Tar, Feathers, and the Enemies of American Liberties, 1768-1776 Author(S): Benjamin H
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Tar, Feathers, and the Enemies of American Liberties, 1768-1776 Author(s): Benjamin H. Irvin Reviewed work(s): Source: The New England Quarterly, Vol. 76, No. 2 (Jun., 2003), pp. 197-238 Published by: The New England Quarterly, Inc. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1559903 . Accessed: 02/11/2011 18:26 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The New England Quarterly, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The New England Quarterly. http://www.jstor.org Tar,Feathers, and the Enemies of American Liberties, 1768-1776 BENJAMIN H. IRVIN 2 October 1775, the New York Gazette and Weekly ON Mercury was pleased to report a "droll affair lately hap- pened at Kinderhook, New York."In that small village south of Albany, a "number of young women" had gathered for a quilt- ing bee when their peace was rudely disturbed: "A young fel- low" dropped in on their "frolic"uninvited. This fellow-"an enemy to the liberties of America," as the Gazette reported- then commenced a lengthy harangue, "as usual," against the Continental Congress. The quilt makers apparently endured the young man's malediction for "some time," but at length, "exasperated,"they "laidhold of him, [and] stripped him naked to the waist." To punish him for his "impudence,"the "girls" tarred and feathered him. Well, not exactly. For want of tar, they "covered him with molasses, and for feathers, took the downy tops of flags, which grow in the meadows, and coated him well."' So was written a new chapter in the development of what the Boston Evening-Post had once dubbed "the popular punish- ment for modern delinquents."' Since bursting into American I am deeply indebted to David Hackett Fischer, Alfred F. Young, Jane Kamensky, James Kloppenberg, and Edward Countrymanfor their insightful contributions to this paper. I would also like to thank the staffs and librariansof the American Antiquarian Society, the Massachusetts Historical Society (MHS), the David Libraryof the Ameri- can Revolution, the InternationalCenter for Jefferson Studies, the LibraryCompany of Philadelphia, and, especially, Melissa Haley of the New-York Historical Society and Karen Stevens of the National Park Service's Independence National Historical Park. I am particularlygrateful to the MHS for permission to quote from its collection. Finally, a special thanks to Douglas Watson for assisting in the preparationof the appendix. 'New YorkGazette and Weekly Mercury, 2 October 1775. 2Boston Evening-Post, 6 November 1769. 197 198 THE NEW ENGLAND QUARTERLY political life in the late 176os, the practice of tar-and-feathers had been thoroughly transformed.Initially confined to bustling seaport towns such as Boston, New York, and Philadelphia,by 1775 tar-and-feathershad made its way inland to quaint Hud- son River villages. Once reserved for imperial customs officials and colonial informants, the sticky punishment was now meted out to loudmouthed lads trumpeting unpatriotic beliefs. Previ- ously the prerogative of hearty Jack Tars, tar-and-featherswas now the domain of young "girls,"quilters no less, who had set aside their needles and thread. Nor were actual pine tar and goose down any longer necessary; tarring and feathering could now be accomplished with syrup and cattails. It was these sorts of shifts in the practice of tar-and-feathers that imbued the Kinderhook affair with its drollery, that made an upstate quilt- ing frolic newsworthy material for a New YorkCity press. How, the Gazette's readers were left to wonder, had the ritual changed so much in so little time? The answer to that question offers insight into the evolution and transmission of folk prac- tices throughout the eighteenth-century Atlantic world, the American colonists' path from resistance to revolution, and the division of a once peaceable people into belligerent patriot and loyalist camps. The transformationof tar-and-feathers,it turns out, was anythingbut a "drollaffair."3 3A few American historians, most notably Alfred F. Young, have examined tar-and- feathers in some depth. See Young's "George Robert Twelves Hewes (1742-1840): A Boston Shoemaker and the Memory of the American Revolution,"William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 38 (October 1981): 561-623; his The Shoemakerand the Tea Party: Memory and the American Revolution (Boston: Beacon Press, 1999), PP. 46-51; and his "English Plebeian Culture and Eighteenth-Century American Radicalism,"in The Ori- gins of Anglo-American Radicalism, ed. Margaret Jacob and James Jacob (London: Allen & Unwin, 1984), pp. 185-212. Young's work built on earlier studies by Walter Kendall Watkins, R. S. Longley, Frank W. C. Hersey, and Albert Matthews. See Watkins, "Tarring and Feathering in Boston in 1770," Old-Time New England 20 (1929): 30-43; Longley, "Mob Activities in Revolutionary Massachusetts,"New En- gland Quarterly 6 (March 1933): 98-130; Hersey, "Tarand Feathers: The Adventures of Captain John Malcom," Colonial Society of Massachusetts Transactions 34 (1941): 429-73; and Matthews, "Joyce,Jun," Colonial Society of Massachusetts Publications 8 (1903): 89-104. Other historians have discussed tar-and-feathers or closely related crowd behavior in their examinationsof the American Revolution or of crowd behavior in general. See Edmund S. Morgan and Helen M. Morgan, The Stamp Act Crisis: Pro- logue to Revolution (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1953); Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., "Political Mobs and the American Revolution, 1765-1776," Proceed- ings of the American Philosophical Society 99 (August 1955): 244-50; Gordon S. Wood, "A Note on Mobs in the American Revolution,"William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., TAR AND FEATHERS, 1768-1776 199 Although its precise origin is uncertain, tar-and-feathersdates back at least as far as medieval times.4 In 1189, Richard I of En- gland ordered that any crusaders found guilty of theft "were to have their heads shaved, to have boiling Pitch dropped upon their Crowns; and after having Cushion-Feathers stuck upon the Pitch, they were to be set on shore, in that figure, at the first place they came to." Centuries later, in 1623, the Bishop of Halverstade ordered that tar-and-feathersbe applied to a party of drunken friars and nuns, and in 1696, an angry crowd im- posed the same punishment upon a London bailiff who at- tempted to arrest a debtor. Other evidence, too, suggests that tar-and-featherslingered in the folk culture of the seventeenth- and eighteenth-century transatlanticrim. In London in 1741, a pamphlet touting the economic importance of Jamaicatold of a plantation master who tarred and feathered disobedient slaves. In Dominica in 1789, a British soldier caught committing bes- tiality with a turkey was drummed out of his regiment while 23 (October 1966): 635-42; Richard Maxwell Brown, "Violence and the American Rev- olution," in Essays on the American Revolution, ed. Stephen G. Kurtz and James H. Hutson (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1973): 81-120; James Barton Hunt, "The Crowd and the American Revolution: A Study of Urban Political Violence in Boston and Philadelphia, 1773-1776" (Ph.D. diss., University of Washington, 1973); Pauline Maier, From Resistance to Revolution: Colonial Radicals and the Development of American Opposition to Britain, 1765-1776 (New York:Vintage Books, 1774); Dirk Hoerder, Crowd Action in Revolutionary Massachusetts, 1765-1780 (New York:Acad- emic Press, 1977); Gary B. Nash, The Urban Crucible: Social Change, Political Con- sciousness and the Origins of the American Revolution (Cambridge:Harvard University Press, 1979); Peter Shaw, American Patriots and the Rituals of Revolution (Cambridge: HarvardUniversity Press, 1981); Paul Gilje, The Road to Mobocracy:Popular Disorder in New York City, 1763-1834 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1987) and Rioting in America (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1996); Jesse Lemisch, Jack Tar vs. John Bull: The Role of New York'sSeamen in Precipitating the Revolution (New York:Garland, 1997); and Robert Blair St. George, Conversing by Signs: Poetics of Implication in Colonial New England Culture (Chapel Hill: University of North Car- olina Press, 1998). There have been few studies of tar-and-feathersoutside of the Revo- lutionarycontext. Two notable exceptions are BertramWyatt-Brown's Southern Honor: Ethics and Behavior in the Old South (New York:Oxford University Press, 1982) and James Elbert Cutler's Lynch-Law: An Investigation into the History of Lynching in the United States (Montclair, N.J.: Patterson Smith, 1969). 4Tarringand feathering may even have had its origins in antiquity. In post-Homeric Greece, tar was applied to homosexual men to remove body hair as a painful and dis- paragingsignifier of effeminacy. See Wyatt-Brown,Southern Honor, p. 441. 200 THE NEW ENGLAND QUARTERLY forced to wear the bird's feathers "roundhis neck [and] on his beard."5 From this brief survey it is clear that the practice of tarring and feathering was imported to the New World rather than cre- ated there. Apparently, tar-and-feathers did not arrive in the mainland colonies of North America until the middle of the eighteenth century, when it was introduced through the mar- itime folkways of sailors. About that time, a skipper in New York tarred and feathered a prostitute attempting to board his ship.6 In the early spring of 1766, another ship's captain, one William Smith, found himself on the receiving end of a tarring and feathering. Smith was seized in Norfolk, Virginia, after al- legedly alerting royal officials to the presence of contraband aboard the snow Vigilant.