When the local Committee of Inspection published a harsh report against Williams and Company in the July 26, 1770 Maryland Gazette, the members must have known they would hear back soon from the merchants. After all, their report was worded with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer, calling out the Williamses as “infamous and base,” “treacherous and faithless,” and “despicable Characters” guilty of “mean and sordid selfishness.” It was meant to provoke a response, and provoke a response it did.
The August 2nd newspaper contained Williams and Company’s “Answer to a most scandalous Piece in your last, attacking our Characters in the most virulent Manner.” Unlike the Committee men, who “were ashamed to set their Names” to their report, Thomas Williams proudly claimed authorship of this reply written on behalf of himself and his partners, Joseph and Thomas Charles Williams.
As for the supposed offense of selling tea at an unfair markup, Williams claimed his firm’s price of 10 shillings a pound was consistent with what other Maryland merchants charged. The Committee either didn’t notice, or it gave its consent. Even some of the Committee members, who were merchants themselves, sold tea at the same rate, Williams wrote.
Thomas Williams criticized one of the Committee men, whom he called “Mr. Attorney” (most likely William Paca), for interrogating Joseph Williams at his place of business without any proper authority. What if the tables were turned, Mr. Hotshot Lawyer? What if we asked you about “all the extraordinary Fees you have taken from your several Clients…over and above what the Law allows you”? Would you respond? Yes, wrote Williams, but “I should expect my Answer would be your Cane over my Head.”
Thomas Williams allowed that there might be some decent men on the Committee, but he couldn’t fathom why they would associate themselves with “Two or Three other Pettifoggers, whose principal Accomplishments consist in depreciating, and if possible murdering, others Characters, under a false Pretence of being shining Patriots of their Country.” These “little spirited Souls have frequently been firing their Squibs and Small-shot…and now they are pleased…to give us a Broadside.” Williams warned that the Committee should “take Care of the Rebound.”
Williams chalked up the Committee’s “Venom” to jealousy over his company’s extensive trading contacts in Europe and America, which enabled the partners to serve their customers “on the very best Terms.” Williams and Company had “increased the Trade of this City,” and even their envious competitors had “sold considerably more Goods by Virtue of our established Friends…who are following us with their kind Orders for Goods to this Place.” Thomas Williams appealed for a public rebuttal of the Committee’s characterization of the partners as “infamous, base, treacherous, faithless, sordid, or infamously inclined Persons.” Surely there were “some good Samaritans both in this City and Country” who would come to their defense as fair, just, and honest traders.
Williams claimed that in the five months since the Committee of Inspection forced the Good Intent to return to England with its cargo of boycotted imports, other ships had been allowed to land their goods, yet the Committee hadn’t moved against the merchants who received those items. It didn’t call out “one of our flaming Patriots, who some Time since raised his Goods 20 or 25 per Cent. higher than he had sold for, on Account of the Scarcity at that Time.” The Committee had failed to give any account of “what became of some large Packages of Goods, that came from some London Ship or Ships, and landed at the Back of the Town in the Night.” Such “notorious Partialities” would break up the nonimportation association. In fact, Thomas Williams warned, the boycott agreement was already “tottering” on the edge of failure, and the Committee had only itself to blame.
Read the August 2, 1770 issue of the Maryland Gazette starting here: https://msa.maryland.gov/megafile/msa/speccol/sc4800/sc4872/001281/html/m1281-1084.html
Glenn E. Campbell
HA Senior Historian
#history #annapolis #annapolishistory #news #annapolisnews #1770news #colonialnews #colonialhistory #marylandgazette
Are you enjoying our posts? We invite you to consider making a tax-deductible contribution to Historic Annapolis to help sustain our organization through this difficult time. Thank you!
