Search this site

Conciliatory Resolution February 27, 1775 Resolved, That it is the opinion of this Committee, that when the Governour, Council, and Assembly, or General Court, of any of his Majesty's Provinces or Colonies in America, shall propose to make provision, according to the condition, circumstances, and situation of such Province or Colony, for contributing their proportion to the common defence, (such proportion to be raised under the authority of the General Court, or General Assembly of such Province or Colony, and disposable by Parliament,) and shall engage to make provision also for the support of the Civil Government, and the Administration of Justice, in such Province or Colony, it will be proper if such proposal shall be approved by his Majesty and the two Houses of Parliament, and for so long as such provision shall be made accordingly, to forbear, in respect of such Province or Colony, to levy any Duty, Tax, or Assessment, or to impose any farther Duty, Tax, or Assessment, except only such Duties as it may be expedient to continue to levy or to impose for the regulation of commerce; the nett produce of the duties last mentioned to be carried to the account of such Province or Colony respectively. Source: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Conciliatory_Resolution

The Farmer Refuted, &c. New-York [February 23,] 1775 Sir, I resume my pen, in reply to the curious epistle, you have been pleased to favour me with; and can assure you, that, notwithstanding, I am naturally of a grave and phlegmatic disposition, it has been the source of abundant merriment to me. The spirit that breathes throughout is so rancorous, illiberal and imperious: The argumentative part of it so puerile and fallacious: The misrepresentations of facts so palpable and flagrant: The criticisms so illiterate, trifling and absurd: The conceits so low, steril and splenetic, that I will venture to pronounce it one of the most ludicrous performances, which has been exhibited to public view, during all the present controversy. You have not even imposed the laborious task of pursuing you through a labyrinth of subtilty. You have not had ability sufficient, however violent your efforts, to try the depths of sophistry; but have barely skimmed along its surface. I should, almost, deem the animadversions, I am going to make, unnecessary, were it not, that, without them, you might exult in a fancied victory, and arrogate to yourself imaginary trophies. But while I pass this judgment, it is not my intention to detract from your real merit. Candour obliges me to acknowledge, that you possess every accomplishment of a polemical writer, which may serve to dazzle and mislead superficial and vulgar minds; a peremptory dictatorial air, a pert vivacity of expression, an inordinate passion for conceit, and a noble disdain of being fettered by the laws of truth. These, Sir, are important qualifications, and these all unite in you, in a very eminent degree. So that, though you may never expect the plaudit of the judicious and discerning, you may console yourself, with this assurance, that Fools and witlings “will” ev’ry sentence raise, And wonder, with a foolish face of praise. You will, no doubt, be pleased, with this further concession, to wit, that there is a striking resemblance between yourself and the renowned hero of the Dunciad. “Pert dulness” seems to be the chief characteristic of your genius as well as his. I might point out a variety of circumstances, in which you both agree; but I shall content myself with having given the hint, and leave it to yourself and to your other admirers to prosecute a comparison, which will reflect so high lustre on the object of admiration. Having thus, briefly, delivered my sentiments of your performance in general, I shall proceed to a particular examination of it, so far, as may be requisite, towards placing it in that just point of light in which it ought to stand. I flatter myself, I shall find no difficulty in obviating the objections you have produced, against the Full Vindication; and in shewing, that your View of the Controversy between Great-Britain and the Colonies, is not only partial and unjust, but diametrically opposite to the first principles of civil society. In doing this, I may, occasionally, interweave some strictures on the Congress Canvassed. First, then, I observe, you endeavour to bring the imputation of inconsistency upon me, for writing “a long and elaborate pamphlet to justify decisions against whose influence none but impotent attempts had been made.” A little attention would have unfolded the whole mystery. The reason assigned, for what I did, was, “lest those attempts,” impotent as they were in a general sense, “might, yet, have a tendency to mislead and prejudice the minds of a few.” To prevent this, I wrote; and if I have been instrumental in preserving a single person, from the baneful effects of your insidious efforts, I shall not regret the time I have devoted to that laudable purpose. To confirm, or to add one friend to his country, would afford a more refined and permanent satisfaction to me, than could, possibly, animate the breast of the proudest ministerial minion, though elevated to the pinnacle of his wished-for preferment, and basking in the sunshine of court favour, as the despicable wages of his prostitution and servility. You tell me, “I knew that at the bar of impartial reason and common sense, the conduct of the Congress must be condemned; but was too much interested, too deeply engaged, in party-views and party-heats, to bear this with patience. I had no remedy (you say) but artifice, sophistry, misrepresentation, and abuse. These (you call) my weapons, and these I wield, like an old experienced practitioner.” You ask, “Is this too heavy a charge? Can you lay your hand upon your heart, and, upon your honour, plead not guilty?” Yes, Sir, I can do more. I can make a solemn appeal to the tribunal of Heaven, for the rectitude of my intentions. I can affirm, with the most scrupulous regard to truth, that I am of opinion, the conduct of the Congress will bear the most impartial scrutiny, that I am not interested, more, than as the felicity and prosperity of this vast continent are concerned, and that I am perfectly disengaged from party of every kind. Here, I expect, you will exclaim with your usual vehemence and indecency; you are now espousing the cause of a party! It is the most daring impudence and falshood to assert the contrary! I can, by no means, conceive, that an opposition to a small herd of mal-contents, among whom, you have thought proper to rank, and a zealous attachment to the general measures of America can be denominated the effect of a party spirit. You, Sir, and your adherents may be justly deemed a faction, because you compose a small number inimical to the common voice of your country. To determine the truth of this affirmation, it is necessary to take a comprehensive view of all the colonies. Th[r]oughout your letter, you seem to consider me, as a person, who has acted, and is still acting some part in the formation and execution of public measures. You tacitly represent me as a Delegate, or member of the Committee. Whether this be done with a design to create a suspicion of my sincerity, or whether it be really your opinion, I know not. Perhaps it is from a complex motive. But I can assure you, if you are in earnest, that you are entirely mistaken. I have taken no other part in the affair, than that of defending the proceedings of the Congress, in conversation, and by the pamphlet I lately published. I approved of them, and thought an undeviating compliance with them essential to the preservation of American freedom. I shall, therefore, strenuously exert myself for the promotion of that valuable end. In the field of literary contention, it is common to see the epithets artifice, sophistry, misrepresentation and abuse, mutually bandied about. Whether they are more justly applicable to you, or me, the public must decide. With respect to abuse, I make not the least doubt, but every reader will allow you to surpass me in that. Your envenomed pen has endeavoured to sully the characters of our continental representatives, with the presumptuous charges of ignorance, knavery, sedition, rebellion, treason and tyranny; a tremendous catalogue indeed! Nor have you treated their friends and adherents, with any greater degree of complaisance. You have also delineated the mercantile body, as entirely devoid of principle; and the several committees as bands of robbers and petty tyrants. In short, except the few who are of your own complexion and stamp, “the virtuous friends of order and good government,” you have not hesitated to exercise your obloquy and malevolence against the whole continent. These things being considered, it is manifest, that, in my answer to your Free Thoughts, I treated you with more lenity than you had a right to expect; and did, by no means, observe the strict law of retaliation. None, but yourself, will think, you can, with the least propriety, complain of abuse. I congratulate myself upon the sentiments, you entertain of my last performance. Such is my opinion of your abilities as a critic, that I very much prefer your disapprobation to your applause. But, with respect to the brilliancy of thought you speak of, give me leave to inform you, that I aimed at nothing more, than justness of thought. I addressed myself to the judgment, not to the imagination. In works, where fancy is predominant, as is the case with yours, there is a better opportunity for displaying brilliancy of thought, than where reason presides and directs. No wonder, then, if you have excelled me in this particular; since your plan is so much more favourable to it, than mine. I shall, for the present, pass over to that part of your pamphlet, in which you endeavour to establish the supremacy of the British Parliament over America. After a proper eclaircissement of this point, I shall draw such inferences, as will sap the foundation of every thing you have offered. The first thing that presents itself is a wish, that “I had, explicitly, declared to the public my ideas of the natural rights of mankind. Man, in a state of nature (you say) may be considered, as perfectly free from all restraints of law and government, and, then, the weak must submit to the strong.” I shall, henceforth, begin to make some allowance for that enmity, you have discovered to the natural rights of mankind. For, though ignorance of them in this enlightened age cannot be admitted, as a sufficient excuse for you; yet, it ought, in some measure, to extenuate your guilt. If you will follow my advice, there still may be hopes of your reformation. Apply yourself, without delay, to the study of the law of nature. I would recommend to your perusal, Grotius. Puffendorf, Locke, Montesquieu, and Burlemaqui. I might mention other excellent writers on this subject; but if you attend, diligently, to these, you will not require any others. There is so strong a similitude between your political principles and those maintained by Mr. Hobbs, that, in judging from them, a person might very easily mistake you for a disciple of his. His opinion was, exactly, coincident with yours, relative to man in a state of nature. He held, as you do, that he was, then, perfectly free from all restraint of law and government. Moral obligation, according to him, is derived from the introduction of civil society; and there is no virtue, but what is purely artificial, the mere contrivance of politicians, for the maintenance of social intercourse. But the reason he run into this absurd and impious doctrine, was, that he disbelieved the existence of an intelligent superintending principle, who is the governor, and will be the final judge of the universe. As you, sometimes, swear by him that made you, I conclude, your sentiment does not correspond with his, in that which is the basis of the doctrine, you both agree in; and this makes it impossible to imagine whence this congruity between you arises. To grant, that there is a supreme intelligence, who rules the world, and has established laws to regulate the actions of his creatures; and, still, to assert, that man, in a state of nature, may be considered as perfectly free from all restraints of law and government, appear to a common understanding, altogether irreconcileable. Good and wise men, in all ages, have embraced a very dissimilar theory. They have supposed, that the deity, from the relations, we stand in, to himself and to each other, has constituted an eternal and immutable law, which is, indispensibly, obligatory upon all mankind, prior to any human institution whatever. This is what is called the law of nature, “which, being coeval with mankind, and dictated by God himself, is, of course, superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times. No human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid, derive all their authority, mediately, or immediately, from this original.” Blackstone. Upon this law, depend the natural rights of mankind, the supreme being gave existence to man, together with the means of preserving and beatifying that existence. He endowed him with rational faculties, by the help of which, to discern and pursue such things, as were consistent with his duty and interest, and invested him with an inviolable right to personal liberty, and personal safety. Hence, in a state of nature, no man had any moral power to deprive another of his life, limbs, property or liberty; nor the least authority to command, or exact obedience from him; except that which arose from the ties of consanguinity. Hence also, the origin of all civil government, justly established, must be a voluntary compact, between the rulers and the ruled; and must be liable to such limitations, as are necessary for the security of the absolute rights of the latter; for what original title can any man or set of men have, to govern others, except their own consent? To usurp dominion over a people, in their own despite, or to grasp at a more extensive power than they are willing to entrust, is to violate that law of nature, which gives every man a right to his personal liberty; and can, therefore, confer no obligation to obedience. “The principal aim of society is to protect individuals, in the enjoyment of those absolute rights, which were vested in them by the immutable laws of nature; but which could not be preserved, in peace, without that mutual assistance, and intercourse, which is gained by the institution of friendly and social communities. Hence it follows, that the first and primary end of human laws, is to maintain and regulate these absolute rights of individuals.” Blackstone. If we examine the pretensions of parliament, by this criterion, which is evidently, a good one, we shall, presently detect their injustice. First, they are subversive of our natural liberty, because an authority is assumed over us, which we by no means assent to. And secondly, they divest us of that moral security, for our lives and properties, which we are intitled to, and which it is the primary end of society to bestow. For such security can never exist, while we have no part in making the laws, that are to bind us; and while it may be the interest of our uncontroled legislators to oppress us as much as possible. To deny these principles will be not less absurd, than to deny the plainest axioms: I shall not, therefore, attempt any further illustration of them. You say, “when I assert, that since Americans have not, by any act of theirs, impowered the British parliament to make laws for them, it follows they can have no just authority to do it, I advance a position subversive of that dependence, which all colonies must, from their very nature, have on the mother country.” The premises from which I drew this conclusion, are indisputable. You have not detected any fallacy in them; but endeavor to overthrow them by deducing a false and imaginary consequence. My principles admit the only dependence which can subsist, consistent with any idea of civil liberty, or with the future welfare of the British empire, as will appear hereafter. “The dependence of the colonies, on the mother country,” (you assert) “has ever been acknowledged. It is an impropriety of speech, to talk of an independent colony: The words independent and colony, convey contradictory ideas, much like killing and sparing. As soon as a colony becomes independent on the parent state, it ceases to be any longer a colony, just as when you kill a sheep, you cease to spare him.” In what sense, the dependance of the colonies on the mother country, has been acknowledged, will appear from those circumstances of their political history, which I shall, by and by, recite. The term colony signifies nothing more, than a body of people drawn from the mother country, to inhabit some distant place, or the country it self so inhabited. As to the degrees and modifications of that subordination, which is due to the parent state, these must depend upon other things, besides the mere act of emigration, to inhabit or settle a distant country. These must be ascertained, by the spirit of the constitution of the mother country, by the compacts for the purpose of colonizing, and, more especially, by the law of nature, and that supreme law of every society—its own happiness. The idea of colony does not involve the idea of slavery. There is a wide difference, between the dependence of a free people, and the submission of slaves. The former I allow, the latter I reject with disdain. Nor does the notion of a colony imply any subordination to our fellow subjects, in the parent state, while there is one common sovereign established. The dependence of the colonies, on Great-Britain, is an ambiguous and equivocal phrase. It may, either mean dependence on the people of Great-Britain, or on the King. In the former sense, it is absurd and unaccountable: In the latter it is just and rational. No person will affirm, that a French colony is independent, on the parent state, though it acknowledge the King of France as rightful sovereign. Nor can it, with any greater propriety, be said, that an English colony is independent, while it bears allegiance to the King of Great-Britain. The difference, between their dependence, is only that which distinguishes civil liberty from slavery; and results from the different genius of the French and English constitution. But you deny, that “we can be liege subjects to the King of Great-Britain, while we disavow the authority of parliament.” You endeavour to prove it thus, “The King of Great Britain was placed on the throne, by virtue of an act of parliament; and he is King of America, by virtue of being King of Great-Britain. He is therefore King of America by act of parliament: And, if we disclaim that authority of Parliament, which made him our King, we, in fact, reject him from being our King; for we disclaim that authority, by which he is King at all.” Admitting, that the King of Great Britain was enthroned by virtue of an act of parliament, and that he is King of America, because he is King of Great-Britain, yet the act of parliament is not the efficient cause of his being the King of America: It is only the occasion of it. He is King of America, by virtue of a compact between us and the Kings of Great-Britain. These colonies were planted and settled by the Grants, and under the Protection of English Kings, who entered into covenants with us for themselves, their heirs and successors; and it is from these covenants, that the duty of protection on their part, and the duty of allegiance on ours arise. So that, to disclaim, the authority of a British Parliament over us, does by no means imply the dereliction of our allegiance to British Monarchs. Our compact takes no cognizance of the manner of their accession to the throne. It is sufficient for us, that they are Kings of England. The most valid reasons can be assigned for our allegiance to the King of Great-Britain; but not one of the least force or plausibility for our subjection to parliamentary decrees. We hold our lands in America by virtue of charters from British Monarchs; and are under no obligations to the lords or commons for them: Our title is similar and equal to that, by which they possess their lands; and the King is the legal fountain of both: this is one grand source of our obligation to allegiance. Another, and the principal source is, that protection which we have hitherto enjoyed from the Kings of Great-Britain. Nothing is more common than to hear the votaries of parliament urge the protection we have received from the mother country, as an argument for submission to its claims. But they entertain erroneous conceptions of the matter; the King himself, being the supreme executive magistrate, is regarded by the constitution, as the supreme protector of the empire. For this purpose, he is the generalissimo, or first in military command; in him is vested the power of making war and peace, of raising armies, equipping fleets and directing all their motions. He it is that has defended us from our enemies, and to him alone, we are obliged to render allegiance and submission. The law of nature and the British constitution both confine allegiance to the person of the King; and found it upon the principle of protection. We may see the subject discussed at large in the case of Calvin: The definition given of it by the learned Coke, is this, “Legiance is the mutual bond and obligation between the King and his subjects, whereby subjects are called his liege subjects, because they are bound to obey and serve him; and he is called their liege lord, because he is bound to maintain and defend them.” Hence it is evident, that while we enjoy the protection of the King, it is incumbent upon us to obey and serve him, without the interposition of parliamentary supremacy. The right of parliament to legislate for us cannot be accounted for upon any reasonable grounds. The constitution of Great Britain is very properly called a limitted monarchy, the people having reserved to themselves a share in the legislature, as a check upon the regal authority, to prevent its degenerating into despotism and tyranny. The very aim and intention of the democratical part, or the house of commons, is to secure the rights of the people. Its very being depends upon those rights. Its whole power is derived from them, and must be terminated by them. It is the unalienable birth-right of every Englishman, who can be considered as a free agent to participate in framing the laws which are to bind him, either as to his life or property. But, as many inconveniences would result from the exercise of this right, in person, it is appointed by the constitution, that he shall delegate it to another. Hence he is to give his vote in the election of some person he chuses to confide in as his representative. This right no power on earth can divest him of. It was enjoyed by his ancestors time immemorial; recognized and established by Magna Charta, and is essential to the existence of the constitution. Abolish this privilege, and the house of commons is annihilated. But what was the use and design of this privilege? To secure his life and property from the attacks of exorbitant power. And in what manner is this done? By giving him the election of those, who are to have the disposal and regulation of them, and whose interest is in every respect connected with his. The representative in this case is bound by every possible tie to consult the advantage of his constituent. Gratitude for the high and honourable trust reposed in him demands a return of attention and regard to the advancement of his happiness. Self-interest, that most powerful incentive of human actions, points and attracts towards the same object. The duration of his trust is not perpetual; but must expire in a few years, and if he is desirous of the future favour of his constituents, he must not abuse the present instance of it; but must pursue the end, for which he enjoys it; otherwise he forfeits it, and defeats his own purpose. Besides, if he consent to any laws hurtful to his constituent, he is bound by the same, and must partake in the disadvantage of them. His friends, relations, children, all whose ease and comfort are dear to him, will be in a like predicament. And should he concur in any flagrant acts of injustice or oppression, he will be within the reach of popular vengeance, and this will restrain him within due bounds. To crown the whole, at the expiration of a few years, if their representatives have abused their trust, the people have it in their power to change them, and to elect others, who may be more faithful and more attached to their interest. These securities, the most powerful that human affairs will admit of, have the people of Britain, for the good deportment of their representatives towards them. They may have proved, at some times, and on some occasions, defective; but, upon the whole, they have been found sufficient. When we ascribe to the British house of commons a jurisdiction over the colonies, the scene is entirely reversed. All these kinds of security immediately disappear; no ties of gratitude or interest remain. Interest, indeed, may operate to our prejudice. To oppress us may serve as a recommendation to their constituents, as well as an alleviation of their own incumbrances. The British patriots may, in time, be heard to court the gale of popular favour, by boasting their exploits in laying some new impositions on their American vassals, and, by that means, lessening the burthens of their freinds and fellow subjects. But what merits still more serious atention is this. There seems to be, already, a jealousy of our dawning splendour. It is looked upon as portentous of aproaching independence. This we have reason to believe is one of the principal incitements to the present rigorous and unconstitutional proceedings against us. And though it may have chiefly originated in the calumnies of designing men, yet it does not entirely depend upon adventitious or partial causes; but is also founded in the circumstances of our country and situation. The boundless extent of territory we possess, the wholesome temperament of our climate, the luxuriance and fertility of our soil, the variety of our products, the rapidity of our population, the industry of our country men and the commodiousness of our ports, naturally lead to a suspicion of independence, and would always have an influence pernicious to us. Jealousy is a predominant passion of human nature, and is a source of the greatest evils. Whenever it takes place between rulers and their subjects, it proves the bane of civil society. The experience of past ages may inform us, that when the circumstances of a people render them distressed, their rulers generally recur to severe, cruel and oppressive measures. Instead of endeavouring to establish their authority in the affection of their subjects, they think they have no security but in their fear. They do not aim at gaining their fidelity and obedience, by making them flourishing, prosperous and happy; but by rendering them abject and dispirited. They think it necessary to intimidate and awe them, to make every accession to their own power, and to impair the people’s as much as possible. One great engine, to effect this in America, would be a large standing army, maintained out of our own pockets to be at the devotion of our oppressors. This would be introduced under pretence of defending us; but in fact to make our bondage and misery complete. We might soon expect the martial law, universally prevalent to the abolition of trials by juries, the Habeas Corpus act, and every other bulwark of personal safety, in order to overawe the honest assertors of their country’s cause. A numerous train of court dependents would be created and supported at our expence. The value of all our possessions, by a complication of extorsive methods, would be gradually depreciated, till it became a mere shadow. This will be called too high-wrought a picture, a phantom of my own deluded imagination. The highest eulogies will be lavished on the wisdom and justice of the British nation. But deplorable is the condition of that people who have nothing else than the wisdom and justice of another to depend upon. “Political writers (say a celebrated author) have established it as a maxim, that, in contriving any system of government, and fixing the several checks and controuls of the constitution, every man ought to be supposed a knave; and to have no other end in all his actions, but private interest. By this interest, we must govern him, and by means of it, make him co-operate to public good, notwithstanding his insatiable avarice and ambition. Without this, we shall in vain boast of the advantages of any constitution, and shall find in the end, that we have no security for our liberties and possessions, except the good will of our rulers; that is, we should have no security at all. “It is therefore a just political maxim, that every man must be supposed a knave. Though, at the same time, it appears somewhat strange, that a maxim should be true in politics, which is false in fact. But to satisfy us on this head, we may consider, that men are generally more honest in a private than in a public capacity; and will go greater lengths to serve a party, than when their own private interest is alone concerned. Honour is a great check upon mankind. But, where a considerable body of men act together, this check is in a great measure removed; since a man is sure to be approved by his own party, for what promotes the common interest, and he soon learns to despise the clamours of adversaries. To this we may add that every court, or senate is determined by the greater number of voices; so that if self-interest influences only the majority, (as it will always do) the whole senate follows the allurements of this separate interest, and acts as if it contained not one member, who had any regard to public interest and liberty.” What additional force do these observations acquire, when applied to the dominion of one community over another! From what has been said, it is plain, that we are without those checks, upon the representatives of Great-Britain, which alone can make them answer the end of their appointment, with respect to us; which is the preservation of the rights, and the advancement of the happiness of the governed. The direct and inevitable consequence is, they have no right to govern us. Let us examine it in another light. The house of Commons receives all its authority from its electors, in consequence of the right they have to a share in the legislature: Its electors are freeholders, citizens and others in Great-Britain. It follows therefore, that all its authority is confined to Great-Britain. This is demonstrative. Sophistry, by an artful play of ambiguous terms, may perplex and obscure it; but reason can never confute it. The power, which one society bestows upon any man or body of men, can never extend beyond its own limits. The people of Great-Britain may confer an authority over themselves; but they can never confer any over the people of America. Because, it is impossible for them to give that to another, which they never possessed themselves. Now, I should be glad to see an attempt to prove, that a freeholder, citizen, or any other man in Great-Britain has any inherent right to the life, property, or liberty of a freeholder, citizen, or any other man in America. He can have no original and intrinsic right, because nature has distributed an equality of rights to every man: He can have no secondary, or derivative right, because the only thing which could give him that is wanting, the consent of the natural proprietor. It is incumbent upon you to demonstrate the existence of such a right, or any thing else you may produce will be of little avail. I do not expect you will be discouraged at the apparent difficulty. It is the peculiar province of an enterprizing genius to surmount the greatest obstacles, and you have discovered an admirable dexterity in this way. You have put to flight some of my best arguments, with no greater pains, than a few positive assertions, and as many paltry witticisms, and you become altogether irresistible by adding with a proper degree of confidence, you know the case to be as I state it. When I say, that the authority of parliament is confined to Great-Britain, I speak of it, in its primitive and original state. Parliament may acquire an incidental influence over others; but this must be by their own free consent. For without this, any power it might exercise, would be mere usurpation, and by no means a just authority. The best way of determining disputes, and of investigating truth, is by descending to elementary principles. Any other method may only bewilder and misguide the understanding; but this will soon lead to a convincing and satisfactory crisis. By observing this method, we shall learn the following truths. That the existence of the house of commons depends upon the people’s right to a share in the legislature; which is exercised, by means of electing the members of that house. That the end and intention of this right is, to preserve the life, property and liberty of the subject, from the encroachments of oppression and tyranny. That this end is accomplished, by means of the intimate connexion of interest, between those members and their constituents, the people of Great-Britain. That with respect to the people of America, there is no such intimate connexion of interest; but the contrary. And therefore that end could not be answered to them; consequently the end ceasing, the means must cease also. That the house of commons derives all its power, from its own real constituents, who are the people of Great-Britain, and that therefore, it has no power, but what they originally had in themselves. That they had no original right to the life, property, or liberty of Americans; nor any acquired from their own consent, and of course could give no authority over them. That, therefore, the house of commons has no such authority. What need is there of a multiplicity of arguments, or a long chain of reasoning to inculcate these luminous principles? They speak the plainest language to every man of common sense; and must carry conviction where the mental eye is not bedimmed, by the mist of prejudice, partiality, ambition, or avarice. Let us now see what has been offered in opposition to them. But, by the way, let me remark, that I have levelled my battery chiefly against the authority, of the house of commons, over America; because, if that be proved not to exist, the dispute is at an end. The efficacy of acts of parliament depends, upon the due authority of the respective branches, to bind the different orders and ranks of the nation. It is said, that “in every government, there must be a supreme absolute authority lodged some where. In arbitrary governments, this power is in the monarch. In aristocratical governments, in the nobles. In democratical, in the people, or the deputies of their electing. Our own government being a mixture of all these kinds, the supreme authority is vested in the king, nobles and people; i.e. the king, house of lords and house of commons, elected by the people. This supreme authority extends as far as the British dominions extend. To suppose a part of the British dominions which is not subject to the power of the British legislature, is no better sense, than to suppose a country, at one and the same time, to be and not to be a part of the British dominions. If therefore the colony of New-York is a part of the British dominions, the colony of New-York is subject, and dependent on the supreme legislative authority of Great-Britain.” This argument is the most specious of any, the advocates for parliamentary supremacy are able to produce; but, when we come to anatomize, and closely examine every part of it, we shall discover, that it is entirely composed of distorted and misapplied principles, together with ambiguous and equivocal terms. The first branch is, that “in every government, there must be a supreme absolute authority lodged somewhere.” This position when properly explained, is evidently just. In every civil society there must be a supreme power, to which all the members of that society are subject; for, otherwise, there could be no supremacy, or subordination, that is no government at all. But no use can be made of this principle beyond matter of fact. To infer from thence, that, unless a supreme absolute authority, be vested in one part of an empire, over all the other parts, there can be no government in the whole, is false and absurd. Each branch may enjoy a distinct complete legislature, and still good government may be preserved, every where. It is in vain to assert, that two or more distinct legislatures cannot exist in the same state. If, by the same state, be meant the same individual community, it is true. Thus, for instance, there cannot be two supreme legislatures in Great-Britain, or two in NewYork. But, if, by the same state, be understood a number of individual societies, or bodies politic, united under one common head, then, I maintain, that there may be one distinct compleat legislature in each: Thus there may be one in Great-Britain, another in Ireland, and another in New-York, and still these several parts may form but one state. In order to this, there must indeed be some connecting, pervading principle; but this is found in the person and prerogative of the King. He it is that conjoins all these individual societies, into one great body politic. He it is, that is to preserve their mutual connexion and dependence, and make them all co-operate to one common end the general good. His power is equal to the purpose, and his interest binds him to the due prosecution of it. Those, who aver, that the independency of America on the British Parliament implies two Sovereign authorities in the same state, deceive themselves or wish to deceive others in two ways; by confounding the idea of the same state with that of the same individual society, and by losing sight of that share which the King has in the sovereignty, both of Great-Britain and America. Perhaps, indeed, it may with propriety be said, that the King is the only Sovereign of the empire. The part which the people have in the legislature, may more justly be considered as a limitation of the Sovereign authority, to prevent its being exercised in an oppressive and despotic manner: Monarchy is universally allowed to predominate in the constitution. In this view, there is not the least absurdity in the supposition that Americans have a right to a limitation similar to that of the people of Great-Britain. At any rate, there can never be said to be two sovereign powers, in the same state; while one common king is acknowledged, by every member of it. Let us, for a moment, imagine the legislature of New-York independent on that of Great-Britain, where would be the mighty inconvenience! How would government be frustrated, or obstructed, by this means? In what manner, would they interfere with each other? In none that I can perceive. The affairs of government might be conducted with the greatest harmony, and, by the mediation of the King, directed to the same end. He (as I before observed) will be the great connecting principle. The several parts of the empire, though, otherwise, independent on each other, will all be dependent on him. He must guide the vast and complicated machine of government, to the reciprocal advantage of all his dominions. There is not the least contradiction in this, no imperium in imperio, as is maintained; for the power of every distinct branch will be limited to itself, and the authority of his Majesty over the whole, will, like a central force, attract them all to the same point. The second part of your paragraph is this, “In arbitrary governments, this (supreme absolute) power is in the monarch; in aristocratical governments, in the nobles; in democratical, in the people, or the deputies of their electing. Our own government, being a mixture of all these kinds, the supreme authority is vested in the King, Nobles, and People, that is, in the King, House of Lords, and House of Commons, elected by the people.” You are mistaken, when you confine arbitrary government to a monarchy. It is not the supreme power being placed in one, instead of many, that discriminates an arbitrary from a free government. When any people are ruled by laws, in framing which, they have no part, that are to bind them, to all intents and purposes, without, in the same manner, binding the legislators themselves, they are in the strictest sense slaves, and the government with respect to them, is despotic. Great-Britain is itself a free country; but it is only so because its inhabitants have a share in the legislature: If they were once divested of that, they would cease to be free. So that, if its jurisdiction be extended over other countries that have no actual share in its legislature, it becomes arbitary to them; because they are destitute of those checks and controuls which constitute that moral security which is the very essence of civil liberty. I will go farther, and assert, that the authority of the British Parliament over America, would, in all probability, be a more intolerable and excessive species of despotism than an absolute monarchy. The power of an absolute prince is not temporary, but perpetual. He is under no temptation to purchase the favour of one part of his dominions, at the expence of another; but, it is his interest to treat them all, upon the same footing. Very different is the case with regard to the Parliament: The Lords and Commons both, have a private and separate interest to pursue. They must be, wonderfully, disinterested, if they would not make us bear a very disproportional part of the public burthens, to avoid them as much as possible themselves. The people of Britain must, in reality, be an order of superior beings, not cast in the same mould, with the common degenerate race of mortals, if the sacrifice of our interest and ease to theirs be not, extremely, welcome and alluring. But should experience teach us, that they are only mere mortals, fonder of themselves than their neighbours, the philanthropy and integrity of their representatives will be of a transcendent and matchless nature, should they not gratify the natural propensities of their constituents, in order to ingratiate themselves, and enhance their popularity. When you say, that “our government being a mixture of all these kinds, the supreme authority is vested in the King, Nobles, and People, that is, the King, House of Lords, and House of Commons, elected by the people,” you speak unintelligibly. A person who had not read any more of your pamphlet, than this passage, would have concluded, you were speaking of our Governor, Council and Assembly, whom, by a rhetorical figure, you stiled King, Nobles and People. For how could it be imagined, you would call any government our own, with this description, that it is vested in the King, Nobles and People, in which, our own people have not the least share? If our own government be vested in the King, Nobles and People, how comes it to pass, that our own people have no part in it? The resolution of these questions will afford a proper field, in which, to display your ingenuity. You must endeavour to transmute the people of America into those of Great-Britain, or your description will be considered, as mere jargon, by every man of sense. Perhaps you may be able, in imitation of that celebrated sophist Spinosa, to prove, that they are only modally different, but substantially the same. Or if you please, that syllogism of the schools, by which, a man is proved a horse, may serve as an excellent model. If I recollect right it is in these words Homo est animal: Equus est animal, Ergo, homo est equus. Which is rendered thus, a man is an animal: an horse is an animal: Therefore, a man is an horse. By the same method of argumentation, you may prove, that, as Britons and Americans are generically the same, they are numerically so, likewise, as your description implies. You may form a syllogism thus: Britons are men: Americans are the same: Therefore Britains and Americans are the same. This argument will be as good, as the one, I am next going to examine. “This supreme authority (you say) extends as far as the British dominions extend. To suppose a part of the British dominions, which is not subject to the power of the British legislature, is no better sense, than to suppose a country, at one and the same time, to be and not to be a part of the British dominions. If, therefore, the colony of New-York be a part of the British dominions, the colony of New-York is subject and dependent on the supreme legislative authority of Great-Britain.” By “this supreme authority” I suppose you mean the Parliament of Great-Britain. I deny that it extends as far as the British dominions extend, and I have given many substantial reasons for this denial, whereas you have never offered any to prove that it does. You have begged the question, and taken that for granted, which is the very point in debate. As to your general position that there must be a supreme, absolute authority lodged somewhere, I have explained, in what sense, it ought to be understood; and shewn, that the several parts of the empire, may each enjoy a separate, independent legislature, with regard to each other, under one common head, the King. The seeming proof you have subjoined is entirely fallacious; and depends upon the use of the terms British dominions, and British legislature, in an equivocal sense. The former may, either signify countries subject to the King, or to the legislature of Great-Britain. When we say French dominions, we mean countries subject to the King of France. In like manner, when we say British dominions, the most proper signification is, countries subject to the King of Great-Britain. At least there is no impropriety in using it, in this sense. If, by the British legislature, you mean nothing more, than the Parliament of Great-Britain, it is well; but if you affix a different idea to it, you are not arbitrarily to impose it upon others. If there be any chimera in your fond imagination, which you express by that term, you must allow others the liberty to think it such. In short, if by the term, you mean an authority resident in one part of his Majesty’s dominions, to make laws for every other part of them; you ought not to apply it in this sense, ’till you have proved, that such an authority does really exist; especially in a controversy about that very matter. By the British dominions, I mean the countries subject to his Britannic Majesty, in his royal capacity. By the British legislature, I will suppose you intend, simply the Parliament of Great-Britain. Let us now try whether “to suppose there may be a part of his British Majesty’s dominions, which is not subject to the parliament, be no better sense, than to suppose a country, at one and the same time to be and not to be, a part of the British dominions.” It is impossible for any thing to be and not to be; but it involves no contradictions to say, that a country may be in subjection to his Britannic Majesty, and in that sense, a part of the British dominions, without being, at all, dependent on the parliament of Great-Britain. The colony of New-York, therefore, may be a branch of the British Empire, though not subordinate to the legislative authority of Britain. Upon the whole, if, by the British dominions, you mean territories subject to the Parliament, you adhere to your usual fallacy, and suppose what you are bound to prove. I deny, that we are dependent on the legislature of Great-Britain, and yet I maintain, that we are a part of the British Empire; but in this sense only, as being the free-born subjects of his Britannic Majesty. Thus have I fully examined that argument, which is esteemed the bulwark of the doctrine of parliamentary supremacy; and I flatter myself, clearly refuted it. The main pillar being now broken down, the whole structure may easily be demolished. I shall therefore proceed with alacrity in the completion of the work. But it is worthy of observation, that a cause must be extremely weak, which admits of no better supports. Your next argument (if it deserves the name) is this, “legislation is not an inherent right in the colonies; many colonies have been established and subsisted long without it. The Roman colonies had no legislative authority. It was not ’till the latter period of their republic, that the privileges of Roman citizens, among which, that of voting in Assemblies of the people, at Rome, was a principal one, were extended to the inhabitants of Italy. All the laws of the empire were enacted at Rome. Neither their colonies, nor conquered countries had any thing to do with legislation.” The fundamental source of all your errors, sophisms and false reasonings is a total ignorance of the natural rights of mankind. Were you once to become acquainted with these, you could never entertain a thought, that all men are not, by nature, entitled to a parity of privileges. You would be convinced, that natural liberty is a gift of the beneficent Creator to the whole human race, and that civil liberty is founded in that; and cannot be wrested from any people, without the most manifest violation of justice. Civil liberty, is only natural liberty, modified and secured by the sanctions of civil society. It is not a thing, in its own nature, precarious and dependent on human will and caprice; but is conformable to the constitution of man, as well as necessary to the well-being of society. Upon this principle, colonists as well as other men, have a right to civil liberty: For, if it be conducive to the happiness of society (and reason and experience testify that it is) it is evident, that every society, of whatsoever kind, has an absolute and perfect right to it, which can never be with-held without cruelty and injustice. The practice of Rome, towards her colonies, cannot afford the shadow of an argument against this. That mistress of the world was often unjust. And the treatment of her dependent provinces is one of the greatest blemishes in her history. Through the want of that civil liberty, for which we are now so warmly contending, they groaned under every species of wanton oppression. If we are wise, we shall take warning from thence; and consider a like state of dependence, as more to be dreaded, than pestilence and famine. The right of colonists, therefore, to exercise a legislative power, is an inherent right. It is founded upon the right of all men to freedom and happiness. For civil liberty cannot possibly have any existence, where the society, for whom laws are made, have no share in making them; and where the interest of their legislators is not inseparably interwoven with theirs. Before you asserted, that the right of legislation was derived “from the indulgence or grant of the parent state,” you should have proved two things, that all men have not a natural right to freedom, and that civil liberty is not advantageous to society. “The position, (you say) that we are bound by no laws, but those, to which we have assented, either by ourselves, or by our representatives, is a novel position, unsupported by any authoritative record of the British constitution, ancient or modern. It is republican, in its very nature; and tends to the utter subversion of the English monarchy. “This position has arisen from an artful change of terms. To say, that an Englishman is not bound by any laws, but those to which the representatives of the nation have given their consent, is to say what is true. But to say, that an Englishman is bound by no laws but those to which he hath consented, in person, or by his representative, is saying what never was true, and never can be true. A great part of the people have no vote in the choice of representatives, and, therefore, are governed by laws, to which, they never consented, either by themselves, or by their representatives.” The foundation of the English constitution rests upon this principle, that no laws have any validity, or binding force, without the consent and approbation of the people, given in the persons of their representatives, periodically elected by themselves. This constitutes the democratical part of the government. It is also, undeniably, certain, that no Englishman, who can be deemed a free agent in a political view, can be bound by laws, to which he has not consented, either in person, or by his representative. Or, in other words, every Englishman (exclusive of the mercantile and trading part of the nation) who possesses a freehold, to the value of forty shillings per annum, has a right to a share in the legislature, which he exercises, by giving his vote in the election of some person, he approves of, as his representative. “The true reason (says Blackstone) of requiring any qualification, with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons, as are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own. If these persons had votes, they would be tempted to dispose of them, under some undue influence, or other. This would give a great, an artful, or a wealthy man, a larger share in elections, than is consistent with general liberty. If it were probable, that every man would give his vote, freely, and without influence of any kind, then, upon the true theory and genuine principles of Liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote, in electing those delegates, to whose charge is committed the disposal of his property, his liberty and life. But since that can hardly be expected, in persons of indigent fortunes, or such as are under the immediate dominion of others, all popular states have been obliged to establish certain qualifications, whereby, some who are suspected to have no will of their own, are excluded from voting; in order, to set other individuals, whose wills may be supposed independent, more thoroughly upon a level with each other.” Hence it appears, that such “of the people as have no vote in the choice of representatives, and therefore, are govern’d, by laws, to which they have not consented, either by themselves or by their representatives, are only those persons, who are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own.” Every free agent, every free man, possessing a freehold of forty shillings per annum, is, by the British constitution, intitled to a vote, in the election of those who are invested with the disposal of his life, his liberty and property. It is therefore, evident to a demonstration, that unless every free agent in America be permitted to enjoy the same privilege, we are entirely stripped of the benefits of the constitution, and precipitated into an abyss of slavery. For, we are deprived of that immunity, which is the grand pillar and support of freedom. And this cannot be done, without a direct violation of the constitution, which decrees, to every free agent, a share in the legislature. It deserves to be remarked here, that those very persons in Great Britain, who are in so mean a situation, as to be excluded from a part in elections, are in more eligible circumstances, than she should be in, who have every necessary qualification. They compose a part of that society, to whose government they are subject. They are nourished and maintained by it, and partake in every other emolument, for which they are qualified. They have no doubt, most of them, relations and connexions, among those who are privileged to vote, and by that means, are not entirely without influence, in the appointment of their rulers. They are not governed by laws made expressly and exclusively for them; but by the general laws of their country; equally obligatory on the legal electors, and on the law makers themselves. So that they have nearly the same security against oppression, which the body of the people have. To this we may add, that they are only under a conditional prohibition, which industry and good fortune may remove. They may, one day, accumulate a sufficient property to enable them to emerge out of their present state. Or, should they die in it, their situation is not entailed upon their posterity, by a fixed and irremediable doom. They, agreeable to the ordinary vicissitudes of human affairs, may acquire what their parents were deficient in. These considerations plainly shew, that the people in America, of all ranks and conditions, opulent as well as indigent (if subjected to the British Parliament) would be upon a less favourable footing, than that part of the people of Britain, who are in so mean a situation, that they are supposed to have no will of their own. The injustice of this must be evident to every man of common sense. I shall now proceed to take such a survey of the political history of the colonies, as may be necessary to cast a full light upon their present contest; and at the same time, to give the public a just conception of the profound and comprehensive knowledge you have of the dispute; the fairness and candour with which you have represented facts, and the immaculate purity of your intentions. But, previous to this, the following observations may not be destitute of utility: His Holiness the Pope, by virtue of being Christ’s Vicegerent upon earth, piously assumed to himself a right to dispose of the territories of infidels, as he thought fit. And, in process of time, all Christian princes learned to imitate his example, very liberally giving and granting away the dominion and property of Pagan countries. They did not seem to be satisfied with the title which Christianity gave them to the next world only; but chose to infer from thence, an exclusive right to this world also. I must refer it to sounder casuists, than I am, to determine concerning the consistency or justice of this principle. It is sufficient for my purpose to observe, that it is the only foundation, upon which Queen Elizabeth and her successors undertook to dispose of the lands in America. Whatever right, therefore, we may suppose to have existed, it was vested entirely in the crown: The nation had no concern in it. It is an invariable maxim, that every acquisition of foreign territory is at the absolute disposal of the King; and, unless, he annex it to the realm, it is no part of it. And if it be once alienated, it can never be united to it without the concurrence of the proprietors. Were there any room to doubt, that the sole right of the territories in America was vested in the crown, a convincing argument might be drawn from the principle of English tenure. By means of the feudal system, the King became, and still continues to be, in a legal sense, the original proprietor, or lord paramount, of all the lands in England. Agreeable to this rule, he must have been the original proprietor of all the lands in America, and was, therefore, authorized to dispose of them in what manner he thought proper. The great enquiry, therefore, is concerning the terms on which these lands were really dispensed. “The first charter, granted by the crown, for the purpose of colonization, is” not “that of King James the first, to the two Virginia companies,” as you assert. Previous to that, there was one from Queen Elizabeth to Sir Walter Raliegh, for all the territory he might discover and plant, between the 33d. and 40th. degrees of North latitude; which was not actually possessed, by any christian prince, or inhabited by any christian people, to have, hold, occupy, and enjoy the same, to him, his heirs, and assigns for ever, with all prerogatives, jurisdictions, royalties, privileges, franchises, thereunto belonging, by sea or land; only reserving, to herself, her heirs and successors, the fifth part of all gold and silver ore that might be acquired in those regions. By this grant, Queen Elizabeth relinquished the whole legislative, and executive power, to Sir Walter, upon no other condition than simple homage, and the above-mentioned fifth part of gold and silver ore; which shews, that the crown considered itself, as invested with the absolute and entire disposal of the territories in America; and the passive conduct of the nation, declares its acquiescence in the same. After many successless efforts to plant a colony in Virginia, this charter was forfeited and abrogated, by the attainder of Sir Walter Raleigh; and then succeeded that of King James the first, to the two Virginia companies, dated the 10th of April, 1606. This was afterwards altered and improved, by a second charter, issued in 1609. There was also a third, dated March 12, 1611–12. The mention of this last would not have answered your purpose, and therefore, you chose to pass it over in silence. In neither of these three, is there the least reservation made of any authority to parliament. The colonies are considered in them, as entirely without the realm, and consequently, without the jurisdiction of its legislature. In the first charter from King James, there are the following clauses: “We do ordain, establish and agree, &c. that each of the said colonies, shall have a council, which shall govern and order all matters and all causes, which shall arise, grow, or happen to, or within, the same; according to such lavs, ordinances, and instructions, as shall be in that behalf, given and signed with our hand, or sign manual, and pass under the privy seal of our realm of England. “And that also, there shall be a council established here in England, which shall consist of thirteen persons, to be for that purpose appointed; which shall have the superior managing and direction only of, and for all matters, that shall, or may concern the government of the said several colonies. “Also, we do for us, our heirs, &c. declare, that all and every the persons, being our subjects, which shall dwell and inhabit within every, or any, the said several colonies, and every of their Children, which shall happen to be born within any of the said several colonies, shall have and enjoy all liberties, franchises and immunities within any of our other dominions, to all intents and purposes as if they had been abiding and born within our Realm of England.” This latter declaration (to which there is one correspondent or similar, in every American Grant) plainly indicates, that it was not the royal intention to comprize the colonies within the realm of England. The powers committed to the two councils demonstrate the same; for they would be incompatible with the idea of any other than distinct states. The King could neither exercise himself, nor empower others to exercise such an authority, as was really vested in the council, without a breach of the constitution, if the colonies had been a part of the realm, or within the jurisdiction of parliament. Such an exertion of power would have been unconstitutional and illegal, and, of course, inadmissible; but we find it was never called in question, by the legislature, and we may conclude from thence, that America was universally considered, as being without the jurisdiction of parliament. The second charter explains and amplifies the privileges of the company, erecting them into “one body or commonalty perpetual,” and confirming to them the property of their former territories; with the addition of all the islands, lying within a hundred miles of the shores of both seas; together with all “commodities, jurisdictions, royalities, priviledges, franchises and preeminences” to be held of the King, “his heirs, and successors,” in free and common socage. They were only to pay one fifth part of all the gold and silver ore, they might find, in lieu of all services. Their government was vested in a council, first appointed by the King, which, upon every necessary occasion, was to be summoned together, by the company’s treasurer. But immediately after the persons appointed are named in the charter, it is declared, that “the said council and treasurer, or any of them, shall be henceforth nominated, chosen, continued, displaced, changed, altered, or supplied, as death, or other several occasions shall require, out of the company of the said adventurers, by the voice of the greater part of the said company and adventurers.” Every member newly elected, to be sworn into office, by the Lord Chancellor. This council had “full power and authority to make, ordain and establish all manner of orders, laws, directions, instructions, forms and ceremonies of government and magistracy, fit and necessary for, and concerning the government of the said colony; and the same to abrogate, revoke, or change, at all times, not only within the precinct of the said colony; but also on the seas, in going or coming to or from the said colony.” This charter is also silent with respect to parliament; the authority of which is evidently precluded, by the whole tenor of it. You, Sir, took no notice of the circumstance, that the council was to be nominated, chosen, continued, &c. out of the Virginia company itself, agreeable to the voice of the majority. You omitted this, and gave quite a different turn to the matter; but herein you acted not at all discordant with your usual practice. Nor did you esteem it politic to transcribe the following clause: “that the said company, and every of them, their factors and assigns, shall be free of all subsidies and customs in Virginia, for the space of one and twenty years; and from all taxes and impositions forever, upon any goods, or merchandizes at any time or times hereafter, either upon importation thither, or exportation from thence.” The third charter is a still farther enlargement of their territory and privileges, and is that, by which their present form of government is modelled. The following extract will shew the nature of it: “We do hereby ordain and grant, that the said treasurer, and company of adventurers and planters, aforesaid, shall and may, once every week, and oftener, at their pleasure, hold and keep a court or assembly, for the better order and government of the said plantation; and that any five persons of our council, for the time being, of which company the treasurer, or his deputy to be always one, and the number of fifteen persons, at the least, of the generality of the said company assembled together, in such manner, as hath been heretofore used and accustomed, shall be reputed to be, and shall be a sufficient court, for the handling, ordering and dispatching of all such casual and particular occurrences, as shall, from time to time happen, touching and concerning the said plantation. And, nevertheless, for the handling, ordering, and disposing of the matters and affairs of greater weight and importance, such as shall in any sort concern the weal public, and the general good of the said plantation, as namely the manner of government, from time to time, to be used, the ordering and disposing of the lands and possessions, and the settling and establishing of a trade there, or such like, there shall be held and kept, every year forever, one great general and solemn assembly. In all, and every of which said great and general courts, so assembled, our will and pleasure is; and We do, for us, our heirs, and successors, forever, give and grant to the said treasurer and company, or the greater number of them, so assembled, that they shall and may have full power and authority, from time to time, and at all times hereafter, to elect and chuse discreet persons to be of our said council, for the first colony of Virginia, and to nominate and appoint such officers, as they shall think fit and requisite for the government, managing, ordering and dispatching of the affairs of the said company, and shall likewise have full power and authority, to ordain and make such laws and ordinances, for the good and welfare of the said plantation, as to them, from time to time, shall be thought requisite and meet; So always, as the same be not contrary to the laws and statutes of this our realm of England.” By this charter, King James divested himself wholly, both of the legislative and executive authority; but, for his own security, prescribed a model for their civil constitution. Their laws were not to be contrary to the laws and statutes of his realm of England; which restriction was inserted into all the subsequent charters, with some little variation, such as, that their laws should be “consonant to reason, and not repugnant, or contary, but as near as conveniently may be agreeable to the laws, statues and rights of this our kingdom of England.” This mode of expression, so indefinite in itself, shews that the use made of the clause, by some ministerial advocates, is by no means natural, or warrantable. It could only be intended to set forth the British constitution, as a pattern for theirs, and accordingly we find, that upon the arrival of Sir George Yardly, in Virginia, soon after this patent was procured, the government was regulated, upon a new plan, that it might “resemble the British constitution, composed of two houses of parliament and a sovereign: The number of the council was increased, intending this body should represent the house of lords, while the house of commons was composed of burgesses, assembled from every plantation and settlement in the country.” There might be a great dissimilarity between the laws of Virginia and those of Great Britain, and yet not an absolute contrariety; so that the clause in question is not explicit, or determinate enough to authorize the conclusion drawn from it. Besides, if the colonies were within the realm of England, there would be no necessity for any provision in favour of its laws; and if they were without (as is clearly implied by the clause itself) it must be a contradiction to suppose its jurisdiction could extend beyond its own limits. But the true interpretation may be ascertained, beyond a doubt, by the conduct of those very princes, who granted the charters. They were certainly the best judges of their own intention, and they have left us indubitable marks of it. In april 1621, about nine years after the third Virginia charter was issued, a bill was introduced into the house of commons, for indulging the subjects of England, with the privilege of fishing upon the coast of America; but the house was informed by the secretary of state, by order of his majesty King James, that “America was not annexed to the realm, and that it was not fitting that parliament should make Laws for those countries.” In the reign of his successor Charles the first (who granted the Massachusetts and Maryland charters) the same bill was again proposed, in the house, and was, in the like manner refused the royal assent, with a similar declaration that “it was unnecessary; that the colonies were without the realm and jurisdiction of parliament.” Circumstances which evidently prove, that these clauses were not inserted to render the colonies dependant on the Parliament; but only (as I have observed) to mark out a model of government, for them. If then, the colonies were, at first without the realm and jurisdiction of parliament, no human authority could afterwards alter the case, without their own voluntary full and express approbation. The settlement of New-England was the next in succession, and was instigated by a detestation of civil and ecclesiastical tyranny. The principal design of the enterprize was to be emancipated from their sufferings, under the authority of parliament, and the laws of England. For this purpose, the Puritans had before retired to foreign countries, particularly to Holland. But Sir Robert Naughton, secretary of state, having remonstrated to his Majesty, concerning the impolicy and absurdity of dispeopling his own dominions, by means of religious oppression; obtained permission for the Puritans to take up their abode in America, were they found an asylum from their former misfortunes. Previous to their embarkation at Holland, they had stipulated, with the Virginia company, for a tract of land, in contiguity with Hudson’s River; but when they arrived in America (by some misconduct of the pilot) they found themselves at Cape Cod, which was without the boundaries of the Virginia Patent. There the season compelled them to remain, and there they have prosecuted their settlements. They looked upon themselves as having reverted to a state of nature; but being willing still to enjoy the protection of their former sovereign, they executed the following instrument. “In the name of God, Amen! We, whose names are under-written, the loyal subjects of our dread sovereign Lord King James, of Great-Britain, &c. King, defender of the faith, &c, having undertaken, for the glory of God, and the advancement of the Christian faith, and the honour of our King, and country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern part of Virginia, do by these presents, mutually, in the presence of God, and one another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body politic, for our better ordering and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid, and by virtue hereof, to enact, constitute, and frame such just and equal laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions and officers, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the colony; unto which, we promise all due submission and obedience.” In witness whereof, we have hereunto subscribed our names, at Cape Cod, November 11th, 1620. This was the original constitution of New Plymouth. It deserves to be remarked here, that these first settlers possessed their lands by the most equitable and independent title, that of a fair and honest purchase from their natural owners the Indian tribes. King James, soon after, erected a Council at Plymouth, in the county of Devon, “for the planting, ruling, ordering and governing of New-England, in America;” and granted to “them, their successors and assigns, all that part of America, lying and being in breadth from 40 deg. of north latitude from the equinoctial line to the 48th degree of the said northerly latitude, inclusively, and in length of, and within all the breadth aforesaid, throughout all the main land, from sea to sea; together with all the firm lands, soils, grounds, havens, ports, rivers, waters, fishings, mines, minerals, precious stones, quarries, and all and singular other commodities, jurisdictions, royalties, privileges, franchises, and preheminences, both within the said tract of land, upon the main, and also within the islands and seas adjacent. To be held of his Majesty, his heirs, and successors in free and common socage, and the only consideration to be, The fifth part of all gold and silver ore, for, and in respect of all and all manner of duties, demands, and services.” This council was vested, with the sole power of legislation, the election and appointment of all officers civil and military, authority to coin money, make war and peace, and a variety of other signal privileges. The colony of New Plymouth was comprehended within the grant. In consequence of which, its inhabitants, a few years after, purchased the claim of the patentees, with all their rights and immunities, and became an independent state by charter. The same motives that induced the settlement of New Plymouth, did also produce that of Massachusetts. It was first colonized, by virtue of a patent from the Council at Plymouth, and in a year after, by a charter from King Charles the first, dated the 4th of March, in the 4th year of his reign, by which, the adventurers and inhabitants were formed into “one body politic and corporate, by the name of the Governor and Company of the Massachusetts-Bay, in New-England,” and cloathed with powers and privileges resembling those of the colony of New Plymouth. It happened some time before this, that there was a dissolution of the Virginia Company, by a royal proclamation, dated 15th of July, 1624, by which the colony became more immediately dependent on the King. The Virginians were greatly alarmed at this, and forthwith presented a remonstrance to the throne: In which they signified an apprehension of “designs formed against their rights and privileges.” In order to banish their fears, the Lords of the Council (in a letter dated the 22d of July, 1634) gave them an assurance, by his Majesty’s direction, “That all their estates, trade, freedom and privileges, should be enjoyed, by them, in as extensive a manner, as they enjoyed them before the recal of the company’s patent.” Agreeable to this, their former constitution was confirmed and continued. The Maryland charter is the next in order, of which you, Sir, have made no mention. It was granted by King Charles I. to Lord Baltimore, and contains such ample and exalted privileges, that no man in his senses can read it, without being convinced it is repugnant to every idea of dependence on Parliament. It bestows on him “all the country of Maryland, and the islands adjacent; together with all their commodities, jurisdictions, privileges, prerogatives, royal rights, &c. &c. of what kinds soever, as well by sea as land; and constitutes him, his heirs and assigns, true and absolute Lords and Proprietaries of the said country, and of all the premises aforesaid; saving always the faith and allegiance, and the sovereign dominion due to himself, his heirs and successors, to be holden of the Kings of England, in free and common socage, by fealty only, and not in capite, paying two Indian arrows, every year, and also the fifth part of all gold and silver ore, which shall from time to time happen to be found. Granting also full and absolute power to the said Lord Baltimore, his heirs, &c. to ordain, make, enact and publish any laws whatsoever, by and with the advice, assent and approbation of the freemen of the said province, or the greater part of them, or of their delegates or deputies, whom, for the enacting of the said laws, when and as often, as need shall require, we will, that the said now Lord Baltimore, and his heirs, shall assemble in such sort and form, as, to him and them, shall seem best. Provided nevertheless, that the said laws be consonant to reason, and be not repugnant, or contrary, but as near as conveniently may be, agreeable to the laws, statutes, and rights of this our kingdom of England.” In another place it is ordained, that he the “said Lord Baltimore, may from time to time, for ever, have and enjoy the customs and subsidies, within the said ports, harbours, &c. within the province aforesaid, payable, or due for merchandizes and wares, there to be laden and unladen; the said subsidies and customs to be reasonably assessed (upon any occasion) by themselves and the people there, as aforesaid, to whom, we give power by these presents for us, our heirs and successors, upon just cause, and in due proportion to assess and impose the same.” I confine myself to these extracts, to avoid prolixity; and pass over the enumeration of those many extensive prerogatives, this charter confers; such as the appointment of all officers, civil and military; the power of making war and peace; the establishment of boroughs and cities, with all necessary immunities, and the like. In the 14th year of Charles the second, the two colonies, Connecticut and New-Haven, petitioned the King to unite them into one colony, which was complied with. Privileges, as valuable and extensive, as any that had been before granted, were comprized in their charter. There was only a reservation of allegiance to the King, without the smallest share of the legislative or executive power. The next year, Providence and Rhode-Island procured a charter, with privileges exactly correspondent to those of Connecticut. You are pleased to assert, “that the charters of Rhode-Island and Connecticut, are simply, matters of incorporation,” and produce an extract in confirmation of this assertion. I should be astonished at so extraordinary a deviation from truth, if there were not many instances similar to it. Not only, the whole tenor of their charters, but their constant practice and form of government, hitherto, declare the reverse of your assertion. But, that I may not unnecessarily prolong this letter, by a quotation of the different parts of the respective charters, give me leave to present you with an account of the constitution of these colonies, which was laid before the House of Lords in January, 1734. “Connecticut and Rhode-Island (say the Commissioners of Trade and Plantations) are charter governments, where almost the whole power of the crown is delegated to the people, who make annual election of their Assembly, their Councils and their Governors, likewise to the majority of which Assemblies, Councils and Governors, respectively, being collective bodies, the power of making laws is granted; and, as their charters are worded, they can, and do make laws, even without the Governor’s assent, no negative voice being reserved to them, as Governors in said charters. These colonies have the power of making laws, for their better government and support; and are not under any obligation, by their respective constitutions, to return authentic copies of their laws to the crown, for approbation and disallowance; or to give any account of their proceedings; nor are their laws repealable, by the crown; but the validity of them depends upon their not being contrary, but, as near as may be, agreeable to the laws of England.” As to the expression, as other our liege people of this our realm of England, or any other corporation or body politic within the same, if any stress be laid upon the particle other, it will imply not only, that the colonies were simple matters of corporation; but that the inhabitants of them were considered as being within the realm of England. But this cannot be admitted as true, without contradicting other clauses of the same charters. Thus, in the preamble to that of Rhode-Island, it is said, that the first planters “did, by the consent of our royal progenitors, transport themselves out of this kingdom of England into America.” And in each of the charters, the King stipulates, that all the children born in America, shall enjoy “all the liberties and immunities of free and natural subjects, within any of his dominions, as if they and every of them were born within the realm of England.” The vague and improper manner, in which this particle is used, in many other places of the several charters, will not allow it the least weight in the present instance. In the 11th article of the third Virginia charter, there is this expression: “All such, and so many of our loving subjects, or any other strangers that will, &c.” The same rule of inference, that makes Rhode-Island and Connecticut simple corporations, will also transform the King’s loving subjects into mere strangers; which I apprehend cannot be done, without some degree of absurdity. In the 15th year of Charles II. Carolina was erected into a principality. A Patent dated March 24, 1663, was granted to eight lord proprietors, vesting them with all its rights, privileges, prerogatives, royalties, &c. and the whole legislative and executive authority, together with the power of creating a nobility. The form of government was determined, by a compact between the people and the proprietors; which contained one hundred and twenty articles; and, “these were to be and remain the sacred and unalterable rule and form of government in Carolina, for ever.” A Palatine was to be elected, from among the proprietaries, who was to govern the Principality during his life; and, at his demise, the surviving lords were to succeed him according to the order of seniority. The legislative power was to reside in the parliament of that country; consisting of the Palatine as sovereign; an upper House, in which the proprietors or their deputies, the Governor and the Nobility were to sit; and a lower House composed of the Delegates of the People. There was likewise a court established, the members of which were three Proprietaries, and the Palatine, as president; and in this court, the whole executive authority was lodged. There were also several other courts: the Chief Justice’s, the High Constable’s, the Chancellor’s, and High Steward’s Court. The principal officers of the state, in number, titles and power, resembled those of the realm of England. The proprietors of Carolina considered themselves, as possessed of every requisite, towards forming a separate, independent state; and were always extremely jealous of any encroachments. They even disputed the King’s authority to establish courts of Vice Admiralty, within their precincts; though for the examination and punishment of offences, committed without them: and always appointed an Admiral of their own. One of their Governors was deposed for “accepting a commission, under King William, as Judge of the Admiralty, when he had, at the same time, a commission from the Lords proprietaries for the same office.” The Philadelphia Charter was next granted; and contained almost an equality of privileges, with that of Maryland. There was indeed a reserve, in favour of parliament, perfectly singular and unprecedented in any foregoing charter; and which must either be rejected, or the general tenor of the grant becomes unintelligible. It happened, that the Charter of Massachusetts was vacated, by a decision in Chancery; and a new one was conferred by William and Mary. The agent for that colony, did not accept it, ’till they had first consulted the most judicious civilians and politicians, upon the contents of it; and, then drew up an instrument, in which, they assigned the reasons of their acceptance. The following extract will serve to shew their sense of it, “the colony (say they) is now made a province; and the General Court has, with the King’s approbation, as much power, in New-England, as the King and parliament have in England. They have all English privileges and liberties; and can be touched, by no law, and by no tax; but of their own making. All the liberties of their religion are for ever secured.” You say, that “the power to levy taxes is restrained to provincial and local purposes, only, and to be exercised, over such only, as are inhabitants and proprietors of the said province.” They are impowered “to levy proportionable and reasonable assessments, rates and taxes, for our service, in the necessary defence and support of the government of the said province, or territory; and the protection and preservation of the inhabitants there.” The defence and support of government, and their own protection and preservation, are the purposes, for which they are to raise supplies; and, in my humble opinion, there are no others, to which any society is under an obligation to contribute its wealth or property. I shall only make one more observation, upon this charter, which is, that there was a reservation in it of liberty, for the people of England, to fish upon their coasts; which would have been useless and absurd, had that province been a part of the realm, and within the jurisdiction of parliament. Were it necessary to elucidate, still more, a point which is so conspicuous from the several charters of the colonies, as well as the express declarations of those princes, by whom they were granted, to wit, “that the colonies are without the realm and jurisdiction of parliament.” I might enumerate many striking circumstances, besides those I have already mentioned. But as the case is by this time sufficiently clear, I shall confine myself to the recital of only one or two more transactions. An act of the 25th of Charles the second was the first, that ever imposed duties on the colonies, for any purpose; and these, as the preamble itself recites, were simply as a regulation of trade, and were of a prohibitory nature. Notwithstanding this, it was the source of great dissatisfaction, and was one of the principal causes of the insurrection, in Virginia, under Colonel Bacon; which after his death subsided; and then the province sent agents to England, to remonstrate “against taxes and imposition being laid on the colony, by any authority, but that of the General Assembly.” In consequence of this, a declaration was obtained, under the privy seal of King Charles, dated 19th of April, 1676, to this effect, that “taxes ought not to be laid upon the proprietors and inhabitants of the colony, but by the common consent of the General Assembly.” About three years after, when King Charles had occasion to raise a permanent revenue, for the support of Virginia, he did not attempt to do it by means of a parliamentary donation; but framed a Bill, and sent it there by Lord Colepepper, who was, at that time, governor, to receive the concurrence of their legislature. It was there passed into a law, and “enacted by the King’s most excellent Majesty, by, and with, the consent of the General Assembly of the colony of Virginia.” If the Virginians had been subjects of the realm, this could not have been done, without a direct violation of magna charta; which provides, that no English subject shall be taxed without the consent of Parliament. Thus Sir, I have taken a pretty general survey of the American Charters; and proved to the satisfaction of every unbiassed person, that they are intirely, discordant with that sovereignty of parliament, for which you are an advocate. The disingenuity of your extracts (to give it no harsher name) merits the severest censure; and will no doubt serve to discredit all your former, as well as future labours, in your favourite cause of despotism. It is true, that New-York has no Charter. But, if it could support it’s claim to liberty in no other way, it might, with justice, plead the common principles of colonization: for, it would be unreasonable, to seclude one colony, from the enjoyment of the most important privileges of the rest. There is no need, however, of this plea: The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for, among old parchments, or musty records. They are written, as with a sun beam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself; and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power. The nations of Turkey, Russia, France, Spain, and all other despostic kingdoms, in the world, have an inherent right, when ever they please, to shake off the yoke of servitude, (though sanctified by the immemorial usage of their ancestors;) and to model their government, upon the principles of civil liberty. I will now venture to assert, that I have demonstrated, from the voice of nature, the spirit of the British constitution, and the charters of the colonies in general, the absolute non-existence of that parliamentary supremacy, for which you contend. I am not apt to be dogmatical, or too confident of my own opinions; but, if I thought it possible, for me to be mistaken, when I maintain, that the parliament of Great-Britain has no sovereign authority over America, I should distrust every principle of my understanding, reject every distinction between truth and falshood, and fall into an universal scepticism. Hitherto, I have reasonned against the whole authority of parliament, without even excepting the right we have conceded of regulating trade. I considered it, in its original state, as founded in the British constitution, the natural rights of society, and the several charters of the colonies. The power of regulating our trade was first exercised in the reign of Charles the second: I shall not examine upon what principle: It is enough, we have consented to it. But I shall proceed to consider the argument, you make use of, to establish the propriety of allowing special duties to be imposed by way of tribute, for the protection of our commerce. You argue thus, “Notwithstanding the large landed estates, possessed by the British subjects, in the different parts of the world; they must be considered, as a commercial, manufacturing people. The welfare, perhaps the existence of Great-Britain, as an independent, or sovereign state, depends, upon her manufactures and trade; and many people in America think, that her manufactures and commerce depend, in a great measure, on her intercourse with her colonies; insomuch, that if this should be neglected, her commerce would decline and die away; her wealth would cease, and her martime power be at an end. If these observations be just, they establish the right of the British parliament to regulate the commerce of the whole empire, beyond possibility of contradiction; a denial of it, would be a denial of a right in the British empire to preserve itself; they prove also, that all parts of the empire must be subject to the British Parliament, for otherwise the trade of the whole cannot be regulated. They point out also, the best mode of raising such a revenue, as is necessary for the support and defence of the government, viz. by duties on imports and exports; because these are attended with the least inconvenience to the subject, and may be so managed, as to raise a revenue, and regulate the trade at the same time.” “When it is considered, that Great-Britain is a maritime power; that the present flourishing state of her trade and of the trade of her colonies depends, in a great measure, upon the protection which they receive from the navy; that her own security depends upon her navy, and that it is principally, a naval protection, we receive from her, there will appear a peculiar propriety in laying the chief burthen of supporting her navy, upon her commerce; and in requesting us to bear a part of the expence, proportional to our ability, and to that protection and security which we receive from it.” The supposition, that a cessation of commerce, between Great-Britain and the colonies, would be ruinous and destructive to the former, is ushered in, as the principal argument, for her right to regulate the commerce of the whole empire. I am willing to allow it its full weight; but I cannot conceive how you can pretend, after making such an use of it, to deny it the force it ought to have, when it is urged, as affording a moral certainty, that our present measures will be successful. If you tacitly adopt the principle, and reason from it, in one case, with what propriety can you reject it, in the other? If the preservation of the British empire depends, in any material degree, upon the right of parliament to regulate the trade of the colonies, what will be the consequence if that trade ceases altogether? You must either acknowledge, that you have adduced a very weak and foolish argument, or that the commercial connexion between Great-Britain and the colonies is essential to her security and prosperity. You have either failed, in proving your point, or you have furnished me, with an ample confutation of all your reasoning against the probability of success, from the restrictions laid on our commerce. If our trade be necessary to the welfare of Great-Britain, she must, of course, be ruined by a discontinuance of it. But it is granted, that Great-Britain has a right to regulate the trade of the empire. The Congress has acknowledged it, so far as concerned their constituents. You infer from thence, that all parts of the empire must be subject to her. They need only be, so far subject, as is necessary for the end proposed, that is the regulation of their trade. If you require any further subjection, you require means that are disproportionate to the end, which is unreasonable, and not at all allowable. With respect to the justice of submitting to impositions, on our trade, for the purpose of raising a revenue, to support the Navy, by which it is protected, I answer, that the exclusive regulation of our commerce, for her own advantage, is a sufficient tribute to Great-Britain for protecting it. By this means, a vast accession of wealth is annually thrown into her coffers. It is a matter of notoriety, that the ballance of trade is very much against us. After ransacking Spain, Portugal, Holland, the English, French, Spanish, Dutch and Danish plantations, for Money and Bills of Exchange, as remittances for the commodities we take from Great-Britain; we are still always greatly in arrears to her. At a moderate computation I am well informed, that the profits she derives from us every year, exceed two millions and a half sterling; and when we reflect, that this sum will be continually increasing, as we grow more and more populous, it must be evident, that there is not the least justice in raising a revenue upon us, by the imposition of special duties. The right of Great-Britain to regulate our trade, upon the plan it is now acknowledged, is not an inconsiderable matter. It is as much as any free people can concede, and as much, as any just people would require. We are not permitted to procure manufactures any where else, than from Great-Britain, or Ireland. Our trade is limited and prescribed, in every respect, as is most for her interest: This is a plentiful source of wealth to her, as I have heretofore shewn, and shall hereafter confirm, by the testimony of some British writers. But I have found out an argument, which I imagine will go very near convincing yourself of the absurdity of what you have offered, on this head. It is short, but conclusive, “the principal profits of our trade center in Great-Britain.” How can you, my dear sir, after making this confession, entertain a single thought, that is incumbent upon us to suffer her to raise a revenue upon our trade? Are not the principal profits a sufficient recompence for protecting it? Surely you would not allow her the whole. This would be rather too generous. However ardent your affection to her, and however much it may be your glory to advance her imperial dignity, you ought to moderate it so far, as to permit us to enjoy some little benefit from our trade. Only a small portion of the profits will satisfy us. We are willing to let her have the principal share, and this you acknowledge she already has. But why will you advise us to let her exhaust the small pittance, we have reserved, as the reward of our own industry in burthensome revenues? This might be liberality and generosity; but it would not be prudence; and let me tell you, in this selfish, rapacious world, a little discretion is, at worst, only a venial sin. It will be expedient to be more cautious for the future. It is difficult to combat truth; and unless you redouble your vigilance, you will (as in the present instance) be extremely apt to ensnare yourself. I shall now briefly examine the excellent mode, you have proposed, for settling our disputes, finally, and effectually. All internal taxation is to be vested, in our own legislatures, and the right of regulating trade, by duties, bounties, &c. to be left to the parliament, together with the right of enacting all general laws, for all the colonies. You imagine that we should then “have all the security for our rights, liberties and properties, which human policy can give us.” Here we widely differ in sentiment, my opinion is, that we should have no “security, besides the good will of our rulers, that is no security at all.” Is there no difference between one system of laws and another? Are not some more favourable and beneficial to the subject, better calculated to preserve his life, and personal liberty than others? It is evident they are. Suppose, instead of the present system established among us, the French laws were to be introduced, for the good of all the colonies, should we have the same security for our lives which we now have? I presume we should not. I presume also, that a revolution in our laws might and would, gradually, take place. A fondness for power is implanted, in most men, and it is natural to abuse it, when acquired. This maxim drawn from the experience of all ages makes it the height of folly to entrust any set of men with power, which is not under every possible controul: perpetual strides are made after more, as long as there is any part with-held. We ought not, therefore, to concede any greater authority to the British parliament, than is absolutely necessary. There seems to be a necessity, for vesting the regulation of our trade there, because, in time, our commercial interests might otherwise interfere with her’s. But with respect to making laws for us, there is not the least necessity, or even propriety in it. Our legislatures are confined to ourselves and cannot interfere, with Great-Britain. We are best acquainted with our own circumstances, and therefore best qualified, to make suitable regulations. It is of no force to object, that no particular colony has power to enact general laws for all the colonies: There is no need of such general laws. Let every colony attend to its own internal police, and all will be well. How have we managed heretofore? The parliament has made no general laws, for our good; and yet our affairs have been conducted, much to our ease and satisfaction. If any discord has sprung up among us, it is wholly imputable to the incursions of Great-Britain. We should be peaceable and happy, if unmolested by her: We are not so destitute of wisdom, as to be in want of her assistance, to devise proper and salutary laws for us. The legislative power of parliament, would at any rate be useless to us, and as utility is the prime end of all laws, that power has no reason for which it should exist. It is not even requisite for preserving the connexion, between Britain and the colonies; for that is sufficiently secured, in two ways, by being united under the same king; and by the important privilege of regulating our commerce, to which we have submitted. That it might be prejudicial to us, no reasonable man can deny. We may trace the evils of it, through the whole administration of justice. Judicial proceedings may be so ordered, as to render our lives and properties dependent on the will and caprice of court favourites and tools. A wide field for bribery and corruption, of every kind, would be opened; and the most enormous exactions would take shelter under the garb of law. It is unnecessary to enter into a particular detail of the different methods, in which all this might be effected; every man’s own imagination will suggest to him a multiplicity of instances. Rigorous, oppressive and tyrannical laws may be thought expedient, as instruments to humble our rebellious tempers, and oblige us to submit to further exertions of authority, ’till the claim to bind us, in all cases whatsoever, be fully complied with. This no doubt would be a work of time. The steps would be gradual and perhaps imperceptible; but they would be sure and effectual. That thirst of power, which influenced the parliament to assert an unlimited authority over us, without the least plausible foundation for it (as I have clearly proved) will authorize us to apprehend the worst. The power of legislating for us, and of raising a revenue upon the articles of commerce would be a sufficient degree of slavery. It is absurd to say, that Great-Britain could not impose heavy burthens, on our commerce, without immediately feeling the effect herself. She may enrich herself, by reducing us to the most lamentable state of penury and wretchedness. We are already forbid to purchase the manufactures of any foreign countries. Britain and Ireland must furnish us with the necessaries we want. Those things we manufacture among ourselves, may be disallowed. We should then be compelled to take the manufactures of Great-Britain, upon her own conditions. We could not, in that case, do without them. However excessive the duties, laid upon them, we shall be under an inevitable necessity to purchase them. How would Great-Britain feel the effects of those impositions, but to her own advantage? If we might withdraw our custom, and apply to other nations; if we might manufacture our own materials; those expedients would serve, as a refuge to us; and would indeed be a security against any immoderate exactions. But these resources would be cut off. There would be no alternative left us. We must submit to be drained of all our wealth, for those necessaries, which we are not permitted to get elsewhere. As to our trade with foreign countries, the burthens imposed on that, however grievous, would, in like manner, affect Great-Britain, only by increasing her public treasure. Her own inhabitants would pay no part of them: They would fall solely upon ourselves. There is no immediate connection between her trade and ours of this kind: they are separate and independent; and, of course, the incumbrances on the one would not injure the other. The superfluity of our products must be exported to enable us to pay our debts to her; and we must submit to be loaded, at her discretion. If we look forward to a period not far distant, we shall perceive, that the productions of our country will infinitely exceed the demands, which Great-Britain and her connections can possibly have for them; and, as we shall then be greatly advanced in population, our wants will be proportionably increased. These circumstances will open an ample field, for extortion and oppression. The legislative authority of Parliament would always be ready to silence our murmurs, by tyrannical edicts: These would be enforced, by a formidable army, kept up among us, for the purpose. The slightest struggles, to recover our lost liberty, would become dangerous and even capital. Those hated things Continental Conventions, by which there might be a communion of councils and measures, would be interdicted. Non-importation and non-exportation agreements would, in effect, be made seditious, illegal, and treasonable. No remedy would be left, but in the clemency of our oppressors; a wretched one indeed, and such as no prudent man would confide in! In whatever light, we consider the matter, we shall find, that we must effectually seal our bondage by adopting the mode you recommend. Agreeable to your own concession, Great-Britain is abundantly recompensed for the naval protection she affords, by the principal profits of our trade: It can, therefore, with no colour of justice, be urged upon us, to permit her to raise a revenue through that channel. But, after all, let us suppose, that the emolument which arises, from the simple and abstracted regulation of our trade, is inadequate to the protection, we derive, from the parent state; does it follow, that her just demands cannot be satisfied, unless we put it in her power to ruin us? When did the colonies refuse to contribute their proportion, towards defraying the expences of government? During the war, our contributions were so liberal and generous, that we were thought to have done more, than our part, and restitution was accordingly made. Massachusetts, that injured, insulted and calumniated country was foremost in displaying its loyalty; and was neither parsimonious of its men nor money. But, notwithstanding this, no confidence, it seems is due to our virtue, or fidelity; but every thing is to be trusted to the wisdom and disinterestedness of a British Parliament. We do not expect, or require, that all should depend upon our integrity or generosity; but only a part: And this every rule of equity intitles us to. We have assented to the exercise of a power, which gives a certainty to Great-Britain of a vast annual income: Any further aids, that may be necessary, ought to be intrusted to our fidelity: When the circumstances of two parties will not admit of precise boundaries to the duty of each, it is not a dictate of justice to put one entirely into the power of the other. If the mother country would desist from grasping at too much, and permit us to enjoy the privileges of freemen, interest would concur with duty, and lead us to the performance of it. We should be sensible of the advantages of a mutual intercourse and connection; and should esteem the welfare of Britain, as the best security for our own. She may, by kind treatment secure our attachment in the powerful bands of self-interest. This is the conduct that prudence and sound policy point out; but alas! to her own misfortune, as well as ours, she is blind and infatuated. If we take futurity into the account, as we no doubt ought to do, we shall find, that, in fifty or sixty years, America will be in no need of protection from Great-Britain. She will then be able to protect herself, both at home and abroad. She will have a plenty of men and a plenty of materials to provide and equip a formidable navy. She will indeed owe a debt of gratitude to the parent state, for past services; but the scale will then begin to turn in her favour, and the obligation, for future services, will be on the side of Great-Britain. It will be the interest of the latter to keep us without a fleet, and, by this means to continue to regulate our trade, as before. But, in thus witholding the means of protection, which we have, within our own reach, she will chiefly consult her own advantage, and oblige herself much more, than us. At that æra, to enjoy the privilege of enriching herself, by the direction of our commerce, and at the same time, to derive supports from our youthful vigour and strength, against all her enemies, and, thereby to extend her conquests over them, will give her reason to bless the times that gave birth to these colonies. By enlarging our views, and turning our thoughts to future days, we must perceive, that the special benefits we receive from the British nation are of a temporary and transient nature; while, on the other hand, those it may reap from us, by an affectionate and parental conduct, will be permanent and durable; and will serve to give it such a degree of stability and lasting prosperity, as could not be expected, in the common fluctuating course of human affairs. Such reflections will teach us, that there is no propriety in making any concessions to Great-Britain, which may be at all inconsistent with our safety. You employ several contemptible artifices to varnish and recommend your scheme. Your conduct, in every respect, affords a striking instance of the depravity of human nature. You insinuate, that the Pennsylvania Farmer admits the right of Parliament to regulate our trade, in the same sense, you do. The very letter your extracts are taken from, is expressly levelled against the revenue act, with regard to paper, glass, &c. The design of that and all his subsequent papers, is to prove, that all duties, imposed upon the articles of commerce, for the purpose of raising a revenue, are to be considered, in the same light, as what you call internal taxes, and ought equally to be opposed. By the “legal authority to regulate trade,” he means nothing more, than what the Congress have allowed. An authority to confine us to the use of her own manufactures, to prescribe our trade, with foreign nations, and the like. This is the power he speaks of as being “lodged in the British Parliament.” And as to general duties, he means such, as the people of Great-Britain are to pay, as well as ourselves. Duties, for the purpose of a revenue, raised upon us only, he calls special duties, and says, “they are as much a tax upon us, as those imposed by the stamp-act.” The following passage will shew the sentiments of this ingenious and worthy gentleman; and, at the same time, will serve to illustrate what I have heretofore said. “If you once admit, (says he) that Great-Britain may lay duties upon her exportations to us, for the purpose of levying money on us only she will then have nothing to do, but to lay duties on the articles which she prohibits us to manufacture; and the tragedy of American liberty is finished. We have been prohibited from procuring manufactures, in all cases, any where but from Great-Britain (excepting linens, which we are permited to import, directly from Ireland). We have been prohibited, in some cases, from manufacturing, for ourselves, and may be prohibited, in others. We are, therefore, exactly in the situation of a city besieged, which is surrounded by the besiegers, in every part, but one. If that is closed up, no step can be taken, but to surrender at discretion. If Great-Britain can order us to come to her, for the necessaries we want, and can order us to pay what taxes she pleases, before we take them away, or when we land them here, we are as abject slaves as France and Poland can shew in wooden shoes, and with uncombed hair. “Perhaps the nature of the necessities of dependent states, caused by the policy of a governing one, for her own benefit, may be elucidated, by a fact, mentioned in history. When the Carthaginians were possessed of the island of Sardinia, they made a decree, that the Sardinians should not raise corn, nor get it any other way, than from the Carthaginians. Then, by imposing any duties they would upon it, they drained from the miserable Sardinians any sums they pleased; and, whenever that miserable and oppressed people made the least movement to assert their liberty, their tyrants starved them to death, or submission. This may be called the most perfect kind of political necessity.” You would persuade us also, that Mr. Pitt’s sentiment accords with yours, about the regulation of trade; but this is as false as the other. When he tells them “to exercise every power, but that of taking money out of our pockets,” he does not mean, that they shall barely refrain from a manual operation upon our pockets; but that they shall exact money from us, in no way whatever. To tax the commodities, Great-Britain obliges us to take from her only, is as much taking money out of our pockets, as to tax our estates; and must be equally excluded by Mr. Pitt’s prohibition. You, all along, argue upon a suppositious denial of the right of Parliament to regulate our trade. You tell us, “It will never give up the right of regulating the trade of the colonies;” and in another place “if we succeed, in depriving Great-Britain of the power of regulating our trade, the colonies will probably be soon at variance with each other. Their commercial interests will interfere; there will be no supreme power to interpose; and discord and animosity must ensue.” I leave others to determine, whether you are most defective in memory or honesty; but, in order to shew, that you are starting difficulties, where there are really none, I will transcribe, for your perusal, part of the fourth resolve of the Congress. After asserting the right of the several provincial legislatures to an exclusive power of legislation, “in all cases of taxation and internal policy,” they conclude thus: “But from the necessity of the case, and a regard to the mutual interests of both countries, we chearfully consent to the operation of such acts of the British parliament, as are bona fide restrained to the regulation of our external commerce, for the purpose of securing the commercial advantages of the whole empire to the mother country, and the commercial benefits of its respective members; excluding every idea of taxation, internal or external, for raising a revenue on the subjects in America, without their consent.” It seems to me not impossible, that our trade may be so regulated, as to prevent the discord and animosity, at the prospect of which you are so terrified, without the least assistance, from a revenue. Thus have I, not only disproved the existence of that parliamentary authority, of which you are so zealous an abettor. But also shewn, that the mode you have proposed, for the acsomodation of our disputes, would be destructive to American freedom. My next business is to vindicate the Congress, by a few natural inferences; and such reflections, on the state of our commercial conexion, with the mother country, as are necessary to shew the insignificancy of your objections to my former arguments, on this head. Since it has been proved, that the British parliament has no right, either to the legislation, or taxation of America; and since neither could be ceded, without betraying our liberties, the Congress would have acted inconsistent with their duty to their country, had they done it. Their conduct, therefore, so far from being reprehensible, was perfectly justifiable and laudable. The regulation of our trade, in the sense it is now admitted, is the only power we can, with justice to ourselves, permit the British parliament to exercise; and it is a privilege of so important a nature, so beneficial and lucrative to Great-Britain, that she ought, in equity, to be contented with it, and not attempt to grasp at any thing more. The Congress, therefore, have made the only concession which the welfare and prosperity of America would warrant, or which Great Britain, in reason could expect. All your clamours, therefore, against them, for not having drawn some proper line, are groundless and ridiculous. They have drawn the only line which American freedom will authorize, or which the relation between the parent state and the colonies requires. It is a necessary consequence, and not an assumed point, that the claim of parliament to bind us by statutes in all cases whatsoever, is unconstitutional, unjust and tyrannical; and the repeated attempts to carry it into execution, evince a fixed inveterate design to exterminate the liberties of America. Mr. Grenville, during his administration, was the projector of this scheme. His conduct as a minister has been severely arraigned, by his successors in office, and by the nation in general; but, notwithstanding this, a measure, which disgraces his character more, than any thing else, has been steadily pursued, ever since. The Stamp Act was the commencement of our misfortunes; which, in consequence of the spirited opposition made by us, was repealed. The revenue act, imposing duties on Paper, Glass, &c. came next; and was also partly repealed on the same account: A part, however, was left to be the instrument of some future attack. The present minister, in conjunction with a mercenary tribe of merchants attempted to effect, by stratagem, which could not be done by an open undisguised manner of proceeding: His emissaries, every where, were set to work. They endeavored, by every possible device, to allure us into the snare. The act, passed for the purpose, was misrepresented; and we were assured with all the parade of pretended patriotism, that our liberties were in no danger. The advantage, we should receive, from the probable cheapness of English tea, was played off, with every exaggeration of falshood; and specious declamations, on the criminality of illicit trade, served as a gilding for the whole. Thus truth and its opposite were blended. The men, who could make just reflections, on the sanctity of an oath, were yet base enough to strike at the vitals of those rights, which ought to be held sacred by every rational being. It so happened, that the first tea ship arrived at Boston. The Assembly of that province, justly alarmed at the consequences, made repeated applications to the consignees, for the East-India company, requesting them to send back the tea. They, as often refused to comply. The ship was detained, ’till the time was elapsed, after which the tea must have been landed, and the duties paid, or it would have been seized, by the Custom-house. To prevent this, a part of the citizens of Boston assembled, proceeded to the ship, and threw the tea into the river. The scheme of the ministry was disappointed, on all hands. The tea was returned from all the colonies, except South-Carolina. It was landed there; but such precautions were taken, as equally served to baffle their attempt. This abortion of their favourite plan inflamed the ministerial ire. They breathed nothing, but vengeance against America: Menaces of punishment resounded, through both houses of parliament. The commons of Great-Britain spoke more in the supercilious tone of masters, than in the becoming language of fellow subjects. To all the judicious reasonings of a Burke, or Barry, no other answer was returned, than an idle tale of lenity and severity. Much was said of their past forbearance and of their future resentment: This was the burthen of the song. The Quixot minister too, promised to bring America to his feet. Humiliating idea! and such as ought to be spurned by every free-born American! Boston was the first victim to the meditated vengeance: An act was passed to block up her ports, and destroy her commerce, with every aggravating circumstance that can be imagined. It was not left at her option to elude the stroke, by paying for the tea; but she was also to make such satisfaction to the officers of his Majesty’s revenue and others, who might have suffered as should be judged reasonable by the governor. Nor is this all, before her commerce could be restored, she must have submitted to the authority claimed and exercised by the parliament. Had the rest of America passively looked on, while a sister colony was subjugated, the same fate would gradually have overtaken all. The safety of the whole depends upon the mutual protection of every part. If the sword of oppression be permitted to lop off one limb without opposition, reiterated strokes will soon dismember the whole body. Hence it was the duty and interest of all the colonies to succour and support the one which was suffering. It is sometimes sagaciously urged, that we ought to commisserate the distresses of the people of Massachusetts; but not intermeddle in their affairs, so far, as perhaps to bring ourselves into like circumstances with them. This might be good reasoning, if our neutrality would not be more dangerous, than our participation: But I am unable to conceive how the colonies in general would have any security against oppression, if they were once to content themselves, with barely pitying each other, while parliament was prosecuting and enforcing its demands. Unless they continually protect and assist each other, they must all inevitably fall a prey to their enemies. Extraordinary emergencies, require extraordinary expedients. The best mode of opposition was that in which there might be an union of councils. This was necessary to ascertain the boundaries of our rights; and to give weight and dignity to our measures, both in Britain and America. A Congress was accordingly proposed, and universally agreed to. You, Sir, triumph in the supposed illegality of this body; but, granting your supposition were true, it would be a matter of no real importance. When the first principles of civil society are violated, and the rights of a whole people are invaded, the common forms of municipal law are not to be regarded. Men may then betake themselves to the law of nature; and, if they but conform their actions, to that standard, all cavils against them, betray either ignorance or dishonesty. There are some events in society, to which human laws cannot extend; but when applied to them lose all their force and efficacy. In short, when human laws contradict or discountenance the means, which are necessary to preserve the essential rights of any society, they defeat the proper end of all laws, and so become null and void. But you have barely asserted, not proved this illegality. If, by the term, you mean a contrariety to law, I desire you to produce the law against it, and maintain, there is none in being. If you mean, that there is no law, the intention of which may authorise such a convention, I deny this also. It has been always a principle of the law that subjects have a right to state their grievances, and petition the King for redress. This is explicitly acknowledged by an act of the first of William and Mary; and “all prosecutions and commitments for such petitioning,” are declared to be illegal. So far then the Congress was a body founded in law; for if subjects have such a right they may undoubtedly elect and depute persons from among themselves to act for them. As to the particular agreements entered into, with respect to our commerce, the law makes no provision for, or against them: They are perfectly indifferent, in a legal sense. We may, or may not trade, as is most suitable to our own circumstances. The deputies, chosen in the several provinces met at Philadelphia, according to appointment; and framed a set of resolves declarative of the rights of America, all which, I have by general arguments proved, are consonant to reason and nature; to the spirit of the British constitution and to the intention of our charters. They made the only concession (as I have also shewn) that their duty to themselves and their country would justify, or that the connection, between Britain and the colonies, demanded. They solicited the King, for a redress of grievances; but justly concluding, from past experience, from the behaviour and declarations of the majority, in both Houses of Parliament, and from the known character and avowed designs of the Minister, that little or no dependence was to be placed upon bare entreaties, they thought it necessary to second them by restrictions on trade. In my former defence of the measures of the Congress, I proved in a manner you never will be able to invalidate, that petitions and remonstrances, would certainly be unavailing. I will now examine your frivolous and prevaricating reply. You answer thus: “In the commotions, occasioned by the stamp act, we recurred to petitions and remonstrances, our grievances were pointed out, and redress solicited with temper and decency. They were heard, they were attended to, and the disagreeable act repealed. The same mode of application succeeded, with regard to the duties laid upon glass, painters colours, &c: You say indeed, that our addresses on this occasion were treated with contempt and neglect. But I beseech you, were not our addresses received, read and debated upon? And was not the repeal of those acts the consequence? The fact you know is as I state it. If these acts were not only disagreeable to the Americans; but were also found to militate against the commercial interests of Great-Britain, it proves what I asserted above, that duties, which injure our trade, will soon be felt in England; and then there will be no difficulty in getting them repealed.” I entirely deny the fact to be, as you state it; and you are conscious it is not. Our addresses were not heard, attended to, and the disagreeable act repealed in consequence of them: If this had been the case, why was no notice taken of them in the repealing act? Why were not our complaints assigned as the inducement to it? On the contrary, these are the express words of the first repeal, to which the second is also similar. “Whereas the continuance of the said act would be attended with many inconveniencies; and may be productive of consequences greatly detrimental to the commercial interests of Great-Britain, may it, therefore, please your most excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent, &c. that from and after the first day of May, 1766, the above mentioned act, and the several matters and things, therein contained, shall be, and is, and are, hereby, repealed, and made void, to all intents and purposes, whatsoever.” The inconveniences, and the ill-consequences to Great-Britain, are the only reasons, given for the revocation of the act. How then can you pretend to say it was in compliance with our petitions? You must think the complaisance of your readers very great, to imagine they will credit your assertions, at the expence of their own understandings. Neither is the use you make of the assigned reason, at all just. The consequences, so detrimental to the commercial interests of Great-Britain, are not such as would have resulted from the natural operation of the act, had it been submitted to; but from the opposition made by us, and the cessation of imports, which had taken place. A non-importation, (to which you have so violent an aversion) was the only thing, that procured us redress, on preceding occasions. We did not formerly, any more, than now, confine ourselves to petitions only; but took care to adopt a more prevailing method, to wit, a suspension of trade. But what proves, to a demonstration, that our former petitions were unsuccessful is, that the grand object, they aimed at, was never obtained. This was an exemption from parliamentary taxation. Our addresses turned entirely upon this point. And so far were they from succeeding, that immediately upon the repeal of the stamp-act, a subsequent act was passed, declaring the right of Parliament to bind us, by statutes, in all cases whatsoever. This declaration of the unlimitted universal authority of Parliament was a direct denial of the leading claim held up in our petition; and of course a rejection of the petition itself. The same observations are applicable to the revenue act, which, had our addresses been successful, would have been wholly not partially revoked; and we should not, at this time, have had any occasion to renew our complaints; but should have been in a state of security and tranquillity. In my former reflections on this head, I urged many considerations to shew, that there is less reason now, than ever, to expect deliverance, by means of remonstrance and entreaty. And indeed, if we consider the vindictive spirit diffused thro’ the words and actions of our oppressors, we must be convinced of this. It impeaches the understandings of the Ministry and the Parliament, in the grossest manner, to suppose they have renewed their attempts, and taken such violent methods to carry them into execution; merely, to have the pleasure of undoing the whole, in condescension to our prayers and complaints. The taxation of America is an object, too near at heart, to be resigned, unless from necessity: And, if they would not have abandoned the principle, there could be no reason to expect they would have desisted from the exercise of it, in the present instance: For the duty upon tea is, in itself, very trifling; and since that is opposed, they could not hope to vary the mode, in any way, that would be less offensive and less obnoxious, to opposition. In answer to the instance, I produced, from the unsuccessful application of the Boston Assembly, you tell me, that “the Governor, against whom the complaint was made, was called to a public trial, before the only court where the cause was cognizable, the King in Council; but the Boston Assembly could not support their charge; and the Governor was acquitted.” The truth is, their charge was extremely well supported in the eye of strict justice; but it was destitute of the mere formalities of law, and, on this score, it was rejected. They accuse him of treachery and falshood; and produced his own letters, against him. It was not admitted as a legal charge, or crimen; nor the party’s letters as an evidence or testis; and by these evasions, the criminal escaped the punishment he deserved, and, instead of it, has been advanced to higher honours; while the complainants were unrelieved and insulted. I remember, when the particulars of this transaction were first published, there was this circumstance mentioned, that the petition, in question, was pronounced at St. James’s to be a “a seditious, vexatious and scandalous libel.” You tell me, “there is also this reason why we should, at least, have tried the mode of petition and remonstrance, to obtain a removal of the grievances we complain of. The Friends of America, in England, have strongly recommended it, as the most decent and probable means of succeeding.” I wish you had been so kind, as to have particularised those friends, you speak of. I am inclined to believe, you would have found some difficulty in this. There have been some publications, in the news-papers, said to be extracts of letters from England; but who were the authors of them? How do you know they were not written in America? or, if they came from England, that the writers of them were really sincere friends? I have heard one or two persons named, as the authors of some of these letters; but they were those, whose sincerity we have the greatest reason to distrust. The general tenor of advice, from those, with whose integrity we are best acquainted, has been to place no dependence on the justice or clemency of Great-Britain; but to work out our deliverance, by a spirited and self-denying opposition. Restrictions, on our trade, have been expressly pointed out and recommended, as the only probable source of redress. You say, “if the information from England be true, we have, by our haughty demands, detached most of our friends there, from our interest, and forced them to take part against us.” Pray, Sir, where did you get this information? Is there any inhabitant of the invisible world, that brings intelligence to you, in a supernatural way? There have been no arrivals from England, preceding the time you wrote your letter, that have brought any account of the proceedings of the Congress being received there, or of the consequences resulting from them. Your information must have, either, come to you, in a miraculous manner, or it must be a fiction of your own imagination. But there are other powerful reasons against trusting to petitions only, in our present circumstances. The town of Boston is in a very critical situation: Men, under sufferings, are extremely apt, either to plunge into desperation, or to grow disheartened and dejected. If the colonies, in general, appeared remiss, or unwilling to adopt vigorous measures, in order to procure the most speedy relief, the people of Massachusetts might perhaps have been hurried on to a rash and fatal conduct, or they might have become languid and lifeless. Delays are extremely dangerous in affairs of such vast consequence. The dispute might have been spun out by ministerial artifice, till the generality of the people became careless and negligent, and, of course, fitter to be imposed upon, and less forward to assert their rights with firmness and spirit. The hand of bribery might have been stretched across the atlantic, and the number of domestic vipers increased among us. The ministry and their agents here are active and subtle. Nothing would have been neglected, that might have a tendency to deceive the ignorant and unwary, or to attract the dishonest and avaricious. How great an influence, places, pensions and honours have upon the minds of men, we may easily discover, by contrasting the former, with the present conduct of some among ourselves. Many, who at the time of the Stamp act were loudest in the cause of liberty, and the most ardent promoters of the spirited proceedings, on that occasion, have now from patriots of the first magnitude dwindled into moderate men, friends to order and good government, dutiful and zealous servants to the ministry. Had our petitions failed, we should have found our difficulties multiplied much more, than we can imagine; and, since there was the highest probability of a failure, it would have been madness to have hazarded so much upon so unpromising a footing. It betrays an ignorance of human nature to suppose, that a design formed and ripening, for several years, against the liberties of any people might be frustrated, by the mere force of intreaty. Men must cease to be as fond of power as they are before this can be the case. I therefore infer, that, if the Congress had not concerted other more efficacious measures, they would have trifled away the liberties of their country; and merited censure, instead of approbation. Commercial regulations were the only peaceable means, from which we could have the least hope of success. These they have entered into; and these I maintain must succeed, if they are not treacherously or pusillanimously infringed. You tell me, “I over-rate the importance of these colonies to the British empire;” and proceed to make such assertions, as must convince every intelligent person, that you are either a mortal foe to truth, or totally ignorant of the matter you undertake. The following extracts will shew whether my representations have been just or not. “Our plantations spend mostly our English manufactures; and those of all sorts almost imaginable, in prodigious quantities; and employ near two thirds of all our English shipping; so that we have more people, in England, by reason of our plantations in America. “We may safely advance, that our trade and navigation are greatly increased, by our colonies; and that they really are a source of treasure, and naval power to this kingdom, since they work for us, and their treasure centers here. Before their settlement our manufactures were few and those but indifferent. The number of English merchants very small; and the whole shipping of the nation much inferior to what now belongs to the northern colonies, only. These are certain facts.” But since their establishments, our condition has altered for the better, almost to a degree beyond credibility. Our manufactures are prodigiously increased, chiefly, by the demand for them, in the plantations, where they at least take off one half, and supply us with many valuable commodities for exportation, which is as great emolument to the mother kingdom, as to the plantations themselves. The same author says, in another place, “before the settlement of these colonies, our manufactures were few, and those but indifferent. In those days, we had, not only our naval stores, but our ships from our neighbours.” “I shall sum up my whole remarks (says another writer) on our American colonies, with this observation, that, as they are a certain annual revenue of several millions sterling to their mother country, they ought carefully to be protected, duly encouraged, and every opportunity, that presents, improved for their increment and advantage; as every one, they can possibly reap, must at last return to us, with interest.”† These quotations clearly prove, that the colonies are of the last importance to Great-Britain. They, not only take off vast quantities of her manufactures, but furnish her with materials to extend her trade, with foreign nations. They also supply her, with naval stores; and, in a great measure, with a navy itself. The present flourishing state of her commerce is chiefly to be attributed to the colonies, who work for her and whose treasure centers with her. How unjust therefore is it in her, not to be satisfied, with the advantages, she has hitherto received, from us; but to aim at depriving us of our freedom, and happiness! And what ruinous consequences must flow from a cessation of our trade, on which her manufactures so much depend! What prodigious numbers must be thrown out of employ, and reduced to beggary and misery! “But she is a great nation, has vast resources, may easily supply the want of our trade, by making very small concessions to Portugal, Russia, Turkey, &c. Should our non-importation distress her manufactures, every man may employ himself to labour on a farm; and the price of grain would be much advanced, in France, Spain, and the Mediterranean. Notwithstanding the present high cultivation of the lands, in England, that kingdom is capable of being improved, by agriculture and commerce, so as to maintain double the number of people, that it does at present. The improvements, in Scotland, within the last thirty years, are amazing. The enterprizing spirit of the people has opened an easy intercourse between all parts of the country; and they have been enriched, by commerce, to a surprizing degree.” I can hardly prevail upon myself to give a serious answer to such ridiculous rant; but, it may be requisite for the sake of the uninformed; and, of course, it would be improper to decline it. The national debt is now about one hundred and forty millions sterling; a debt unparalelled, in the annals of any country, besides. The surplus of the annual revenues, after paying the interest of this debt, and the usual expences of the nation, is, upon an average, about one million and a quarter sterling: so that, with all their present resources, they would not be able to discharge the public debt, in less, than one hundred and twelve years, should the peace continue all that time. It is well known, that most of the necessaries of life are, at present, heavily taxed, in Great-Britain and Ireland. The common people are extremely impoverished, and find it very difficult to procure a subsistence: They are totally unable to bear any new impositions; and, of course, there can be no new internal sources opened. These are stubborn facts, and notorious to every person, that has the least acquaintance, with the situation of the two kingdoms: Had there been the vast resources you speak of, why have they not been improved to exonerate the people, and discharge the enormous debts of the nation? The guardians of the state have been a supine, negligent, and stupid pack indeed, to have overlooked, in the manner they have done, those numerous expedients, they might have fallen upon for the relief of the public. It cannot be expected, but that a war will take place, in the course of a few years, if not immediately; and then, through the negligence of her rulers, Great-Britain, already tottering under her burthens, will be obliged to increase them, ’till they become altogether insupportable; and she must sink under the weight of them. These considerations render it very evident, that the mighty resources you set forth, in such pompous terms, have nothing, but an imaginary existence; or they would not have been left so uncultivated in such necessitous and pressing circumstances. You think, you have nothing to do; but to mention the names of a few countries, Portugal, Russia, Turkey, &c. and you have found out an easy remedy for the inconveniences flowing from the loss of our trade. Yet, in truth, Great-Britain carries on, as extensive a commerce with those countries and all others, as their circumstances will permit. Her trade is upon the decline with many of them. France has, in a great measure, supplanted her in Spain, Portugal and Turkey, and is continually gaining ground. Russia is increasing her own manufactures fast, and the demand for those of Great-Britain must decrease in proportion. “Most of the nations of Europe have interfered with her, more or less in divers of her staple manufactures, within half a century, not only in her woolen, but in her lead and tin manufactures, as well as her fisheries.” A certain writer, in England, who has written on the present situation of affairs, with great temper, deliberation, and apparent integrity, has these observations; “the condition of the great staple manufactures of our country is well known, those of the linen and the silk, are in the greatest distress, and the woolen and the linen are now publickly bandied and contending, against one another. One part of our people is starving at home, on the alms of their parishes; and another running abroad to this very country, that we are contending with. The produce of North-America used to be sent yearly to Britain, is reckoned at about four millions sterling; the manufactures of Britain, and other commodities returned from hence, at nearly the same sum; the debts due from America to the British merchants here, at about six millions, or a year and a half of that commerce. Supposing, therefore, the Americans to act in this case, as they did, in the time of the stamp act; we shall then have yearly, until the final settlement of this affair, manufactures to the value of four millions sterling, left and heaped on the hands of our merchants, and master manufactures; or we shall have workmen and poor people put out of employ, and turned adrift in that proportion. There will likewise be drawn from our home consumption, and out of our general trade and traffic, North-American commodities, to the same value; and debts will to the immense sum above mentioned be withheld from private people here. What effects these things will produce, considering the present state of our trade, manufactures, and manufacturers, the condition of our poor at home, and the numbers of people running abroad, it don’t want many words to explain and set forth. They were before severely felt, for the time that they lasted, and it is apprehended, that the present situation of the public is yet more liable to the impression. These are some of the difficulties and distresses, which we are, for a trial of skill, going to bring on ourselves; and which will be perpetually magnifying and increasing, as long as the unnatural contest shall continue.” From these facts and authorities, it appears unquestionable, that the trade of Great-Britain, instead of being capable of improvement among foreign countries, is rather declining; and, instead of her being able to bear the loss of our commerce, she stands in great need of more colonies to consume her manufactures. It is idle to talk of employing those, who might be thrown out of business, upon farms. All the lands in England, of any value, have been long ago disposed of, and are already cultivated as high as possible. The laborious farmers find it an exceeding difficult task to pay their yearly taxes, and supply their families, with the bare necessaries of life; and it would be impracticable to give employment in agriculture to any more, than are already engaged. We can have no doubt of this, if we consider the small extent of territory in Great Britain, the antiquity of its settlement, and the vast number of people it contains. It is rather overstocked, with inhabitants; and were it not for its extensive commerce, it could not maintain near the number it does at present. This is acknowledged on all hands. None, but yourself, would hazard the absurdity of a denial. The emigrations from Britain, particularly, from the north part of it, as well as the most authentic accounts, prove the contrary of your representations—Men are generally too much attached to their native countries to leave it and dissolve all their connexions, unless they are driven to it, by necessity. The swarms, that every year come over to America, will never suffer any reasonable man to believe, upon the strength of your word, that the people in Scotland or Ireland, are even in tolerable circumstances. I cannot forbear wondering, when you talk of the price of grain being advanced in France, Spain and the Mediterranean; and insinuate, that Britain may be able to supply them: It will be well, if she can raise grain enough, for herself, so as not to feel the want of those considerable quantities, she frequently gets from us. I am apt to think, she will experience some inconvenience, on this account. With respect to Ireland, you think yourself under no obligation to point out, where she may find purchasers for her linens, so numerous and wealthy, as we are; but, unless you could do this, you must leave that country in very deplorable circumstances. It is not true, that she may do just as well with her linens, upon her hands, as we can with our flax seed, upon ours. Linen is a staple manufacture of hers, and the sole means of subsistence to a large part of her inhabitants. Flax seed, as an article of commerce, is comparatively of little importance to us; but we shall stand in need of all the flax we can raise to manufacture linens for ourselves, and therefore, shall not lose our seed by ceasing to export it. I shall say more of this hereafter. Nor is it by any means a just inference, that because Ireland formerly subsisted, without a linen manufactory, she would not therefore severely feel any present obstruction to the sale of the article in question. Her burthens are now much more grievous than they formerly were; and, of course, her resources ought to be proportionably greater, or she must sink under the pressure of them. The linen manufactory is, at this time one of her most valuable resources, and could not be materially injured or impeded, without producing the most melancholy effects. The distressed condition of Ireland will not admit of any dimunition of her means; but pressingly demands an enlargement of them. It is of little moment to contest the possibility, that that country might procure a sufficiency of flax seed, elsewhere, than from us; ’till it can be shewn, where she may find a mart for her linens, equal to the American; and this you are not willing even to attempt. Yet I have credible information, that she could not obtain from Holland, much more than usual (for the reasons I before assigned) and, that she has always had, as much from the Baltic, as she could conveniently get. With regard to Canada, any considerable supply from thence, would be a work of time, and no relief to her immediate exigencies. I observed in my former pamphlet, that “the Dutch may withold their usual supplies: They may choose to improve the occasion, for the advancement of their own trade: They may take advantage of the scarcity of materials in Ireland, to increase and put off their own manufactures.” You answer it by saying, “you never yet knew a Holander, who would withold any thing that would fetch him a good price.” The force of my observation turns upon its being his interest to do it. You should have shewn, that it would be more profitable to him, to sell it to the Irish, than to retain it, for the purposes mentioned; otherwise that very avarice, you ascribe to him will operate, as I supposed. You are unmercifully witty, upon what I said, concerning the West-Indies; but the misfortune of it is, you have done nothing else, than “blunder round about my meaning.” I will endeavour to explain myself, in a manner more level to your capacity. The lands in the West-Indies are extremely valuable, because they produce the Sugar Cane, which is a very lucrative plant; but they are small, in quantity, and therefore, their proprietors appropriate only small portions, to the purpose of raising food. They are very populous, and therefore, the food raised among themselves, goes but little way. They could not afford sufficient sustenance to their inhabitants, unless they were chiefly or entirely applied to the production of necessaries; because they are so small in quantity, and so thickly inhabited. These are truths, which every person, acquainted with the West Indies, must acquiesce in; and should they be deprived of external succours, they must either starve, or suspend the cultivation of the sugar cane. The last is the best side of the dilemma; but that would cut off an annual income of several millions sterling to Great Britain: For it cannot admit of a doubt, that the chief part of the profits of the English West-Indies, ultimately center there. But, in order to disappoint my malice, you tell me, that Canada raises 400,000 bushels of wheat a year; and this you imagine will pretty well supply the wants of the West-Indians; but, give me leave to inform you, that it would not satisfy a tenth part of them. The single Island of Jamaica would require much more. At a moderate computation, I believe there are 400,000 people in the British West Indies only: Let us allow a pound of wheat a day, upon an average, to each; and make a calculation accordingly. At a pound a day, every person must be supposed to consume 365 lb. a year, that is, about twelve bushels. Now as there are as many people as there are bushels of wheat raised in Canada; and as each person would consume twelve bushels, it follows, that the quantity you mention, would not be above a twelfth part sufficient. But can we imagine, that all the wheat of Canada would be devoted to the use of the British West Indies? If our ports were to be blocked up, would not the French and Spanish islands be in great distress for provisions? And have not the Canadians any near connexions among them? Would they not naturally sympathize with them, and do all in their power to afford relief? And could they find no means to accomplish their inclinations? The answer to these questions is easy: The Islands belonging to the French and Spaniards will be greatly distressed: The Canadians will be very ready and desirous to assist them; and they will contrive some expedients to communicate a large share of what their country yields. What you say concerning the lumber exported from Canada, is totally false. That country labours under many inconveniencies, which have hitherto prevented the exportation of that article, but in very small quantities, and of a particular kind. The places w[h]ere the lumber grows, are so far distant from the sea ports, that the expence of transportation is too great to make it worth while to ship any other than butt staves, and these must be brought quite from Lake Champlain. This disadvantage, together with the number of hands it would require, and the time necessary to enter extensively into any branch of trade, and to remove all the impediments naturally in the way, would render the situation of the West-Indians, truly pitiable, were they once necessitated to depend upon Canada only, for supplies of lumber. The attention of Missisippi is entirely engrossed in raising Corn and Indigo: The advantage arising from these articles, is much greater than would result from lumber; and of course, the people of that country will never attend to the latter, in preference to the former. Thus have I proved in a full, clear, and conclusive manner, that a cessation of our trade with Britain, Ireland and the West-Indies, would be productive of the most fatal consequences to them all; and that, therefore, the peace, happiness and safety of the British Empire, are connected with the redress of our grievances; and, if they are at all consulted, our measures cannot fail of success. As to the justice of proceeding in the manner we have done, it must depend upon the necessity of such a mode of conduct. If the British parliament are claiming and exercising an unjust authority, we are right in opposing it, by every necessary means. If Remonstrances and Petitions have been heretofore found ineffectual, and we have no reasonable ground to expect the contrary, at present, it is prudent and justifiable to try other methods, and these can only be restrictions on trade. Our duty to ourselves and posterity, supersede the duties of benevolence to our fellow-subjects in Great-Britain, Ireland and the West-Indies. You can never confute the arguments I before made use of on this head, unless you can prove the right of parliament to act as it has done, or the likelihood of succeeding by petitions; your feeble endeavours to effect this, I have sufficiently baffled. You must now collect new forces, and make a more vigorous effort, or you must quit the field in disgrace. Such vociferation as this, is not to be admitted instead of argument, “are the Irish and West-Indians accountable for our mad freaks? Do you ex[p]ect to extend the tyranny of the congress over the whole British empire, by the legerdemain of calling it American freedom? Do you think that the Irish and West-Indians are in duty bound to enter into our non-importation, non-consumption, and non-exportation agreement, till our grievances real or pretended, are removed? And that they deserve to be starved if they do not? Enjoy your folly and malevolence if you can.” The resistance we are making to parliamentary tyranny, cannot wear the aspect of mad freaks to any, but such mad imaginations as yours. It will be deemed virtuous and laudable, by every ingenuous mind. When I said, that the people of Great-Britain, Ireland, and the West-Indies, were to be considered as politically criminal, for remaining neutral, while our privileges were attacked; I did not mean, that they ought to enter into any of the above mentioned agreements; but, that it was their duty to signify, in a public manner, their disapprobation of the measures carrying on; and to use all their influence to have them laid aside. Had they interested themselves in the affair, with any degree of zeal and earnestness, we should not, probably, have had occasion to act as we do; and they would not have been in danger of their present calamities. Their obligation to assist us in the preservation of our rights, is of the very same nature with ours, to carry on a trade with them. But you insist upon it, that we should not be able to live without the manufactures of Great-Britain; and that we should be ruined by a prohibition of our exports “the first winter after our English goods are consumed, we shall be starving with cold,” after all our endeavours, “the requisite quantity of wool to clothe the inhabitants of this continent, could not be obtained in twenty years.” As to cotton it “must come from the southern colonies, and the expence of bringing it by land, would be too great for the poor. Besides, we have nobody to manufacture our materials after we have got them.” All these, you think, are insuperable obstacles; and would, if duly considered, induce us to bend our necks tamely and quietly to the profered yoke, as much less dreadful, than the evils attendant upon our measures will inevitably be. Nature has disseminated her blessings variously throughout this continent: Some parts of it are favourable to some things, others to others; some colonies are best calculated for grain; others for flax and hemp; others for cotton; and others for live stock of every kind: By this means, a mutually advantageous intercourse may be established between them all. If we were to turn our attention from external to internal commerce, we should give greater stability, and more lasting prosperity to our country, than she can possibly have otherwise. We should not then import the luxuries and vices of foreign climes; nor should we make such hasty strides to public corruption and depravity. Let all those lands, which are rich enough to produce flax and hemp, be applied to that purpose; and let such parts, as have been a long time settled, still continue to be appropriated to grain, or other things they are fit for. We shall want as much of the former articles as can be raised; and perhaps, as much of the latter, as may be requisite towards the due improvement of the poorer part of our soil. Let it be considered, that the colonies, which are adapted to the production of materials for manufactures, will not be employed in raising grain, but must take what they use chiefly from the other colonies; and, in return, supply their materials; by this means, and by dedicating no more of our land to the raising of wheat, rye, corn, &c. than is incapable of producing other things, we shall find no superfluity of those articles, and shall make a very beneficial use of all our lands. This is practicable; difficulties may be started, but none which perseverance and industry may not overcome. The clothes we already have in use, and the goods at present in the country, will, with care, be sufficient to last three years. During that time, we shall be increasing our sheep as much as possible. It is unfair to judge of the future from the past. Hitherto we have paid no great attention to them; we have killed and exported as fast as we could obtain a sale: When we come to attend properly to the matter, to kill but few, and to export none, we shall, in the course, of two or three years, have large numbers of sheep; and wool enough to go a considerable way towards clothing ourselves. Flax and hemp, we should undoubtedly have in abundance. The immense tracts of new rich land, which may be planted with these articles, would yield immense quantities of them. What large supplies of seed do we annually export to Ireland! When we come to with-hold these, and make the cultivation of flax and hemp, a matter of serious attention, we shall soon procure a plenty of them. In speaking of this matter, you confine your views to the single small province of New-York. You say, “We sow already as much flax, as we can conveniently manage. Besides, it requires a rich free soil; nor will the same ground in this country produce flax a second time, till after an interval of five or six years. If the measures of the Congress should be carried into full effect, I confess we may in a year or two, want a large quantity of hemp, for the executioner. But I fear, we must import it. It exhausts the soil too much to be cultivated, in the old settled parts of the province.” There is land enough in the other provinces, that is rich, free and new; nor is at all liable to the objections you make. As to this particular province, and any others in the same circumstances, let only such parts as are fit, be planted, with the articles in question; and let the rest be managed as before. Much more may be produced in this, than has been hitherto; but, if it could not afford a sufficiency for itself; let it exchange its grain with other colonies, that super-abound with such materials. If we sow already as much flax, as we can conveniently manage, it is, because the chief of our attention is engrossed by other things; but the supposition is, that there will be less demand for them, and more for flax; and, by attending less to present objects, we shall have it in our power for the future, to sow and manage much more flax, than in the time past. With respect to cotton, you do not pretend to deny, that a sufficient quantity of that might be produced. Several of the southern colonies are so favorable to it, that with due cultivation, in a couple of years they would afford enough to cloath the whole continent. As to the expence of bringing it by land, the best way will be to manufacture it w[h]ere it grows; and afterwards transport it to the other colonies. Upon this plan I apprehend, the expence would not be greater, than to build and equip large ships, to import the manufactures of Great-Britain from thence. The difficulty of transportation would be attended, with one great advantage. It would give employment and bread to a number of people; and would among other things, serve to prevent there being those terrific bands of thieves, robbers and highwaymen, which you endeavor to draw up, in such formidable array, against the Congress. It would however be hardly possible to block up our ports, in such a manner, as to cut off all communication between the colonies, by water. There would remain some avenues in spite of all that could be done, and we should not be idle in making proper use of them. I mentioned before, the vast quantities of skins in America, which would never let us want a warm and comfortable suit. This is one of our principal resources, and this you have passed over in silence. A suit made of skins, would not be quite so elegant as one of broad cloth; but it would shelter us from the inclemency of the winter, full as well. Upon the whole, considering all the resources we have; and the time we shall have to prepare them, before we are in actual want; there can be no room to doubt, that we may live without the manufactures of Britain, if we are careful, frugal and industrious. But, it is said, we have no persons to manufacture our materials, after we have provided them. Among the swarms of emigrants, that have within these few years past, come to the continent; there are numbers of manufacturers, in the necessary branches. These, for want of encouragement in their own occupations, have been obliged to apply themselves to other methods of getting a living; but would be glad of an opportunity to return to them. Besides these, we should soon have a plenty of workmen, from Britain and Ireland: Numbers, who would be thrown out of employ there, would be glad to flock to us for subsistence. They would not stay at home and be miserable, while there was any prospect of encouragement here. Neither is there any great difficulty, in acquiring a competent knowledge of the manufacturing arts. In a couple of years many of our own people might become proficient enough, to make the coarser kinds of stuffs and linens. But if it should be necessary, we have other resources besides all these. It will be impossible for the ships of Britain, to line the vast extended coast of this continent, in such a manner, as to preclude the admission of foreign aids and supplies. After every possible precaution against it, we shall still be able to get large quantities of goods from France and Holland. I shall conclude this head, with one more observation, which is this, That all such, as may be deprived of business, by the operation of our measures in America, may be employed in cultivating lands. We have enough, and to spare. It is of no force to object, that “when our exports are stopped, our grain would become of little worth.” They can be occupied in raising other things, that will be more wanted, to wit; Materials for manufactures; and only a sufficiency of provisions, for their own use. In such a country as this, there can be no great difficulty in finding business, for all its inhabitants. Those obstacles, which to the eye of timidity or disaffection, seem like the Alps would to the hand of resolution and perseverance, become mere hillocks. Once more I insist upon it, that Great-Britain can never force us to submission, by blocking up our ports; and that the consequences of such a procedure to herself, Ireland and the West-Indies, would be too fatal to admit of it. If she is determined to enslave us, it must be by force of arms; and to attempt this, I again assert, would be nothing less, than the grossest infatuation, madness itself. Whatever may be said of the disciplined troops of Britain, the event of the contest must be extremely doubtful. There is a certain enthusiasm in liberty, that makes human nature rise above itself, in acts of bravery and heroism. It cannot be expected, that America would yield, without a magnanimous persevering and bloody struggle. The testimony of past ages, and the least knowledge of mankind, must suffice to convince us of the contrary. We have a recent instance in Corsica, to what lengths a people will go, in defence of its liberties; and if we take a view of the colonies in general, we must perceive that the pulse of Americans beats high, in their country’s cause. Let us then suppose, the arms of Britain triumphant and America mutilated, exhausted and vanquished. What situation will Britain then be in? What laurels will she reap, from her conquest? Alas! none. Every true friend to that deluded country, must shudder at the prospect of her self-destroying success. The condition, we should be left in would disable us from paying the six millions sterling, which is due, for the manufactures of Britain. Instead of the present millions, derived annually from our trade, we should be so distressed and reduced, as to be for many years to come, a burthen, and not an advantage. Millions are soon dispensed, in supporting fleets and armies. Much British treasure and blood would be expended in effecting our ruin. This then would be the situation of Great-Britain. Her public debt would be augmented several millions. Her merchants, who are one of the principal sources of her opulence, would many of them become bankrupt, by the loss of the vast sums due them, in America. Her manufactures would stagnate and decay, and her revenues would be considerably diminished. This continent, which is now a rich source of wealth and strength, would be debilitated and depressed. Would the ancient rivals and enemies of Britain be idle, at such a conjuncture as this? Would they not eagerly seize the opportunity to recover their former losses, and revenge the evils, they have sustained on former occasions? It will be said, this is possible, but it may not happen. I answer, causes must fail of their usual effects, if it does not. Princes and nations must cease to be ambitious and avaricious. The French from being a jealous, politic and enterprizing people, must be grown negligent, stupid and inattentive to their own interest. They never could have a fairer opportunity, or a greater temptation to aggrandise themselves, and triumph over Britain, than would be here presented. Let us imagine England immersed in a war with France, Spain, or any other potent neighbour, with her public debt increased, some of her best springs dried up, and America ruined; not only unable to afford her any assistance; but, perhaps fired with resentment and a sense of accumulated injuries, ready to throw itself into the arms of her enemies. In these circumstances, what would be the fate of this unhappy kingdom? Every man of discernment must be convinced, that ruin would be unavoidable. But, what reason have we to believe, the arms of Britain would prevail? It will be replied, because she can send against us some of the best troops in the world, either with respect to valour, or discipline; and because we have only a raw, unexperienced militia to oppose them with. Discipline and military skill are certainly matters of great importance, and give those, to whom they belong, a vast superiority; but they do not render them invincible. Superior numbers, joined to natural intrepidity, and that animation, which is inspired by a desire of freedom, and a love of one’s country, may very well overballance those advantages. I imagine, it will be readily allowed, that Britain could not spare an army of above fifteen thousand men to send against the colonies. These would have to subdue near 600,000. The established rule of computing the number of men, capable of bearing arms in any nation, is by taking a fifth part of the whole people. By the best calculations we are supposed in America, to exceed three millions. The fifth part of three millions is 600,000. But, in order to be certain of our computation; let us suppose, there are only 500,000 fighting men in the colonies. Then there will be upwards of 30 Americans to one British soldier. A great disparity indeed! And such as never can be compensated by any discipline, or skill whatever! It will be objected, that these 500,000 cannot act together. I grant it; nor is there any occasion that they should: Forty thousand, will be a sufficient number to make head at a time, and these must be kept up by fresh supplies as fast as there is any diminution. Let it be remembered, that there are no large plains, for the two armies to meet in, and decide the contest, by some decisive stroke, where any advantage gained, by either side, might be prosecuted, ’till a complete victory was obtained. The circumstances of our country put it in our power, to evade a pitched battle. It will be better policy, to harrass and exhaust the soldiery, by frequent skirmishes and incursions, than to take the open field with them, by which means, they would have the full benefit of their superior regularity and skill. Americans are better qualified, for that kind of fighting, which is most adapted to this country, than regular troops. Should the soldiery advance into the country, as they would be obliged to do, if they had any inclination to subdue us, their discipline would be of little use to them. We should, in that case, be at least upon an equality with them, in any respect; and as we should have the advantage, on many accounts, they would be likely to gain nothing by their attempts. Several of the colonies are now making preparation, for the worst (and indeed the best way to avoid a civil war, is to be prepared for it.) They are disciplining men, as fast as possible; and, in a few months, will be able to produce many thousands, not so much inferior, in the essentials of discipline, as may, perhaps, be imagined. A little actual service will put them very nearly upon a footing, with their enemies. The history of the Swedes and Russians, under Charles XII, and Peter the Great, will teach us, how soon a people, possessed of natural bravery, may be brought to equal the most regular troops. The Swedes, at first, obtained very signal advantages; but, after a while, the Russians learned to defeat them with equal numbers. It is true, there was one of the greatest men, the world has seen, at the head of the latter; but there was one who emulated the Macedonian conqueror, at the head of the former. Charles was, perhaps, never surpassed by any man, in courage, or skill; and his soldiers were well worthy of such a general. There is also this important circumstance, in our favour, when compared with the Russians. They were barbarous and untractable: We are civilized and docile. They were ignorant even of the theory of war: We are well acquainted with it; and, therefore, should more easily be brought to the practice of it; and be sooner taught that order and method, which we are deficient in. It is sometimes urged, that we have no experienced officers to command us. We labour under some disadvantage, in this respect; but not so great, as is believed. There are many, who have served in the last war, with reputation, dispersed throughout the colonies. These might have the superior direction of matters; and there are men enough of known sense, and courage, who would soon make excellent officers. During the disputes, between the unfortunate Charles and the parliament, many country gentlemen served, in the armies of the latter, and signalized themselves, for their military virtues. It is worthy of observation, that the present state of the army is not the most favourable. As is always the consequence of a long peace, there are many effeminate striplings, among the officers, who are better calculated to marshal the forces of Venus, than to conduct the sturdy sons of Mars. There are, comparatively, but few veterans, either among the leaders, or the common soldiers. You ask me, what resources have the colonies to pay, cloath, arm and feed their troops? I refer you to the accounts, from Virginia and Marblehead, for an answer to this question. Our troops, on the spot, with us, will be much more easily maintained, than those of Britain, at such a distance. We are not so poor and incumbered, as to be unable to support those who are immediately employed in defending our liberties. Our country abounds in provisions. We have already materials enough among us, to keep us in cloaths, longer than Britain would have any appetite to continue her hostilities. Several of the colonies are pretty well stored with ammunition. France, Spain, and Holland would find means, to supply us with whatever we wanted. Let it not be said, that this last is a bare possibility, that France and Spain have promised not to interfere in the dispute, and that Holland has long been a faithful ally to the British nation. There is the highest degree of probability, in the case. A more desireable object, to France and Spain, than the disunion of these colonies from Great-Britain, cannot be imagined. Every dictate of policy and interest would prompt them to forward it, by every possible means. They could not take any so effectual method, to destroy the growing power of their great rival. The promises of princes and statesmen are of little weight. They never bind longer, than ’till a strong temptation offers to break them; and they are frequently make, with a sinister design. If we consult the known character of the French, we shall be disposed to conclude, that their present, seemingly, pacific and friendly disposition is merely a piece of finesse; intended to dupe administration into some violent measures with the colonies, that they may improve them to their own advantage. The most that can be expected is, that they would refrain from an open rupture, with Britain. They would undoubtedly take every clandestine method to introduce among us supplies of those things, which we stood in need of to carry on the dispute. They would not neglect any thing, in their power, to make the opposition on our part, as vigorous and obstinate as our affairs would admit of. With respect to Holland, notwithstanding express engagements to the contrary, her merchants, during the last war, were constantly supplying the French and Spaniards, with military stores, and other things, they had occasion for. The same, or perhaps, more powerful motives, would influence them to assist us, in a like manner. But it seems to me a mark a great credulity to believe, upon the strength of their assurance, that France and Spain, would not take a still more interesting part, in the affair. The disjunction of these colonies from Britain, and the acquisition of a free trade with them are objects of too inviting a complexion, to suffer those kingdoms to remain idle spectators of the contention. If they found us inclined to throw ourselves upon their protection, they would eagerly embrace the opportunity to weaken their antagonist and strengthen themselves. Superadded to these general and prevailing inducements, there are others of a more particular nature. They would feel no small inconvenience, in the loss of those supplies, they annually get from us; and their Islands in the West-Indies, would be in the greatest distress for want of our trade. From these reflections, it is more than probable, that America is able to support its freedom, even by the force of arms, if she be not betrayed, by her own sons. And, in whatever light we view the matter, the consequences to Great-Britain, would be too destructive, to permit her to proceed to extremities, unless she has lost all just sense of her own interest. You say, “the grand Congress, the piddling committees, through the continent, have all disclaimed their subjection to the sovereign authority of the empire: They deny the authority of parliament, to make any laws, to bind them all. They claim an absolute independency. Great-Britain has no choice, but to declare the colonies independent states, or to try the force of arms, in order to bring them to a sense of their duty.” It is the common trick of ministerial writers to represent the Congress, as having made some new demands, which were unknown to former times; whereas, in truth, they have, in substance, acknowledged the only dependence on parliament which was ever intended, by their predecessors. Nor [is] it true, that they have claimed an absolute independency. It is insulting common sense, to say so when it is notorious, that they have acknowledged the right of parliament to regulate the trade of the colonies. Any further dependence on it, is unnecessary and dangerous. They have professed allegiance to the British King, and have bound themselves, on any emergency, to contribute their proportion of men and money, to the defence and protection of the whole empire. Can this be called absolute independency? Is it better for Britain to hazard the total loss [of] these colonies, than to hold them upon these conditions? Is it preferable to make enemies of the people of America, instead of being connected with them, by the equal tie of fellow subjects? Is it not madness, to run the risk of losing the trade of these colonies, from which the mother country, drew “more clear profit, than Spain has drawn from all her mines,” because they insist only upon all the essential rights of free men? You may call it effrontery, consummate assurance, or what you please, to say so; but every man, capable of taking a full prospect of all the probable mischiefs, which may result, from an open rupture between Britain and the colonies, will coincide with me, when I affirm, that nothing, but the most frantic extravagance, can influence administration to attempt the reduction of America, by force of arms. It is sufficiently evident, from the respective charters, that the rights, we now claim, are coeval with the original settlement of these colonies. These rights have been, at different times, strenuously asserted, though they have been suffered to be violated, in several instances, through inattention, or, perhaps, an unwillingness to quarrel with the mother country. I shall decline producing any other proofs of the sense of the other provinces, than those already mentioned, and shall confine my self, to a few extracts, from the resolves of some assemblies of this province. In 1691, there was an act passed by the General Assembly, which contained the following clauses. “Be it enacted, by the Governor, Council and Representatives, met in General Assembly, and it is hereby enacted and declared, by the authority of the same, that the supreme legislative power and authority, under their Majesty’s William and Mary, King and Queen of England, &c. shall, for ever, be and reside, in a Governor in chief, and Council appointed, by their Majesties, their heirs and successors, and the people, by their representatives, met and convened, in General Assembly. “That no freeman shall be taken, or imprisonned, or be deprived of his freehold, or life, or liberty, or free customs, or outlawed, or exiled, or any other ways destroyed, nor shall be passed upon, adjudged, or condemned, but by the lawful judgment of his peers and by the law of the province. “That no aid, tax, talliage, custom, loan, benevolence, gift, excise, duty, or imposition whatsoever, shall be laid, assessed, imposed, levied, or required, of, or on, any of their Majesty’s subjects, within this province, &c. or their estates, upon any manner of colour or pretence whatsoever, but, by the act and consent of the Governor and Council and Representatives of the people, in General Assembly, met and convened.” This act shews clearly the sense of his Majesty’s Representative, his Council and the Assembly of this province, above eighty years ago, which was, that the supreme legislative authority and the exclusive power of taxation should, for ever, be and reside, in a Governor in chief, and Council, appointed by their Majesties, their heirs and successors, and the people, by their representatives, met and convened, in General Assembly. We may also infer, from hence, that the other colonies actually enjoyed similar privileges, at that time: For, it would have been the height of presumption, in this province, to claim such important immunities, had not the others been in possession of the like. This act of itself confutes all, that has been said, concerning the novelty of our present claims, and proves, that the injurious reflections, on the Congress, for having risen, in their demands, are malicious and repugnant to truth. You have produced some expressions of the Congress and Assembly of this province, in 1765, which you lay great stress upon. The true meaning of them may be gathered, from the following passage, which is taken from the same piece, that contains the expressions in question: The Congress speak thus: “It is humbly submitted, whether there be not a material distinction, in reason and sound policy, at least, between the necessary exercise of parliamentary jurisdiction, in general acts, for the amendment of the common law, and the regulation of trade and commerce, through the whole empire, and the exercise of that jurisdiction, by imposing taxes, on the colonies.” They allow only a power of making general acts for the amendment of the common law, and for the general regulation of trade. As to any special laws, to bind the colonies, in particular, they never intended submission to these; nor could they intend a right to impose special duties, of any kind, for the purpose of raising a revenue, which is, to all intents and purposes, a species of taxation. The resolves of our Assembly, the last day of December 1771, about three years afterwards, will serve as a full explanation. “As it is, not only, the common birthright of all his Majesty’s subjects, but, is also essential to the preservation of the peace, strength and prosperity of the British empire, that an exact equality of constitutional rights, among all his Majesty’s subjects, in the several parts of the empire, be uniformly and invariably maintained and supported; and as it would be inconsistent with the constitutional rights, of his Majesty’s subjects, in Great-Britain, to tax them, either in person, or estate, without the consent of their representatives, in Parliament assembled. It is therefore “Resolved nemine contradicente, “That it is the opinion of this committee, that no tax under any name, or denomination, or on any pretence, or for any purpose whatsoever, can, or ought to be imposed, or levied upon the persons, estates, or property of his Majesty’s good subjects within this colony, but of their free gift, by their representatives lawfully convened, in General Assembly. “That it is the opinion of this committee, that this colony lawfully and constitutionally has and enjoys an internal legislature, in which, the crown and the people of this colony are constitutionally represented; and that the power and authority of the said legislature cannot lawfully or constitutionally be suspended, abridged, abrogated or annulled by any power or prerogative whatsoever, the prerogative of the crown, ordinarily exercised, for prorogations and dissolutions, only, excepted.” A supreme authority, in the Parliament, to make any special laws for this province, consistent with the internal legislature here claimed is impossible; and cannot be supposed, without falling into that solecism, in politics, of imperium in imperio. I imagine, Sir, I have, by this time, pretty fully and satisfactorily answered every thing, contained in your letter, of any consequence: The parts, I have left unattended to, are such as cannot operate, materially, to the prejudice of the cause I espouse; but I should not have neglected them, had it not been, that I have already taken a very ample range; and it would, perhaps, be imprudent to delay a conclusion. Whatever opinion may be entertained of my sentiments and intentions, I attest that being, whose all-seeing eye penetrates the inmost recesses of the heart, that I am not influenced (in the part I take) by any unworthy motive—that, if I am in an error, it is my judgment, not my heart, that errs. That I earnestly lament the unnatural quarrel, between the parent state and the colonies; and most ardently wish for a speedy reconciliation, a perpetual and mutually beneficial union, that I am a warm advocate for limitted monarchy, and an unfeigned well-wisher to the present Royal Family. But on the other hand, I am inviolably attached to the essential rights of mankind, and the true interests of society. I consider civil liberty, in a genuine unadulterated sense, as the greatest of terrestrial blessings. I am convinced, that the whole human race is intitled to it; and, that it can be wrested from no part of them, without the blackest and most aggravated guilt. I verily believe also, that the best way to secure a permanent and happy union, between Great-Britain and the colonies, is to permit the latter to be as free, as they desire. To abridge their liberties, or to exercise any power over them, which they are unwilling to submit to, would be a perpetual source of discontent and animosity. A continual jealousy would exist on both sides. This would lead to tyranny, on the one hand, and to sedition and rebellion, on the other. Impositions, not really grievous in themselves, would be thought so; and the murmurs arising from thence, would be considered as the effect of a turbulent ungovernable spirit. These jarring principles would, at length, throw all things into disorder; and be productive of an irreparable breach, and a total disunion. That harmony and mutual confidence may speedily be restored, between all the parts of the British empire, is the favourite wish of one, who feels the warmest sentiments of good will to mankind, who bears no enimity to you, and who is, A sincere Friend to America. Source:https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-01-02-0057

A Full Vindication of the Measures of the Congress, &c. New-York [December 15] 1774 Friends and Countrymen, It was hardly to be expected that any man could be so presumptuous, as openly to controvert the equity, wisdom, and authority of the measures, adopted by the congress: an assembly truly respectable on every account! Whether we consider the characters of the men, who composed it; the number, and dignity of their constituents, or the important ends for which they were appointed. But, however improbable such a degree of presumption might have seemed, we find there are some, in whom it exists. Attempts are daily making to diminish the influence of their decisions, and prevent the salutary effects, intended by them. The impotence of such insidious efforts is evident from the general indignation they are treated with; so that no material ill-consequences can be dreaded from them. But lest they should have a tendency to mislead, and prejudice the minds of a few; it cannot be deemed altogether useless to bestow some notice upon them. And first, let me ask these restless spirits, whence arises that violent antipathy they seem to entertain, not only to the natural rights of mankind; but to common sense and common modesty. That they are enemies to the natural rights of mankind is manifest, because they wish to see one part of their species enslaved by another. That they have an invincible aversion to common sense is apparent in many respects: They endeavour to persuade us, that the absolute sovereignty of parliament does not imply our absolute slavery; that it is a Christian duty to submit to be plundered of all we have, merely because some of our fellow-subjects are wicked enough to require it of us, that slavery, so far from being a great evil, is a great blessing; and even, that our contest with Britain is founded entirely upon the petty duty of 3 pence per pound on East India tea; whereas the whole world knows, it is built upon this interesting question, whether the inhabitants of Great-Britain have a right to dispose of the lives and properties of the inhabitants of America, or not? And lastly, that these men have discarded all pretension to common modesty, is clear from hence, first, because they, in the plainest terms, call an august body of men, famed for their patriotism and abilities, fools or knaves, and of course the people whom they represented cannot be exempt from the same opprobrious appellations; and secondly, because they set themselves up as standards of wisdom and probity, by contradicting and censuring the public voice in favour of those men. A little consideration will convince us, that the congress instead of having “ignorantly misunderstood, carelessly neglected, or basely betrayed the interests of the colonies,” have, on the contrary, devised and recommended the only effectual means to secure the freedom, and establish the future prosperity of America upon a solid basis. If we are not free and happy hereafter, it must proceed from the want of integrity and resolution, in executing what they have concerted; not from the temerity or impolicy of their determinations. Before I proceed to confirm this assertion by the most obvious arguments, I will premise a few brief remarks. The only distinction between freedom and slavery consists in this: In the former state, a man is governed by the laws to which he has given his consent, either in person, or by his representative: In the latter, he is governed by the will of another. In the one case his life and property are his own, in the other, they depend upon the pleasure of a master. It is easy to discern which of these two states is preferable. No man in his senses can hesitate in choosing to be free, rather than a slave. That Americans are intitled to freedom, is incontestible upon every rational principle. All men have one common original: they participate in one common nature, and consequently have one common right. No reason can be assigned why one man should exercise any power, or pre-eminence over his fellow creatures more than another; unless they have voluntarily vested him with it. Since then, Americans have not by any act of their’s impowered the British Parliament to make laws for them, it follows they can have no just authority to do it. Besides the clear voice of natural justice in this respect, the fundamental principles of the English constitution are in our favour. It has been repeatedly demonstrated, that the idea of legislation, or taxation, when the subject is not represented, is inconsistent with that. Nor is this all, our charters, the express conditions on which our progenitors relinquished their native countries, and came to settle in this, preclude every claim of ruling and taxing us without our assent. Every subterfuge that sophistry has been able to invent, to evade or obscure this truth, has been refuted by the most conclusive reasonings; so that we may pronounce it a matter of undeniable certainty, that the pretensions of Parliament are contradictory to the law of nature, subversive of the British constitution, and destructive of the faith of the most solemn compacts. What then is the subject of our controversy with the mother country? It is this, whether we shall preserve that security to our lives and properties, which the law of nature, the genius of the British constitution, and our charters afford us; or whether we shall resign them into the hands of the British House of Commons, which is no more privileged to dispose of them than the Grand Mogul? What can actuate those men, who labour to delude any of us into an opinion, that the object of contention between the parent state and the colonies is only three pence duty upon tea? or that the commotions in America originate in a plan, formed by some turbulent men to erect it into a republican government? The parliament claims a right to tax us in all cases whatsoever: Its late acts are in virtue of that claim. How ridiculous then is it to affirm, that we are quarrelling for the trifling sum of three pence a pound on tea; when it is evidently the principle against which we contend. The design of electing members to represent us in general congress, was, that the wisdom of America might be collected in devising the most proper and expedient means to repel this atrocious invasion of our rights. It has been accordingly done. Their decrees are binding upon all, and demand a religious observance. We did not, especially in this province, circumscribe them by any fixed boundary, and therefore as they cannot be said to have exceeded the limits of their authority, their act must be esteemed the act of their constituents. If it should be objected, that they have not answered the end of their election; but have fallen upon an improper and ruinous mode of proceeding: I reply, by asking, Who shall be the judge? Shall any individual oppose his private sentiment to the united counsels of men, in whom America has reposed so high a confidence? The attempt must argue no small degree of arrogance and self-sufficiency. Yet this attempt has been made, and it is become in some measure necessary to vindicate the conduct of this venerable assembly from the aspersions of men, who are their adversaries, only because they are foes to America. When the political salvation of any community is depending, it is incumbent upon those who are set up as its guardians, to embrace such measures, as have justice, vigour, and a probabilty of success to recommend them: If instead of this, they take those methods which are in themselves feeble, and little likely to succeed; and may, through a defect in vigour, involve the community in still greater danger; they may be justly considered as its betrayers. It is not enough in times of eminent peril to use only possible means of preservation: Justice and sound policy dictate the use of probable means. The only scheme of opposition, suggested by those, who have been, and are averse from a non-importation and non-exportation agreement, is, by Remonstrance and Petition. The authors and abettors of this scheme, have never been able to invent a single argument to prove the likelihood of its succeeding. On the other hand, there are many standing facts, and valid considerations against it. In the infancy of the present dispute, we had recourse to this method only. We addressed the throne in the most loyal and respectful manner, in a legislative capacity; but what was the consequence? Our address was treated with contempt and neglect. The first American congress did the same, and met with similar treatment. The total repeal of the stamp act, and the partial repeal of the revenue acts took place, not because the complaints of America were deemed just and reasonable; but because these acts were found to militate against the commercial interests of Great Britain: This was the declared motive of the repeal. These instances are sufficient for our purpose; but they derive greater validity and force from the following: The legal assembly of Massachusetts Bay, presented, not long since, a most humble, dutiful, and earnest petition to his Majesty, requesting the dismission of a governor, highly odious to the people, and whose misrepresentations they regarded as one chief source of all their calamities. Did they succeed in their request? No, it was treated with the greatest indignity, and stigmatized as “a seditious, vexatious, and scandalous libel.” I know the men I have to deal with will acquiesce in this stigma. Will they also dare to calumniate the noble and spirited petition that came from the Mayor and Aldermen of the city of London? Will they venture to justify that unparalelled stride of power, by which popery and arbitrary dominion were established in Canada? The citizens of London remonstrated against it; they signified its repugnancy to the principles of the revolution; but like ours, their complaints were unattended to. From thence we may learn how little dependence ought to be placed on this method of obtaining the redress of grievances. There is less reason now than ever to expect deliverance, in this way, from the hand of oppression. The system of slavery, fabricated against America, cannot at this time be considered as the effect of inconsideration and rashness. It is the offspring of mature deliberation. It has been fostered by time, and strengthened by every artifice human subtilty is capable of. After the claims of parliament had lain dormant for awhile, they are again resumed and prosecuted with more than common ardour. The Premier has advanced too far to recede with safety: He is deeply interested to execute his purpose, if possible: we know he has declared, that he will never desist, till he has brought America to his feet; and we may conclude, nothing but necessity will induce him to abandon his aims. In common life, to retract an error even in the beginning, is no easy task. Perseverance confirms us in it, and rivets the difficulty; but in a public station, to have been in an error, and to have persisted in it, when it is detected, ruins both reputation and fortune. To this we may add, that disappointment and opposition inflame the minds of men, and attach them, still more, to their mistakes. What can we represent which has not already been represented? what petitions can we offer, that have not already been offered? The rights of America, and the injustice of parliamentary pretensions have been clearly and repeatedly stated, both in and out of parliament. No new arguments can be framed to operate in our favour. Should we even resolve the errors of the ministry and parliament into the falibility of human understanding, if they have not yet been convinced, we have no prospect of being able to do it by any thing further we can say. But if we impute their conduct to a wicked thirst of domination and disregard to justice, we have no hope of prevailing with them to alter it, by expatiating on our rights, and suing to their compassion for relief; especially since we have found, by various experiments, the inefficacy of such methods. Upon the whole, it is morally certain, this mode of opposition would be fruitless and defective. The exigency of the times requires vigorous and probable remedies; not weak and improbable. It would therefore be the extreme of folly to place any confidence in, much less, confine ourselves wholly to it. This being the case, we can have no resource but in a restriction of our trade, or in a resistance vi & armis. It is impossible to conceive any other alternative. Our congress, therefore, have imposed what restraint they thought necessary. Those, who condemn or clamour against it, do nothing more, nor less, than advise us to be slaves. I shall now examine the principal measures of the congress, and vindicate them fully from the charge of injustice or impolicy. Were I to argue in a philosophical manner, I might say, the obligation to a mutual intercourse in the way of trade with the inhabitants of Great-Britain, Ireland and the West-Indies is of the imperfect kind. There is no law, either of nature, or of the civil society in which we live, that obliges us to purchase, and make use of the products and manufactures of a different land, or people. It is indeed a dictate of humanity to contribute to the support and happiness of our fellow creatures and more especially those who are allied to us by the ties of blood, interest, and mutual protection; but humanity does not require us to sacrifice our own security and welfare to the convenience, or advantage of others. Self preservation is the first principle of our nature. When our lives and properties are at stake, it would be foolish and unnatural to refrain from such measures as might preserve them, because they would be detrimental to others. But we are justified upon another principle besides this. Though the manufacturers of Great Britain and Ireland, and the Inhabitants of the West Indies are not chargeable with any actual crime towards America, they may, in a political view, be esteemed criminal. In a civil society, it is the duty of each particular branch to promote, not only the good of the whole community, but the good of every other particular branch: If one part endeavours to violate the rights of another, the rest ought to assist in preventing the injury: When they do not, but remain nutral, they are deficient in their duty, and may be regarded, in some measure, as accomplices. The reason of this is obvious, from the design of civil society, which is, that the united strength of the several members might give stability and security to the whole body, and each respective member; so that one part cannot encroach upon another, without becoming a common enemy, and eventually endangering the safety and happiness of all the other parts. Since then the persons who will be distressed by the methods we are using for our own protection, have by their neutrality first committed a breach of an obligation, similar to that which bound us to consult their emolument, it is plain, the obligation upon us is annulled, and we are blameless in what we are about to do. With respect to the manufacturers of Great Britain, they are criminal in a more particular sense. Our oppression arises from that member of the great body politic, of which they compose a considerable part. So far as their influence has been wanting to counteract the iniquity of their rulers, so far they acquiesced in it, and are to be deemed confederates in their guilt. It is impossible to exculpate a people, that suffers its rulers to abuse and tyrannize over others. It may not be amiss to add, that we are ready to receive with open arms, any who may be sufferers by the operation of our measures, and recompense them with every blessing our country affords to honest industry. We will receive them as brethren, and make them sharers with us in all the advantages we are struggling for. From these plain and indisputable principles, the mode of opposition we have chosen is reconcileable to the strictest maxims of Justice. It remains now to be examined, whether it has also the sanction of good policy. To render it agreeable to good policy, three things are requisite. First, that the necessity of the times require it: Secondly, that it be not the probable source of greater evils, than those it pretends to remedy: And lastly, that it have a probability of success. That the necessity of the times demands it needs but little elucidation. We are threatened with absolute slavery; it has been proved, that resistance by means of Remonstrance and Petition, would not be efficacious, and of course, that a restriction on our trade, is the only peaceable method, in our power, to avoid the impending mischief: It follows therefore, that such a restriction is necessary. That it is not the probable source of greater evils than those it pretends to remedy, may easily be determined. The most abject slavery, which comprehends almost every species of human misery, is what it is designed to prevent. The consequences of the means are a temporary stagnation of commerce, and thereby a deprivation of the luxuries and some of the conveniencies of life. The necessaries, and many of the conveniencies, our own fertile and propitious soil affords us. No person, that has enjoyed the sweets of liberty, can be insensible of its infinite value, or can reflect on its reverse, without horror and detestation. No person, that is not lost to every generous feeling of humanity, or that is not stupidly blind to his own interest, could bear to offer himself and posterity as victims at the shrine of despotism, in preference to enduring the short lived inconveniencies that may result from an abridgment, or even entire suspension of commerce. Were not the disadvantages of slavery too obvious to stand in need of it, I might enumerate and describe the tedious train of calamities, inseparable from it. I might shew that it is fatal to religion and morality; that it tends to debase the mind, and corrupt its noblest springs of action. I might shew, that it relaxes the sinews of industry, clips the wings of commerce, and introduces misery and indigence in every shape. Under the auspices of tyranny, the life of the subject is often sported with; and the fruits of his daily toil are consumed in oppressive taxes, that serve to gratify the ambition, avarice and lusts of his superiors. Every court minion riots in the spoils of the honest labourer, and despises the hand by which he is fed. The page of history is replete with instances that loudly warn us to beware of slavery. Rome was the nurse of freedom. She was celebrated for her justice and lenity; but in what manner did she govern her dependent provinces? They were made the continual scene of rapine and cruelty. From thence let us learn, how little confidence is due to the wisdom and equity of the most exemplary nations. Should Americans submit to become the vassals of their fellow-subjects in Great Britain, their yoke will be peculiarly grievous and intolerable. A vast majority of mankind is intirely biassed by motives of self-interest. Most men are glad to remove any burthens off themselves, and place them upon the necks of their neighbours. We cannot therefore doubt, but that the British Parliament, with a view to the ease and advantage of itself, and its constituents, would oppress and grind the Americans as much as possible. Jealousy would concur with selfishness; and for fear of the future independence of America, if it should be permitted to rise to too great a height of splendor and opulence, every method would be taken to drain it of its wealth and restrain its prosperity. We are already suspected of aiming at independence, and that is one principal cause of the severity we experience. The same cause will always operate against us, and produce an uniform severity of treatment. The evils which may flow from the execution of our measures, if we consider them with respect to their extent and duration, are comparatively nothing. In all human probability they will scarcely be felt. Reason and experience teach us, that the consequences would be too fatal to Great Britain to admit of delay. There is an immense trade between her and the colonies. The revenues arising from thence are prodigious. The consumption of her manufactures in these colonies supplies the means of subsistence to a vast number of her most useful inhabitants. The experiment we have made heretofore, shews us of how much importance our commercial connexion is to her; and gives us the highest assurance of obtaining immediate redress by suspending it. From these considerations it is evident, she must do something decisive. She must either listen to our complaints, and restore us to a peaceful enjoyment of our violated rights; or she must exert herself to enforce her despotic claims by fire and sword. To imagine she would prefer the latter, implies a charge of the grossest infatuation of madness itself. Our numbers are very considerable; the courage of Americans has been tried and proved. Contests for liberty have ever been found the most bloody, implacable and obstinate. The disciplined troops Great Britain could send against us, would be but few, Our superiority in number would over balance our inferiority in discipline. It would be a hard, if not an impracticable task to subjugate us by force. Besides, while Great Britain was engaged in carrying on an unnatural war against us, her commerce would be in a state of decay. Her revenues would be decreasing. An armament, sufficient to enslave America, would put her to an insupportable expence. She would be laid open to the attacks of foreign enemies. Ruin, like a deluge, would pour in from every quarter. After lavishing her blood and treasure to reduce us to a state of vassalage, she would herself become a prey to some triumphant neighbour. These are not imaginary mischiefs. The colonies contain above three millions of people. Commerce flourshes with the most rapid progress throughout them. This commerce Great-Britain has hitherto regulated to her own advantage. Can we think the annihilation of so exuberant a source of wealth, a matter of trifling import. On the contrary, must it not be productive of the most disastrous effects? It is evident it must. It is equally evident, that the conquest of so numerous a people, armed in the animating cause of liberty could not be accomplished without an inconceivable expence of blood and treasure. We cannot therefore suspect Great-Britain to be capable of such frantic extravagance as to hazard these dreadful consequences; without which she must necessarily desist from her unjust pretensions, and leave us in the undisturbed possession of our privileges. Those, who affect to ridicule the resistance America might make to the military force of Great-Britain, and represent its humiliation as a matter the most easily to be achieved, betray, either a mind clouded by the most irrational prejudices, or a total ignorance of human nature. However, it must be the wish of every honest man never to see a trial. But should we admit a possibility of a third course, as our pamphleteer supposes, that is, the endeavouring to bring us to a compliance by putting a stop to our whole trade: Even this would not be so terrible as he pretends. We can live without trade of any kind. Food and clothing we have within ourselves. Our climate produces cotton, wool, flax and hemp, which, with proper cultivation would furnish us with summer apparel in abundance. The article of cotton indeed would do more, it would contribute to defend us from the inclemency of winter. We have sheep, which, with due care in improving and increasing them, would soon yield a sufficiency of wool. The large quantity of skins, we have among us, would never let us want a warm and comfortable suit. It would be no unbecoming employment for our daughters to provide silks of their own country. The silk-worm answers as well here as in any part of the world. Those hands, which may be deprived of business by the cessation of commerce, may be occupied in various kinds of manufactures and other internal improvements. If by the necessity of the thing, manufactures should once be established and take root among us, they will pave the way, still more, to the future grandeur and glory of America, and by lessening its need of external commerce, will render it still securer against the encroachments of tyranny. It is however, chimerical to imagine that the circumstances of Great-Britain will admit of such a tardy method of subjecting us, for reasons, which have been already given, and which shall be corroborated by others equally forcible. I come now to consider the last and principal engredient that constitutes the policy of a measure, which is a probability of success. I have been obliged to anticipate this part of my subject, in considering the second requisite, and indeed what I have already said seems to me to leave no room for doubting, that the means we have used will be successful, but I shall here examine the matter more thoroughly, and endeavour to evince it more fully. The design of the Congress in their proceedings, it cannot, and need not be desired, was either, by a prospect of the evil consequences, to influence the ministry to give up their enterprize; or should they prove inflexible, to affect the inhabitants of Great-Britain, Ireland and the West-Indies in such a manner, as to rouse them from their state of neutrality, and engage them to unite with us in opposing the lawless hand of tyranny, which is extended to ravish our liberty from us, and might soon be extended for the same purpose against them. The Farmer mentions, as one probable consequence of our measures, “clamours, discord, confusion, mobs, riots, insurrections, rebellions in Great-Britain, Ireland and the West-Indies;” though at the same time that he thinks it is, he also thinks it is not a probable consequence. For my part, without hazarding any such seeming contradictions, I shall, in a plain way, assert, that I verily believe a non-importation and non-exportation will effect all the purposes they are intended for. It is no easy matter to make any tolerably exact estimate of the advantages that acrue to Great-Britain, Ireland and the West-Indies from their commercial intercourse with the colonies, nor indeed is it necessary. Every man, the least acquainted with the state and extent of our trade, must be convinced, it is the source of immense revenues to the parent state, and gives employment and bread to a vast number of his Majesty’s subjects. It is impossible but that a suspension of it for any time, must introduce beggary and wretchedness in an eminent degree, both in England and Ireland; and as to the West-India plantations, they could not possibly subsist without us. I am the more confident of this, because I have a pretty general acquaintance with their circumstances and dependencies. We are told, “that it is highly improbable, we shall succeed in distressing the people of Great-Britain, Ireland and the West-Indies, so far as to oblige them to join with us in getting the acts of Parliament, which we complain of, repealed: The first distress (it is said) will fall on ourselves; it will be more severely felt by us, than any part of all his Majesty’s dominions, and will affect us the longest. The fleets of Great-Britain command respect throughout the globe. Her influence extends to every part of the earth. Her manufactures are equal to any: Superior to most in the world. Her wealth is great. Her people enterprizing and persevering in their attempts to extend, and enlarge, and protect her trade. The total loss of our trade will be felt only for a time. Her merchants would turn their attention another way: New sources of trade and wealth would be opened: New schemes pursued. She would soon find a vent for all her manufactures in spite of all we could do. Our malice would hurt only ourselves. Should our schemes distress some branches of her trade, it would be only for a time; and there is ability and humanity enough in the nation to relieve those, that are distressed by us, and put them in some other way of getting their living.” The omnipotence and all sufficiency of Great-Britain may be pretty good topics for her passionate admirers to exercise their declamatory powers upon, for amusement and trial of skill; but they ought not to be proposed to the world as matters of truth and reality. In the calm, unprejudiced eye of reason, they are altogether visionary. As to her wealth, it is notorious that she is oppressed with a heavy national debt, which it requires the utmost policy and œconomy ever to discharge. Luxury has arrived to a great pitch; and it is an universal maxim that luxury indicates the declension of a state. Her subjects are loaded with the most enormous taxes: All circumstances agree in declaring their distress. The continual emigrations, from Great-Britain and Ireland, to the continent, are a glaring symptom, that those kingdoms are a good deal impoverished. The attention of Great-Britain has hitherto been constantly awake to expand her commerce. She has been vigilant to explore every region, with which it might be her interest to trade. One of the principal branches of her commerce is with the colonies. These colonies, as they are now settled and peopled, have been the work of near two centuries: They are blessed with every advantage of soil, climate and situation. They have advanced with an almost incredible rapidity. It is therefore an egregious piece of absurdity to affirm, that the loss of our trade would be felt for a time (which must signify a short time.) No new schemes could be pursued that would not require, at least, as much time to repair the loss of our trade, as was spent in bringing it to its present degree of perfection, which is near two centuries. Nor can it be reasonably imagined, that the total and sudden loss of so extensive and lucrative a branch, would not produce the most violent effects to a nation that subsists entirely upon its commerce. It is said, “there is ability and humanity enough in the nation to relieve those that are distressed by us; and to put them into some other way of getting their living.” I wish the gentleman had obliged his readers so much, as to have pointed out this other way; I must confess, I have racked my brains to no purpose to discover it, and am fully of opinion it is purely ideal. Besides the common mechanic arts, which are subservient to the ordinary uses of life, and which are the instruments of commerce; know no other ways in time of peace, in which men can be employed, except in agriculture and the liberal arts. Persons employed in the mechanic arts, are those, whom the abridgment of commerce would immediately affect, and as to such branches as might be less affected, they are already sufficiently stocked with workmen, and could give bread to no more; not only so, but I can’t see by what legerdemain, a weaver, or clothier could be at once converted into a carpenter or black-smith. With respect to agriculture, the lands of Great Britain and Ireland have been long ago distributed and taken up; nor do they require any additional labourers to till them; so that there could be no employment in this way. The liberal arts cannot maintain those who are already devoted to them; not to say, it is more than probable, the generality of mechanics, would make but indifferent philosophers, poets, painters and musicians. What poor shifts is sophistry obliged to have recourse to! we are threatened with the resentment of those against whom our measures will operate. It is said, that “instead of conciliating, we shall alienate the affections of the people of Great-Britain, of friends, we shall make them our enemies;” and further, that “we shall excite the resentment of the government at home against us, which will do us no good, but, on the contrary, much harm.” Soon after, we are told that “we shall probably raise the resentment of the Irish and West-Indians: The passions of human nature” it is said, “are much the same in all countries. If they find us disposed wantonly to distress them, to serve our own purposes, they will look out for some method to do without us: will they not look elsewhere for a supply of those articles, they used to take from us? They would deserve to be despised for their meanness did they not.” To these objections I reply, first with respect to the inhabitants of Great-Britain, that if they are our friends, as is supposed, and as we have reason to believe; they cannot, without being destitute of rationality, be incensed against us for using the only peaceable and probable means, in our power, to preserve our invaded rights: They know by their own experience how fruitless remonstrances and petitions are: They know, we have tried them over and over to no purpose: They know also, how dangerous to their liberties, the loss of ours must be. What then could exite their resentment if they have the least regard to common justice? The calamities, that threaten them, proceed from the weakness, or wickedness of their own rulers; which compels us to take the measures we do. The insinuation, that we wantonly distress them to serve our own purposes, is futile and unsupported by a single argument. I have shewn, we could have no other resource; nor can they think our conduct such, without a degree of infatuation, that it would be impossible to provide against, and therefore useless to consult. It is most reasonable to believe, they will revenge the evils they may feel on the true authors of them, on an aspiring and ill-judging ministry; not on us, who act out of a melancholy necessity, and are the innocent causes in self-defence. With respect to the ministry, it is certain, that any thing, which has a tendency to frustrate their designs, will not fail to excite their displeasure; but since we have nothing to expect from their justice and lenity, it can be no objection to a measure, that it tends to stir up their resentment. But their resentment (it is often said) may ruin us. The impossibility of doing that, without at the same time, ruining Great-Britain, is a sufficient security. The same may be said with regard to the Irish and the West-Indians, which has been said concerning the people of Great-Britain. The Irish, in particular, by their own circumstances will be taught to sympathise with us, and commend our conduct. Justice will direct their resentment to its proper objects. It is true self-love will prompt both the Irish and the West-Indians to take every method in their power, to escape the miseries they are in danger of; but what methods can they take? “The Irish (it is said) may be supplied with flax-seed from Holland, the Baltic, and the river St. Lawrence: Canada produces no inconsiderable quantity already.” And as to the West-Indies, “they produce now many of the necessaries of life. The quantity may be easily increased. Canada will furnish them with many articles they now take from us; flour, lumber, horses, &c. Georgia, the Floridas, and the Mississippi abound in lumber: Nova Scotia in fish.” The Dutch are rivals to the English in their commerce. They make large quantities of fine linens, gause, laces, &c. which require the flax to be picked before it comes to seed; for which reason, it is not in their power to raise much more seed than they want for their own use. Ireland has always had the surplus from them. They could, if they were ever so willing, enlarge their usual supplies but very little. It is indeed probable they may withold them. They may choose to improve the occasion for the advancement of their own trade: They may take advantage of the scarcity of materials in Ireland, to increase and put off their own manufactures. The Baltic has ever supplied Ireland with its flax, and she has been able to consume that, with all she could derive from other quarters. As to Canada, I am well informed it could at present afford, but a very inconsiderable quantity. It has had little encouragement, hitherto, to raise that article, and of course has not much attended to it. The instances mentioned, of seed being “bought up there at a low price, brought to New-York, and sold to the Irish factors at a great advance,” does not prove there is any quantity raised there. Its cheapness proceeds from there being no demand for it; and where there was no demand, there was no inducement to cultivate it. Upon the whole, it appears, that the supplies of flax-seed, which Ireland might draw elsewhere, could be trifling in comparison with those received from us, and not at all equivalent to her wants. But if this were not the case, if she might procure a sufficiency without our help, yet could she not do without us. She would want purchasers for her linens after they were manufactured; and where could she find any so numerous and wealthy as we are? I must refer it to the profound sagacity of Mr. A. W. Farmer, to explore them, it is too arduous a task for me. Much less could the West-Indies subsist independent of us. Notwithstanding the continual imports from hence, there is seldom or ever, in any of the islands, a sufficient stock of provisions to last six months, which may give us an idea, how great the consumption is. The necessaries they produce within themselves, when compared with the consumption, are scarcely worth mentioning. Very small portions of the lands are appropriated to the productions of such necessaries, indeed it is too valuable to admit of it. Nor could the quantity be increased to any material degree, without applying the whole of the land to it. It is alledged, that Canada will furnish them with “flour, lumber, horses, &c. and that Georgia, the Floridas and Mississipi abound in lumber; Nova Scotia in fish.” These countries have been all-along carrying on a trade to the West-Indies, as well as we; and can it be imagined that alone, they will be able to supply them tolerably? The Canadians have been indolent, and have not improved their country as they ought to have done. The wheat they raise at present, over and above what they have occasion for themselves, would be found to go but little way among the islands. Those, who think the contrary, must have mistaken notions of them. They must be unapprized of the number of souls they contain: Almost every 150 or 200 acres of land, exclusive of populous towns, comprehend a hundred people. It is not a small quantity of food that will suffice for so many. Ten or fifteen years diligence, I grant, might enable Canada to perform what is now expected from her; but, in the mean time, the West-Indians might have the satisfaction of starving. To suppose the best, which is, that by applying their canelands to the purpose of procuring sustenance, they may preserve themselves from starving: still the consequences must be very serious or pernicious. The wealthy planters would but ill relish the loss of their crops, and such of them as were considerably in debt would be ruined. At any rate, the revenues of Great-Britain would suffer a vast diminution. The Farmer, I am inclined to hope, builds too much upon the present disunion of Canada, Georgia, the Floridas, the Mississippi, and Nova Scotia from other colonies. A little time, I trust, will awaken them from their slumber, and bring them to a proper sense of their indiscretion. I please myself with the flattering prospect, that they will, ere long, unite in one indissoluble chain with the rest of the colonies. I cannot believe they will persist in such a conduct as must exclude them from the secure enjoyment of those heaven-descended immunities we are contending for. There is one argument I have frequently heard urged, which it may be of some use to invalidate. It is this, that if the mother country should be inclined to an accommodation of our disputes, we have by our rash procedure thrown an insurmountable obstacle in her way; we have made it disgraceful to her to comply with our requisitions, because they are proposed in a hostile manner. Our present measures, I have proved, are the only peaceable ones we could place the least confidence in. They are the least exceptionable, upon the score of irritating Great-Britain, of any our circumstances would permit. The congress have petitioned his Majesty for the redress of grievances. They have, no doubt, addressed him in the most humble, respectful and affectionate terms; assured him, of their own loyalty, and fidelity and of the loyalty and fidelity of his American subjects in general; endeavoured to convince him, that we have been misrepresented and abused; and expressed an earnest desire to see an amicable termination of the unhappy differences now existing. Can a pretext be wanting, in this case, to preserve the dignity of this parent state, and yet remove the complaints of the colonies? How easy would it be to overlook our particular agreements, and grant us redress in consequence of our petitions? It is easy to perceive there would be no difficulty in this respect. I have omitted many considerations, which might be adduced to shew the impolicy of Great-Britains, delaying to accommodate matters, and attempting to enforce submission by cutting off all external sources of trade. To say all the subject allows, would spin out this piece to an immoderate length; I shall, therefore, content myself with mentioning only three things more. First, it would be extremely hurtful to the commerce of Great-Britain to drive us to the necessity of laying a regular foundation for manufactories of our own; which, if once established, could not easily, if at all, be undermined, or abolished. Secondly, it would be very expensive to the nation to maintain a fleet for the purpose of blocking up our ports, and destroying our trade: nor could she interrupt our intercourse with foreign climes without, at the same time, retrenching her own revenues; for she must then lose the duties and customs upon the articles we are wont to export to, and import from them. Added to this, it would not be prudent to risk the displeasure of those nations, to whom our trade is useful and beneficial. And lastly, a perseverance in ill-treatment would naturally beget such deep-rooted animosities in America, as might never be eradicated; and which might operate to the prejudice of the empire to the latest period. Thus have I clearly proved, that the plan of opposition concerted by our congress is perfectly consonant with justice and sound policy; and will, in all human probability, secure our freedom against the assaults of our enemies. But, after all, it may be demanded why they have adopted a non-exportation; seeing many arguments tend to shew that a non-importation alone would accomplish the end desired? I answer, that the continuance of our exports is the only thing which could lessen, or retard the efficacy of a non-importation. It is not indeed probable it should do that to any great degree; but it was adviseable to provide against every possible obstruction. Besides this, the prospect of its taking place, and of the evils attendant upon it, will be a prevailing motive with the ministry to abandon their malignant schemes. It will also serve to convince them, that we are not afraid of putting ourselves to any inconveniencies, sooner than be the victims of their lawless ambition. The execution of this measure has been wisely deferred to a future time, because we have the greatest reason to think affairs will be settled without it, and because its consequences would be too fatal to be justified by any thing but absolute necessity. This necessity there will be, should not our disputes terminate before the time allotted for its commencement. Before I conclude this part of my address, I will answer two very singular interrogatories proposed by the Farmer, “Can we think (says he) to threaten, and bully, and frighten the supreme government of the nation into a compliance with our demands? Can we expect to force submission to our peevish and petulant humours, by exciting clamours and riots in England?” No, gentle Sir. We neither desire, nor endeavour to threaten, bully, or frighten any persons into a compliance with our demands. We have no peevish and petulant humours to be submitted to. All we aim at, is to convince your high and mighty masters, the ministry, that we are not such asses as to let them ride us as they please. We are determined to shew them, that we know the value of freedom; nor shall their rapacity extort, that inestimable jewel from us, without a manly and virtuous struggle. But for your part, sweet Sir! tho’ we cannot much applaud your wisdom, yet we are compelled to admire your valour, which leads you to hope you may be able to swear, threaten, bully and frighten all America into a compliance with your sinister designs. When properly accoutered and armed with your formidable hiccory cudgel, what may not the ministry expect from such a champion? alas! for the poor committee gentlemen, how I tremble when I reflect on the many wounds and scars they must receive from your tremendous arm! Alas! for their supporters and abettors; a very large part indeed of the continent; but what of that? they must all be soundly drubbed with that confounded hiccory cudgel; for surely you would not undertake to drub one of them, without knowing yourself able to treat all their friends and adherents in the same manner; since ’tis plain you would bring them all upon your back. I am now to address myself in particular to the Farmers of NewYork. My good countrymen, The reason I address myself to you, in particular, is, because I am one of your number, or connected with you in interest more than with any other branch of the community. I love to speak the truth, and would scorn to prejudice you in favour of what I have to say, by taking upon me a fictitious character as other people have done. I can venture to assure you, the true writer of the piece signed A. W. Farmer, is not in reality a Farmer. He is some ministerial emissary, that has assumed the name to deceive you, and make you swallow the intoxicating potion he has prepared for you. But I have a better opinion of you than to think he will be able to succeed. I am persuaded you love yourselves and children better than to let any designing men cheat you out of your liberty and property, to serve their own purposes. You would be a disgrace to your ancestors, and the bitterst enemies to yourselves and to your posterity, if you did not act like men, in protecting and defending those rights you have hitherto enjoyed. I say, my friends, I do not address you in particular, because I have any greater connexion with you, than with other people. I despise all false pretentions, and mean arts. Let those have recourse to dissimulation and falshood, who can’t defend their cause without it. ’Tis my maxim to let the plain naked truth speak for itself; and if men won’t listen to it, ’tis their own fault: they must be contented to suffer for it. I am neither merchant, nor farmer. I address you, because I wish well to my country, and of course to you, who are one chief support of it; and because an attempt has been made to lead you astray in particular. You are the men too who would lose most should you be foolish enough to counteract the prudent measures our worthy congress has taken for the preservation of our liberties. Those, who advise you to do it, are not your friends, but your greatest foes. They would have you made slaves, that they may pamper themselves with the fruits of your honest labour. ’Tis the Farmer who is most oppressed in all countries where slavery prevails. You have seen how clearly I have proved, that a non-importation and non-exportation are the only peaceable means in our power to save ourselves from the most dreadful state of slavery. I have shewn there is not the least hope, to be placed in any thing else. I have confuted all the principal cavils raised by the pretended Farmer, and I hope, before I finish, to satisfy you, that he has attempted to frighten you with the prospect of evils, which will never happen. This indeed I have, in a great measure, done already, by making appear the great probability, I may almost say certainty, that our measures will procure us the most speedy redress. Are you willing then to be slaves without a single struggle? Will you give up your freedom, or, which is the same thing, will you resign all security for your life and property, rather than endure some small present inconveniencies? Will you not take a little trouble to transmit the advantages you now possess to those, who are to come after you? I cannot doubt it. I would not suspect you of so much baseness and stupidity, as to suppose the contrary. Pray who can tell me why a farmer in America, is not as honest and good a man, as a farmer in England? or why has not the one as good a right to what he has earned by his labour, as the other? I can’t, for my life, see any distinction between them. And yet it seems the English farmers are to be governed and taxed by their own Assembly, or Parliament; and the American farmers are not. The former are to choose their own Representatives from among themselves, whose interest is connected with theirs, and over whom they have proper controul. The latter are to be loaded with taxes by men three thousand miles off; by men, who have no interest, or connexions among them; but whose interest it will be to burden them as much as possible; and over whom they cannot have the least restraint. How do you like this doctrine my friends? Are you ready to own the English farmers for your masters? Are you willing to acknowledge their right to take your property from you, and when they please? I know you scorn the thought. You had rather die, than submit to it. But some people try to make you believe, we are disputing about the foolish trifle of three pence duty upon tea. They may as well tell you, that black is white. Surely you can judge for yourselves. Is a dispute, whether the Parliament of Great-Britain shall make what laws, and impose what taxes they please upon us, or not; I say, is this a dispute about three pence duty upon tea? The man that affirms it, deserves to be laughed at. It is true, we are denying to pay the duty upon tea; but it is not for the value of the thing itself. It is because we cannot submit to that, without acknowledging the principle upon which it is founded, and that principle is a right to tax us in all cases whatsoever. You have, heretofore experienced the benefit of being taxed by your own Assemblies only. Your burdens are so light, that you scarcely feel them. You’d soon find the difference if you were once to let the Parliament have the management of these matters. How would you like to pay four shillings a year,* out of every pound your farms are worth, to be squandered, (at least a great part of it) upon ministerial tools and court sycophants? What would you think of giving a tenth part of the yearly products of your lands to the clergy? Would you not think it very hard to pay 10s. sterling per annum, for every wheel of your waggons and other carriages, a shilling or two for every pane of glass in your houses, and two or three shillings for every one of your hearths? I might mention taxes upon your mares, cows, and many other things; but those I have already mentioned are sufficient. Methinks I see you stare, and hear you ask how you could live, if you were to pay such heavy taxes? Indeed my friends I can’t tell you. You are to look out for that, and take care you do not run yourselves in the way of danger, by following the advice of those, who want to betray you. This you may depend upon, if ever you let the Parliament carry its point, you will have these and more to pay. Perhaps before long, your tables, and chairs, and platters, and dishes, and knives and forks, and every thing else would be taxed. Nay, I don’t know but they would find means to tax you for every child you got, and for every kiss your daughters received from their sweet-hearts, and God knows, that would soon ruin you. The people of England would pull down the Parliament House, if their present heavy burdens were not transferred from them to you. Indeed there is no reason to think the Parliament would have any inclination to spare you: The contrary is evident. But being ruined by taxes is not the worst you have to fear. What security would you have for your lives? How can any of you be sure you would have the free enjoyment of your religion long? would you put your religion in the power of any set of men living? Remember civil and religious liberty always go together, if the foundation of the one be sapped, the other will fall of course. Call to mind one of our sister colonies, Boston. Reflect upon the situation of Canada, and then tell me whether you are inclined to place any confidence in the justice and humanity of the parliament. The port of Boston is blocked up, and an army planted in the town. An act has been passed to alter its charter, to prohibit its assemblies, to license the murder of its inhabitants, and to convey them from their own country to Great Britain, to be tried for their lives. What was all this for? Just because a small number of people, provoked by an open and dangerous attack upon their liberties, destroyed a parcel of Tea belonging to the East India Company. It was not public but private property they destroyed. It was not the act of the whole province, but the act of a part of the citizens; instead of trying to discover the perpetrators, and commencing a legal prosecution against them; the parliament of Great-Britain interfered in an unprecedented manner, and inflicted a punishment upon a whole province, “untried, unheard, unconvicted of any crime.” This may be justice, but it looks so much like cruelty, that a man of a humane heart would be more apt to call it by the latter, than the former name. The affair of Canada, if possible, is still worse. The English laws have been superceded by the French laws. The Romish faith is made the established religion of the land, and his Majesty is placed at the head of it. The free exercise of the protestant faith depends upon the pleasure of the Governor and Council. The subject is divested of the right of trial by jury, and an innocent man may be imprisioned his whole life, without being able to obtain any trial at all. The parliament was not contented with introducing arbitrary power and popery in Canada, with its former limits, but they have annexed to it the vast tracts of land that surround all the colonies. Does not your blood run cold, to think an English parliament should pass an act for the establishment of arbitrary power and popery in such an extensive country? If they had had any regard to the freedom and happiness of mankind, they would never have done it. If they had been friends to the protestant cause, they would never have provided such a nursery for its great enemy: They would not have given such encouragement to popery. The thought of their conduct, in this particular shocks me. It must shock you too my friends. Beware of trusting yourselves to men, who are capable of such an action! They may as well establish popery in New-York and the other colonies as they did in Canada. They had no more right to do it there than here. Is it not better, I ask, to suffer a few present inconveniencies, than to put yourselves in the way of losing every thing that is precious. Your lives, your property, your religion are all at stake. I do my duty. I warn you of your danger. If you should still be so mad, as to bring destruction upon yourselves; if you should still neglect what you owe to God and man, you cannot plead ignorance in your excuse. Your consciences will reproach you for your folly, and your children’s children will curse you. You are told, the schemes of our Congress will ruin you. You are told, they have not considered your interest; but have neglected, or betrayed you. It is endeavoured to make you look upon some of the wisest and best men in the America, as rogues and rebels. What will not wicked men attempt! They will scruple nothing, that may serve their purposes. In truth, my friends, it is very unlikely any of us shall suffer much; but let the worst happen, the farmers will be better off, than other people. Many of those that made up the Congress have large possessions in land, and may, therefore be looked upon as farmers themselves. Can it be supposed, they would be careless about the farmer’s interest, when they could not injure that, without injuring themselves? You see the absurdity of such a supposition. The merchants and a great part of the tradesmen get their living by commerce. These are the people that would be hurt most, by putting a stop to it. As to the farmers, “they furnish food for the merchant and mechanic; the raw materials for most manufactures are the produce of their industry.” The merchants and mechanics are already dependent upon the farmers for their food, and if the non-importation should continue any time, they would be dependent upon them for their cloaths also. It is a false assertion, that the merchants have imported more than usual this year. That report has been raised by your enemies to poison your minds with evil suspicions. If our disputes be not settled within eighteen months, the goods we have among us will be consumed; and then the materials for making cloaths must be had from you. Manufactures must be promoted with vigour, and a high price will be given for your wool, flax and hemp. It will be your interest to pay the greatest care and attention to your sheep. Increase and improve the breed as much as possible: Kill them sparingly, and such only as will not be of use towards the increase and improvement of them. In a few months we shall know what we have to trust to. If matters be not accommodated by spring, enlarge the quantity of your flax and hemp. You will experience the benefit of it. All those articles will be very much wanted: They will bring a great deal higher price than they used to do. And while you are supplying the wants of the community, you will be enriching yourselves. Should we hereafter, find it necessary to stop our exports, you can apply more of your land to raising flax and hemp, and less of it to wheat, rye, &c. By which means, you will not have any of those latter articles to lie upon hand. There will be a consumption for as much of the former as you can raise, and the great demand they will be in, will make them very profitable to you. Patience good Mr. Critic! Kill them sparingly, I said, what objection have you to the phrase? You’ll tell me, it is not classical; but I affirm it is, and if you will condescend to look into Mr. Johnson’s dictionary, you will find I have his authority for it. Pray then, for the future, spare your wit, upon such occasions, otherwise the world will not be disposed to spare its ridicule. And though the man that spares nobody does not deserve to be spared himself, yet will I spare you, for the present, and proceed to things of more importance. Pardon me, my friends, for taking up your time with this digression; but I could not forbear stepping out of the way a little, to shew the world, I am as able a critic, and as good a punster as Mr. Farmer. I now return to the main point with pleasure. It is insinuated, “That the bustle about non-importation, &c. has its rise, not from patriotism, but selfishness;” and is only made by the merchants, that they may get a high price for their goods. By this time, I flatter myself you are convinced, that we are not disputing about trifles. It has been clearly proved to you, that we are contending for every thing dear in life, and that the measures adopted by the congress, are the only ones which can save us from ruin. This is sufficient to confute that insinuation. But to confirm it, let me observe to you, that the merchants have not been the foremost to bring about a non-importation. All the members of the congress were unanimous in it; and many of them were not merchants. The warmest advocates for it, every where, are not concerned in trade, and, as I before remarked, the traders will be the principal sufferers, if it should continue any time. But it is said it will not continue, because, “when the stores are like to become empty, they will have weight enough to break up the agreement.” I don’t think they would attempt it; but if they should, it is impossible a few mercenary men could have influence enough to make the whole body of people give up the only plan their circumstances admit of for the preservation of their rights, and, of course, to forfeit all they have been so long striving to secure. The making of a non-importation agreement did not depend upon the merchants; neither will the breaking of it depend upon them. The congress have provided against the breach of the non-importation, by the non-consumption agreement. They have resolved for themselves and us their constituents, “not to purchase, or use any East-India Tea whatsoever; nor any goods, wares, or merchandize, from Great-Britain or Ireland, imported after the first of December, nor molasses, &c. from the West Indies, nor wine from Madeira, or the Western Islands, nor foreign Indigo.” If we do not purchase or use these things, the merchant will have no inducement to import them. Hence you may perceive the reason of a non-consumption agreement. It is to put it out of the power of dishonest men, to break the non importation. Is this a slavish regulation? Or is it a hardship upon us to submit to it? Surely not. Every sensible, every good man must approve of it. Whoever tries to disaffect you to it, ought to meet with your contempt. Take notice, my friends, how these men are obliged to contradict themselves. In one place you are told, that all the bustle about non-importation, &c. has its rise, not from patriotism, but from selfishness, “or, in other words, that it is made by the merchants to get a higher price for their goods.” In another place it is said, that all we are doing is instigated by some turbulent men, who want to establish a republican form of government among us. The Congress is censured for appointing committees to carry their measures into execution, and directing them “to establish such further regulations, as they may think proper for that purpose.” Pray, did we not appoint our Delegates to make regulations for us? What signified making them, if they did not provide some persons to see them executed? Must a few bad men be left to do what they please, contrary to the general sense of the people, without any persons to controul them, or to look into their behaviour and mark them out to the public? The man that desires to screen his knavery from the public eye, will answer yes; but the honest man, that is determined to do nothing hurtful to his country, and who is conscious his actions will bear the light, will heartily answer no. The high prices of goods are held up to make you dissatisfied with the non-importation. If the argument on this head were true, it would be much better to subject yourselves to that disadvantage, for a time, than to bring upon yourselves all the mischiefs I have pointed out to you. Should you submit to claims of the Parliament, you will not only be oppressed with the taxes upon your lands, &c. which I have already mentioned; but you will have to pay heavy taxes upon all the goods we import from Great-Britain. Large duties will be laid upon them at home; and the merchants, of course, will have a greater price for them, or it would not be worth their while to carry on trade. The duty laid upon paper, glass, painter’s colours, &c. was a beginning of this kind. The present duty upon tea is preparatory to the imposition of duties upon all other articles. Do you think the Parliament would make such a serious matter of three pence a pound upon tea, if it intended to stop there? It is absurd to imagine it. You would soon find your mistake if you did. For fear of paying somewhat a higher price to the merchants for a year or two, you would have to pay an endless list of taxes, within and without, as long as you live, and your children after you. But I trust, there is no danger that the prices of goods will rise much, if at all. The same congress that put a stop to the importation of them, has also forbid raising the prices of them. The same committee that is to regulate the one, is also to regulate the other. All care will be taken to give no cause of dissatisfaction. Confide in the men whom you, and the rest of the continent have chosen the guardians of our common liberties. They are men of sense and virtue. They will do nothing but what is really necessary for the security of your lives and properties. A sad pother is made too about prohibiting the exportation of sheep, without excepting weathers. The poor Farmer is at a mighty loss to know how weathers can improve, or increase the breed. Truly I am not such a conjurer, as to be able to inform him; but if you please, my friends, I can give you two pretty good reasons, why the congress has not excepted weathers. One is, that for some time, we shall have occasion for all the wool we can raise; so that it would be imprudent to export sheep of any kind: and the other is, that, if you confine yourself chiefly to killing weathers, as you ought to do, you will have none to export. The gentleman who made the objection, must have known these things, as well as myself; but he loves to crack a jest, and could not pass by so fair an opportunity. He takes notice of the first of these reasons himself; but in order to weaken its force, cries, “let me ask you, brother farmers, which of you would keep a flock of sheep, barely, for the sake of their wool?” To this he answers, “not one of you. If you cannot sell your sheep to advantage, at a certain age, you cannot keep them to any profit.” He thinks, because he calls you brother farmers, that he can cajole you into believing what he pleases; but you are not the fools he takes you for. You know what is for your own interest better than he can tell you. And we all know, that in a little time, if our affairs be not settled, the demand for wool will be very great. You will be able to obtain such a price, as will make it worth your while to bestow the greatest attention upon your sheep. In another place, this crafty writer tells you, that, “from the day our exports, from this province are stopped, the farmers may date the commencement of their ruin.” He asks, “will the shop-keeper give you his goods? will the weaver, shoe-maker, black-smith, carpenter work for you without pay?” I make no doubt, you are satisfied, from what I have said, that we shall never have occasion to stop our exports; but if things turn out contrary to our expectation, and it should become necessary to take that step, you will find no difficulty in getting what you want from the merchants and mechanics. They will not be able to do without you, and, consequently, they cannot refuse to supply you with what you stand in need of from them. Where will the merchants and mechanics get food and materials for clothing, if not from the farmer? And if they are dependent upon you, for those two grand supports of life, how can they withold what they have from you? I repeat it (my friends) we shall know, how matters are like to be settled by the spring. If our disputes be not terminated to our satisfaction by that time, it will [be] your business to plant large parts of your lands with flax and hemp. Those articles will be wanted for manufactures, and they will yield you a greater profit than any thing else. In the interim, take good care of your sheep. I heartily concur with the farmer, in condemning all illicit trade. Perjury is, no doubt, a most heineous and detestable crime; and for my part, I had rather suffer any thing, than have my wants relieved at the expence of truth and integrity. I know, there are many pretended friends to liberty, who will take offence at this declaration; but I speak the sentiments of my heart without reserve. I do not write for a party. I should scorn to be of any. All I say, is from a disinterested regard to the public weal. The congress, I am persuaded, were of the same opinion: They, like honest men, have, as much as was in their power, provided against this kind of trade, by agreeing to use no East-India tea whatever, after the first day of March next. I shall now consider what has been said, with respect to the payment of debts, and stopping of the courts of justice. Let what will happen, it will be your own faults, if you are not able to pay your debts. I have told you, in what manner you may make as much out of your lands as ever: by bestowing more of your attention upon raising flax and hemp, and less upon other things. Those articles (as I have more than once observed) will be in the highest demand: There will be no doing without them; and, of course, you will be able to get a very profitable price for them. How can it be, that the farmers should be at a loss for money to pay their debts, at a time, when the whole community must buy, not only their food, but all the materials for their cloaths from them? You have no reason to be uneasy on that account. As to the courts of justice, no violence can, or will be used to shut them up; but, if it should be found necessary, we may enter into solemn agreement to cease from all litigations at law, except in particular cases. We may regulate law suits, in such a manner, as to prevent any mischief that might arise from them. Restrictions may be laid on to hinder merciless creditors, from taking advantage of the times, to oppress and ruin their debtors but, at the same time, not to put it in the power of the debtors, wantonly, to withold their just dues from their creditors, when they are able to pay them. The law ruins many a good honest family. Disputes may be settled in a more friendly way; one or two virtuous neighbours may be chosen by each party to decide them. If the next congress should think any regulations concerning the courts of justice requisite, they will make them; and proper persons will be appointed to carry them into execution, and to see, that no individuals deviate from them. It will be your duty to elect persons, whose fidelity and zeal for your interest you can’t depend upon, to represent you in that congress; which is to meet at Philadelphia, in May ensuing. The Farmer cries, “tell me not of delegates, congresses committees, mobs, riots, insurrections, associations; a plague on them all. Give me the steady, uniform, unbiassed influence of the courts of justice. I have been happy under their protection, and I trust in God, I shall be so again.” I say, tell me not of the British Commons, Lords, ministry, ministerial tools, placemen, pensioners, parasites. I scorn to let my life and property depend upon the pleasure of any of them. Give me the steady, uniform, unshaken security of constitutional freedom; give me the right to be tried by a jury of my own neighbours, and to be taxed by my own representatives only. What will become of the law and courts of justice without this? The shadow may remain, but the substance will be gone. I would die to preserve the law upon a solid foundation; but take away liberty, and the foundation is destroyed. The last thing I shall take notice of, is the complaint of the Farmer, that the congress will not allow you “a dish of tea to please your wives with, nor a glass of Madeira to cheer your spirits, nor a spoonful of molasses, to sweeten your butter milk with.” You would have a right to complain, if the use of these things had been forbidden to you alone; but it has been equally forbidden to all sorts of people. The members of the congress themselves are no more permitted to please their wives with a dish of tea, or to cheer their spirits with a glass of wine, or to sweeten their butter milk with a spoonful of molasses, than you are. They are upon a footing with you in this respect. By him! but, with your leave, my friends, we’ll try, if we can, to do without swearing. I say, it is enough to make a man mad, to hear such ridiculous quibbles offered instead of sound argument; but so it is, the piece I am writing against contains nothing else. When a man grows warm, he has a confounded itch for swearing. I have been going, above twenty times, to rap out an oath, by him that made me, but I have checked myself, with this reflection, that it is rather unmannerly, to treat him that made us with so much freedom. Thus have I examined and confuted, all the cavils and objections, of any consequence, stated by this Farmer. I have only passed over such things, as are of little weight, the fallacy of which will easily appear. I have shewn, that the congress have neither “ignorantly misunderstood, carelessly neglected, nor basely betrayed you;” but that they have desired and recommended the only effectual means to preserve your invaluable privileges. I have proved, that their measures cannot fail of success; but will procure the most speedy relief for us. I have also proved, that the farmers are the people who would suffer least, should we be obliged to carry all our measures into execution. Will you then, my friends, allow yourselves, to be duped by this artful enemy? will you follow his advices, disregard the authority of your congress, and bring ruin on yourselves and posterity? will you act in such a manner as to deserve the hatred and resentment of all the rest of America? I am sure you will not. I should be sorry to think, any of my countrymen would be so mean, so blind to their own interest, so lost to every generous and manly feeling. The sort of men I am opposing give you fair words, to persuade you to serve their own turns; but they think and speak of you in common in a very disrespectful manner. I have heard some of their party talk of you, as the most ignorant and mean-spirited set of people in the world. They say, that you have no sense of honour or generosity; that you don’t care a farthing about your country, children or any body else, but yourselves; and that you are so ignorant, as not to be able to look beyond the present; so that if you can once be persuaded to believe the measures of your congress will involve you in some little present perplexities, you will be glad to do any thing to avoid them; without considering the much greater miseries that await you at a little distance off. This is the character they give of you. Bad men are apt to paint others like themselves. For my part, I will never entertain such an opinion of you, unless you should verify their words, by wilfully falling into the pit they have prepared for you. I flatter myself you will convince them of their error, by shewing the world, you are capable of judging what is right and left, and have resolution to pursue it. All I ask is, that you will judge for yourselves. I don’t desire you to take my opinion or any man’s opinion, as the guide of your actions. I have stated a number of plain arguments; I have supported them with several well-known facts: It is your business to draw a conclusion and act accordingly. I caution you, again and again, to beware of the men who advise you to forsake the plain path, marked out for you by the congress. They only mean to deceive and betray you. Our representatives in general assembly cannot take any wiser or better course to settle our differences, than our representatives in the continental congress have taken. If you join with the rest of America in the same common measure, you will be sure to preserve your liberties inviolate; but if you separate from them, and seek for redress alone, and unseconded, you will certainly fall a prey to your enemies, and repent your folly as long as you live. May God give you wisdom to see what is your true interest, and inspire you with becoming zeal for the cause of virtue and mankind. A Friend to America. Source: https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-01-02-0054

Resolution of the First Continental Congress to send a Petition to Repeal the Intolerable Acts October 26, 1774 To the King's Most Excellent Majesty: Most Gracious Sovereign: We, your Majesty's faithful subjects of the Colonies of New-Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New-York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, the Counties of New-Castle, Kent, and Sussex, on Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina, in behalf of ourselves and the inhabitants of those Colonies who have deputed us to represent them in General Congress, by this our humble Petition, beg leave to lay our Grievances before the Throne. A Standing Army has been kept in these Colonies ever since the conclusion of the late war, without the consent of our Assemblies; and this Army, with a considerable Naval armament, has been employed to enforce the collection of Taxes. The authority of the Commander-in-Chief, and under him of the Brigadiers General has, in time of peace, been rendered supreme in all the Civil Governments in America. The Commander-in-chief of all your Majesty's Forces in North America, has, in time of peace, been appointed Governour of a Colony. The charges of usual offices have been greatly increased; and new, expensive, and oppressive offices have been multiplied. The Judges of Admiralty and Vice Admiralty Courts are empowered to receive their salaries and fees from the effects condemned by themselves. The Officers of the Customs are empowered to break open and enter houses, without the authority of any Civil Magistrate, founded on legal information. The Judges of Courts of Common Law have been made entirely dependent on one part of the Legislature for their salaries, as well as for the duration of their commissions. Counsellors, holding their commissions during pleasure, exercise Legislative authority. Humble and reasonable Petitions from the Representatives of the People, have been fruitless. The Agents of the People have been discountenanced, and Governours have been instructed to prevent the payment of their salaries. Assemblies have been repeatedly and injuriously dissolved. Commerce has been burthened with many useless and oppressive restrictions. By several Acts of Parliament made in the fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth years of your Majesty's Reign, Duties are imposed on us for the purpose of raising a Revenue; and the powers of Admiralty and Vice Admiralty Courts are extended beyond their ancient limits, whereby our property is taken from us without our consent; the trial by jury, in many civil cases, is abolished; enormous forfeitures are incurred for slight offences; vexatious informers are exempted from paying damages, to which they are justly liable, and oppressive security is required from owners before they are allowed to defend their right. Both Houses of Parliament have resolved, that Colonists may be tried in England for offences alleged to have been committed in America, by virtue of a Statute passed in the thirty-fifth year of Henry the Eighth, and, in consequence thereof, attempts have been made to enforce that Statute. A Statute was passed in the twelfth year of your Majesty's Reign, directing that persons charged with committing any offence therein described, in any place out of the Realm, may be indicted and tried for the same in any Shire or County within the Realm, whereby the inhabitants of these Colonies may, in sundry cases, by that Statute made capital, be deprived of a trial by their peers of the vicinage. In the last sessions of Parliament an Act was passed for blocking up the Harbour of Boston; another empowering the Governour of the Massachusetts Bay to send persons indicted for murder in that Province, to another Colony, or even to Great Britain, for trial, whereby such offenders may escape legal punishment; a third for altering the chartered Constitution of Government in that Province; and a fourth for extending the limits of Quebec, abolishing the English and restoring the French laws, whereby great numbers of British Freemen are subjected to the latter, and establishing an absolute Government and the Roman Catholick Religion throughout those vast regions that border on the Westerly and Northerly boundaries of the free Protestant English settlements; and a fifth, for the better providing suitable Quarters for Officers and Soldiers in his Majesty's service in North America. To a Sovereign, who glories in the name of Briton, the bare recital of these Acts must, we presume, justify the loyal subjects, who fly to the foot of his Throne, and implore his clemency for protection against them. From this destructive system of Colony Administration, adopted since the conclusion of the last war, have flowed those distresses, dangers, fears, and jealousies, that over whelm your Majesty's dutiful Colonists with affliction; and we defy our most subtle and inveterate enemies to trace the unhappy differences between Great Britain and these Colonies, from an earlier period, or from other causes than we have assigned. Had they proceeded on our part from a restless levity of temper, unjust impulses of ambition, or artful suggestions of seditious persons, we should merit the opprobrious terms frequently bestowed upon us by those we revere. But so far from promoting innovations, we have only opposed them; and can be charged with no offence, unless it be one to receive injuries and be sensible of them. Had our Creator been pleased to give us existence in a land of slavery, the sense of our condition might have been mitigated by ignorance and habit. But, thanks be to his adorable goodness, we were born the heirs of freedom, and ever enjoyed our right under the auspices of your Royal ancestors, whose family was seated on the British Throne to rescue and secure a pious and gallant Nation from the Popery and despotism of a superstitious and inexorable tyrant. Your Majesty, we are confident, justly rejoices that your title to the Crown is thus founded on the title of your people to liberty; and, therefore, we doubt not but your royal wisdom must approve the sensibility that teaches your subjects anxiously to guard the blessing they received from Divine Providence, and thereby to prove the performance of that compact which elevated the illustrious House of Brunswick to the imperial dignity it now possesses. The apprehension of being degraded into a state of servitude, from the pre-eminent rank of English freemen, while our minds retain the strongest love of liberty, and clearly foresee the miseries preparing for us and our posterity, excites emotions in our breats which, though we cannot describe, we should not wish to conceal. Feeling as men, and thinking as subjects, in the manner we do, silence would be disloyalty. By giving this faithful information, we do all in our power to promote the great objects of your Royal cares, the tranquillity of your Government, and the welfare of your people. Duty to your Majesty, and regard for the preservation of ourselves and our posterity, the primary obligations of nature and of society, command us to entreat your Royal attention; and, as your Majesty enjoys the signal distinction of reigning over freemen, we apprehend the language of freemen cannot be displeasing. Your Royal indignation, we hope, will rather fall on those designing and dangerous men, who, daringly interposing themselves between your Royal person and your faithful subjects, and for several years past incessantly employed to dissolve the bonds of society, by abusing your Majesty's authority, misrepresenting your American subjects, and prosecuting the most desperate and irritating projects of oppression, have at length compelled us, by the force of accumulated injuries, too severe to be any longer tolerable, to disturb your Majesty's repose by our complaints. These sentiments are extorted from hearts that much more willingly would bleed in your Majesty's service. Yet, so greatly have we been misrepresented, that a necessity has been alleged of taking our property from us without our consent, "to defray the charge of the administration of justice, the support of Civil Government, and the defence, protection, and security of the Colonies." But we beg leave to assure your Majesty that such provision has been and will be made for defraying the two first artiticles, as has been and shall be judged by the Legislatures of the several Colonies just and suitable to their respective circumstances; and, for the defence, protection, and security of the Colonies, their Militias, if properly regulated, as they earnestly desire may immediately be done, would be fully sufficient, at least in times of peace; and, in case of war, your faithful Colonists will be ready and willing, as they ever have been, when constitutionally required, to demonstrate their loyalty to your Majesty, by exerting their most strenuous efforts in granting supplies and raising forces. Yielding to no British subjects in affectionate attachment to your Majesty's person, family, and Government, we too dearly prize the privilege of expressing that attachment by those proofs that are honourable to the Prince who receives them, and to the People who give them, ever to resign it to any body of men upon earth. Had we been permitted to enjoy, in quiet, the inheritance left us by our forefathers, we should, at this time, have been peaceably, cheerfully, and usefully employed in recommending ourselves, by every testimony of devotion, to your Majesty, and of veneration to the state, from which we derive our origin. But though now exposed to unexpected and unnatural scenes of distress by a contention with that Nation in whose parental guidance on all important affairs, we have hitherto, with filial reverence, constantly trusted, and therefore can derive no instruction in our present unhappy and perplexing circumstances from any former experience; yet, we doubt not, the purity of our intention, and the integrity of our conduct, will justify us at that grand tribunal before which all mankind must submit to judgment. We ask but for Peace, Liberty, and Safety. We wish not a diminution of the prerogative, nor do we solicit the grant of any new right in our favour. Your Royal authority over us, and our connection with Great Britain, we shall always carefully and zealously endeavour to support and maintain. Filled with sentiments of duty to your Majesty, and of affection to our parent state, deeply impressed by our education, and strongly confirmed by our reason, and anxious to evince the sincerity of these dispositions, we present this Petition only to obtain redress of Grievances, and relief from fears and jealousies, occasioned by the system of Statutes and Regulations adopted since the close of the late war, for raising a Revenue in America—extending the powers of Courts of Admiralty and Vice Admiralty—trying persons in Great Britain for offences alleged to be committed in America—affecting the Province of Massachusetts Bay—and altering the Government and extending the limits of Quebec; by the abolition of which system the harmony between Great Britain and these Colonies, so necessary to the happiness of both, and so ardently desired by the latter, and the usual intercourses will be immediately restored. In the magnanimity and justice of your Majesty and Parliament we confide for a redress of our other grievances, trusting, that, when the causes of our apprehensions are removed, our future conduct will prove us not unworthy of the regard we have been accustomed in our happier days to enjoy. For, appealing to that Being, who searches thoroughly the hearts of his creatures, we solemnly profess, that our Councils have been influenced by no other motive than a dread of impending destruction. Permit us then, most gracious Sovereign, in the name of all your faithful People in America, with the utmost humility, to implore you, for the honour of Almighty God, whose pure Religion our enemies are undermining; for your glory, which can be advanced only by rendering your subjects happy, and keeping them united; for the interests of your family depending on an adherence to the principles that enthroned it; for the safety and welfare of your Kingdoms and Dominions, threatened with almost unavoidable dangers and distresses, that your Majesty, as the loving Father of your whole People, connected by the same bands of Law, Loyalty, Faith, and Blood, though dwelling in various countries, will not suffer the transcendent relation formed by these ties to be farther violated, in uncertain expectation of effects, that, if attained, never can compensate for the calamities through which they must be gained. We therefore most earnestly beseech your Majesty, that your Royal authority and interposition may be used for our relief, and that a gracious Answer may be given to this Petition. That your Majesty may enjoy every felicity through a long and glorious Reign, over loyal and happy subjects, and that your descendants may inherit your prosperity and Dominions till time shall be no more, is, and always will be, our sincere and fervent prayer. New-Hampshire; John Sullivan, Nathaniel Folsom. Massachusetts Bay; Thomas Cushing, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine. Rhode-Island;Stephen Hopkins, Samuel Ward. Connecticut; Eliphalet Dyer, Roger Sherman, Silas Deane. New-York; Philip Livingston, John Alsop, Isaac Low, James Duane, John Jay, William Floyd, Henry Wisner, Simon Boerum. New-Jersey; William Livingston, John De Hart, Stephen Crane, Richard Smith. Pennsylvania; Edward Biddle, Joseph Galloway, John Dickinson, John Morton, Thomas Mifflin, George Ross, Charles Humphreys. Delaware Government; Cæsar Rodney, Thomas McKean, George Read. Maryland; Matthew Tilghman, Thomas Johnson, Junr. William Paca, Samuel Chase. Virginia; Richard Henry Lee, Patrick Henry George Washington, Edmund Pendleton, Richard Bland, Benjamin Harrison. North Carolina; William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, Richard Caswell. South Carolina; Thomas Lynch, Christopher Gadsden, John Rutledge, Edward Rutledge. Source: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Petition_to_the_King

Declaration and Resolves of the First Continental Congress OCTOBER 14, 1774 Whereas, since the close of the last war, the British parliament, claiming a power, of right, to bind the people of America by statutes in all cases whatsoever, hath, in some acts, expressly imposed taxes on them, and in others, under various presences, but in fact for the purpose of raising a revenue, hath imposed rates and duties payable in these colonies, established a board of commissioners, with unconstitutional powers, and extended the jurisdiction of courts of admiralty, not only for collecting the said duties, but for the trial of causes merely arising within the body of a county: And whereas, in consequence of other statutes, judges, who before held only estates at will in their offices, have been made dependant on the crown alone for their salaries, and standing armies kept in times of peace: And whereas it has lately been resolved in parliament, that by force of a statute, made in the thirty-fifth year of the reign of King Henry the Eighth, colonists may be transported to England, and tried there upon accusations for treasons and misprisions, or concealments of treasons committed in the colonies, and by a late statute, such trials have been directed in cases therein mentioned: And whereas, in the last session of parliament, three statutes were made; one entitled, "An act to discontinue, in such manner and for such time as are therein mentioned, the landing and discharging, lading, or shipping of goods, wares and merchandise, at the town, and within the harbour of Boston, in the province of Massachusetts-Bay in New England;" another entitled, "An act for the better regulating the government of the province of Massachusetts-Bay in New England;" and another entitled, "An act for the impartial administration of justice, in the cases of persons questioned for any act done by them in the execution of the law, or for the suppression of riots and tumults, in the province of the Massachusetts-Bay in New England;" and another statute was then made, "for making more effectual provision for the government of the province of Quebec, etc." All which statutes are impolitic, unjust, and cruel, as well as unconstitutional, and most dangerous and destructive of American rights: And whereas, assemblies have been frequently dissolved, contrary to the rights of the people, when they attempted to deliberate on grievances; and their dutiful, humble, loyal, and reasonable petitions to the crown for redress, have been repeatedly treated with contempt, by his Majesty's ministers of state: The good people of the several colonies of New-Hampshire, Massachusetts-Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New-York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Newcastle, Kent, and Sussex on Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North- Carolina and South-Carolina, justly alarmed at these arbitrary proceedings of parliament and administration, have severally elected, constituted, and appointed deputies to meet, and sit in general Congress, in the city of Philadelphia, in order to obtain such establishment, as that their religion, laws, and liberties, may not be subverted: Whereupon the deputies so appointed being now assembled, in a full and free representation of these colonies, taking into their most serious consideration, the best means of attaining the ends aforesaid, do, in the first place, as Englishmen, their ancestors in like cases have usually done, for asserting and vindicating their rights and liberties, DECLARE, That the inhabitants of the English colonies in North-America, by the immutable laws of nature, the principles of the English constitution, and the several charters or compacts, have the following RIGHTS: Resolved, N.C.D. 1. That they are entitled to life, liberty and property: and they have never ceded to any foreign power whatever, a right to dispose of either without their consent. Resolved, N.C.D. 2. That our ancestors, who first settled these colonies, were at the time of their emigration from the mother country, entitled to all the rights, liberties, and immunities of free and natural- born subjects, within the realm of England. Resolved, N.C.D. 3. That by such emigration they by no means forfeited, surrendered, or lost any of those rights, but that they were, and their descendants now are, entitled to the exercise and enjoyment of all such of them, as their local and other circumstances enable them to exercise and enjoy. Resolved, 4. That the foundation of English liberty, and of all free government, is a right in the people to participate in their legislative council: and as the English colonists are not represented, and from their local and other circumstances, cannot properly be represented in the British parliament, they are entitled to a free and exclusive power of legislation in their several provincial legislatures, where their right of representation can alone be preserved, in all cases of taxation and internal polity, subject only to the negative of their sovereign, in such manner as has been heretofore used and accustomed: But, from the necessity of the case, and a regard to the mutual interest of both countries, we cheerfully consent to the operation of such acts of the British parliament, as are bonfide, restrained to the regulation of our external commerce, for the purpose of securing the commercial advantages of the whole empire to the mother country, and the commercial benefits of its respective members; excluding every idea of taxation internal or external, for raising a revenue on the subjects, in America, without their consent. Resolved, N.C.D. 5. That the respective colonies are entitled to the common law of England, and more especially to the great and inestimable privilege of being tried by their peers of the vicinage, according to the course of that law. Resolved, N.C.D. 6. That they are entitled to the benefit of such of the English statutes, as existed at the time of their colonization; and which they have, by experience, respectively found to be applicable to their several local and other circumstances. Resolved, N.C.D. 7. That these, his Majesty's colonies, are likewise entitled to all the immunities and privileges granted and confirmed to them by royal charters, or secured by their several codes of provincial laws. Resolved, N.C.D. 8. That they have a right peaceably to assemble, consider of their grievances, and petition the king; and that all prosecutions, prohibitory proclamations, and commitments for the same, are illegal. Resolved, N.C.D. 9. That the keeping a standing army in these colonies, in times of peace, without the consent of the legislature of that colony, in which such army is kept, is against law. Resolved, N.C.D. 10. It is indispensably necessary to good government, and rendered essential by the English constitution, that the constituent branches of the legislature be independent of each other; that, therefore, the exercise of legislative power in several colonies, by a council appointed, during pleasure, by the crown, is unconstitutional, dangerous and destructive to the freedom of American legislation. All and each of which the aforesaid deputies, in behalf of themselves, and their constituents, do claim, demand, and insist on, as their indubitable rights and liberties, which cannot be legally taken from them, altered or abridged by any power whatever, without their own consent, by their representatives in their several provincial legislature. In the course of our inquiry, we find many infringements and violations of the foregoing rights, which, from an ardent desire, that harmony and mutual intercourse of affection and interest may be restored, we pass over for the present, and proceed to state such acts and measures as have been adopted since the last war, which demonstrate a system formed to enslave America. Resolved, N.C.D. That the following acts of parliament are infringements and violations of the rights of the colonists; and that the repeal of them is essentially necessary, in order to restore harmony between Great Britain and the American colonies, viz. The several acts of Geo. III. ch. 15, and ch. 34.-5 Geo. III. ch.25.-6 Geo. ch. 52.-7 Geo.III. ch. 41 and ch. 46.-8 Geo. III. ch. 22. which impose duties for the purpose of raising a revenue in America, extend the power of the admiralty courts beyond their ancient limits, deprive the American subject of trial by jury, authorize the judges certificate to indemnify the prosecutor from damages, that he might otherwise be liable to, requiring oppressive security from a claimant of ships and goods seized, before he shall be allowed to defend his property, and are subversive of American rights. Also 12 Geo. III. ch. 24, intituled, "An act for the better securing his majesty's dockyards, magazines, ships, ammunition, and stores," which declares a new offence in America, and deprives the American subject of a constitutional trial by jury of the vicinage, by authorizing the trial of any person, charged with the committing any offence described in the said act, out of the realm, to be indicted and tried for the same in any shire or county within the realm. Also the three acts passed in the last session of parliament, for stopping the port and blocking up the harbour of Boston, for altering the charter and government of Massachusetts-Bay, and that which is entitled, "An act for the better administration of justice, etc." Also the act passed in the same session for establishing the Roman Catholic religion, in the province of Quebec, abolishing the equitable system of English laws, and erecting a tyranny there, to the great danger (from so total a dissimilarity of religion, law and government) of the neighboring British colonies, by the assistance of whose blood and treasure the said country was conquered from France. Also the act passed in the same session, for the better providing suitable quarters for officers and soldiers in his majesty's service, in North-America. Also, that the keeping a standing army in several of these colonies, in time of peace, without the consent of the legislature of that colony, in which such army is kept, is against law. To these grievous acts and measures, Americans cannot submit, but in hopes their fellow subjects in Great Britain will, on a revision of them, restore us to that state, in which both countries found happiness and prosperity, we have for the present, only resolved to pursue the following peaceable measures: 1. To enter into a non-importation, non-consumption, and non-exportation agreement or association. 2. To prepare an address to the people of Great-Britain, and a memorial to the inhabitants of British America: and 3. To prepare a loyal address to his majesty, agreeable to resolutions already entered into. Source: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/resolves.asp

To the People of Great Britain, from the Delegates appointed by the several English Colonies of New-Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New-York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, the Lower Counties on Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina, to consider of their Grievances in General Congress, at Philadelphia, September 5, 1774. Friends and Fellow-Subjects: When a Nation, lead to greatness by the hand of Liberty, and possessed of all the Glory that heroism, munificence, and humanity can bestow, descends to the ungrateful task of forging chains for her friends and children, and instead of giving support to Freedom, turns advocate for Slavery and Oppression, there is reason to suspect she has either ceased to be virtuous, or been extremely negligent in the appointment of her Rulers. In almost every age, in repeated conflicts, in long and bloody wars, as well civil as foreign, against many and powerful Nations, against the open assaults of enemies, and the more dangerous treachery of friends, have the inhabitants of your Island, your great and glorious ancestors, maintained their independence, and transmitted the rights of Men, and the blessings of Liberty, to you, their posterity. Be not surprised therefore, that we, who are descended from the same common ancestors; that we, whose forefathers participated in all the rights, the liberties, and the Constitution you so justly boast of, and who have carefully conveyed the same fair inheritance to us, guarantied by the plighted faith of Government, and the most solemn compacts with British Sovereigns, should refuse to surrender them to men who found their claims on no principles of reason, and who prosecute them with a design, that by having our lives and property in their power, they may with the greater facility enslave you. The cause of America is now the object of universal attention; it has at length become very serious. This unhappy country has not only been oppressed, but abused and misrepresented; and the duty we owe to ourselves and posterity, to your interest, and the general welfare of the British Empire, leads us to address you on this very important subject. Know then, That we consider ourselves, and do insist, that we are and ought to be as free as our fellow-subjects in Britain, and that no power on earth has a right to take our property from us without our consent. That we claim all the benefits secured to the subject by the English Constitution, and particularly that inestimable one of Trial by Jury. That we hold it essential to English liberty, that no man be condemned unheard, or punished for supposed offences, without having an opportunity of making his defence. That we think the Legislature of Great Britain is not authorized by the Constitution to establish a Religion fraught with sanguinary and impious tenets, or to erect an arbitrary form of Government in any quarter of the globe. These rights we, as well as you, deem sacred; and yet, sacred as they are, they have, with many others, been repeatedly and flagrantly violated. Are not the Proprietors of the soil of Great Britain lords of their own property? Can it be taken from them without their consent? Will they yield it to the arbitrary disposal of any man, or number of men whatever? You know they will not. Why then are the Proprietors of the soil of America less lords of their property than you are of yours? Or why should they submit it to the disposal of your Parliament, or any other Parliament or Council in the world, not of their election? Can the intervention of the sea that divides us cause disparity in rights? Or can any reason be given, why English subjects, who live three thousand miles from the Royal Palace, should enjoy less liberty than those who are three hundred miles distant from it? Reason looks with indignation on such distinctions, and Freemen can never perceive their propriety. And yet, however chimerical and unjust such discriminations are, the Parliament assert that they have a right to bind us in all cases, without exception, whether we consent or not; that they may take and use our property when and in what manner they please; that we are pensioners on their bounty for all that we possess, and can hold it no longer than they vouchsafe to permit. Such declarations we consider as heresies in English politicks, and which can no more operate to deprive us of our property, than the interdicts of the Pope can divest Kings of sceptres which the laws of the land and the voice of the people have placed in their hands. At the conclusion of the late war—a war rendered glorious by the abilities and integrity of a Minister, to whose efforts the British Empire owes its safety and its fame: at the conclusion of this war, which was succeeded by an inglorious peace, formed under the auspices of a Minister of principles and of a family unfriendly to the Protestant cause, and inimical to liberty; we say, at this period, and under the influence of that man, a plan for enslaving your fellow-subjects in America was concerted, and has ever since been pertinaciously carrying into execution. Prior to this era you were content with drawing from us the wealth produced by our commerce. You restrained our trade in every way that could conduce to your emolument. You exercised unbounded sovereignty over the sea. You named the Ports and Nations to which alone our merchandise should be carried, and with whom alone we should trade; and though some of these restrictions were grievous, we nevertheless did not complain. We looked up to you as to our parent state, to which we were bound by the strongest ties, and were happy in being instrumental to your prosperity and your grandeur. We call upon you yourselves to witness our loyalty and attachment to the common interest of the whole Empire. Did we not, in the last war, add all the strength of this vast Continent to the force which repelled our common enemy? Did we not leave our native shores, and meet disease and death, to promote the success of British arms in foreign climates? Did you not thank us for our zeal, and even reimburse us large sums of money, which you confessed we had advanced beyond our proportion, and far beyond our abilities? You did. To what causes, then, are we to attribute the sudden change of treatment, and that system of slavery which was prepared for us at the restoration of peace? Before we had recovered from the distresses which ever attend war, an attempt was made to drain this country of all its money, by the oppressive Stamp Act. Paint, Glass, and other commodities, which you would not permit us to purchase of other Nations, were taxed. Nay, although no Wine is made in any country subject to the British state, you prohibited our procuring it of foreigners, without paying a tax imposed by your Parliament, on all we imported. These and many other impositions were laid upon us most unjustly and unconstitutionally, for the express purpose of raising a Revenue. In order to silence complaint, it was, indeed, provided that this revenue should be expended in America, for its protection and defence. These exactions however can receive no justification from a pretended necessity of protecting and defending us; they are lavishly squandered on Court favourites and Ministerial dependants, generally avowed enemies to America, and employing themselves, by partial representations, to traduce and embroil the Colonies. For the necessary support of Government here we ever were and ever shall be ready to provide. And whenever the exigencies of the state may require it, we shall, as we have heretofore done, cheerfully contribute our full proportion of men and money. To enforce this unconstitutional and unjust scheme of taxation, every fence that the wisdom of our British ancestors had carefully erected against arbitrary power, has been violently thrown down in America; and the inestimable right of Trial by Jury taken away in cases that touch both life and property. It was ordained, that whenever offences should be committed in the Colonies against particular Acts imposing various duties and restrictions upon trade, the prosecutor might bring his action for the penalties in the Courts of Admiralty; by which means the subject lost the advantage of being tried by an honest uninfluenced jury of the vicinage, and was subjected to the sad necessity of being judged by a single man—a creature of the Crown; and, according to the course of a law, which exempts the prosecutor from the trouble of proving his accusation, and obliges the defendant either to evince his innocence, or to suffer. To give this new Judicatory the greater importance, and as if with design to protect false accusers, it is further provided, that the Judge's certificate of there having been probable causes of seizure and prosecution, shall protect the prosecutor from actions at common law for recovery of damages. By the course of our law, offences committed in such of the British Dominions in which Courts are established and justice duly and regularly administered, shall be there tried by a jury of the vicinage. There the offenders and the witnesses are known, and the degree of credibility to be given to their testimony, can be ascertained. In all these Colonies justice is regularly and impartially administered, and yet, by the construction of some, and the direction of other Acts of Parliament, offenders are to be taken by force, together with all such persons as may be pointed out as witnesses, and carried to England, there to be tried in a distant land by a jury of strangers, and subject to all the disadvantages that result from want of friends, want of witnesses, and want of money. When the design of raising a Revenue from the Duties imposed on the importation of Tea into America, had, in a great measure, been rendered abortive, by our ceasing to import that commodity, a scheme was concerted by the Ministry with the East India Company, and an Act passed enabling and encouraging them to transport and vend it in the Colonies. Aware of the danger of giving success to this insidious manœuvre, and of permitting a precedent of taxation thus to be established among us, various methods were adopted to elude the stroke. The people of Boston, then ruled by a Governour, whom, as well as his predecessor, Sir Francis Bernard, all America considers as her enemy, were exceedingly embarrassed. The ships which had arrived with the Tea, were, by his management, prevented from returning; the duties would have been paid; the cargoes landed and exposed to sale; a Governour's influence would have procured and protected many purchasers. While the Town was suspended by deliberations on this important subject, the Tea was destroyed. Even supposing a trespass was thereby committed, and the proprietors of the Tea entitled to damages, the Courts of Law were open, and Judges appointed by the Crown presided in them. The East India Company, however, did not think proper to commence any suits; nor did they even demand satisfaction, either from individuals or from the community in general. The Ministry, it seems, officiously made the case their own, and the great Council of the Nation descended to intermeddle with a dispute about private property. Divers papers, letters, and other unauthenticated ex parte evidence were laid before them; neither the persons who destroyed the Tea, nor the people of Boston, were called upon to answer the complaint. The Ministry, incensed by being disappointed in a favourite scheme, were determined to recur from the little arts of finese, to open force and unmanly violence. The Port of Boston was blocked up by a Fleet, and an Army placed in the Town. Their trade was to be suspended, and thousands reduced to the necessity of gaining subsistence from charity, till they should submit to pass under the yoke and consent to become slaves, by confessing the omnipotence of Parliament, and acquiescing in whatever disposition they might think proper to make of their lives and property. Let justice and humanity cease to be the boast of your Nation! Consult your history; examine your records of former transactions, nay, turn to the annals of the many arbitrary States and Kingdoms that surround you, and show us a single instance of men being condemned to suffer for imputed crimes, unheard, unquestioned, and without even the specious formality of a trial; and that, too, by laws made expressly for the purpose, and which had no existence at the time of the fact committed. If it be difficult to reconcile these proceedings to the genius and temper of your Laws and Constitution, the task will become more arduous, when we call upon our Ministerial enemies to justify, not only condemning men untried, and by hearsay, but involving the innocent in one common punishment with the guilty; and for the act of thirty or forty, to bring poverty, distress, and calamity, on thirty thousand souls, and those not your enemies, but your friends, brethren, and fellow-subjects. It would be some consolation to us if the catalogue of American oppressions ended here. It gives us pain to be reduced to the necessity of reminding you that, under the confidence reposed in the faith of Government, pledged in a Royal Charter from a British Sovereign, the forefathers of the present inhabitants of the Massachusetts Bay left their former habitations and established that great, flourishing and loyal Colony. Without incurring or being charged with a forfeiture of their rights; without being heard; without being tried; without law, and without justice, by an Act of Parliament their Charter is destroyed; their liberties violated; their Constitution and form of Government changed; and all this upon no better pretence than because in one of their Towns a trespass was committed on some merchandise said to belong to one of the Companies, and because the Ministry were of opinion that such high political regulations were necessary to compel due subordination and obedience to their mandates. Nor are these the only capital grievances under which we labour. We might tell of dissolute, weak, and wicked Governours having been set over us; of Legislatures being suspended for asserting the rights of British subjects; of needy and ignorant dependents on great men advanced to the seats of Justice, and to other places of trust and importance; of hard restrictions on Commerce, and a great variety of lesser evils, the recollection of which is almost lost under the weight and pressure of greater and more poignant calamities. Now mark the progression of the Ministerial plan for enslaving us. Well aware that such hardy attempts to take our property from us; to deprive us of that valuable right of Trial by Jury; to seize our persons and carry us for trial to Great Britain; to blockade our Ports; to destroy our Charters and change our forms of Government, would occasion, and had already occasioned great discontent in the Colonies, which might produce opposition to these measures, an Act was passed to protect, indemnify, and screen from punishment such as might be guilty even of murder, in endeavouring to carry their oppressive edicts into execution; and by another Act the dominion of Canada is to be so extended, modelled, and governed, as that by being disunited from us, detached from our interests, by civil as well as religious prejudices, that by their numbers daily swelling with Catholick emigrants from Europe, and by their devotion to Administration, so friendly to their religion, they might become formidable to us, and, on occasion, be fit instruments in the hands of power, to reduce the ancient, free, Protestant Colonies to the same state of slavery with themselves. This was evidently the object of the Act; and in this view being extremely dangerous to our liberty and quiet, we cannot forbear complaining of it as hostile to British America. Superadded to these considerations, we cannot help deploring the unhappy condition to which it has reduced the many English settlers, who, encouraged by the Royal Proclamation, promising the enjoyment of all their rights, have purchased estates in that country. They are now the subjects of an arbitrary Government, deprived of trial by jury, and when imprisoned, cannot claim the benefit of the Habeas Corpus Act, that great bulwark and palladium of English Liberty. Nor can we suppress our astonishment that a British Parliament should ever consent to establish in that country a Religion that has deluged your Island in blood, and dispersed impiety, bigotry, persecution, murder, and rebellion, through every part of the world. This being a true state of facts, let us beseech you to consider to what end they lead. Admit that the Ministry, by the powers of Britain, and the aid of our Roman Catholick neighbours, should be able to carry the point of taxation, and reduce us to a state of perfect humiliation and slavery; such an enterprise would doubtless make some addition to your National Debt, which already presses down your liberties, and fills you with pensioners and placemen. We presume, also, that your commerce will somewhat be diminished. However, suppose you should prove victorious, in what condition will you then be? What advantages or what laurels will you reap from such a conquest? May not a Ministry with the same Armies enslave you? It may be said you will cease to pay them; but remember the taxes from America, the wealth, and we may add the men, and particularly the Roman Catholicks of this vast Continent, will then be in the power of your enemies; nor will you have any reason to expect, that after making slaves of us, many among us should refuse to assist in reducing you to the same abject state. Do not treat this as chimerical. Know that in less than half a century, the quit-rents reserved to the Crown, from the numberless grants of this vast Continent, will pour large streams of wealth into the Royal coffers; and if to this be added the power of taxing America at pleasure, the Crown will be rendered independent of you for supplies, and will possess more treasure than may be necessary to purchase the remains of liberty in your Island. In a word, take care that you do not fall into the pit that is preparing for us. We believe there is yet much virtue, much justice, and much publick spirit in the English Nation. To that justice we now appeal. You have been told that we are seditious, impatient of Government, and desirous of Independency. Be assured that these are not facts, but calumnies. Permit us to be as free as yourselves, and we shall ever esteem a union with you to be our greatest glory and our greatest happiness; we shall ever be ready to contribute all in our power to the welfare of the Empire; we shall consider your enemies as our enemies, and your interest as our own. But, if you are determined that your Ministers shall wantonly sport with the rights of mankind; if neither the voice of justice, the dictates of the law, the principles of the Constitution, or the suggestions of humanity, can restrain your hands from shedding human blood in such an impious cause, we must then tell you that we will never submit to be hewers of wood or drawers of water for any Ministry or Nation in the world. Place us in the same situation that we were at the close of the last war, and our former harmony will be restored. But, lest the same supineness, and the same inattention to our common interest, which you have for several years shown, should continue, we think it prudent to anticipate the consequences. By the destruction of the trade of Boston the Ministry have endeavoured to induce submission to their measures. The like fate may befall us all. We will endeavour therefore to live without trade, and recur for subsistence to the fertility and bounty of our native soil, which will afford us all the necessaries, and some of the conveniences of life. We have suspended our importation from Great Britain and Ireland; and, in less than a year's time, unless our grievances should be redressed, shall discontinue our exports to those Kingdoms and the West Indies. It is with the utmost regret, however, that we find ourselves compelled, by the over-ruling principles of self-preservation, to adopt measures detrimental in their consequences to numbers of our fellow-subjects in Great Britain and Ireland. But we hope, that the magnanimity and justice of the British Nation will furnish a Parliament of such wisdom, independence, and publick spirit, as may save the violated rights of the whole Empire from the devices of wicked Ministers and evil Counsellors, whether in or out of office; and thereby restore that harmony, friendship, and fraternal affection between all the inhabitants of his Majesty's Kingdoms and Territories so ardently wished for by every true and honest American. Source: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Address_to_the_People_of_Great_Britain

Quebec Act Great Britain : Parliament - The Quebec Act: June 22, 1774 An Act for making more effectual Provision for the Government of the Province of Quebec in North America. WHEREAS his Majesty, by his Royal Proclamation bearing Date the seventh Day of October, in the third Year of his Reign, thought fit to declare the Provisions which had been made in respect to certain Countries, Territories, and Islands in America, ceded to his Majesty by the definitive Treaty of Peace, concluded at Paris on the tenth day of February, one thousand seven hundred and sixty-three: And whereas, by the Arrangements made by the said Royal Proclamation a very large Extent of Country, within which there were several Colonies and Settlements of the Subjects of France, who claimed to remain therein under the Faith of the said Treaty, was left, without any Provision being made for the Administration of Civil Government therein; and certain Parts of the Territory of Canada, where sedentary Fisheries had been established and carried on by the Subjects of France, Inhabitants of the said Province of Canada under Grants and Concessions from the Government thereof, were annexed to the Government of Newfoundland, and thereby subjected to Regulations inconsistent with the Nature of such Fisheries: I May it therefore please your most Excellent Majesty that it may be enacted; and be it enacted by the King's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the Authority of the same: That all the Territories, Islands, and Countries in North America, belonging to the Crown of Great Britain, bounded on the South by a Line from the Bay of Chaleurs, along the High Lands which divide the Rivers that empty themselves into the River Saint Lawrence from those which fall into the Sea, to a Point in forty-five Degrees of Northern Latitude, on the Eastern Bank of the River Connecticut, keeping the same Latitude directly West, through the Lake Champlain, until, in the same Latitude, it meets the River Saint Lawrence: from thence up the Eastern Bank of the said River to the Lake Ontario; thence through the Lake Ontario, and the River commonly call Niagara and thence along by the Eastern and South-eastern Bank of Lake Erie, following the said Bank, until the same shall be intersected by the Northern Boundary, granted by the Charter of the Province of Pennsylvania, in case the same shall be so intersected: and from thence along the said Northern and Western Boundaries of the said Province, until the said Western Boundary strike the Ohio: But in case the said Bank of the said Lake shall not be found to be so intersected, then following the said Bank until it shall arrive at that Point of the said Bank which shall be nearest to the North-western Angle of the said Province of Pensylvania, and thence by a right Line, to the said North-western Angle of the said Province; and thence along the Western Boundary of the said Province, until it strike the River Ohio; and along the Bank of the said River, Westward, to the Banks of the Mississippi, and Northward to the Southern Boundary of the Territory granted to the Merchants Adventurers of England, trading to Hudson's Bay; and also all such Territories, Islands, and Countries, which have, since the tenth of February, one thousand seven hundred and sixty-three, been made Part of the Government of Newfoundland, be, and they are hereby, during his Majesty's Pleasure, annexed to, and made Part and Parcel of, the Province of Quebec, as created and established by the said Royal Proclamation of the seventh of October, one thousand seven hundred and sixty-three. II Provided always:.That nothing herein contained, relative to the Boundary of the Province of Quebec, shall in anywise affect the Boundaries of any other Colony. III Provided always, and be it enacted: That nothing in this Act contained shall extend, or be construed to extend, to make void, or to vary or alter any Right, Title, or Possession, derived under any Grant, Conveyance, or otherwise nowsoever, of or to any Lands within the said Province, or the Provinces thereto adjoining; but that the same shall remain and be in Force, and have Effect, as if this Act had never been made. IV And whereas the Provisions, made by the said Proclamation, in respect to the Civil Government of the said Province of Quebec, and the Powers and Authorities givcn to the Governor and other Civil Officers of the said Province, by the Grants and Commissions issued in consequence thereof, have been found, upon Experience, to be inapplicable to the State and Circumstances of the said Province, the Inhabitants whereof amounted, at the Conquest, to above sixty-five thousand Persons professing the Religion of the Church of Rome, and enjoying an established Form of Constitution and System of Laws, by which their Persons and Property had been protected, governed, and ordered, for a long Series of Years, from the first Establishment of the said Province of Canada; be it therefore further enacted by the Authority aforesaid: That the said Proclamation, so far as the same relates to the said Province of Quebec, and the Commission under the Authority whereof the Government of the said Province is at present administered, and all and every the Ordinance and Ordinances made by the Governor and Council of Quebec for the Time being, relative to the Civil Government and Administration of Justice in the said Province, and all Commissions to Judges and other Officers thereof, be, and the same are hereby revoked, annulled, and made void, from and after the first Day of May, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five. V And, for the more perfect Security and Ease of the Minds of the Inhabitants of the said Province, it is hereby declared: That his Majesty's Subjects, professing the Religion of the Church of Rome of and in the said Province of Quebec, may have, hold, and enjoy, the free Exercise of the Religion of the Church of Rome, subject to the King's Supremacy, declared and established by an Act, made in the first Year of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, over all the Dominions and Countries which then did, or thereafter should belong, to the Imperial Crown of this Realm; and that the Clergy of the said Church may hold, receive, and enjoy, their accustomed Dues and Rights, with respect to such Persons only as shall profess the said Religion. VI Provided nevertheless: That it shall be lawful for his Majesty, his Heirs or Successors, to make such Provision out of the rest of the said accustomed Dues and Rights, for the Encouragement of the Protestant Religion, and for the Maintenance and Support of a Protestant Clergy within the said Province, as he or they shall, from Time to Time think necessary and expedient. VII Provided always, and be it enacted: That no Person professing the Religion of the Church of Rome, and residing in the said Province, shall be obliged to take the Oath required by the said Statute passed in the first Year of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, or any other Oaths substituted by any other Act in the Place thereof; but that every such Person who, by the said Statute, is required to take the Oath therein mentioned, shall be obliged, and is hereby required, to take and subscribe the following Oath before the Governor, or such other Person in such Court of Record as his Majesty shall appoint, who are hereby authorized to administer the same; videlicet, I A.B., do sincerely promise and swear: That I will be faithful, and bear true Allegiance to his Majesty King George, and him will defend to the utmost of my Power, against all traitorous Conspiracies, and Attempts whatsoever, which shall be made against his Person, Crown, and Dignity; and I will do my utmost Endeavor to disclose and make known to his Majesty, his Heirs and Successors, all Treasons, and traitorous Conspiracies, and Attempts, which I shall know to be against him, or any of them; and all this I do swear without any Equivocation, mental Evasion, or secret Reservation, and renouncing all Pardons and Dispensations from any Power or Person whomsoever to the contrary. So help me GOD. And every such Person, who shall neglect or refuse to take the said Oath before mentioned, shall incur and be liable to the same Penalties, Forfeitures, Disabilities, and Incapacities, as he would have incurred and been liable to for neglecting or refusing to take the Oath required by the said Statute passed in the first Year of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth. VIII And be it further enacted by the Authority aforesaid: That all his Majesty's Canadian Subjects within the Province of Quebec, the religious orders and Communities only excepted, may also hold and enjoy their Property and Possessions, together with all Customs and Usages relative thereto, and all other their Civil Rights, in as large, ample, and beneficial Manner, as if the said Proclamation, Commissions, Ordinances, and other Acts and Instruments had not been made, and as may consist with their Allegiance to his Majesty, and Subjection to the Crown and Parliament of Great Britain; and that in all .Matters of Controversy, relative to Property and Civil Rights, Resort shall be had to the Laws of Canada, as the Rule for the Decision of the same; and all Causes that shall hereafter be instituted in any of the Courts of Justice, to be appointed within and for the said Province by his Majesty, his Heirs and Successors, shall, with respect to such Property and Rights, be determined agreeably to the said Laws and Customs of Canada, until they shall be varied or altered by any Ordinances that shall, from Time to Time, be passed in the said Province by the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, or Commander in Chief, for the Time being, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Legislative Council of the same, to be appointed in Manner herein-after mentioned . IX Provided always: That nothing in this Act contained shall extend, or be construed to extend, to any Lands that have been granted by his Majesty, or shall hereafter be granted by his Majesty, his Heirs and Successors, to be holden in free and common Soccage. X Provided also: That it shall and may be lawful to and for every Person that is Owner of any Lands, Goods, or Credits, in the said Province, and that has a Right to alienate the said Lands, Goods, or Credits, in his or her Lifetime, by Deed of Sale, Gift, or otherwise, to devise or bequeath the same at his or her Death, by his or her last Will and Testament; any Law, Usage, or Custom, heretofore or now prevailing in the Province, to the contrary hereof in any-wise notwithstanding; .such Will being executed either according to the Laws of Canada, or according to the Forms prescribed by the Laws of England. XI And whereas the Certainty and Lenity of the Criminal Law of England, and the Benefits and Advantages resulting from the Use of it, have been sensibly felt by the Inhabitants, from an Experience of more than nine Years, during which it has been uniformly administered: be it therefore further enacted by the Authority aforesaid: That the same shall continue to be administered, and shall be observed as Law in the Province of Quebec, as well in the Description and Quality of the Offence as in the Method of Prosecution and Trial; and the Punishments and Forfeitures thereby inflicted to the Exclusion of every other Rule of Criminal Law, or Mode of Proceeding thereon, which did or might prevail in the said Province before the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and seventy-four; any Thing in this Act to the contrary thereof in any respect notwithstanding; subject nevertheless to such Alterations and Amendments as the Governor, Lieutenant-governor, or Commander in Chief for the Time being, by and with the Advice and Consent of the legislative Council of the said Province, hereafter to be appointed, shall, from Time to Time, cause to be made therein, in Manner hereinafter directed. XII And whereas it may be necessary to ordain many Regulations for the future Welfare and good Government of the Province of Quebec, the Occasions of which cannot now be foreseen, nor, without much Delay and Inconvenience, be provided for, without intrusting that Authority, for a certain Time, and under proper Restrictions, to Persons resident there, and whereas it is at present inexpedient to call an Assembly; be it therefore enacted b~ the Authority aforesaid: That it shall and may be lawful for his Majesty, his Heirs and Successors, by Warrant under his or their Signet or Sign Manual, and with the Advice of the Privy Council, to constitute and appoint a Council for the Affairs of the Province of Quebec, to consist of such Persons resident there, not exceeding twenty-three, nor less than seventeen, as his Majesty, his Heirs and Successors, shall be pleased to appoint, and, upon the Death, Removal, or Absence of any of the Members of the said Council, in like Manner to constitute and appoint such and so many other Person or Persons as shall be necessary to supply the Vacancy or Vacancies; which Council, so appointed and nominated, or the major Part thereof; shall have Power and Authority to make Ordinances for the Peace, Welfare, and good Government, of the said Province, with the Consent of his Majesty's Governor, or, in his Absence, of the Lieutenant-governor, or Commander in Chief for the Time being. [Repealed by The Constituional Act, 1791] XIII Provided always: That nothing in this Act contained shall extend to authorize or impower the said legislative Council to lay any Taxes or Duties within the said Province, such Rates and Taxes only excepted as the Inhabitants of any Town or District within the said Province may be authorized by the said Council to assess, levy, and apply, within the said Town or District, for the Purpose of making Roads, erecting and repairing publick Buildings, or for any other Purpose respecting the local Convenience and Oeconomy of such Town or District. XIV Provided also, and be it enacted by the Authority aforesaid: That every Ordinance so to be made, shall, within six Months, be transmitted by the Governor, or, in his Absence, by the Lieutenant-governor, or Commander in Chief for the Time being, and laid before his Majesty for his Royal Approbation; and if his Majesty shall think fit to disallow thereof, the same shall cease and be void from the Time that his Majesty's Order in Council thereupon shall be promulgated at Quebec. XV Provided also: That no Ordinance touching Religion, or by which any Punishment may be inflicted greater than Fine or Imprisonment for three Months, shall be of any Force or Effect, until the same shall have received his Majesty's Approbation. XVI Provided also: That no Ordinance shall be passed at any Meeting of the Council where less than a Majority of the whole Council is present, or at any Time except between the first Day of January and the first Day of May, unless upon some urgent Occasion, in which Case every Member thereof resident at Quebec, or within fifty Miles thereof, shall be personally summoned by the Governor, or, in his absence, by the Lieutenant-governor, or Commander in Chief for the Time being, to attend the same. XVII And be it further enacted by the Authority aforesaid: That nothing herein contained shall extend, or be construed to extend, to prevent or hinder his Majesty, his Heirs and Successors, by his or their Letters Patent under the Great Seal of Great Britain, from erecting, constituting, and appointing, such Courts of Criminal, Civil, and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction within and for the said Province of Quebec, and appointing, from Time to Time, the Judges and Officers thereof, as his Majesty, his Heirs and Successors, shall think necessary and proper for the Circumstances of the said Province. XVIII. Provided always, and it is hereby enacted: That nothing in this Act contained shall extend, or be construed to extend, to repeal or make void, within the said Province of Quebec, any Act or Acts of the Parliament of Great Britain heretofore made, for prohibiting, restraining, or regulating, the Trade or Commerce of his Majesty's Colonies and Plantations in America; but that all and every the said Acts, and also all Acts of Parliament heretofore made concerning or respecting the said Colonies and Plantations, shall be, and are hereby declared to be, in Force, within the said Province of Quebec, and every Part thereof. Source: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/quebec_act_1774.asp

Great Britain : Parliament - The Quartering Act; June 2, 1774 An act for the better providing suitable quarters for officers and soldiers in his MajestyÂ’s service in North America. WHEREAS doubts have been entertained, whether troops can be quartered otherwise than in barracks, in case barracks have been provided sufficient for the quartering of all officers and soldiers within any town, township, city, district, or place, within his MajestyÂ’s dominions in North America: And whereas it may frequently happen, from the situation of such barracks, that, if troops should be quartered therein, they would not be stationed where their presence may be necessary and required: be it therefore enacted by the KingÂ’s most excellent majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons, in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, That, in such cases, it shall and may be lawful for the persons who now are, or may be hereafter, authorised be law, in any of the provinces within his MajestyÂ’s dominions in North America, and they are hereby respectively authorised, impowered, and directed, on the requisition of the officer who, for the time being, has the command of his MajestyÂ’s forces in North America, to cause any officers or soldiers in his MajestyÂ’s service to be quartered and billetted in such manner as is now directed by law, where no barracks are provided by the colonies. II. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That if it shall happen at any time that any officers or soldiers in his MajestyÂ’s service shall remain within any of the said colonies without quarters, for the space of twenty-four hours after such quarters shall have been demanded, it shall and may be lawful for the governor of the province to order and direct such and so many uninhabited houses, out-houses, barns, or other buildings, as he shall think necessary to be taken, (making a reasonable allowance for the same), and make fit for the reception of such officers and soldiers, and to put and quarter such officers and soldiers therein, for such time as he shall think proper. III. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That this act, and every thing herein contained, shall continue and be in force, in all his MajestyÂ’s dominions in North America, until the twenty-fourth day of March, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-six. Source: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/quartering_act_1774.asp

Administration of Justice Act Third of Five of the Intolerable Acts Great Britain : Parliament - The Administration of Justice Act; May 20, 1774 An act for the impartial administration of justice in the cases of persons questioned for any acts done by them in the execution of the law, or for the suppression of riots and tumults, in the province of the Massachuset's Bay, in New England. WHEREAS in his Majesty's province of Massachuset's Bay, in New England, an attempt hath lately been made to throw off the authority of the parliament of Great Britain over the said province, and an actual and avowed resistance, by open force, to the execution of certain acts of parliament, hath been suffered to take place, uncontrouled and unpunished, in defiance of his Majesty's authority, and to the subversion of all lawful government whereas, in the present disordered state of the said province, it is of the utmost. importance to the general welfare thereof, and to the re-establishment of lawful authority throughout the same, that neither the magistrates acting in support of the laws, nor any of his Majesty's subjects aiding and assisting them therein, or in the suppression of riots and tumults, raised in opposition to the execution of the laws and statutes of this realm, should be discouraged from the proper discharge of their duty, by an apprehension, that in case of their being questioned for any acts done therein, they may be liable to be brought to trial for the same before persons who do not acknowledge the validity of the laws, in the execution thereof, or the authority of the magistrate in the support of whom, such acts had been done: in order therefore to remove every such discouragement from the minds of his Majesty's subjects, and to induce them, upon all proper occasions, to exert themselves in support of the public peace of the provinces, and of the authority of the King and parliament of Great Britain over the same; be it enacted by the King's most excellent majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons, in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, That if any inquisition or indictment shall be found, or if any appeal shall be sued or preferred against any person, for murder, or other capital offence, in the province Of the Massachuset's Bay, and it shall appear, by information given upon oath to the governor, or, in his absence, to the lieutenant-governor of the said province, that the fact was committed by the person against whom such inquisition or indictment shall be found, or against whom such appeal shall be sued or preferred, as aforesaid, either in the execution of his duty as a magistrate, for the suppression of riots, or in the support of the laws of revenue, or in acting in his duty as an officer of revenue, or in acting under the direction and order of any magistrate, for the suppression of riots, or for the carrying into effect the laws of revenue, or in aiding and assisting in any of the cases aforesaid: and if it shall also appear, to the satisfaction of the said governor, or lieutenant-governor respectively, that an indifferent trial cannot be had within the said province, in that case, it shall and may be lawful for the governor, or lieutenant-governor, to direct, with the advice and consent of the council, that the inquisition, indictment, or appeal, shall be tried in some other of his Majesty's colonies, or in Great Britain; and for that purpose, to order. the person against whom such inquisition or indictment shall be found, or against whom such appeal shall be sued or preferred, as aforesaid, to be sent, under sufficient custody, to the place appointed for his trial, or to admit such person to bail, taking a recognizance, (which the said governor, or, in his absence, the lieutenant-governor, is hereby authorised to take), from such person, with sufficient sureries, to be approved of by the said governor, or, in his absence, the lieutenant-governor, in such sums of money as the said governor or, in his absence, the lieutenant-governor, shall deem reasonable for the personal appearance of such person, if the trial shall be appointed to be had in any other colony, before the governor, or lieutenant-governor, or commander in chief of such colony; and if the trial shall be appointed to be had in Great Britain, then before his Majesty's court of King's Bench, at a time to be mentioned in such recognizances; and the governor, or lieutenant-governor, or commander in chief of the colony where such trial shall be appointed to be had, or court of King's Bench, where the trial is appointed to be had in Great Britain, upon the appearance of such person, according to such recognizance, or in custody, shall either commit such person, or admit him to bail, until such trial; and which the said governor, or lieutenant-governor, or commander in chief, and court of King's Bench, are hereby authorised and impowered to do. II. And, to prevent a failure of justice, from the want of evidence on the trial of any such inquisition, indictment or appeal, be it further enacted, That the governor, or, in his absence, the lieutenant-governor, shall, and he is hereby authorised and required, to bind in recognizances to his Majesty all such witnesses as the prosecutor or person against whom such inquisition or indictment shall be found, or appeal sued or preferred, shall desire to attend the trial of the said inquisition, indictment, or appeal, for their personal appearance , at the time and place of such trial, to give evidence: and the said governor, or in his absence, the lieutenant-governor, shall thereupon appoint a reasonable sum to be allowed for the expences of every such witness, and shall thereupon give to each witness a certificate, in writing, under his hand and seal, that such witness has entered into a recognizance to give evidence, and specifying the sum allowed for his expenses and the collector and collectors of the customs, or one of them, within the said province, upon the delivery of such certificate, are, and is hereby authorised and required, forthwith to pay to such witness the sum specified therein for his expences. III. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That all prosecutors and witnesses, who shall be under recognizances to appear in any of his Majesty's colonies in America, or in Great Britain, in pursuance of this art, shall be free from all arrests and restraints, in any action or suit to be commenced against them during their going to such colony, or coming to Great Britain, and their necessary stay and abiding there, on occasion of such prosecution, and returning again to the said province of the Massachusset's Bay. IV. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That all and every his Majesty's, justices of the peace, and other justices and coroners, before whom any person shall be brought, charged with murder, or other capital crime, where it shall appear by proof, on oath, to such justices or coroners, that the fact was committed by such person, either in the execution of his duty as a magistrate, for the suppression of riots, or in the support of the laws of revenue, or in acting in his duty as an officer of revenue, or in acting under the direction and order of any magistrate, for the suppression of riots, or for the carrying into effect the laws of revenue, or in aiding and assisting in any of the cases aforesaid, are hereby authorized and required to admit every such person to brought before him or them, as aforesaid, to bail; any law, custom, or usage, to the contrary thereof in any-wise notwithstanding. V. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That where it shall be made appear to the judges or justices of any court, within the said province of Massachuset's Bay, by any person, against whom any inquisition or indictment shall be found, or appeal sued or preferred for murder, or other capital crime, that the fact was committed by such person, either in the execution of his duty as a magistrate, for the suppression of riots, or in the support of the laws of revenue, or in acting in his duty as an officer of revenue, or in acting under the direction and order of any magistrate, for the suppression of riots, or for the carrying into effect the laws of revenue, or in aiding and assisting in any of the cases aforesaid, and that he intends to make application to the governor, or lieutenant-governor of the said province, that such inquisition , indictment, or appeal, may be tried in some other of his Majesty's colonies, or in Great Britain, the said judges or justices are hereby authorised and required to adjourn or postpone the trial of such inquisition, indictment, or appeal, for a reasonable time, and admit the person to bail, in order that he may make application to the governor, or lieutenant-governor, for the purpose aforesaid. V1. And be it further enacted, That the governor, or, in his absence, the lieutenant governor, if he shall direct the trial to be had in any other of his Majesty's colonies, shall transmit the inquisition, indictment , or appeal, together with recognizances of the witnesses, and other recognizances, under the seal of the province, to the governor, or lieutenant-governor, or commander in chief of such other colony, who shall immediately issue a commission of Oyer and Terminer, and deliver, or cause to be delivered, the said inquisition ,indictment, or appeal, with the said recognizances to the chief justice, and such other persons as have usually been commissioners of Oyer and Terminer, justices of assize, or general gaol delivery there; who shall have power to proceed upon the said inquisition, indictment, or appeal, as if the same had been returned, found, or preferred before them; and the trial shall thereupon proceed in like manner, to all intents and purposes, as if the offence had been committed in such place: and in case the governor, or, in his absence the lieutenant-governor, shall direct the trial to be had in Great Britain, he shall then transmit the inquisition, indictment or appeal; together with the recognizances, of the witnesses, and other recognizances, under the seal of the province to one of Majesty's principal secretaries of state, who shall deliver, or cause to be delivered, the same, to the master of the crown office to be filed of record in the court of King's Bench, and the inquisition, indictment, or appeal, shall be tried and proceeded upon, in the next term, or at such other time as the court shall appoint, at the bar of the court of King's Bench, in like manner to all intents and purposes, as if the offence had been committed in the county of Middlesex, or in any other county of that part of Great Britain called England, where the court of King's Bench shall fit, or else before such commissioners, and in such county, in that part of Great Britain called England, as shall be assigned by the King's majesty's commission, in like manner and form to all intents and purposes, as if such offence had been committed in the same county where such inquisition, indictment, or appeal, shall be so tried. VII. And be it enacted by the authority aforesaid, That in case, on account of any error or defect in any indictment, which, in virtue or under the authority of this act, shall be transmitted to any other colony, or to Great Britain, the same shall be quashed, or judgement thereon arrested, or such indictment adjudged bad upon demurrer, it shall and may be lawful to prefer a new indictment or indictments against the person or persons accused in the said colony, to which such indictment, so quashed or adjudged bad shall have been transmitted, or before the grand jury of any county in Great Britain, in case such former indictment shall have been transmitted to Great Britain, in the same manner as could be done in case the party accused should return to the place where the offence was committed; and the grand jury and petty jury of such other colony or county in Great Britain shall have power to find and proceed upon such indictment or indictments, in the same manner as if the offence, by such indictment or indictments charged, had been committed within the limits of the colony or county for which such juries shall respectively be impanelled to serve. VIII. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That this act, and every clause, provision, regulation, and thing, herein contained, shall commence and take effect upon the first day of June, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-four; and be, and continue in force, for and during the term of three years. Source: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/admin_of_justice_act.asp

Massachusetts Government Act Second of Five of the Intolerable Acts Great Britain : Parliament - The Massachusetts Government Act; May 20, 1774 An act for the better regulating the government of the province of the MassachusetÂ’s Bay, in New England. WHEREAS by letters patent under the great seal of England, made in the third year of the reign of their late majesties King William and Queen Mary, for uniting, erecting, and incorporating, the several colonies, territories, and tracts of land therein mentioned, into one real province, by the name of Their Majesties Province of the MassachusetÂ’s Bay, in New England; whereby it was, amongst other things, ordained and established, That the governor of the said province should, from thenceforth, be appointed and commissionated by their Majesties, their heirs and successors: It was, however, granted and ordained, That, from the expiration of the term for and during which the eight and twenty persons named in the said letters patent were appointed to be the first counsellors or assistants to the governor of the said province for the time being, the aforesaid number of eight and twenty counsellors or assistants should yearly, once in every year, for ever thereafter, be, by the general court or assembly, newly chosen: And whereas the said method of electing such counsellors or assistants, to be vested with the several powers, authorities, and privileges, therein mentioned, although conformable to the practice theretofore used in such of the colonies thereby united, in which the appointment of the respective governors had been vested in the general courts or assemblies of the said colonies, hath, by repeated experience, been found to be extremely ill adapted to the plan of government established in the province of the MassachusetÂ’s Bay, by the said letters patent herein-before mentioned, and hath been so far from contributing to the attainment of the good ends and purposes thereby intended, and to the promoting of the internal welfare, peace, and good government of the said province, or to the maintenance of the just subordination to, and conformity with, the laws of Great Britain, that the manner of exercising the powers, authorities, and privileges aforesaid, by the persons so annually elected, hath, for some time past, been such as had the most manifest tendency to obstruct, and, in great measure, defeat, the execution of the laws; to weaken and, in great measure, defeat, the execution of the laws; to weaken the attachment of his MajestyÂ’s well-disposed subjects in the said province to his MajestyÂ’s government, and to encourage the ill-disposed among them to proceed even to acts of direct resistance to, and defiance of, his MajestyÂ’s authority; And it hath accordingly happened that an open resistance to the execution of the laws hath actually taken place in the town of Boston, and the neighbourhood thereof, within the said province: And whereas it is, under these circumstances, become absolutely necessary, in order to the preservation of the peace and good order of the said province, the protection of his MajestyÂ’s well-disposed subjects therein resident, the continuance of the mutual benefits arising from the commerce and correspondence between this kingdom and the said province, and the maintaining of the just dependance of the said province upon the crown and parliament of Great Britain, that the said method of annually electing the counsellors or assistants of the said province should no longer be suffered to continue but that the appointment of the said counsellors or assistants should henceforth be put upon the like footing as is established in such other of his MajestyÂ’s colonies or plantations in America, the governors whereof are appointed by his MajestyÂ’s commission, under the great seal of Great Britain: Be it therefore enacted by the KingÂ’s most excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons, in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, That from and after the first day of August, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-four, so much of the charter, granted by their majesties King William and Queen Mary to the inhabitants of the said province of the MassachusetÂ’s Bay, in New England, and all and every clause, matter, and thing, therein contained, which relates to the time and manner of electing the assistants or counsellors for the said province, be revoked, and is hereby revoked and made void and of none effect; and that the offices of all counsellors and assistants, elected and appointed in pursuance thereof, shall from thenceforth cease and determine: And that, from and after the said first day of August, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-four, the council, or court of assistants of the said province for the time being, shall be composed of such of the inhabitants or proprietors of lands within the same as shall be thereunto nominated and appointed by his Majesty, his heirs and successors, from time to time, by warrant under his or their signet or sign manual, and with the advice of the privy council, agreeable to the practice now used in respect to the appointment of counsellors in such of his MajestyÂ’s other colonies in America, the governors whereof are appointed by commission under the great seal of Great Britain: provided, that the number of the said assistants or counsellors shall not, at any one time, exceed thirty-six, nor be less than twelve. II. And it is hereby further enacted, That the said assistants or counsellors, so to be appointed as aforesaid, shall hold their offices respectively, for and during the pleasure of his Majesty, his heirs or successors; and shall have and enjoy all the powers, privileges, and immunities, at present held, exercised, and enjoyed, by the assistants or counsellors of the said province, constituted and elected, from time to time, under the said charter, (except as herein-after excepted); and shall also, upon their admission into the said council, and before they enter upon the execution of their offices respectively, take the oaths, and make, repeat, and subscribe, the declarations required, as well by the said charter as by any law or laws of the said province now in force, to be taken by the assistants or counsellors who have been so elected and constituted as aforesaid. III. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That from and after the first day of July, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-four, it shall and may be lawful for his MajestyÂ’s governor for the time being of the said province, or, in his absence, for the lieutenant-governor, to nominate and appoint, under the seal of the province, from time to time, and also to remove, without the consent of the council, all judges of the inferior courts of common pleas, commissioners of Oyer and Terminer, the attorney general, provosts, marshals, justices of the peace, and other officers to the council or courts of justice belonging; and that all judges of the inferior courts of common pleas, commissioners of Oyer and Terminer, the attorney general, provosts, marshals, justices, and other officers so appointed by the governor, or, in his absence, by the lieutenant-governor alone, shall and may have, hold, and exercise, their said offices, powers, and authorities, as fully and completely, to all intents and purposes, as any judges of the inferior courts of common pleas, commissioners of Oyer and Terminer, attorney general, provosts, marshals, or other officers, have or might have done heretofore under the said letters patent, in the third year of the reign of their late majesties King William and Queen Mary; any law, statute, or usage, to the contrary notwithstanding. IV. Provided always, and be it enacted, That nothing herein contained shall extend, or be construed to extend, to annul or make void the commission granted before the said first day of July, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-four, to any judges of the inferior courts of common pleas, commissioners of Oyer and Terminer, the attorney general, provosts, marshals, justices of the peace, or other officers; but that they may hold and exercise the same, as if this act had never been made, until the same shall be determined by death, removal by the governor, or other avoidance, as the case may happen. V. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That, from and after the said first day of July, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-four, it shall and may be lawful for his MajestyÂ’s governor, or, in his absence, for the lieutenant-governor for the time being of the said province, from time to time, to nominate and appoint the sheriffs without the consent of the council, and to remove such sheriffs with such consent, and not otherwise. VI. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That, upon every vacancy of the officers of chief justice and judges of the superior court of the said province, from and after the said first day of July, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-four, the governor for the time being, or, in his absence, the lieutenant-governor, without the consent of the council, shall have full power and authority to nominate and appoint the persons to succeed to the said offices; who shall hold their commissions during the pleasure of his Majesty, his heirs and successors; and that neither the chief justice or judges appointed before the said first day of July, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-four, nor those who shall hereafter be appointed pursuant to this act, shall be removed, unless by the order of his Majesty, his heirs or successors, under his or their sign manual. VII. And whereas, by several acts of the general court, which have been from time to time enacted and passed within the said province, the freeholders and inhabitants of the several townships, districts, and precincts, qualified, as is therein expressed, are authorised to assemble together, annually, or occasional[y, upon notice given, in such manner as the said acts direct, for the choice of select men, constables, and other officers, and for the making and agreeing upon such necessary rules, orders, and bye laws, for the directing, managing, and ordering, the prudential affairs of such townships, districts, and precincts, and for other purposes: and whereas a great abuse has been made of the power of calling such meetings, and the inhabitants have, contrary to the design of their institution, been misled to treat upon matters of the most general concern, and to pass many dangerous and unwarrantable resolves: for remedy whereof, be it enacted, That from and after the said first day of August, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-four, no meeting shall be called by the select men, or at the request of any number of freeholders of any township, district, or precinct, without the leave of the governor, or, in his absence, of the lieutenant-governor, in writing, expressing the special business of the said meeting, first had and obtained, except the annual meeting in the months of March or May, for the choice of select men, constables, and other officers, or except for the choice of persons to fill up the offices aforesaid, on the death or removal of any of the persons first elected to such offices, and also, except any meeting for the election of a representative or representatives in the general court; and that no other matter shall be treated of at such meetings, except the election of their aforesaid officers or representatives, nor at any other meeting, except the business expressed in the leave given by the governor , or, in his absence, by the lieutenant-governor. VIII. And whereas the method at present used in the province of MassachusetÂ’s Bay in America, of electing persons to serve on grand juries, and other juries, by the freeholders and inhabitants of the several towns, affords occasion for many evil practices, and tends to pervert the free and impartial administration of justice: for remedy whereof, be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That, from and after the respective times appointed for the holding of the general sessions of the peace in the several counties within the said province, next after the month of September, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-four, the jurors to serve at the superior courts of judicature, courts of assize, general gaol delivery, general sessions of the peace, and inferior court of common pleas, in the several counties within the said province, shall not be elected, nominated, or appointed, by the freeholders and inhabitants of the several towns within the said respective counties nor summoned or returned by the constables of the said towns; but that, from thenceforth, the jurors to serve at the superior courts of judicature, courts of assize, general gaol delivery, general sessions of the peace, and inferior court of common pleas within the said province, shall be summoned and returned by the sheriffs of the respective counties within the said province; and all writs of Venire Facias, or other process or warrants to be issued for the return of jurors to serve at the said courts, shall be directed to the sheriffs of the said counties respectively, any law, custom, or usage, to the contrary notwithstanding. IX. Provided always, and be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That wherever the sheriff of any country shall happen to be a party, or interested or related to any party of person interested in any prosecution or suit depending in any of the said courts; that then in such case, the writ of Venire Facias, of other process or warrant for the summoning and return of a jury, for the trial of such prosecution or suit, shall be directed to, and executed by, the coroner of such county; and in case such coroner shall be also a party, or interested in, or related to, the Venire Facias, or other process or warrant, for the summoning and return of a jury for the trial of such prosecution or suit shall be directed to, and executed by, a proper and indifferent person, to be appointed for that purpose by the court wherein such prosecution or suit shall be depending. X. And that all sheriffs may be the better informed of persons qualified to serve on juries at the superior courts of judicature, courts of assize, general gaol delivery, general sessions of the peace, and inferior court of common pleas, within the said province, be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That the constables of the respective towns, within the several counties of the said province, shall, at the general sessions of the peace to be holden for each county, next after the month of September in every year, upon the first day of the said sessions, return and deliver to the justices of the peace, in open court, a true life, in writing, of the names and places of abode of all persons within the respective towns for which they serve, or the districts thereof, qualified to serve upon juries, with their titles and additions, between the age of one and twenty years and the age of seventy years; which said justices or any two of them, at the said sessions in the respective counties, shall cause to be delivered a duplicate of the aforesaid lists, by the clerk of the peace of every country, to the sheriffs, or their deputies, within ten days after such session; and cause each of the said lists to be fairly entered into a book by the clerk of the peace, to be by him provided, and kept for that purpose amongst the records of the said court; and no sheriff shall impanel or return any person or persons to serve upon any grand jury, petit jury, whatsoever, in any of the said courts that shall not be named or mentioned in such list: and, to prevent a failure of justice, through the neglect of constables to make such returns of persons qualified to serve on juries, as in and by this act is directed, the clerks of the peace of the said several counties are hereby required and commanded, twenty days at least next before the month of September, yearly, and every year, to issue forth precepts or warrants, under their respective hands and seals, to the respective constables of the several towns within the said respective counties, requiring them, and every of them, to make such return of persons qualified to serve upon juries as hereby respectively directed; and every constable failing at any time to make and deliver such return to the justices in open court, as aforesaid, shall forfeit and incur the penalty of five pounds sterling to his Majesty, and his successors: to be recovered by bill, plaint, or information, to be prosecuted in any of the courts aforesaid; and, in order that the constables may be the better enabled to make complete lists of all persons qualified to serve on juries, the constables of the several towns shall have free liberty, at all seasonable times, upon request by them made to any officer or officers, who shall have in his or their custody any book or account of rates or taxes on the freeholder or inhabitants within such respective towns, to inspect the same, and take from thence the names of such persons qualified to serve on juries, dwelling within the respective, towns for which such lists are to be given in and returned pursuant to this act; and shall, in the month of September, yearly, and every year, upon two or more Sundays, fix upon the door of the church, chapel, and every other publick place of religious worship within their respective precincts, a true and exact list of all such persons intended to be returned to the said general sessions of the peace, as qualified to serve on juries, pursuant to the directions of this act; and leave at the same time a duplicate of such list with the town clerk of the said place, perused by the freeholder and inhabitants thereof, to the end that notice may be given of persons duly qualified who are omitted, or of persons inserted by mistake who ought to be omitted out of such lists; and it shall and may be lawful to and for the justices, at the general sessions of the peace to which the said lists shall be so returned, upon due proof made before them of any person or persons duly qualified to serve on juries being omitted in such lists, or of any person or persons being inserted therein who ought to have been omitted, to order his or their name or names to be inserted or struck out, as the case may require: and in case any constable shall wilfully omit, out of such list, any person or persons, whose name or names ought to be inserted, or shall wilfully insert any person or persons who ought to be omitted, every constable so offending, shall, for every person so omitted or inserted in such list, contrary to the true intent and meaning of this act, be fined by the said justices, in the said general sessions of the peace, in the sum of forty shillings sterling. XI. Provided always, and be it enacted by the authority aforesaid, That in case default shall at any time hereafter be made, by any constable or constables, to return lists of persons qualified to serve on juries within any of the said towns to the said court of general sessions of the peace; then, and in such case, it shall be lawful for the sheriff of the county, in which such default shall be made, to summon and return to the several courts aforesaid, or any of them, such and so many persons dwelling in such towns, or the districts thereof, qualified to serve on juries, as he shall think fit to serve on juries at such respective courts; any thing herein contained to the contrary thereof in any-wise notwithstanding. XII. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That every summons of any person, to serve upon any of the juries at the said courts, or any of them, shall be made by the sheriff, or other person, ten days at the least before the holding of every such court; and in case any jurors, so to be summoned, be absent from the usual place of his habitation at the time of such summons, notice of such summons shall be given, by leaving a note, in writing, under the hand of such sheriff, or person, containing the contents thereof, at the dwelling-house of such juror, with some person inhabiting in the same XIII. Provided always, and be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That in case a sufficient number of persons qualified to serve on juries shall not appear at the said courts, or any of them, to perform the service of grand or petit jurors; that then, and in such case, it shall be lawful for the said court to issue a writ or precept to the sheriff, requiring him to summon a sufficient number of other persons qualified to serve on juries, immediately to appear at such court, to fill up and compleat the number of jurors to serve at such court; and such persons are hereby required to appear and serve as jurors at the said courts accordingly. XIV. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That no person who shall serve as a juror, at any of the said courts, shall be liable to serve again as a juror at the same court, or any other of the courts aforesaid, for the space of three years then next following; except upon special juries. XV. And, in order that sheriffs may be informed of the persons who have served as jurors, it is hereby further enacted by the authority, aforesaid, that every sheriff shall prepare and keep a book, or register, wherein. the names of all such persons who have served as jurors, with their additions and places of abode, and the times when, and the courts in which they served, shall be alphabetically entered and registered; which books or registers shall, from time to time, be delivered over to the succeeding sheriff of the said county; within ten days after he shall enter upon his office; and every juror, who shall attend and serve at any of the courts aforesaid, may at the expiration of the time of holding every such court, upon, application to the sheriff, or his deputy, have a certificate immediately, gratis, from the sheriff, or his deputy, testifying such his attendance and service; which said certificate the said sheriff, or his deputy, is required to give to every such juror. XVI. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That if, by reason of challenges, or otherwise, there shall not be a sufficient number of jurors for the trial of any prosecution for any misdemeanour, or any action depending in any of the said courts; then, and in such case, the jury shall be filled up de Talibus Circumstantibus, to be returned by the sheriff, unless he be a party, or interested or related to any party or person interested in such prosecution or action; and, in any of which cases, to be returned by the coroner, unless he be a party, or interested or related to any party or person interested in such prosecution or action; and, in any of these cases, to be returned by a proper and indifferent person, to be appointed by the court for that purpose. XVII. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That in case any person summoned to serve upon the grand or petit jury, at any of the courts aforesaid, or upon the jury in any prosecution, action, or suit, depending in any of the said courts, shall not appear and serve at the said courts, according to the said summons, (not having any reasonable excuse to be allowed by the judges or justices at such court,) he shall be fined by the judges or justices of such court in any sum not exceeding the sum of ten pounds, nor less than twenty shillings sterling. XVIII. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That every sheriff, or other officer, to whom the Venire Facias, or other process or warrant, for the trial of causes, or summoning of juries, shall be directed, shall, upon his return of every such writ, or other process or warrant, (unless in cases where a special jury shall be struck by order or rule of court, pursuant to this act,) annex a pannel to the said writ, or process, or warrant, containing the christian and surnames, additions, and places of abode, of a competent number of jurors, named in such lists, which number of jurors shall not be less than twenty-four, nor more than forty-eight, without direction of the judges or justices of such court or session, or one of them, who are hereby respectively impowered and required, if he or they see cause, by order, under his or their respective hand or hands, to direct a greater number; and then such number as shall be so directed shall be the number to be returned to serve on such jury. XIX. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That for the trials of all actions or suits depending in any of the said courts, the name of each and every person who shall be summoned and returned as aforesaid, with his addition, and the place of his abode, shall be written in several and distinct pieces of parchment, or paper, being all as near as may be of equal size and bigness. and shall be delivered unto the officer to be appointed by the court for that purpose, by the sheriff, under sheriff, or some agent of his; and shall, by direction and care of such officer, be rolled up all as near as may be, in the same manner, and put together in a box or glass to be provided for that purpose; and when any cause shall be brought on to be tried, some indifferent person, by direction of the court, may and shall, in open court, draw out twelve of the said parchments or paper, one after another; and if any of the persons, whose names shall be so drawn, shall not appear, or shall be challenged, and such challenge allowed, then such person shall proceed to draw other parchments or papers from the said box, till twelve indifferent persons shall be drawn; which twelve indifferent persons being sworn shall be the jury to try the said cause: and the names of the persons so drawn and sworn shall be kept apart by themselves in some other box or glass, to be kept, for that purpose, till such jury shall have given in their verdict and the same is recorded, or until such jury shall, by consent of the parties, or leave of the court, be discharged; and then the same names shall be rolled up again, and returned to the former box or glass, there to be kept, with the other names remaining at that time undrawn, and so toties quoties, as long as any cause remains then to be tried. XX. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That it shall and may be lawful to and for the superior court of assize, and court of common pleas upon motion made on behalf of his Majesty, his heirs or successors, or on the motion of any prosecutor or defendant, in any indictment or information for any misdemeanor depending, or to be brought or prosecuted in the said court, or on the motion of any plaintiff or plaintiffs, defendant or defendants, in any action, cause, or suit whatsoever, depending, or to be brought and carried on in the said court, and the said court, is hereby authorized and required, upon motion as aforesaid, in any of the cases before mentioned, to order and appoint a jury to be struck for the trial of any issue joined in any of the said cases, and triable by a jury of twelve men, by such officer of the said court as the court shall appoint; and for that purpose the sheriff, or his deputy, shall attend such officer with the duplicate of the lists of persons qualified to serve on juries; and such officer shall thereupon take down, in writing, from the said duplicate, the names of forty-eight persons qualified to serve on juries, with their additions, and places of abode, a copy whereof shall forthwith be delivered to the prosecutors or plaintiffs, their attornies or agents, and another copy thereof to the defendants, their attornies or agents, in such prosecutions and causes; and the said officer of the court aforesaid shall, at a time to be fixed by him for that purpose, strike out the names of twelve of the said persons, at the nomination of the prosecutors or plaintiffs, their attornies or agents, and also the names of twelve others of the said persons, at the nomination of the said defendants in such prosecutions and suits; and the twenty-four remaining persons shall be struck and summoned, and returned to the said court as jurors, for the trial of such issues. XXI. Provided always, That in case the prosecutors or plaintiffs, or defendants, their attornies or agents, shall neglect or refuse to attend the officer at the time fixed for striking the names of twenty-four persons as aforesaid, or nominate the persons to struck out; then, and in such case, the said officer shall, and he is hereby required to strike out the names of such number of the said persons as such prosecutors or plaintiffs, or defendants, might have nominated to be struck out. XXII. And be it further enacted, That the person or party who shall apply for such special jury as aforesaid, shall not only bear and pay the fees for striking such jury, but shall also pay and discharge all the expences occasioned by the trial of the cause by such special jury, and shall not have any further or other allowance for the same, upon taxation of costs, than such person or party would be intitled unto in case the cause had been tried by a common jury, unless the judge, before whom the cause is tried, shall, immediately after the trial, certify, in open court, under his hand, upon the back of the record, that the same was a cause proper to be tried by a special jury. XXIII. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That, in all actions brought in any of the said courts, where it shall appear to the court in which such actions are depending, that it will be proper and necessary that the jurors who are to try the issues in any such actions, should have the view of the messuages, lands, or place in question, in order to their better understanding the evidence that will be given upon the trial of such issues; in every such case the respective courts in which such actions shall be depending may order the jury to the place in question, who then and there shall have the matters in question shewn them by two persons to be appointed by the court; and the special costs of all such views as allowed by the court, shall, before the trial, be paid by the party who moved for the view, (the adverse party not consenting thereto;) and shall, at the taxation of the bill of costs, have the same allowed him, upon his recovering judgement in such trial; and upon all views with the consent of parties, ordered by the court, the costs thereof, as allowed by the court, shall, before trial, be equally paid by the said parties; and in the taxation of the bill of costs, the party recovering judgement shall have the sum by him paid allowed to him; any law, usage, or custom, to the contrary notwithstanding. XXIV. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That if any action shall be brought against any sheriff, for what he shall do in execution, or by virtue of this act, he may plead the general issue, and give the special matter in evidence; and if a verdict shall be found for him, he shall recover treble costs. Source: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/mass_gov_act.asp

May 14, 1774 To the FREEHOLDERS and YEOMANRY of my Country. The virtue, strength and fortitude of a state generally reside in the FREEHOLDERS of the Nation. In you, Gentlemen, as the LANDED INTEREST of the Country, do I place my confidence, under GOD, at this Day. To you, Gentlemen, therefore, I dedicate THIS temporary WORK, as a testimony of that great respect and warm affection, with which, I am, Your Friend and Countryman, JOSIAH QUINCY, jun. Boston, May 14, 1774. [1; unpaginated] PREFACE. THE Statute of the 14th George 3d, received in the last Ships from London (entitled “An Act, to discontinue, in such Manner, and for such Time as are therein mentioned, the landing and discharging, the lading or shipping of Goods, Wares, Merchandize, at the Town, and within the Harbour of Boston, in the Province of Massachusetts-Bay, in North-America,”) gave rise to the following OBSERVATIONS:—They will appear thrown together in haste; and as the Writer was out of Town on business, almost every day, the Sheets were printing off, no doubt many Errors of the Press escaped correction. The Inaccuracies of a sudden Production from one of infirm health, perplexed with various avocations, will receive a mild censure: more material faults, FRIENDS may be prone to forgive; but from Enemies—public or private—we are never to expect indulgence or favor. JOSIAH QUINCY, Junr. Boston, May 14, 1774. [2; unpaginated] OBSERVATIONS &c. IN times of public calamity, it is the duty of a good citizen to consider. If his opportunities or advantages, for knowledge and reflection, are greater than those of mankind in general, his whole duty will remain undischarged, while he confines his thoughts to the compass of his own mind. But if danger is added to the calamity of the times, he who shall communicate his sentimentson public affairs with decency and frankness, merits attention and indulgence, if he may not aspire to approbation and praise. Whoever attends to the tenor and design of the late act of the British Parliament for the BLOCKADE OF this HARBOUR, and duly considers the extensive confusion and distress this measure must inevitably produce; whoever shall reflect upon the justice, policy and humanity of legislators, who could deliberately give their sanction to such a procedure—must be satisfied, that the man, who shall OPENLY dare to expose their conduct, hazards fatal consequences.—Legislators, who could condemn a whole town unheard, nay uncited to answer; who could involve thousands in ruin and misery, without suggestion of any crime by them committed; and who could so construct their law, as that enormous pains and pe- [3; unpaginated] nalties would inevitably ensue, NOTWITHSTANDING THE MOST PERFECT OBEDIENCE TO IT’S INJUNCTIONS; I say, that legislators, thus formed as MEN, thus principled as STATESMEN, would undoubtedly imagine the attainder and death of a private individual, for his public animadversions, a less extraordinary act of power. But all exertions of duty have their hazard:—if dread of Parliamentary extravagance is to deter from public energies, the safety of the common wealth will soon be despaired of; and when once a sentiment of that kind prevails, the excesses of present enormities so rapidly increase, that strides, at first appearance, exorbitant, will soon be found—but the beginning of evils. We therefore consider it as a just observation, that the weight and velocity of public oppressions are ever in a ratio proportionate to private despondency and public despair. [4] He who shall go about to treat of important and perilous concerns, and conceals himself behind the curtain of a feigned signature, gives an advantage to his adversaries; who will not fail to stigmatize his thoughts, as the notions of an unknown writer, afraid or ashamed to avow his sentiments; and hence they are deemed unworthy of notice and refutation. Therefore I give to the world both my sentiments and name upon the present occasion, and shall hear with patience him, who will decently refute what is advanced, and shall submit with temper to that correction and chastisement which my errors deserve. The act now under consideration opens with a recital, that “dangerous commotions and insurrections have been fomented and raised in Boston—by divers ill-affected persons, to the subversion of his Majesty’s Government, and to theutter destruction of the public peace, and good order of the said town; in which commotions and insurrections certain valuable cargoes of Teas, being the property of the East-India Company, and on board certain vessels lying within the bay or harbour of Boston, were seized and destroyed: and in the present condition of said town and harbour, the commerce of his Majesty’s subjects cannot be safely carried on there, nor the customs payable to his Majesty be duly collected.” Two questions naturally arise out of this preamble: The first, whether the facts set forth are true; and Secondly, whether upon a supposition of their truth, they are a sufficient foundation for the subsequent parts of the statute, or will warrant the disabilities, forfeitures, pains and penalties, enacted and inflicted on the subject?—Both inquiries seem intimately to concern the honour and justice of the British le– [5] gislature. And however unimportant the judgment of Americans may now appear to that august body—yet surely the judgment of Europe and future ages is not unworthy their high consideration. Removed from the eye of royalty, the piety of a Sovereign may cease to pity miseries it doth not behold; remote from the cries of public justice and the efforts of popular despair, Lords and Commons may remain unaffected, for a season, with American convulsions; yet justice and humanity must soon excite those operations in America and Europe, which hereafter will move even the senate of Britain. True knowledge and real virtue perhaps was never more diffused than on this northern continent; refined humanity (‘tis boasted) was never more predominant than in Europe at this day:—Can it be supposed, that this virtue will be discordant and inactive; that this knowledge will omit to unfold public wrongs, or that such humanity will cease to interpose? That commotions were in Boston; that East-India tea was destroyed, are facts not controverted. But that such commotions were natural to be expected; that they were such as statesmen must have foreseen and A FATHER OF HIS COUNTRY, who foresaw, would prevent, rather than punish, is equally true. The sentiments of all Americans relative to the Tea act are no secret, their fervor in the COMMON CAUSE equally known; and their probable intemperance in consequence of the arrival of India teas, it required no profound skill in men and politics to predict. Nay the British papers were full, and the senate echoed, with the predictions similar to those which are now fulfilled. It was not difficult for Englishmen in Britain to tell how [6] Englishmen in Americawould conduct on such occasions. What shall we then say? Shall we impute to those, who are dignified as “the wisest and most august” the barbarous projection—deliberately to ensnare, that they might superlatively punish? The calm deliberation of premeditated malice seems rather more characteristick of a private bosom, than a public body. But Governor Hutchinson (the representative of his Majesty in this Province) when treating upon an act of the Massachusetts Government imposing a tax or duty upon goods of the inhabitants of other colonies, hath assured us, that “in all ages and countries, by bodies and communities of men such deeds have been done as most of the individuals of which such communities consisted, acting separately, would have been ashamed of.” An observation that his Excellency might have imbibed, from that prince of historians, Dr. Robertson. “To abandon usurped power, to renounce lucrative error, are sacrifices, which the virtue of individuals, has, on some occasions, offered to TRUTH; but from ANY SOCIETY of men, no such effort can be expected. The corruptions of society, recommended by common utility, and justified by universal practice, are viewed by it’s members, without shame or horror; and reformation never proceeds from themselves, but is always FORCED upon them by some FOREIGN hand.” “Caesar, Lepidus and Antony, says Plutarch, shew, that no beast is more savage than man, when possessed of power equal to his passion.” If the sentiments of Dr. Robertson are just, have we not cause to fear from very powerful states and legislators an equal ferocity? [7] And it is an observation of the illustrious Lord Clarendon, that it is the nature of man, rather to commit two errors, than retract one. When elevated characters commit a second error, it carries the air of an intended discovery, how little they feel for the first, how much they despise the people, how much they are above shame, fear and amendment. But to heighten cruelty by wantonness, to render it more pungent by insult, are such exorbitances, as seldom disgrace the records of mankind. But whenever such instances occur, they strikingly verify that eternal truth recorded in the House of Lords—“it is much easier to restrain liberty from running into licentiousness than POWER from swelling into tyranny and oppression.” Can it add dignity to this noble sentiment, or weight to this important truth, to say, that among the illustrious personages who subscribed it with their hands and transmitted it to posterity, we find a “Chesterfield” and “Cobbam,” a “Strafford” and a “Bathurst[,] a “Haversham” and “Gower”? But to return. Are popular commotions peculiar to Boston? Hath not every maritime town in England been repeatedly affected by them? Are they not incident to every commercial and popular city?—whence, then, is it, that BOSTON is devoted to such unexampled treatment? But it may be said, Boston, as a town, hath aided, abeted, and participated in these tumults. Where is the evidence of it? I presume the King, Lords and Commons of Great-Britain had none; for they do not suggest it: I presume they did not believe it, because they have not intimated it. And had they [8] been furnished with such evidence, had they believed the fact, surely it is an imputation unworthy of their dignity, to say, that they would not have given that matter in the preamble of the statute, as the ground of their extraordinary proceedure. But the records of Boston, and known facts prove that the inhabitants discountenanced and disavowed all riot and disorder. I am thus warranted in saying, that the mere occurrences expressed in the act, is that matter which the British legislature have judged worthy the most unparallelled penal severities. Whether this judgment be right, is a subject interesting to a citizen of the town to enquire; it is a subject on which a man will speak feelingly; on which AN ENGLISHMAN will speak freely and openly. Previous to further observations, it may be necessary to say, that the town of Boston had as a town cautiously and wisely conducted, not only without tumult, but with studied regard to established law. This the rolls of the town verify, and a hundred witnesses can confirm. At the last town-meeting relative to the East-India tea and it’s consignees, it was largely debated, whether it should be an instruction to the committee, who were appointed to wait on those Gentlemen, to insist on their preremptory answer;—whether they would send back the Tea: and after long debate on the question, it passed by a very large majority in the negative. And the greatest enemy of the country cannot point out any one step of the Town of Boston, in the progress of this matter, that was tumultuous, disorderly and against law. This also is an additional reason, why we must conclude that the mere temporary events which [9]took place in Boston, without any illegal proceedure of the town, in the matter of the tea, is in the judgment of the British senate an adequate foundation for the last act received from that powerful body. The first enacting clause of the statute now in view, annihilates all commercial transactions within two certain points of the harbour of Boston, uponpain of the FORFEITURE of “goods, wares and merchandize, and of boat, lighter, ship, vessel, or other bottom;—and of the guns, ammunition, tackle, furniture and stores, in or belonging to the same:” “and of any barge, hoy, lighter, wherry, or boat into which any goods &c. are laden,” &c. The next paragraph, “in case any wharfinger,” &c. or any of their servants shall take up or land, or knowingly suffer to be taken up or landed, or shall ship off, or suffer to be water-born, at or from any of their said wharves, &c. goods &c.” enacts a FORFEITURE and LOSS of such “goods &c. and TREBLE the value thereof, to be computed at the highest price of such sort of goods, &c. together with the vessels and boats, and all the horses, cattle, and carriages, whatsoever made use of in the shipping, unshipping, landing, removing, carriage, or conveyance of any of the aforesaid goods,” &c. The next clause provides, “that if any ship &c. shall be moored or lie at anchor, or be seen hovering within said bay, &c. or within one league from the said bay, &c. it shall and may be lawful for any Admiral, or commissioned officer of his Majesty’s fleet or ships of war, or for ANY OFFI- [10] CER OF HIS MAJESTY’S CUSTOMS, to compel such ship or vessel to depart to SOME OTHER port or harbour, or to SUCH STATION AS THE SAID OFFICER SHALL APPOINT and to use SUCH FORCE for that purpose as shall be found necessary: And if such ship or vessel shall not depart accordingly, WITHIN SIX HOURS after notice for that purpose given by such person as aforesaid, such ship or vessel, together with all the goods laden on board thereon, and all the guns, ammunition, tackle and furniture shall be forfeited and lost, WHETHER BULK SHALL HAVE BEEN BROKEN OR NOT.” Let us here pause for a moment;—let us give time for one single reflection; let us give space for one pulse of the veins—one emotion of the heart. And who can think, but those exalted characters and that generous prince, stiled THE FATHER OF all HIS PEOPLE—who united to this terrible act had many reflections, many feelings of humanity, while they were solemnly consigning thousands—if not millions—to ruin, misery and desperation? The persons in whom this authority is vested, are not confined to the ports or harbours on this continent: the vessel and cargo may be ordered to what harbour, port or station of the whole world, the officer pleases—if he appoint a continental station, ‘tis grace and favour;—and what may be the price of thatpurchase, who can tell! what scope for malice and ill-will; for pride and haughtiness; for avarice and power to wanton and insult, till the one is satiated and the other wearied! Who are the persons to whom such unbounded, such enormous power is entrusted? Power is [11] known to be intoxicating in it’s nature, and in proportion to it’s extent, is ever prone to wantoness: power and authority, says Plutarch, awaken every passion, and discover every latent vice: —what a cogent temptation is here placed to insnare the most virtuous? But if there be one depraved passion in the bosom, as power gives scope and opportunity, how soon will it be called forth in licentious exercise? Shall I be thought going too far; shall I trespass upon the bounds of truth and decency, if I say, that SOME of his Majesty’s commissioned officers, in his fleet, or ships of war; SOME officers of his customs are not altogether worthy of such high confidence and trust? Are there not inferior commissioned officers in the King’s ships; are there not many of the LOWER officers of the customs, who have neither strength of understanding or integrity of heart to weild such a mighty power? Nay, may not I add, that SOME FEW (into whose hands peradventure the estate of a good subject and opulent merchant may chance to fall) are destitute of all sense, mental and humane? While contemplating this subject,—while the mind is active, and heart warm—how apt are we to forget, that the illustrious Houses, who gave their sanction to this astonishing law, are dignified as learned and venerable;—and the Prince that gave his fiat, denominated—“THE WISEST AND BEST OF KINGS”? Declining an entrance upon matters heretofore discussed by abler heads, I have omitted all observation on the right and policy of the claims and laws of Great-Britain over the colonies; upon the same principle, I waive entering that copious field which is presented, by that part of the present act, which provides for the recovery of all forfeitures and penalties in the courts of admiralty—whose extended [12] jurisdiction hath been matter of very great grievance, heart-burnings and complaint; whose judges hold their commissions by the tenure of will and pleasure; and whose large salaries are a most powerful incentive to the desire of—well-pleasing ALL on whom they depend. Another passage in this statute makes utterly void ALL CONTRACTS, “for consigning, shipping, or carrying any goods, &c. to or from the harbour of Boston, which HAVE BEEN made or entered into, or which shall be madeor entered into, so long as the act continues in force, relating to any ship which shall arrive at said town or harbour after the first day of June”. Jurisprudents and the sages of the law for centuries have taught, that retrospective or post facto statutes, were not only militant with the principles of sound morals, but those also of political wisdom. But the Parliament, who by the bold figure of common lawyers, are stiled omnipotent, here enforces a different doctrine. The english colonist, replete with loyalty to his sovereign; the descendant from Britain, animated by love for a mother-country, represses the excursions of his understanding and passions: but the subject or native of another state will feel no such restraint. He had contracted to send his merchandize to this port, expects his returns in the commodities of the country—in compliance with his obligations, his treasures are moving with hazard upon the ocean, with hopes warm for gain. The ship (in which peradventure he hath risqued his life as well as fortune) after many a toil and jeopardy, reaches the destined port. But how are his hopes baffled—how will he [13] rage and exclaim? vast hath been his expences to prepare for his adventure, and equally great his expectations from the Boston merchant. What guilt hath he contracted, what crime hath he committed, that he also should be involved in the calamitous consequences of this unexampled statute? Bouyed up for a moment, perhaps, with a vain expectation, that he may have a remedy on his contract against the merchant here;—how will this supposed foreigner sink with a ten-fold despondency, how will he rise again with adequate indignation, when he discovers all remedy gone;—his contract declared by the law, “utterly void, to ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES WHATSOEVER?”—Here again, love of a parent-country, love for a parent-king checks the current of reason, and restrains the career of passion. Having taken this view, before we proceed further, it is natural once more to ask, whence arose this extraordinary stride of legislation; what is it, that the town of Boston hath done? what new and unheard of crime have the inhabitants committed to justify enacting of such disabilities, forfeitures, pains, and penalties? punishments that descend indiscriminately on all ought to have the sanction of unerring wisdom, and almighty power, or it will be questioned, if not opposed:—The present vengeance falls indiscriminately on the acknowledged innocent, as well as the supposed guilty. Surely the evil is of a very malignant and terrible nature that can require such an extraordinary remedy. Admit fora moment, that the inhabitants of Boston were charged as high criminals; the highest criminals are not punishable, till arraigned before disinterested [14] judges, heard in defence, and found guilty of the charge. But so far from all this, a whole people are accused, prosecuted by they know not whom; tried they know not when; proved guilty they know now how; and sentenced in a mode, which for number of calamities, extent and duration of severity, exceeds the annals of past ages, and we presume, in pity to mankind, will not mark any future Era in the story of the world. What will be the real consequences of this astonishing measure, and what those intended and expected by the planners of it are very different considerations. A MACHIAVEL may plan, and his schemes prove abortive; an [Duke of] ALVA may be sent to execute, and his army be defeated. The circle of the arts and sciences, like the ball of empire, hath held a western course. From Chaldea and Egypt to Greece and Rome, soon after in Italy, and thence to the western provinces of Europe. Chaldea and Egypt had their Magi, their law-givers and heroes, when Greece and Rome swarmed with petty feudatories and barbarians; Greece and Rome flourished in literature, when Gaul, Germany, and Britain were uncivilized, rude and ignorant. Wise and sagacious politicians have not been able to stay the rotation of this revolving scientific circle, any more than mighty potentates to repel the velocity of the flying ball of empire:—superior to human powers, like blazing stars, they hold their destined course, and play their corruscations as they run their race. The expectations of those who were the fautors of the present measures, must have been to bring down superlative distress, discord, confusion, despair, and perdition upon a multitude. How then [15] will our amazement increase, when we shall hear that the hard fate of this multitude cannot be avoided? Let the inhabitants comply with the requisitions of the statute, let them be implicitly obedient to it’s injunctions:—what is the evil they will escape? what is the boon they may hope to attain? hope and fear are said to be the hinges of government. Legislators have therefore considered it as sound policy, never to drive the subject into acts of despair, by causing punishments to appear as inevitable, on the first promulgation of a law. When a legislative body ordaineth penalties to take place in cases of performance or non-performance of particular matters, they surely will take due care, that sufficient notice is given of their public will and sufficient time to comply with their mandates; so that obedience maynot only proceed from principles of regard to the law-makers, but motives of personal safety to the subject himself. This seems not more consonant to political wisdom, than to nature and equity.—But let us now suppose, that upon the first intimations of the present law, Boston had been as prone to obey the edict of a British Court, as the Turk to comply with the mandate of the Divan; let us imagine them as servile, as fawning as a court dependant to a minister of state;—nay, if there be any thing in nature, yet more humble and more base, let Boston (in idea for a short moment) be that humble, servile base and fawning something: What doth it all avail? The first time the inhabitants of this town had any intimation, of the will of the British Parliament, was on the tenth of may, and the act is to take place on the first of June; and thence to continue in full force, “until it shall sufficiently appear to his Majesty that [16] full satisfaction hath been made by or on behalf of the inhabitants of the said town of Boston to the united company of merchants of England trading to the East-Indies, for the damage sustained by the said company by the destruction of their goods sent to the said town of Boston, on board certain ships or vessels as aforesaid; AND UNTIL IT SHALL BE CERTIFIED TO HIS MAJESTY in council BY THE GOVERNOR, or LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, of the said province, that reasonable satisfaction hath been made to the officers of his Majesty’s revenue and OTHERS, WHO SUFFERED BY THE RIOTS AND INSURRECTIONS ABOVE MENTIONED, in the months of November and December in the year 1773, and in the month of January in the year 1774.” Satisfaction could not be made to the East-India company, if all Boston had the WILL and POWER to do it, till the town had time and opportunity to call a meeting, assemble, consult and determine upon the measure: great bodies are not calculated for speedy decision, any more than velocity of motion. The resolution formed; time must be given for dispatches to England, application to the East-India company, an adjustment with them upon the nice point of “full satisfaction”:—that accomplished; time must be given for making the matter “sufficiently appear to his Majesty.”—Let any one consider but for a moment, what a length of time must inevitably elapse before all this can be accomplished: nay, may it not well be questioned, considering the parties and all persons concern’d and the circumstances of this affair, whether such accomplishment be practicable? But is this all that is to be done and effected before relief can be given to [17] this distressed land? Far otherwise. “The Governoror Lieutenant Governor, must also first certify to his Majesty, in Council, that reasonable satisfaction hath been made to the officers of his Majesty’s revenue, and OTHERS, who SUFFERED by the riots and insurrections above mentioned”. No person is particularly designated to be the judge between the subject, and the officers of his Majesty’s revenue: No provision being expressly made, touching this point, how probable that litigation might arise concerning it? If we say that the Governor, or Lieutenant Governor, is the implied judge of this matter: How is the question to be brought before him, how tried, and how adjusted? These also are points not settled in a moment: Long indeed would be the period before the subject in Boston will be capable to ascertain and make such satisfaction, as that the person here pointed out, would make his certificate, that it was plenary and reasonable. Governor Bernard lately filled the chair of government, while Mr. Hutchinson was second in command: Governor Hutchinson now fills the chair, and the office of Lieutenant Governor is vacant. How long would it be before the inhabitants of Boston would acquiesce in the decision of either of these gentlemen? How little probability is there, considering the sentiments, the past and present conduct of these gentlemen, that they would speedily give the required certificate?—If it hath been found difficult to touch the tender feelings of the American and Native, how long would it take to excite generous sentiments in the Briton and Stranger? [18] But these are all preparatories to the obtaining any ease or relief from the pressure of this penal law. The prerequisites to the restoration of public felicity are here not only improbable, but when considered altogether and in the present crisis of public affairs are they not impracticable? But yet worse, being accomplished, it could in no way prevent the misery and calamities of this British edict. The space given for the subject to stay this torrent of evils is so short, that it is impossible for him, exerting his utmost energies, to prevent being overwhelmed. (But what mortals are unable to prevent—HEAVEN may stay or divert.) An avenue seems to be opened by the benignity of our British fathers; but when attempted, affords no way of escape. My veneration for Britain is so great, that I will not suppose the great council of the nation intended to flatter with a false hope, that cruel disappointment might heighten the poignancy of suffering—the anguish of despair. But sure the fathers of a people will consider, what are like to be the sentiments and conduct of men driven to distractionby a multitude of inevitable evils, and consigned to despair from the terms of their deliverance? Wonder was excited on the first view of the present law; our astonishment hath been increasing in the progress of our survey. A period is not yet put to our admiration. The faculties of sensation are yet to be further stretched. The civilian and statesman, the moralist and sage had heretofore delivered those maxims of truth and [19] those rules of government, which wise legislators have ever observed, and the bulk of mankind yet honour and revere.—To know the laws of the land already in force, previous to the publication of a new code, or in the technical phraseology of a common lawyer “to know how the law stood before we make a new statute”, hath been considered as an indispensable accomplishment of a good legislator. But that illustrious Parliament, whose power is distinguished, with the appellation of “omnipotent”, seem not to have exercised this important knowledge—tho’ we do not hence rashly infer, that they are destitute of information, because all who are vested with omnipotence of power are ever inspired with proportionate wisdom. It must again be noticed, that no relief is to be had, “untill full satisfaction hath been made BY or ON behalf of the inhabitants of said town of Boston”. Now to suppose that any in England or Europe would make satisfaction “on behalf” of said Inhabitants was unnatural, if not absurd; but what is more to the point, it was certainly unparliamentary. The remaining alternative is that satisfaction must be made by Boston. Every person knows, that towns in this Province cannot raise or appropriate any monies, but by the express provisions and direct authority of law: it is a matter of equal notoriety that all town assessments of money are expresly confined, by the 4 Wm. & Mar. c. 13. to the “maintenance and support of the ministry, schools, the poor, and defraying of other necessary TOWN CHARGES”. A law which received the royal approbation, almost a century agone. [20] Will any now say, that the monies appointed to be paid to the East-India house come within the words of “necessary town charges”? When did the town contract the debt, or how are they subject to the payment of it? Had the Parliament seen fit to enact, that monies requisite to satisfy the India merchants, should be so considered; two questions (not of quick decision) might then have arisen; the one touching the validity and obligatory force of the statute; theother, whether it would then come within the intent and design of the Province law. For past doubt, our Provincial legislators had no such charge (as the one here supposed) in view, when they made the law of Wm. & Mary; and in this way therefore the matter could not be brought within it’s provision. Parliament must then make a new act to enable and impower Boston to pay the India company, before the town can comply with the terms of relief of their trade. In the mean while, what is to be the situation of Boston and the inhabitants of the globe with whom they have such extensive connections?—But, it is very apparent, that the Parliament have not as yet enacted the payment of this satisfaction as a town charge. They have only placed it in the option of the town to make that payment, or submit to the consequences. That payment, we affirm, they cannot pay, without breach of the law of the land.—New and unheard of therefore is the state of this people. They must sustain the severest afflictions, they must stand the issue of distracting remedies—or—violate one of the most known and practiced laws of the land!—Let us search the history of the world;—let us inspect the records of a Spanish inquisition; [21] let us enter the recesses of an Ottoman court;—nay, let us traverse the regions of romance and fable—where shall we find a parallel? “When the Hungarians were called REBELS first, they were called so for no other reason than this, (says the elegant Ld. Bolingbroke) that they would not be SLAVES”. But for BRITONS, when they would not venture to call their CHILDREN, rebels, that they should treat them as worse than REBELS, was reserved to distinguish an age of vaunted light, humanity and knowledge—the Era of a King, who prides himself as born and bred a Briton! To complain of the enormities of power, to expostulate with over-grown oppressors, hath in all ages been denominated sedition and faction; and to turn upon tyrants, treason and rebellion. But tyrants are rebels against the first laws of Heaven and Society:—to oppose their ravages is an instinct of nature—the inspiration of GOD in the heart of man. In the noble resistance which mankind make to exorbitant ambition and power, they always feel that divine afflatus, which, paramount every thing human, causes them to consider the LORD OF HOSTS as their leader, and his angels as fellow-soldiers: —trumpets are to them joyful sounds, and the ensigns of war, the banners of GOD; —their wounds are bound up in the oil of a good cause, and their blood flows into the veins of a Saviour; sudden death is to them present martyrdom,and funeral obsequies resurrections to eternal honour and glory:—their widows and babes, being received into the arms of a compassionate GOD, and their names enrolled among [22] DAVID’S WORTHIESS—greatest losses are to them greatest gains; for they leave the troubles of their warfare to lie down on beds of eternal rest and felicity. There are other parts of the act now before us, which merit notice: particularly that, relative to the prosecution of suits in the ordinary courts of law, “for any thing done in pursuance of the act”; by which the defendant is enabled “to plead the general issue, and give the act, and the general matter, in evidence”: whereupon it follows, that if it shall appear so to have been done, the jury SHALL find for the defendant”; who, by an after clause, is to “recover treble costs”. From this passage some have been lead to conclude, that the appearance of this matter was to be to the Judge; and that if it had that appearance to him, and he should direct the jury accordingly; however it might appear to the jury, they must follow the directions of the Judge, and acquit the defendant. But this is a construction, which as the words do not necessarily carry that meaning, I will not permit myself to suppose the design of the law. However the late donations of large salaries by the crown, to the justices of our superior Courts, who are nominated by the Governor, and hold their commission, durante bene placito, have not a little contributed to the preceeding apprehension. Another passage makes provision for “assigning and appointing such and so many open places, quays and wharfs, within the said harbour, creeks, havens and islands, for the landing, discharging, lading and shipping of goods, as his Majesty, his heirs or successors, shall judge necessary and ex- [23] pedient”; and also for “appointing such and so many officers of the customs therein, as his Majesty shall think fit; after which it shall be lawful for any person or persons to lade or put off from, or to discharge and land upon, such wharfs, quays, and places, so appointed within the said harbour, AND NONE OTHER, any goods, wares and mechandize whatsoever”. By which the property of many private individuals is to be rendered useless, and worse than useless; as the possession of a thing, aggravates the misfortune of those who are deprived of a capacity to enjoy. But if the property of some few is to be rendered nothing worth, so that of many others is to be openly invaded:—But why should we dwell upon private wrongs, while those of the multitude call for all our attention? If any should now say—we are a commercial people—commercial plans can only save us. If any think that ideas of the merchant are at this day to give spring to our nerves and vigour to our actions; if any say, that empire in this age of the world, is only founded in commerce:—let him show me the people emancipated from oppression by commercial principles and measures: let him point me, that unexplored land, where trade and slavery flourish together. Till then, I must hold a different creed; and believe—that tho’ commercial views may not be altogether unprofitable; that tho’ commercial plans may do much, they never can do ALL. With regard then, to how much the merchant, the artificer, the citizen and the husbandsman may do, let us no longer differ. But let every one apply his strength and abilities to that [24] mighty burden, which unless removed, must crush US ALL. AMERICANS have one COMMON INTEREST to unite them; that interest must cement them. Natural allies, they have published to the world professions of reciprocal esteem and confidence, aid and assistance; they have pledged their faith of mutual friendship and alliance. Not only common danger, bondage, and disgrace; but national truth and honour conspire to make THE COLONISTS resolve—TO STAND OR FALL TOGETHER. Americans never were destitute of discernment; they have never been grossly deficient in virtue; a small share of sagacity is now needful to discover, the insidious art of our enemies; the smallest spark of virtue will on this occasion kindle into flame. Will the little temporary advantage held forth for delusion, seduce them from their duty? Will they not evidence at this time, how much they despise the commercial bribe of a British ministry; and testify to the world that they do not vail to the most glorious of the antients, in love of freedom and sterness of virtue? But as to THE INHABITANTS OF THIS PROVINCE, how great are the number, how weighty the considerations to actuate their conduct? Not a town in this colony, but have breathed the warmest declarations of attachment to their rights, union in their defence, and perseverance to the end. Should any ONE maritime town (for more than ONE I will not believe there can be) allured by the expectations of gain, refuse to lend their aid;—entertaining the base idea of build- [25] ing themselves upon the ruins of this metropolis—and in the chain of future events, on the destruction of ALL AMERICA,—what shall we say?—hours of bitter reflection will come,when their own feelings shall excite consideration; when remembrance of the past, and expectation of the future shall fill up the measure of their sorrow and anguish.—But I turn from the idea, which blasts my country with infamy—my species with disgrace. The intelligent reader must have noticed, that through the whole of the act of Parliament, there is no suggestion that the East-India company had made any demand for damage done to their property:—if the company supposed they had received injury, it doth not appear whom they considered guilty, and much less, that they had alledged any charge against the town of Boston. But I presume that if the company were intitled to receive a recompense from the town until they prosecuted their demand they are supposed to wave it. And we cannot but imagine, that this is the first instance, where Parliament hath ordered one subject to pay a satisfaction to another, when the party aggrieved did not appear to make his regular claim; and much more uncommon is it, for such recompence to be ordered without ascertaining the amount to which the satisfaction shall extend. But if the East-India company were now made easy, and Boston reduced to perfect silence and humiliation:—how many “OTHERS” are they, who would suggest, that they “SUFFERED by the riots and insurrections abovementioned” and demand “reasonable satisfaction” therefor.—The singular texture, uncer- [26] tainty, looseness and ambiguity of this phrase in the statute seems so calculated for dispute, such an eternal bar to a full compliance with the requisitions of the act, and of course to render permanent it’s evils, that I cannot speak upon the subject without trespassing upon those bounds of respect and decency, within the circle of which I have endeavoured to move. Here waiving further particular consideration of that subject which gave origin to this performance; I shall proceed to an equally interesting subject—that of STANDING ARMIES and CIVIL SOCIETY. ——————————— The faculty of intelligence may be considered as the first gift of GOD: it’s due exercise is the happiness and honour of man; it’s abuse his calamity and disgrace. The most trifling duty is not properly discharged without the exertion of this noble faculty; yet how often does it lie dormant, while the highest concernments are in issue? Believe me (my countrymen) the labor of examining for ourselves, or great imposition, must be submitted to; there is no otheralternative: and unless we weigh and consider what we examine, little benefit will result from research. We are at this extraordinary crisis called to view the most melancholy events of our day: the scene is unpleasant to the eye, but it’s contemplation will be useful; if our thoughts terminate with judgment, resolution and spirit. If at this period of public affairs, we do not think, deliberate, and determine like men—men of [27] minds to conceive, hearts to feel, and virtue to act—what are we to do?—to gaze upon our bondage? while our enemies throw about fire-brands, arrows and death, and play their tricks of desperation with the gambols of sport and wantonness. The proper object of society and civil institutions is the advancement of “the greatest happiness of the greatest number”. The people (as a body, being never interested to injure themselves and uniformly desirous of the general wellfare) have ever made this collective felicity the object of their wishes and pursuit. But strange, as it may seem, what the many through successive ages have desired and sought, the few have found means to baffle and defeat. The necessity of the acquisition hath been conspicuous to the rudest mind; but man, inconsiderate, that “in every society, there is an effort constantly tending to confer on one part the height of power, and to reduce the other to the extreme of weakness and misery”, hath abandoned the most important concerns of civil society to the caprice and controul of those, whose elevation caused them to forget their pristine equality, and whose interest urged them to degrade the best and most useful below the worst and most unprofitable of the species. Against this exertion, and the principle which originates it, no vigilance can be too sharp, no determination too severe. [28] But alas—as if born to delude and be deluded—to believe whatever is taught, and bear all that is imposed—successive impositions, wrongs and insults awaken neither the sense of injury or spirit of revenge. Fascinations and enchantments, chains and fetters bind in adamant the understanding and passions of the human race. Ages follow ages, pointing the way to study wisdom—but the charm continues. Sanctified by authority and armed with power, error and usurpation bid defiance to truth and right, while the bulk of mankind sit gazing at the monster of their own creation:—a monster, to which their follies and vices gave origin, and their depravity and cowardice continue in existence. “The greatest happiness of the greatest number” being the object and bond of society, the establishment of truth and justice, ought to be the basis of civil policy and jurisprudence. But this capital establishment can never be attained in a state where there exists a power superior to the civil magistrate and sufficient to controul the authority of the laws. Whenever, therefore, the profession of arms becomes a distinct order in the state, and a standing army part of the constitution, we are not scrupulous to affirm, that the end of the social compact is defeated, and the nation called to act upon the grand question consequent upon such an event. The people who compose the society (for whose security the labour of it’s institution was perform- [29] ed, and of the toils it’s preservation daily sustained) THE PEOPLE, I say, are the only competent judges of their own welfare, and, therefore, are the only suitable authority to determine touching the great end of their subjection and their sacrifices. This position leads us to two others, not impertinent on this occasion, because of much importance to Americans:— That the legislative body of the common-wealth ought to deliberate, determine and make their decrees in places where the legislators may easily know from their own observation the wants and exigencies, the sentiments and will, the good and happiness of the people; and the people as easily know the deliberations, motives, designs and conduct of their legislators, before their statutes and ordinances actually go forth and take effect:— That every member of the legislature ought himself to be so far subject in his person and property to the laws of the state, as to immediately and effectually feel every mischief and inconvenience resulting from all and every act of legislation. The science of man and society, being the most extended in it’s nature, and the most important in it’s consequences of any in the circle of erudition, ought to be an object of universal attention and study. Was it made so, the rights of mankind would not remain buried for ages, under systems of civil and priestly hierarchy, nor social felicity overwhelmed by lawless domination. Under appearances the most venerable and institutions the most revered; under the sanctity of religion; the dignity of government, and the smiles of [30] beneficence, do the subtle and ambitious make their first incroachments upon their species. Watch and oppose ought therefore to be the motto of mankind. A nation in it’s best estate—guarded by good laws, fraught with publicvirtue, and steeled with martial courage—may resemble Achilles: but Achilles was wounded in the heel. The least point left unguarded, the foe enters:—latent evils are the most dangerous—for we often receive the mortal wound, while we are flattered with security. The experience of all ages shews that mankind are inattentive to the calamities of others, careless of admonition, and with difficulty roused to repel the most injurious invasions. “I perceive (said the great patriot Cicero to his countrymen) an inclination for tyranny in all Caesar projects and executes.” Notwithstanding this friendly caution, not “till it was too late did the people find out, that no beginnings, however small, are to be neglected.” For that Caesar, who at first attacked the common-wealth with mines very soon opened his batteries. —Encroachments upon the rights and property of the citizen are like the rollings of mighty waters over the breach of antient mounds: slow and unalarming at the beginning; rapid and terrible in the current; a deluge and devastation at the end.—Behold the oak, which stretcheth itself to the mountains, and overshadows the vallies, was once an acorn in the bowels of the earth:—Slavery (my friends) which was yesterday engraf- [31] ted among you, already overspreads the land, extending its arms to the ocean, and it’s limbs to the rivers:—Unclean and voracious animals under it’s covert, find protection and food,—but the shade blasteth the green herb, and the root thereof poisoneth the dry ground, while the winds which wave its branches scatter pestilence and death. Regular government is necessary to the preservation of private property and personal security. Without these, men will descend into barbarism, or at best become adepts in humiliation and servility: but they will never make a progress in literature or the useful arts. Surely a proficiency in arts and sciences is of some value to mankind, and deserves some consideration.—What regular government can America enjoy with a legislative a thousand leagues distant, unacquainted with her exigencies, militant in interest, and unfeeling of her calamities? What protection of property—when ministers under this authority shall overrun the land with mercenary legions? What personal safety when a British administration—(such as it now is, and corrupt as it may be)—pour armies into the capital and senate-house—point their artillery against the tribunal of justice, and plant weapons of death at the posts of our doors? Thus exposed to the power, and insulted by the arms of Britain—STANDING ARMIES become an object of serious attention. And as the history of mankind affords no instance of successful and confirmed tyranny, without the aid of military forces, we shall not wonder to find them the desiderata of princes, and the grand object of modern poli- [32] cy.—What, tho’ they subdue every generous passion and extinguish every spark of virtue—all this must be done, before empires will submit to be exhausted by tribute and plundered with impunity. Amidst all the devices of man to the prejudice of his species, the institution of which we treat hath proved the most extensively fatal to religion, morals and social happiness. Founded in the most malevolent dispositions of the human breast, disguised by the policy of state, supported by the lusts of ambition, THE SWORD hath spread havock and misery throughout the world. By the aid of mercenary troops, the sinews of war, the property of the subject, the life of the common-wealth have been committed to the hands of hirelings, whose interest and very existence, depend on an abuse of their power. In the lower class of life, STANDING ARMIES have introduced brutal debauchery and real cowardice; in the higher orders of state, venal haughtiness and extravagant dissipation. In short whatever are the concommitants of despotism; whatever the appendages of oppression, this ARMED MONSTER hath spawned or nurtured, protected or established;—monuments and scourges of the folly and turpitude of man. Review the armament of modern princes:—what sentiments actuate the military body? what characters compose it? Is there a private centinel of all the innumerable troops that make so brilliant a figure, who would not for want of property have been driven from a Roman cohort, when soldiers were the defenders of liberty? [33] Booty and blind submission is the science of the camp. When lust, rapacity, or resentment incite whole battallions proceed to outrage. Do their leaders command—obedience must follow. “Private soldiers (said Tiberius Gracchus from the Roman rostrum) fight and die to advance the wealth and luxury of the great.” “Soldiers (said an eminent Puritan in his sermon preached in this country more than 130 years ago) are commonly men who fight themselves fearlessly into the mouth of hell for revenge, a booty, or a little revenue:—a cry of battle is a day of harvest for the devil”. Soldiers, like men, are much the same in every age and country. “Heroes are much the same, the point’s agreed, From Macedonia’s madman to the Sweed.” What will they not fight for—whom will they not fight against?—Are these men, who take up arms with a view to defend their country and its laws? Do the ideas or feelings of the citizen actuate a British private on entering the camp? Excitements, generous and noble like these are far from being the stimuli of a modern phalanx. The general of an army, habituated to uncontrouled command, feels himself absolute: he forgets his superiors, or rather despises that civil authority, which is destitute of an energy to compel his obedience. His soldiers (who look up to him as their sovereign, and to their officers as magistrates) loose the sentiments of the citizen and contemn the [34] laws. Thus a will and a power to tyranize become united; and the effects are as inevitable and fatal in the political, as the moral world. The soldiers of Great Britain are by the mutiny act deprived of those legal rights which belong to the meanest of their fellow-subjects, and even to the vilest malefactor. Thus divested of those rights and privileges which render Britons the envy of all other nations, and liable to such hardships and punishments as the limits and mercy of our known laws utterly disallow; it may well be thought they are persons best prepared and most easily tempted to strip others of their rights, having already lost their own. Excluded, therefore, from the enjoyments which others possess, like Eunuchs of an Eastern seraglio, they envy and hate the rest of the community, and indulge a malignant pleasure in destroying those privileges to which they can never be admitted. How eminently does modern observation verify that sentiment of Baron Montesquieu—a slave living among free-men will soon become a beast. A very small knowledge of the human breast, and a little consideration of the ends for which we form into societies and common-wealths discover the impropriety and danger of admitting such an order of men to obtain an establishment in the state: the annals and experience of every age shew; that it is not only absurdity and folly—but distraction and madness. But we in this region of the earth have not only to dread and struggle with the natural and common calamities resulting from such military bodies, but the combined dan- [35] gers arising from AN ARMY OF FOREIGNERS, stationed in the very bowels of the land. Infatuated Britons have been told—and as often deceived, that an army of natives would never oppress their own countrymen.But Caesar and Cromwell, and an hundred others have enslaved their country with such kind of forces. And who does not know that subalterns are implicitly obedient to their officers;—who when they become obnoxious are easily changed, as armies to serve the purposes of ambition and power are soon new modelled. But as to America, the armies which infest her shores, are in every view FOREIGNERS, disconnected with her in interest, kindred and other social alliances; who have nothing to lose, but every thing to gain by butchering and oppressing her inhabitants.—But yet worse: —their inroads are to be paliated, their outrages are to receive a sanction and defence from a Parliament whose claims and decrees are as unrighteous, as the Administration is corrupt; as boundless as their ambition, and as terrible as their power. The usurpation and tyranny of the Decemviri of Rome are represented as singularly odious and oppressive: but even they never assumed what Britain in the face of all mankind hath avowed and exercised over the Colonies:—the power of passing laws merely on her own authority. “Nothing that we propose (said they to the people) can pass into a law without your consent. Be yourselves, ye romans, the authors of those LAWS ON WHICH YOUR HAPPINESS DEPENDS”. “The dominion of all great empires degrades and debases the human species”. The dominion of Britain is that of a mighty empire. Her [36] laws waste our substance, her placemen corrupt our morals, and her armies are to break our spirits. —Yes, are they not to do more? “To spoil, to slaughter and to commit every kind of violence; and then to call the manaeuvre by a lying name—GOVERNMENT; and when they have spread a general devastation, call it PEACE.” In the barbarous Massacres of France, in the 16th century, the very hangmen refused obedience to the cruel mandates of the French monarch, saying they were legal officers, and only executed those the laws condemned. Yet history bears testimony that the soldiers performed the office which the hangman refused. Who then can be at a loss for the views of those who were so fond of introducing and tenacious of obtaining similar peace-officers in this obnoxious capital? But let all such—yes, let Great-Britain consider the nature of mankind: let her examine carefully the history of past events, and attend to the voice of experience. In the same age we have just mentioned, the Low-Countries, then subject to the crown of Spain, being persecuted by the court and church of thatkingdom rose up to resist their oppressors. Upon which, in the year 1567, the Duke of Alva was sent, and entered the country with a well-appointed army, ten thousand strong; in order to quell and punish the insurgents. Terrified with these martial operations, the towns [37] suffered the open breach of their charters, and the people submitted to the most humiliating infraction of their liberties; while Alva, being invested with the government, erected the court of twelve, called the council of blood, and caused great numbers to be condemned and executed on account of the insurrections. Universal complaints insued on this disuse of the ordinary courts of law and the introduction of the army: but complaints were in vain, and all murmurs despised. The people became enraged; but without a leader, they were over-awed. “The army (says Sir William Temple) was fierce and brave, and desirous of nothing so much as a rebellion of the country.” All was seizure and process, confiscation and imprisonment, blood and horror, insolence and dejection, punishments executed and meditated revenge. But though the multitude threatened vengeance, the threats of a broken and unarmed people excited contempt and not fear. Alva redoubled his impositions and ravages, his edicts were published for raising monies without the consent of the state, and his soldiers were called to levy the exactions by force.—But the event shewed, that the timidity and tameness of mankind, like every thing human, will have a period. The patience of the miserable sufferers came to an end; and those commotions began which deluged great part of Europe with blood, and finally freed THE UNITED PROVINCES from the yoke of Spain and the inquisition.—What conflicts too sharp—what horrors too dreadful to endure for such a happy deliverance—such a glorious issue? Thus “the first period of the low-country troubles (says the same ingenious writer) proved to King Philip (of Spain) a dear experience, how little the boldest armies and best conduct are able to withstand the torrent of a stubborn and enraged people, which ever bears all [38] down before it, till it be divided into different channels by arts, or by chance; or till the springs, which are the humours that fed it, come to be spent, or dry up of themselves. During several centuries, history informs us, that no monarch in Europe was either so bold, or so powerful as to venture on any steps toward the introduction of regular troops. At last, Charles the 7th of France, seizing a favourable opportunity in 1445, executed that which his predecessors durst not attempt, and established the first standing army known in Europe. Lewis the 11th, son,and successor of Charles, finding himself at the head of his father’s forces, was naturally excited to extend the limits of his ancestors, in the levies of money and men. Charles had not been able to raise upon his subjects two millions, but the army he left his successor enabled him to levy near five. The father established an army of about seventeen hundred, which “he kept in good order and placed for the defence of the realm”; but this army, though thus disciplined and stationed, enabled the son to maintain “in continual pay a terrible band of men of arms, which gave the realm (says the Historian Philip de Commines) a cruel wound of which it bled many years.” How regular, correspondent and uniform are the rise and progression of military calamities in all ages! How replete with instruction—how full of admonition are the memorials of distant times—especially when contracted into the view, and held up in comparison with the present. [39] Charles and Lewis having set the example, all the neighbouring crowned heads soon followed, and mercenary troops were introduced into all the considerable kingdoms of the continent. They gradually became the only military force that was employed or trusted. It has long been (says the learned Dr. Robertson) the chief object of policy to encrease and support them, and the great aim of Princes or ministers to discredit and to annihilate all other means of national activity or defence.” Who will wonder at this, who reflect, that absolute monarchies are established, and can only be supported by mercenary forces? Who can be surprized, that princes and their subalterns discourage a martial spirit among the people, and endeavour to render useless and contemptible the militia, when this institution is the natural strength, and only stable safeguard, of a free country? “Without it, ‘tis folly to think any free government will ever have security and stability.” A standing army in quarters will grow effeminate and dissolute; while a militia, uniformly exercised with hard labor, are naturally firm and robust. Thus an army in peace is worse than a militia; and in war, a militia will soon become disciplin’d and martial. But “when the sword is in the hands of a single person—as in our constitution—he will always (says the ingenious Hume) neglect to discipline the [40] militia in order to have a pretext for keeping up a standing army. ‘TIS EVIDENT, (says the same great character) that this is a mortal distemper in the BRITISH government; of which it must at last inevitably perish.” What a deformed monster is a standing army in a free nation? Free, did I say? what people are truly free,whose monarch has a numerous body of armed mercenaries at his heels? who is already absolute in his power—or by the breath of his nostrils may in an instant make himself so? No free government was ever founded or ever preserved it’s liberty without uniting the characters of citizen and soldier in those destined for defence of the state. The sword should never be in the hands of any, but those who have an interest in the safety of the community, who fight for their religion and their offspring ;—and repell invaders that they may return to their private affairs and the enjoyment of freedom and good order. Such are a well regulated militia composed of the freeholders, citizen and husbandman, who take up arms to preserve their property as individuals, and their rights as freemen. Such is the policy of a truly wise nation, and such was the wisdom of the antient Britons. The primitive constitution of a state in a few centuries falls to decay:—errors and corruptions creep gradually into the admini- [41] stration of government—‘till posterity forget or disregard the institutions of their remote ancestors. In antient time, THE MILITIA of England was raised officered and conducted by common consent. It’s militia was the ornament of the realm in peace and for ages continued the only and sure defence in war. Was the King himself general of an army—it was by the consent of his people. Thus when the Romans visited the island of Britain, Cassibelan was the Prince and chief commander in war; but it was by the election of the great Common Council, Summa belli (says Caesar) COMMUNI CONCILIO, Cassibelano traditur. Nor will this seem strange, when we consider that it was the first state maxim of the Druids ne loqui de republica, nisi per concilium—not even to speak upon a matter of state but in council. Nor is it to be wondered that such politicians informed Caesar, that they had been so long accustomed to liberty, that they knew not the meaning of tribute and slavery; and sent him word, that they had as good blood as he, and from the same fountain. Surely a message that was received by a Roman, may be sent to a British Caesar. There were those venerable Druids, who had inspired the Gauls, of whom Caesar reports this memorable boast; We can call or appeal to such a Great Common Council, as all the world cannot resist. Tacitus, speaking of our Saxon ancestors, relates, Reges ex nobilitate, Duces ex virtute in iisdem conciliis eliguntur. The great council, or the parliament of the state, had, not only the appointment of the principes militia, but the conduct of all military forces, from the first erection of the standard to it’s lodgment in theCitidel; for as the same noble writer informs, it was their general custom—not to intrust any man with the bearing of arms, antequam [42] CIVITAS suffecturum probaverit. Such was the security of the people from the calamities of a standing army:—happy indeed if their successors could boast a similar provision—Britain would not now be groaning under oppression—nor her distant children struggling for their freedom. A spirited nation thus embodied in a well disciplined militia will soon become warlike, and such a people more fitted for action than debate, always hasten to a conclusion on the subject of grievances and public wrongs, and bring their deliberations to the shortest issue. With them “it is the work of but one day, to examine and resolve the nice question, concerning the behaviour of subjects towards a ruler who abuses his power”. Artful dissemblings and plausible pretences are always adopted in order to introduce regular troops. Dyonysius became the tyrant of Syracuse, the most opulent of all the Grecian cities, by feigning a solicitude for the people and a fear of his own person. He humbly prayed only a guard for his protection: they easily granted, what he readily took—the power of plundering by military force and entailing his sovereignty by a devise of his sword. Agathocles, a successor to the Dyonysian family and to the command of the army, continued the military tyranny, and butchered the enslaved people by centuries. Cardinal Ximenes, who made the first innovation of this kind in Spain, disguised the measure under the pious and popular appearance of resisting the progress of the Infidels. The Nobles saw his views and excited opposition in the chief towns of the [43] kingdom. But by dexterously using terror and intreaty, force and forbearance, the refractory cities were brought to compliance. The nobles thus, driven to desperate resolutions by the Cardinal’s military movements, at a personal interview were warm and intemperate. When the Arch-prelate insensibly led them towards a balcony from which they had a view of a large body of troops under arms, and a formidable train of artillery, “Behold, says he, pointing to these and raising his voice, the powers which I have received from his Catholick majesty.” “With these I govern Castile and with these I will govern it”. Nobles and people discovered it was now too late for resistance:—to regret past folly and dread future calamities was the remaining fate of the wretched Castilians. After the Romans quitted the island of Britain, the first appearance of a standing army was under Richard the second. Thesuppression of his enemies in Ireland calling him out of England, his subjects, seized the opportunity and dethroned him. Henry the 7th, a character odious for rapacity and fraud, was the first King of England who obtained a permanent military band in that kingdom. It was only a band of fifty archers:—with the harmless appellation of Yeomen of the guards. This apparently trivial institution was a precedent for the greatest political evil that ever infested the inhabitants of Britain. The ostensible pretext was the dignity of government—“the grandeur of majesty”:— the alteration of the constitution and an increase of power was the aim of the prince. An early “oppugnation of the King’s authority”, tho’ no doubt his favorite subalterns would have stiled it “ILL TIMED”, had easily effected that disbanding of the new-raised forces, which being a little while delayed, no subsequent struggles have accomplished. The wisdom of resistance at the beginning has been repeatedly inculcated by the wise and liberal-minded of all nations, and the experience of every age hath confirmed their instruction. But no Precept or example can make the bulk of mankind wise for themselves. Tho’ cautioned (as we have seen) against the projects of Caesar, the smiles of his benignity deceived the Roman Common-wealth, till the increase of his power bid defiance to opposition. Celebrated for his generosity and magnificence, his complacency and compassion, the complaisant courtier made his way into the hearts of his countrymen. They would not believe, tho’ admonished by the best of men and first of patriots, that the smiling Caesar would filch away their liberties, that a native—born and bred a Roman—would enslave his country—the land of his fathers—the land of his birth—the land of his posterity. But the ambitious Caesar aiming at authority, and [45] Caesar armed and intoxicated with power, appear in very different characters. He who appeared with the mildness of a fine gentleman, in his primaeval state, in an advanced station conducted with the sterness of a tyrant. Opposed by a tribune of the people in taking money out of the public treasury against the laws, Caesar WITH AN ARMY AT HIS HEELS, proclaimed “arms and laws do not flourish together.” “If you are not pleased, (added the usurper) with what I am about, you have nothing to do but to withdraw. Indeed war will not bear much liberty of speech. When I say this I am departing from my own right. For you and all I have found exciting a spirit of faction against me are ay my disposal.” Saying this, he approached the doors of the treasury, as the keys were notproduced, he sent his work-men to break them open. This is the complaisant Caesar—renowned for his amiable qualities: by his early address he deceived and by his arts inslaved his countrymen—and prepared the way for a succeeding Nero to spoil and slaughter them.—Singular and very remarkable have been the interpositions of Providence in fa- [46] vour of New-England:—the permission of an early carnage in our streets, peradventure, was to awaken us from the danger;—of being politely beguiled into security and fraudfully drawn into bondage:—a state that sooner or later ends in rapine and blood.—Shall we be too enthusiastick, if we attribute to the Divine influence, that unexpected good which hath so often in our day been brought out of premeditated evil? Few, comparatively, of the many mischiefs aimed against us, but what have terminated in some advantage, or are now verging to some happy issue.—If the dexterity of veteran troops have not excited envy, if their outrage hath not provoked revenge, their military discipline hath set a well-timed example, and their savage fury been a well-improved incentive. The lusts of an enemy may touch a sensibility of mind and his very pride pique the virtue of the heart. Fleets which appeared formidable, and armies which threatened destruction have either vapoured away with empty parade, or executed their mischievous designs with rashness and folly. To compensate the insult and repair the injury, Providence hath caused these armaments to scatter much wealth and diffuse abroad a martial passion:—a passion, which hath proved so contagious, that our MILITIA are advanced a century, at least, in discipline and improvements. Where are the people who can compose a militia of better men, more expert in the use of arms, and the conduct of the field, than we can now call forth into action? A militia who a few years ago, knew near as much of the science of Algebra, as of the art military. [47] Thus hostile invasions have roused among us the GENIUS of War.—that Genius, which under GOD, will conduct us with safety and honour—with triumph and glory. Surely we may say of our adversaries;—in the net, which they hid, is their own foot taken, and they are snared in the wickedness of their own hands.—Our enemies the last ten years, have been employed to weave a spiders web and hatch the eggs of a Cocatrice:—consuming their own bowels by what they have weaved; and destroyed by what they have brought forth.—Thus Goliath is killed with his own sword, Haman hanged upon his own gallows. Marvellous were thedoings of GOD in the eyes of our fathers;—nor less astonishing are his works in the days of their progeny. Charles the 2d. told his Parliament, their “jealousy, that the forces he had rais’d were designed to controul law and property, was weak and frivolous.” The cajolement took for a season, [48] but his subjects having been abused by repeated violations of his most solemn vows, at last rouzed from their lethargy; and the King began to dread the severity of their vengeance. He therefore kept up a standing army, not only against law, but the repeated resolutions of every Parliament of his reign. He found that corruption without force could not confirm him a tyrant, and therefore cherished and augmented his troops to the destruction of his people and the terror of his senators. “There go our masters” was a common saying among the members of Parliament. “No law can restrain these people; houses are taken from us, our lives are in danger” (said one member of Parliament.) “Without betraying our trust, (said Russel) we must vote these standing forces a grievance. There are designs, about the King, to ruin religion and property. Public business is the least of their concern. A few upstart people, making hay while the sun shines, set up an army to establish their interest: I would have care taken for the future, that no army be raised for a cabal-interest. A Gentleman said the last session, that this war was made rather for the army, than the army for the war. This government, with a standing army, can NEVER BE SAFE: We cannot be secure in this house; and some of us may have our heads taken off.” Patriots harrangued in vain—the Commons voted the Keeping up the army illegal and a grievance—but while they thus did, they openly betrayed a dread of that army. “I would not give an [49] alarm to those who have arms in their hands” said one member; “I cannot but observe that the House of Commons is now in fear of the army”, said another. Plain as it was for what end the army was kept up, the people slumbered. The exigencies of the times called for something more than votes and paper-resolutions. What was the consequence of this national cowardice and inactivity? “England saw herself engaged in the expence of 600,000 Pounds sterling, to pay an army and fleet, which certainly (says Rapin) had not been prepared TO make war with France OR FOR THE SECURITY OF ENGLAND” —Spirited resolves may please the ear; senatorial eloquence may charm the eye, but these are not the weapons with which to combat standing armies: (thesewas not those,) which freed this Capital from stationed regiments;—they are not those, which will ultimately—But I forbear: time will unfold, what I may not foretell. The British Court, never destitute of plausibilities to deceive, or inventions to enthrall the nation, appropriated monies, raised by Parliament for the purpose of disbanding the army, to their countenance, and uniformly pursued similar measures, till in the year 1684, “the King in order to make his people sensible of their new slavery, affected to muster his troops, which amounted to 4000 well-armed and disciplined.” If Rapin denominated so small an armament, the slavery of the subject under Charles the 2d:—what would he call the state of Britons under George the third? With 4000 troops the kingdom it seems was reduced to servitude: but the spirit of the nation soon after [50] rose. In 1685 complaint was made in Parliament, “that the country was weary of the oppression, and plunder of the soldiers”; “the army (it was said) debauched the manners of all the people, their wives, daughters and servants.” The grievance became intolerable—and what was happy, it was not too mighty for opposition. James the second, had only 14, or 15,000 troops,—and no riot act. The barbarities of a Kirk, and the campaign of a Jefferies, could not pass with impunity. THE REVOLUTION succeeded and James abdicated his throne.—Such was the fate of one, who vainly affected to play the despot with about fifteen regiments: had he been encircled with an hundred, no doubt, he had reigned an applauded tyrant—flattered in his day, with that lying appellation—“the wisest and the best of Kings.” The army of the present king of great Britain is larger than that with which Alexander sub- [51] dued the East, or Caesar conquered Gaul. “If the army, we now keep up (said Sr. John Phillips 30 Years ago, in the House of Commons) should once be as much attached to the Crown as Julius Caesar’s army was to him, I should be glad to know where we could find a force superior to that army.” Is there no such attachment now existing? Surely the liberties of England, if not held at will, are holden by a very precarious tenure. The supreme power is ever possessed by those who have arms in their hands and are disciplined to the use of them. When the Archives conscious of a good title disputed with Lysander about boundaries, the Lacedemonian shewed his sword, and vauntingly cried out, “he that is master of this can best plead about boundaries.” The Marmotines of Messina declined appearance at the tribunalof Pompey, to acknowledge his jurisdiction, alledging in excuse, ancient priviledges, granted them by the Romans—“Will you never have done (exclaimed Pompey) with citing laws and priviledges to men who wear swords.” What boundaries will they set to their passions, who have no limits to their power? Unlimited oppression and wantoness are the never-failing attendants of un- [52] bounded authority. Such power a veteran army always acquire, and being able to riot in mischief with impunity, they always do it with licentiousness. Regular soldiers, embodied for the purpose of originating oppression or extending dominion, ever compass the controul of the Magistrate. The same force which preserves a despotism immutable, may change the despot every day. Power is soon felt by those who possess it, and they who can command will never servilely obey. The leaders of the army, having become masters of the person of their Sovereign, degrade or exalt him at will. Obvious as these truths may seem, and confirmed as they are by all history, yet a weak or wicked Prince is easily perswaded, by the creatures who surround him to act the tyrant. A character so odious to subjects, must necessarily be timid and jealous. Afraid of the wise and good, he must support his dignity by the assistance of the worthless and wicked. Standing armies are therefore raised by the infatuated Prince. No sooner established, than the defenceless multitude are their first prey. Mere power is wanton and cruel: the army grow licentious and the people grow desperate. Dreadful alternative to the infatuated monarch! In constant jeopardy of losing the regalia of empire, till the caprice of an armed Banditti degrade him[53] from sovereignty, or the enraged people wreak an indiscriminate and righteous vengeance. Alas! when will Kings learn wisdom, and mighty men have understanding? A further review of the progress of armies in our parent-state will be a usefull, tho’ not a pleasant employ. No particular reason or occasion was so much as suggested in the bill which passed the Parliament in 1717, for keeping on foot a standing army of 30,000 men in time of peace: (a number since amazingly encreased.) An act justly recorded in the Lord’s Journal to be a precedent for keeping the same army at all times, and which the protest of that day foretold “MUST INEVITABLY subvert the antient constitution of the realm, and subject the subjects to arbitrary power.” To borrow the pointed turn of a modern orator—what was once prophecy, is now history. The powers given by the mutiny act which is now constantly passed everyyear was repeatedly in former times “opposed and condemned by Parliament as repugnant to MAGNA-CHARTA, and inconsistent with the fundamental rights and liberties of the people.” In this statute no provision is made for securing the obedience of the military to the civil power, on which the preservation of our constitution depends. A great number of armed men gover- [54] ned by martial law, having it in their power, are naturally inclined not only to disobey, but to insult the civil Magistrate: The experience of what hath happened in England, as well as the memorials of all ages and nations have made it sufficiently apparent, that wherever an effectual provision is not made to secure the obedience of soldiers to the laws of their country, the military hath constantly subverted and swallowed up the civil power.—What provision of this mind can the several Continental legislatures make against British troops stationed in the Colonies? Nay, if the virtue of one branch of government attempted the salutary measure, would the first branch ever give it’s consent? A Governor must—he will obey his master: the alternative is obvious. The armies quartered among us must be removed, or they will in the end overturn and trample on all that we ought to hold valuable and sacred. We have authority, to affirm, that the regular forces of Great Britain consist of a greater number than are necessary for the guard of the King’s person and the defence of government, and therefore dangerous to the constitution of the kingdom. What then do these armaments, when established here, threaten to our laws and liberties? Well might the illustrious members of the house of Peers, in 1722, hold forth the danger of “a total alteration of the frame of our constitution from a legal and limited monarchy to a despotick” [55] and declare, they were “induced to be of this judgment, as well from the nature of armies, and the inconsistency of great military power and martial law with civil authority, as from the known and universal experience of other countries in Europe, which, by the influence and power of standing armies, in time of peace, have from limited monarchies, like ours, been changed into absolute.” The taxes necessary to maintain a standing army, drain and impoverish the land. Thus exhausted by tribute, the people gradually become spiritless, and fall an early sacrifice to the reigning power. Spirits, like Britons, naturally fierce and independent are not easily awed or suddenly vanquished by the sword. Hence an augmentation of forces hath been pushed, when there was no design of bringing them into action againstEnglishmen in an open field. New forces have oftener than once been raised in England more for civil than military service; and as elections for a new parliament have approached, this door has been opened to introduce a large body of commissioned Pensioners. What hath been the consequence? A constant majority of placemen meeting under the name of a Parliament, to establish grievances instead of redressing them—to approve implicitly the measures of a court without information—to support and screen ministers they ought to controul or punish—to grant money without right and expend it without discretion? Have these been the baneful consequences? Are these solemn truths? Alas! we tremble to think:—but we may venture to say, that when this is true of that legislative autho [56] rity, which not only claims, (but exercises) “full power and authority to make laws and statutes to bind the colonies and people of America IN ALL CASES whatsoever”; —the FORMS of our constitution, creating a fatal delusion, will become our greatest grievance. The FORMALITIES of a free and the ends of a despotic state have often subsisted together. Thus deceived was the Republick of Rome:—Officers and Magistrates retained their old names:—the FORMS of the antient government being kept up, the fundamental laws of the Common-wealth were violated with impunity, and it’s once free constitution utterly annihilated. He who gave Augustus Caesar the advice “that to the officers of state the same names, pomp and ornaments, should be continued, with all the appearances of authority, without the power, discovered an intimate acquaintance with mankind. The advice was followed, and Caesar soon became Senate, magistracy and laws. Is not Britain to America, what Caesar was to Rome? It is curious to observe the various acts of imposition, which are alternately practiced by the [57] great and subtle of this world on their subordinate and simple-minded brethren. Are a people free, new oppressions are introduced or shrouded under old names;—are they in present bondage, and begin to grow turbulent; new appellations must be adopted to disguise old burthens. A notable instance of this latter kind we find in the Parliament of Great Britain, (in 36 Edw: 3.ch:2) upwards of four hundred years ago. The royal prerogative, called purveyance, having been in vain regulated by many preceeding statutes, still continued so intolerably greivous, that fresh murmurs and complaints called for a more adequate or better adapted provision. The British legislature, for this valuable purpose, therefore passed this very remarkable law; which by way ofremedy, enacted as follows, viz.—“That the hateful NAME of purveyor, shall be changed into that of Acator.” Thus the nation were to be made to believe, that the oppression ceased, because, the name was altered.—For the honour of government, as well as mankind, it is devoutly to be wished, that our laws and history contained no other record of such disgracefull practices.—If any late acts of the British parliament carry strong marks of a similar policy, it is surely, not altogether unworthy the consideration of the members of that august body;—how far, such disingenuous practices are consistant with the honour of their private characters, or the dignity of their public station. The magic of sounds and appellations hath not ceased, and they work as much deception and abuse as ever. What valuable purpose does a wholly subordinate legislative serve, (except to amuse with the shadow, while the substance is departed) if [58] a remote state may legislate for and bind us “in all cases”? To what end doth an American house of Representatives go through the forms of granting away monies, if another power, full as familiar with our pockets, may annihilate all they do; and afterwards, with a modern dexterity, take possession of our purses without ceremony, and dispose of the contents with modesty;—without controul, and without account? It is curious and instructive to attend the course of debate in the British Commons for keeping up the army. At first even the highest courtiers would argue—that a standing army, in time of peace, was never attempted; Soon after the Court-speakers urged for continuance of a numerous army for one year longer. At the end of several years after, the Gentlemen throw aside the mask, and boldly declare such a number of troops must always be kept up. In short, the army must be continued till it be- [59] comes part of the constitution, and in later times members of the house have ventured to harangue for measures, none would have dared to lisp a few years before. The wise foresaw this, and the honest foretold it. “If we continue the army but a little while longer (said a celebrated member upwards of forty years ago,) it may be in the power of some Gentlemen to talk in this house in terms that will be no way agreable to the constitution or liberties of our country. To tell us, that the same number of forces must be always kept up, is a proposition full-fraught with innumerable evils, and more particularly with this, that it may make wicked ministers more audacious than otherwise they would be in projecting and propagating schemes which may be inconsistent with the liberties, destructive of the trade, and burthensomeon the people of this nation. In countries governed by standing armies, the inclinations of the people are but little minded, the ministers place their security in the army, the humours of the army they only consult, with them they divide the spoils, and the wretched people are plundered by both.”—Who that now reconsiders this prophetic language, in conjunction with the events of his own time, but will cry out—the speaker felt the impulse of inspiration!” “Whoever (says the justly celebrated Dr. Blackstone) will attentively consider the English history may observe, that the stagnant abuse of any power, by the crown or it’s ministers, has always been productive of a struggle, which either dis- [60] covers the exercise of that power to be contrary to law, or (if legal) restrains it for the future.” The ingenious commentator seems here to have particular reference to periods prior to the revolution. But will the learned judge say, that, since that era there have been no flagrant abuses of power by the crown or its ministers? Have not repeated struggles arose in consequence of such abuses, which did not terminate in the happy issue so characteristic of Englishmen? Let any one peruse the journals of parliament, especially those of the house of peers: let him carefully review the British and American annals, of the present century, and answer truly to those questions.—The natural enquiry will be—whence then is it—that such abuses have become so numerous and flagrant, and the struggles of Britons so unsuccessful? Will not the question receive an ample solution in the words of the same great lawyer?—“There is a newly acquired branch of (royal) power; and that not the influence only, but THE FORCE OF A DISCIPLINED ARMY, paid indeed ultimately by the people, but immediately by the crown; raised by the crown, officered by the crown, commanded by the crown.” We are told, by the same learned author, that “whenever the unconstitutional oppresssions, even of the SOVEREIGN POWER, advance with gigantic strides and threaten desolation to a state, mankind will not be reasoned out of the feelings of humanity, nor will sacrifice their liberty by a scrupulous adherence to those political maxims, [61] which were established to preserve it.” —But those who cannot be reasoned out of their feelings, are easily repressed by the terror of arms from giving tokens of their sensibility; and states antient and modern—(yes Britain will bear me witness!)—who would disdain to sacrifice their freedom to political institutions have tremblingly stood alooff, while it was dragged to the altar under the banners of a royal army. The policy and refinements of men cloathed with authority often deceive those who are subject to it’s controul; and thus a people are often induced to waive their rights, and relinquish the barriers of their safety. The fraud, however, must at last be discovered, and the nation will resume their antient liberties, if there be no force sufficient to screen the usurper and defend his domination. The sword alone is sufficient to subdue that spirit which compells rulers to their duty, and tyrants to their senses. Hence, then, though a numerous standing army may not be absolutely requisite to depress a kingdom into servitude, they are indispensably necessary to confirm an usurpation. A large army and revenue are not easily and at once forced upon a free people. By slow degrees and plausible pretences, as we have seen in England, the end is accomplished. But when once a numerous body of revenue and military men, entirely dependant on the crown, are incorporated, they are regardless of any thing, but it’s will: and where that will centers and what such power can effect is a matter of no doubtfull disputation. [62] The present army of a prince is always composed of men of honour, and integrity, as the reigning monarch is ever the best of kings. In such an army, it is said, you may trust your liberties with safety: in such a king you may put your confidence without reserve:—the good man has not a wish beyond the happiness of his subjects! Yet let it be remembered, that under the best of kings, we ought to seize the fleeting opportunity, and provide against the worst. But admitting that from this rare character—a wise and good monarch—a nation have nothing to fear;—yet they have every thing to dread from those who would cloath him with authority, and invest him with powers incompatible with all political freedom and social security. France, Spain, Denmark, and Sweden, in modern times, have felt the baneful effects of this fatal policy. Tho’ the latter state are said to have this excellent institution; that the commissions to their military officers all run quamdiu se bene gesserit: a regulation which ought to be the tenure of all offices of publick trust and may be of singular utility in states which have incorporated a standing army as part of the constitution of government. An invasion and conquest by mere strangers and foreigners are neither so formidable or disgraceful as the establishment of a standing army under co- [63] lour of the municipal law of the land. Thus Roman armies were more terrible to the Roman colonies, than an “enemy’s army.” Valor has scope foraction against an open enemy, but the most precious liberties of a kingdom are massacred in cold blood by the disciplined Janizaries of the state, and there is little hope of a general resistance. The natural inherent right of the conquered is to throw off the yoke, as soon as they are able; but subjects enslaved by the military forces of their own sovereign, become spiritless and despondent; and scaffolds and axes, the gibbet and the halter, too often terrify them from those noble exertions which would end in their deliverance by a glorious victory or an illustrious death. Yet in full peace without any just apprehensions of insurrections at home or invasions from abroad, it was the mischievous policy of the English ministry, in 1717, to procure an allowance of near double the forces to what had ever before been established by the sanction of parliament in times of public tranquillity. Well might many of the nobility of Britain conceive, that as so many forces were no ways necessary to support, they had reason to fear danger to the constitution, which way never entirely subverted but by a standing army. The English military bands have since been much augmented;—and whether this disgraceful subversion has already taken place, or is still verging to it’s accomplishment, may be resolved, after a further inspection into memorials of the present age. [64] More than half a century since, the discerning members of the house of Lords discovered the tendency of these extraordinary armaments to be no other, than to overthrow the civil power of the kingdom, and to turn it into a military government. A very short period after this, many of the same noble house, bore open testimony, that they were “justly jealous from the experience of former times, that the crown itself, as well as the liberties of the people might be found at the disposal of a standing army at home.” But as if one standing army was not enough to ruin a nation of Englishmen, a new kind of forces was raised against the Common-wealth. The officers employed in the customs, excise, in other branches of the revenue, and other parts of the public service compose in effect A SECOND STANDING ARMY in England, and in some respects are more dangerous, than that body of men properly so called. The influence which this order have in the elections of members to serve in parliament, hath been too often felt in Great Britain to be denied. And we have good authority to say, “that examples are not hard to find, where the military forces have withdrawn to create an appearance ofa free election, and the standing CIVIL forces of this kind have been sent to take that freedom away.” —Is a house of commons thus chosen the representative of the people,—or of the administration,—or of a single minister? As Lewis, the 11th of France, was the first monarch in Europe, who reduced corruption to a system, so the era of it’s establishment in England may be fixed at the reign of Charles the second. Britain, then for the first time, saw CORRUPTION, like a destroying angel, walking at noonday.—Charles pensioned his Parliament, and by it extinguished not only the spirit of freedom, but the sentiments of honour and the feelings of shame. Since the age of Charles, the science of bribery and corruption hath made amazing progress. Patriots of the last century told their countrymen what it threatned—the Worthies of this day ought rather to tell what hath been effected. Nearly fifty years ago, there were more than two hundred persons holding offices or employments under the crown in the house of commons. Since that time this body like the military (and for the same purposes) have received very notable additions.—Is it to be wondered, then, as we verge nearer to our own times, we should hear the most august assembly in the kingdom declaring to the whole world that “the influence of the crown is almost irresistable, being already overgrown and yet increasing.” —that “the most valuable rights of the nation are subverted by arbitrary and illegal proceedings:—“ that “a flagrant usurpation” (is made upon the subject) as highly repugnant to every principle of the constitution, AS THE CLAIM OF SHIP-MONEY BY KING CHARLES THE FIRST, or that of the dispensing power [66] by king James the second”? Finally, considering all that we have seen in the course of our review, could any thing else be expected, than what forty of the house of Lords openly protest they “have seen with great uneasiness,—a plan for a long time SYSTEMATICALLY carried on, FOR LOWERING ALL THE CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS OF THE KINGDOM, rendering the house of Commons “odious and the house of Peers contemptible”? Here let us pause (my fellow citizens) and consider:—hath the execrable plan thus systematically and for a long time pursued, at last, taken effect? Are all the constitutional powers of Great Britain so lowered in the estimation of the people, that their representatives are detested, and their nobility despised? Is their King possessed of power sufficient to make fear, a substitute for love? Has he an army at his absolute command, with which no force in his empire is able tocope?—judge ye, my countrymen, of these questions, upon which I may not decide: —judge, for yourselves, of the political state of that kingdom, which claims a right of disposing of OUR ALL;—a right of laying every burden that power can impose; —a right of over-running our soil and freeholds with mercenary legions, and still more mercenary placemen and dependants. Thus luxury and riot, debauchery and havock are [67] to become the order and peace of our cities, and the stability and honour of our times. To this and like hopeful purposes—we find “the fullest directions sent to the several officers of the revenue, that all the produce of the American duties, arising or to arise, by virtue of any British act of Parliament, should from time to time, be paid to the deputy pay-master in America to defrey the subsistence of the troops, and any military expences incurred in the Colonies.” Highly favoured Americans! You are to be wasted with taxes and impositions in order to satisfy the charges of those armaments which are to blast your country with the most terrible of all evils—universal corruption, and a military government. The reigns of past and present great monarchs when compared, often present a striking similitude. The Emperor Charles the fifth, having exalted the royal prerogative (or the influence of the crown) on the ruins of the privileges of the Castilians, allowed the name of the Cortes (or the Par- [68] liament to remain; and the formality of holding it thus continued, he reduced it’s authority and jurisdiction to nothing, and modelled it in such a manner, that it became (says Dr. Robertson) rather a junto of the servants of the crown, than an assembly of the representatives of the people. The success of Charles in abolishing the privileges of the commons, and in breaking the power of the nobles of Castile, encouraged an invasion of the liberties of Aragon, which were yet more extensive. Attend Americans! Reflect on the situation of your mother country, and consider the late Conduct of your Brethren in Britain towards this Continent. “The Castilians (once high spirited and brave in the cause of freedom) accustomed to subjection themselves, ASSISTED (says the same illustrious historian) IN IMPOSING THE YOKE on their more happy and independent neighbours.” —Hath not Britain (fallen from her pristine freedom and glory) treated America, as Castile did Aragon? Have not Britons imposed on our necks the same yoke which the Castilians imposed on the happy Aragonese? Yes!—I speak it with grief—I speak it with anguish—Britons are our oppressors:—Ispeak it with shame—“I speak it with indignation—WE ARE SLAVES.” As force fixes the chains of vassalage, so cowardice restrains an inslaved people from bursting in sunder their bands. But the case perhaps is not desperate till the yoke has been so [69] long borne, that the understanding and the spirits of the people are sunk into ignorance and barbarism, supineness and perfect inactivity. Such, I yet trust, is not the deplorable state of the land of my nativity. How soon it may be—we shall tremble, when we reflect that the progress of thraldom is secret and its effect incredibly rapid, and dreadful. Hence we see nations once the freest and most high-spirited in Europe, abject in the most humiliating condition. The oath of allegiance to their king, exhibits the true standard of all just subjection, to government, and testifies a genuine sense and spirit. “We, who are each of us as good, and who are altogether more powerful than you, promise obedience to your government, IF YOU MAINTAIN OUR RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES; IF NOT, NOT.” When a people, endowed with such understanding, sentiments and virtue have fallen into a disgraceful vassalage—what have WE in this land, at this time, reason to fear?—The same Athenians who insulted and bid defiance to a Phillip of Macedon crouched and cowled at the feet of an Alexander. ROMANS who with righteous indignation expelled royalty and the Tarquins bore with infamy and shame the ravages of succeeding kings and emperors. ENGLISHMEN who rose with a divine enthusiasm against the first Charles, disgracefully submitted to the usurpation of a Cromwell, and then with unexampled folly and madness restored that odious and execrable race of tyrants, the house of Stewart. Examples, like these, ought to excite [70] the deepest concern;—at this day; they ought to do more—to inspire fortitude and action. Providence from the beginning hath exercised this country with singular trials. In the earliest periods of our history, New-England is seen surrounded with adversaries, and alternately vexed with foes foreign and domestick. Fierce as her enemies were from abroad and savage as the Natives of America were within,—her worst enemies will be found those of her own household.— Our fathers “left their native country with the strongest assurance that they and their posterity should enjoy the priviledges of free natural born English subjects.” Depending upon these assurances, they sustained hard-ships scarcely parralled in the annals of the world. Yet compassion natural to the human breast did not restrain internal foes from involving them in new calamities,nor did that disgrace and contempt which suddenly fell upon the conspirators damp the ardour of their malignity. So early as 1633, (not fourteen years after the first arrival at Plymouth) “the new settlers were in perils from their own countrymen.” In this, the infant state of the country, while exposed to innumerable hardships, vexed with hostilities from Europe and the depredations of savages, there existed men, who “beheld the Massachusetts with an envious eye:” The characteristicks of the first conspirators against this province were secrecy and industry: they had [71] effected the mischief before the people knew of their danger. Morton in his letter to Jefferies of the first of may 1634, writes, that “the Massachusetts patent by an order of Council was brought in view and the privileges well scanned.” But by whom? Very like some of more modern fame: An arch-bishop, and the privy council of Charles the first! Excellent essay-masters, for New-England priviledges,—most renowned judges of the rights and liberties of mankind!—They first discover the Charter (“to be void,”) and then no doubt advise to the issuing of the commission found by my lord Barrington in the 31st volume of Mr. Petyt’s Manuscript, “a commission directed to the archbishop of Canterbury, the Lord chancellor, and other Lords of the privy council, by which they are impowered to prepare laws, for the better government of the Colonies”, “which were afterwards to be enforced by THE KING’S PROCLAMATION.” This was considered as a master-stroke of policy, and the public conspirators of the day display’d the plumage of triumph with that spirit and ostentation which have descended to their successors. But how easy is it, with Providence, to disappoint the projects and humble the pride of man! Laud and his master in the subsequent periods of history are found too busied with their own concerns, to attend much to those of others. Hence this extraordinary Commission was never executed and the plan set on foot within three years after, “for revoking the patent of the Massachusetts,” [72] proved abortive. Literary correspondencies inimical to the Province, commenced with Archbishop Laud, in 1638. But in the pious language of our fathers, “the LORD delivered them from the oppressor,” “against all men’s expectations they were encouraged, and much blame and disgrace fell upon their adversaries.” Yet notwithstanding, “a spirit full of malignity against the country (not very long after, much endangered both it’s civil and religious liberties.” More than a century agone , “the great priviledges of New-England were matter of envy,” and accordingly complaints multiplied to Cromwell, no doubt for the benevolent purpose of abridging (what were called) English Liberties. “All attempts to the prejudice of the colony being to no purpose” with the Protector, the adversaries of the province were despondent, untill the restoration of Charles the 2d. gave new hopes; when “petitions and complaints were prefered against the Colony to the king in council, and to the Parliament.” [73] “False friends and open enemies” now became the terror of the country, while new foes brought new charges to render it obnoxious. “The great men and muses of the country, made their complaints also to the king.” —The consequences were such as might be expected. “Four persons were sent over from England, one of them the known and professed enemy of the country, with such extraordinary powers (that our ancestors with grief complain) they were to be subjected to the arbitrary power of strangers proceeding not by any established law, but their own discretion.” How astonishingly uniform, how cruelly consistent has been the conduct of Britain from that day to the present? Amid all these severe trials, the inhabitants of New-England, conducted with a virtue and piety worthy [of] remembrance and imitation. “They appealed to GOD, they came not into this wilderness to seek great things for themselves, but for the sake of a poor and quiet life”—they testified to their Sovereign that “their liberties were dearer to them than their lives.” “Evilminded men continue (however) to misrepresent them” and what is a most incredible, “the difficulties of the Colony, during a war, which excited compassion in some, yet those very distresses were improved by others to render the Colony more obnoxious.” [74] Although “this is certain, that as the Colony was at first settled, so it was preserved from ruin without any charge to the mother country”; yet “in the height of the distress of war, and whilst the authority of the Colony was contending with the natives for the possession of the soil: complaints were making in England which struck at the powers of government.” With what ferocity have Americans been pursued from the earliest times? That Daemon of malevolence, which went forth at the beginning, still spirits up our adversaries and persecutes the country with unabated malice. “Randolph, who, the people of New England said, went up and down seekingto devour them,” was the next active emisary against the province. “He was incessant and open in endeavouring the alteration of the constitution.” In his open enmity, he appears far less odious than those who have been equally inimical and equally indefatigable to the same purpose, with more cowardice, dissimulation, and [75] hypocrisy. Eight voyages were made across the Atlantic in the course of nine years by this inveterate spirit, with hostile intentions to the government. Nor will it be surprising to find him thus expose his life upon the ocean, when such services acquired “new powers”. Have we not seen in our own day, a similar policy adopted, and the same object operating as a motive to the like execrable conduct? Such has been the strange, tho’ unhappily consistent, conduct of our mother-country, that she has laid temptations and given rewards and stipends to those who have slandered and betrayed her own children. Incited probably by the same motive, Cranfield rose up in league with Randolph, and “infamously represented the colony as rogues and rebels.” Libels and conspiracies of this nature called for the interposition of authority: express laws were enacted for the prevention of like treasonable practices for the future and death being deemed the proper punishment for an enemy to his country, traitors to the constitution were to suffer that penalty. Thus a “conspiracy to invade the commonwealth, or any treacherous attempt to alter and subvert fundamentally the frame of polity and government was made a capital offence.” Did our laws now contain a like provision, public conspirators and elevated parricides would tremble for their heads, who do not shudder at the enormity of their crimes. There are characters in society so devoid of virtue and endued with ferocity, that nothing [76] but sanguinary laws can restrain their wickedness. Even the distress and cries of their native country excite no compassion: reverence for fathers and affection for children cause no reluctance at measures which stain the glorious lineage of their ancestors with infamy, and blast their spreading progeny with oppression.—that emanation from the Deity which creates them intelligents, seems to cease it’s operation, and the tremendous idea of a GOD and futurity, excites neither repentance or reformation. Thus my countrymen, from the days of Gardiner and Moreton, Gorges and Mason, Randolph and Cranfield down to the present day, the inhabitants of this Northern region have constantly been in danger and troublesfrom foes open and secret, abroad and in their bosom. Our freedom has been the object of envy, and to make void the charter of our Liberties the work and labor of an undiminished race of villains. One cabal having failed of success, new conspirators have rose, and what the first, could not make “void”, the next “humbly desired to revoke.” To this purpose one falshood after another hath been fabricated and spread abroad with equal turpitude and equal effrontery. That minute detail which would present actors now on the stage is the province of HISTORY:—She, inexorably severe towards the eminently guilty, will delineate their characters with the point of a diamond:—and thus blazoned in the face of day, the abhorrence and execrations of mankind will consign them to an infamous immortality. [77] So great has been the credulity of the British Court, from the beginning, or such hath been the activity of false brethren, that no tale inimical to the Northern Colonies, however false or absurd, but what hath found credit with administration, and operated to the prejudice of the Country. Thus it was told, and believed in England, that we were not in earnest in the expedition against Canada at the beginning of this century, and that the country did every thing in its power to defeat the success of it, and that the misfortune of that attempt ought to be wholly attributed to the northern colonies. While nothing could be more obvious, than that New-England had exhausted her youngest blood and all her treasures in the undertaking; and that every motive of self-preservation, happiness and safety must have operated to excite these provinces to the most spirited and persevering measures against Canada. The people who are attacked by bad men have a testimony of their merit, as the constitution which is invaded by powerful men, hath an evidence of it’s value. The path of our duty needs no minute delineation:—it lies level to the eye. Let us apply then, like men sensible of it’s importance and determined on it’s fulfillment. The inroads upon our public liberty call for reparation: The wrongs we have sustained call for—justice. That reparation and that justice may yet be obtained by union, spirit and firmness. But to divide and conquer was the maxim of the Devil in the garden of Eden—to disunite and inslave hath been the principle of all his votaries from that [78] period to the present. The crimes of the guilty are to them the cords of association, and dread of punishment, the indissoluble bond of union. The combinations, of publick robbers ought, therefore, to cement patriots and heroes: and as the former plot,and conspire to undermine and destroy the common-wealth, the latter ought to form a compact for opposition—a band of vengeance. What insidious arts, and what detestable practices have been used to deceive, disunite and enslave the good people of this Continent? The mystical appellations of loyalty and allegiance, the venerable names of government and good order, and the sacred ones of piety and public virtue have been alternately prostituted to that abominable purpose. All the windings and guises, subterfuges and doublings, of which the human soul is susceptible, have been displayed on the occasion. But secrets which were thought impenetrable are no longer hid; characters deeply disguised are openly revealed: the discovery of gross impostors hath generally preceeded, but a short time, their utter extirpation. Be not again, my country-men, “EASILY captivated with the appearances ONLY of wisdom and piety—professions of a regard to liberty and of a strong attachment to the publick interest.” Your fathers have been explicitly charged with this folly by one of their posterity. Avoid this and all similar errors. Be cautious against the deception of appearances. By their fruits ye shall know them, was the saying of ONE who perfectly knew the human heart. Judge of affairs which concern social happiness by facts:—Judge of man by his deeds. For it is very certain, that pious zeal for days and times, for [79] mint and cummin hath, often, been pretended by those who were infidels at bottom; and it is as certain, that attachment to the dignity of Government, and the King’s service, hath often flowed from the mouths of men who harboured the darkest machinations against the true end of the former, and were destitute of every right principle of loyalty to the latter. Hence then, care and circumspection are necessary branches of political duty. And as “it is much easier to restrain liberty from running into licentiousness, than power from swelling into tyranny and oppression,” so much more caution and resistance are required against the over-bearing of rulers, than the extravagance of the people. To give no more authority to any order of state and to place no greater public confidence in any man, than is necessary for the general wellfare, may be considered by the people as an important point of policy. But though craft and hypocrisy are prevalent, yet piety and virtue have a real existence: duplicity and political imposture abound, yet benevolence and public spirit are not altogether in sheep’s-cloathing, so superlative knaves and parricides will assume the vesture of the man of virtue and patriotism. These things are permitted BY PROVIDENCE, no doubt, for wise and good reasons. Man was created a rational, and was designed for an active being. His faculties of intelligence and force were given him for use. When the wolf, therefore, is found devouring the flock, no hierarchy forbids a seisure of the victim for sacrifice; so also, when [80] dignified impostors are caught destroying those, whom their arts deceived and their stations destined them to protect,—the sabre of justice flashes righteousness at the stroke of execution. Yet be not amused, my Countrymen!—the extirpation of bondage, and the reestablishment of freedom are not of easy acquisition. The worst passions of the human heart, and the most subtle projects of the human mind are leagued against you; and principalities and power have acceded to the combination. Trials and conflicts you must, therefore, endure;—hazards and jeopardies—of life and fortune—will attend the struggle. Such is the fate of all noble exertions for public liberty and social happiness.—Enter not the lists without thought and consideration, lest you arm with timidity and combat with irresolution. Having engaged in the conflict, let nothing discourage your vigour, or repel your perseverance:—Remember, that submission to the yoke of bondage is the worst that can befall a people after the most fierce and unsuccessful resistance. What can the misfortune of vanquishment take away, which despotism and rapine would spare? It had been easy (said the great law-giver Solon to the Athenians,) to repress the advances of tyranny, and prevent it’s establishment, but now it is established and grown to some height it would be MORE GLORIOUS to demolish it. But nothing glorious is accomplished, nothing great is attained, nothing valuable is secured without magnanimity of mind and devotion of heart to the service.—BRUTUS-LIKE, therefore, dedicate yourselves at this day to the service of your Country; and henceforth live A LIFE OF LIBERTY AND GLORY.—“On the [81] ides of March” (said the great and good man to his friend Cassius just before the battle of Philippi) “On the ides of march I DEVOTED MY LIFE to my Country, and since that time, I have lived A LIFE OF LIBERTY AND GLORY”. Inspired with public virtue, touched with the wrongs and indignant at the insults offered his Country, the high-spirited Cassius exhibits an heroic example:—“Resolved as we are”, (replied the hero to his friend) “resolved as we are, let us march against the enemy, for tho’ we should not conquer, we have nothing to fear. SPIRITS and GENII, like these, rose in Rome—and have since adorned Britain: such also will one day make glorious this more Western world. AMERICA hath in store her BRUTI and CASSII—her Hampdens and Sydneys—Patriots and Heroes, who will form a BAND OF BROTHERS: —men who will have memories and feelings—courage and swords:—courage, that shall inflame their ardent bosoms, till their hands cleave to their swords—and their SWORDS to their Enemies hearts. F I N I S The Author has felt exquisitely while writing upon the subjects of his consideration; and the multitude and perplexity of his private business have denied him sufficient time to revise this publication. Under these circumstances, (and being also several years on this side the meridian of the age of man) there will be found, no doubt, many indiscretions and faults for those of riper years and cooler judgment to correct and censure.—The great Lord Chan. Bacon hath told us of wise legislators who have made their law upon the spur of the occasion:—a good citizen, deeply pricked by the spur of the times, is very apt to start with an over-hasty speed.—The only excuse of the writer is;—that as he at first assumed his pen from the impulses of his Conscience, so he now publishes his sentiments from a sense of duty to GOD and his Country. Source: https://archive.org/details/observationsonac00quin/page/n3/mode/2up?ref=ol&view=theater https://www.colonialsociety.org/node/2598#:~:text=JOSIAH%20QUINCY%2C%20Junr.,Boston%2C%20May%2014%2C%201774.

Boston Port Act 1st of 5 of the Intolerable Acts Great Britain : Parliament - The Boston Port Act : March 31, 1774 An act to discontinue, in such manner, and for such time as are therein mentioned, the landing and discharging, lading or shipping, of goods, wares, and merchandise, at the town, and within the harbour, of Boston, in the province of MassachusetÂ’s Bay, in North America. WHEREAS dangerous commotions and insurrections have been fomented and raised in the town of Boston, in the province of MassachusetÂ’s Bay, in New England, by divers ill-affected persons, to the subversion of his MajestyÂ’s government, and to the utter destruction of the publick peace, and good order of the said town; in which commotions and insurrections certain valuable cargoes of teas, being the property of the East India Company, and on board certain vessels lying within the bay or harbour of Boston, were seized and destroyed: And whereas, in the present condition of the said town and harbour, the commerce of his MajestyÂ’s subjects cannot be safely carried on there, nor the customs payable to his Majesty duly collected; and it is therefore expedient that the officers of his MajestyÂ’s customs should be forthwith removed from the said town: May it please your Majesty that it may be enacted; and be it enacted by the KingÂ’s most excellent majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons, in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, That from and after the first day of June, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-four, it shall not be lawful for any person or persons whatsoever to lade put, or cause or procure to be laden or put, off or from any quay, wharf, or other place, within the said town of Boston, or in or upon any part of the shore of the bay, commonly called The Harbour of Boston, between a certain headland or point called Nahant Point, on the eastern side of the entrance into the said bay, and a certain other headland or point called Alderton Point, on the western side of the entrance into the said bay, or in or upon any island, creek, landing place, bank, or other place, within the said bay or headlands, into any ship, vessel, lighter, boat, or bottom, any goods, wares, or merchandise whatsoever, to be transported or carried into any other country, province or place whatsoever, or into any other part of the said province of the MassachusetÂ’s Bay, in New England; or to take up, discharge, or lay on land, or cause or procure to be taken up, discharged, or laid on land, within the said town, or in or upon any of the places aforesaid, out of any boat, lighter, ship, vessel, or bottom, any goods, wares, or merchandise whatsoever, to be brought from any other country, province, or place, or any other part of the said province of the MassachusetÂ’s Bay in New England, upon pain of the forfeiture of the said goods, wares, and merchandise, and of the said boat, lighter, ship, or vessel or other bottom into which the same shall be taken, and of the guns, ammunition, tackle, furniture, and stores, in or belonging to the same: And if any such goods, wares, or merchandise, shall, within the said town, or in any the places aforesaid, be laden or taken in from the shore into any barge, hoy, lighter, wherry, or boat, to be carried on board any ship or vessel coming in and arriving from any other country or province, or other part of the said province of the MassachusetÂ’s Bay in New England, such barge, hoy, lighter, wherry, or boat, shall be forfeited and lost. II. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That if any warfinger, or keeper of any wharf, crane, or quay, of their servants, or any of them, shall take up or land, or knowingly suffer to be taken up or landed, or shall ship off, or suffer to be waterborne, at or from any of their said wharfs, cranes, or quays, any such goods, wares, or merchandise; in every such case, all and every such wharfinger, and keeper of such wharf, crane, or quay, and every person whatever who shall be assisting, or otherwise concerned in the shipping or in the loading or putting on board any boat, or other vessel for that purpose, or in the unshipping such goods, wares, and merchandise, or to whose hands the same shall knowingly come after the loading, shipping, or unshipping thereof, shall forfeit and lose treble the value thereof, to be computed at the highest price which such sort of goods, wares, and merchandise, shall bear at the place where such offence shall be committed, together with the vessels and boats, and all the horses, cattle, and carriages, whatsoever made use of in the shipping, unshipping, landing, removing, carriage, or conveyance of any of the aforesaid goods, wares, and merchandise. III. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That if any ship or vessel shall be moored or lie at anchor, or be seen hovering within the said bay, described and bounded as aforesaid, or within one league from the said bay so described, or the said headlands, or any of the islands lying between or within the same, it shall and may be lawful for any admiral, chief commander, or commissioned officer, of his MajestyÂ’s fleet or ships of war, or for any officer of his MajestyÂ’s customs, to compel such ship or vessel to depart to some other port or harbour, or to such station as the said officer shall appoint, and to use such force for that purpose as shall be found necessary: And if such ship or vessel shall not depart accordingly, within six hours after notice for that purpose given by such person as aforesaid, such ship or vessel, together with all the goods laden on board thereon, and all the guns, ammunition, tackle, and furniture, shall be forfeited and lost, whether bulk shall have been broken or not. IV. Provided always, That nothing in this act contained shall extend, or be construed to extend, to any military or other stores for his MajestyÂ’s use, or to the ships or vessels whereon the same shall be laden, which shall be commissioned by, and in the immediate pay of, his Majesty, his heirs or successors; nor to any fuel or victual brought coastwise from any part of the continent of America, for the necessary use and sustenance of the inhabitants of the said town of Boston, provided the vessels wherein the same are to be carried shall be duly furnished with a cocket and let-pass, after having been duly searched by the proper officers of his MajestyÂ’s customs at Marblehead, in the port of Salem, in the said province of MassachusetÂ’s Bay; and that some officer of his MajestyÂ’s customs be also there put on board the said vessel, who is hereby authorized to go on board, and proceed with the said vessel, together with a sufficient number of persons, properly armed, for his defence, to the said town or harbour of Boston; nor to any ships or vessels which may happen to be within the said harbour of Boston on or before the first day of June, one thousand seven hundred and seventy four, and may have either laden or taken on board, or be there with intent to load or take on board, or to land or discharge any goods, wares, and merchandise, provided the said ships and vessels do depart the said harbour within fourteen days after the said first day of June, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-four. V. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That all seizures, penalties, and forfeitures, inflicted by this act, shall be made and prosecuted by any admiral, chief commander, or commissioned officer, of his MajestyÂ’s fleet, or ships of war, or by the officers of his MajestyÂ’s customs, or some of them, or by some other person deputed or authorised, by warrant from the lord high treasurer, or the commissioners of his MajestyÂ’s treasury for the time being, and by no other person whatsoever: And if any such officer, or other person authorised as aforesaid, shall, directly or indirectly, take or receive any bribe or reward, to connive at such lading or unlading, or shall make or commence any collusive seizure, information, or agreement for that purpose, or shall do any other act whatsoever, whereby the goods, wares, or merchandise, prohibited as aforesaid, shall be suffered to pass, either inwards or outwards, or whereby the forfeitures and penalties inflicted by this act may be evaded, every such offender shall forfeit the sum of five hundred pounds for every such offence, and shall become incapable of any office or employment, civil or military; and every person who shall give, offer, or promise, any such bribe or reward, or shall contract, agree, or treat with any person, so authorised as aforesaid, to commit any such offfence, shall forfeit the sum of fifty pounds. VI. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That the forfeitures and penalties inflicted by this act shall and may be prosecuted, sued for, and recovered, and be divided, paid, and applied, in like manner as other penalties and forfeitures inflicted by any act or acts of parliament, relating to the trade or revenues of the British colonies or plantations in America, are directed to be prosecuted, sued for, or recovered, divided, paid, and applied, by two several acts of parliament, the one passed in the fourth year of his present Majesty, (intituled, An act for granting certain duties in the British colonies and plantations in America; for continuing, amending, and making perpetual, an act passed in the sixth year of the reign of his late majesty King George the Second, intituled, An act for the better securing and encouraging the trade of his MajestyÂ’s sugar colonies in America: for applying the produce of such duties, and of the duties to arise by virtue of the said act, towards defraying the expences of defending, protecting, and securing, the said colonies and plantations; for explaining an act made in the twenty-fifth year of the reign of King Charles the Second, intituled, An act for the encouragement of the Greenland and Eastland trades, and for the better securing the plantation trade; and for altering and disallowing several drawbacks on exports from this kingdom, and more effectually preventing the clandestine conveyance of goods to and from the said colonies and plantations, and improving and securing the trade between the same and Great Britain;) the other passed in the eighth year of his present MajestyÂ’s reign, (intituled, An act for the more easy and effectual recovery of the penalties and forfeitures inflicted by the acts of parliament relating to the trade or revenues of the British colonies and plantations in America.) VII. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That every charter party bill of loading, and other contract for consigning shipping, or carrying any goods, wares, and merchandize whatsoever, to or from the said town of Boston, or any part of the bay or harbour thereof, described as aforesaid, which have been made or entered into, or which shall be made or entered into, so long as this act shall remain in full force, relating to any ship which shall arrive at the said town or harbour, after the first day of June, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-four, shall be, and the same are hereby declared to be utterly void, to all intents and purposes whatsoever. VIII. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That whenever it shall be made to appear to his Majesty, in his privy council, that peace and obedience to the laws shall be so far restored in the said town of Boston, that the trade of Great Britain may safely be carried on there, and his MajestyÂ’s customs duly collected, and his Majesty, in his privy council, shall adjudge the same to be true, it shall and may be lawful for his Majesty, by proclamation, or order of council, to assign and appoint the extent, bounds, and limits, of the port or harbour of Boston, and of every creek or haven within the same, or in the islands within the precincts thereof; and also to assign and appoint such and so many open places, quays, and wharfs, within the said harbour, creeks, havens, and islands, for the landing, discharging, lading, and shipping of goods, as his Majesty, his heirs or successors, shall judge necessary and expedient; and also to appoint such and so many officers of the customs therein as his Majesty shall think fit, after which it shall be lawful for any person or persons to lade or put off from, or to discharge and land upon, such wharfs, quays, and places, so appointed within the said harbour, and none other, any goods, wares, and merchandise whatever. IX. Provided always, That if any goods, wares, or merchandize, shall be laden or put off from, or discharged or landed upon, any other place than the quays, wharfs, or places, so to be appointed, the same, together with the ships, boats, and other vessels employed therein, and the horses, or other cattle and carriages used to convey the same, and the person or persons concerned or assisting therein, or to whose hands the same shall knowingly come, shall suffer all the forfeitures and penalties imposed by this or any other act on the illegal shipping or landing of goods. X. Provided also, and it is hereby declared and enacted, That nothing herein contained shall extend, or be construed, to enable his Majesty to appoint such port, harbour, creeks, quays, wharfs, places, or officers in the said town of Boston, or in the said bay or islands, until it shall sufficiently appear to his Majesty that full satisfaction hath been made by or on behalf of the inhabitants of the said town of Boston to the united company of merchants of England trading to the East Indies, for the damage sustained by the said company by the destruction of their goods sent to the said town of Boston, on board certain ships or vessels as aforesaid; and until it shall be certified to his Majesty, in council, by the governor, or lieutenant governor, of the said province, that reasonable satisfaction hath been made to the officers of his MajestyÂ’s revenue, and others, who suffered by the riots and insurrections above mentioned, in the months of November and December, in the year one thousand seven hundred and seventy-three, and in the month of January, in the year one thousand seven hundred and seventy-four. XI. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That if any action or suit shall be commenced, either in Great Britain or America, against any person or persons, for any thing done in pursuance of this act of parliament, the defendant or defendants, in such action or suit, may plead the general issue, and give the said act, and the special matter, in evidence, at any trial to be had thereupon, and that the same was done in pursuance and by the authority of this act: and if it shall appear so to have been done, the jury shall find for the defendant or defendants; and if the plaintiff shall be nonsuited, or discontinue his action, after the defendant or defendants shall have appeared: or if judgment shall be given upon any verdict or demurrer, against the plaintiff, the defendant or defendants shall recover treble costs, and have the like remedy for the same, as defendants have in other cases by law. Source:https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/boston_port_act.asp