Last week we looked at the severe economic crisis caused by the post war economic depression. Money shortages and the demands to repay war debts were making life difficult for almost everyone.
Massachusetts Money Problems
With the Revolutionary war at an end, Massachusetts was dealing with the problems on peace. The economy was in a post-war depression that pitted the merchant creditors, who mostly live in or around Boston, against the debtor farmers in the western part of the state.
 |
| Fight during Shays Rebellion |
In the western part of the state, farming was the prime economic engine. While the farms were rather productive, no one had any money to buy any of the farm products. Most exchanges were done through barter. Many farmers had borrowed in order to increase production during the war. It was part of the effort to feed the army. With the war over and demand for crops down, prices plummeted.
Many farmers who had returned from the war had been issued paper money or certificates, which were not worth anything close to face value. Most of them sold their paper at 10 to 15 percent of face value.
By the middle of the 1780’s a financial crisis was developing. Eastern merchants were getting squeezed for cash by British merchants. They were unable to sell most of their goods outside of Massachusetts. Merchants began to put the squeeze on farmers for repayment of debts, in cash, so that the merchants could pay their debts to suppliers in London.
On top of that, state debt was about 15x the size of the debt before the war, at about £1.5 million, at a time when the states annual tax receipts were about £60,000.
John Hancock had served as governor of Massachusetts since the adoption of the state constitution in 1780. He won reelection overwhelmingly each year.
Open Protest
Political protests, of course, were nothing new in Massachusetts. The patriot leaders had been protest leaders themselves before the war.
Even before the war ended, western farmers began protesting economic conditions. Minister Samuel Ely led a revolt in Hampshire county. In 1782, shortly after Massachusetts passed the Tender Act, requiring all taxes be paid in cash, farmers found themselves unable to pay. Much like protesters had done during the colonial era, Ely led a mob that shut down the county courts, preventing them from seizing properties or jailing debtors.
Ely had been an itinerant preacher during the war. He roamed around Connecticut, Massachusetts,and Vermont. While he did not formally join the army, he served as a volunteer at the battle of Bennington. He became an early leader of the protest movement in western Massachusetts, where he called for the overthrow of the Massachusetts Constitution.
After Ely’s mob shut down the courts, authorities arrested him and brought him to Springfield for trial. A court fined him £50 and sentenced him to six months in jail. About fifty local militia men formed up, marched on the jail, and forced Ely’s release. Ely fled to the wilderness in Vermont, where he evaded capture.
Ely soon got involved in land disputes in Vermont, getting himself arrested there, charged with being a “pernicious and seditious man” who was disturbing the peace. Vermont had its own problems, still fighting to be an independent state. It did not want to involve itself in Massachusetts’ tax fights. Officials banished Ely and turned him over to authorities in Massachusetts. He ended in Castle William in Boston Harbor, where his friends could not conduct another jailbreak.
Realizing Ely represented a political movement, politicians did not want to make him a martyr. After he requested clemency, citing the conditions of his imprisonment, the legislature voted to have him released on bond. More than 500 farmers had engaged in the illegal actions. Only three were arrested and those were soon released.
The Ely revolt in 1782 brought attention to the plight of western farmers. Despite this, many believed this sort of lawlessness needed to be treated as a criminal matter. The law and order crowd would not tolerate disruption of the courts and legal process. Even Samuel Adams, who had led mobs in the colonial era, made a distinction between the colonial protests which he led, and protests against a democratically elected government with laws made by representatives of the people, including himself.
Adams, along with former Continental General Artemas Ward, travelled to western Massachusetts in the summer of 1783 to meet with local officials. They heard complaints about high taxes and the money shortages that threatened farmers’ property.
The state government eventually reduced taxes by deferring the repayment of some state debt. Governor John Hancock also pushed for the creation of more paper money, which increased the money supply, but also led to inflation.
Hancock v. Adams
As I discussed last week, the debtor farmers loved inflation since it made it easier to repay their debts. The merchants in the east, however, objected to policies that allowed repayment of debts in depreciated currency.
Hancock had served as governor of the state since the implementation of the Constitution in 1780. He was elected with over 90% of the vote, and re-elected each year with overwhelming numbers. Hancock did have his detractors though. Among them was Samuel Adams.
Hancock and Adams had worked well together before and during much of the war. Adams had been happy to use Hancock’s money for the movement and allow Hancock to serve in high ceremonial positions. However, when Adams expected to be elected governor in 1780, and the people chose Hancock instead, the two men became more adversarial. Hancock wanted to be loved by all, and refused to take any controversial positions that might hurt him with the voters. By contrast, Adams wanted to take action to pay down the state war debts and to crack down on protesters like Ely who threatened the state’s law and order.
Adams and Hancock also had different visions for the state. Adams had a rather puritanical view of society. He believed that people should live simply and frugally. He opposed the payment of pensions to Continental officers and the creation of the Society of the Cincinnati as these would create a privileged class within the republic Adams blamed the economic problem, not on an unfair economic system that imposed high taxes on farms and restricted the money supply, but rather on “the habits of luxury contracted in the late war, from the vast quantity of goods imported” as well as “receiving and giving unlimited credit.” For Adams, reforming economic and tax policies was not the answer. People had to “lay aside the destructive fashions and expensive superfluities of the day; be sober, temperate, and industrious.”
Despite the fact that Hancock was a rich merchant, he refused to support the political demands of the merchant class, and Adams. The merchants wanted to pay down state debt. Many of them held that state debt and would get paid when the state collected the money. They also greatly opposed paper money policies that meant they would be repaid with depreciated money.
Adams backed the merchants. Hancock backed the farmers. Another issue that divided the men was a new social club in Boston that allowed card playing and dancing in the evening. Adams saw this as part of the moral collapse of society, while Hancock seemed to enjoy such distractions.
James Bowdoin
One of the leading merchants that allied himself with Adams’ harsher economic policies was James Bowdoin. Bowdoin had been a prominent official in the colonial era, even sitting on the Governor's Council before that became controversial. He eventually got kicked off the Council for his support of the patriot cause. Bowdoin had been named a delegate to the First Continental Congress, but declined the appointment citing the poor health of both his wife and himself. For a time, early in the war, he served as president of the executive council of the Massachusetts Provincial Congress, and later as President of the Massachusetts Constitutional Convention.
In 1780, Bowdoin ran against Hancock for governor. He lost in a landslide. This trouncing was repeated for several more elections. Hancock always won in a landslide with Bowdoin failing to get even 10% of the vote in any election. Hancock’s support dwindled with each election, but remained strong. His weakest showing in 1784 still gave him over two-thirds of the popular vote.
Congress’ Requisition Act of 1785, which we discussed last week, made the fight between the merchants and farmers even more contentious. The only way the state could meet the demands, was by greatly increasing taxes on its citizens. Feeling the pressure, Hancock offered to resign. By some accounts, this was a political ploy, expecting most of the establishment to beg him to stay in office. When that did not happen, Hancock did resign, citing health problems.
Lieutenant Governor Thomas Cushing took up the role and ran in the 1786 elections. Cushing generally supported Hancock’s positions, but lacked any real political charisma. He had only become lieutenant governor in 1780 after Bowdoin and James Warren both rejected the position.
With Hancock off the ticket, Bowdoin made another real effort to win election as governor. Samuel Adams backed Bowdoin. Former Continental General Benjamin Lincoln also allowed himself to be put forward as a candidate.
Bowdoin received the most votes with about 44%. Since no candidate received a majority, the legislature made the choice, selecting Bowdoin.
With Adams’ support, Governor Bowdoin put in place a number of policies that the eastern establishment had been demanding for years. He raised taxes in order to pay off debt, and also increased enforcement for the collection of back taxes. He refused to loosen the money supply to help anyone pay these taxes.
The result was that many farmers, even those with extremely productive farms, faced the possibility that their land could be seized for non-payment of taxes or other debts. The farmers themselves faced the possibility of debtors' prison.
Taxes in 1786 were more than ten times what they were before the Revolutionary War began. Poll taxes required everyone to pay the same amount. So a wealthy merchant like John Hancock owed the same $1.75 that was also paid by a laborer earning 20 or 30 cents a day. In addition, property taxes were based on acres of land, not the land’s value. Western farmers often had large farms with land that was not particularly valuable as it was not suited for farming. Their tax burden was a far larger portion of the value of their land than someone who owned a smaller but more valuable property in the east.
In some towns, the number of lawsuits for debt collection quadrupled during this time. The number of men in debtor’s prison increased tenfold. In Worcester, for example, debtors made up more than three-quarters of all prisoners.
Rebellion
The western farmers sent petitions and demanded relief to these policies. They needed a fairer tax system and the issuance of more paper money.. After the legislature adjourned in July without taking action on these petitions, the petitioners turned into protesters.
On August 29, 1786, a group of protestors prevented the Northampton County Court from sitting. The protesters called themselves Regulators, a reference to the Regulator movement of North Carolina, where western farmers had fought against unfair eastern tax policies in that state in the 1760s.
A week later, on September 5, similar protests shut down the courts in Worcester. Officials attempted to call out the local militia to restore order and open the courts, but the militia failed to turn out. Most of the militia were either sympathetic to the cause of the protesters, or were themselves protesters.
Daniel Shays
As the protesters organized themselves, many leaders, often militia officers, commanded the men and kept the protests organized. Over time, Daniel Shays emerged as the leader of the movement.
Shays had been born in Massachusetts to Irish immigrants. He was a militia sergeant before the war. His war service began on the day of Lexington and Concord. Although he did not see combat personally that day, his company joined the siege of Boston. He saw action at Bunker Hill and was soon commissioned a lieutenant for his actions on that day. In 1776, joined the Continental Army and served in the New York campaign. By 1777 he was serving as a captain in a Massachusetts regiment. He served at Saratoga under General Benjamin Lincoln. In 1779 he participated in the much celebrated raid on Stoney Point under Anthony Wayne. In 1780. Shays served under the Marquis de Lafayette, and helped fend off a British landing in New Jersey. It was around this time that Lafayette honored Shays with a sword. Later that year Captain Shays was one of the officers assigned to guard Major John Andre after Arnold’s betrayal. All of this is to say that Shays had a long and honorable record during the war.
Almost two weeks after Andre’s execution, Shays resigned his commission and returned home. Like most Continental officers, Shays had not been paid during most of his service and was broke. In 1777, he was forced to sell a farm in New Hampshire. Shortly before his resignation, He also sold the sword that Lafayette had given him, a very controversial act among his fellow officers.
After he returned home to Pelham, Massachusetts, in October, 1780, he was hit with a lawsuit for unpaid debts. He was forced to sell more land to repay his debts.
Despite his money problems, Shays was a prominent member of the community and well respected for his military service. He sat on the local committee of safety. When the 1786 mass meeting decided to shut down the Northampton Courts, Shays accepted appointment to a committee to raise and equip a force of regulators. His bearing and experience as an officer made him a natural leader. By some accounts, Shays sent men to request that Ethan Allen take command of the rebellion, but Allen refused.
Although most people on both sides saw Shays as the leader, he himself rejected that title. Shays was reluctantly drawn into the fight but did command those who joined to serve under him. When the courts tried to resume business at the end of September, Shays led men again to keep the Northampton courts closed.
Response
This time, officials were prepared for the protests. William Shepard was also a veteran of the Continental Army. By this time (1786) he was serving in the Massachusetts House of Representatives, and as a general in the state militia. Shepard took 300 friendly militia to the courthouse in Springfield. When others arrived to shut down the courts, they found themselves pretty evenly matched. While the protestors demonstrated, they did not attempt to seize the building. Even so, the judges adjourned without hearing any cases.
After this incident, Shepard was able to recruit more militia and moved to the Springfield Armory as a defensive position.
The government in Boston condemned these attacks on law and order. Governor Bowdoin called on the legislature to "vindicate the insulted dignity of government." Samuel Adams claimed that the British were behind these plots and were inciting treason. Even though these tactics were very similar to those Adams had used against the British years earlier, Adams believed this case was different. Such protests, in his view, were appropriate against a colonial government appointed by outsiders. But going against the elected government of the people was deserving of the death penalty. Adams helped push through a new Riot Act, and a resolution to suspend habeas corpus so that authorities could more easily take on the rebellion.
Governor Bowdoin did not have enough money to call out a full militia army. He also could not call on the Continental Army since there no longer was one. Even so, the government issued arrest warrants for leaders, and managed to capture a few of them in November.
In January, 1787, Governor Bowdoin suggested raising a privately financed army. Eastern merchants who supported the effort to collect on the debts owed to them were happy to pay. Bowdoin raised over £6,000 from 125 wealthy merchants. With the money the government raised an army of 3000 men from the eastern part of the state.
While Shays and the other leaders had organized their forces, they needed more weapons to contest the new army being brought against them. The only source of such weapons in the area was the Springfield Armory, where Congress had stored weapons from the Revolutionary war. As I mentioned, the pro-government militia under Shepard had already taken possession of the armory and now had a force of about 1200 men.
Three different groups of rebels agreed to attack the armory on January 25. One of the groups later sent a note saying they could not make it. The second leader, Eli Parsons, got the note and paused his attack. But Shays did not get the notice and marched his column toward the armory.
Shapard first attempted to discourage the attackers by firing over their heads. When that did not work, he ordered cannons to fire grapeshot into the advancing line. With that, the attack collapsed and the attackers fled.
General Benjamin Lincoln had taken command of the 3000 man militia army that was tasked with crushing the rebellion. Shays sent a messenger to his old commander, requesting a short truce until the legislature could act on their petition. Instead, Lincoln took his army on a night march that raided Shays’ camp on February 4, and scattered the rebels. Some were captured, but many escaped. Shays managed to make his way to Vermont where he remained in hiding.
Lincoln’s militia army returned home. After that, there was one final raid in late February in Sheffield Massachusetts. Local militia put down the raid, but at a loss of one man killed on each side, and dozens wounded.
Aftermath
With the rebellion at an end, Gov. Bowdoin remained vengeful. He offered a reward for the capture of Shays and got the legislature to pass the Disqualification Act that prevented any of the rebels from running for office.
Despite those efforts, anger at state policies caused Bowdoin to be thrown out of office in the next state elections two months later. John Hancock returned as governor. He cut taxes and placed a moratorium on debts. This seemed to calm the crisis.
Two rebel leaders, John Bly and Charles Rose, were hanged in December. Shays remained in hiding in Vermont until he received a pardon in 1788.
Next week, we’ll return to the Continental Congress, as it attempts to solve many of the country’s economic problems with passage of the Northwest Ordinance.
- - -
Next Episode 344 Northwest Ordinance of 1787 (coming soon)
Previous Episode 342 Paper Money Riot
 |
| Click here to donate |
 |
| Click here to see my Patreon Page |
An alternative to Patreon is SubscribeStar. For anyone who has problems with Patreon, you can get the same benefits by subscribing at SubscribeStar.
| Help Support this podcast on "BuyMeACoffee.com" |
Signup for the AmRev Podcast Mail List
Further Reading
Websites
The Requisition of 1785 and Shays’s Rebellion, 1786–1787 https://digfir-published.macmillanusa.com/tap6e/tap6e_ch8_19.html
Shays’ Rebellion: https://www.mountvernon.org/library/digitalhistory/digital-encyclopedia/article/shays-rebellion
The Events and Impact of Shays’s Rebellion: https://csac.history.wisc.edu/document-collections/confederation-period/shays-rebellion
Griffiths, Bruce D. “Samuel Adams and John Hancock: The Relationship that Determined the Formation of America” University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Masters Thesis, 2018. https://scholarworks.utrgv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1275&context=etd
Vaughan, Alden T. “The ‘Horrid and Unnatural Rebellion’ of Daniel Shays” American Heritage: June 1966, vol. XVII, no. 4. https://www.americanheritage.com/horrid-and-unnatural-rebellion-daniel-shays
“Shays’s Rebellion.” The American Historical Review, vol. 36, no. 4, 1931, pp. 776–78. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/1838006.
“Documents Relating to the Shays Rebellion, 1787.” The American Historical Review, vol. 2, no. 4, 1897, pp. 693–99. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/1833986.
Feer, Robert A. “Shays’s Rebellion and the Constitution: A Study in Causation.” The New England Quarterly, vol. 42, no. 3, 1969, pp. 388–410. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/363616.
Moody, Robert E. “Samuel Ely: Forerunner of Shays.” The New England Quarterly, vol. 5, no. 1, 1932, pp. 105–34. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/359493.
Parker, Rachel R. “Shays’ Rebellion: An Episode in American State-Making.” Sociological Perspectives, vol. 34, no. 1, 1991, pp. 95–113. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/1389145.
Pencak, William. “Samuel Adams and Shays’s Rebellion.” The New England Quarterly, vol. 62, no. 1, 1989, pp. 63–74. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/366210.
Pressman, Richard S. “Class Positioning and Shays’ Rebellion: Resolving the Contradictions of ‘The Contrast.’” Early American Literature, vol. 21, no. 2, 1986, pp. 87–102. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25056617.
Smith, Jonathan. “The Depression of 1785 and Daniel Shays’ Rebellion.” The William and Mary Quarterly, vol. 5, no. 1, 1948, pp. 77–94. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/1920948.
Warren, Joseph Parker. “The Confederation and the Shays Rebellion.” The American Historical Review, vol. 11, no. 1, 1905, pp. 42–67. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/1832364.
A sermon, preached in Lenox in the county of Berkshire, and Commonwealth of Massachusetts, December 6, 1787; at the execution of John Bly and Charles Rose: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=evans;cc=evans;rgn=main;view=text;idno=N16785.0001.001
Video: Daniel Bullen: Shay's Honorable Rebellion, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIcyDT1aqik
Free eBooks
(from archive.org unless noted)
Holland, J. G. History of Western Massachusetts, Springfield: S. Bowles and Co. 1855.
Noble, John A Few Notes on the Shays Rebellion, Worcester, MA: C. Hamilton, 1903.
Rivers, George R. R. Captain Shays, a populist of 1786, Boston: Little, Brown & Co. 1897.
Vaughan, Alden T. “The ‘Horrid and Unnatural Rebellion’ of Daniel Shays” American Heritage: June 1966, vol. XVII, no. 4, p. 50-53 (borrow only).
Books Worth Buying
(links to Amazon.com unless otherwise noted)*
Bullen, Daniel Daniel Shays's Honorable Rebellion: An American Story, Westholme Publishing, 2021.
Condon, Sean Shays's Rebellion: Authority and Distress in Post-Revolutionary America, Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 2015.
Richards, Leonard L. Shays's Rebellion: The American Revolution's Final Battle, Univ. of Pa. Press, 2002.
Szatmary, David P. Shays' Rebellion: The Making of an Agrarian Insurrection, Univ. of Mass Press, 1980.
* As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
