Volume 3, Chapter 15, The Newport Case
Enforcement troubles in Rhode Island began promptly.
The assembly forbade the governor from swearing in any customs officials.
And after John Temple, Surveyor General of the Customs at Boston,
seized the ship Rhoda at Newport for engaging in illegal trade,
a party of citizens loaded the cargo at night and put the ship to sea.
The Rota, incidentally, was owned by a judge of the Rhode Island Superior Court.
In a more important case, John Robinson, in the spring of 1764, seized a vessel and cargo
of sugar that had, in turn, been seized by a British naval officer. Robinson took the
cargo to Rhode Island's Admiralty Court, which superbly thwarted the collector by selling
In March 1765, moreover, Robinson and his deputy, John Nicholl, seized the vessels Wayne
Scott and Nellie for possessing illegal molasses and took the case to the Rhode Island Admiralty
Court. The judge, John Andrews, and the prosecutor or king's advocate, James Honeyman, were both
Both native Rhode Islanders, and both highly sympathetic to the merchants. They did their
best to thwart the whole proceeding. Witnesses were not summoned and were permitted to escape.
Honeymen refused to attend the trial, and finally Judge Andrews acquitted both of the
ships. When Robinson and Nickell complained to England of this treatment, Judge Andrews
Judge Andrews retaliated swiftly, suing the customs officers in Common Law Court for defamation.
Judge Andrews won the case and proceeded to sue Robinson for complaining to the governor.
Such cases being typical in Rhode Island, the judge and the king's advocate effectively
stymied the royal customs officials in that province.
When, therefore, John Robinson seized the ship Polly in April 1765 for smuggling molasses,
he should not have been surprised to receive the full treatment from populace and judiciary
alike. In fact, here was an excellent example of cooperation in obstruction between the
citizens of Rhode Island and neighboring Massachusetts. The vessel was seized at Dighton on the Massachusetts
The first step for Robinson and his aides was to have a crew bring the Polly to Newport to be condemned in court, but they could find no one indicted to serve on such an obnoxious voyage.
That night a large group of citizens carried away the whole cargo and grounded the sloop.
Robinson's two aides found it healthier not to interfere, and when warned by the local
justice of the peace of further rebellious action by the mob, they scurried back to Newport.
And a cruise sent by Robinson to bring the Polly to Newport was sent fleeing back by
a turbulent crowd of about a hundred people.
Hearing the news of the popular resistance, John Robinson gathered an armed force of British
Robinson arrived in Dayton, then he was arrested and sued for 3,000 pounds in damages by Job
Smith for seizing his vessel, the poly, and its cargo. The suit would eventually be superseded
by justification for probable cause in Vice Admiralty Court, but meanwhile Robinson was
taken to Taunton, Massachusetts to the jeers and threats of the populace. Without friends
Forced to stand bail, Robinson was forced to spend the night in jail until bailed out
by John Temple.
Meanwhile, Robinson ranted that the wretch Smith was deserving of the severest treatment
that the law could inflict.
At Taunton, it was again justices of the peace who obstructed Robinson's efforts at enforcement.
Finally, Robinson called on a British warship and re-seized the poly.
Acted strongly by Temple, he then lashed out at the Rhode Islanders by taking the case
to court at Halifax, Nova Scotia. Not only remote, Halifax was in a militarily held domain
as well. Resentment in the colony also piled up against the British fleet, both for its
enforcing activities and for impressing colonial seamen into the Royal Fleet. The impressment
issue burst forth in the summer of 1764. Three crewmembers of the British naval schooner,
St. John, came ashore and stole some pigs and chickens from Newport citizens. The Newporters
were incensed to find that the sheriff rowing out to arrest the thieves was prevented from
boarding the St. John. The same day, one of the ships' impressed seamen managed to escape
to Newport, and the St. John sent out an armed party to recapture him on the charge of desertion.
This outrage was too much for the people of Newport. When the armed party landed, a Newport
mob promptly seized the commanding officer, giving him a little taste of impressment in
reverse, and stoned and drove off the rest of his men. In retaliation for the warship's
In this defiance of the civil sheriff, two members of the Rhode Island Council ordered the gunners at the Fort to shell the St. John, as it left port that day, and fifty other New Porters enthusiastically joined in the firing.
Such incidents polarized the conflict on both sides. Thus, the Rhode Island Council chastised the gunners for not trying conscientiously to sink the warship.
In the meanwhile, Captain Richard Smith of the Royal Navy was urging the British government
to use this act of insurrection as a means of a coerced change of government in this licentious
republic. At about the same time, the British schooner Chalour impressed some fishermen off
Long Island in New York. The Chalour's master was threatened with death if the men were retained.
and so the victims were released the next day.
Notwithstanding, a New York City mob seized a boat from the chalour and burned it ceremoniously in front of City Hall.
Thus the impressment issue kindled opposition to Britain in the colonies.
The explosive issue of impressment, or at least forced conscription, into the Navy was also involved in a clash off New England in December 1764.
Officers of the British warships Signet and Jamaica forcibly boarded a passenger ship off New England looking for deserters from the Navy.
The passengers rose to their own defense and managed to throw several of the officers overboard.
The fight ended when an officer ran through one of the passengers with his sword, a finale
that incensed the citizens of Newport when the signet put into port shortly afterward.
A more directly rebellious act by Newporters against the Crown over in Pressman occurred
in the spring of 1765. The royal ship Maidstone had arrived at Newport at the end of the previous
year and proceeded to conscript colonial sailors at a furious pace. Indeed, the Maidstone men
even broke an agreement not to seize Newport townspeople. Trade was crippled out of fear
of losing crews to impressment, and fishermen refused to venture forth about their business.
The people of Newport decided to take positive measures to defend life and property against these outrages by England.
On June 4, the Maidstone officers impressed the full crew of a ship.
A furious mob of 500 seized one of the Maidstone's boats and burned it completely.
completely. Lieutenant Jenkins of the Royal Vessel was seized by the crowd and almost
killed until cooler and more timorous heads prevailed. A few weeks later the Maidstone
finally bowed to pressures coming from the masses, up to and including Governor Samuel
Ward, and released all the impressed and kidnapped Rhode Islanders. The British officials,
The Maidstone's captain and the Customs officers wrote to England complaining of the form ending
of violent resistance to England by the Rhode Island officials, who being democratically
elected would be turned out of office if they behaved otherwise. The attack on the Maidstone
stemmed from the lawlessness of the people and from the principles of the constitution
of the government, which is the most popular that can be formed.
The merchants also reacted to the Sugar Act and the enforcement of mercantilist restrictions
by trying to encourage self-sufficiency in manufacturing in the colonies. This reaction
at first was meant not as pressure on Britain to repeal the Sugar Act, but simply as a means
of reducing dependence on a foreign trade that was now crippled. Wealthy merchants of New
New York and Boston formed associations and advanced capital for spinning factories and
whisky distilleries to replace rum and planned to increase wool manufacture. Concerted movements
arose in Boston, New York, New Haven and Elizabeth to abstain from luxury imports and substitute
American products. In Boston, an association formed by some counselors, representatives
and others pledged a boycott of British manufacturers and of the consumption of lamb in order to
help domestic woolens. Leading liberals in New York formed in late 1764 a Society for
the Promotion of Arts, Agriculture and Economy of New York City to promote these aims. Included
Among the founders was the eminent radical triumvirate of William Livingston, William
Smith Jr., and John Moran Scott, as well as Philip Livingston, Frederick Phillips, and
James Duane. All these popular actions tended to unite the people against British legislation.
The upshot of the trade restrictions, aided by the check on inflation imposed by the British
The British Currency Act of 1764, in areas south of New England, was a severe business depression in the colonies.
Evidences of severe depression appeared by the spring of 1764 in Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Boston, New Hampshire, Philadelphia, Maryland and Virginia.
In Boston, the bankruptcy of Nathaniel Wheelwright, one of New England's leading merchants, in January 1765, was a severe blow to business confidence.
The Virginia planters, heavily indebted to English merchants, were in particularly bad straits, with the price of tobacco declining sharply.