Boston Tea Party: Price, Not Tax, Was the Issue

Your Jan. 2 article on the resurgence of tea drinking (“Cup of Tea: Americans Drink It Up”) mistakenly ascribes the Boston Tea Party of December, 1773, to colonial protests against Britain’s high tax on that commodity. In fact, the tea was dumped into Boston Harbor in response to British attempts to lower the price of tea.

Six years earlier, in 1767, a financially pressed British had enacted the Townshend duties, which included a tax on tea, without colonial approval. The colonists, resenting Parliament’s claim to tax them without their representation, responded by boycotting British goods. The government, under heavy pressure from British merchants, repealed the duties on all goods except tea in 1770. The tea tax was maintained as a symbol of Britain’s determination, in the words of George III, to “keep up the right.”

The financial problems of the East India Company in 1772 spurred the British government to solve colonial and corporate problems with one stroke. Overstocked with tea, the company’s officers asked the British government to let them sell tea directly to American consumers and to exempt them from paying an English export tax. These measures would enable the company to charge less for the tea.

At the same time, the British government hoped that lower tea prices would put an end to American tea smuggling, for that was how Americans had traditionally avoided paying high tea prices. If tea could be sold more cheaply, the British reasoned, Americans would abandon smuggling and accept the small duty on tea as part of the price. The East India Company could recover its fortunes, the Treasury would gather revenues previously lost to boycott and smuggling and the authority of Parliament to tax the colonists would no longer be an issue. It was a clever plan.

Sam Adams and his friends feared that New Englanders would succumb to temptation and buy the dutied tea at the new lower prices. Opposition to parliamentary power might dissolve in the fragrant vapors of East India Company tea; for accepting the tea was to risk conceding Parliament’s unrestricted right to tax the colonists. Adams’ followers made sure that New Englanders had no chance to put their consciences to the test by tossing the cargo overboard before the duty could be paid and the tea readied for sale.

When news of the Tea Party reached Britain, the government passed the Coercive Acts, which, among other things, closed Boston Harbor until damages were paid and greatly restricted Massachusetts self-governemnt. Within 16 months of the Tea Party, Britain and the colonists were at war.

HOWARD SEFTEL University of California, Berkeley Carol McGraw’s article on the growing popularity of tea (Jan. 2) was most interesting and provides an excellent opportunity to call attention to the total ignorance on the part of Southern California restaurants of how to make and serve tea.

For some unaccountable reason, restaurants in this area (in all price ranges) require their patrons to make their own tea. They provide a cup or pot of hot water and a tea bag on the side. The main problem with this is that in order to make a proper cup of tea, the water must be boiling when poured over the tea. If it isn’t boiling, the tea is tasteless. No matter how close one’s table is to the kitchen, the water is no longer boiling by the time the person discovers the wrapped tea bag in his saucer. If coffee were served in such a manner, restaurants would soon lose their customers.

Iced tea receives even less culinary attention than hot tea. In order to make a proper glass of iced tea, a pot of strong tea should be made and allowed to cool to room temperature before pouring over ice cubes. Pouring hot tea over icea results in nothing more than timed water.

Now that tea is so trendy, perhaps your article will inspire some of the restaurants in this area to learn how it’s made.

POLLY S. BROWDER La Jolla