Celebrating 17 years

The American Revolution in Massachusetts



This article discusses the emergence of the American Revolution in Massachusetts. It describes the period when the American thirteen colonies started to resist the England and its different imperial policies imposed on them from 1763 to 1775. During this period too, the Massachusetts Bay colony underwent the revolution and the resistance against England and its policies. What is significant also is that the leaders of Massachusetts, who carried the revolution, proved to be shrewd men, intelligent, and also clever enough to organize their resistance against England. They also knew how to plan their resistance at the political and the military. Besides, Massachusetts succeeded to unite the rest of the colonies against England, and thus making from the cause of Massachusetts the cause of America.


Revolutions took place almost everywhere, and the American history includes one chapter of the revolutionary period. The United States’ history constitutes the history of, fundamentally, a number of colonies which succeeded to form the United States’ Republic. These colonies were of British origins, since the task of building colonial settlements in North America was held by the British themselves, and once established, they formed part of the British Empire in the New World. If we look back at the United States’ history, we have to deal with the Pre- Independence era in which an important historical event took place in the eighteenth century; it was the American Revolutionary War (1775-1783). It tells the story of the Americans and the means they used to achieve their independence.

Although the American Revolutionary War took place in the period from (1775-1783), it had its roots before 1775. It emerged because by 1763 the English speaking communities in the American Continent realized to some extent that their interests and goals were distinct from those of the ruling class in the mother- country.1 After the North American territory had been settled, the American colonists were used to do things in their own way. Thus, they succeeded to manage their colonial affairs without British interference. However, the stage of revolt was set in motion when the British Government decided to rule the American colonies after the Seven Years’ War (1754-1763).2

When the Americans started their revolt, their resistance was symbolized by certain events which had taken place during the revolutionary era such as The Boston Massacre, The Boston Tea Party, and The Lexington- Concord revolutionary outbreak. All these events hold the common belief that the bulk of the American Revolution started and occurred in the colony of Massachusetts. It played an important role which caused the emergence of the American radical movement devoted to independence during the revolutionary era. The American Revolution in Massachusetts (1763-1775) constitutes the object of this article to analyze the followings:

The origins, the reasons, and the different predominant factors of the American Revolution in Massachusetts; whether economic; based particularly on the British imperial policy of 1763 and other which included taxation and some other economic measures, or political which was based primarily on colonial awareness of political affairs. The emergence of the revolution in Massachusetts, and to which level the economic factor of taxation had affected the people of Massachusetts, and how it mobilized people to resist. What were the different means taken by the people of Massachusetts to react against the British measures when they started their revolution in 1763 until the revolutionary outbreak in 1775.

Origins of the American Revolution

The good feeling between the English colonies and their mother- country was at its best until the year 1763 during which colonial relations between England and its thirteen colonies in North America began to be deteriorated. All the events which took place in the period following 1763 marked the beginning of the American Revolution. Imperial relationships between England and its thirteen colonies would never be the same as had been before because of the fact that motivations for imperial changes would come out of the following circumstances.

In the period from 1621 until 1756, there had been little British intervention in America. This period is known as “salutary neglect”. The colonists were for the most part British in origin. They were proud of their Anglo-Saxon heritage. They were also proud of their affiliation with Great Britain and satisfied with the prosperity they enjoyed as part of Britain’s commercial Empire. However, the problems that arose when the British Government decided to manage the affairs of the Empire appeared as a stage for the revolution. The American colonists started to react against their government when the British statesmen decided to put into practice a particular imperial policy of reconstruction of their Empire after the end of the French and Indian War (1754-1763).

After the Anglo- French rivalry had ended, there arose additional concerns about the matters of colonial defense, the enforcement of the Navigation Acts, Indian policy, revenue receipts, and colonial trade with the French Caribbean Islands. Britain’s attempts to abolish this trade led to suggestions for revising basic structures for colonial trade. All these necessities provided the background of new different policies in the reconstruction of the Empire following the year 1763. The story of these changes and the colonists’ reaction to them is the story of the coming of the American Revolution.3

Enforcement of the Navigation Acts

Although England was victorious in 1763, it was exhausted. The French and Indian War (1754-1763) was expensive. Moreover, P. M. George Greenville, like other imperial statesmen, knew that ships and troops would have to remain there to protect what had been won; but the problem was how to pay for them. When George Greenville presented his report to the House of Commons, he pointed out to the following provision:

“We have expended much in America. Let us now prevail ourselves of the fruits of that expense. The great object to reconcile the regulation of commerce with an increase of revenue. The expense of maintaining 10.000 men in North America, amount £ 359,000. The troops victualling, and surveying North America £ 181,800. Some ... commercial controls would make the colonies more adjuncts to the imperial economic system. It was particularly desirable to prevent intercourse of America with foreign nations.” 4

Greenville believed that the English policy towards the colonies should be changed, and that the colonies had to be ruled in another way because of the costs of the war, the looseness of the Empire, and that Parliament was the only institution to legislate for the colonies. When his imperial reorganization policy began to be implemented, he first ordered the enforcement of the Navigation Acts which were taxes paid to England on imports shipped into colonial harbours. They also restricted the 5 places where colonial ships could go to sell their cargoes in the world. These acts had been introduced in 1651 by the Revolutionary Parliament of Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658).6

Greenville found that the amount of money coming from the customs duties was too small for the commerce being carried on. According to him, £ 7,600 was spent each year in salaries for customs officials who collected only £ 1,900 as revenue from the colonies and the West Indies. He concluded that colonial ships were smuggling cargoes, and the customs men were not enforcing the laws.54 When George Greenville intended to end up this illegitimate trade in America, he ordered the use of the Writs of Assistance so as to stop smuggling which was indulged in the Northern colonies, and in Massachusetts in particular, against the Navigation Acts.7

Furthermore, Greenville reorganized the Vice-Admiralty Courts so as to provide strong machinery for the enforcement of the Navigation Acts. Although these courts were different in operation from the Common-Law Courts, they served only one purpose, to resolve disputes among merchants and seamen. They only dealt with commercial matters. When Great Britain decided to enforce the Navigation Acts in the colonies in 1763, these courts were authorized further to enforce the customs duties, and charge criminals for smuggling. 8

Attempts to Impose Revenue Taxes

As far as money- rising is concerned, George Greenville emphasized on the British orthodox view that Parliament had the indisputable power to pass revenue acts. He believed that there was no distinction between taxation and legislation; between internal or external taxation because they were founded upon one authority. So, Parliament found in taxation a way to collect the needed money to run by, and to implement the imperial reorganization policy. George Grenville stated this parliamentary right to tax the colonies in the following speech addressed to the House of Commons on January 14, 1766:

“ ... That this kingdom has the sovereign, the supreme Legislative power over America, is granted. It cannot be denied; and Taxation is a part of that sovereign power. It is one branch of the legislation. It has been exercised, over those who are not, who were never represented. It is exercised over the East India Company, the merchants of London, and the proprietors of the stocks, and over great manufacturing towns... . Protection and obedience are reciprocal. Great Britain protects America, and America is bound to yield obedience. If not, tell me when the Americans were emancipated? When they want the protection, they are always very ready to ask for it, and has always been afforded them in the most full and ample manner. Great Britain has run itself into an immense debt to give them this protection; and no they are called upon to contribute a small share towards the public expense... .” 9

Accordingly, Grenville proposed three steps to impose taxes in the colonies. Under his request, Parliament began to enact a number of taxes in order to raise money from the colonies. The first measure in taxing the colonies was issued in 1764.61 It was the Sugar Act which included the following provisions:

The original tax, the Molasses Act of 1733, of sixpence per gallon was reduced into three-penny duty.

1. Specified wines, cloth, coffee, tropical foods, and silk were now subject to importation duties. These taxable items were added to molasses and sugar.

2. American exports, notably iron and lumber, were subjected to close supervision; shippers were required to complete a cumbersome bonding procedure before loading their cargoes.10

Greenville’s policy of taxation included a third measure, the Stamp Act. Under Greenville’s request, Parliament attempted to raise revenue through direct taxation of commercial and legal papers in the colonies. Since new enormous defense burdens had resulted from the French and Indian War (1754-1763), the British Government decided to set up military forts along the western frontier to protect the colonies from Indian attacks, and intended to meet half of the costs by both the Sugar Act and Stamp Act’s revenues.11

The Stamp Act was passed by Parliament on March 8, 1765 and was put into effect on November 1, 1765. In the eighteenth century, before stamps were invented, and the post office became an important governmental agency, documents were taxed provided that they should be printed or written on particular papers sold only by the government and its agents. So, any document that was not written on the stamped papers was not legal.12

In the American colonies, the colonial assemblies used to impose stamps duties on the colonists. However, Greenville’s Stamp Act in the colonies required that in addition to legal documents, newspapers, pamphlets, handbills, and even playing cards should be printed on the special papers. Moreover, other documents such as land transactions, liquor licenses, wills, probate orders, bail bonds, articles of apprenticeship, passports, notarizations, almanacs, and calendars would have to be stamped.13 There would also have to be a separate stamp for each sheet of legal document. The cost varied from a half penny to ^ 1. George Grenville expected the sums of money from this act would be used for protecting the colonies. 14

Since the English ministry resolved to adopt a more vigorous policy for colonial control in 1763, this scheme was elaborated under the leadership of Charles Townshend who proposed the following measures: the enforcement of the Acts of Navigation and Trade, the raising of revenues in the colonies by direct and indirect taxation, and the use of these revenues for the support of a standing military force in the colonies.15 Like Grenville, Townshend thought that taxing the colonies was the only way of money- raising. Furthermore, he defended the British right to tax the colonies as well as the Britain’s own citizens were being taxed when he spoke to the House of Commons as follows:

“Will these Americans, children planted by our care, nourished up by our indulgence until they are grown to a degree of strength and opulence, and protected by our arms, will they grudge to contribute their mite to relieve us from the heavy weight of that burden which we lie under?” 16

Accordingly, Charles Townshend made a sarcastic decision to build up his financial recovery program relying on taxes and revenues collected from the colonies.17 When Parliament decided to reduce the English Land Tax, Townshend suggested levying taxes in the colonies. So, under his request, Parliament passed the Townshend Duties in May, 1767.

The Townshend Acts consisted of four acts passed to assert what it was considered the Parliament’s right to legislate for the colonies. These acts were designed to suspend the resisting representative assembly of New York, and to collect additional revenue duties from the colonies. The Townshend Acts set up new ways to collect taxes. From the Townshend Acts, the new duties were estimated to bring ^ 40.000 annually so as to operate new frontier forts.18

England carried on its imperial policy which was based mainly on taxation until the time when Lord North (1732–1792) succeeded the former Prime Minister William Pitt in 1770, and became the third Prime Minister whom King George III used for the reconstruction of the British Empire. Lord North confronted a serious problem when the British East India Company was losing business, and was close to bankruptcy. Soon, Lord North decided to help the company and to relieve its financial situation. 19

Its finances steadily declined because of the Bengal Famine. This event sounded a death- knell to the company’s affairs when military and administrative costs mounted beyond control. Meanwhile, Europe faced a commercial stagnation and trade depression; England had problems with its American colonies which were major importers of Indian Tea.20

In order to avoid bankruptcy, the company’s directors appealed to Parliament for financial help. Under North’s request, the Tea Act was passed in May 1773 which gave the company monopolistic activities to sell 17 million pounds of tea stored in England directly in America at a low price to undersell its competitors who were smuggling Dutch tea.21

The Tea Act was regarded as a legislative manoeuvre by the North’s ministry to make English tea marketable in America. At the same time, it was an attempt through which Lord North hoped to reassert Parliament’s right to levy direct revenue taxes on the colonies.22

Role of Political Awareness

There was another political factor which had great impacts on the colonists in Massachusetts, in particular, and helped them to revolt against the English authority. It was the role of political awareness. In 1763, the English colonists were so mature, and were more enlightened in North America; and in New England in particular. Their colonies served as filters through which new ideas of the European Enlightenment entered. Newspapers and colleges helped to form a new thought and a new culture which crystallized the American colonial society.

Due to the freedom of thought, the colonists exercised their complete control of both internal and external affairs relying on elected houses which constituted a maturing ground for such future revolutionary leaders. The British colonists were also influenced by the teachings of European philosophers who started to inquire about the source of authority, and about political bonds between the governors and the governed. Accordingly, the British colonists relied on these ideas of Enlightenment to oppose and resist the British politicians and their imperial policy.

In addition to the British imperial policy, the American Revolution was also due to some historical trends which took place in Europe and America that affected, or gave impetus to the revolution.23 Political awareness, the impact of the European philosophers’ teachings, and Enlightenment are also regarded as the origins of the American Revolution, which started in Massachusetts and spread to the remaining thirteen colonies.24

As far as Massachusetts is concerned, it was established in New England area. It is important to study the American Revolution in relation to the Massachusetts Bay Colony because resistance to the English colonial policy emerged first there. The history of the permanent settlement in New England was started by the Puritans, a religious group that emerged in England during the seventeenth century. They were Calvinists who disagreed with some Catholic practices which still existed in the Church of England, and they believed that the Church must be purified.25

The history of Massachusetts Bay Colony was characterized by the conflictual relationships with the mothercountry. There emerged resistance between the colony which tried to get full autonomy from England so as to be independent in the management of its colonial affairs, and the Crown which wanted to exercise total control over the colony.26

This political resistance was due to some circumstances; the colony was settled by the Puritans whose ancestors had fled to America after they had been persecuted. They hated both the English Church and Government. They used to accustom themselves to the freest and most subtle debate of all religious questions. Their simple church organization took a democratic aspect; the people used to elect their own religious leaders and dismiss them whenever they pleased. Thus, they enjoyed this religious liberty for a long period of time.27

After the English Crown had been restored, Charles II (1603– 1685) intended to tighten control over Massachusetts because of two problems: Massachusetts’ mistreatment of the Quakers, and Massachusetts stopping the use of the Navigation Acts. 28 Although Edward Randolph was sent by Charles II to enforce the Navigation Acts there; but he failed. He was threatened by colonial captains if he came aboard to see what their cargoes carried and where there came from.29 Charles II reacted severely. He cancelled Massachusetts charter in 1684, and consequently Massachusetts became a Royal Colony.

When James II (1633-1701) came to the throne in 1685, he did not recognize colonial charters and wanted to rule the colonies without Parliament.30 He appointed Edmund Andros Massachusetts’ Royal Governor. The latter abolished the Legislative Assembly, levied taxes on the colonists, and made the laws himself.31 However, when King James II was deposed after the Glorious Revolution (1688-1689), the news reached Massachusetts and the people of Boston went into action. They dragged cannons and shot against Andros who was captured, and his rule was over.32 This factor shows that the Massachusetts’ people regarded their revolt against the English Crown as a lawful reaction because their rights were violated, and they stood to restore back their inherited tradition to be governed by their own legislature. 33

As far as Enlightenment is concerned, it is an intellectual movement which was associated with the eighteenth century during which certain thinkers and writers in Europe, primarily in England and France, were more enlightened than their compatriots, and started to enlighten them.

They believed that human reason could be used to combat ignorance and tyranny in order to build a better world. It was a remarkable change, and a time of rational thinking. Elites of this age started to look for the source of authority, whether political or religious. They turned towards human rights to examine the relations between the governors and the governed.34

Among the influents of Enlightenment was the English political philosopher John Locke (1632–1704). He preached his famous doctrine that all men naturally possess certain rights; life, liberty, and property. The governor derives his power from the consent of the people, and that governments should be like a contract between the ruler and his subjects. The people give up certain of their rights in return for just rule, and the ruler should hold his power only so as to rule justly.35

These ideas had great impacts on colonial political thinking, and the colonists were largely influenced by these ideas. When the Declaration of Independence was issued, it was based on Locke’s ideas. Consequently, an American political thought emerged in Massachusetts, and was a mixture of Puritan theology, Locke’s politics, and colonial life experience. Moreover, the American Enlightenment was mainly derived from Locke’s work of Treaties of Civil Governments (1690).36

John Locke explains, in this work, his views on governments. He states that the relationships between the governors and their subjects were based on a social contract. According to him, the government’s power cannot be totally arbitrary so as to destroy the lives and the fortunes of the people. Locke believes that there is no need to government with greater powers; for this would be needed to keep the subjects down. John Locke believes that any form of government is met with great charges, and it cannot support these charges without money and funds collected from taxes. So, under the social contract between the ruler and his subjects, the latter should contribute in these charges through paying a tribute for the maintenance of their protection under his own consent.

These ideas of Enlightenment reached the colonial populations and Massachusetts colonists, in particular, through education which was the key element leading to the awareness of political affairs. The Puritans regarded education as an important factor in social life. Since their society was based on religion, they believed that it was necessary for everyone to read and understand the Bible. 37

In 1647, the Massachusetts Legislature ordered every town with 50 or more families to establish elementary schools so as to teach reading and writing. Those schools were opened to all children- boys and girls, rich and poor. Towns with 100 or more families also had to set up a grammar or secondary schools “to instruct youths as they may be fitted for the university.” 38

Moreover, in 1636 the Puritans succeeded to set up their first college in Massachusetts. It was Harvard College, named for the minister John Harvard (1607-1638), an English clergyman and principal benefactor of the College.

Since its establishment, the college had developed an academic system of teaching for the sake of making citizens ready to the service of both the public and the nation. The college also allowed most colonists to read protests against British injustice printed in pamphlets and books. Furthermore, it provided education and the writings of Greek Philosophy, English, French, and other philosophers such as John Locke and John Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778). Their ideas that men were created equal dwelled in these colonists’ minds.39

So, Harvard College played an important role in teaching and educating ideas of Enlightenment to its graduates who were so mature to know about their political rights. When the scene was set, they were awakened by what was going on in their colonies and started to react against the British policies following the Seven Years’ War (1754-1763).40

Furthermore, a great number of American patriots who led the revolution against England and its colonial policies such as John Adams (1735!1826), John Hancock (1737–1793), and Dr. Joseph Warren (1741!1775) graduated from Harvard. 41

Since these colonial radical theorists had derived their political ideas mainly from John Locke’s works, they believed in representation, natural rights, and contractual government. They argued that when the British Government took their liberties away from them, it dissolved the political bonds tying both Americans and British together. When England began to implement its imperial policy in 1763, these revolutionary leaders felt that they were hit hard by this legislation; they organized themselves and started to oppose the British rule.42

Political Resistance to English Imperial Policy in Massachusetts

The British imperial policy which started to be put into practice was justified by the great need of the Crown’s ministers to look for different ways to finance the King’s military policy. During the French and Indian War (1754-1763), the British government had taken financial responsibility for the defense of the colonies and some military aids. Moreover, King George III (1738-1820) and Prime Minister William Pitt (1708-1778) decided to keep an army of eighty-five regiments to protect the colonies, but the problem was how to pay for them. England was financially exhausted after her struggle with France had ended, and that its national debt had soared to £ 140 m.

Accordingly, parliamentary taxation was introduced to solve this huge financial problem. This imperial policy which was introduced in 1763 was felt as a great burden to be supported from the part of the colonists. Since the British successive governments believed that the colonies should be ruled strictly, colonial attitudes towards the British government began to be changed. They believed that they were driven to revolt by the unreasonable and unjust actions of their government.

Another factor which helped them to cause the revolution was that they were a relatively homogenous people with a well established identity, Americans. The story of their opposition to the British measures is the history of the American Revolution, and the colony of Massachusetts is known as the birthplace of the revolution. Resistance in Massachusetts against the English policy was shaped in a political form through which people in the colony used different political means to manifest their opposition.

This political resistance was the first step which was undergone by the Massachusetts’ colonists in their revolution when they began to react against the British imperial policy, and the different taxing laws. Thus, political resistance in Massachusetts began in 1763, and was carried on until 1775 during the revolutionary era. Accordingly, the colonists started to resist the British imperial policy, and their resistance took a political aspect in the first ground. It is commonly known as a political resistance in which the colonists relied on political arguments to justify it, and was manifested in protests, congresses, and riots.

Resisting the Navigation Acts

Subsequently, Massachusetts’ people started to resist the different economic laws that characterized the English imperial policy and other economic measures of 1763. So, the first task in the revolution was to resist the enforcement of the Navigation Acts and the Writs of Assistance.

The New England merchants and Massachusetts’ tradesmen in particular had been hit hard by the Navigation Acts and other economic laws which were imposed by the Greenville Administration. They believed that the new rules would restrict their trade with Europe and the West Indies. However, they became more skilled in smuggling. They used to pass money to certain customs’ inspectors to ignore half of the cargo on a ship.43

In fact, the English customs officers were authorized to enforce laws against smuggling in New England using the Writs of Assistance.44 The execution of the writs aroused public attention in Massachusetts, and consequently one man prepared a legal battle against the English authority to issue these writs. James Otis (1725-1783); a Massachusetts’ lawyer set in motion the question of the English sovereignty to rule over the colonies.45

Together with his fellow attorney Oxenbridge Tachter, James Otis appealed to the Massachusetts’ Court in February, 1761 to contest the worth of the Writs of Assistance.46 What occurred in Massachusetts’ Court in that day would represent the ideological struggle which inspired the revolution in Massachusetts. During the debate, Jeremiah Gridley, who represented the King’s authority in Massachusetts, stressed on the fact that the Writs of Assistance were lawful measures applied in the colonies to stop smuggling; for the English customs officials in North America needed the necessary power to enforce the King’s laws. He further argued that these measures were not only used to collect taxes, but also to protect the colonies and the state from foreign subversives.47

James Otis, on the other hand, stated that the use of the writs was a violation of the traditional rights of Englishmen. If these writs were used, the colonists would be subject to arbitrary enslavement. This would jeopardize the sacred privilege of the subjects’ lives, and made every family vulnerable to arbitrary invasion of their privacy. 48 If the English Government insisted to use the writs, the consequences might be unpredictable in the colonies. Although Otis and Oxenbridge lost the case and the writs were issued, their speeches rose an important question of how much the English Parliament could exert in the colonies.49 Furthermore, James Otis published his pamphlet “The Rights of the British Colonists Asserted and Proved” in which he stated the famous slogan of “No Taxation Without Representation”. The pamphlet was widely circulated in the colonies, and provided people with necessary arguments to react against the so-called English oppressive measures.50

» Continued on page 2



1- Adams, James Truslow, Revolutionary New England, 1691- 1775, Atlantic Monthly Press, Boston, 1923. p. 268.

2- Alice Dickinson, The Colony of Massachusetts, Franklin Watts, New York, 1975.

3- Fischer, Syndey George, The Struggle for American Revolution, Vol. I, Books for Libraries Press, Free Port, New York, 1971.

4- Jacobson, Mark J., The Development of the American Thought, Appleton- Century Co., New York, 1932.

5- King, David C.; Marvin, Mariah; Weitzman, David; Dwiggins, Toni, United States History, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. Inc, USA, 1986.

6- Labaree, Benjamin Woods, The Boston Tea Party, Oxford University Press, New York, 1964.

7- Laslett, Peter, Locke’s Two Treaties of Civil Government, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1975.

8- Latham, Earl, The Declaration of Independence, D. C. Heath & Company, Boston. 1956.

9- Maier, Pauline, Colonial Radicals and the Development of American Opposition to Britain, 1765- 1776, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1972.

10- Miller, John C., Origins of The American Revolution, Little, Brown and Co., Boston, 1943.

11- Morgan, Edmund S.; Morgan, Helen M., The Stamp Act Crisis: Prologue to the Revolution, 1764- 1766, North Carolina University Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 1959.

12- Morin, J.- M., Précis de Sociologie, Editions Nathan, Paris, 1966.

13- Schwartz, Seymour I., The French and Indian War, 1754- 1763: The Imperial Struggle for North America, Castle Books, Edison, New Jersey, 2000.

14- Smith, Robert, The Infamous Boston Massacre, Crowell- Collier Press, New York, 1969.

15- Sosin, Jack M., British Colonial Policy and the Origins of the American Revolution, 1763-1775, Lincoln, Nebraska, 1965.

16- Stout, Neil R., The Royal Navy in America, 1760-1775: A Study of the Enforcement of the British Colonial Policy in the Era of the American Revolution, Naval Institute Press, Annapolis, Maryland, 1973.

17- Tourtellot, Arthur B., Lexington and Concord, The Beginning of The War of The American Revolution, W. W. Norton & Company, New York, 2000.

18- Trevelyan, G. M., A shortened History of England, Penguin Books, London, 1987.

19- Ubbelohde, Carl, The American Colonies and the British Empire,1607-1763, Thomas Y. Crowell Company, New York, 1968.

20- Ubbelohde, Carl, The Vice- Admiralty Courts and the American Revolution, North Carolina University Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 1960.

21- Bliven, Bruce, The American Revolution, Random House, New York, 1958. p. 25.

22- Countryman, Edward, The American Revolution, Penguin Books, London, 1985. pp. 53-4.

23- Becker, Carl; Milford, Humphrey, The Eve of the American Revolution: A Chronicle of the Breach with England, Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut, 1918, p. 335.

24- Fischer, Syndey George, The Struggle for American Revolution, Vol. I, Books for Libraries Press, Free Port, New York, 1971. p. 96.

25- Edward Countryman. op. cit. p. 105.

26- Curti, Merle, The Growth of the American Thought, Harper and Row Publishers, New York, 3 Edition, rd 1964. p. 150.

27- Hart, Albert Bushnell, Commonwealth History of Massachusetts; Colony, Province, and State, The State History, New York, 1927. p. 11.

28- Ellis, George E. , The Puritan Age and Rule in the Colony of the Massachusetts Bay, 1629-1685, Houghton Mifflin Company, New York, 1888. p. 26.

29- Ibid., p. 30.

30- Alice Dickinson. op. cit. pp. 39- 40.

31- George E. Ellis. op. cit. p. 36.

32-Bernard Bailyn. Bernard Bailyn, Political Experience and Enlightenment Ideas in Eighteenth Century America, American Historical Review, 67 (Jan. 1992). p.350.

33- Alice Dickinson. op. cit. p. 42.

34- Ibid., p. 43.

35- Trevelyan, G. M., A Shortened History of England, Penguin Books, London, 1987. p. 145.

36- George Mc. Michael, Crews, F., Levenson J.C., Marx L., & Smith, D.E., A Concise Anthology of American Literature, Mc Millan Publishing Company, New York. Inc, 1985. p. 169.

37- Cranston, Maurice, John Lock, A Biography, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1985. p. 26.

38- Bailyn, Bernard, The Origins of Independence, Alfred A. Knopf, New York. 1968. p. 339.

39- Ferguson, Robert A., The American Enlightenment 1750- 1820, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1957. p. 142.

40- David C. King, Mariah Marvin, David Weitzman, & Toni Dwiggins, op. cit. p. 57.

41- Bernard Bailyn. op. cit. p. 342.

42- Bernard Bailyn, The Ideological Origins of The American Revolution, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1967. p. 130.

43- Bonwick, Colin, English Radicals and the American Revolution, North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 1977, p. 3.

44- Bernard Bailyn. op. cit. p. 347.

45- Alice Dickinson. op. cit. p. 52.

46- Syndey George Fischer. op. cit. p. 49.

47- Edward Countryman. op. cit. p. 69.

48- Alice Dickinson. op. cit. p. 52.

49- Bernard Bailyn. op. cit. p. 155.

50- Joseph L. Andrews, Jr. op. cit. p. 6.

51- Adams, Charles F., ed, The Works of John Adams, Little, Brown and Co., Boston, 1851. p. 521.

52- Alice Dickinson. op. cit. p. 53.

53- Edward Countryman. op. cit. p. 71.

54- Barrow, Thomas C., Trade and Empire, The British Customs Service in Colonial America, 1660-1775, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1967. p. 153.

55- Edmund S. Morgan & Helen M. Morgan, The Stamp Act Crisis: Prologue to the Revolution, 1764- 1766, North Carolina University Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 1959. p. 17.

56- Richard B. Morris, The New World, Time- Life Books, New York, 1963. p. 150.

57- Pauline Maier, Colonial Radicals and the Development of American Opposition to Britain, 1765- 1776, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1972. p. 129.

58- John Bullion, British Ministers and the American Resistance to the Stamp Act, October – December 1765, William and Mary Quarterly, 3 Ser., 49 rd (Jan. 1992). p. 88.

59- Edmund S. Morgan & Helen M. Morgan. op. cit. p. 26.

60- Joseph L. Andrews, Jr. op. cit. p. 8.

61- John Bullion, Truly Loyal Subjects: British Politicians and the Failure to foresee American Resistance to Parliament Taxation, 1762-1765, Connecticut Review, 11 (Summer 1989). P. 32.

62- Andrews, Charles M., The Colonial Period of the American History, Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut, 1938. p.428.

63- Colin, Joseph R., The American Past, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers, New York, 1984. p. 119.

64- Ibid. p. 20.

65- Bernard Bailyn. op. cit. p. 177.

66- Howard, George Elliot, Preliminaries of the Revolution, 1763-1775, AMS, New York, 1905. p. 203.

67- Ibid.

68- Barrow, Thomas C., Trade and Empire, The British Customs Service in Colonial America, 1660-1775, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1967. p. 96.

69- Allan Nevis & Henry Steele Commager. op. cit. pp. 68-9.

70- Robert Smith, The Infamous Boston Massacre, Crowell- Collier Press, New York, 1969, p. 78.

71- Edward Countryman. op. cit. p. 90.

72- Jr. Bruce Bliven. op. cit. p. 21.

73- Joseph L. Andrews, Jr. op. cit. p. 9.

74- Joseph R. Colin. op. cit. 120.

75- Jr. Bruce Bliven. op. cit. p. 22.

76- Joseph L. Andrews, Jr. op. cit. pp. 9-10.

77- Joseph R. Colin. op. cit. 122.

78- Joseph L. Andrews, Jr. op. cit. p. 10.

79- Robert Young, The Real Patriots of the American Revolution, Parsippany, Dillon, New Jersey, 1996, p. 114.

80- David C. King, Mariah Marvin, David Weitzman, & Tonni Dwiggins, op. cit. p. 86.

81- James Truslow Adams, The Epic of America, Little, Brown and Co., Boston, 1931. p. 82.

82- Alan Axelrod, “ Invitation to a Tea Party”, “ Complete Idiot’s Guide to American History”, Simon & Schusterr McMillan Company, New York, 1998, p. 73.

83- Donald Barr Chidsey, The Great Separation: The Story of the Boston Tea Party and the Beginning of the American Revolution, Crown Publishers. Inc, New York, 1965, p. 145.

84- James Truslow Adams. op. cit. p. 84.

85- Syndey George Fischer. op. cit. p. 160.

86- Pauline Maier. op. cit. p. 153.

87- Benjamin Woods Labaree, The Boston Tea Party, Oxford University Press, New York, 1964. p. 7.

88- Allan Axelrod. op. cit. p. 160.

89- James Truslow Adams. op. cit. p. 86.

90- Ibid.

91- Syndey George Fischer. op. cit. p. 162.

92- Bernhard Knollenberg, Did Samuel Adams Provoke The Boston Tea Party and the Clash in Lexington? American Antiquarian Society Proceedings. New Ser., 70 (Oct. 1960). p. 493.

93- Joseph L. Andrews, Jr. op. cit. p. 11.

94- Syndey George Fischer. op. cit. p. 164.

95- Jr. Bruce Bliven. op. cit. p. 28.

96- Ibid. p. 29.

97- Allan Nevis & Henry Steele Commager, A Pocket History of the United States of America, Random House, Inc. New York., 1945.p. 75.

98- Richard B. Morris. op. cit. p. 154.

99- Syndey George Fischer. op. cit. p. 182.

100- John R. Galvin, The Minute Men, The First Fight: Myths and Realities of the American Revolution, Brassey’s. Inc. Dulles, Virginia, 1996. p. 13.

101- Alice Dickinson. op. cit. p. 75.

102- William H. Hallahan, The Day of the American Revolution Begun, 19 April 1775, Harper Collins Publishers, Inc., New York, 2001. p. 135.

103- Richard B. Morris. op. cit. p. 155.

104- John R. Galvin. op. cit. p. 57.

105- Peter J. Stanlis, “British Views of the American Revolution: A Conflict Over Right and Sovereignty”, Early American Literature, Vol. 11. Issue 2, 1976. p. 191.

106- Allan Nevis & Henry Steele Commager, . p. 72.