The Impact of the Stamp Act of 1765 on Colonial American Printers: Threat or Bonanza?

In this study two sets of data are used to determine whether there is a correlation between financial circumstances of twenty-seven Colonial American printers/firms and the political positions of their newspapers, and thus to resolve conflicting claims in regard to the response of Colonial American printers to the Stamp Act. This Act was imposed on the American colonies by the British Parliament in 1765, a year of great foment in the American Colonies when the Stamp Act became law and when the law went into effect. To determine the printers'/firms' relative financial position and access to capital in 1765, an analysis was made of the existing bibliographic records for the other books, pamphlets, and broadsides which they produced that year to determine the quantity of paper which passed through their presses. To arrive at the printers'/firms' newspapers' relative political orientation and to confirm their relative financial position and access to capital, a content analysis was made of all Colonial American newspapers printed in 1765 which still exist to describe manifest and latent newspaper content.

It was found that printers/firms could be ranked by relative financial position based on quantitative data; collaborations and printing for Colonial assemblies and governors contributed positively to relative financial position; and there is a correlation between relative financial position, advertisements in newspapers, and political positions of newspapers. It was also found that there was virtually no support among printers/firms for the Stamp Act in 1765; Isaiah Thomas's characterizations of printers/firms are supported by quantitative evidence; and the printing firm, Franklin and Hall, was atypical in 1765.

It was concluded that those printers/firms least strong financially presented a neutral viewpoint of the Stamp Act in their newspapers, those most strong presented a negative viewpoint, and those in the middle presented an even more negative viewpoint. These findings resolved the conflicting claims of historians.