[Back to the tobacco mini-series.]
In 1731, the Board of Trade recommended passage of the tobacco act requiring inspection of tobacco. But even this approval was half-hearted; the recommendation was of the tone, "Let's pass it and see what happens, and if we don't like it we can repeal it." Lt. Gov. Gooch in Virginia was now faced with the implementation of the act. The large planters were on his side as they generally grew the best tobacco. If the trash tobacco could be eliminated, they saw improved prices for the better tobacco. The smaller planters were not as favorable, since they generally grew a poorer tobacco. Some of the large planters saw overproduction as a problem, and they wanted a return to the stint laws.
The small planters were concerned that the large planters would dominate the inspection system and would use their power to condemn the tobacco of the small planters. They thought the large planters would automatically have their tobacco passed while the tobacco of the small planters would be at the mercy of the inspectors. The problem was compounded by the fact that the smaller planters often had marginal land which did yield inferior tobacco. So the tobacco law was launched with considerable opposition. The first crop under the new law was severely damaged by the weather. Gooch told the inspectors to be lenient in their grading, or the opposition to the law would be overwhelming.
The planters in the Northern Neck were a major part of the opposition. These small planters usually did not have slaves, and did all of the work themselves. During the winter, rioters burned several government warehouses. Gooch vigorously sought out the culprits to let them know that they could not hide under a lack of identification, but he was lenient in the punishment. In the spring of the next year, Gooch wrote a pamphlet anonymously which extolled the inspection law. It was aimed at the small planter who could not understand why burning part of the crop could be beneficial. The pamphlet seemed to help stem the opposition to the law. The large planters generally fell into line behind Gooch and supported the law.
At a session of the House of Burgesses, repeal and serious amendments were beaten down. The Council (i.e., large planters) helped by punishing fourteen inspectors who had embezzled, shown favoritism, accepted bribes, or otherwise violated the law.
In 1734, Gooch asked the assembly to continue the law for another four years. What was becoming evident was that the large planters controlled the assembly, and the government in general. In the late 1730's, the battle was between the large planters and the small producers, many of whom were on the frontier and in the Northern Neck. The closer a planter was to Williamsburg, and to the rivers, the more power he had. In 1736, the House of Burgesses voted to repeal the tobacco act, and some of the larger planters made no opposition to this because they knew that the measure would not be passed by the Council which was dominated by the large planters. In 1742, the renewal of the act passed the House.
(30 May 01)
We gratefully acknowledge the work of John Blankenbaker who published over 2,500 Germanna History Notes via the Germanna-L@rootsweb.com email list from 1997 to 2008. We are equally thankful to George Durman (Sgt. George) for hosting the list and republishing the notes via rootsweb.com.