Historical Curiosities
Commentary on
the perhaps hard-to-believe assertions
that weren’t
fudged in Exquisite Folly
Epigraph
– Readers will have noted a startling similarity of the rhetoric of “A.B.C.’s”
letter to that of Occupy Wall Street. Though there are many ideological
differences between the protesters of 1765 and those of a quarter-millenium
later, they share a deep frustration with their respective oligarchic
establishments and a great outrage against injustice. What is particularly curious
is that the two movements were geographically located in exactly the
same place! Zuccotti Park, the 2011-12 focal point of OWS, is on Broadway,
half-way between Bowling Green and City Hall Park; the marches inspired by
objections to the Stamp Act moved back and forth along that same avenue. The 99 percent rhetoric is also put into the mouth of
Marinus Willett—though your author has no real idea how seriously he might have
taken it.
The fictional
mansion of Aaron Colegrove is located directly opposite what is
now Zuccotti Park, and is imagined as one of ten elegant Georgian houses
occupying its block, which now hosts a single 51-story office tower, 140
Broadway, completed in 1967, fronted by an unusually commodious sidewalk.
Chapter 1
– Pianofortes were not new in 1765. However, thanks to rising general
prosperity and the enhanced manufacturing capabilities of the early industrial
revolution, they were suddenly
much more affordable, and a great increase in innovation, production, and
quality was recorded during the second half of the 18th Century. The
“square pianoforte,” manufactured by Johannes Zumpe, a German who fled to
London to escape the Seven Years’ War, was particularly popular. Though they
offered a pleasing advance in sound quality over both harpsichords and
clavichords, they still lacked the metal frame which, in the 19th
Century, enabled strings to hold their pitch despite much
heavier—louder—strikes. We imagine that Thomas
Dordrecht, perceiving the musical value for money of the instruments, risked
the last of his savings to import two of them to America.
The three blocks of Reade
Street west of Broadway today have the same footprint they did in 1765.
Then, however, it was the very furthest edge of town, far from the fashionable
sections. The underlying land was owned by Trinity Church, based on a 1705 gift
from Queen Anne. Trinity Church to this day owns some fourteen acres of
Manhattan real estate.
Insofar
as the radicals of 1765 had a slogan, it was “Liberty, Property, and No Stamps!”
Taxation without representation was considered a violation of property rights,
and those rights were regarded as essential in Lockean, enlightenment thinking.
Their perfect ability to reconcile this slogan with chattel slavery is
attributable, according to my understanding, not to a loophole in the
principle, but to denial and evasion of enslaved people’s humanity. (If anyone
finds this so unspeakably reprehensible that they cannot tolerate any precept
of the founding generation, I’d be glad to point out some equivalent instances
of denial and evasion of other people’s humanity that are prevalent among 21st
Century Americans!)
No one should doubt their
sincerity, at any rate. Consider the following doggerel from the New
York Weekly Post-Boy in September 1765, which is possibly a reprint of a
Boston piece, as it references the August riots in Boston:
HE who for a Post, or base sordid Pelf, His Country betrays, makes a Rope for himself; Of this an Example before you we bring, In these infamous Rogues, who in Effigy swing. Huzza, my brave Boys! —every Man stand his ground, With Liberty’s Praise let the Welkin resound; Eternal Disgrace on their miscreants fall, Who thro’ Pride or for Wealth would ruin us all. Let us make wise Resolves, and to them let’s stand
strong, (Your Puffs and your Vapours do never last long) To maintain our just rights every measure pursue, To our King we’ll be loyal, to ourselves we’ll be
true. Those Blessings our Fathers obtain’d by their
blood, We are justly oblig’d as their Sons to make good; All internal Taxes let us then nobly spurn, These Effigies first—next the Stamp Paper burn. Chorus: —Sing Tantarara,
burn all, burn all! |
|
When we think today of Tar and
Feathers, the iconic intimidation method of the Sons of Liberty, the image
of tar that comes to mind is the hot asphalt spread on roadways, which would
surely cause serious burns if applied directly to the skin. A recent article by
J.L. Bell on the myths of
Tar ’n Feathers asserts, to the contrary, that “in the eighteenth century
‘tar’ meant pine tar, used for several purposes in building and maintaining
ships,” which “doesn’t have to be very hot to be sticky.” That article also
implies that your present author was in error to
suggest that James Colegrove, for example, might have feared T&F,
because “the first example of such an assault in pre-Revolutionary America took
place in the port of Norfolk, Virginia, in March 1766.” Call it dramatic license!
Chapter 2
– The chaos in shipping depicted in the fall of 1765 was a prominent
fact up and down the American coast. The proposed tactic against the tax, a general
boycott of British commerce, was universally anticipated, as were its ruinous
consequences. The various ruses employed to evade legal and bureaucratic
peccadilloes, both before and after the implementation of the tax, are
historical, but the results were as painful as predicted on both sides of the
pond, and did spur the ultimate revocation.
The “public gardens,” Ranelagh
and Vauxhall, were recent innovations in London that were
instantly imitated in New York City, on much smaller scales. They were
privately-owned institutions, open to the public for an admission fee, that
provided many of the amenities that tax-supported public parks provide today.
Both were opened in New York in 1765 (just before
Thomas Dordrecht returned from abroad). Neither survived the American
Revolution, and no trace of them can be seen today.
The spinning jenny, a
multi-spool spinning frame, was invented in 1764 by James Hargreaves in
Lancashire. The device reduced the amount of labor required to produce yarn, as
one worker could manage eight or more spools at once. It followed the several
1738 improvements to the loom made by John Kay, which allowed one weaver to
double his or her output. That invention—commonly called the
fly-shuttle—resulted in a shortage of feedstock, and triggered the start of the
Industrial Revolution. Hargreaves kept his machine secret for some time, but
produced a number for his own growing business. The price of yarn fell,
angering the large spinning community in Blackburn, who broke into his house and
smashed his machines, forcing him to flee to Nottingham in 1768.
In June 1765, the nine-year-old Wolfgang
Amadeus Mozart had been in London with his father and sister for fourteen
months, having entertained the king in October 1764. In June 1765, both of the
“young prodigies” performed daily at the Swan and Harp Tavern in Cornhill, the
charge being a mere two shillings and sixpence. One writer called this
“Leopold’s last, desperate effort to extract guineas from the English public,”
prior to the trio’s return home. Another likened this part of the tour to a
travelling circus, comparing the Mozarts to a family of acrobats. The
Mozarts left London on 24 July 1765. It is therefore
completely plausible that Thomas Dordrecht, staying with his uncle in the music
business during his last month in Europe, could have been exposed to the boy
Mozart.
Chapter 3
– “Heart of Oak” is the official march of the Royal Navy. The words were
penned in 1760 by the actor-impresario David Garrick to celebrate Britain’s
many victories in the Seven Years’ War. Oakum is a preparation of tarred
fibre used in shipbuilding for caulking the joints of timbers in wooden
vessels. Oakum was recycled from old tarry ropes, which were painstakingly
unraveled. The grubby task was a common sailors’ chore—and a penal occupation
in prisons and workhouses. The name of the
(fictional) tavern, Hearts of Oakum, is thus a satirical jab at the
militarist and imperialist Navy—satiric names for drinking
establishments being an old New York tradition.
Just as New York City emulated
London’s gardens, it had its own Macaroni Club, founded in 1764, which
was despised by radicals for its oblivious readiness to encourage huge bets on
horse races at a time when most residents were feeling deeply pinched. (The “macaroni”
was both a type of men’s wig, and the 18th Century equivalent of
today’s “metrosexual.” Its origin does in fact derive from Italian pasta.)
Men’s discussion clubs were very
popular in American cities at the time. The “Encyclopedia
Club,” to which John Glasby belonged, however, is fictional, based
on the enlightenment’s explicit aim to pursue omnivorous knowledge, and perhaps
specifically inspired by the publication of Diderot’s (French) encyclopedia in
1755.
Chapter 4
– The Battle of Sainte-Foy took place just west of the city of Québec
(the area is now incorporated within the city), on April 28, 1760. Though
it was a very bloody, hard-fought affair, it’s relatively unknown—perhaps
because the French won it. After the fall of the city of Québec in
September 1759, the French had rallied in the spring and marched northeast from
Montréal to retake it. Despite their success at Sainte-Foy, they were unable to
force a surrender, and were later finally overcome back at Montréal in
September 1760, the last of the war’s engagements on the North American
continent.
The fictional story
of Captain William Colegrove’s demise derives from a friend’s tale of a
prominent military ancestor who was wounded in the buttocks, and how the rest
of his family struggled for generations to deny the supposedly undignified
bodily insult had ever occurred, much to my friend’s amusement.
The ancestor in question survived. It would require great medical neglect and
incompetence, I imagine, for such a wound to be mortal; however, if it occurred
just before a major battle ... such failures are hardly inconceivable.
The
presence of women in the shipping office surprises
but does not shock Thomas Dordrecht—particularly as the women in question were
the wives of the principals. Just as the increasing division of labor
slowly vitiated the constraints of chattel slaves, so the requirements of urban
mercantile enterprises tended to break down the hoary agrarian distinctions of
“men’s work and women’s work.” Though women’s individual property rights were
horrendously neglected by modern standards, they were not entirely disdained in
all cases, providing some motivation for wives and widows to participate
strongly in commercial endeavors.
Chapter 5
– Thomas Dordrecht attends a (fictional) meeting
of the radicals’ committee on September 20, 1765, in which selections are read
aloud from the “first issue” of the Constitutional Courant, which
was also the last issue (although that might not have been the plan at
the time). The quotations, attributed to the
historical Isaac Sears and John Lamb, reading the pseudonymous “Philo Patriae”
and “Philoeutherus,” are virtually verbatim—interspersed, of course, with
Dordrecht’s instant assessment. The paper itself was half the size of
the period’s regular newspapers—probably because it had no advertising. It was
a single sheet, roughly 11” by 17”, with three long columns of extremely small
print on both sides—absolutely a torture to read! The
quotations of poems, posters, and handbills cited throughout Exquisite Folly,
are similarly genuine.
The
colonial attitude, circa 1765, toward “the best of kings” requires some
explanation in light of subsequent events. George III’s popularity was
strong in America from his 1760 accession right up to 1774-75. His
predecessor, George II, was remembered with enormous fondness. The popularity
of monarchs, generally, ran in inverse proportion to their meddlesomeness and
their distance. The Hanoverians were much more highly esteemed in their remote
territories than in Britain itself. All problems were invariably blamed solely
on the royal councilors, who were assumed to be incompetent if not plain evil.
In fact, George III had little sympathy for the American position, and solidly
supported the Stamp Act. But it was not until the Intolerable Acts of 1774 that
the general American public turned against him. The Declaration of Independence
then made a point of accusing the king, rather than the Parliament, of all
America’s grievances—emphasizing the totality of the political break.
King’s
College (now Columbia University) was
established by a royal charter in 1754, having a connection to the established
(that is, tax-supported) Anglican Church, much to the infuriation of the
“dissenting” Protestant sects—especially the Presbyterians, who fomented a
“pamphlet war” against it that raged for several years. The clergy of the Dutch
Reformed denomination, New York’s largest religious plurality, were suborned
into acquiescence by promises that their religious rights would remain
sacrosanct. King’s remained officially Anglican until the British occupied the
city in 1776, after which all its activities were halted. In 1784, immediately
after the evacuation, the school renamed itself and reopened with a secularized
constitution. (I can’t resist observing a slight problem with this sketch: it’s titled “in 1770,” yet the costume is
clearly mid-19th Century!)
The
concept of “freemanship,” or “freedom of the city,” goes back to
medieval times (with antecedents in ancient Rome). Originally it was an honor
bestowed by a municipality—which in turn possessed certain royally-granted
“freedoms”—that ensured a man was not to be claimed in serfdom. Later, it
ensured the right to vote in local elections and a right to engage in business
(which was not otherwise assured). The notion was
imported into colonial New York City, where it became the purchasable
demonstration of a certain level of economic wherewithal, then deemed a
necessary property consideration for voting. New York did possess the most open
franchise of the late colonial era—which would not say much for it in terms of
modern understanding. The concept has since entirely disappeared from
the United States, though honorary “keys to the city” are occasionally given
here. Britain and Commonwealth countries still employ it as a traditional
honor, as do some continental nations.
In
the summer of 1995, your author (among a large cohort of Americans) had the
pleasure of witnessing the formal investiture of an English friend as a Freeman
of the City of London. The ceremony occurred in modern rooms attached to
the ancient Guildhall. My friend had acquired this right as a member of a guild
with the improbable name of the Worshipful Company of Information
Technologists. A judge in a wig and full robes required him to swear that
he would disclose any plots he overheard against her sacred majesty Queen
Elizabeth II. Then there was an enormous comedy of everbody taking pictures of
everbody else, followed by lunch in a grand old pub on Leadenhall Street.
Chapter
9 – Peter Colegrove’s remarks about effusive
funerals being “contrary to the temper of the times,” may be perplexing to
modern readers. In the late colonial period, funerals had become enormously
elaborate—and hugely expensive—affairs. Reforming preachers railed against such
extravagance and Massachusetts even passed a law against it. An ostentatious funeral for Artemis Colegrove would indeed
have garnered criticism, though Peter’s trepidation regarding physical interference
is clearly a matter of both panic and deliberate exaggeration.
Chapter 10 – The dramatic public events
surrounding the November first official implementation of the Stamp Tax are
based on the sketchy historical record, with details inferred by your
present author. Much of the record is based not on journalistic “reporting,”
but on private letters, some written years after the fact. Nonetheless,
historians are confident of certain events:
· There was a meeting of some two hundred “principal
merchants” late in the afternoon of October 31st, at which the
radicals’ nonimportation boycott proposal was endorsed.
· A similar meeting of retailers and artisans was held
simultaneously and also approved a boycott.
· Governor Colden and the small military force
domiciled in Fort George did reorient the fort’s cannons from the harbor, to
face Bowling Green.
· One parade began downtown just at dusk, and toted an
effigy of Colden past the Merchants’ Coffee House and the City Hall (where
there was a tense confrontation with the mayor), and down to the Fort. The
governor’s private garage was broken into and his carriage stolen.
· This parade then joined a much larger gathering on
the Common—that is, today’s City Hall Park—around 8:00 PM. The figure of
two thousand persons is historical; however, just as such counts can be easily
exaggerated or minimized today, this assertion is all we have by way of
evidence. The parade proceeded down Broadway by torch and candlelight.
People did attempt to gain admittance to the Fort; entry was denied; some tried
to storm it, but the radicals defused that attempt by starting a controlled
bonfire that included the governor’s carriage and sleighs in addition to the
satiric effigies.
· Later in the evening, contrary to the intention of
the leading radicals, a mob broke away to attack the mansion of Major Thomas
James and succeeded in virtually demolishing it. They later attacked some
houses of ill-repute as well.
o Ironically, Major Thomas James, hated for his
earlier public threats, was the very officer who, despite great provocation
from both sides, did not fire on the huge assembly of protestors in
Bowling Green.
o Required, some months later, to justify his inaction
to Parliament, James averred that he might have killed nine hundred of
the populace that night. He was restrained, he said, by his certain belief that
the militias of New York and New Jersey would have stormed the fort the following
day and massacred all within.
o Noted historians Edmund S. & Helen M. Morgan, in
their book The
Stamp Act Crisis, assert that “it was only the coolness of the officers
within that prevented the American Revolution from beginning on November 1,
1765 [emphasis added].”
· The events of the following days—delineated to our “recovering” hero by Cooper and Mapes—closely
follow the record. The continuing issue was the radicals’ demand that the city
should take possession of the stamps. Had Colden not finally surrendered on
November 5th—when the traditionally rowdy Guy Fawkes celebrations
might have touched off even more extensive rioting—the fort might well have
been stormed amid a horrendous bloodbath.
Chapter 11 – The celebration of “Guy
Fawkes Day,” still a tradition in Britain, was also a tradition in the British
colonies. In addition to being a feast of “misrule” and social class
role-reversal, in the 18th Century it had a decidedly anti-Catholic
aspect. Catholics in America, less prevalent then than Muslims are today, were
the butt of a great propaganda of alleged threats against the Protestant
majority. The still-shaky claim of the Hanoverian dynasty to the British throne
was justified as a defense against the alleged nefarious design of the papacy
to forcibly reclaim the whole of Christendom. (Most overt expressions of
religious prejudice were cleaned up in a trice during the Revolutionary War,
when the infant United States desperately needed the aid of Catholic France.)
Chapter 12 – There was in fact a terrific
storm, that caused major flooding about the littoral, immediately after Sir
Henry Moore’s landing on November 13th. (The man was really lucky
not to have arrived three days later!)
The confluence
of the Harlem and East Rivers, an area of water still known as Hell Gate,
was infinitely more problematic to navigate in the 18th Century than
it is today—which is not to suggest that it’s to be taken lightly today! The
natural topographical hazards, above and below the water line, were then far
more constraining. As the tides were pulling just as much water then as now
through a tighter funnel, the currents were even fiercer. Though repeated
efforts were made to dredge the area, the basic problem was solid rock, and it
was not until 1885, when the Army Corps of Engineers tunneled into it and
detonated the largest controlled explosion yet known, that some of the
rocky outcrops disappeared and the relatively open configuration we know today
took shape. The success of that fascinating effort, coupled with the later
creation of the “Harlem Ship Channel,” and the “Ambrose Channel” in Lower New
York Bay, greatly enhanced New York City’s capability as a port.
Chapter 15 – The three main political
factions of mid-18th Century New York City, plus their
numerically insignificant opponents, the Court Party, are carefully parsed in
Joseph S. Tiedemann’s Reluctant
Revolutionaries. The following is your author’s highly simplified
summarization:
·
The “DeLancey faction” were imperialists and
mercantilists. (Today, we might call them “crony capitalists.”) Their wealth
was based in shipping and manufacturing enterprises.
·
The “Livingston faction” were legalists and
traditionalists. Their wealth was based in landed property, primarily in the
Hudson valley.
·
The middle classes in the city, the “Liberty Boys,”
were the libertarians of the day, although notions of a pure free market
economy had yet to be articulated, resulting in a good deal of
self-contradiction. Such wealth as they possessed derived from small business,
the professions, and their work as artisans—then known as “mechanics.”
·
The “Court faction,” which basically consisted only
in the handful of royal appointees and the military officers, supported the
Stamp Act, because they identified more closely with England’s problems than
New York’s.
·
The DeLancey faction opposed the Stamp Act as
counter-productive.
·
The Livingston faction opposed the Stamp Act as
counter-productive and illegal.
·
The Liberty Boys opposed the Stamp Act as
counter-productive, illegal, and an immoral affront.
The
series of actions taken by New York radicals in late November and
December, 1765—with the exception of references to
the fictional Colegroves, of course—are pretty much historical, as
related from our hero’s perspective.
Dordrecht
obliquely refers to the settlement of “a notorious case that had aggravated
[the lawyers] for three long years.” This was the convoluted criminal affair of
Cunningham v. Forsey (related in Thomas Truxes’ excellent Defying
Empire), in which the former, a wealthy New York merchant, had attacked
the latter in public at Noon in the full view of many witnesses, stabbing him
with his sword. Convicted of assault, he fled to England. Prosecuted again in
civil court, a New York jury demanded he pay Forsey £1,500 damages. Governor
Colden arbitrarily overturned this
decision, and the Crown later supported
him—throwing the New York legal profession into an uproar that happened to
end with a reversal in December 1765, just a few weeks after the humiliated Colden
was replaced by Sir Henry Moore.
The
building housing the Anglican congregation of Trinity Church in 1765 was
the first of three built on the same spot (Broadway and Wall Street). The
colonial church, a modest structure built in 1698, still boasted a steeple
which, being the highest spot in the city, served as a landmark for returning
seamen. It burned down in the great fire of 1776.
Did
New York ships really sneak out
past the Navy in December 1765? Yes,
and they tried every other ruse they could come up with to avoid Stamp duties.
All the East Coast shippers were “in the same boat” (pardon the pun), and
between the tax collectors and the fiery radicals, it wasn’t just their own
objections to the tax that forced the issue. Whether
John Glasby’s idea of blaming the supercargo would actually have convinced a
dubious and nevous ship captain—much less a bureaucratic enforcer—it does
suggest the level of desperation involved.
Notices – Ordering – Author – Contact