After the repeal of the Stamp Act, Parliament took a different approach to raising revenue, passing the 1767
Townshend Acts, which established new
duties on various imports and strengthened the
customs agency by creating the American Customs Board. The British government believed that a more efficient customs system was necessary because many colonial American merchants had been smuggling. Smugglers violated the
Navigation Acts by trading with ports outside of the British Empire and avoiding import taxes. Parliament hoped that the new system would reduce smuggling and generate revenue for the government. Colonial merchants, even those not involved in smuggling, found the new regulations oppressive. Other colonists protested that new duties were another attempt by Parliament to tax the colonies without their consent. Hancock joined other Bostonians in calling for a boycott of British imports until the Townshend duties were repealed. In their enforcement of the customs regulations, the Customs Board targeted Hancock, Boston's wealthiest Whig. They may have suspected that he was a smuggler or they may have wanted to harass him because of his politics, especially after Hancock snubbed Governor
Francis Bernard by refusing to attend public functions when the customs officials were present. On April 9, 1768, two customs employees (called tidesmen) boarded Hancock's brig
Lydia in
Boston Harbor. Hancock was summoned, and finding that the agents lacked a
writ of assistance (a general search warrant), he did not allow them to go below deck. When one of them later managed to get into the hold, Hancock's men forced the tidesman back on deck. Customs officials wanted to file charges, but the case was dropped when
Massachusetts Attorney General Jonathan Sewall ruled that Hancock had broken no laws. Later, some of Hancock's most ardent admirers called this incident the first act of physical resistance to British authority in the colonies and credit Hancock with initiating the American Revolution.
Liberty affair The next incident proved to be a major event in the coming of the American Revolution. On the evening of May 9, 1768, Hancock's sloop
Liberty arrived in Boston Harbor, carrying a shipment of
Madeira wine. When local custom officers inspected the ship the next morning, they found that it contained 25
pipes of wine, just one fourth of the ship's carrying capacity. Hancock paid the duties on the 25 pipes of wine, but officials suspected that he had arranged to have more wine unloaded during the night to avoid paying the duties for the entire cargo. They did not have any evidence to prove this, since the two tidesmen who had stayed on the ship overnight gave a sworn statement that nothing had been unloaded. |alt=Full-length portrait of a young man seated at a table. He wears a finely tailored dark suit, knee breeches with white stockings, and a wig in the style of an English gentleman. He holds a quill pen in his right hand, and is turning the pages of a large book with the other hand. One month later, while the
HMS Romney was in port, one of the tidesmen changed his story: he claimed that he had been forcibly held on
Liberty while it had been illegally unloaded. On June 10, customs officials seized
Liberty. Bostonians were already angry because
Romneys captain,
John Corner, had been
impressing local sailors, which arguably violated an act of Parliament, the
Trade to America Act 1707 (
6 Ann. c. 64), which prohibited colonial impressment. A riot broke out when officials began to tow
Liberty out to
Romney, which was also an arguable violation of existing legislation. The confrontation escalated when a contingent of sailors and
marines from
Romney coming ashore to tow
Liberty were mistaken for a press gang. Following the riot, the customs officials relocated to
Romney and then to
Castle William, claiming that they were unsafe in town. Local Patriots insisted that the customs officials were exaggerating the danger so that London would send troops to Boston. Crown officials filed two lawsuits stemming from
Liberty incident: an
in rem suit against the ship and an
in personam suit against Hancock. Officials as well as Hancock's accuser stood to gain financially since, as was the custom, any penalties assessed by the court would be awarded to the governor, the informer, and the Crown, each getting a third. The first suit, filed on June 22, 1768, resulted in the confiscation of
Liberty in August. Customs officials then used the ship to enforce trade regulations until it was burned by angry colonists in
Rhode Island the following year. The second trial began in October 1768, when charges were filed against Hancock and five others for allegedly unloading 100 pipes of wine from
Liberty without paying the duties. If convicted, the defendants would have had to pay a penalty of triple the value of the wine, which came to
£9,000. With John Adams serving as his lawyer, Hancock was prosecuted in a highly publicized trial by a
vice admiralty court, which had no jury and was not required to allow the defense to cross-examine the witnesses. After dragging out for nearly five months, the proceedings against Hancock were dropped without explanation. Although the charges against Hancock were dropped, many writers later described him as a smuggler. The accuracy of this characterization has been questioned. "Hancock's guilt or innocence and the exact charges against him", wrote historian John W. Tyler in 1986, "are still fiercely debated." Historian Oliver Dickerson argues that Hancock was the victim of an essentially criminal
racketeering scheme perpetrated by Bernard and the customs officials. Dickerson believes that there is no reliable evidence that Hancock was guilty in
Liberty case and that the purpose of the trials was to punish Hancock for political reasons and to plunder his property. Opposed to Dickerson's interpretation were Kinvin Wroth and Hiller Zobel, the editors of John Adams's legal papers, who argue that "Hancock's innocence is open to question" and that the officials acted legally, if unwisely. Lawyer and historian Bernard Knollenberg concludes that the customs officials had the right to seize Hancock's ship, but towing it out to
Romney had been illegal. Legal historian John Phillip Reid argues that the testimony of both sides was so politically partial that it is not possible to objectively reconstruct the incident. Aside from
Liberty affair, the degree to which Hancock was engaged in smuggling, which may have been widespread in the colonies, has been questioned. Given the clandestine nature of smuggling, records are scarce. If Hancock was a smuggler, no documentation of this has been found. John W. Tyler identified 23 smugglers in his study of more than 400 merchants in revolutionary Boston but found no written evidence that Hancock was one of them. Biographer William Fowler concludes that while Hancock was probably engaged in some smuggling, most of his business was legitimate, and his later reputation as the "king of the colonial smugglers" is a myth without foundation. ==Massacre to Tea Party==