Why was Hutinson insistent upon the tea being unloaded in Boston?

Question

The question looks like this:
Hutchinson was aware that New York had turned back tea-carrying vessels. Why do you think he was insistent upon the tea being unloaded in Boston?
Its for school.. and I can't find it! Help!!!

Answer 1

The difference in Boston (from New York AND Philadelphia, and to some extent Charles Town) was that the CONSIGNEES to receive the tea refused to back down an refuse the shipments or resign their commissions. Why? Perhaps because they FELT more confident of the support of the royal governor (Hutchinson), whereas those in the other cities caved in when they were threatened , despite official support.

So why did THESE may not back down? It MAY be because Hutchinson was more determined OR because the main consigness were Hutchinson's relatives --two sons and a nephew.
http://oror.essortment.com/bostonteaparty_rotm.htm

As for why Governor Hutchinson was so resolved, there are a few factors that might come into play:

1) he had a financial stake in this, in part because his family (and may have been invested in the East India Company)
Frankly, I don't think this factor should be overplayed. It seems likely he would have behaved the same way WITHOUT financial interest.

2) Boston was THE hotbed of patriot sentiment under Sam Adams and the Sons of Liberty. So it may have seemed particularly important to put down this effort in that city.

3) Hutchinson's resolve may have been strengthened by recent events. In particular, the divulging of the Whateley letters (obtained through Ben Franklin, distributed by Sam Adams). in which Hutchinson had advocated firmer policies, including military force, against the colony, had inflamed the public. This may have increase his determination not to be cowed. (Some say this made him hate the rebels more and that motivated him. I'm not sure there is evidence of that.)
http://www.strike-the-root.com/3/smith/smith17.html

For a more detailed account, see the three-page article beginning here:
http://www.boston-tea-party.org/economic-causes.html
and Thomas Fleming, *Liberty*, pp. 75-9.

Answer 2

He was loyal to Britain and was determined to uphold the law.

"He was deeply Loyalist and resisted the gradual movement toward independence from the British crown. He was convinced that the rebellious spirit was only the work of such patriot hotheads as Samuel Adams, for whom he developed a deep enmity."
http://www.americanrevwar.homestead.com/files/HUTCH.HTM