On November 1, 1773, John Malcolm who had rendered himself obnoxious “by being an Informer” was “genteely _Tarr’d_ and _Feather’d_” by “about 30 Sailors” at Pownalborough (Mass.).[106] On January 25, 1774, Malcolm was in Boston, and when some taunting remarks were made to him to the effect that he had been tarred and feathered but not in the proper manner, he dared any one to do it better and assaulted one man, slightly injuring him. In the evening a number of people took Malcolm out, stripped him, tarred his head and his body, feathered him, set him in a chair in a cart, and thus carried him through the streets, finally whipping and beating him before they let him go.[107] On the morning of January 30 the following handbill[108] was found pasted up in the most public places: BRETHREN, AND FELLOW-CITIZENS! This is to Certify, That the modern Punishment lately inflicted on the ignoble JOHN MALCOLM, was not done by our Order—We reserve that Method for bringing Villains of greater Consequence to a Sense of Guilt and Infamy. JOYCE, jun^r. (_Chairman of the Committee for_ Taring _and_ Feathering.) ☞ If any Person should be so hardy as to tear this down, they may expect my severest Resentment. J. jun. During the years 1773 and 1774 tea commissioners and tea consignees, in addition to customs informers and importers of British goods, fell into popular disfavor, and thus became subjects for tarring and feathering. “Tiewaghnodago” in the Boston Gazette, December 20, 1773,[109] said that he had been informed that “some _little_ Shopkeepers in this Town,” finding that tea was not likely to be used, had raised the price of coffee a few coppers per pound, and he asked “whether _Tar_ and _Feathers_ would not be a constitutional encouragement for such eminent Patriotism.” In the period 1765–1775 there were likewise cases of mob violence where houses were attacked and damaged by having missiles thrown at them and where property was destroyed.[110] In one instance at least the owner of goods which were destroyed by a mob recovered damages in the courts. Early in the year 1772, according to S. G. Arnold,[111] there occurred “a memorable instance of the triumph of law over popular prejudice.” One David Hill was detected in selling goods included in the non-importation agreement, and the goods were seized and destroyed by a mob. Hill brought action in the Rhode Island courts, and the superior court confirmed the judgment of the inferior court and gave the plaintiff two hundred and eighty-two pounds damages and costs. Tarring and feathering was not reserved for certain informers and importers or for tea consignees alone, however. This punishment was administered in at least two instances for offenses other than those growing out of the political controversies of the time.