Violation of Continental Association

September 15

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , ,

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

South-Carolina and American General Gazette (September 15, 1775).

“He … declares, that he has never made the least Infringement on the said Resolves.”

Richard Lushington was serious about defending his reputation.  When the merchant suspected that rumors circulated about alleged misconduct, he placed an advertisement in the South-Carolina and American General Gazette to offer a substantial reward to anyone who revealed the source.  In a notice dated September 5, 1775, Lushington declared that he “has just Reason to surmise, from the Conduct of the Committee of Charlestown” that was responsible for enforcing nonimportation and nonexportation agreements “that some evil, malicious Person or Persons has lodged an Information of his having violated the Resolves of the Continental and Provincial Congresses, by shipping Provisions to the disunited Colonies.”  The Continental Association did not prohibit exporting commodities to Britain, Ireland, and colonies in the West Indies until September 10, but perhaps the reports contended that Lushington had been overzealous in how much and how quickly he exported provisions to colonies in the Caribbean that had not signaled support for the American cause.  Had the merchant attempted to sidestep the Continental Association, abiding by the letter but not the spirit?

Lushington denied that he acted inappropriately.  “[I]n justification of his own Character, which he esteems as sacred,” he proclaimed that “he has never made the least Infringement on the said Resolves.”  The merchant was so anxious to address the allegations that offered “a Reward of ONE HUNDRED POUNDS currency to any Person or Persons that will discover to him the Informer, on Oath, in order that such false, atrocious Villains may be publickly known in the Community.”  He may have been especially keen to address the charges manufactured against him because, as Amy Pastan explains, he was a Quaker and thus an outsider among the predominantly Anglican population in Charleston.  “While Quakers were tolerated in the southern port city,” Pastan notes, “their anti-slavery views set them apart from the Charleston elite.”  Whatever challenges he faced as fall arrived in 1775, Lushington later demonstrated his allegiance to the American cause by serving as captain of a Patriot militia company known as the Free Citizens of Charleston as well as the Jews Company because several Jewish men, also outsiders in Charleston, served in it.

For more on Lushington and the Free Citizens of Charleston, visit “Rediscovering Charleston’s Revolutionary Outsiders.”

August 16

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , ,

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

Massachusetts Spy (August 16, 1775).

“An unwearied Pedlar of that baneful herb TEA.”

Naham Houghton of Lancaster, Massachusetts, went too far and there had to be consequences.  An advertisement in the August 16, 1775, edition of the Massachusetts Spy gave an abbreviated account of what occurred.  According to John Prescott, chairman of the local Committee of Inspection, there had been complaints that Houghton behaved as “enemy to his Country, by officiating as an unwearied Pedlar of that baneful herb TEA, and otherwise rendering himself odious to the inhabitants of this town.”  Prescott did not elaborate on the other infractions.  Selling tea was enough to get Houghton into hot water.

That violated the Continental Association, a nonimportation agreement devised by the First Continental Congress in response to the Coercive Acts imposed by Parliament in retribution for the Boston Tea Party.  The eleventh article outlined an enforcement mechanism, stating that a “Committee be chosen in every County, City, and Town” to monitor compliance with the pact.  When a majority determined that someone committed a violation, they would “cause the truth of the case to be published in the Gazette, to the End that all such foes to the rights of British America may be publickly known and universally condemned as Enemies.”  In turn, the rest of the community would “break off all Dealings with him, or her.”

The committee in Lancaster apparently sought to work with Houghton in seeking an explanation for his actions, but to no avail.  Prescott reported that Houghton refused to “appear before the Committee that his political principles might be known” even though he had been warned.  Neither the committee nor the town tolerated such defiance.  The town voted “to caution all friends to the community, to entirely shun his company,” as the Continental Association instructed, “and have no manner of dealings or connections with him, except acts of common humanity.”  Selling tea continued to resonate as a political act, yet it was only one of many offenses that made Houghton “odious” to his neighbors.  At the same time that others suspected of Tory sympathies confessed their errors and used newspaper advertisements to rehabilitate their reputations, Houghton steadfastly refused to bow to such pressure exerted by the Committee of Inspection.  He instead became the subject of an advertisement that made clear, far and wide, that he was not in good standing in his community.

May 24

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , ,

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

Pennsylvania Journal (May 24, 1775).

“I … have inadvertently and imprudently sold India Bohea TEA, to sundry persons and at sundry times.”

Isaac Worrell needed to do some damage control when others discovered that he had been selling tea in violation of the third article of the Continental Association in the spring of 1775.  That nonimportation agreement, devised by the First Continental Congress the previous fall, stated “we will not purchase or use any Tea imported on Account of the East India Company, or any on which a Duty hath been or shall be paid; and, from and after the first Dat of March next, we will not purchase or use any East India Tea whatever.”  Yet Worrell had not abided by those terms.

In an advertisement that first appeared in the May 17, 1775, edition of the Pennsylvania Journal and ran again the following week, Worrell confessed that he “imprudently sold India Bohea TEA, to sundry persons and at sundry times since the resolves of the Congress have taken place,” though he claimed that he had done so “inadvertently.”  Readers may have been skeptical that a prohibited act that occurred repeatedly happened “inadvertently.”  All the same, Worrell hoped that they would take note of his explanation for the infractions and accept his apology.  He asserted that he had “no other motive or consideration … but my own interest, in getting off my hands about 30 or 40 pounds of said Tea.”  He also contended that he acquired the tea “long before the said resolves took place,” hoping that would make his offense seem less serious.  At least he had not actively ordered or received new shipments.

Worrell assured his community that he had reformed.  “I do now promise to adhere to, and strictly observe and keep inviolate for the future,” he proclaimed, “the said resolves of the Congress relating to Trade and Commerce.”  He hoped that would be sufficient that “my fellow countrymen will accept this my accknowledgment, as a satisfaction for my offence.”  The Continental Association called for breaking off all ties, commercial and social, with those who violated it, yet Worrell hoped that his apology would outweigh his flimsy excuses to restore him to the good graces of the public. That he managed to sell “30 or 40 pounds of said Tea,” however, suggests that many others did not obey the terms of the Continental Association.  Loyalists accused Patriots of cheating, especially when it came to tea.  Worrell’s notice seems to support such allegations.