The first of the boycotts occurred in 1765 with woolen cloth and tea; a multitude of petitions were sent to repeal the Stamp Act. Unfortunately, none of the petitions were signed by women. However, the boycotts that accompanied these petitions directly affected the women. If they could not import cloth, they would have to weave it--a hated chore. Although it increased the women’s workload, the colonial women fervently stood behind the boycotts, believing it was their patriotic duty to resist the the taxation. The boycotts had an immediate and powerful effect--more so than any speech or trade agreement.
In fact, when Benjamin Franklin testified in the British House of Commons in 1766, he dramatically stated that the non-importation of British goods to the colonies would have a devastating effect on the economy of Great Britain. Franklin refers to the items women make and wear--these same women were the main drive behind the ability to boycott the goods he mentions.
'The goods they [the colonists] take from Britain are either necessities, mere conveniences, or superfluities. The first, as cloth &c. with a little industry they can make at home; the second they can do without, till they are able to provide them among themselves; and the last, which are much the greatest part, they will strike off immediately. They are mere articles of fashion, purchased and consumed, because the fashion in a respected country, but will now be detested and rejected" (Witkowski, 222). |
The boycotts would not have been successful if not for the notable efforts of women in the colonial communities. Women were “urged by the press, by ministers, and by the colonial leadership to look upon domestic duties and chores as political weapons, [and] these women began to see themselves . . . as actors upon the political stage” (Berkin, 17). Women spun their own wool, wove their own ‘Liberty Cloth,’ and created their own herbal ‘Liberty Tea’ and this, in turn, had a heavy impact on the British economy.
Furthermore, to support their efforts, newspapers frequently published articles stating how much the economy of the colonies depended on the actions of the women – including abundant information on spinning bees and instructions on how to spin raw materials, such as wool and flax, into thread (Norton, 166). The ability for the colonies to survive without British goods depended solely on the actions of these industrious women.
|
One particularly notable story of boycotting the Stamp Act is in New York City when "a group of brides-to-be said no to their fiances, putting a public notice in the local newspaper that they would not marry men who applied for a stamped marriage license" (Berkin, 14). Other actions by brides-to-be occurred as well. Some were rushing to finalize their marriages before the Stamp Act officially began.
Look through the middle column of the Boston Gazette, October 14, 1765 newspaper article below. Find the paragraph written about "young persons . . . joining in Wedlock". How many couples did they indicate were intending to get married? What is the reason they give for wanting to quickly marry?
Your browser does not support viewing this document. Click here to download the document.
Image Courtesy of Massachusetts Historical Society
Soon, because of the economic pressure of the boycotts, the colonies successfully caused the Stamp Act to be repealed. Ironically, British potters found a niche in the teapot market and created the "No Stamp Act" teapot to sell to the colonies after the repeal.
|