Could they [the Ministry) not have given up their Plan for enslaving America without seizing . . . all the Arms and Ammunition? and without soliciting and finally obtaining an Order to prohibit the Importation of warlike Stores in the Colonies? . . . And shall we like the Carthaginians, peaceably surrender our Arms to our Enemies, in Hopes of obtaining in Return the Liberties we have so long been contending for? . . .
I . . . hope that no Person will, at this imponam Crisis, be unprepared to act in his own Defence, should he by Necessity be driven thereto. And I must here beg Leave to recommend to the Confederation of the People of this Continent, Whether, when we are by an arbitrary Decree prohibited the having Arms and Ammunition by Importation, we have not by the Law of Self Preservation, a Right to seize upon all those within our Power, in order to defend the liberties which GOD and Nature have given us . . .?25
More information on what precipitated the import ban was published in London and reprinted in the colonial newspapers. Exaggerated accounts of armed struggle in the colonies had reached England. One such account stated:
An order of the council, dated the 19th inst. is published in this night’s Gazette, prohibiting the exportation of gun powder and arms, from any poim of the kingdom. . . .
By a letter received by a merchant in this city from New York . . . [the ship left New York in mid-September] the Captain says an express was just mailed there from Boston, with an account that there had been an engagement between the troops and the Bostonians; the Troops set fire to the town, which was all in flames when the express came away. What gives the greatest credit to this accoum is, the entire prohibition of gunpowder, and all sorts of arms and ammunition.
Notwithstanding the ministerial accounts from America are kept a profound secret the late embargo on gunpowder proves their fears respecting that country to be very great. Great quantities of nitre and salt-petre just shipped, are again disembarking in consequence of Saturday night’s Gazette.26
While the above correspondence Dartmouth shared with Gage stressed the Dutch connection, English gun makers had been receiving orders for vast numbers of arms from the Americans. As was originally published in a London newspaper:
Saturday’s proclamation, it is said, was occasioned by intelligence received from Sheffield and Birmingham of amazing quantities of fire arms, & c. being nearly ready to be sent to America, in consequence of an order received from thence some time since.
Two vessels, laden with gun-powder and other military utensils, bound for the other side of the Atlantic, were stopped at Gravesend on Monday by the out clearers, in consequence of the King’s Proclamation inserted in Saturday night’s Gazette. . . .
A letter received in town from an English Gentleman at Brest says, that a French frigate and a snow lately sailed from that port for America, laden with firelocks, gunpowder, & c. . . .
The letters received for Friday from Boston, dated the 21st of September, are of the most alarming nature. They assert, that the inhabitants of Boston, and of the province of Massachusetts Bay are now in arms. . . .27
As noted, the Royal proclamation immediately halted arms shipments bound for America. “Some ships fitting out at Liverpool could not have permission to take on board any gun-powder, guns, or swords, . . . which . . . proves the fears of the ministry, respecting America, to be very great.”28 An American sympathizer in England predicted that “the proclamation against sending guns and gun powder out of this kingdom will be of very little use or effect, because the Americans will certainly procure whatever quantity of them they want from Holland, France, and Spain . . . .”29
British authorities anticipated that, and “orders have been given for the seizing every ship, of what nation soever, that are employed in conveying arms or ammunition to the Americans. This, ‘tis thought, will be the cause of some serious disputes.”30 Indeed, “immediately after the King’s proclamation issued prohibiting the exportation of arms and ammunition from Great-Britain, two men of war were ordered to the Texel, in Holland, in order to prevent the transportation of those articles in English bottoms to America.” The same report referred to “the late Seizure of Arms, Lead and Powder, made by the Collector of this Port [New York].”31 A letter from Bristol dated the day after Christmas reported that “orders are given for several frigates to be fitted out immediately to sail for America, to be stationed there in order to cruise along the coasts, to prevent any ammunition or arms being sent to the Americans by any foreign power.”32
The merchants and people of Liverpool reportedly “were heartily disposed in favor of America,” and ”Sir William Meredith declared openly, before and at his election for Liverpool, his sentiments against the measures of administration toward the colonies: that the order of his Majesty in council, prohibiting the exportation of gun powder or armies had stopped ten or fifteen large ships there, almost ready for the sea, bound to the coast of Africa.”33
But the Americans claimed to have the practical ability to arm themselves. A Philadelphian wrote to a member of Parliament on Christmas Eve:
The late Proclamation forbidding the exportation of gun-powder and firearms to America seemed intended to take away from the colonies the power of defending themselves by force. I think it my duty to inform you that the said proclamation will be rendered ineffectual by a manufactory of gunpowder, which has lately been set on foot in this Province, the materials of which may be procured in great perfection, and at a easier rate than they can be imported from Great Britain, among ourselves. There are, moreover, gunsmiths enough in this Province to make one hundred thousand stands of arms in one year, at twenty-eight shillings sterling apiece, if they should be wanted. It may not be amiss to make this intelligence as public as possible, that our rulers may see the impossibility of enforcing the late Acts of Parliament by arms.34
A vocal minority of members of Parliament sympathized with the Americans regarding the arms embargo and other grievances. On March 22, 1775, Parliament debated Edmund Burke’s Resolutions for Conciliation with America, which proposed that the colonies not be taxed and which, not surprisingly, failed. In the course of his eloquent speech, Burke pointed out that some of the same injustices the Americans were suffering had been committed before in Wales:
Sir, during that state of things, Parliament was not idle. They attempted to subdue the fierce spirit of the Welsh by all sorts of rigorous laws. They prohibited by statute the sending all sorts of arms into Wales, as you prohibit by proclamation (with something more of doubt on the legality) the sending arms to America. They disarmed the Welsh by statute, as you attempted, (but still with more question on the legality) to disarm New England by an instruction. They made an Act to drag offenders from Wales into England for trial, as you have done (but with more hardship) with regard to America.35
A perhaps typical example of the seizure of imported arms and powder took place in the port of New York City in late December 1774. Several containers of arms and a barrel of powder were seized for lack of cockets (receipts for payment of duties). The containers were taken to the Custom House, and then, after someone attempted to retrieve them, to a man-of-war. The powder was lodged in the Powder House. Andrew Elliot, the customs collector, received a letter dated the 27th purportedly signed by “the Mohawks and River Indians” stating:
A number of Fire-arms of British manufacture, legally imported, having been lately seized by your orders and conveyed on board the Man-of-War, by which arbitrary steps you have declared yourself and inveterate enemy to the liberties of North America; in this light we view you, and from you we shall demand these Arms whenever they are wanted, which is probable will be soon. You will therefore, if you have the least regard to the safety of yourself or your servants, who seized them, be careful to prevent their being sent away, as you may depend upon answering for a contrary conduct with a vengeance.36
The collector responded with a letter denying any illegal conduct in the seizure, and had it posted at the Coffee House, apparently a place where the allege
d smugglers would learn of it.37 In response, a handbill was “secretly conveyed into almost every house in Town” imploring whether, “when Slavery is clanking her infernal chains, . . . will you supinely fold your arms, and calmly see your weapons of defence torn from you, by a band of ruffians?” It asked whether the readers would be “robbed of your Arms, by a few petty Custom House Officers, with impunity?” The missive continued:
your country has been basely robbed by the Officers of the Customs, of a considerable number of Arms, which were legally exported from Great Britain, and imported here, in the Ship Lady Gage, and therefore not liable to a seizure, upon any pretence whatsoever, as they are actually the manufacture of England. Those Arms I am credibly informed, are now on board the Man-of-War, and are in a few days to be sent to General Gage, and of consequence are to be used for your destruction.38
The handbill urged that the people assemble before the collector, “insist upon the Arms being relanded,” or face the consequences. It concluded: “It is not a season to be mealy-mouthed, . . . and we do not know but that the Arms may be wanted to-morrow.”39 It seems doubtful that the arms and powder were ever returned to the owners.
Domestically, Gage may have extended his seizure of powder to shops and other private places, for it was reported in December “that General Gage has taken possession of all the gunpowder he could discover [in Boston], which is proof that the new Governor thinks there is something to be feared from the virtuous spirit of the Americans.”40
A political satire had General Gage averring: “The inhabitants of the province of Massachusetts Bay, have not only thrown off the jurisdiction of the British Parliament, but they are disaffected to the British Crown. . . . They have even provided themselves with arms and ammunition, and have acquired a complete knowledge of the military exercises, in direct opposition to my proclamations.”41 However, the statement sounds more like reality than satire.
The freeholders and other inhabitants of Boston met at Faneuil Hall on December 30, with Samuel Adams in the chair. The gathering’s resolutions recounted the seizures of gunpowder and militia cannon, dispersal of peaceable assemblies, and military occupation, which “at length roused the people to think of defending themselves and their property by arms, if nothing less could save them from violence and rapine.” And contrary to Gage’s assertion “that no man’s property has been seized or hurt, except the King’s,” the resolutions averred: “We need not enumerate all the instances of property seized; it is enough to say, that a number of Cannon, the property of a respectable Merchant of this Town, were seized and carried off by force.”42
Meanwhile, the Provincial Congress in Cambridge urged the Minutemen and other militiamen to perfect their military discipline and resolved to promote gun making. The Congress sought to encourage “such persons, as are skilled in the manufacturing of fire arms and bayonets, diligently to apply themselves thereto, for supplying such of the inhabitants as shall be deficient.” It promised to purchase “so many effective arms and bayonets as can be delivered in a reasonable time upon notice given to this congress at its next session.”43
The colonists often repeated points of political philosophy from their Whig brethren across the Atlantic. The Freeman’s Dublin Journal offered a typical example, stating that “the instant a king violates his part of the contract, . . . a Whig thinks that the legislative power of course naturally returns to the people, and that they are at full liberty to take arms, and drive the tyrant from the throne.”44 Scottish Whig James Burgh’s Political Disquisitions (1774)—“a book which ought to be in the hands of every American who has learned to read,” according to John Adams45—was frequently quoted, particularly the following:
The confidence, which a standing army gives a minister, puts him upon carrying things with a higher hand, than he would attempt to do, if the people were armed, and the court unarmed, that is, if there were no land-force in the nation, but a militia. Had we at this time no standing army, we should not think of forcing money out of the pockets of three millions of our subjects. . . . [Burgh goes on to list deprivation of jury trial, lack of representation, and other grievances of the Americans.] There is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people.46
Opposing the armed patriots were the Royal militias buttressed by the Redcoats: “It is said that orders are given for his Majesty’s militias stationed in North America to be immediately reinforced by several detachments of land forces from Great-Britain and Ireland.”47
Bloodshed was barely avoided on February 27, when British forces landed at Salem, Essex County, to seize the colonists’ growing stock of munitions. A rider warned, “The Regulars are coming after the guns and are now near Malloon’s Mills!” The people swarmed out of the churches and dragged off cannon and other weapons into the woods. Militiamen from the vicinity filled the town. After a standoff, confrontation was avoided, and the troops left empty-handed.48
While Massachusetts took the center stage, the other colonies were preparing for the worst. Patrick Henry’s “liberty or death” oration on March 23, 1775, to the Convention of Delegates of Virginia in Richmond, directly confronted the political import of an armed versus a disarmed populace. Henry implored:
They tell us . . . . that we are weak—unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? . . . Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? . . . Three million people, armed in the holy cause of liberty . . . are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us.49
Among the resolutions that Henry proposed and the convention adopted was the following: “That a well regulated Militia, composed of Gentlemen and Yeomen, is the natural Strength, and only Security, of a free Government.”50 The militia rendered unnecessary the standing army, which is “always subversive of the quiet, and dangerous to the liberties of the people.” The militia would “secure our inestimable rights and liberties from those further violations with which they are threatened.” Such luminaries as Patrick Henry, Richard Henry Lee, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson formed “a committee to prepare a plan for the embodying, arming, and disciplining such a number of men as may be sufficient” to protect the colony.51 The convention also recommended “that every Man be provided with a good Rifle” and “that every Horseman be provided . . . with Pistols and Holsters, a Carbine, or other Firelock.”52
Meanwhile, patriots were smuggling quantities of arms and gunpowder out of Boston, and searches and seizures, some yielding massive supplies, were being stepped up. Boston merchant John Andrews wrote on March 18:
Our provincial congress is to meet next month at Concord, when, I am told, there is to be an army of observation incamp’d, consisting of twenty thousand men. Am also inform’ d that the congress have expended near a million in our Old tenor for ammunition and provisions. This I know, that they have had upwards of fifty ton of shot, shell, &ca., cast, besides an innumerable number of Musket balls. Have seen twenty load cover’d with dung go out of town myself, but lately all carts have been searched by the Guards, and unluckily last Saturday evening a load of cartridges were seiz’d pack’d in candle boxes, consisting of 13,500 besides 4 boxes balls. The countryman struggled hard before he would deliver’em, and received two or three bad wounds.53
This seizure, with a higher estimate of cartridges, was noted by Lieutenant Frederick MacKenzie of the Royal Welch Fusiliers in his diary entry on the same date:
A country man was Stopped at the Lines, going out of town with 19,000 ball Cartridges, which were taken from him. When liberated, he had the insolence to go to Head quarters to demand the redelivery of them. When asked who they were for, he said they were for his own use; and on being refused them, he said he could nor help it, but they were the last parcel of a large quantity which he had carried out at different times. Great numbers of Arms have been
carried out of town during the Winter; and if more strict search had been made at the Lines, many of them, and much Ammunition might have been seized.54
The owner was Robert Pierpont of Roxbury, Suffolk County, whose “insolence” must have stemmed from being so Americanized—his apparent namesake ancestor sailed from England and established the family in Roxbury a century before.55 Pierpont gave a detailed deposition about the seizure and his petition to Gage for return of his property, explaining that on the afternoon of March 10:
on a cart of mine drove by one Hugh Floud while at the Neck, it was stopped by a number of soldiers, who having searched the cart and finding thirteen boxes containing cartridges & bullets for muskets, they took the same from the cart who they kept under guard for sometime and then permitted him to depart with his cart, whereupon I this morning waited upon General Gage, having before acquainted him with their stoppage, and claimed the boxes of shot & cartridges as my property. Upon this his Excellency reply’d, that he’d opposed the Errand I was upon before this time, for two Custom house officers had gone up to them, and that I could not have them at present, but that they should be marked and put in a safe place.56
Gage was personally willing to hear Pierpont’s petition, perhaps not so much to be a caring governor but to gain intelligence about such smuggling. While the above wording is somewhat unclear, it seems that the Customs House officers may have suspected that the huge quantity of ammunition had been imported in violation of the ban, and the soldiers thus seized it as smuggled goods. This would justify indefinite detention of the seized items.
The Founders' Second Amendment Page 9