In the midst of this new election, as usual, much talk is made of the founding of our country so just to give a little unknown perspective, it didn’t start with the Boston Tea Party; that was an end of a beginning, as well as a beginning, going back to Samuel Adams’s dad, who, with others, in order to circumvent, if you will, Britain’s hold on lending, started a land bank, to loan money, allowing the borrowers to use their land as collateral, mostly farmers, which should probably be expected, as they would tend to be the people with land, now wouldn’t they, but also mechanics or as I would call it now – the skilled tradespeople thought not quite sure how they fit in since how many of them hand land but then maybe for their shops? 800 of them and they controlled the House of Representatives; however, slight problem, just 794 too many, for it was actually illegal to form any type of unincorporated business of more than 6 people (so why didn’t they just incorporate? hm; don’t know that answer) so they were forced down; now, granted, that might be a little dangerous anyway – actually thinking 2008 anybody? but then as in that time as well, it is a way to raise cash and capital when both are in short supply – think the question to be asked – and maybe should know more before I post – is why it was in the first place but to answer the question as to how they got the money out of the land to loan I find intriguing and also somewhat, can I say, like we in reality are doing now – they just made up their own currency, or at least paper money; sound familiar? and we all know what that does, right? so the powers that be began to get scared so we know what happens then – haven’t we seen it in our own time – thus begins the big contraction so then of course what happens? people start complaining about lack of money – another question I have – I mean, the lenders probably were granted their land by the king to begin with, but what about the borrowers/farmers, typically – which didn’t make the throne very happy, – can’t have just any and everybody making up their own currency, now can we? hm, so of course they had to shut them down, now, didn’t they, which they did, not allowing that currency to be used, thereby making those landowners – or at least those with any other assets that could be used then personally responsible for the value of said paper money, as in the loans would now go back to having to be made in silver and gold, thereby causing the Crown to come after those who had any, like the Adams, although they didn’t have enough, so they were forced into bankruptcy for their debt then to the British government and at risk of having their land foreclosed on to cover it. However, doesn’t this sound familiar?
Now the issue then, as now, was – what rights did they have? at least under their charter – which had been revoked, however – do find it interesting in light of the Freedom Caucus in Congress now that apparently the word caucus is a corruption of the word “caulkers” since the caucus of the day was made up of ship’s mechanics – caulkers, if you will – as well as others – basically the same as those of the Land Bank.
Not really sure how Samuel, which it was him, at least by that time, with his parents, or at least his father, being gone by then, managed to stave it off, except by his gift of gab, but somehow he did, but not but such that he had to work his way through school, as a waiter on campus- which I find interesting – kinda gives a little different perspective possibly than if he’d had his way paid. He did resent it, however, or maybe not so much the actual working, but the reason why, the British Crown being behind it – kinda fueled the fire, so to speak, if you will. He never forgot it, plotting, maybe, his revenge. Good thing he had that gift of gab but I’m sure many of the those his dad’s bank lended to felt the same way for he was able to drum up support for the cause. So one thing leading to another led up to the tea issue – now having said that, it wasn’t quite the anarchist move it’s been made out to be, although I actually find it all rather intriguing – the tea company didn’t really have a problem; they were going to have the cheapest tea, making the consumers happy – kinda like the Wal-Mart of their day? the people who had the problem were those who’d been selling the tea that had been cheaper before – why does sound so familiar? this even reminds me of a convo just had last night with young man up the road – a mechanic, even, as is my son – same thing happening in that field – those ships would have gladly left, had they been allowed to by Britain, who was who wouldn’t let them leave; it’s who was determined that tea was going to be unloaded within the 20 days required by law but Samuel and his ilk were equally determined it wasn’t going to be; however, they were trying to work within the existing laws, so on that last day or – night – ok, the tea had to be unloaded – therefore, it was. However, a little bit of confusion; when the tea ship’s owner appealed to the governor it appears that he asked for permission to unload the tea, rather than permission to leave with it – but the governor refused – that I don’t really understand; if he wouldn’t allow him to unload seems he would have allowed him to leave