December 22

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

New-York Journal (December 22, 1774).

“Willing to comply with the association entered into by the late Continental Congress.”

When a shipment of “1 bale of woolens and 1 box of silks” arrived in New York via the Lady Gage on December 10, 1774, Archibald McVickar surrendered the good to the local Committee of Inspection and placed an advertisement to that effect in the New-York Journal.  He declared that he was “willing to comply with the association entered into by the late Continental Congress.”  Accordingly, those goods “will be sold … under the direction of William Denning, John Berrian, and Nicholas Roosevelt.”  Anyone wishing to learn more about the sale should “apply to the above Gentlemen” rather than to the McVickar.

McVickar abided by the Continental Association, a nonimportation agreement enacted by the First Continental Congress in response to the Coercive Acts.  In particular, the tenth article stated, “In Case any Merchant, Trader, or other Persons, shall import any Goods or Merchandise after the first Day of December [1774], and before the first Day of February next, the same ought forthwith, at the Election of the Owner, to be either reshipped or delivered up to the Committee of the County or town wherein they shall be imported, to be stored at the Risk of the Importer, until the Non-importation Agreement shall cease, or be sold under the Direction of the Committee aforesaid.”  In other words, McVickar had three options since his shipment arrived on December 10.  He could return it, turn the goods over to the committee to store until the nonimportation agreement ended, or turn the goods over to the committee to sell.

McVickar chose the final option.  The Continental Association made further provisions that he would be reimbursed for the cost of the goods yet could not earn any profit on them.  Instead, any profit was to be applied to relief efforts for Boston where the harbor had been closed and blockaded since the Boston Port Act went into effect on June 1.  McVickar added a nota bene to clarify that the “goods were ordered in June last.”  At that time, colonizers suspected that a nonimportation agreement might go into effect in the future, but the First Continental Congress had not yet met or composed and disseminated the Continental Association.  McVickar suggested that he had not deliberately attempted to get around that agreement, as he further demonstrated in asserting that he was “willing to comply with the association.”  Whatever he lost in profit, he gained in staying in the good graces of members of the community who supported the Patriot cause.

July 5

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

South-Carolina Gazette and Country Journal (July 5, 1774).

“DONATIONS for the Relief of our distressed Brethren in BOSTON, now suffering for the common Cause of AMERICA.”

Parliament intended to punish Boston when it closed and blockaded the harbor, effective June 1, 1774, as punishment for the destruction of the tea the previous December, yet colonizers from New England to Georgia protested what some described as “that unconstitutional Act.”  The Boston Port Act halted trade in what had been a bustling port city.  In early July, a dozen prominent residents of Charleston and other towns in South Carolina published an advertisement that outlined their plans to send aid to Massachusetts.  They described how “MANY generous and charitable Persons in this Colony” were “desirous to send … DONATIONS for the Relief of our distressed Brethren in BOSTON, now suffering for the common Cause of AMERICA.”  Parliament had miscalculated if it believed that other colonies would not react to the Boston Port Act and the other Coercive Acts.  As many colonizers mobilized to protest, contemplating measures that included nonimportation agreements, some directed their attention to assisting the people of Boston whose patriotic spirit put them in the position of enduring Parliament’s retribution.  Bostonians had acted in the interests of all colonizers, so they had earned the support of colonizers near and far.

The committee that collected donations in Charleston described the Boston Port Act as the “most cruel, arbitrary and oppressive Act of the British Parliament.”  As they explained in their advertisement, it prompted them to organize a “laudable” and “necessary” plan to collect donations “for the Benefit of such poor Persons, whose unfortunate Circumstances, occasioned by the Operation of that unconstitutional Act, may be through to stand in most Need of immediate Assistance.”  The committee encouraged other to participate in this endeavor as “a Mark of real Sympathy and Union with our Sister colonies.”  They made that appeal at the same time that John Holt incorporated a “JOIN OR DIE” emblem into the masthead of the New-York Journal, another testament to belief in the “common cause of AMERICA.”  The committee pledged to “faithfully, and as expediously as possible” send donations to “Gentlemen of known Probity, Public Spirit, and Honour in Boston” to distribute as they deemed appropriate.  One member of the committee, Christopher Gadsden, even offered to store and ship rice donated in support of the people of Boston, likely hoping that gesture would inspire others to similar generosity.

News coverage of reactions to the Boston Port Act appeared elsewhere in the July 5 edition of the South-Carolina Gazette ad Country Journal, though the appeal from the committee ran among “NEW ADVERTISEMENTS.”  Throughout the imperial crisis, advertisements often relayed news and opinion that supplemented articles and editorials.  In this instance, the committee collecting aid for Boston made a forceful argument about politics and attempted to shape public opinion concerning current events.  Their advertisement bolstered commentary that readers encountered throughout the newspaper, not solely in the portion for “freshest Advices, both Foreign and Domestic” selected by the printer.