What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?
Boston Evening-Post (July 11, 1774).
“The Sign of the LEOPARD.”
When Daniel Scott advertised his “Medicine Store [at] the Sign of the LEOPARD, South End” in the July 11, 1774, edition of the Boston Evening-Post, he adorned his notice with a woodcut depicting that exotic animal. The device that he chose to represent his store gave colonizers greater access to faraway places that were part of global networks of trade and (often involuntary) migration. Residents of the busy port spotted the leopard when they passed by Scott’s store. His advertisement disseminated an image of an animal native to Africa and Asia even more widely, reaching readers who encountered such creatures mainly through descriptions rather than images. Something similar occurred with the “Sign of the ELEPHANT” that marked the location of “HILL’s ready Money Variety Store” in Providence and the woodcut of an elephant in Hill’s advertisements in the Providence Gazette in the spring and summer of 1774. That these entrepreneurs used these animals as their emblems suggests that colonizers were familiar enough with their descriptions to recognize them when they saw them, yet the signs and woodcuts helped clarify their visualizations.
Colonizers did have some opportunities to view exotic animals transported to British North America. In August 1768, for instance, Abraham Van Dyck advertised that he had on display “one of the most beautiful Animals, call’d, The LEOPARD” that had “JUST ARRIVED” in New York. Assuming readers had limited familiarity with this large cat, Van Dyck provided a description: “adorned all over with very neat and different spots, black and white [and] much in Shape, Nature, and Colour, like unto a Panther.” To further entice prospective audiences, he included a woodcut depicting the creature. He also stated that he had “several other Animals” on display “in the Broad-Way,” but did not indicate which species. Although colonizers in New York could pay one shilling for a “full View of the Leopard,” most did not have chances to observe this animal very often. Their most regular access to visual images of leopards, elephants, and other exotic animals would have been shop signs and, occasionally, advertising media, such as trade cards and newspaper notices, that incorporated woodcuts. Scott offered lengthy descriptions of some of the medicines he sold, but many readers may have considered the image of the leopard the most engaging part of his advertisement.
What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?
Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Post-Boy (May 9, 1774).
“Cannot fail to give universal Satisfaction to their Customers.”
I originally selected this advertisement to further demonstrate that even though advertisers usually wrote the copy but left the format and other aspects of graphic design to compositors who worked in printing offices they sometimes gave instructions about how they wanted specific elements of how their notices to appear. In this instance, John Barrett and Sons ran a lengthy advertisement enclosed within a border of decorative type in three newspapers simultaneously. Their notice appeared in the Boston Evening-Post, the Boston-Gazette, and the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Post-Boy on May 9, 1774. On closer examination, however, I discovered that this advertisement presents further evidence that printing offices in Boston sometimes shared type already set for advertisements. A week ago, I documented this with Joseph Peirce’s advertisement.
As was the case with that notice, the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Post-Boy operated independently. Among other newspapers, Barrett and Sons’ advertisement apparently originated in the Boston-Gazette before being reprinted in the Boston Evening-Post. Notably, it ran next to Peirce’s advertisement in the May 9 edition, that type having made its way back to the printing office for the Boston-Gazette. The visual evidence makes it difficult to dispute that some printers transferred type from one newspaper to another. The printing ornaments that formed the border around the advertisement make that clear. Even if the compositor for the Boston Evening-Post happened to copy the font, capitalization, italics, size, centering, left justification, right justification, and other format exactly from the Boston-Gazette, itself a highly unlikely scenario, matching the decorative type would have been practically impossible. Note that the compositor chose one type of ornament for the upper and lower borders and a different ornament for the left and right borders, except for the last ornament before the right corner in the lower border. In that position appears the same ornament from the left and right borders in the advertisements in both newspapers. Furthermore, the compositor introduced one more variation midway down the left and right borders, marking where the side-by-side columns listing goods begin. To the left of “Chints, Calicoes” and to the right of “An Assortment,” a different ornament appears, once again in both the Boston-Gazette and the Boston Evening-Post.
Barrett and Sons’ advertisement did not make it into the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Weekly News-Letter, in any form, unlike the type for Peirce’s advertisement that seems to have been transferred from the Boston-Gazette and the Boston Evening-Post to that newspaper. That might have been due to Richard Draper’s poor health and seeking a partner to assist him in running his printing office making such coordination too difficult at that moment. Yet the type for Peirce’s advertisement made its way into that newspaper once again on May 12 after running in the Boston-Gazetteon May 9 (but not in the Boston Evening-Post for a second time on that day). This suggests instead that Barrett and Sons, the advertisers, made decisions about which publications would carry their advertisement, likely based on their own marketing budget and sense of which newspapers had the best circulation. This instance raises further questions about the coordination among printing offices, especially the logistics, the bookkeeping, and the fees. These advertisements demonstrate that printers in Boston who usually competed with each other for both subscribers and advertisers cooperated on occasion when it came to inserting advertisements in their newspapers.
Left to right: Boston-Gazette (May 9, 1774); Boston Evening-Post (May 9, 1774).
What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?
Boston-Gazette (May 2, 1774).
{ Blue }
Rich { Black and } Sattins
{ White }
Joseph Peirce’s advertisement on the front page of the May 2, 1774, edition of the Boston-Gazette stood out thanks to its unique graphic design. The shopkeeper provided a list of merchandise that he recently imported from London, but rather than arrange it in a dense paragraph, as in most advertisements, or create columns with one item per line, as in some advertisements, this one featured one item per line with each line centered. As a result, the text created an irregular shape with a lot of white space on either side. That certainly distinguished the advertisement from the news in the column to the right, justified on both sides.
Advertisers usually generated copy, while compositors made most decisions about format. When merchants and shopkeepers ran advertisements with identical copy in multiple newspapers, variations in fonts, capitalization, italics, font size, and other design elements testified to the creative work done by the compositors in each printing office. Advertisers likely submitted general instructions with the copy for advertisements that arranged goods in columns, but that may not have always been the case. M.B. Goldthwait’s advertisement for “DRUGS and MEDICINES” in the April 28, 1774, edition of the Massachusetts Spy, for instance, listed a variety of patent medicines in a paragraph, while his advertisement in the May 2 edition of the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Post-Boy separated them into side-by-side columns.
Peirce seems to have submitted specific instructions with the copy for his advertisement. It had the same format in the May 2 editions of the Boston Evening-Post and the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Post-Boy and the May 5 edition of the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Weekly News-Letter. They even gave the same treatment to three lines for:
{ Blue }
Rich { Black and } Sattins
{ White }
That indicates that the compositors incorporated the format that Peirce sketched when he composed the copy. Curiously, the advertisements in the Boston-Gazette, the Boston Evening-Post and the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Weekly News-Letter appear identical, as though the printing offices shared type set in one and transferred to the others. If that was indeed the case, it raises questions about day-to-day operating practices and collaboration among printers in Boston. Even if some printing office shared type, Pierce’s advertisements in the Boston-Gazette and the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Post-Boy had minor variations while retaining the same format. That suggests that Peirce provided his vision for his advertisement to at least two printing offices, taking an active role in designing as well as writing his notice.
Left to right: Boston-Gazette (May 2, 1774); Boston Evening-Post (May 2, 1774); Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Weekly News-Letter (May 5, 1774).
What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?
Boston Evening-Post (January 17, 1774).
“TO BE SOLD CHEAP, by Mrs. Sheaffe.”
Mrs. Sheaffe placed this advertisement in the Boston Evening-Post. She ran a shop where she sold a variety of items, including choice citron (referring to citrus fruits), sugar, wine, and “All Kinds of Groceries.” Mrs. Sheaffe ambitiously invested to integrate herself into life as a businessowner as her advertisements appear twice in Massachusetts newspapers during the week of January 14-20, 1774, appearing in both the Boston Evening-Post and the Boston-Gazette. According to Gloria Main in “Gender, Work, and Wages in Colonial New England,” “most women in retailing were widows who had taken over a deceased husband’s shop.”[1] As this woman went by “Mrs. Sheaffe” it is likely that she was a widow and opened her shop to support herself and her family. Mrs. Sheaffe’s investments in advertising her shop in multiple newspapers demonstrates her industriousness and desire to establish herself as a businessowner of Boston. During the Revolutionary Era, the role of women in business extended far beyond just buying goods, many of them acting as retailers themselves.
**********
ADDITIONAL COMMENTARY: Carl Robert Keyes
David convincingly suggests that Mrs. Sheaffe may have been a widow responsible for supporting herself and perhaps others in her household. When other female entrepreneurs placed advertisements in newspapers published in Boston, they tended to use their full names, just as their male counterparts did. Mrs. Sheaffe’s decision to go by “Mrs. Sheaffe” may have been intended to remind those who knew her of her circumstances as a widow. She may have also meant for that to justify her role in the marketplace as a shopkeeper rather than as a consumer. Although some women ran businesses, as their advertisements attest, doing so was often depicted as a masculine endeavor, one better suited to men than women.
Mrs. Sheaffe attained a certain level of visibility in Boston, thanks in part to her frequent advertisements. Other women certainly assisted in running family businesses, even when they were not considered proprietors or mentioned in advertisements. When Herman Brimmer and Andrew Brimmer advertised “An Assortment of Mens, Womens & Childrens Hose” and other garments in the same edition of the Boston Evening-Post that Mrs. Sheaffe promoted her wares, they sought female customers, recognizing the role that women played as consumers. Their advertisement, like so many others, may have hidden the role that wives, daughters, and other female relations played in helping to run their shop “next Door to the Sign of the Lamb.”
Other female entrepreneurs did not achieve the same visibility in the marketplace as Mrs. Sheaffe because women were less likely to place newspaper advertisements compared to men who ran businesses. That same issue of the Boston Evening-Post included a notice calling on “All Persons indebted to the Estate of the late Mrs. Ruth Sinclair, Shopkeeper,” to settle accounts. According to a list of recent deaths in the December 27, 1773, edition of the Boston Evening-Post, she was the “Widow of the late Capt. Sinclair.” He died thirteen years earlier, a notice about settling his estate in the August 25, 1760, edition of the Boston-Gazette listing his widow as “sole Executrix.” Although she was apparently known to residents of Boston as a shopkeeper, Ruth Sinclair did not publish any advertisements. Instead, she may have relied on foot traffic and recommendations from loyal customers.
Mrs. Sheaffe was not alone as a proprietor of her own business during the era of the American Revolution. Other women ran businesses and an even greater number participated in the marketplace as more than consumers, assisting in shops run by husbands, fathers, brothers, and others. Yet Mrs. Sheaffe did make her role as a female entrepreneur much more visible in the public prints than most other women. Her advertisements testify to what was possible for women, though not usual.
**********
[1] Gloria L. Main, “Gender, Work, and Wages in Colonial New England,” William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 51, no. 1 (January 1994): 58.
What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250years ago today?
Boston Evening-Post (December 27, 1773).
“The above Teas were imported before any of the East-India Company’s Tea arrive, or it was known they would send any on their own Account.”
Cyrus Baldwin advertised “Choice Bohea and Souchong Tea” in the December 20, 1773, edition of the Boston Evening-Post, the first issue published following the protest now known as the Boston Tea Party. In an effort to convince both prospective customers and the general public that he traded in good faith, he appended a nota bene to assert that his teas “were imported before any of the East-India Company’s Tea arrive, or it was known they would send any on their own Account.” Three days later, he ran a similar advertisement in the Massachusetts Spy. That notice included new merchandise, but it still listed “CHOICE Bohea and Souchong Teas” and concluded with the same nota bene. As the politics of tea became a main topic of discussion, in town meetings, in the press, in everyday conversation, did not decide to discontinue his advertisements presenting tea for sale at his shop in Boston.
Boston-Gazette (December 27, 1773).
On December 27, Baldwin once again advertised in the Boston Evening-Post, replacing his advertisement from the previous issue with the one from the Massachusetts Spy. In addition, that advertisement, complete with the nota bene, also ran in the Boston-Gazette on December 27. Over the course of several days, Baldwin inserted it in three of the five newspapers published in Boston at the time. Notably, neither Isaiah Thomas, the printer of the Massachusetts Spy, nor Benjamin Edes and John Gill, the printers of the Boston-Gazette, rejected the advertisement, though they had earned reputations as the printers who most vociferously advocated for the patriot cause and critiqued Parliament and colonial officials. Did their willingness to publish the advertisement serve as tacit endorsement of the rationale Baldwin offered to justify selling his tea? Maybe not. The printers may have been too busy participating in events as they unfolded after the Boston Tea Party and gathering news from near and far that they did not scrutinize the contents of all the advertisements submitted to their printing offices. After all, other merchants and shopkeepers continued to advertise tea in the Boston-Gazette and the Massachusetts Spy. The printers may not have examined each advertisement closely to spot tea among the lists of merchandise. They might have also been satisfied, at least for the moment, because they knew any tea sold by Baldwin and others had not been acquired via the problematic shipments that ended up in the harbor rather than in shops and stores.
As colonizers, including “Venders of Tea,” debated what to do next following the Boston Tea Party, they did not immediately cease advertising, buying, selling, and drinking tea. Following strategies that they adopted in response to the Stamp Act and the Townshend Acts, they eventually devised nonimportation and consumption agreements. Loyalists like Peter Oliver accused patriots, especially women, of cheating on those agreements. Such indiscretions would have been a continuation of the flexibility toward tea exhibited in newspaper advertisements published in the days immediately after the Boston Tea Party.
What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?
Boston Evening-Post (December 20, 1773).
“The above Teas were imported before any of the East-India Company’s Tea arrived, or it was known they would send any on their own Account.”
Cyrus Baldwin hoped to sell the “Choice Bohea and Souchong Teas” that he stocked at his shop in Boston while he still had a chance. Tea had become a lightning rod for political discourse throughout the fall of 1773, thanks to the Tea Act and the arrival of ships carrying tea on behalf of the East India Company. That discourse erupted into a protest that involved the destruction of the tea on those ships when colonizers disguised as Indians tossed the tea into the harbor, an event now known as the Boston Tea Party. That put Baldwin in a difficult position, especially as discussions about boycotting tea occurred at the town meeting. When he advertised bohea, souchong, and hyson tea in the December 20 edition of the Boston Evening-Post, just four days after the East India Company’s tea went into the harbor, Baldwin appended a nota bene to inform prospective customers and the general public that “[t]he above Teas were imported before any of the East-India Company’s Tea arrived, or it was known they would send any on their own Account.” Baldwin justified selling the tea he already stocked. He also sought to give consumers a reasonable justification for purchasing his tea before the situation became any more volatile and they faced condemnation from the community.
Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Post-Boy (December 20, 1773).
Baldwin’s advertisement ran immediately below a “NOTIFICATION” that summarized a meeting “of some of the principal Venders of TEAS in Boston” that took place on Friday, December 17, the day after the protest on the docks. The same notification ran in all three newspapers published in Boston on Mondays, the Boston Evening-Post, the Boston-Gazette, and the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Post-Boy. It reported that “Venders of TEAS” met for the purpose of “consulting and determining in suitable Measures to be adopted, and to cooperate with a great number of respectable Inhabitants of this Province, express’d by a Vote of their late Assembly to suppress the Use of that detested Article.” They did not, however, reach any conclusions. Instead, they “agreed that a general and full Meeting should be convened” on December 20 “where it is desired and expected that all the Dealers in, and Venders of Teas will punctually attend.” That included Baldwin as well as Archibald Cunningham, William Jackson, Samuel Allyne Otis, and Elizabeth Perkins, all of whom advertised tea in the December 20 edition of the Boston Evening-Post, though none of the others included the same sort of disclaimer that Baldwin carefully inserted in his advertisement. A nota bene warned, “It is earnestly desired, that those concerned would not fail of giving attendance at the Time fix’d.”
The notice in the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Post-Boy included an additional note: “A common Cause is best supported by a common Association.—The Defence and Maintenance of our Rights and Liberties is the common Cause of every American; and therefore all should unite, Hand in Hand, in one common Association in order to support it.” Answering the abuses perpetrated by Parliament, this note suggested, did not depend on a uniform response by “Venders of TEAS” alone but rather the support and concerted efforts of consumers to abide by whatever measures colonizers in Boston adopted when they voted at town meetings. Everyone had a duty to defend American liberties via the choices they made about how they participated in the marketplace. For the moment, however, Cyrus Baldwin just wanted to sell the tea that he claimed he imported before the crisis commenced.
What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?
Boston Evening-Post (November 8, 1773).
“Ann-Street Advertisements.”
Jonathan Williams, Jr., placed an advertisement for a “Number of the most Fashionable BROAD CLOTHS” and “ENGLISH GOODS in general” in the November 1, 1773, edition of the Boston Evening-Post. On that day, he ran the same advertisement in the Boston-Gazette. It appeared again in the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Weekly News-Letter and the Massachusetts Spy on November 4. Jeremiah Allen also advertised widely, promoting a “new Supply of Goods in the Hard-Ware Branch” in the same newspapers. Archibald Cunningham did the same, inserting advertisements for wine, tea, and groceries in all of those newspapers.
That these entrepreneurs advertised in several newspapers simultaneously did not distinguish them from others in Boston and other urban ports with multiple newspapers, but an innovative aspect of their marketing efforts did deviate from standard practices. Williams, Allen, and Cunningham apparently collaborated in creating a business district where they encouraged consumers to shop. Their advertisements appeared together under the heading “Ann-Street Advertisements” in the Boston Evening-Post. Decorative type marked the beginning and end of this set of advertisements. The same header ran in the Massachusetts Spy, though the notices lacked the decorative type. Still, a double line followed the last of the three advertisements, in contrast to the single line that separated most advertisements, indicating to observant readers where the section of “Ann-Street Advertisements” concluded. Those three advertisements received the same treatment in the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Weekly News-Letter as in the Boston Evening-Post. Even though Cunningham’s advertisement did not consistently run in the Boston-Gazette, a header for “Ann-Street Advertisements” introduced the notices placed by Allen and Williams. As in the Massachusetts Spy, the dividing lines indicated that those advertisements constituted a distinct section. Unfortunately, America’s Historical Newspapers, the most extensive database of early American newspapers, does not include some editions of the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Post-Boy. The issue for November 15 features all three advertisements by Allen, Cunningham, and Williams, one after the other under a header for “Ann-street Advertisements.” Those three entrepreneurs introduced their business district in all five newspapers published in Boston at the time.
The campaign did not continue in all of those newspapers, but it did run in some of them for several weeks. For instance, the series of “Ann-Street Advertisements,” treated as a section within the paid notices, appeared in the Massachusetts Spy through December 2, running for five consecutive weeks. The advertisements appeared together with their header for three consecutive weeks in both the Boston Evening-Post and the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Weekly News-Letter. Allen, Cunningham, and Williams apparently determined that the whole was worth more than the sum of the parts, that they would benefit more from advertising as a collective than marketing their wares separately. Their strategy focused on enticing consumers to visit a commercial district to fulfill various needs while their competitors all focused on a single shop or store. They likely hoped that cooperating among themselves and coordinating with the local printing offices would multiply the returns on their investments in advertising.
What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?
Boston Evening-Post (September 6, 1773).
“HORSEMANSHIP, By Mr. BATES.”
Not long after Mr. Bates concluded his performances in New York, he arrived in Boston and began advertising exhibitions of his feats of horsemanship in the newspapers there. He commenced with notices in the Boston Evening-Post and the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Post-Boy on Monday, September 6, 1773, informing ladies and gentlemen of the city about his performance on Wednesday or, if the weather did not permit, on Friday.
As he had done in his advertisements in New York, he deployed “HORSEMANSHIP” as a headline for his notice and then introduced himself as “The ORIGINAL PERFORMER; Who has had the honor or performing” for a longlist of royalty in Europe. He declared that he earned “the greatest APPLAUSE” from those regal audiences, but did not expect colonizers in New York to take his word for it. Instead, he had “Certificates from the several Courts” that they could examine. In addition, he asserted that the “greatest Judges in the MANLY ART” of horsemanship considered his skills “to excel any Horseman that ever attempted any Thing of the Kind.” Bates hoped that the promises of such a spectacle would entice audiences in Boston to attend his show.
He had reason to feel confident in the effectiveness of this marketing strategy. After all, he gave the same pitch in New York. He may have delivered newspapers, clippings, or perhaps even handbills from that city to the printing offices in Boston or he may have copied out the advertisement from one of those sources. Whatever method he deployed, he remained consistent in how he introduced himself and described his skills to prospective audiences, likely sticking with what worked. He also repeated another technique that he used in New York, encouraging anyone interested in the performance to acquire tickets quickly because “No Money will be taken at the Doors, nor Admittance without Tickets.” Rather than wait until the time and day of the show, Bates aimed to generate ticket sales in advance. Through experience, he devised a system that he believed worked best for inciting interest and securing his livelihood.
What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?
Boston Evening-Post (July 26, 1773).
“Upon the whole, Justice and Equity, Law, Reason and Necessity urges me to draw the following Conclusion.”
A. Bowman defiantly advertised that he would sell a “Large Assortment of ENGLISH, SCOTCH and IRISH GOODS” at his “AUCTION-ROOM” on the “North Side of the Market” in Boston on August 6, 1773. He prefaced the details of the “PUBLIC VENDUE” with a lengthy address “To the PUBLIC” in the July 26 edition of the Boston Evening-Post, providing an overview of recent events involving the General Court and an Act for the Regulation and Limitation of Auctioneers.
Bowman explained that when the Court initially passed the act in February “Seven Persons officiated daily in that Business.” However, “when the time came that this Act was to be in force, and the Select Men gave out Licences according to the Letter of the Law, Five were set aside.” Bowman was among the auctioneers that did not receive a license, as he previously lamented in a series of advertisements in several newspapers published in Boston. In May, those five auctioneers presented petitions to the Court in hopes that “we might be reinstated in our former Business.” In turn, the Court exercised “Wisdom and Goodness” and passed a new act that permitted the selectmen to bestow six more licenses. The intention of the Court, according to Bowman, had been to provide relief to the former auctioneers, but when the selectmen appointed six additional auctioneers Bowman learned that he was not among them. “Cruel Fate!”
Bowman considered his options, “revolving and re-revolving the whole Matter in my Mind,” and decided to “go on with my Business in form as the Law directs,” though lacking a license. In other words, he intended to obey every aspect of the law except for holding a license granted by the selectmen, asserting that it “is not my fault” and “no Reason has ever been assigned to me” why he did not receive a license.” Bowman contented that “every Inhabitant of the Town of Boston” knew that the “additional Act was framed & enacted for the sole purpose of relieving me and my fellow Sufferers.” He therefore upheld “the very Spirit of the Law” by resuming business as an auction, even if he did not adhere to the letter of the law. He had been forced into that position when the selectmen neglected to act according to the intention of the legislature in passing the new act.
In addition, Bowman argued that he had a right to earn his livelihood, especially since the colony assessed taxes on him. “Early after my Arrival in this Province,” he explained, “the Laws of it soon found me out and commanded me to contribute for their Support.” He had paid his share “all along,” but a few weeks earlier “a large Demand was made upon me from that Quarter, and considering my hard Fate of late I was very unable to answer.” To his chagrin, “this Creditor takes no denial, and tome made no Abatement.” On the one hand, the law demanded that Bowman pay taxes, but, on the other, a law passed with the intention of allowing him to pursue his occupation instead prevented him from doing so. Such injustice did not represent the “Genius of America.”
Instead, it demanded a response. Bowman resolved to resume his business as an auctioneer, realizing that he risked prosecution “for a supposed Breach of a Law.” In that case, he anticipated that a “Jury of my Peers” would hear his case and acknowledge what had actually happened. He also encouraged the “Compassionate Legislative Body who have already exerted their Authority for my Relief” would once again address his predicament and “adhere to the same human Principles on which they founded the late Act.”
The community also had an opportunity to respond when Bowman once again “contend[ed] for my daily Bread” according to the “honour and fidelity with which I conducted my business in former times.” With a flourish at the end of his lengthy account, Bowman declared that “Justice and Equity, Law, Reason and Necessity” prompted him to hold an auction at the end of the following week. “A. BOWMAN, Auctioneer,” had no choice but to follow that path. He knew it and so did the public, at least once he published an advertisement that framed the narrative to demonstrate how much he had been wronged throughout the entire ordeal.
What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?
Boston Evening-Post (July 12, 1773).
“The Particulars of the late melancholy and shocking TRAGEDY.”
Ripped from the headlines! Just a few weeks after the “melancholy and shocking TRAGEDY, which lately happened at SALEM, near Boston, the 17th of June 1773,” Ezekiel Russell advertised a broadside commemorating the deaths of ten drowning victims, three men and seven women. Compounding the tragedy, five of the women were pregnant, “two or three of them far advanced.”[1] Several boats had departed from Salem’s harbor “on Parties of Pleasure,” including one boat that took its passengers to Baker’s Island, “where they went ashore, staid and dined.” When the passengers boarded again, the boat sailed to another part of the island “for the Purpose of Fishing” and later anchored between Baker’s Island and Misery Island, “where they drank Tea.”
When the weather began to look threatening, they determined to try for Marblehead Harbour.” As the wind intensified, the men recommended to William Ward, “the Commander of the Boat,” that he lower the sails, but Ward insisted that “the Boat would stand it.” The passengers, “trusting his Judgment, thought proper to submit.” The women huddled in the cabin, out of the wind and out of the way of the men attempting to get the boat to shore. When a “sudden, smart Gust of Wind canted the Boat over on one Side,” one of the men, John Becket, had time to open the cabin door and warn the women that “they were all going to the Bottom.” The Boat “instantly sunk.” Becket and a “Lad about 15 Years old” were the only survivors. Becket reported that heard the women shrieking in their last moments. Observers on shore in Marblehead, about a mile distant, saw what happened and, “by their timely and vigorous Efforts,” launched a small schooner to retrieve Becket and the youth from the water, but it was too late to aid Ward and the women.
Russell presented an even more dramatic scene when he marketed the broadside, suggesting that the boat had been closer to shore than the newspaper accounts indicated. “Shocking indeed must one imagine it for their Friends on the Shore at Marblehead, and at the small Distance of 100 Yards,” he proclaimed, “to behold these distressed People just launching into Eternity, and not able to afford them the least of their wonted Assistance!” Ramping up his efforts to play on the emotions of prospective customers, Russell became even more melodramatic: “Surely the Shrieks and Cries of the poor drowning Souls, which seemed to reach the Heavens (especially the Lamentations of the Women, as the pregnant Situation of five of them made the Scene more dreadful) must pierce the Soul of the Spectator, and melt his Heart, even were it adamant!” It was not Russell who was ghoulish in marketing this broadside, but rather readers who could learn of this “melancholy and shocking TRAGEDY” without it affecting them. They could demonstrate that the events had indeed moved them by purchasing and displaying the broadside “Decorated with the Figure of Ten Coffins.”
The following day, colonizers from Salem and Marblehead located and raised the sunken boat. They recovered the bodies of six of women, but did not find the bodies of Mrs. Diggadon and the three men. They returned the bodies of the women to “the same Wharf from which so much Cheerfulness and Gaiety they departed the Day before.” At the funerals, the “Solemnity of the several Processions drew together a vast Number of People” of “all Ranks” to mourn the victims of such a tragedy.
That account of the tragedy first appeared in the June 22 edition of the Essex Gazette, published in Salem. Within the next ten days, the Boston Evening-Post reprinted the news on June 28 and the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Weekly News-Letter did so on July 1. Even if colonizers in Salem, Boston, and other towns did not read about the tragedy, they almost certainly heard about it given the way that local news, especially something as “melancholy and shocking” as these drownings, usually spread by word-of-mouth much more quickly than printers could set type.
Russell provided an opportunity for consumers to acquire a keepsake of the tragedy. He anticipated that they would be eager to do so, offering “Great Allowance … to travelling Traders, who buy [the broadside] by the Groce [or Gross].” In other words, peddlers who would disseminate the broadside throughout the countryside received a significant discount for purchasing by volume. Russell claimed that he did not consider it macabre to advertise and sell the broadside, asserting that it was “printed in this Form at the Request of the Friends and Acquaintance of the Ten deceased Persons.” To incite sales, whether at his shop or from itinerant peddlers, he suggested that it was “very proper to be posted up in every House in New-England, to keep in Remembrance the most sorrowful Event, of the kind, that has happened in America since its first Discovery.” Even as Russell focused on the emotional response to such a harrowing story, he participated in the commodification of recent events, just as printers, booksellers, and others did following the Boston Massacre and the death of George Whitefield.
[1] This narrative draws from the account in the Essex Gazette. That account also appeared in the Boston Evening-Post and the Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Weekly News-Letter and on the broadside.
