Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Boston Tea Party was an American political and mercantile protest on December 16, 1773, by the Sons of Liberty in Boston in colonial Massachusetts. [2] The target was the Tea Act of May 10, 1773, which allowed the East India Company to sell tea from China in American colonies without paying taxes apart from those imposed by the Townshend Acts.
The name is presumed to have been inspired by the phrase's use in a pro-American, anti-taxation speech in the House of Commons on February 6, 1765, by Irish MP Isaac Barré. [9] [10] A precursor of the Sons of Liberty in Boston was the Loyal Nine, which burned effigies of Stamp Act commissioner Andrew Oliver in Boston on August 14, 1765. When ...
After the Boston Massacre in 1770, yearly anniversary meetings were held at the church until 1775, featuring speakers such as John Hancock and Dr. Joseph Warren. In 1773, 5,000 people met in the Meeting House to debate British taxation and, after the meeting, a group raided three tea ships anchored nearby in what became known as the Boston Tea ...
You learned about the Boston Tea Party in school but did you learn how New Bedford was involved in it?
Boston is set to re-enact a defiant act of political and mercantile sabotage that set the US colonies on a course to revolution. Boston Tea Party 250th anniversary: City to re-enact key moment in ...
Join the South Dennis Free Public Library for a Boston Tea Party party at 10 a.m. on Dec. 16. A scavenger hunt, games and crafts will commence and cookies and tea will be served to guests.
Boston Tea Party mural in statehouse. Effective May 10, 1773, the Tea Act 1773 went into effect. This act was designed to assist the financially troubled British East India Company and enable tea to enter North America priced lower than the tea typically smuggled in to avoid taxes. [3]
Engraving by Paul Revere depicting British reaction to the Boston Tea Party. The Massachusetts debate reached a pitch in 1772 when Hutchinson, in a speech to the assembly, argued that either the colony was wholly subject to Parliament, or that it was effectively independent.