Following her husband Samuel’s death in August 1770, Anne Middleton assumed control of the family’s Annapolis tavern and ferrying business. October 25th was a busy day for her, as that was when, in response to a call issued by a group of Baltimore merchants, a meeting was held at Mrs. Middleton’s tavern “to judge of the Expediency of continuing the [nonimportation] Association under the particular Circumstance of the Philadelphia Merchants breaking theirs.”
Of the four men appointed by the Baltimoreans to represent their interests, only one—Jonathan Hudson—showed up at Middleton Tavern. The other attendees included “Committees from Queen-Anne’s, Talbot, and Dorchester Counties, some Gentlemen of the Council, a considerable Majority of the Representatives in Assembly, several Merchants of the City of Annapolis, and other Gentlemen from different Counties of the Province.” This was a crowded gathering of some very influential Marylanders.
As reported in the November 1st Maryland Gazette, Jonathan Hudson produced his credentials from the “Merchants and Traders of the Town of Baltimore” and then presented their position on continuing the colonial boycott of British imported goods in no uncertain terms. The Baltimoreans “were determined to depart from the Non-importation Agreement, and import every Kind of Goods from Great-Britain, such only excepted on which Duties are, or hereafter may be imposed by the Parliament of Great-Britain, notwithstanding any Resolutions of this Meeting to the contrary, and that He was likewise instructed not to agree to any other Terms but to a Dissolution of the Association.”
Hudson’s listeners were not swayed, and the resolutions they passed unanimously in response made it clear that Maryland as a whole was not going to follow the wayward lead of a few troublemakers from Baltimore. They affirmed “that the British Subjects in America have a constitutional exclusive Right of taxing themselves in a legislative Capacity.” They backed up the nonimportation agreement as a “necessary, prudent, and legal Measure for obtaining Redress of the Aggrievances of America” and urged continuing a strict adherence to its terms.
The Middleton Tavern attendees called out Jonathan Hudson and his fellows for their “indecent and inconsistent Message to this Meeting,” their “shameful Disregard … to the most sacred Rights and Liberties of America,” and their attempt “to destroy that Union and good faith so necessary at this, and at all Times for the Safety and constitutional Rights of these Colonies.” Furthermore, they resolved to do no business with anyone who “shall by any Means break the Association.” Finally, they directed that their resolutions be printed in the Maryland Gazette and forwarded to the other American colonies. Other towns and provinces might be buckling under economic and political pressure, but these patriotic Marylanders meeting in Annapolis urged “the People of America” to hold firm “until a total Repeal of the injurious and oppressive Revenue-Act [taxing imported tea] takes Place.”
While the boycott saga had been reported by the Maryland Gazette for many months by now, the newspaper’s November 1, 1770 edition also introduced a new issue that was going to dominate provincial politics for many months to come. Maryland’s tobacco inspection act had just expired, and the General Assembly’s lower house refused to renew it without first reviewing, and possibly revising, the system of taxes and fees, payable in either tobacco or paper currency, collected to pay for certain services performed by some government appointees.
When one of those bureaucrats, William Steuart, Clerk of the Land Office, collected his usual fees despite the fact that the law which authorized him to do so had recently lapsed, he provoked a stern response from the lower house. The delegates unanimously resolved that Maryland’s legislators “have the sole Right … to impose and establish Taxes, or Fees; and that the imposing, establishing, or collecting any Taxes, or Fees, on, or from the Inhabitants of this Province, under Colour or Pretence of any Proclamation issued by, or in the Name of the Lord Proprietary, or other Authority, is arbitrary, unconstitutional, and oppressive.” This was a preemptive swipe at Maryland’s proprietary governor, Robert Eden, who might be tempted to issue just such an executive order to ensure his handpicked favorites could keep lining their pockets with tobacco and cash.
The lower house delegates’ position was clear: unjust taxation which originated in Annapolis was just as odious as that which was devised in London, and they weren’t going to stand for it. Now, would Governor Eden stand for that?
Read the November 1, 1770 issue of the Maryland Gazette starting here: https://msa.maryland.gov/megafile/msa/speccol/sc4800/sc4872/001281/html/m1281-1153.html
Glenn E. Campbell
HA Senior Historian
