January 1775 in the American Colonies

War Between Great Britain and the American Colonies Looms on the Horizon

January 1 — Criticism of Timothy Ruggles

Boston — This article criticizing Timothy Ruggles, the Chief Justice of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, was printed in the Pennsylvania Gazette on January 23, 1775. Ruggles had presided over the Stamp Act Congress in 1765 but was reprimanded by the Massachusetts Legislature for refusing to sign the Declarations and Resolves.

“The chief troubles of our Israel [1] are the Philantrops, the Hazlerods, the Sir Froths, the Tims, the Bens, and the Bobs These are men, who, for large shares of the American plunder, have sold themselves to do wickedly. The barbarians who have been aiding and assisting bad governors and abandoned ministers, in all their attempts to subjugate and enslave these once happy colonies: the hireling prostitutes who have been constantly representing to ministry that the friends of liberty were a small, insignificant, divided faction; that the people had not virtue to sacrifice any parts of the profits of their trade, or the luxury of their living for the sake of their country; or spirit to withstand the least exertion of power. These are traitors who were for none but licensed town-meetings [2], and gave administration the outlines of the excerable Boston Port Bill and the other detestable bills for destroying the charter [3], and those sacred compacts which Americans once thought were of some value, the faith of kings being the security. These are the unblushing advocates for pensioned governors, dependent judges, hired attorneys, and sheriff-created jurors, that the people might, under color of law, be stript of their property, without their consent, and suitably punished if they should dare to complain: the odious rebels, who, for the support of these hateful measures, have invited the troops and ships, that are now distressing the inhabitants of Boston, and alarming not only a single province, but a whole continent. And when almost every event has turned out contrary to their predictions, and when it might be reasonably expected that the union of the colonies, the resolutions of the Continental Congress, and the late associations and preparations to withstand all hostile attempts upon our persons or properties, might lead administration to suspect at least the policy or safety of pushing this people to extremities; We find this infamous cabal playing over the old game of ministerial deception, and Timothy Ruggles [4] with a gravity peculiar to himself and an owl, asserting in the public prints — “that though many of the people had for some time past been arming, their numbers would not appear in the field so large as imagined, before it was known that independency was the object in contemplation;” [5] and further, that since that time, many associated in divers parts of the province, to support what he calls “Government.” — But the views and designs of these pensioned prostitutes of Massachusetts, — in all that they say or write, are perfectly kenned by the most short-sighted amongst us. In vain are their scare-crows, raw-head and bloody bones, held up to deter us from taking the most effectual means for our security. Tlie little scribbling, illiberal pieces, which have disgraced the Massachusetts Gazettes, will not lessen the Continental Congress in our esteem; or retard the measures they have recommended, notwithstanding the sums paid to effect it. These writers, and their attempts to encourage or mislead, are treated with ineffable contempt by their countrymen. It has, however, been unhappy for both countries that the representations and projects of such men as these have been heeded and adopted on the other side of the Atlantic; men whose very livings have depended upon the continuation of those measures which Americans have so long complained of, and sought to have redressed. If these unnaturals should succeed in their present misleading attempts, to the preventing a speedy close to our differences, we shall then have good reason to conclude that blindness has happened to Britons, that the fulness of American Liberty might come in.”

Notes

1. Boston.
2. Governor Gage’s Proclamation restricting Town Meetings.
3. Charter of Massachusetts Bay.
4. Timothy Ruggles, Chief Justice of the Province of Massachusetts Bay. Ruggles published a plan of association in most of the Boston papers, Dec. 23–27, 1774, and reprinted in Gaines’ New York Gazette, Jan. 9, 1775.
5. An assertion as false as it is impudent and injurious, first uttered by a hireling priest — Dr. Myles Cooper, the President of King’s College, a Loyalist — in the New York Freeholder, who at the same time declared that he had rather be under the government of Roman Catholics than Dissenters — a declaration truly characteristic of the doctor, and his little club of malignants. — The people of Massachusetts have hitherto acted purely on the defensive; they have only opposed those new regulations which were instantly to have been executed, and would have annihilated all our rights. For this absolutely necessary and manly step they have received the approbation of the Continental Congress, one of the most respectable assemblies in the world. They aim at no independency, nor any thing new, but barely the preservation of their old rights. They have referred their cause to the whole continent, and are determined to act only in free consultation, and close union with their brethren. This is indeed the safety of all.

January 2 — Watertown, Massachusetts, voted to organize a Minuteman Company. The Watertown Minutemen were led by Captain Samuel Barnard. Around the same time, the town of Billerica organized a Committee of Inspection and selected William Stickney as its delegate to the next Massachusetts Provincial Congress.

January 3 — New York Sons of Liberty Harass John Case

New York — This article was published in Rivington’s Gazette on January 12, 1775. It provides details on an incident between Isaac Sears, a prominent member of the New York Sons of Liberty, and John Case, who was suspected of being a Loyalist.

“This morning, Mr. John Case, an old man of near sixty years of age, from Long Island, was entreated by an acquaintance of his to go to the house of Jasper Drake, tavernkeeper near Beekman’s Slip, where he was told Captain McD—l [1] Captain S—s [2], and others wanted to converse with him on politics. He went, and soon entered into conversation with Captain McD—l, who attempted to convince him that he was in an error, but not being able to effect it, politely left him. Captain S—s, with several other persons, then attacked him with the force of their eloquence and noise, but Case said he was an unlearned man, and but of few words — that he could not reply to above one. That he judged, however, the fairest way to come at the truth would be to recur to the origin of the present contest between Great Britain and the Colonies, and to trace from the time of the stamp act, the encroachments of ministerial power, and the increasing demands for provincial privileges. This was objected to by Captain S—s, as it would require too much time and attention to discuss. He said that he would question him a little, and asked Case whether the king had not violated his coronation oath? Mr. Case replied, that he thought he had not, and reasoned on this and other matters in as cool a manner as possible, in order not to irritate Captain S—s, who, however, soon grew warm, and branded Case with the appellation of Tory, and told him that if he was in Connecticut government he would be put to death. S—s then demanded of Case whether, if the Bostonians were to take up arms, he would fight for the king? Case answered, that if he fought on either side, he would certainly fight for no one else, as he conceived King George to be his lawful sovereign, for the minister a few days before prayed for our rightful sovereign Lord King George the Third, on which S–s replied he was sorry that he had turned churchman, where such prayers were used; Case replied, these expressions were delivered the preceding Sunday by Dr. Rodgers at the Presbyterian meeting, for he himself was a Presbyterian. After a few more queries and replies of a similar nature, S—s told him that he would not suffer a Tory to sit in company with gentlemen, placed a chair in the chimney corner, caught Case by the arm, and forced him into it. 

He then called for a negro boy, who belonged to the house, and ordered him to sit along with him; for that he (Case) was only fit to sit in company with slaves; but the negro had too much understanding to comply. Mr. Case then called for some wine, and offered it to the company, but

S—s refused to accept of it, pushed him down in the chair where he before had placed him, and ordered the rest not to drink with a Tory; and further, that whoever spoke to Case, should forfeit a bowl of toddy, which was exacted by him from two persons who happened to disobey his mandates.

S—s then told Case that his age protected him, for if he was a young man, he would have placed him on a red-hot gridiron; and after he had detained this old man as long as he thought proper, he dismissed him.”

Notes

1. Alexander McDougall, New York Sons of Liberty.
2. Isaac “King” Sears, New York Sons of Liberty.
3. John Rodgers, pastor of the church on Wall Street.

• Alexander McDougall (1732–1786) — McDougall was a prominent leader of the New York Sons of Liberty and served as a General in the Continental Army during the American Revolutionary War. McDougall is most famous for his role as a leader of the Patriot Cause in New York City. In 1769, he wrote a broadside called  “To the Betrayed Inhabitants of New York” that triggered the Golden Hill Riots (January 1770).
• Isaac Sears (?–1786) — Sears was a prominent leader of the Patriot Movement in New York City, along with McDougall and John Lamb. Sears was involved in various incidents, including the Battle of Golden Hill.

January 4 — Connecticut Prepares for War

Hartford — The Governor of Connecticut, Jonathan Trumbull, met with his council to discuss the possibility of hostilities. A letter written on January 13 provided the details and indicated that defectors from the British Army were helping the Connecticut Militia.

“…we are told they have ordered three hundred barrels of gunpowder, and lead in proportion, to be purchased at the public expense. The militia in the whole colony is mustered every week, and in most towns they have a deserter from his Majesty’s forces, by way of drill sergeant. Nothing but a spirit of independence would suffer matters to be carried to such extremities, as make all prudent inhabitants fear that our parchment will soon totter.”

• John Trumbull (1710–1785) — Trumbull, the Governor of Connecticut, was the only colonial Governor who supported the Patriot Cause. His son, John Trumbull, served as an aide-de-camp to George Washington during the American Revolutionary War and became a famous painter known as the “Painter of the Revolution.”

January 9 — Two letters were printed in Gaines’ New York Gazette on January 9, 1775. The first letter indicates that most people living in England were in agreement with British officials that Parliament’s authority over America needed to be maintained. The second letter disputes this assertion.

The first said: “A letter from London of a late date, says, Lord North behaves with the greatest firmness and composure, and is resolutely determined to carry his point with the colonies, and smiles with contempt upon any tales of congresses and combinations in America. The Duke of Richmond has positively declared his unjustifiable lengths, their pretensions cannot any longer be supported; and that the constitutional authority of Parliament over them must be maintained; and that this is the language of most people of England.”

The second said: “A writer in England gives the following advice to administration with respect to America: ‘Let authority give way to prudence; dignity is supported best by justice; the bread of at least one hundred thousand manufacturers is of more importance than a shadowy authority; the lives of our fellow-subjects, descended from ourselves, and though born in a distant climate, are dear to us. One passionate resolve may sacrifice a million of British subjects, and subject this nation and its dependencies to ruin, and those who framed it to everlasting infamy. More is at stake than many comprehend; those who say otherwise are ignorant, or foes in disguise.;”

• Frederick North (1732–1792) —  The 2nd Earl of Guilford. Lord North served as British Prime Minister (1770–1782) for most of the American Revolutionary War. He supported measures like the Intolerable Acts, which intensified colonial resistance.

January 10 — The inhabitants of Marblehead, Massachusetts, met and agreed to prepare for hostilities with England. They also took measures to expose Loyalists.

“The people of Marblehead, Massachusetts, met to-day and resolved, that, as a great number of the inhabitants of that town may soou be called forth, to assist in defending the charter and constitution of that province, as well as the rights and liberties of all America, in order thereto it is necessary that they should be properly disciplined and instructed in the art of war; they also ordered that a committee of fifteen be appointed to attend to the conduct of the ministerial tools and Jacobites in that town, and to report their names to the town, that effectual measures may be taken to silence them in the future, or expel them from the community.”

January 11 — The South Carolina Provincial Congress met. According to reports in the New York Mercury, “They have shut up the courts of law…” and “This is such a step as no other province has yet taken.”

January 11 — A report in Rivington’s Gazette said that John Dickinson had abandoned the Patriot Cause.

“The violent party in Philadelphia are greatly crest-fallen; they see with inexpressible chagrin the numbers of their former adherents which they lose every day. The Pennsylvania Farmer, a gentleman of great discernment, and possessed of a very large estate, has deserted them, greatly alarmed at the length our committee are carrying matters; he has declared he will not meet them any more, and he does not declare alone.”

Holt’s Journal disputed the claim, reporting that Dickinson had been elected to represent Pennsylvania at the Second Continental Congress, which was planned for May 1775.

“…the people in several colonies are deserting the cause of their country and joining its enemies to enslave it. That several of the most eminent patriots had deserted the cause, particularly the Philadelphia farmer — who remains the same invariable friend he has ever been to his country and mankind, and is now one of the delegates for the province of Pennsylvania, to meet next May in general Congress.”

• John Dickinson (1732–1808) — Dickinson was a Founding Father known as the “Penman of the Revolution” for his Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania. Although he refused to sign the Declaration of Independence, his name was signed to the United States Constitution.

January 12 — The British ship Kingfisher sailed to Turtle Bay, New York, for the winter. The ship was under the command of Captain George Montagu. The British also had a storehouse at Turtle Bay that was raided by the New York Sons of Liberty on July 20.

January 12 — At a gathering of the New York Sons of Liberty, a copy of the pamphlet called “Farmer A.W.’s View of the Controversy Between Great Britain and the Colonies” was burned. The pamphlet, written by Reverend Samuel Seabury, criticized the Continental Congress and the Continental Association. “Farmer A.W.” referred to “A Westchester Farmer.”

• Samuel Seabury (1729–1796) — Seabury was a controversial Anglican priest due to his support for having a British Bishop oversee the Church of England in America. In December 1774, Seabury wrote “Free Thoughts on the Proceedings of the Continental Congress.” Alexander Hamilton responded to this pamphlet with his “Full Vindication of the Measures of Congress” on December 15. Seabury responded to Hamilton with “Farmer A.W.’s View.” Seabury remained in America and eventually returned to his home state, Connecticut, where he became its first Anglican Bishop.

January 18 — Georgia Provincial Congress

Georgia — The Georgia Provincial Congress met for the first time. The delegates were from five parishes that supported the Patriot Cause. The Congress met in Savannah and expressed its support for Massachusetts. However, the seven Loyalist parishes in Georgia prevented the colony from sending delegates to the First Continental Congress.

January 20 — Altercation in Boston

Boston — An altercation took place in Boston involving two young men, British troops, and the Town Watch. Reports differed on the sequence of events. From the Patriot side, it was similar to the events that preceded the Boston Massacre. From the Loyalist side, the British troops followed the law in dealing with rowdy Americans.

This report was published in the Boston Gazette, published by Benjamin Edes and John Gill, who were associated with the Boston Sons of Liberty and the Patriot Cause:

“A little after ten o’clock this evening, two young men passing down Milk street, near the entrance into Loug Lane, they were accosted by an officer, not in the English, but as they supposed in another language, which they did not understand; they asked him what he meant; he replied he meant to tell them to go about their business. 

They had not gone far before the officer called to them to stop. They stopped till he came up to them, and angry words ensued. 

The young men, however, parted from him the second time, and went on their way towards their homes. The officer followed and overtook them near the head of the lane, and stopped them again, telling them he supposed they were stiff Americans; to which one of them said he gloried in the character. Here again words ensued, and the officer drew his sword, flourished it and struck one of the young men on the arm, who immediately seized him.

At this juncture, three or four of the town watch, who were upon the patrol, came up and separated them, advising them to go home. The two young men did so, but the officer refused, saying he was prisoner of the watch and would go with them; they told him he was not their prisoner, but might go where he pleased, and if he desired it, they would see him safe home: but he insisted upon it that he was their prisoner. 

The watchmen went down the lane towards their head-quarters in King street, where they had been going before, and the officer accompanied them. In the way they met with several persons, whom they took to be servants of officers, who, supposing the officer to be in custody of the watch, attempted to rescue him, but he insisted upon being a prisoner, and said the watchmen were his friends, and he would go with them. They then went forward, and in Quaker Lane, which leads into King street, they were met and assaulted by more than twenty officers of the army, who took several of their watch poles from them, and wounded some of them.”

On February 9, the Loyalist newspaper, Rivington’s Gazette, published a different version of the incident in question:

“You have read in that fund of lies and sedition, Edes and Gill, of a “high-handed riot.” There have been five field officers on a court of inquiry, to inspect into the conduct of the officers concerned on that occasion. 

It commenced by Lieutenant Myers, 38th Regiment, being, without the smallest cause, insulted by two townspeople, who not only called him a Tory, rascal, scoundrel, &c., but damned the king, governor, army, and every friend to government; the former he put up with, the latter resented, by knocking the person down. 

He was immediately surrounded by the watch; and though he immediately surrendered, and gave his sword to a Mr. Winslow, who came up at the time, (a private gentleman,) and informed them, and this gentleman, of the cause of the quarrel, they treated him with every indignity possible; not only .allowed the two men to knock him down in the midst of them, but they themselves kicked and beat him all the way to the watch-house, a little short of a quarter of a mile. 

The noise about the watch-house brought together a few officers, whom Mr. Myers requested not to interfere, concealed from them the cruel treatment he had met with, and insisted on remaining in custody. The insolence of the watch to those gentlemen occasioned a fresh riot, when the interposition of a party from the main guard prevented any bad consequences. 

Immediately after, Myens was released, by order from the governor. Complaints were immediately lodged against the officers, and bail is to be given to-morrow for their appearance. 

I cannot quit this subject without observing, that the high-flyers are much disappointed in the event of this riot; not only at the little mischief done, but at the ready submission of every officer concerned, to the laws of the country.”

January 23 — British Occupation of Marshfield

Marshfield — A detachment of British troops left Boston and sailed to Marshfield, Massachusetts. General Gage sent them to help protect Loyalists living in the area who asked for protection. The Loyalists, known as the Marshfield Association, included Timothy Ruggles. The Pennsylvania Journal reported:

“This morning a detachment of about one hundred and twenty soldiers from the army in Boston, under the command of Captain Balfour, were embarked in armed vessels for Marshfield, about forty miles from that place.

We are at a loss for the occasion of this extraordinary maneuver, as all of our accounts from Marshfield agree that the people in that vicinity were peaceable, and no injury had been offered any of the Tories.

A few persons there, it is said, who have rendered themselves disagreeable and contemptible to their neighbors, have taken it into their heads to make complaint to General Gage for military protection. In this they have engaged a number of idle young fellows, and some negroes to join them. The letters from thence state that the numbers and quality of the petitioners are despicable. 

Some inhabitants not unfriendly to the Tory cause, signified their disapprobation of this measure. The sending soldiers alarms and irritates the country; but what service the Tory cause is to receive from this step, time will discover.”

January 25 — The Gray Maggot

Boston — A pamphlet was published in Boston that asserted the members of the Continental Congress had to have been intoxicated when they adopted the Suffolk Resolves. On February 6, the Pennsylvania Journal published a rebuttal:

“A despicable pamphlet lately published in Boston, now commonly called the “Grey Maggot”  has asserted, 

‘That the only apology which could be made for the conduct of the Continental Congress in adopting the Suffolk resolves, was that they came into this vote immediately after drinking thirty-two bumpers of Madeira, of which the next morning, when their heads were cool, they were ashamed, and then prudently determined not to do the business till after dinner for the future!’

If it would not offend the characters of that truly august assembly to take so much notice of this most impudent and false assertion, as seriously to contradict it, we would say, that it appears from the minutes of the Congress, that as they sat till late in the afternoon, they never did any business after dinner, and that the Suffolk resolves were acted upon Saturday, in the forenoon. 

From this instance the public may see to what an astonishing height of unblushing falsehood and the basest calumny against the most respectable characters, the enemies of our common rights have now attained; and how ready they are to perform any dirty drudgery for the sake of procuring or preserving a titled or lucrative place.”

• Suffolk Resolves (1774) — The Suffolk Resolves were written by Joseph Warren in protest of the Intolerable Acts and military preparations taken by Governor Thomas Gage after the Powder Alarm. In its first official act, the First Continental Congress endorsed the Resolves and ordered colonial newspapers to print them.

January 25 — The funeral of Thomas Lawrence, an alderman and former mayor of Philadelphia, was held and conducted “agreeable to the resolves of the Continental Congress.” This refers to the Articles of Association, which said that “…on the death of any relation or friend, none of us, or any of our families, will go into any further mourning-dress than a black crape or ribbon on the arm or hat, for gentlemen; and a black ribbon and necklace for ladies; and we will discontinue the giving of gloves and scarfs at funerals.”

• Continental Association (1774) — The Continental Association was an organization created by the First Continental Congress to enforce the Articles of Association — a trade boycott against British merchants — unless Britain repealed the Coercive Acts.

January 27 — Lord Dartmouth’s Orders

London, England — Secretary of State for the Colonies William Legge, Lord Dartmouth, wrote a letter to General Thomas Gage, ordering him to enforce the Crown’s authority in Boston. Gage oversaw 4,000 troops and 460 Royal Marines from four warships. The Royal Marines were under the command of Major John Pitcairn.

• Primary Document — Lord Dartmouth Letter to Thomas Gage, January 27, 1775.