for that time, but enough for some years to come, when the draw- backs would cease. The exportation would then be very small for a considerable time. "Suppose," they said, "that the draw- backs upon teas amount communibus annis to £50,000 a year and that in the four remaining years of the bargain there will be tea exported to answer the Irish and American demand for four years after the conclusion of it. In this case it is evident that, besides the loss of £50,000 a year after the drawback is resumed, they will, in the course of the next four years, suffer a diminu- tion of revenue to the amount of £400,000, if the company are permitted to enter their drawbacks into the annual account as net produce of the custom house duties."'^^ '"Ibid. (Treas. Sol. Papers. Bundle 3321). " Ibid. 72 '■ Ibid. Trade; of the Deilaware District 303 It was also claimed that the East India Company defrauded the pubHc considerably by contriving to change their date of sale. Before 1766 the company had always had two sales, September and March, and the annual revenue was £763,062 I4s. lOd. When they learned or believed that the act of 7 Geo. Ill, c. 56, would be passed, they postponed the March sale to August. This made only one sale, in 1767, and caused the average to be computed from nine sales rather than ten. The company answered this charge by saying that the nine sales were larger than the ten dur- ing the five years before 1762, and that they were compelled to put the price very low in order to counteract the smuggling under high prices due to duties."^ During the year ending July 5th, 1768, the government suf- fered considerably by this arrangement. It had been agreed that £718,000 or thereabouts, was the average of all duties before the act. The immense Cjuantity of tea put up for sale in that year, however low the prices were, furnished duties sufficient to make good to the government that sum and some hundred pounds over. Besides, the government had paid in drawbacks £58,000, and had received from the company toward that sum only £32,000. The deficiency on the whole from the average of the foreign duties was £26,000, but towards the deficiency the American duty of 3d. should be taken into account. Nevertheless the government suf- fered and at the same time the company had no deficiency to make good. At the end of the next year the company had to pay £142,000 to make up for the deficiency. The drawbacks were £67,000, but, after the deduction of the £32,000 due to the gov- ernment, there remained only £35,000. In 1770, the government lost £18,500. Nevertheless, during the three years the company had lost through the decrease in the price of tea £600,000, although legal consumption had increased two-fifths; £185,000 had been paid for indemnification and the government was demanding £80,000 as the difference between the drawback and the annual £32,000. It was estimated that the company would be out £850,000 for three years, if the government " Ibid. 304 Smith College; Studies in History won, while the government would not lose a shilling; if, on the other hand, the company succeeded, they would lose £785,000, and the government i80,000. In either case the experiment was a dear one. That was the state of affairs between the government and the East India Company at the close of 1770. Neither the company nor the government was satisfied, and matters did not mend dur- ing the next few years. The difficulty seemed to lie with the North American colonies. After- the repeal of the duties on glass, painters' colors and lead, the disturbances subsided. For a time tea was imported, principally at Boston but the amount was so small that the government revenues were insignificant, and the company steadily lost money. The truth of the matter was that the colonists in general did not need to patronize the company, because they could supply themselves with tea smuggled from St. Eustatius or from Boston, where the merchants were not over conscientious in carrying out the non-importation agreement. Two attempts were made to satisfy all parties concerned. The first, in 1772, arranged that the company should pay £718,000 an- nually into the exchequer, since according to the treasury account the indemnification was never sufficient, and according to the company's table'^'* the company more than indemnified the govern- ment. This arrangement did not aid in the American difficulties and the company was forced to store in English warehouses dur- ing that year 16,000,000 pounds of tea, at one shilling per pound, because of the discontent in- the colonies. Such pressure was brought to bear upon the government that the company was al- lowed the privilege of importing tea directly into the colonies, duty free, on the condition that they would pay over to the gov- ernment a sum equivalent to the former duties. It was hoped that by this method the company would be able to increase their sales appreciably, and at the same time remove the friction be- tween the colonies and the mother country.'''^ 74 I 75 ' cf. Tables, pp. 300-301. Treasury Solicitor Papers, Bundle, 3321. As it worked out through concessions to the East India Co., the colo- nists were paying less for their tea than people in England— See M Farrand— The Taxation of Tea, 1767-1773, p. 269. Trade: of the Delaware; District 305 Shortly after the arrangement was made it became evident that the colonies were not going to accept it. They saw no differ- ence between paying the duty themselves and allowing the East India Company to pay it for them. Led on by this idea, they listened to those, who, for the sake of a principle, were anxious to thwart the plans of the government, and to those — and these were almost as numerous — who through fraudulent means were getting large profits by importing tea from Holland and Boston. '^^ The latter class never lost an opportunity to keep up the fire of indig- nation against the government and the East India Company. The general character of the opposition to the tea act in Amer- ica and the especially vigorous measures adopted in Boston are familiar facts of history. We have only recently come to realize, however, the very important part played by the city of Philadel- phia. The publication of the lengthy correspondence of James and Drinker of Philadelphia, Pigon and Booth of London, and their branch in New York, proves almost conclusively, not only that the resistance originated in Philadelphia, but that the move- ment in other colonies was largely directed by the Philadelphia leaders. Moderate and without excessive ferment, they were able to prevent the landing of tea, although they allowed Captain Ayres to protest, and loaned him a sufficient amount to prepare for a return voyage.'^' Thus it seems that the various acts passed during these ten years had, from the point of view of the ministry, an economic basis. The avowed purpose of the legislation from the beginning was to increase the revenue and in every instance the trade of the empire was the chief consideration. While it is true that some of the demands — for example, the sugar act — if enforced, would have impoverished certain parts of the empire and enriched oth- ers, that was more or less an incident in the general imperial scheme. The difficulties and embarrassments attending the 76 . 77 ' Treasury Boiard Papers, I, 462. Bulletin of Friends' Historical Society of Philadelphia, Vol. II, No. 3 and Vol. Ill, No. 1. Thomas B. Taylor, The Philadelphia Counterpart of the Boston Tea Party. 306 Smith College Studies in History "enumerated" policy were no doubt recognized by those who made the demands, but to counteract the well organized system of smuggling there seemed to be no more effectual method than to make Great Britain the entrepot of the whole empire. On the other hand the resistance to the acts in the Delaware district can be defended on economic grounds. The very nature of the trade and the economic conditions of the district forbade any restric- tions on the West Indian trade. Although an economic pressure upon the trade is discernible only in the sugar and stamp acts, nevertheless the "enumerated" policy, which continued during the entire period except for a few alterations, was the chief cause of the later resistance. It would be impossible to explain except on political grounds the action taken towards the Townshend acts and tea acts. The non-importation agreements must be consid- ered as economic measures taken against the general policy re- flected in these acts, rather than against the acts themselves. CHAPTER III The; Ei^i^e;ct of the British Legisi^ation The numerous letters and pamphlets written by traders and colonists in disapproval of the ministerial program would lead one to conclude that the colonial trade was seriously hampered, that factories were erected in large numbers, that imports and exports rapidly decreased and that the high duties caused a great deal of hardship. There can be no doubt, however, that the evil results were greatly exaggerated. It is possible, by considering the state of manufactures, the custom house statistics of exports and im- ports, and the amount of smuggling during the period, to estimate roughly the real extent to which the legislation was effective. (1) Manufactures The state of manufactures in the colonies after 1763 is one of the best indications of the efifect of the British legislation during this period. This is particularly true in the case of the Delaware district, whose traders were compelled to obtain British manu- factures though circuitous routes. Restrictions placed upon the trade with the West Indies and southern Europe affected their ability to import manufactures quite as much as duties upon goods imported directly from Great Britain. Before 1763, manufactures had gained little headway in the district. The small amount of woolen and linen produced was a sign of poverty. Most of the manufactures were of the house- hold type, the price of labour being so high that it was unprofit- able to establish factories. According to Dickinson, the situation had changed by 1765. He wrote to William Pitt in that year, "Thousands are now in these northern provinces raising flocks of sheep who never had any before ; the price of which animal and their wool have within two years increased upwards of 30%. Beef, pork, wheat and our other produce fall daily in their prices, because the merchants cannot ship these commodities to other markets as formerly, which greatly favors raising of sheep; for 308 Smith Collkge Studies in History instead of fields of wheat, Indian corn, and grazing pastures for our cattle, most will in short time, if things continue as they are at present, be turned into sheep pastures. Fulling mills are erect- ing all over the country, dyers and other workmen are constantly arriving from home. It is the opinion of most people here that more woolen clothes have been made within the last two years than in twenty years together, which real necessity has set on foot. One thing that greatly encourages our manufactures in general is the lowness of wages of late, which are likely still to fall owing to the great scarcity of cash ; the main obstacle of our setting up manufactures formerly being the exorbitant price of labour."! According to Bagnall, a linen manufactory was set up in Philadelphia in 1764. Hemp, flax and land were purchased for this purpose, and some nine hundred persons were employed. A plant of another kind was started by Daniel Mause two years later. He advertised in the Pennsylvania Gazette that he had lately erected a number of looms for the manufacture of thread and cotton stockings, and other kind of hosiery, "hoping the good people of this and neighboring provinces will encourage this his undertaking at a time when America calls for the endeavors of her sons ; and as the goodness of Pennsylvania made stockings is so well known and so universally esteemed, said Mause will work up thread, cotton, worsted, yarn, etc., in the best manner for the country gentlemen or others who may be pleased to employ him for a moderate satisfaction. "^ These instances and a few more represent the efforts made in setting up manufactories in Pennsylvania after 1763. They were at best spasmodic and temporary. John Penn, writing on Janu- ary 27, 1767, said concerning manufactures in his province, "Very little encouragement is given to such schemes, nor do I know of any actually carrying out at this time except two. One of these was set up about three years ago in this city, by private subscrip- ' Chatham Papers, Bun. 97. Dec. 1765. Letters from John Dickinson. 'Bagnall, W. R., Textile Industries. 1789-1810, pp. 51-54. Pennsylvania Gazette, May 1, 1766. Trade of the Delaware District ' 309 tion, for the making of sail cloth, ticking and linens, but the per- sons concerned have already sunk money by their project; for the high price of labour will not allow any of the articles to be made at so cheap a rate as those of the same quality and goodness man- ufactured in England and sold by the retailer here. They have therefore lately resolved to discontinue that undertaking."^ Penn's report differed considerably from that just quoted from Dickinson. The discrepancy between them is partly ac- counted for when the purpose in each case is analyzed. Penn as an official would be anxious to give as favorable an account as possi- ble of his colony ; while Dickinson, who strongly opposed the stamp and sugar acts was eager to give all of the facts their most gloomy aspect. Nevertheless, Dickinson wrote when two acts were in force which were considered by merchants to be pernicious to trade, and Penn's account came after the repeal of one and the partial repeal of the other. Taking all things into consideration, it seems that the legislation of 1763-1765 gave a little stimulus to manufactures in that it drained the district of specie and thus made it more difficult to get money for remittance to England. During the remaining years of this period manufacturing con- ditions remained about the same. There were spasmodic attempts to erect plants of various kinds, but the high price of labor, lack of capital and presence of free lands made manufacturing on a large scale unprofitable. The various attempts to establish manufactories naturally ac- companied a decrease in the importation of manufactures into the district. The merchants, in 1766, in giving evidence as to the inefficacy of the stamp act, claimed that there was a considerable decrease in manufactures sent from England. One house gave the following figures for manufactures sent to New England, New York and Pennsylvania : 1763 il, 131,901 4.y. 4d. 1764 537,614 13 7 1765 404,644 14 10^ 3 C. O., 5 :1281, p. 69. John Penn sent anothre report with the same information on the 13 June, 1768. * Addit. Mss., 33030, f. 163. Examination of Merchants before the House of Lords, 1765. 310 Smith ColIvEge Studies in History (2) Trade Statistics The export and import trade statistics between Great Britain and Philadelphia also show a decided fluctuation during the per- iod. From 1702 to 1763 there was a fairly steady increase in spite of the many wars. After 1763, when the time seemed pro- pitious for a great advancement of trade, the variation was not only greater than in the earlier period, but the high mark of 1760 was never reached again in the colony of Pennsylvania. While it would be too much to assert that this was wholly due to the British trade legislation, the fact that a decrease occurs after cer- tain acts were passed indicates that the trade was affected by them. The greatest decrease of imports from England came dur- ing the years 1764-1766 and 1769-1770.'^ Reasons for the first instance may be found in the sugar act and stamp act, which cut ofif means for getting remittances more than any other acts. The second period covers the years in which the non-importation agreements were most effective. The first instance of a non-importation agreement was in 1765. Soon after the stamp act congress, which presented the po- litical reasons why the act should be repealed, a paper containing six resolutions was passed around in Philadelphia from house to house and from store to store for signers. Among other things it was agreed that the subscribers should countermand all orders for British manufactures, unless they were articles which could be used in American manufactories, and that if goods were imported the sale of them should be prevented. ° It would be difficult to determine what force these resolutions exerted, as the closing of the harbors at Philadelphia between November 1st and December 1st accomplished their object. After the customs officers began to clear vessels without stamped paper the act was for all practical purposes null and void. 'See App. IV. " Pa. Hist. Soc. Mss., An. 340. Non-importation agreement signed by the merchants in Philadelphia 25 Oct. 1765. According to the grandson of William Bradford, one of the principal factors in the movement, this paper was "the first public act in the country declaring resistance to the oppressive acts of the British crown." Trade of the Delaware District 311 No other concerted efforts were made until after the revenue act. In the meantime the quartering of troops in Boston, the ap- pointment of officers out of sympathy with the colonial trade, the suppression of the New York legislature, and the stationing of cutters in the harbors, had added to the flame kindled by the acts passed previous to 1766. On the passage of the revenue act and the establishment of the customs board, attempts were made to in- terest British merchants in the American distress. For this pur- pose associations of economy and non-importation of superflu- ities were formed in most of the northern colonies.' From a letter of New York merchants to merchants in Philadelphia, dated Sept. 1, 1768, it is evident that these attempts were of several months standing.^ They referred to a previous invitation, given to Philadelphia merchants to enter an association of non-importa- tion, and complained that the scheme had fallen short because they had waited for the Philadelphia merchants to act. They consid- ered the time of year most propitious because of the spring or- ders, and were determined to proceed without the aid of Philadel- phia.^ The Philadelphia merchants were the last to enter the associa- tion. John Penn wrote in July, 1770, "The reasons, given by the merchants here for delaying to adopt the measures so long, were because they judged any such rash and untimely resolutions, in- stead of answering the purpose intended by them, would rather irritate the government against them and be the means of frus- trating the design of the petitions, which had been sent by the as- sembly of this province to the king and parliament, and there- fore they thought it most advisable to decline entering into any 'C. O., 5:1283, p. 67. *Pa. Hist. Soc. Mss. Society of Collection Letters from New York Merchants. Broadsides A. B. 1, No. 129. Pa. Hist. Soc. This paper published 25 April, 1768, shows that the Philadelphia merchants were also aroused early in the year. ''C. O., 5:1299. John Penn evidently refers to this letter in his correspondence with Lord Hillsborough, in 1770, when he wrote that attempts had been made as early as September, 1768. 312 Smith Coi^l^ge; Studies in History agreement proposed by them, till they should know the success of these petitions. But afterwards, on hearing they were not likely to have the desired effect, they immediately joined heartily in the general association. "^"^ The merchants of Philadelphia finally agreed on the 10th of March, 1769, that they would also restrict importation. The agreement varied in different colonies, but in general the follow- ing was accepted by all : (1) Nothing was to be imported which was taxed by parlia- ment for the purpose of raising a revenue in America, except pa- per not exceeding six shillings per ream and such articles as had already been ordered. (2) Enumerated goods were not to be imported. (3) Wines were not to be imported. (4) No ewe lambs that would be weaned before the first of May were to be killed. (5) If any enumerated goods were imported, importers, agents and managers were not to be allowed to make use of them. (6) Persons disobeying these articles were to be boycotted. (7) After the expiration of six months none of the enum- erated articles were to be imported from any other colony which had imported them from Great Britain. (8) No tradesman or merchant was to take advantage of the scarcity of these goods to enhance prices. ^^ When it was learned that the house of commons had agreed to pass a bill for the repeal of duties on paper, glass, painters' colors and lead, but that the duty on tea was to be continued, the merchants of Philadelphia had a general meeting to consider the best plan of conduct to be pursued. They desired to wait until '"C. O., 5:1299. Letter from John Penn to Lord Hillsborough, 1770. C. O., 5:1300. Letter from Lord Hillsborough to John Penn in which he said "it would have redounded greatly to the honour of the merchants of Philadelphia, if they had kept to the resolution in which they so long persisted by declining any association against importation from Great Britain." See also Annual Register, 1765, p. 55. N. Y. Col. Doc, VH, pp. 799-800. " C. O., 5:1282, Non-importation agreements. Trade of the Delaware District 313 the 5th of June before taking any steps, that they might learn the sentiments of the merchants of the neighboring colonies and act in concert with them. On the 5th of June another meeting was held, and it was determined that there should be no altera- tion in the agreement which they had entered upon on the 10th of March, 1769.12 The feeling, which existed among the merchants of Philadel- phia at this time, is best shown in a letter written by James Drinker to his partner Abel James on the 29th of April, 1770. "I have heretofore mentioned to thee the restlessness and dissatis- faction of many of the importers under the present agreements ; the pretexts for such uneasiness have been that the burden was unequally borne. While the importers of wine, molasses, etc., were pursuing their trade to considerable advantage and paying large sums into the treasury for revenues raised out of those ar- ticles, the importers of British goods were standing still and sac- rificing all for the public good. That our agreement subjected us in many instances to hardships which the other colonies had in their agreement wisely guarded against. At Boston baize for fishermen was an excepted article. Maryland imports all coarse woolens at or under eight shillings per yard, and are running away with our trade for Indian goods and all others which that price will comprehend. Albany continues importing for their Indian trade; our Indians must be properly and reasonably sup- plied with clothing and other necessaries, which in our present circumstances, the traders must apply for to Maryland or Albany. That in the agreement formed on the 10 March, 1769, a great number of persons signed who were not importers, yet these by the tenor of the agreement, are to determine as to our trade and property, and have a vote in the altering, releasing and annulling the same. It is further urged that so far as we have tried the experiment, it has proved grievous to many, and that a number of '^C. O., 5:1300, Letter written by John Penn to Lord Hillsborough, September 5, 1770. 314 Smith College Studies in History shopkeepers and importers, who have but small capitals, must sink under it if continued another season. "^^ In the spring of 1770 the non-importation agreements began to break. The repeal of the revenue act on April 12th, 1770, without the repeal of the duty on tea, caused a dissension among the American merchants regarding importation. On the 10th of May the principal merchants of Albany wrote to the merchants in New York thus : "We are desired by the merchants of this place to acquaint you that they have this day resolved to make null and void their articles of non-importation entered into last summer, and are agreed to import all sorts of merchandise from Great Britain as before the agreement of non-importation was entered into, except the article of tea which they have agreed not to import till the duty on the same shall be taken off. We hope our resolution may be approved of by the merchants and traders of your place."i4 This news was received with disapprobation by some of the merchants in New York. Isaac Low wrote on the 26th of May to merchants in Philadelphia informing them of the action taken by the Albany merchants and expressing his astonishment at the "hasty and unwarrantable resolution," but he hoped that it would not influence any of the merchants of New York or Phila- delphia.^^ It is quite evident, however, from a letter of Lieutenant Gov- ernor Golden to the Earl of Hillsborough, dated the 16th of May, that there were a number of merchants in New York, Philadel- phia and Boston who were likewise ready to give up the agree- ment. "The merchants in this place and in Philadelphia have under consideration, whether to import goods from Great Britain or not. I am told the majority both in this place and Philadelphia are " Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 14, p. 42. Printed Correspondence of James Drinker to his partner Abel James. " Pa. Hist. Soc. Mss. Society of Collection, Merchants' Letters. " Ibid. Trade of the Delaware District 315 for importing, and that they will come to a determination in a few days. The party in opposition to the present administration join with the people of Boston in measures to prevent importa- tion and for that purpose stole late in the night last week a pro- cession of the mob to expose a Boston importer, who happened to come to this place. The magistrates knew nothing of the de- sign till it was too late, otherwise, I believe it would have been prevented. Tho' the parties are much exasperated against each other, I hope the public peace will be preserved, and the is- sue will be favourable to the government."^ ^ Three weeks later, on the 7th of July, 1770, Golden again wrote to Hillsborough. This letter indicates a wide divergence of opinion existing between the merchants of Philadelphia and New York. He said, "Soon after it was known that the parliament had repealed the duties on paper, glass, etc., the merchants in this place sent to Philadelphia that they might unitedly agree to a general importation of everything except tea. They at first re- ceived a favourable answer, and their agreement to the proposal was not doubted ; but soon after a letter was received at Philadel- phia from a gentleman in England, in whom the Quakers in that place repose the greatest confidence, advising them to persist in non-importation, till every internal taxation was taken off; this changed the measures of Philadelphia; but the principal inhabi- tants of this place continue resolved to show their gratitude for the regard the parliament has in removing the grievances they complained of. As there still remains a restless faction, who from popular arguments, rumours and invectives, are endeavouring to excite riots and opposition among the lower class of people a num- ber of gentlemen went round the town to take the sentiments of the individuals. I am told that 1180, among which are the prin- cipal inhabitants, declared for importation, about 300 were neutral or unwilling to declare their sentiments, and a few of any dis- tinction declared in opposition to it. I am informed likewise that the merchants of this place resolved to acquaint the mer- "N. Y. Col. Doc, Vol. VIII. pp. 214-5. 6 316 Smith College Studies in History chants of Boston and Philadelphia with their inclination to im- port."i7 The "gentleman in England," referred to, was, in all proba- bility, Benjamin Franklin, who was in England at that time. A letter from him as agent for Pennsylvania and Massachusetts, written on the 18th of March, 1770, to a correspondent in Amer- ica, concluded with this remark : "In short it appears to me, that if we do not now persist in this measure until it has had its full effect, it can never again be used on any future occasion with the least prospect of success, and that if we do persist another year we shall never afterwards have occasion to use it."^*' It is impossible to determine whether or not the decision to retain the non-importation agreement in Philadelphia was influ- enced by this letter. It is certain, however, that after receiving word from New York that a majority of the merchants there had resolved to import everything, except tea and other articles on which duties might subsequently be imposed,^''* the inhabitants of Philadelphia, the suburbs and a great number from the country, met in the State House and adopted the following resolutions : "1. That the non-importation agreement entered into by the merchants and traders of the colonies is a safe, peaceable and constitutional way of asserting our rights and, if persisted in, there is reason to believe it will produce the desired effect, and therefore ought to be considered as a bulwark of our liberty. "2. That good effect depends upon perseverance and that strength consists of union. "3. That a breach of the agreement at present cannot be owing to any want of real necessaries, especially in the northern colonies, and that the partial repeal of the American revenue act is no just foundation for deviating from the agreement entered into ; as the claim of right to tax us without our consent is still kept up and the duty on tea retained as a test of that right. "Ibid., p. 217. ^* Smyth, Writings of Benjamin Franklin, Vol. V, p. 254. " Pa. Hist. Soc. Mss. Society of Collection, Letter from Isaac Low and others in N. Y., 26 May. 1770. Trade of the Delaware District 317 "4. That the alteration adopted by a majority of the inhabi- tants of the city of New York is a sordid and wanton defection from the common cause, and that by that defection they have, as much as in them Hes, weakened the pubHc character of America, strengthened the hands of our enemies, and encouraged them to prosecute their designs against our common Hberty. "5. That all the bad consequences that may ensue to the lib- erties of America by their defection are chargeable upon a pre- vailing faction in New York. "6. That as a testimony to the world of our disapprobation of the late measures adopted by that prevailing faction we will break off all commercial intercourse with New York, so far as not to purchase of any of the inhabitants of the colony of New York any goods except alkaline, salts, skins, furs, flax and hemp, until they return to their agreement or until the act of 7 Geo. Ill is totally repealed. And we pledge ourselves each to the others that if we know of any person attempting to bring into this city or province any goods from New York except these above enumerated, that we will immediately give information of them to the merchants' committee, that their names may be pub- lished in the newspapers, provided always that every inhabitant of this place, town and province, who has effects at New York, may have the liberty to remove them from thence, provided it is done within six weeks from this date."-"' The chief advantage of these agreements was that they helped to make the complaints of the merchants against the revenue act more effective. So far as actually diminishing the revenue was concerned, they did not accomplish much, owing to the fact that they were frequently violated. They had scarcely any effect in Boston and Rhode Island, where merchants made little effort to conceal the fact that they imported manufactures from Great Britain. In Philadelphia the association held out the longest, and statistics show considerable diminution of trade; but even here the method of procedure was found to be impossible, on =°C. O., 5:1300. Inclosure dated 19 July, 1770, in a letter from John Penn to Lord Hillsborough. 318 Smith College Studies in History account of non-enforcement in other colonies and the overpower- ing commercial interests of the people. The great increase of imports, in 1771, indicates that the agreements had become a dead letter in Philadelphia. ^^ While the statistics show a decrease in certain years in all manufactured articles imported from Great Britain, except ne- cessities, the trade in other channels seems little afifected. The amount of molasses legally imported was less in 1765, -^ but other- wise the West India trade did not appreciably change. With the exception of the one year, 1769, the tonnage in all the channels of trade does not vary^s in a marked degree. The comparatively slight deviation in the trade statistics is not, however, a proof that the trade of the district did not sufifer from the legislation. After the close of the Anglo-French struggles, when the freedom of the seas was much greater, trade should have increased rapidly in every part of the empire. Furthermore, in determining the effect of the legislation upon trade in the Dela- ware district, the failure of the grain crop in Europe must be taken into account. The first important demand for American wheat was made in the autumn of 1765 and 1766. James Tilgh- man wrote to Thomas Penn on the 10th of November, 1766 — "I believe you will have a very great receipt of money this year. The European demand for our produce is a very favorable cir- cumstance. "^^ The merchants of London who traded with North America felt this situation keenly. At one of their meetings held on the 31st of October, 1766, they drew up the following memorial which states clearly the condition both in Europe and America : "^Appendix lY. ^T., I, 505. The revenue collected in Pennsylvania from the duty on molasses w^as also less in 1765 than it was for the two preceding years: 1763 £165 Os. Od. 1764 1,576 12 6 1765 91 5 "" Customs, 16:1. Tables of the West Indian, the Southern European and the Wine Island trade. ='Pa. Hist. Mss., Vol. X. Trade of the; Dei^aware District 319 "That effectual relief may be obtained by a speedy importa- tion of wheat and flour from the continent of America, where the crops this year have been remarkably plentiful and the grain par- ticularly good in quality. "That from the latest advices from that side, 28th ult. Phil- adelphia, the best wheat might have been purchased and im- ported into this kingdom at or under 33 shillings per quarter in which computation are included, commission for purchasing, charges of shipping, insurance, freight, tonnage and port charge. "That although the price in America may probably advance by the orders which are sent thither for the supply of Italy, there is, nevertheless, great reason to believe it may be purchased in America on lower terms than in any part of Europe. "That for these considerations the undermentioned persons do agree to subscribe the several sums set against their names for the purpose of importing wheat and flour from America. "That a call pro rata, be made on the subscribers as often as money is wanted. "That three vessels be chartered and sail directly for this purpose. "That orders be forwarded by them and several others for the earliest conveyances for purchasing wheat and flour in America, that such a number of vessels be chartered there as may be thought proper. "That the vessels shall be engaged to touch at Falmouth for orders where to proceed to a port of discharge. "That in case the ports of England are opened by govern- ment for the admission of grain from the British plantations, the said vessels shall be ordered to such ports of the kingdom as shall appear from the best intelligences to be in the greatest want of bread-corn. "That all the grain imported shall be sold for the benefit of the manufacturers, mechanics and laborious poor without any profit to the subscribers whatsoever. "That in case the ports of Great Britain should not be opened for the admission of grain from the British plantations, the said 320 Smith College Studies in History ships shall be ordered to such markets as may appear to be the most advantageous to the subscribers."-^ In 1767, the situation was such that wheat was imported from the continent of Europe free of duty,-^ and in the next year an act was found which permitted the importation of wheat from the colonies free of duty. The poor harvests in Europe, during the years 1767, 1769, 1771, made it necessary to continue this act. Thus the abnormal demand came at an opportune time and helped to counteract the difficulties incident to the enumerated policy. (3) Illicit Trade After 1763 Statistics are, after all, very ineffective in measuring the amount of trade under a highly protective system. Smuggling was so prevalent that when allowances have been made for all the vessels which never entered, and the undervaluation of goods which were legally imported, the accounts of the custom officials assume little importance. Consequently the state of illicit trade would be a better indication of the effects of the British legisla- tion, especially upon the trade of this district, than either the number of new manufactures or the fluctuations of the amount turned into the exchequer. One of the chief aims of the new acts was the prevention of illicit trade. The government hoped to secure as much by that means as by the new export and import duties, at least enough to pay for the various colonial establish- ments. With all the carefully worked out details of the new regulation there remained some defects to which the failure of executing the laws may be partially attributed. Among these, one of the most noticeable was the small number of authorized land- ing places. This was a great handicap in the enforcement of such clauses as the one in the act of 7 Geo. Ill, c. 46, which provided "that from, and after, the 20th of November, 1767, the master or other persons having or taking the charge or command of every ship or vessel arriving in any British colony or plantation in America shall before he proceeds with his vessel to the place of "^ Chatham Papers, Bun. 97. 31 Oct., 1766. Merchants' Proposal. ■"7 Geo. Ill, c. 4-11. Trade; of the De;i,aware District 321 unloading, come directly to the custom house for the port, or dis- trict where he arrives, and make a just and true entry upon oath before the collector or comptroller or other principal officers of the customs there, of the burthen, contents and lading of such sloop or vessel."-' It was almost impossible to carry this out, because there were numerous harbors and places without customs offi- ces, where vessels were fitted out and to which they returned to unload and discharge. On one occasion the following questions were asked : 1. "Must a master bring his vessel to a port or district where there is a customs house, and may the officers of the customs re- fuse to admit him to an entry if he does not bring the vessel? Ans. 'Not necessary to bring the vessel in, but the master must apply for admittance before unloading.' 2. "Do these regulations hold for coastwise shipping? Ans. 'No. Only for foreign shipping.' " In the first place, supposing a trader was dishonest enough to carry on illicit trade, it is almost inconceivable that he would cease to be dishonest at the port of entry, when chances were few that a false cocket would be detected. Secondly, if the trader had acted according to the letter of the law and successfully evaded the detection of the customs officials, he was able to pro- ceed in landing the contraband goods with little difficulty. ^^ On the other hand, if there had been officers at the principal landing places to search the vessel carefully, the trader would no doubt have been less courageous in his dishonest pursuits.-'' Duncan Stuart, writing to Thos. Bradshaw on the 13th of February, 1769, from New London, made this point very clear. He said, "The amount of duties collected in one year was £319 3s. 2d. The smallness is owing to several vessels belonging '' T., I, 463. 7 Geo. Ill, c. 46. cf. Chap. I. ^ T., I, 463. The interpretation of this clause also rendered it useless. ^ T., I, 400. On another occasion it was remarked that places existed where there were few outdoor officers, and in such places the indoor officers trusted entirely to the report of the master. 322 Smith College Studies in History to this district having entered their cargoes at Boston, New York and Philadelphia, but there is no doubt with me that it is in great measure owing to a great many goods being run, an evil that in my humble opinion can never effectually be prevented, unless sea vessels (whose burthern ought to be at least 70 tons) are obliged by law to unload at particular quays. But as long as vessels are allowed to land their cargoes at the distance of 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 miles from the custom house, business is and must be carried on in a very loose manner, and all endeavors to check it are in vain."3o The opinion of Jonathan Sewall, attorney-general of Massa- chusetts Bay, given on the same date, is worth considering as it applies to the Delaware district as much as to Massachusetts. He believed "that England should appoint officers at one or more ports in every province, but the boundaries of few or none of the ports have been ascertained by any authority whatsoever. Trade not being confined to the places where the officers reside but being carried on at places convenient to the merchants, vessels with dutiable goods often arrive at points remote, the master proceeds by land and makes report and entries at the customs house and often never comes near the customs house at all, and as little credit can be given to the report and entry, the revenue is often defrauded and gives opportunity to the merchants to run any part of the cargo with impunity."^^ Soon after this an in- vestigation was made concerning the towns, districts and ports of America, but nothing was done towards improving the condi- tions. ^^ The fee system was another fault, which had been only par- tially corrected, when salaries were given to the chief officer of the vice-admiralty. Although a fee was defined by law as a "gra- tuity given to an officer over and above his salary to excite him to a diligent performance of his duty,"^^ it meant a dependence ™T., I, 399, Feb., 1769. " Ibid. 32 Cf. Chap. I, p. 244, note 10. Addit. Mss., 15484. " C. O., 5:1273, Act regulating fees for custom-house officers. T., I, 471. Nov. 14, 1767. Trade of the; Delaware; District 323 because the salaries were very small. The officers under a highly protective system were either aiding in the illicit trade by granting false certificates, or they were in danger of suffering from in- sufficient fees. The amount of fees was ascertained in three different ways, by act of parliament, by custom, and by verdict of jury. At- tempts were made, in 1765, to determine fees by law. The clause which concerns the customs house fees opens with the words "and in order to prevent any disputes concerning what fees the officers of His Majesty's customs in the British colonies or planta- tions in America may be entitled to for making entries or other business done by them in the execution of their employment." The fact that a table of fes was not given proves that it was to stand upon no positive law or authority. The law merely states that they should receive the same fees as their predecessors, un- less they were exorbitant or contrary to an act of parliament. The fees generally taken by the naval officer at Philadelphia were: Entering and clearing vessel £1 7s. Od. Bill of health if required 6 Making a bond for enumerated goods 5 Certificate for cancelling such bond 5 Certificate for taking naval stores to Great Britain 5 For Governor's let passes for vessels above 60 tons 12 For Governor's let passes for vessels under 60 tons 10 0"' The fees of the collector and comptroller, the only other officers who received fees, were : Collector Comptroller Entering and clearing vessels £1 7s. Od. £0 9s. Od. Bill of health if required 6 2 Certificate for cancelling bond 5 10 Register and recording the same 14 General permit for goods shipped on board in shallop 2 T., I, 482, 7 Mar., 1771. List of fees. 324 Smith College Studies in History Collector Comptroller Port entry £0 5s. Od. Bill of stores 2 6 Certificate for Great Britain 5 £0 Is. 8d. Certificate for naval stores 5 There is a wide discrepancy in the accounts concerning the officers^^ in the Delaware district and their relations with the traders. John Penn, in transmitting the above lists of fees to John Robinson, a member of the customs board at Boston, re- marked, "The collector informs me that the merchants of this port have always cheerfully paid the fees expressed in the list, ex- cept that about twelve months ago, a number of them objected to some part of them in which, upon a conference with him on the subject, they afterwards acquiesced and have ever since paid them."36 This report indicates harmonious relations between the cus- toms officers and the traders. Nevertheless, it should not be taken too literally. Letters from governors of different pro- vinces show that the home authorities were continually getting word from the merchants that there were many obstructions in the way of customs officers exerting their duties, and yet the gov- ernors seemed incapable of assisting them in time to be of any use. Often they reported that they had heard of none in their re- spective colonies. A correspondence between Lord Hillsborough and the proprietors of Pennsylvania shows to what extent ob- structions at Philadelphia were known, or perhaps it would be more accurate to say, reported by the governor of Pennsylvania. Hillsborough wrote on the 19th of July, 1771, to the proprietors of Pennsylvania: "The lord commissioners of His Majesty's treasury have communicated to me several papers, received from the commissioners of customs in America relative to certain out- rages committed on their officers, and the neglect of the governor and civil magistrates in giving them assistance and protection, and their lordships have desired that I would take such measures 'T., I, 482, 1 Feb., 1771. C. O., 5:1300, Report of John Penn. Trade of the Delaware; District 325 as I shall judge most expedient, to prevent in such governors and civil magistrates the like neglect of their duty for the future. "From these papers it appears that some of the most violent of these outrages have been committed in the city of Philadelphia, particularly in the months of April and October, 1769, on occasion of lawful seizures made by the officers of the customs, when such seizures were rescued by force and violence, and the officers and those from whom they received information of breaches of the law were treated with the greatest cruelty and inhumanity in the presence of the magistrate who gave them no assistance. It has given me great concern to find such acts of violence and inhu- manity in a colony, from which I have received such strong pro- fessions of loyalty and duty to the king, and in a city hitherto deservedly commended for the regularity of its government."^'^ When John Penn was informed concerning this letter, he wrote in a very characteristic manner that he regretted extremely these acts of violence, but he assured Hillsborough that the complaints were unfairly represented, that officers had nothing of which to complain, and that the colony was among the first in loyalty to the king. The latter part of his letter is in itself an admission of unsatisfactory trade conditions in the district. He said that it was almost impossible to prevent mob outrages, and that the back- wardness of the people to become informers added to the diffi- culty of prosecuting the leaders. ^^ The affair of October, 1769, may stand on its own merits. Mr. Swift, the collector of Philadelphia, was informed that 39 pipes and 10 quarter casks of Fayal wine had been landed without paying duty. When the informer was discovered, he was tarred and feathered and dragged over stones. The magistrates took no notice of this. In the trial they put the blame on the collector and said that he had been bribed, but the collector denied the charge, and stated that he had told the informer that he would "C. O., 5:1284, Letter from Lord Hillsborough to the Proprietors of Pennsylvania, 19 July, 1771. ''Ibid., Letter of John Penn to Hillsborough, 24 Dec, 1171. Also in C. O., 5 :1300. 326 Smith College Studies in History pay him lOs. per pipe in case the seizure was made. When the people heard this they were incensed and threatened Mr. Swift himself, who, fearing that the king's money might be in danger, turned over to the cashier of the port £1,186 18^. 14c?. sterling, endorsed by Mr. Meredith, the wealthiest merchant in Phil- adelphia. Supposing that the facts in this case were true, and there is every probability that they were, several deductions might be drawn from them in the light of the correspondence just men- tioned. In the first place, it is evident that there was consider- able friction between the customs officials and the people as well as the traders. Secondly, when a case came up which was so obvious that the collector could scarcely let it pass and maintain even the appearance of doing his duty, the results were so pain- ful that there was little incentive to repeat the effort. Duncan Stuart was thoroughly justified when he said, "If I make a seiz- ure the stores are broken open, the goods are taken away, and woe to him that would make a discovery." Thirdly, when such a case came up and outrages were committed, the governor passed over the incident in his reports as of little importance and said that his people were free from any "illegalities" and "offered no obstructions to trade. "^^ A case arose, between 1770 and 1772, which is illustrative of the difficulties experienced by the collectors when they attempted to make seizures. ■**^ John Hatton was the collector at Salem and Cohensey in 1770. It was actually known by him that ships were arriving, and that pilot boats were unloading, and secreting con- traband goods, before the vessels made a formal entry. Every attempt to make a seizure was met with violence, and he received no assistance from the officers and magistrates, who were them- selves helpers, because the people sanctioned the smuggling. On one occasion, the 8th of November, 1770, Hatton seized a pilot boat off Cape May, which was laden with contraband goods from ="• T., I, 471, 24 Oct., 1769. ^'The Case of John Hatton. T., 482, Dec. 25, 1770; T., 491, Jan. 17, 1771. Trade of the; Delaware: District 327 the Prince of Wales. While doing this he was violently assaulted by a number of armed men from the Prince of Wales, who took the pilot boat out of his possession and robbed and dangerously wounded him, his son, and others on board with him.^^ His slave was taken prisoner and a little later, on land, his son was asaulted a second time, when, in company with the son of John Swift, he was attempting to find the pilot boat.^2 Hatton pro- tested to the governor of New Jersey, and a month later wrote to the commissioners of the customs at Boston that he had been most basely treated while performing his duty. He also said that he was well informed that a set of merchants at Philadelphia had given a considerable amount of money to officers of the province, in order to gain any point they wished, and that they had made the Cape their "staunch store" for contraband goods. Although the governor issued a proclamation for the arrest of the nine men who were supposed to be involved in the afifair, nothing was really accomplished. One of the principal offenders, a man by the name of Hughes, was imprisoned, but, owing to the fact that he was a nephew of one of the justices, he was almost immediately released on bail. On the whole, the proclamation was a very perfunctory proceeding on the part of the governor, who did all he could a little later to injure Hatton in a communi- cation to the board of customs at Boston. On the 10th of April, 1771, he wrote that Hatton had a violent temper, was arrogant, and threatened to make unfavorable reports of officers who did not strictly obey his instructions. ■^^ He charged him with com- plicity with the worst smugglers in Philadelphia, saying that no doubt Mr. Hatton would have made no mention of illicit trade if the seamen had offered him money. The governor said that Hat- ton had been "guilty of unwarranted practices in his office and had given encouragement and assistance to the most noted smug- glers to a great detriment of the king's revenues, notwithstanding which you have suffered him to continue in office and have not, "T., I, 491, 17 Jan., 1771. <2 rr\ I, 476. *^T., I, 491, 10 April, 1771. 328 Smith College Studies in History at least as I can learn, even shown any marks of your disapproba- tion of his conduct. Had I not known that the inspector general, after a strict examination into the matter, had made such a report to you, I should myself have suspended Hatton from acting in his office till further orders from proper authority. But as you were made fully acquainted with his conduct and it was a matter over which you had particular superintendency, I was unwilling to interfere, more especially as I had a right to expect that you would have thought yourself in duty bound after receiving such information to remove him from his office in the customs."'*^ No aid whatever was given in the Prince of Wales case by the collectors in the other ports of the district. Mr. Hatton com- plained that the collector at Burlington, Mr. Read, always inter- fered with the exercise of his duties. Since Read was one of the three chief justices of the province, for which position he received a salary from the assembly, it was more to his interest to consider the wishes of the people than to perform his duty as collector. The officers at Philadelphia excused themselves by saying that it seemed none of their business, since the vessel had a proper clearance and entry. An entry had been made at Philadelphia on the 10th of November that Brennen and Postlethwaite had shipped 7,188 bushels of white salt and 24 chaldrons of coal from Liver- pool to Philadelphia in the Prince of Wales.^^ The case came up again and again. It was discussed in the several courts and ordered out of first one and then another. Mr. Kemper, one of the judges of the civil courts, said that it was a matter of prudence rather than of law as to how far he should proceed. Andrew Allen, the attorney-general of Pennsylvania, decided that the case could not be tried in the ordinary courts except on the grounds of personal injury. In that capacity re- dress from one or all the offenders could be obtained. He also pointed out difficulties in bringing the case up in the vice-ad- miralty courts. So far as breaches of the laws of trade were concerned, they could undoubtedly be tried in that court, but only " Ibid. " T., I, 476. Trade of the Delaware District 329 if suit were brought within the year. As it was then the 28th of October, 1771, there was Httle time before the expiration of the year. As to the damages, he said "The different judges that have for many years past presided in the courts of the vice-admiralty here, who have also been gentlemen of high repute in law, have invariably laid it down as a rule not to determine any suit, which have sounded merely in damages without calling in the assistance of a jury to ascertain the quantum of damages. "^"^ The result was that Hatton did not succeed in winning a single point. It is little wonder that few cases came up in these courts, when one so obvious as this, with the facts not disproved, could do nothing more than bring odium upon the collector. In the reform of the vice-admiralty it was expressly stipulated that it should have complete jurisdiction over all matters concerning seizures, and it was contrary to the purpose of the reform that there should be any difficulty in obtaining a hearing. Instead of hearing fewer cases it was supposed to have cognizance over more. The chief reason for this state of affairs was again the lack of salaries. The officers below the judge in each court were com- pelled to engage in other pursuits, and thus they were dependent upon the people. This defect was particularly noticeable after the discontent in the colonies became so marked. The officers did not dare to consider cases contrary to the wishes of the people, upon whom they were dependent for their livelihood. Richard Reeves, one of the commissioners at Boston, wrote on the 25th of August, 1772, to John Robinson, a member of the London cus- toms board, concerning the apathetic condition of the vice-ad- miralty court in the Delaware district. He said that the attorney- general of Pennsylvania had refused to undertake any prosecu- cutions for penalties incurred by persons aiding in the running of goods, and that there was neither solicitor nor advocate general in Philadelphia. In order to explain the position of the attorney- general, he inclosed a letter from the collector of Philadelphia, dated the 7th of the preceding June: "Upon several seizures "T., I, 471. 330 Smith Colle;ge; Studie;s in History lately made here we have frequently applied to the attorney gen- eral to prosecute for penalties incurred, and on finding his neg- lect therein, we thought proper to demand of him a reason, and his direct answer whether or not he would do it, to which he has replied (after taking a long time to consider it) that, as he had no salary from the crown to make him independent, he could by no means undertake any prosecutions of that kind which would injure him greatly in his business as a lawyer, and therefore he must beg leave to decline it. We are informed that all the law- yers here have combined not to undertake any of the like prosecu- tions. Indeed we have been told, whoever did, would meet a worse fate than ever the informers have done. This being the case, we hope the board will not impute it to any neglect of duty or inattention to their commands that those prosecutions have not been instituted."'*^ This letter is sufficient to show that only a few of the many cases of smuggling ever reached the vice-admiralty court. As an example of their decision upon cases which did come up, that of the sloop Riihy may be given. On the 30th of July, 1772, the col- lector and the comptroller informed the board that they had made a seizure of the Ruby from Cape Nicola Mole, for trading with- out a register. The sloop contained 134 casks of molasses from Hispaniola, worth 16c?. per gallon, or £999 Ss. Ad. The vessel was navigated chiefly by foreigners and the property itself was for- eign. About a month later, the collector and the comptroller is- sued a writ of delivery for the vessel and goods. ^^ As instances of this kind had happened many times, and as such practices (ex- cept cases allowed by 14 Chas. II, ch. II, sec. 30) were very detri- mental to the revenue and a great discouragement to the officer, it was thought that the case was of prime importance. The case came up in the court of vice-admiralty and was prose- cuted by James Biddle, the deputy judge of the court. The ver- dict went against the officers of the customs, and the sloop with " T., I, 491, Letter of Richard Reeves to John Robinson, 25 Aug., 1772 with enclosure. '^ Ibid., Letter of Richard Reeves. 17 Sept., 1772. Trade of the; Delaware District 331 her cargo was returned to the owner, Emmanuel Roderick. The collector and the comptroller objected strenuously to the decision but with no avail. This Emmanuel Roderick claimed to be a resi- dent of Rhode Island, but it could not be proved that he had been naturalized. He said that he took a cargo to Hispaniola in a ves- sel called the Hopestill, which was entirely owned by him, was English manned, and was built in Rhode Island. In return for the cargo he purchased from this island 134 casks of molasses. Before his return he discovered at the port of Limberg in the same island that his vessel would not stand a return voyage. He then sold it much to his loss, and waited for an English vessel, but as no English vessel came and he was afraid that his molasses would spoil, he finally bought the sloop Ruby which had been built and registered in Virginia, although the register was lost. As many of his seamen had left the island, only the master and a few negroes being left, and as no Englishmen were available, he was obliged to man the sloop with foreigners. He had no in- tention of smuggling, but meant to explain all of this at Philadel- phia, obtain a new register for the sloop, and pay the duty on foreign molasses. ^^ Roderick's defense is plausible, but extremely improbable. At a time when almost every other man was a smuggler or interested in smuggling, it would be necessary to prove more conclusively every part of his story than to have his oath. He knew what risks were involved and should have been willing to suffer the consequences. If such instances were allowed to go unpunished, it was impossible to put any effective check upon illicit trade. The case is particularly suspicious in that the vessel came from His- paniola. This island, especially Cape Nicola Mole, was, as in the earlier period, a notorious smuggling center. Almost every ves- sel, which went to Jamaica laden with provisions and lumber, cleared for Cape Nicola Mole to purchase a cargo of sugar, coffee and molasses, with the money which they received from the Ja- maica merchants. It was also one of the bases for European ^'' T., I, 491, 10 Aug., Claim and Answer of Emmanuel Roderick. 7 332 Smith College; Studies in History manufactured goods during the time when merchants were at- tempting to do without manufactures imported via England.^" In fact, in every route the regulations and laws were increas- ingly disregarded. Trade continued, as before, to follow the natural channel, and for all practical purposes this district en- joyed free trade. This condition of affairs was clearly brought out in a report on a bill for regulating the trade in North Am- erica in 1773. It was urged that greater care should be taken to compel owners of provincial built ships to register them, to com- pel vessels to be brought into port for examination and to require greater discrimination in seizures on the part of the officers, so that the fair trader would not be discouraged. In the latter part of the report, however, which stated the grievances of the offi- cers, the reasons why the trade legislation had been such a fail- ure are fully explained. The officers complained, (1) that the heavy charges of the provincial courts of the admiralty kept many cases from being tried, the expense of prosecution of petty seiz- ures often being a greater charge than the goods; (2) that com- bination among the people prevented the sale of goods which were seized, in order that the smuggler could buy them in again at a low rate; (3) that there were very few crown lawyers in some ports, and that little assistance was given by those who were there, because they had no salaries. '"C. O., 5:119, 6 May, 1773, Letter from G. B. Rodney to Phillip Stephens. CONCLUSION There is little doubt that the legislation which has been dis- cussed was an economic necessity from the point of view of the empire, but it is equally true that it was economically untenable in the Delaware district. As has been pointed out, the trade of this district depended upon circuitous routes which were prac- tically forbidden by the "enumerated policy." In order to carry on trade with any advantage after the enactment of the legislation, the merchants and traders were compelled to resort to illegal methods on a much larger scale than ever before. This was, however, not a protest against protection per se, because the dis- trict itself was committed to that principle. It was merely a pro- test against this particular form of imperial protection. As the political controversies superseded the economic, illicit trade was condoned by all except the few appointees who were financially interested in enforcing the law. The result was that the authority of the vice-admiralty courts and custom houses of the district was completely nullified, and such conditions of free trade existed as to make the period for the individual traders more prosperous than any previous one. On the other hand, the British govern- ment had expended large sums to reorganize the protective sys- tem with the expectation of increasing the revenue by more ade- quate restrictions. When, therefore, the regulations became in- effectual through illicit trade, the government's loss of revenue was tremendous, and the increased expenditure for equipment proved to be a worthless experiment. Compelled to yield one point after another, the government finally realized that it would have to abandon the protective policy altogether, or enforce its laws by militant methods. BIBLIOGRAPHY MANUSCRIPTS A. Public Record Office, London, England. I. Admiralty Office Papers. a. Class I. In Letters. 1. Letters from the British Consuls, Bundle 3837. 2. Letters from the Custom House, Bundle 3866. b. Class IL Out Letters. 1. Letters relating to the Admiralty and Vice- Admiralty courts, Bundle 1057. IL Audit Office Papers. a. Accounts Various, Bundle 1391. III. Chatham Papers, Bundles 97 and 343. VI. Colonial Office Papers. a. Class V. Original Documents, Bundles 38:67; 112:- 221:511; 573; 710; 851; 1133; 1228*; 1233*; 1263*; 1265*-1268*; 1270*; 1273*; 1275*; 1277*; 1280*; 1284*; 1288*-1292; 1299*; 1300*; 1499*. b. Class XXXIII. Shipping Returns from Barbadoes, Bundle 17. c. Class LXXVI. Shipping Returns from Dominica, Bundle 4. d. Class CXLII. Shipping Returns from Jamaica, Bundle 19. e. Class CCCXC. Board of Trade Commercial 1688-1792, Bundle 5. f. Class CCCXC. Board of Trade Journal, Bundle 10. V. Custom House Papers. a. Custom House Series. 1. Accounts. (a) Ledger of Imports and Exports, 1764- 1765. b. Custom House Miscellanea, 16. VI. Domestic State Papers. a. Entry Book Classified, Book 140. VII. Pipe Office Papers. a. Declared Accounts. 1. Customs, 1765-1770. Rolls, 1264-1265. VIII. Treasury Board Papers. a. Class I. In Letters. Original Correspondence, Bun- dles, 351; 399; 400; 451; 462; 463; 471; 476; 482; 491. * Some of the references to these bundles were among the extracts made by Mr. G. L. Beer. Trade of the Delaware District 335 b. Class II. Out Letters. 1. Customs, Vols. 27, 28. 2. Various XVIII, Vol. I. c. Class VII. Miscellanea Various — Shipping Returns, Bundle 45. IX. Treasury Solicitor Papers. a. State of the question between the Treasury and the East India Company respecting the tea-duties, Bundle 3321. B. Custom House, London. I. Custom House Establishment Books, Sept. 8, 1767, Jan. 5, 1776. 29 Vols. C. House of Lords, London. I. House of Lords Mss. Collection dated 1763-1775. D. British Aluseum, London. I. Additional Mss. 15,484, 33,030 and 37,021. E. Friends Reference Library, London. I. Collection of Mss. 4 — Letters to and from Philadelphia, 1757. F. Pennsylvania Historical Society, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. I. Custom House Papers, 1704-1713. II. Society of Collection — Letters of Merchants. III. Penn. Letter Book IX. IV. Penn. Mss., Vol. X. V. Pennsylvania Historical Society Mss. PRINTED SOURCES A. Records. I. Charter of William Penn and Laws of the Province of Penn- sylvania from 1682-1700. Published by J. B. Linn, Harris- burg, Pennsylvania, 1879. II. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania. 16 Vols. ed. by Samuel Hazard, Philadelphia, 1852. III. Documents relative to the Colonial History of New York, VII. 11 Vols. ed. by E. B. O'Callaghan, xMbany, New York, 1856. IV. Pennsylvania Archives. 1st Series. 12 Vols. ed. by Samuel Hazard, Philadelphia, 1852-1907. 2d Series. 19 Vols. ed. by W. H. Egle and J. B. Linn, Harrisburg, 1874-93. 3d Series. 30 Vols. ed. by W. H. Egle and G. E. Read, 1897-1898. 4th Series. 12 Vols. ed. by G. E. Read, Harrisburg, Pa., 1900. V. Statutes of the Realm to 1713. 12 Vols. London, 1810-1828. VI. (British) Statutes at Large. 109 Vols. ed. by Danby Pickering, London, 1762. 336 Smith College Studies in History VII. Statutes of Pennsylvania at Large. 14 Vols. ed. by J. T. Mitchell and Henry Flanders, Harris- burg, Pa., 1896-1910. VIII. Votes and Proceedings of the House of Representatives of Pennsylvania, Vol. III. 6 Vols. Philadelphia, 1752-1776. B. General Works. I. Chalmers, George, Introduction to the Revolt of the Colonies. 2 Vols. Boston, 1845. II. De Bow, J. D. B., The Industrial Review of the Southern and Western States. 3 Vols. New Orleans, 1852-3. III. Ford, P. L., Writings of John Dickinson. (The Historical Society of Pennsylvania Memoirs. Vol. XIV.) Phila- delphia, 1895. IV. Macpherson, David, Annals of Commerce, Manufactures, Fisheries, and Navigation, with brief notices of the arts and sciences connected with them. 3 Vols. London, 1805. V. Pitkins, Timothy, A Statistical View of the Commerce of the United States of America. New York, 1817. VI. Smyth, A. H. (Editor), Writings of Benjamin Franklin. 10 Vols. New York, 1905. C. Pamphlets.* I. Bernard, Governor, Select Letters on the Trade and Govern- ment of America. Boston, 1774. II. Pownall, Thomas, Administration of the Colonies. London, 1768. in. Smith, William, A Brief State of the Province of Pennsyl- vania in 1755. New York, 1764. IV. Anonymous, Observations of the Merchants at Boston on the Several Acts of Parliament respecting American Com- merce and Revenue. Boston, 1770. D. Newspapers and Magazines. I. The Annual Register. Vol. VIII. 158 Vols. London, 1758-1914. II. Pennsylvania Magazine of History. Vol. IV. Edited by the Historical Society of Pennsylvania. 38 Vols. Philadelphia, 1877-1914. III. Pennsylvania Gazette. Edited by Benjamin Franklin, Philadelphia, 1729-1766. *A splendid collection of pamphlets may be fonud in All Souls Library, Oxford, England, where there are thirteen volumes of the most important pamphlets written between 1760-1776. Trade of the Delaware District 2)2>7 IV. Broadsides. (Historical Society of Pennsylvania.) A. B. I., No. 129. SECONDARY WORKS A. General Histories. I. Hanna, C. A., The Wilderness Trail. 2 Vols. New York, 1911. n. Madison, James, Letters and Other Writings. New York, 1889. HI. Osgood, Herbert L., The American Colonies in the Seven- teenth Century. 3 Vols. New York, 1904-7. IV. Rossiter, William, A Century of Population. Philadelphia, 1894. V. Swank, James Moore, History of the Manufacture of Iron in all Ages and particularly in the United States from Colonial Times to 1891. Philadelphia, 1892. B. Monographs. I. Bagnall, W. R., The Textile Industries of the United States. 2 Vols. Cambridge, 1893. II. Bean, Theodore W., History of Montgomery County. Phila- delphia, 1884. III. Beer, G. L., a. The Commercial Policy of England towards the Ameri- can Colonies. Columbia University Studies III, No. 2. b. British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765. New York, 1907. c. The Origins of the British Colonial System, 1578-1660. New York, 1908. d. The Old Colonial System. Part I. 2 Vols. New York, 1912. IV. Bishop, J. L., A History of American Manufactures from 1608-1860. 2 Vols. Philadelphia, 1861-1864. V. Giesecke, A. A., American Commercial Legislation before 1789. Philadelphia, 1910. VI. Goss, John Dean, The First Stages of the Tariff Policy of the United States from Colonial Times to the McKinley Administration Bill. Columbia University Studies in History, Economics and Politics. Vol. I., No. 2. New York, 1891. VII. Lincoln, C. H., The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsyl- vania. University of Pennsylvania. Philadelphia, 1901. VIII. Lord, E. L., Industrial Experiments in the British Colonies of North America. (Johns Hopkins University Press.) Baltimore, 1898. C. Articles. I. Andrews, C. M., Colonial Commerce. (The American His- torical Review, Vol. XX, pp. 43-63.) New York, 1915. 338 Smith College Studies in History II. Farrand. M., The Taxation of Tea, 1767-1773. (The Ameri- can Historical Review, Vol. Ill, pp. 266-269). New York, 1898. III. Fisher, W. C, American Trade Regulations before 1789. (Papers of the American Historical Association, Vol. Ill, pp. 223-249.) New York, 1889. IV. Smith, W. R., Sectionalism in Pennsylvania during the Revo- lution. (Political Science Quarterly, Vol. XXIV, pp. 208- 235.) New York. V. Taylor, Thomas B., The Philadelphia Counterpart of the Boston Tea Party. (Friends' Historical Society Bulletins Nos. 2 and 3.) Philadelphia, 1913. ' VI. Morriss, U. S., Colonial Trade of Maryland, 1689-1715. (Johns Hopkins University Studies, Series XXXII.) Baltimore, 1914. VII. Root, W. T., The Relations of Pennsylvania with the British Government, 1696-1765. Philadelphia, 1912. MAPS A. Eshleman, H. Frank. Map of the Earliest Highways leading from the Delaware and Schuylkill Rivers to the Susquehannah River and its branches. Lancaster, Pa., 1907. B. SchuU, Nicholas, Map of Pennsylvania, 1759. Pennsylvania Archives, 3rd Series, App. I-IX. C. Scull, William, Map of Pennsylvania, 1770. Ibid. CALENDARS A. Andrews, C. M., and Davenport, Frances G., Guide to the Manu- script Materials for the History of the United States to 1783, in the British Museum, in Minor London Archives, and in the Libraries of Oxford and Cambridge. Washington, D. C, 1908. B. Andrews, C. M., Guide to the Materials for American History to 1783 in the Public Record Office of Great Britain. 2 Vols. Washington, D. C, 1912-1914. APPENDICES APPENDIX I An account of goods and merchandise imported Pennsylvania from Christmas 1699 to Christmas 1700 Quantity Cwt. Quarter Lbs. Grocery — Ginger dry 2 Molasses 177 Rice 7 Sugar Brown 4 Indigo Skins — Bear, black Beaver Buck in hair Cat Elk Fisher Fox Mink Musquash Otter Raccoon Wolf Braziletto 5 Tobacco Whale fins 5 At Value- Cow horns Buck skins into England from Customs iO Us. Od. 1 13 11 4 2 3 5 13 7 . 130 1 6 7 . 452 64 2 7 . 121 5 14 5 . 516 9 3 1 . 826 2 6 10 14 19 11 96 3 8 1 . 1322 12 10 4^ . 783 8 6 8 . 2163 7 13 5 . 116 3 2 3 . 4721 16 4 6 . 173 26 4 6 '. 64,791 1414 6 6 . 7 3 VA 7 4% 9 16 9J4 *C. O. 5:1291. This list was signed, Walter Cox. APPENDIX II EXPORTS FROM PENNSYLVANIA TO LONDON IN ENGLISH SHIPS, 1764-1765* Amount Merchandise Tons Cwt. Qtr. Lbs. Estimat Ashes Pott 7,989 At 3d. lb. Copper Ore 113 3 24 At 2/6 cwt. Castoreum .. 11 At 4-6.y. lb. Cort'x Elutheria . . 25 2 27 At 28-32J. lb Winteranus . . 8,980 At 2-3d. lb. Gum Copal .. 393 At 9-nd. lb £99 \7s. 3d 14 4 9 2 15 38 12 6 93 10 10 24 10 2 * Customs, III, 65. 340 Smith College Studies in History Amount Merchandise Tons Cwt. Qtr Oyl Chymical . . Sassafras Rad. Serp'ntaria Sarsaparilla . . . Sperma Cati 50 Sassafras 2 Turpentine 875 Elephants Teeth . . 3 Groc. Pimento. Rice 1171 Indigo Iron Bar 54 19 Pig Iron 170 17 Oil Train 94 2 Pitch and Tar.. 210 lasts Rozin 12 Skins : Bear, Black.. 1,178 Beaver 81 Pelts 1,382 Buck, deer hair 10,397 Calabor Cat 1,480 Coney 14 Deer 208 Elk n Fisher 252 Fox, Ord'y .. 1,802 Martin 143 Lbs. 203 19 130 150 Estimated first cost or value 2 1 10 2 . . 1,479 3 21 . . 2,500 2 9 8 32 gals. 7 bbls. 2 No. Nos. lb. No. Mink 10,848 Musquash . . . Otter Panther Raccoon .... Wolf Spirits, Rum . . Sturgeon Wax, Bees .... Whale Fins.... Wine, Madeira Boat Boards... Brazielletto . . . Cedar Planks.. Fustick Oak Planks.... Logwood Mahogany .... Plank Pine Boards . . Walnut 9.258 2,439 2 2,428 81 2,894 Gals. 214 Kegs 180 cwt. 1 gr. 4 et. 5 cwt. 3 gr. 12 et. 64 tons 3:11 13,000 Feet 3 Tons 35 No. 94 Tons 65,000 Feet 184 Tons 5 Tons 509 No. 6 No. 305 Logs At 4-6.y. lb. 50 At 6-8.y. cwt. At 2-3.y. lb. 16 At \\-\M. lb. 7 At 5-8£ lOd. cwt. 7 At 6-8j. cwt. At 9-ll.y. cwt. 437 At 4/10-7i cwt. 18 At ^-Id. lb. 36 At 14-18.y. cwt. 937 At 12-18rf. lb. 156 At 9/10-10£ 10.f. ton At 18-22.?. ton At ll-13i ton At 8-10£ last At 8-lO.y. cwt. At 6-7^. At 3-4.f. At 20-40.?. At 2-2>s. 100 No. At 2 At 10-14d. Doz. At 12-18 At 6-7.?. At 6-8(/. At 14-6d. At 7-9rf. At 20-21(f. At 5-7d. At 3-4.?. At 20.?. At 5-7d. At 4-6 At 20d. Gall. At 3-4j. Keg At 45-55.?. cwt. At 7-9£ cwt. At 19-23£ Ton At \d. At .6-8£ Ton At 5.?. At 8-10£ Ton At 2d. At 10-14i At 7-9£ At 20.?. At 30.?. At 20j. 170 1,135 1,895 5 36 14 1,299 3 12 13 25 7 112 4 994 231 426 2 60 20 241 37 450 46 1,360 54 21 846 541 2,220 40 509 9 305 15 1 5 10 14 15 15 19 11 5 17 10 5 12 16 3 12 1 6 14 7 12 15 8 9 16 14 5 3 9 18 17 13 3 8 15 13 11 9 6 1 4 16 3 6 6 8 8 6 6 4 6 4 9 1 4 4 Trade of the Delaware District 341 Amount Merchandise Tons Cwt. Qtr. Lbs. Estimated first cost or value Pipe 306:3:15 No. At 14-16.y. 430 3 1 Staves 306 cwt. 3 gr. 15 No. At 16-8.y. 107 8 1 Pink Roots .... 83 lbs. 753 Sails made .... 48 Ells 3 Total 16,042 4 1 APPENDIX III IMPORTS TO PENNSYLVANIA FROM LONDON, 1764-1765* Eng. Manufacture Amount Cost Amount of the value Allom 17 cwt. At 2ls. cwt. £17 I7s. Od. Apoth. Ware .... 417 cwt. At 40.y. cwt. 834 Apparel Parcels.. 11 No. At 20.y. 11 Bags 217 doz. At 5-7.y. doz. 65 2 Beer 8 tons 3 hhds. 9 gal. At 4-6£ Ton 43 18 6 Books 119cwt. Iqr.Olb. At 3-5£ cwt. 477 Brass Wrought .. 393 cwt. qr. 20 lb. At 4-5i cwt. 1,769 6 Bridles 1 doz. At 8-14.y. doz. 11 Cards new Wool. 362 (895 doz.) At 7-12^. doz 171 19 Cards playing ... 39 cwt. 3 qr. At 20-25.f. cwt. 44 14 4 Chariots 5 No. At 15-25£ 100 Cheese 158 cwt. qr. At 20-28.y. cwt. 189 12 Coals 63 At 22-26.y. cwt. 75 12 Cofifer Wrought.. 247 cwt. 2 qr. At 5-5-12 cwt. 1,311 15 Cordage 1,540 :0 :0 At 20-26^. cwt. 1,771 Fustians 40 no. At 20s. per no. 40 Gartering Crewel. 50 Gross At lOs. gross. 25 Glass 67,125 no. At 5,100 per no. 167 16 3 Glass Green 155 cwt. qr. 5 Ib.At 10.y. per cwt. 77 10 5 Glass W. Flint... 49 cwt. 2 qr. 221 lb. At 20s. per cwt. 49 13 10 Glass Windows . . 13 chests At 14-25^. chest. 13 Gloves, leather . . 3,828 doz. At 4-8.y. doz. 1,148 8 Grindlestones ... 40 At 25-35.?. 60 Gunpowder 297 cwt. 2qr. 5 At 3-3£ 15 cwt. 1,064 4 2 Haberdashery ... 2,575 cwt. 1 qr. At 40j. cwt. 5,150 10 Harness, Coaches. 3 pairs n. At 40-60.?. pair 7 10 Hats : Beavers, Castors 403 doz. At 3-5£ doz. 1,612 Felt 1.293 3/4 doz. At 20-25.y. doz. 1,455 18 4 Chip 140 doz. At 4-6s. doz. 35 Straw 40 doz. At 3-4/6 doz. 7 10 Hempseed 12 1/2 qr. At 20.y. qr. 12 10 Iron Nails 99 cwt. At 30-40j. cwt. 1,573 5 Iron Wrought . . . 3,354 tons, 1 cwt, 22 qr. At 2/10-3£ cwt. 9,224 14 6 Lead and Shot... 61 ton 4 cwt. 2qr. OAt 10-11 per ton 642 17 3 Leather Wrought. 7,694 lbs. At 2-2/6s. lb. 865 11 6 Linen : 9,848 no. At 30-40 17,234 * Customs, III, 65. 342 Smith Colle;ge; Studies in History Eng. Manufacture Amount British 52,845 yds. Irish 204,601 yds. Sail 12,780 Ells Lithrage of lead. 45 cwt. 2:0 Pewter 826 cwt. Pictures or Prints 18 cwt. 2 qr. Saddles, Great... 12 No. Saddles, Small .. 12 No. Shovels Shod 30 doz. Silk in pieces 7,541 lbs. 1 oz. Silk Stitch, Sew'g 2,521 lbs., 9 oz. Steel 700 cwt. Tobacco pipes ... 338 Gross Vetures, Double.. 96 no. Watches, Silver.. 12 No. Clothes and Bags. 1,070 no. Double .Minikins 816 Single 1,020 Long 4 Remnants 100 Short 1,114 no. Spanish 572 Cottons 920 Welch plains .... 1,500 (4,100) Flannel 62,400 Yards Frize 1,700 (2,000) Kersies 205 no. Perfits and Serges 440 lbs. Stock'g for child'n 10 doz. Stock'g for men.. 6,722 doz. Stuflfs 293,140 lbs. Stuff, Silk (Inde) 581 lbs., 9 oz. Stuff, Silk worst. 4,474 lbs., 5 oz. Cabinet ware .... Colours, painters. Cottons, Linens . . 46,301 sq. yds. Goods, several . . . Plate Wrought .. 600 oz. Plate Glass White 26 cwt. 0:7 Stationery Toys Cost Amount of the value At 6-18 yds. 2,642 5 At 6-lSd. yd. 10,230 1 At 12.f. 639 At 7-11 cwt. 20 9 6 At 3-4i cwt. 2,891 At 25-30 cwt. 27 15 At 30-40.J. 21 At 13-17.y. 9 At ll-13.y. lbs. 18 At 30-40^. lb. 13,196 17 2 At 30-40s. lb. 4,412 14 At 27-30 cwt. 997 10 At I2d. gross. 16 18 At 25-30^. 49 10 At 2:10-5£ 45 At 3-4£ 4,012 10 At 7-8i 10s. no. 6,324 At 34-35.?. no. 2,014 10 At 7-10£ 23 5 At 18-24(f. lb. 8 15 At 10-13i no. 12,811 At 4-6i 2,860 At 5-18£ 100 goods 54 5 7 At 5-6£ 100 goods 27 10 At 8-18rf. yd. 3,380 At 20-30(/. yd. 117 1 8 At 20-50s. 358 15 At 3-3/6S. lb. 71 10 At 4-14.?. doz. 4 10 At 24-44.?. doz. 11,427 8 At 2-3s. lb. 36,642 10 At 2.?. 3/6 lb. 79 19 3 At 2-3s. 6d. lb. 615 4 4 10 100 10,417 46,102 200 720 423 18 34 APPENDIX IV PENNSYLVANIA IMPORTS AND EXPORTS, 1702-1763 Value of British GocxJs, Wares Value of Foreign and Merchan- ( ^oods. Wares an d Total \ 'alue Value of dise Imported Merchandise ini Imports Exports into Pa. ported into Pa. into Pa. from Pa. 1702 i2,997 0^. Od. £3,347 Os. Od. 1707 9,342 4,145 1712 14,365 786 1717 8,464 1,471 1722 22,505 4,499 1727 26,397 6,882 1732 31,979 12,823 1732 41,698 8,524 1737 56.690 15,198 0* 1740 i46,471 Us. 9S^'i ^ s 1