II. To the Inhabitants of the Colony of Massachusetts-Bay My Friends, 30 January 1775 I have heretofore intimated my intention, of pursuing the Tories, through all their dark intrigues, and wicked machinations; and to shew the rise, and progress of their schemes for enslaving this country. The honour of inventing and contriving these measures, is not their due. They have been but servile copyers of the designs of Andross, Randolph, Dudley, and other champions of their cause towards the close of the last century. These latter worthies accomplished but little: and their plans had been buried with them, for a long course of years, untill in the administration of the late Governor Shirley they were revived, by the persons who are now principally concern'd in carrying them into execution. Shirley, was a crafty, busy, ambitious, intrigueing, enterprizing man; and having mounted, no matter by what means, to the chair of this province, he saw, in a young growing country, vast prospects of ambition opening before his eyes, and he conceived great designs of aggrandizing himself, his family and his friends. Mr. Hutchinson and Mr. Oliver, the two famous Letter writers, were his principal ministers of state—Russell, Paxton, Ruggles, and a few others, were subordinate instruments. Among other schemes of this junto, one was to raise a Revenue in America by authority of parliament. In order to effect their purpose it was necessary to concert measures with the other colonies. Dr. Franklin, who was known to be an active, and very able man, and to have great influence, in the province of Pennsylvania, was in Boston in the year 1754, and Mr. Shirley communicated to him the profound secret, the great design of taxing the colonies by act of parliament. This sagacious gentleman, this eminent philosopher, and distinguished patriot, to his lasting honour, sent the governor an answer in writing with the following remarks upon his scheme. Remarks which would have discouraged any honest man from the pursuit. The remarks are these. “That the people always bear the burden best, when they have, or think they have, some share in the direction. “That when public measures are generally distasteful to the people, the wheels of government must move more heavily. “That excluding the people of America from all share in the choice of a grand council for their own defence, and taxing them in parliament, where they have no representative, would probably give extreme dissatisfaction. “That there was no reason to doubt the willingness of the colonists to contribute for their own defence. “That the people themselves, whose all was at stake, could better judge of the force necessary for their defence, and of the means for raising money for the purpose, than a British parliament at so great distance. “That natives of America, would be as likely to consult wisely and faithfully for the safety of their native country, as the Governors sent from Britain, whose object is generally to make fortunes, and then return home, and who might therefore be expected to carry on the war against France, rather in a way, by which themselves were likely to be gainers, than for the greatest advantage of the cause. “That compelling the colonies to pay money for their own defence, without their consent, would shew a suspicion of their loyalty, or of their regard for their country, or of their common sense, and would be treating them as conquered enemies, and not as free Britons, who hold it for their undoubted right not to be taxed but by their own consent, given through their representatives. “That parliamentary taxes, once laid on, are often continued, after the necessity for laying them on, ceases; but that if the colonists were trusted to tax themselves, they would remove the burden from the people, as soon as it should become unnecessary for them to bear it any longer. “That if parliament is to tax the colonies, their assemblies of representatives may be dismissed as useless. “That taxing the colonies in parliament for their own defence against the French, is not more just, than it would be, to oblige the cinque ports, and other coasts of Britain, to maintain a force against France, and to tax them for this purpose, without allowing them representatives in parliament. “That the colonists have always been indirectly taxed by the mother country (besides paying the taxes necessarily laid on by their own assemblies) inasmuch as they are obliged to purchase the manufactures of Britain, charged with innumerable heavy taxes; some of which manufactures they could make, and others could purchase cheaper at other markets. “That the colonists are besides taxed by the mother country, by being obliged to carry great part of their produce to Britain, and accept a lower price, than they might have at other markets. The difference is a tax paid to Britain. “That the whole wealth of the colonists centers at last in the mother country, which enables her to pay her taxes. “That the colonies have, at the hazard of their lives and fortunes, extended the dominions, and increased the commerce and riches of the mother country, that therefore the colonists do not deserve to be deprived of the native right of Britons, the right of being taxed only by representatives chosen by themselves. “That an adequate representation in parliament would probably be acceptable to the colonists and would best unite the views and interests of the whole empire.” The last of these propositions seems not to have been well considered, because an adequate representation in parliament, is totally impracticable: but the others have exhausted the subject. If any one should ask what authority or evidence I have of this anecdote, I refer him to the second volume of political disquisitions, page 276, 7, 8, 9. A book which ought to be in the hands of every American who has learned to read. Whether the ministry at home or the junto here, were discouraged by these masterly remarks, or by any other cause, the project of taxing the colonies was laid aside, Mr. Shirley was removed from this government, and Mr. Pownal was placed in his stead. Mr. Pownal seems to have been a friend to liberty and to our constitution, and to have had an aversion to all plots against either, and consequently to have given his confidence to other persons than Hutchinson and Oliver, who, stung with envy, against Mr. Pratt and others, who had the lead in affairs, set themselves, by propagating slanders against the governor, among the people, and especially among the clergy, to raise discontents, and make him uneasy in his seat. Pownal averse to wrangling, and fond of the delights of England, solicited to be recalled, and after some time Mr. Bernard was removed from New Jersey to the chair of this province. Bernard was the man for the purpose of the junto—educated in the highest principles of monarchy, naturally daring and courageous, skilled enough in law and policy to do mischief, and avaricious to a most infamous degree: needy at the same time, and having a numerous family to provide for—he was an instrument, suitable in every respect, excepting one, for this junto to employ. The exception I mean, was blunt Frankness, very opposite to that cautious cunning, that deep dissimulation, to which they had by long practice disciplined themselves. However, they did not dispair of teaching him this necessary artful quality by degrees, and the event shew'd they were not wholly unsuccessful, in their endeavours to do it. While the war lasted, these simple provinces were of too much importance in the conduct of it, to be disgusted, by any open attempt against their liberties. The junto therefore, contented themselves with preparing their ground by extending their connections and correspondencies in England, and by conciliating the friendship of the crown officers occasionally here, and insinuating their designs as necessary to be undertaken in some future favourable opportunity, for the good of the empire, as well as of the colonies. The designs of providence are inscrutable. It affords to bad men, conjunctures favourable for their designs, as well as to good. The conclusion of the peace, was the most critical opportunity, for our junto, that could have presented. A peace founded on the destruction of that system of policy, the most glorious for the nation, that ever was formed, and which was never equalled in the conduct of the English government, except in the interregnum, and perhaps in the reign of Elizabeth; which system however, by its being abruptly broken off, and its chief conductor discarded before it was compleated, proved unfortunate to the nation by leaving it sinking in a bottomless gulph of debt, oppressed and borne down with taxes. At this lucky time, when the British financier, was driven out of his wits for ways and means, to supply the demands upon him, Bernard is employed by the junto, to suggest to him the project of taxing the Colonies by act of parliament. I don't advance this without evidence. I appeal to a publication made by Sir Francis Bernard himself, the last year, of his own select letters on the trade and government of America, and the principles of law and polity applied to the American colonies. I shall make much use of this pamphlet before I have done. In the year 1764, Mr. Bernard transmitted home to different noblemen and gentlemen four copies of his principles of law and polity, with a preface, which proves incontestibly, that the project of new regulating the American colonies were not first suggested to him by the ministry, but by him to them. The words of this preface are these. “The present expectation, that a new regulation of the American governments will soon take place, probably arises more from the opinion the public has of the abilities of the present ministry, than from any thing that has transpired from the cabinet: It cannot be supposed that their penetration can overlook the necessity of such a regulation, nor their public spirit fail to carry it into execution. But it may be a question, whether the present is a proper time for this work; more urgent business may stand before it; some preparatory steps may be required to precede it; but these will only serve to postpone. As we may expect that this reformation, like all others, will be opposed by powerful prejudices, it may not be amiss to reason with them at leisure, and endeavour to take off their force before they become opposed to government.” These are the words of that arch enemy of North-America, written in 1764, and then transmitted to four persons, with a desire that they might be communicated to others. Upon these words, it is impossible not to observe. First, That the ministry had never signified to him, any intention of new regulating the colonies; and therefore, that it was he who most officiously and impertinently put them upon the pursuit of this will with a whisp, which has led him and them into so much mire. 2. The artful flattery with which he insinuates these projects into the minds of the ministry, as matters of absolute necessity, which their great penetration could not fail to discover, nor their great regard to the public, omit. 3. The importunity with which he urges a speedy accomplishment of his pretended reformation of the governments, and 4. His consciousness that these schemes would be opposed, although' he affects to expect from powerful prejudices only, that opposition, which all Americans say, has been dictated by sound reason, true policy, and eternal justice. The last thing I shall take notice of is, the artful, yet most false and wicked insinuation, that such new regulations were then generally expected. This is so absolutely false, that excepting Bernard himself, and his junto, scarcely any body on this side the water had any suspicion of it—insomuch that if Bernard had made public, at that time, his preface and principles, as he sent them to the ministry, it is much to be doubted whether he could have lived in this country—certain it is, he would have had no friends in this province out of the junto. The intention of the junto, was, to procure a revenue to be raised in America by act of parliament. Nothing was further from their designs and wishes, than the drawing or sending this revenue into the exchequer in England to be spent there in discharging the national debt, and lessening the burdens of the poor people there. They were more selfish. They chose to have the fingering of the money themselves. Their design was, that the money should be applied, first in a large salary to the governor. This would gratify Bernard's avarice, and then it would render him and all other governors, not only independent of the people, but still more absolutely a slave to the will of the minister. They intended likewise a salary for the lieutenant governor. This would appease in some degree the knawings of Hutchinson's avidity, in which he was not a whit behind Bernard himself. In the next place, they intended a salary to the judges of common law, as well as admiralty. And thus the whole government, executive and judicial, was to be rendered wholly independent of the people, (and their representatives rendered useless, insignificant and even burthensome) and absolutely dependent upon, and under the direction of the will of the minister of state. They intended further to new model the whole continent of North America, make an entire new division of it, into distinct, though more extensive and less numerous colonies, to sweep away all the charters upon the continent, with the destroying besom of an act of parliament, and reduce all the governments to the plan of the royal governments, with a nobility in each colony, not hereditary indeed, at first, but for life. They did indeed flatter the ministry and people in England, with distant hopes of a revenue from America, at some future period, to be appropriated to national uses there. But this was not to happen in their minds for some time. The governments must be new-moddelled, new regulated, reformed first, and then the governments here would be able and willing to carry into execution any acts of parliament or measures of the ministry, for fleecing the people here, to pay debts, or support pensioners, on the American establishment, or bribe electors, or members of parliament, or any other purpose that a virtuous ministry could desire. But as ill-luck would have it, the British financier, was as selfish as themselves, and instead of raising money for them, chose to raise it for himself. He put the cart before the horse. He chose to get the revenue into the exchequer, because he had hungry cormorants enough about him in England whose cooings were more troublesome to his ears, than the croaking of the ravens in America. And he thought if America could afford any revenue at all, and he could get it by authority of parliament, he might have it himself, to give to his friends, as well as raise it for the junto here, to spend themselves, or give to theirs. This unfortunate preposterous improvement of Mr. Grenville, upon the plan of the junto, had well nigh ruined the whole. I will proceed no further without producing my evidence. Indeed to a man who was acquainted with this junto, and had any opportunity to watch their motions, observe their language, and remark their countenances, for these last twelve years, no other evidence is necessary; it was plain to such persons, what this junto was about. But we have evidence enough now under their own hands of the whole of what was said of them by their opposers, through this whole period. Governor Bernard, in his letter July 11, 1764, says, “that a general reformation of the American governments would become not only a desirable but a necessary measure.” What his idea was, of a general reformation of the American governments, is to be learnt from his principles of law and polity, which he sent to the ministry in 1764. I shall select a few of them in his own words; but I wish the whole of them could be printed in the news-papers, that America might know more generally the principles and designs and exertions of our junto. His 29th proposition is, “The rule that a British subject shall not be bound by laws, or liable to taxes, but what he has consented to, by his representatives, must be confined to the Inhabitants of Great-Britain only; and is not strictly true even there. 30. The parliament of Great-Britain, as well from its rights of sovereignty, as from occasional exigences, has a right to make laws for, and impose taxes upon its subjects in its external dominions, although they are not represented in such parliament. But 31. Taxes imposed upon the external dominions, ought to be applied to the use of the people, from whom they are raised. 32. The parliament of Great-Britain has a right and duty to take care to provide for the defence of the American colonies; especially as such colonies are unable to defend themselves. 33. The parliament of Great-Britain has a right and a duty to take care that provision be made for a sufficient support of the American governments. Because 34. The support of the government is one of the principal conditions upon which a colony is allowed the power of legislation. Also because 35. Some of the American colonies have shewn themselves deficient in the support of their several governments, both as to sufficiency and independency.” His 75th proposition is, “Every American government is capable of having its constitution altered for the better. 76. The grants of the powers of governments to American colonies by charters, cannot be understood to be intended for other than their infant or growing states. 77. They cannot be intended for their mature state, that is, for perpetuity; because they are in many things unconstitutional and contrary to the very nature of a British government. Therefore 78. They must be considered as designed only as temporary means, for settling and bringing forward the peopling the colonies: which being effected, the cause of the peculiarity of their constitution ceases. 79. If the charters can be pleaded against the authority of parliament, they amount to an alienation of the dominions of Great Britain, and are, in effect acts of dismembering the British empire, and will operate as such, if care is not taken to prevent it. 83. The notion which has heretofore prevailed, that the dividing America into many governments and different modes of government, will be the means to prevent their uniting to revolt, is ill founded; since, if the governments were ever so much consolidated, it will be necessary to have so many distinct states, as to make a union to revolt, impracticable. Whereas 84. The splitting America into many small governments, weakens the governing power, and strengthens that of the people; and thereby makes revolting more probable and more practicable. 85. To prevent revolts in future times (for there is no room to fear them in the present) the most effectual means would be, to make the governments large and respectable, and ballance the powers of them. 86. There is no government in America at present, whose powers are properly ballanced; there not being in any of them, a real and distinct third legislative power mediating between the king and the people, which is the peculiar excellence of the British constitution. 87. The want of such a third legislative power, adds weight to the popular, and lightens the royal scale; so as to destroy the balance between the royal and popular powers. 88. Altho' America is not now (and probably will not be for many years to come) ripe enough for an hereditary nobility; yet it is now capable of a nobility for life. 89. A nobility appointed by the king for life, and made independent, would probably give strength and stability to the American governments, as effectually as an hereditary nobility does to that of Great-Britain. 90. The reformation of the American governments should not be controuled by the present boundaries of the colonies; as they were mostly settled upon partial, occasional, and accidental considerations, without any regard to a whole. 91. To settle the American governments to the greatest possible advantage, it will be necessary to reduce the number of them; in some places to unite and consolidate; in others to seperate and transfer; and in general to divide by natural boundaries, instead of imaginary lines. 92. If there should be but one form of government established for all the North-American provinces, it would greatly facilitate the reformation of them; since, if the mode of government was every where the same, people would be more indifferent under what division they were ranged. 93. No objections ought to arise to the alteration of the boundaries of provinces from proprietors, on account of their property only; since there is no occasion that it should in the least affect the boundaries of properties. 94. The present distinction of one government being more free or more popular than another, tend to embarass and to weaken the whole; and should not be allowed to subsist among people, subject to one king and one law, and all equally fit for one form of government. 95. The American colonies, in general, are, at this time, arrived at that state, which qualifies them to receive the most perfect form of government, which their situation and relation to Great-Britain, make them capable of. 96. The people of North-America, at this time, expect a revisal and reformation of the American governments, and are better disposed to submit to it, than ever they were, or perhaps ever will be again. 97. This is therefore the proper, and critical time to reform the American governments upon a general, constitutional, firm, and durable plan; and if it is not done now, it will probably every day grow more difficult, till at last it becomes impracticable.” My friends, these are the words, the plans, principles, and endeavours of Governor Bernard in the year 1764. That Hutchinson and Oliver, notwithstanding all their disguises which you well remember, were in unison with him in the whole of his measures, can be doubted by no man. It appeared sufficiently in the part they all along acted, notwithstanding their professions. And it appears incontestibly from their detected letters, of which more hereafter. Now let me ask you—if the parliament of Great-Britain, had all the natural foundations of authority, wisdom, goodness, justice, power, in as great perfection as they ever existed in any body of men since Adam's fall: and if the English nation was the most virtuous, pure and free, that ever was; would not such an unlimited subjection of three millions of people to that parliament, at three thousand miles distance be real slavery? There are but two sorts of men in the world, freemen and slaves. The very definition of a freeman, is one who is bound by no law to which he has not consented. Americans would have no way of giving or withholding their consent to the acts of this parliament, therefore they would not be freemen. But, when luxury, effeminacy and venality are arrived at such a shocking pitch in England, when both electors and elected, are become one mass of corruption, when the nation is oppressed to death with debts and taxes, owing to their own extravagance, and want of wisdom, what would be your condition under such an absolute subjection to parliament? You would not only be slaves—But the most abject sort of slaves to the worst sort of masters! at least this is my opinion. Judge you for yourselves between Massachusettensis and NOVANGLUS

I. To the Inhabitants of the Colony of Massachusetts-Bay My Friends, 23 January 1775 A Writer, under the signature of Massachusettensis, has addressed you, in a series of papers, on the great national subject of the present quarrel between the British administration and the colonies. As I have not in my possession, more than one of his Essays, and that is in the Gazette of December 26, I will take the liberty, in the spirit of candor and decency, to bespeak your attention, upon the same subject. There may be occasion, to say very severe things, before I shall have finished what I propose, in opposition to this writer, but there ought to be no reviling. Rem ipsam dic, mitte male loqui, which may be justly translated, speak out the whole truth boldly, but use no bad language. It is not very material to enquire, as others have done, who is the author of the speculations in question. If he is a disinterested writer, and has nothing to gain or lose, to hope or fear, for himself, more than other individuals of your community; but engages in this controversy from the purest principles, the noblest motives of benevolence to men, and of love to his country, he ought to have no influence with you, further than truth and justice will support his argument. On the other hand, if he hopes to acquire or preserve a lucrative employment, to screen himself from the just detestation of his countrymen, or whatever other sinister inducement he may have; as far as the truth of facts and the weight of argument, are in his favour, he ought to be heard and regarded. He tells you, “that the temporal salvation of this province depends upon an entire and speedy change of measures, which must depend upon a change of sentiments respecting our own conduct and the justice of the British nation.” The task, of effecting these great changes, this courageous writer, has undertaken in a course of publications in a news-paper. Nil desperandum is a good motto, and Nil admirari, is another. He is welcome to the first, and I hope will be willing that I should assume the last. The public, if they are not mistaken in their conjecture, have been so long acquainted with this gentleman, and have seen him so often disappointed, that if they were not habituated to strange things, they would wonder at his hopes, at this time to accomplish the most unpromising project of his whole life. In the character of Philanthrop, he attempted to reconcile you, to Mr. Bernard. But the only fruit of his labour was, to expose his client to more general examination, and consequently to more general resentment and aversion. In the character of Philalethes, he essayed to prove Mr. Hutchinson a Patriot, and his letters not only innocent, but meritorious. But the more you read and considered, the more you were convinced of the ambition and avarice, the simulation and dissimulation, the hypocricy and perfidy of that destroying angel. This illfated and unsuccessful, tho' persevering writer, still hopes to change your sentiments and conduct—by which it is supposed that he means to convince you that the system of colony administration, which has been pursued for these ten or twelve years past, is a wise, righteous and humane plan: that Sir Francis Bernard and Mr. Hutchinson, with their connections, who have been the principal instruments of it, are your best friends;—and that those gentlemen in this province, and in all the other colonies, who have been in opposition to it, are from ignorance, error, or from worse and baser causes, your worst enemies. This is certainly an inquiry, that is worthy of you: and I promise to accompany this writer, in his ingenious labours to assist you in it. And I earnestly intreat you, as the result of all shall be, to change your sentiments or persevere in them, as the evidence shall appear to you, upon the most dispassionate and impartial consideration, without regard to his opinion or mine. He promises to avoid personal reflections, but to penetrate the arcana, and expose the wretched policy of the whigs.—The cause of the whigs is not conducted by intrigues at a distant court, but by constant appeals to a sensible and virtuous people; it depends intirely on their good will, and cannot be pursued a single step without their concurrence, to obtain which all designs, measures and means, are constantly published to the collective body. The whigs therefore can have no arcana: But if they had, I dare say they were never so left, as to communicate them to this writer: you will therefore be disappointed if you expect from him any thing which is true, but what has been as publick as records and news-papers could make it. I, on my part, may perhaps in a course of papers, penetrate arcana too. Shew the wicked policy of the Tories—trace their plan from its first rude sketches to its present compleat draught. Shew that it has been much longer in contemplation, than is generally known—who were the first in it—their views, motives and secret springs of action—and the means they have employed. This will necessarily bring before your eyes many characters, living and dead. From such a research and detail of facts, it will clearly appear, who were the aggressors—and who have acted on the defensive from first to last—who are still struggling, at the expence of their ease, health, peace, wealth and preferment, against the encroachments of the Tories on their country—and who are determined to continue struggling, at much greater hazards still, and like the Prince of Orange resolve never to see its entire subjection to arbitrary power, but rather to die fighting against it, in the last ditch. It is true as this writer observes, “that the bulk of the people are generally but little versed in matters of state, that they rest the affairs of government where accident has placed them.” If this had not been true, the designs of the tories had been many years ago, entirely defeated. It was clearly seen, by a few, more than ten years since, that they were planning and pursuing the very measures, we now see executing. The people were informed of it, and warned of their danger: But they had been accustomed to confide in certain persons, and could never be persuaded to believe, until prophecy, became history. Now they see and feel, that the horrible calamities are come upon them, which were foretold so many years ago, and they now sufficiently execrate the men who have brought these things upon them. Now alas! when perhaps it is too late. If they had withdrawn their confidence from them in season, they would have wholly disarmed them. The same game, with the same success, has been played in all ages and countries, as Massachusettensis observes. When a favourable conjuncture has presented, some of the most intrigueing and powerful citizens have conceived the design of enslaving their country, and building their own greatness on its ruins. Philip and Alexander, are examples of this in Greece—Caesar in Rome—Charles the fifth in Spain—Lewis the eleventh in France—and ten thousand others. “There is a latent spark in the breasts of the people capable of being kindled into a flame, and to do this has always been the employment of the disaffected.” What is this “latent spark”? The love of Liberty? a Deo, hominis est indita naturae. Human nature itself is evermore an advocate for liberty. There is also in human nature, a resentment of injury, and indignation against wrong. A love of truth and a veneration for virtue. These amiable passions, are the “latent spark” to which those whom this writer calls the “disaffected” apply. If the people are capable of understanding, seeing and feeling the difference between true and false, right and wrong, virtue and vice, to what better principle can the friends of mankind apply, than to the sense of this difference. Is it better to apply as, this writer and his friends do, to the basest passions in the human breast, to their fear, their vanity, their avarice, ambition, and every kind of corruption? I appeal to all experience, and to universal history, if it has ever been in the power of popular leaders, uninvested with other authority than what is conferred by the popular suffrage, to persuade a large people, for any length of time together, to think themselves wronged, injured, and oppressed, unless they really were, and saw and felt it to be so. “They,” the popular leaders, “begin by reminding the people of the elevated rank they hold in the universe as men; that all men by nature are equal; that kings are but the ministers of the people; that their authority is delegated to them by the people for their good, and they have a right to resume it, and place it in other hands, or keep it themselves, whenever it is made use of to oppress them. Doubtless there have been instances, when these principles have been inculcated to obtain a redress of real grievances, but they have been much oftener perverted to the worst of purposes.” These are what are called revolution-principles. They are the principles of Aristotle and Plato, of Livy and Cicero, of Sydney, Harrington and Lock.—The principles of nature and eternal reason.—The principles on which the whole government over us, now stands. It is therefore astonishing, if any thing can be so, that writers, who call themselves friends of government, should in this age and country, be so inconsistent with themselves, so indiscreet, so immodest, as to insinuate a doubt concerning them. Yet we find that these principles stand in the way of Massachusettensis, and all the writers of his class. The Veteran, in his letter to the officers of the army, allows them to be noble, and true, but says the application of them to particular cases is wild and Utopian. How they can be in general true, and not applicable to particular cases, I cannot comprehend. I thought their being true in general was because, they were applicable to most particular cases. Gravity is a principle in nature. Why? because all particular bodies are found to gravitate. How would it sound to say, that bodies in general are heavy; yet to apply this to particular bodies and say, that a guinea, or a ball is heavy, is wild, &c? “Adopted in private life,” says the honest amiable Veteran, “they would introduce perpetual discord.” This I deny, and I think it plain, that there never was an happy private family where they were not adopted. “In the State perpetual discord.” This I deny, and affirm that order, concord and stability in the state, never was or can be preserved without them. “The least failure in the reciprocal duties of worship and obedience in the matrimonial contract would justify a divorce.” This is no consequence from those principles. A total departure from the ends and designs of the contract, it is true, as elopement and adultery, would by these principles justify a divorce, but not the least failure, or many smaller failures in the reciprocal duties, &c. “In the political compact, the smallest defect in the prince a revolution.” By no means. But a manifest design in the Prince, to annul the contract on his part, will annul it on the part of the people. A settled plan to deprive the people of all the benefits, blessings and ends of the contract, to subvert the fundamentals of the constitution—to deprive them of all share in making and executing laws, will justify a revolution. The author of a, “Friendly Address to all reasonable Americans”, discovers his rancour against these principles, in a more explicit manner, and makes no scruples to advance the principles of Hobbs and Filmer, boldly, and to pronounce damnation, ore rotunda, on all who do not practice implicit passive obedience, to all established government, of whatever character it may be. It is not reviling, it is not bad language, it is strictly decent to say, that this angry bigot, this ignorant dogmatist, this foul mouthed scold, deserves no other answer than silent contempt. Massachusettensis and the Veteran, I admire, the first for his art, the last for his honesty. Massachusettensis, is more discreet than either of the others. Sensible that these principles would be very troublesome to him, yet conscious of their truth, he has neither admitted nor denied them. But we have a right to his opinion of them, before we dispute with him. He finds fault with the application of them. They have been invariably applied in support of the revolution and the present establishment—against the Stuarts, the Charles's and James's,—in support of the reformation and the protestant religion, against the worst tyranny, that the genius of toryism, has ever yet invented, I mean the Romish superstition. Does this writer rank the revolution and present establishment, the reformation and protestant religion among his worst of purposes? What “worse purpose” is there than established tyranny? Were these principles ever inculcated in favour of such tyranny? Have they not always been used against such tyrannies, when the people have had knowledge enough to be apprized of them, and courage to assert them? Do not those who aim at depriving the people of their liberties, always inculcate opposite principles, or discredit these? “A small mistake in point of policy” says he, “often furnishes a pretence to libel government and perswade the people that their rulers are tyrants, and the whole government, a system of oppression.” This is not only untrue, but inconsistent with what he said before. The people are in their nature so gentle, that there never was a government yet, in which thousands of mistakes were not overlooked. The most sensible and jealous people are so little attentive to government, that there are no instances of resistance, until repeated, multiplied oppressions have placed it beyond a doubt, that their rulers had formed settled plans to deprive them of their liberties; not to oppress an individual or a few, but to break down the fences of a free constitution, and deprive the people at large of all share in the government and all the checks by which it is limitted. Even Machiavel himself allows, that not ingratitude to their rulers, but much love is the constant fault of the people. This writer is equally mistaken, when he says, the people are sure to be loosers in the end. They can hardly be loosers, if unsuccessful: because if they live, they can but be slaves, after an unfortunate effort, and slaves they would have been, if they had not resisted. So that nothing is lost. If they die, they cannot be said to lose, for death is better than slavery. If they succeed, their gains are immense. They preserve their liberties. The instances in antiquity, which this writer alludes to, are not mentioned and therefore cannot be answered, but that in the country from whence we are derived, is the most unfortunate for his purpose, that could have been chosen. The resistance to Charles the first and the case of Cromwell, no doubt he means. But the people of England, and the cause of liberty, truth, virtue and humanity, gained infinite advantages by that resistance. In all human probability, liberty civil and religious, not only in England but in all Europe, would have been lost. Charles would undoubtedly have established the Romish religion and a despotism as wild as any in the world. And as England has been a principal bulwark from that period to this, of civil liberty and the protestant religion in all Europe, if Charles's schemes had succeeded, there is great reason to apprehend that the light of science would have been extinguished, and mankind, drawn back to a state of darkness and misery, like that which prevailed from the fourth to the fourteenth century. It is true and to be lamented that Cromwell did not establish a government as free, as he might and ought; but his government was infinitely more glorious and happy to the people than Charles's. Did not the people gain by the resistance to James the second? Did not the Romans gain by resistance to Tarquin? Without that resistance and the liberty that was restored by it would the great Roman orators, poets and historians, the great teachers of humanity and politeness, the pride of human nature, and the delight and glory of mankind, for seventeen hundred years, ever have existed? Did not the Romans gain by resistance to the Decimvirs? Did not the English gain by resistance to John, when Magna Charta was obtained? Did not the seven united provinces gain by resistance to Phillip, Alva and Gran-233vell? Did not the Swiss Cantens, the Genevans and Grissons, gain by resistance to Albert and Grisler? NOVANGLUS

Report on Lord North's Conciliatory Resolution July 31, 1775 The Congress took the said Resolution into consideration, and are thereupon of opinion: That the Colonies of America are entitled to the sole and exclusive privilege of giving and granting their own money; that this involves a right of deliberating whether they will make any gift, for what purposes it shall be made, and what shall be its amount; and that it is a high breach of this privilege for any body of men, extraneous to their constitutions, to prescribe the purposes for which money shall be levied on them, to take to themselves the authority of judging of their conditions, circumstances, and situations, and of determining the amount of the contribution to be levied. That as the Colonies possess a right of appropriating their gifts, so are they entitled at all times to inquire into their application, to see that they be not wasted among the venal and corrupt for the purpose of undermining the civil rights of the givers, nor yet be diverted to the support of standing armies, inconsistent with their freedom and subversive of their quiet. To propose, therefore, as this Resolution does, that the monies given by the Colonies shall be subject to the disposal of Parliament alone, is to propose that they shall relinquish this right of inquiry, and put it in the power of others to render their gifts ruinous, in proportion as they are liberal. That this privilege of giving or of withholding our monies, is an important barrier against the undue exertion of prerogative, which, if left altogether without control, may be exercised to our great oppression; and all history shows how efficacious is its intercessions for redress of grievances and re-establishment of rights, and how improvident it would be to part with so powerful a mediator. We are of opinion that the proposition contained in this Resolution is unreasonable and insidious: unreasonable, because, if we declare we accede to it, we declare, without reservation, we will purchase the favour of Parliament, not knowing at the same time at what price they will please to estimate their favour. It is insidious, because, individual Colonies, having bid and bidden again, till they find the avidity of the seller too great for all their powers to satisfy; are then to return into opposition, divided from their sister Colonies whom the Minister will have previously detached by a grant of easier terms, or by an artful procrastination of a definitive answer. That the suspension of the exercise of their pretended power of taxation, being expressly made commensurate with the continuance of our gifts, these must be perpetual to make that so. Whereas, no experience has shown that a gift of perpetual revenue secures a perpetual return of duty or of kind disposition. On the contrary, the Parliament itself, wisely attentive to this observation, are in the established practice of granting their supplies from year to year only. Desirous and determined as we are, to consider in the most dispassionate view every seeming advance towards a reconciliation made by the British Parliament, let our brethren of Britain reflect what would have been the sacrifice to men of free spirits, had even fair terms been proffered, as these insidious proposals were, with circumstances of insult and defiance. A proposition to give our money, accompanied with large fleets and armies, seems addressed to our fears rather than to our freedom. With what patience would Britons have received articles of treaty from any power on earth when borne on the point of the bayonet by military plenipotentiaries? We think the attempt unnecessary to raise upon us by force or by threats our proportional contributions to the common defence, when all know, and themselves acknowledge, we have fully contributed whenever called upon to do so in the character of freemen. We are of opinion it is not just that the Colonies should be required to oblige themselves to other contributions, while Great Britain possesses a monopoly of their trade. This of itself lays them under heavy contribution. To demand, therefore, additional aids in the form of a tax, is to demand the double of their equal proportion; if we are to contribute equally with the other parts of the Empire, let us equally with them enjoy free commerce with the whole world. But while the restrictions on our trade shut to us the resources of wealth, is it just we should bear all other burdens equally with those to whom every resource is open? We conceive that the British Parliament has no right to intermeddle with our provisions for the support of civil Government or administration of justice. The provisions we have made are such as please ourselves, and are agreeable to our own circumstances; they answer the substantial purposes of Government and of justice, and other purposes than these should not be answered. We do not mean that our people shall be burdened with oppressive taxes, to provide sinecures for the idle or the wicked under colour of providing for a civil list. While Parliament pursue their plan of civil Government within their own jurisdiction, we also hope to pursue ours without molestation. We are of opinion the proposition is altogether unsatisfactory, because it imports only a suspension of the mode, not a renunciation of the pretended right to tax us. Because, too, it does not propose to repeal the several acts of Parliament passed for the purposes of restraining the Trade, and altering the form of Government of one of our Colonies; extending the boundaries and changing the Government of Quebeck; enlarging the jurisdiction of the Courts of Admiralty and Vice-Admiralty; taking from us the right of trial by a jury of the vicinage, in cases affecting both life and property; transporting us into other countries to be tried for criminal offences; exempting, by mock trial, the murderers of Colonists from punishment; and quartering soldiers on us in times of profound peace. Nor do they renounce the power of suspending our own Legislatures, and for legislating for us themselves in all cases whatsoever. On the contrary, to show they mean no discontinuance of injury, they pass acts at the very time of holding out this proposition, for restraining the Commerce and Fisheries of the Provinces of New-England, and for interdicting the trade of other Colonies with all foreign Nations and with each other. This proves, unequivocally, they mean not to relinquish the exercise of indiscriminate legislation over us. Upon the whole, this proposition seems to have been held up to the world, to deceive it into a belief that there was nothing in dispute between us but the mode of levying taxes; and that the Parliament having now been so good as to give up this, the Colonies are unreasonable if not perfectly satisfied: Whereas, in truth, our adversaries still claim a right of demanding ad libitum, and of taxing us themselves to the full amount of their demand if we do comply with it. This leaves us without any thing we can call property. But what is of more importance, and what in this proposal they keep out of sight as if no such point was now in contest between us, they claim a right to alter our Charters and establish laws, and leave us without any security for our lives and liberties. The proposition seems also to have been calculated more particularly to lull into fatal security our well-affected fellow-subjects on the other side the water, till time should be given for the operation of those arms which a British minister pronounced would instantaneously reduce the "cowardly" sons of America to unreserved submission. But when the world reflects how inadequate to justice are these vaunted terms; when it attends to the rapid and bold succession of injuries, which, during the course of eleven years, have been aimed at these Colonies; when it reviews the pacifick and respectful expostulations, which, during that whole time, were the sole arms we opposed to them; when it observes that our complaints were either not heard at all, or were answered with new and accumulated injuries; when it recollects that the Minister himself, on an early occasion, declared, "that he would never treat with America, till he had brought her to his feet;" and that an avowed partisan of Ministry has more lately denounced against us the dreadful sentence, "delenda est Carthago;" that this was done in presence of a British Senate, and being unreproved by them, must be taken to be their own sentiment, (especially as the purpose has already in part been carried into execution,) by their treatment of Boston and burning of Charlestown; when it considers the great armaments with which they have invaded us, and the circumstances of cruelty with which these have commenced and prosecuted hostilities; when these things, we say, are laid together and attentively considered, can the world be deceived into an opinion that we are unreasonable, or can it hesitate to believe with us that nothing but our own exertions may defeat the Ministerial sentence of death or abject submission. Source: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Report_on_Lord_North%27s_Conciliatory_Resolution

Olive Branch Petition SATURDAY JULY 8, 1775 The Congress met according to adjournment. The Petition to the King being engrossed, was compared, and signed by the several members. To the King's most excellent Majesty: MOST GRACIOUS SOVEREIGN, We, your Majesty's faithful subjects of the colonies 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 these colonies, who have deputed us to represent them in general Congress, entreat your Majesty's gracious attention to this our humble petition. The union between our Mother country and these colonies, and the energy of mild and just government, produced benefits so remarkably important, and afforded such an assurance of their permanency and increase, that the wonder and envy of other Nations were excited, while they beheld Great Britain riseing to a power the most extraordinary the world had ever known. Her rivals, observing that there was no probability of this happy connexion being broken by civil dissensions, and apprehending its future effects, if left any longer undisturbed, resolved to prevent her receiving such continual and formidable accessions of wealth and strength, by checking the growth of these settlements from which they were to be derived. In the prosecution of this attempt, events so unfavourable to the design took place, that every friend to the interests of Great Britain and these colonies, entertained pleasing and reasonable expectations of seeing an additional force and extension immediately given to the operations of the union hitherto experienced, by an enlargement of the dominions of the Crown, and the removal of ancient and warlike enemies to a greater distance. At the conclusion, therefore, of the late war, the most glorious and advantageous that ever had been carried on by British arms, your loyal colonists having contributed to its success, by such repeated and strenuous exertions, as frequently procured them the distinguished approbation of your Majesty, of the late king, and of parliament, doubted not but that they should be permitted, with the rest of the empire, to share in the blessings of peace, and the emoluments of victory and conquest. While these recent and honorable acknowledgments of their merits remained on record in the journals and acts of that august legislature, the Parliament, undefaced by the imputation or even the suspicion of any offense, they were alarmed by a new system of statutes and regulations adopted for the administration of the colonies, that filled their minds with the most painful fears and jealousies; and, to their inexpressible astonishment, perceived the dangers of a foreign quarrel quickly succeeded by domestic dangers, in their judgment, of a more dreadful kind. Nor were their anxieties alleviated by any tendency in this system to promote the welfare of the Mother country. For tho' its effects were more immediately felt by them, yet its influence appeared to be injurious to the commerce and prosperity of Great Britain. We shall decline the ungrateful task of describing the irksome variety of artifices, practiced by many of your Majesty's Ministers, the delusive presences, fruitless terrors, and unavailing severities, that have, from time to time, been dealt out by them, in their attempts to execute this impolitic plan, or of traceing, thro'a series of years past, the progress of the unhappy differences between Great Britain and these colonies, which have flowed from this fatal source. Your Majesty's Ministers, persevering in their measures, and proceeding to open hostilities for enforcing them, have compelled us to arm in our own defence, and have engaged us in a controversy so peculiarly abhorrent to the affections of your still faithful colonists, that when we consider whom we must oppose in this contest, and if it continues, what may be the consequences, our own particular misfortunes are accounted by us only as parts of our distress. Knowing to what violent resentments and incurable animosities, civil discords are apt to exasperate and inflame the contending parties, we think ourselves required by indispensable obligations to Almighty God, to your Majesty, to our fellow subjects, and to ourselves, immediately to use all the means in our power, not incompatible with our safety, for stopping the further effusion of blood, and for averting the impending calamities that threaten the British Empire. Thus called upon to address your Majesty on affairs of such moment to America, and probably to all your dominions, we are earnestly desirous of performing this office, with the utmost deference for your Majesty; and we therefore pray, that your royal magnanimity and benevolence may make the most favourable construction of our expressions on so uncommon an occasion. Could represent in their full force, the sentiments that agitate the minds of us your dutiful subjects, we are persuaded your Majesty would ascribe any seeming deviation from reverence in our language, and even in our conduct, not to any reprehensible intention, but to the impossibility of reconciling the usual appearances of respect, with a just attention to our own preservation against those artful and cruel enemies, who abuse your royal confidence and authority, for the purpose of effecting our destruction. Attached to your Majesty's person, family, and government, with all devotion that principle and affection can inspire, connected with Great Britain by the strongest ties that can unite societies, and deploring every event that tends in any degree to weaken them, we solemnly assure your Majesty, that we not only most ardently desire the former harmony between her and these colonies may be restored, but that a concord may be established between them upon so firm a basis as to perpetuate its blessings, uninterrupted by any future dissensions, to succeeding generations in both countries, and to transmit your Majesty's Name to posterity, adorned with that signal and lasting glory, that has attended the memory of those illustrious personages, whose virtues and abilities have extricated states from dangerous convulsions, and, by securing happiness to others, have erected the most noble and durable monuments to their own fame. We beg leave further to assure your Majesty, that notwithstanding the sufferings of your loyal colonists, during the course of the present controversy, our breasts retain too tender a regard for the kingdom from which we derive our origin, to request such a reconciliation as might in any manner be inconsistent with her dignity or her welfare. These, related as we are to her, honor and duty, as well as inclination, induce us to support and advance; and the apprehensions that now oppress our hearts with unspeakable grief, being once removed, your Majesty will find your faithful subjects on this continent ready and willing at all times, as they ever have been, with their lives and fortunes, to assert and maintain the rights and interests of your Majesty, and of our Mother country. We, therefore, beseech your Majesty, that your royal authority and influence may be graciously interposed to procure us relief from our afflicting fears and jealousies, occasioned by the system before mentioned, and to settle peace through every part of your dominions, with all humility submitting to your Majesty's wise consideration whether it may not be expedient for facilitating those important purposes, that your Majesty be pleased to direct some mode, by which the united applications of your faithful colonists to the throne, in pursuance of their common councils, may be improved into a happy and permanent reconciliation; and that, in the mean time, measures may be taken for preventing the further destruction of the lives of your Majesty's subjects; and that such statutes as more immediately distress any of your Majesty's colonies may be repealed. For by such arrangements as your Majesty's wisdom can form, for collecting the united sense of your American people, we are convinced your Majesty would receive such satisfactory proofs of the disposition of the colonists towards their sovereign and parent state, that the wished for opportunity would soon be restored to them, of evincing the sincerity of their professions, by every testimony of devotion becoming the most dutiful subjects, and the most affectionate colonists. That your Majesty may enjoy a long and prosperous reign, and that your descendants may govern your dominions with honor to themselves and happiness to their subjects, is our sincere and fervent prayer. JOHN HANCOCK colony of New Hampshire John Langdon colony of Massachusetts bay Thomas Chushing Saml Adams John Adams Robt Treat Paine colony of Rhode island and providence plantations Step Hopkins Sam: Ward colony of Connecticut Elipht Dyer Roger Sherman Silas Deane colony of New York Phil. Livingston Jas Duane John Alsop Frans Lewis John Jay Robt R Livingston junr Lewis Morris Wm Floyd Henry Wisner New Jersey Wil: Livingston John De Hart Richd Smith Pennsylvania John Dickinson B Franklin Geo: Ross James Wilson Chas Humphreys Edwd Diddle counties of New Castle Kent and Sussex on delawar Caesar Rodney Thos M° Kean Geo: Read Maryland Mat. Tilghman Ths Johnson Junr W Paca Samuel Chase Thos Stone colony of Virginia P. Henry Jr Richard Henry Lee Edmund Pendleton Bend Harrison Th: Jefferson North Carolina Will Hooper Joseph Hewes South Carolina Henry Middleton Tho Lynch Christ Gadsden J. Rutledge Edward Rutledge. Source https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/contcong_07-08-75.asp

A Declaration by the Representatives of the United Colonies of North-America, now met in Congress (Second Continental Congress)at Philadelphia, setting forth the causes and necessity of their taking up Arms. If it was possible for men who exercise their reason, to believe that the divine Author of our existence intended a part of the human race to hold an absolute property in, and an unbounded power over others, marked out by his infinite goodness and wisdom, as the objects of a legal domination never rightfully resistible, however severe and oppressive, the inhabitants of these Colonies might at least require from the Parliament of Great Britain some evidence, that this dreadful authority over them has been granted to that body. But a reverence for our great Creator, principles of humanity, and the dictates of common sense, must convince all those who reflect upon the subject, that Government was instituted to promote the welfare of mankind, and ought to be administered for the attainment of that end. The Legislature of Great Britain, however, stimulated by an inordinate passion for a power, not only unjustifiable, but which they know to be peculiarly reprobated by the very Constitution of that Kingdom, and desperate of success in any mode of contest where regard should be had to truth, law, or right, have at length, deserting those, attempted to effect their cruel and impolitick purpose of enslaving these Colonies by violence, and have thereby rendered it necessary for us to close with their last appeal from reason to arms. Yet, however blinded that Assembly may be, by their intemperate rage for unlimited domination, so to slight justice and the opinion of mankind, we esteem ourselves bound, by obligations of respect to the rest of the world, to make known the justice of our cause. Our forefathers, inhabitants of the Island of Great Britain, left their native land, to seek on these shores a residence for civil and religious freedom. At the expense of their blood, at the hazard of their fortunes, without the least charge to the Country from which they removed, by unceasing labour, and an unconquerable spirit, they effected settlements in the distant and inhospitable wilds of America, then filled with numerous and warlike nations of barbarians. Societies or Governments, vested with perfect Legislatures, were formed under Charters from the Crown, and a harmonious intercourse was established between the Colonies and the Kingdom from which they derived their origin. The mutual benefits of this union became in a short time so extraordinary, as to excite astonishment. It is universally confessed, that the amazing increase of the wealth, strength, and navigation of the Realm, arose from this source; and the Minister who so wisely and successfully directed the measures of Great Britain in the late war, publickly declared, that these Colonies enabled her to triumph over her enemies. Towards the conclusion of that war, it pleased our Sovereign to make a change in his Councils. From that fatal moment, the affairs of the British Empire began to fall into confusion, and gradually sliding from the summit of glorious prosperity, to which they had been advanced by the virtues and abilities of one man, are at length distracted by the convulsions that now shake it to its deepest foundations. The new Ministry finding the brave foes of Britain, though frequently defeated, yet still contending, took up the unfortunate idea of granting them a hasty peace, and of then subduing her faithful friends. These devoted Colonies were judged to be in such a state as to present victories without bloodshed, and all the easy emoluments of statutable plunder. The uninterrupted tenour of their peaceable and respectful behaviour, from the beginning of colonization; their dutiful, zealous, and useful services during the war, though so recently and amply acknowledged in the most honourable manner by His Majesty, by the late King, and by Parliament, could not save them from the meditated innovations. Parliament was influenced to adopt the pernicious project; and assuming a new power over them, have, in the course of eleven years, given such decisive specimens of the spirit and consequences attending this power, as to leave no doubt concerning the effects of acquiescence under it. They have undertaken to give and grant our money without our consent, though we have ever exercised an exclusive right to dispose of our own property; statutes have been passed for extending the jurisdiction of Courts of Admiralty and Vice-Admiralty beyond their ancient limits; for depriving us of the accustomed and inestimable privilege of Trial by Jury, in cases affecting both life and property; for suspending the Legislature of one of the Colonies; for interdicting all commerce to the capital of another; and for altering fundamentally the form of Government established by Charter, and secured by acts of its own Legislature, solemnly confirmed by the Crown; for exempting the "murderers" of Colonists from legal trial, and, in effect, from punishment; for erecting in a neighbouring Province, acquired by the joint arms of Great Britain and America, a despotism dangerous to our very existence; and for quartering soldiers upon the Colonists in time of profound peace. It has also been resolved in Parliament, that Colonists charged with committing certain offences, shall be transported to England to be tried. But why should we enumerate our injuries in detail? By one statute it is declared that Parliament can "of right make laws to bind us in all cases whatsoever." What is to defend us against so enormous, so unlimited a power? Not a single man of those who assume it is chosen by us, or is subject to our control or influence; but, on the contrary, they are all of them exempt from the operation of such laws, and an American revenue, if not diverted from the ostensible purposes for which it is raised, would actually lighten their own burdens, in proportion as they increase ours. We saw the misery to which such despotism would reduce us. We, for ten years, incessantly and ineffectually besieged the Throne as supplicants; we reasoned, we remonstrated with Parliament, in the most mild and decent language. Administration, sensible that we should regard these oppressive measures as freemen ought to do, sent over fleets and armies to enforce them. The indignation of the Americans was roused, it is true; but it was the indignation of a virtuous, loyal, and affectionate people. A Congress of Delegates from the United Colonies was assembled at Philadelphia, on the fifth day of last September. We resolved again to offer an humble and dutiful petition to the King, and also addressed our fellow-subjects of Great Britain. We have pursued every temperate, every respectful measure; we have even proceeded to break off our commercial intercourse with our fellow-subjects, as the last peaceable admonition, that our attachment to no Nation upon earth should supplant our attachment to liberty. This, we flattered ourselves, was the ultimate step of the controversy; but subsequent events have shown how vain was this hope of finding moderation in our enemies. Several threatening expressions against the Colonies were inserted in His Majesty's Speech; our Petition, though we were told it was a decent one, and that His Majesty had been pleased to receive it graciously, and to promise laying it before his Parliament, was huddled into both Houses among a bundle of American papers, and there neglected. The Lords and Commons, in their Address, in the month of February, said, that "a rebellion at that time actually existed within the Province of Massachusetts-Bay; and that those concerned in it had been countenanced and encouraged by unlawful combinations and engagements entered into by His Majesty's subjects in several of the other Colonies; and, therefore, they besought His Majesty, that he would take the most effectual measures to enforce due obedience to the laws and authority of the supreme Legislature. Soon after, the commercial intercourse of whole Colonies with foreign countries, and with each other, was cut off by an act of Parliament; by another, several of them were entirely prohibited from the Fisheries in the seas near their coasts, on which they always depended for their sustenance; and large re-enforcements of ships and troops were immediately sent over to General Gage. Fruitless were all the entreaties, arguments, and eloquence of an illustrious band of the most distinguished Peers and Commoners, who nobly and strenuously asserted the justice of our cause, to stay, or even to mitigate the heedless fury with which these accumulated and unexampled outrages were hurried on. Equally fruitless was the interference of the City of London, of Bristol, and many other respectable Towns, in our favour. Parliament adopted an insidious manœuvre, calculated to divide us, to establish a perpetual auction of taxations, where Colony should bid against Colony, all of them uninformed what ransom would redeem their lives; and thus to extort from us, at the point of the bayonet, the unknown sums that should be sufficient to gratify, if possible to gratify, Ministerial rapacity, with the miserable indulgence left to us of raising, in our own mode, the prescribed tribute. What terms more rigid and humiliating could have been dictated by remorseless victors to conquered enemies? In our circumstances, to accept them, would be to deserve them. Soon after intelligence of these proceedings arrived on this Continent, General Gage, who, in the course of the last year had taken possession of the Town of Boston, in the Province of Massachusetts-Bay, and still occupied it as a garrison, on the 19th day of April sent out from that place a large detachment of his army, who made an unprovoked assault on the inhabitants of the said Province, at the Town of Lexington, as appears by the affidavits of a great number of persons, some of whom were officers and soldiers of that detachment, murdered eight of the inhabitants, and wounded many others. From thence the troops proceeded in warlike array to the Town of Concord, where they set upon another party of the inhabitants of the same Province, killing several and wounding more, until compelled to retreat by the country people suddenly assembled to repel this cruel aggression. Hostilities, thus commenced by the British Troops, have been since prosecuted by them without regard to faith or reputation. The inhabitants of Boston, being confined within that Town by the General, their Governour, and having, in order to procure their dismission, entered into a treaty with him, it was stipulated that the said inhabitants, having deposited their arms with their own Magistrates, should have liberty to depart, taking with them their other effects. They accordingly delivered up their arms; but in open violation of honour, in defiance of the obligation of treaties, which even savage nations esteemed sacred, the Governour ordered the arms deposited as aforesaid, that they might be preserved for their owners, to be seized by a body of soldiers; detained the greatest part of the inhabitants in the Town, and compelled the few who were permitted to retire, to leave their most valuable effects behind. By this perfidy, wives are separated from their husbands, children from their parents, the aged and the sick from their relations and friends, who wish to attend and comfort them; and those who have been used to live in plenty, and even elegance, are reduced to deplorable distress. The General, further emulating his Ministerial masters, by a Proclamation, bearing date on the 12th day of June, after venting the grossest falsehoods and calumnies against the good people of these Colonies, proceeds to "declare them all, either by name or description, to be rebels and traitors; to supersede the course of the common law, and instead thereof to publish and order the use and exercise of the law martial." His troops have butchered our countrymen; have wantonly burnt Charlestown, besides a considerable number of houses in other places; our ships and vessels are seized; the necessary supplies of provisions are intercepted, and he is exerting his utmost power to spread destruction and devastation around him. We have received certain intelligence, that General Carleton, the Governour of Canada, is instigating the people of that Province, and the Indians, to fall upon us; and we have but too much reason to apprehend, that schemes have been formed to excite domestick enemies against us. In brief, a part of these Colonies now feel, and all of them are sure of feeling, as far as the vengeance of Administration can inflict them, the complicated calamities of fire, sword, and famine. We are reduced to the alternative of choosing an unconditional submission to the tyranny of irritated Ministers, or resistance by force. The latter is our choice. We have counted the cost of this contest, and find nothing so dreadful as voluntary slavery. Honour, justice, and humanity, forbid us tamely to surrender that freedom which we received from our gallant ancestors, and which our innocent posterity have a right to receive from us. We cannot endure the infamy and guilt of resigning succeeding generations to that wretchedness which inevitably awaits them, if we basely entail hereditary bondage upon them. Our cause is just. Our union is perfect. Our internal resources are great, and, if necessary, foreign assistance is undoubtedly attainable. We gratefully acknowledge, as signal instances of the Divine favour towards us, that His providence would not permit us to be called into this severe controversy until we were grown up to our present strength, had been previously exercised in warlike operations, and possessed of the means of defending ourselves. With hearts fortified with these animating reflections, we most solemnly, before God and the world, declare, that, exerting the utmost energy of those powers which our beneficent Creator hath graciously bestowed upon us, the arms we have been compelled by our enemies to assume, we will, in defiance of every hazard, with unabating firmness and perseverance, employ for the preservation of our liberties; being, with one mind, resolved to die freemen rather than live slaves. Lest this declaration should disquiet the minds of our friends and fellow-subjects in any part of the Empire, we assure them that we mean not to dissolve that union which has so long and so happily subsisted between us, and which we sincerely wish to see restored. Necessity has not yet driven us into that desperate measure, or induced us to excite any other nation to war against them. We have not raised armies with ambitious designs of separating from Great Britain, and establishing independent states. We fight not for glory or for conquest. We exhibit to mankind the remarkable spectacle of a people attacked by unprovoked enemies, without any imputation or even suspicion of offence. They boast of their privileges and civilization, and yet proffer no milder conditions than servitude or death. In our own native land, in defence of the freedom that is our birth-right, and which we ever enjoyed till the late violation of it; for the protection of our property, acquired solely by the honest industry of our forefathers and ourselves, against violence actually offered, we have taken up arms. We shall lay them down when hostilities shall cease on the part of the aggressors, and all danger of their being renewed shall be removed, and not before. With an humble confidence in the mercies of the supreme and impartial Judge and Ruler of the Universe, we most devoutly implore his divine goodness to protect us happily through this great conflict, to dispose our adversaries to reconciliation on reasonable terms, and thereby to relieve the Empire from the calamities of civil war. Source: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Declaration_of_the_Causes_and_Necessity_of_Taking_Up_Arms

The New England Restraining Act March 30 1775 THE Statutes at Large, From the Thirteenth Year of the Reign of KING GEORGE the THIRD To the Sixteenth Year of the Reign of KING GEORGE the THIRD, inclusive. To which is prefixed, A TABLE of the TITLES of all the Publick and Private Statutes during that Time. With a COPIOUS INDEX. An Act to Restrain the Trade and Commerce of the Provinces of MASSACHUSETTS BAY and NEW-HAMPSHIRE, and Colonies of CONNECTICUT and RHODE-ISLAND, and PROVIDENCE PLANTATION, in NORTH AMERICA, to GREAT BRITAIN, IRELAND, and the BRITISH Islands in the WEST INDIES; and to prohibit such Provinces and Colonies from carrying on any Fishery on the banks of NEWFOUNDLAND, or other places therein mentioned, under certain conditions and limitations. Whereas, by an Act, made in the twelfth year of the reign of King Charles the Second, entituled “An Act for the Encouraging and Increasing of Shipping and Navigation;” and by several subsequent Acts of Parliament which are now in force, it is, amongst other things, enacted, that for every Ship or Vessel that shall load any commodities in those Acts particularly enumerated, at any British Plantation, being the Growth, Product, or Manufacture thereof, Bonds shall be given, with one surety, to the value of one thousand Pounds, if the Ship be of less burthen than one hundred tons, and of the sum of two thousand Pounds, if the Ship be of greater burthen, that the same commodities shall be brought by such Ship or Vessel to some other British Plantation, or to some Port in Great Britain: And whereas, by several other Acts of Parliament which are now in force, no commodities of the Growth, Product, or Manufacture of Europe, (except Salt for the Fisheries, Wines of the Madeiras and Azores, and Western Islands, and Victual and Linen Cloth from Ireland, under the restrictions in such Acts particularly mentioned) can be imported into any Plantation, Colony, Territory, or place belonging to his Majesty in Asia, Africa, or America, but what shall be bona fide, and without fraud, laden and shipped in Great Britain, and carried directly from thence: And whereas, during the continuance of the Combinations and Disorders which at this time prevail within the Provinces of Massachusetts Bay and New-Hampshire, and the Colonies of Connecticut and Rhode-Island, to the obstruction of the Commerce of these Kingdoms and other his Majesty’ s Dominions, and in breach and violation of the laws of this Realm, it is highly unfit that the inhabitants of the said Provinces and Colonies should enjoy the same privileges of Trade, and the same benefits and advantages to which his Majesty’ s faithful and obedient subjects are entitled; Be it therefore 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 from and after the first day of July, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five, and during the continuance of this Act, no Goods, Wares, or Merchandises, which are particularly enumerated in, and by the said Act made in the twelfth year of King Charles the Second, or any other Act, being the Growth, Product or Manufacture of the Provinces of Massachusetts Bay, or New-Hampshire, or Colonies of Connecticut, Rhode-Island, or Providence Plantation, in North America, or any or either of them, are to be brought to some other British Colony, or to Great Britain; or any such enumerated Goods, Wares, or Merchandise, which shall at any time or times have been imported or brought into the said Provinces or Colonies, or any or either of them, shall be shipped, carried, conveyed, or transported from any of the said Provinces or Colonies, respectively, to any Land, Island, Territory, Dominion, Port, or Place whatsoever, other than to Great Britain, or some of the British Islands in the West Indies, to be laid on shore there; and that no other Goods, Wares, or Merchandise, whatsoever, of the Growth, Product, or Manufacture of the Provinces or Colonies hereinbefore mentioned, or which shall at any time or times have been imported or brought into the same, shall, from and after the said first day of July, and during the continuance of this Act, be shipped, carried, conveyed, or transported from any of the said Provinces or Colonies, respectively, to any other Land, Island, Territory, Dominion, Port, or place whatsoever, except to the Kingdoms of Great Britain, or Ireland, or to some of the British Islands in the West Indies, to be laid on shore there; any law, custom, or usage, to the contrary notwithstanding. II. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That from and after the said first day of July, before any Ship or Vessel shall lade, or take on board any Goods as aforesaid, in any or either of the Provinces or Colonies before mentioned, sufficient Bond, with one surety, besides the Master of such Ship or Vessel, shall be given to the Collector, or other principal Officer of the Customs at the Port or place where such Goods are intended to be laden, or taken on board, in the penalty of one thousand Pounds, if the Ship be of less burthen than one hundred tons; and of the sum of two thousand Pounds if the Ship shall be of that or any greater burthen, with condition that such enumerated Goods shall not be landed, or put on shore, at or upon any other Land, Island, Territory, Dominion, Port, or place whatsoever, except some Port or place within the Kingdom of Great Britain, or some of the British Islands in the West Indies; and that all other Goods, Wares, or Merchandise, so intended to be laden as aforesaid, shall not be landed or put on shore at or upon any Land, Island, Territory, Dominion, Port, or place whatsoever, other than, and except, some Port or place within the Kingdoms of Great Britain, or Ireland, or some of the British Islands in the West Indies; and with further condition to bring a Certificate in discharge thereof, within eighteen months from the date of such Bond, for such of the said Goods as shall be entered for, or landed in, Great Britain or Ireland, respectively, and within six months for such of the said Goods as shall be entered for, or landed in, any of the British Islands in the West Indies; which respective Certificates shall be under the hands and seals of office of the Collector and Comptroller, or other principal Officer of the Customs, resident at the Port or place where such Goods shall be landed, testifying the landing thereof; or such Bond or Bonds shall and maybe discharged by proof, upon oath made by credible persons, that the said Goods were taken by enemies, or perished in the Seas. III. And it is hereby further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That where any such Bond or Bonds shall be given as aforesaid, in pursuance of this Act, the Collector, or other principal Officer of the Customs, to whom such Bond or Bonds shall have been given, shall deliver, under his hand and seal of office, without fee or reward, to the Master of the Ship or Vessel taking in such Goods, for the security of her Navigation, a Certificate that such Bond or Bonds hath or have been given, expressing therein the quantity and species of the Goods, with the marks and numbers of the Packages, and the Port or place for which they were entered; and if any such Goods shall be laden on board any such Ship or Vessel in any of the Provinces or Colonies in this Act before mentioned, before such Bond or Bonds shall be given, or shall be found on board any Ship or Vessel, without the Certificate hereinbefore directed, that such Bond or Bonds hath or have been given, the Goods so laden, together with the Ship or Vessel, with her Guns, Ammunition, Tackle, Apparel, and Furniture, shall be forfeited: and if any Goods, so laden as aforesaid, shall be landed or discharged at any Port or place, contrary to the intent and meaning of this Act, over and above the penalty of the Bond or Bonds, the Shipper and Owner of such Goods, and the Master or person taking charge of the Vessel on board which they were laden, shall respectively forfeit the full value of the Goods so landed or discharged, to be estimated according to the highest price or value which such sort of Goods bear in the Province or Colony where and at the time when they were shipped and laden; which Ship and Goods may be seized and prosecuted, or the value of such Goods prosecuted for by any Admiral, Chief Commander, or Commissioned Officer of his Majesty’ s Fleet or Ships-of-War, or by any Officer of his Majesty’ s Customs, in the manner hereinafter directed. IV. And it is hereby further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That from and after the first day of September, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five, and during the continuance of this Act, no sort of Wines, Salt, or any Goods or commodities whatsoever, (except Horses, Victual, and Linen Cloth, the Produce and Manufacture of Ireland, imported directly from thence) shall be imported into any of the said Colonies or Provinces hereinbefore respectively mentioned, upon any pretence whatsoever, unless such Goods shall be bona fide, and without fraud, laden and shipped in Great Britain, and carried directly from thence, upon forfeiture thereof, and of the Ship or Vessel on board which such Goods shall be laden; and it shall be lawful for any Admiral, Chief Commander, or Commissioned Officer of his Majesty’ s Fleet or Ships-of-War, or any Officer of his Majesty’ s Customs, to seize any Ship or Vessel arriving at any of the said Provinces or Colonies before mentioned, or which shall be discovered within two leagues of any shore thereof, having such Goods on board, and the Goods laden thereon, (except as before excepted) for which the Master, or other person taking charge of such Ship or Vessel, shall not produce a Cocket or Clearance from the Collector, or proper Officer of his Majesty’ s Customs, certifying that the said Goods were laden on board the said Ship or Vessel in some Port of Great Britain; any law, custom, or usage, to the contrary notwithstanding. V. Provided always, and it is hereby further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That this Act, or any thing herein contained, shall not extend, or be construed to extend, to prohibit the exportation or carrying out from any of the Provinces or Colonies before mentioned, or the importation into the same, of any Goods or Commodities whatsoever, for the victualling or providing any of his Majesty’ s Ships-of-War, or other Ships or Vessels in his Majesty’ s service, or for his Majesty’ s Forces, Forts, or Garrisons; any thing herein contained to the contrary notwithstanding. VI. And provided, also, That nothing herein contained shall extend, or be construed to extend, to hinder or restrain the lawful importation into any or either of the said Provinces or Colonies hereinbefore mentioned, from any of the British Islands in the West Indies, of any such Goods or Commodities, being the Growth or Produce thereof, as may now by law be imported from thence into the said Provinces or Colonies, or any or either of them. VII. And it is hereby further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That if any Ship or Vessel, being the property of the subjects of Great Britain, not belonging to, and fitted out from Great Britain or Ireland, or the Islands of Guernsey, Jersey, Sark, Alderney, or Man, shall be found, after the twentieth day of July, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five, carrying on any Fishery, of what nature or kind soever, upon the banks of Newfoundland, the Coast of Labrador, or within the River or Gulf of St. Lawrence, or upon the Coast of Cape Breton, or Nova Scotia, or any other part of the Coast of North America, or having on board materials for carrying on any such Fishery, every such Ship or Vessel, with her Guns, Ammunition, Tackle, Apparel, and Furniture, together with the Fish, if any shall be found on board, shall be forfeited, unless the Master, or other person having the charge of such Ship or Vessel, do produce to the Commander of any of his Majesty’ s Ships-of-War, stationed for the protection and superintendence of the British Fisheries in America, a Certificate, under the hand and seal of the Governour or Commander-in-Chief, of any of the Colonies or Plantations of Quebec, Newfoundland, St. John, Nova Scotia, New-York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, East Florida, West Florida, Bahamas, and Bermudas, setting forth that such Ship or Vessel, expressing her name, and the name of her Master, and describing her build and burthen, hath fitted and cleared out from some one of the said Colonies or Plantations, in order to proceed upon the said Fishery, and that she actually and bona fide belongs to, and is the whole and entire property of his Majesty’ s subjects, inhabitants of the said Colony or Plantation; which Certificates such Governours or Commanders-in-Chief, respectively, are hereby authorized and required to grant. VIII. And to the end that the foregoing Prohibitions, Restrictions, and Regulations may be more effectually carried into execution, it is hereby further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That it shall and may be lawful to and for all or any of the Commanders of his Majesty’ s Ships or Vessels of War, stationed and appointed for the regulation and protection of the British Fishery upon the Coasts of North America, or to and for the Commanders of any other of his Majesty’ s Ships or Vessels employed at Sea, and they, and every of them, are hereby required and enjoined to examine, search, and visit all Ships and Vessels suspected to be carrying on the said Fisheries, and to seize, arrest, and prosecute, in manner hereinafter directed, all and every such Ships and Vessels as shall be found to be carrying on the said Fisheries, not belonging to and fitted out from Great Britain or Ireland, or the Islands of Guernsey, Jersey, Alderney, Sark, or Man, which shall not have on board the Certificate hereinbefore required. IX. Provided always, and be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That nothing herein contained shall extend, or be construed to extend, to empower any Officer of his Majesty’ s Ships-of-War, or of his Majesty’ s Customs, to seize any Ship or Vessel which shall be fitted and cleared out from any of the said Colonies and Provinces before the first day of June, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five, for the Whale Fishery only, and which shall be found carrying on such Fishery within the limits aforesaid, between the said first day of June and the first day of November, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five, and not carrying on, nor having on board any materials for carrying on any other Fishery. X. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That nothing in this Act contained, respecting the Fisheries carried on by his Majesty’ s subjects in North America, shall affect, or be construed to affect, any Ship or Vessel, her Guns, Ammunition, Tackle, Apparel, Furniture or Fish, on board, being the property of any of the inhabitants of the Island of Nantucket, employed in the Whale Fishery only, if it shall appear, by the papers on board, that such Ship or Vessel was fitted and cleared out from thence before the first day of June, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five, or if the Master, or other person having the charge of any such Ship or Vessel as aforesaid, shall produce a Certificate, under the hand and seal of the Governour or Commander-in-Chief of the Province of the Massachusetts Bay, setting forth that such Ship or Vessel, (expressing her name, and the name of her Master, and describing her built and burthen) is the whole and entire property of his Majesty’ s subjects of the said Island of Nantucket, and was the property of one or more of them on or before the twenty-fifth day of March, in the year one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five, and that she was cleared out with materials on board in order to proceed upon the Whale Fishery only; any thing in this Act to the contrary thereof, in any wise notwithstanding. XI. Provided also, and be it enacted by the authority aforesaid, That nothing in this Act contained respecting the Fisheries carried on by his Majesty’ s subjects in North America, shall extend, or be construed to extend, to any Ship or Vessel being the property of any of the inhabitants of the Townships of Marshfield and Scituate, in the Province of Massachusetts Bay, employed in or carrying on the Mackerel, Shad, and Alewife Fisheries only, if the Master or other person having the charge of any such Ship or Vessel as aforesaid, shall produce a Certificate, under the hand and seal of the Governour or Commander-in-Chief of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, setting forth that such Ship or Vessel, (expressing her name and the name of her Master, and describing her built and burthen) is the whole and entire property of his Majesty’ s subjects of the said Townships of Marshfield and Scituate, and was the property of one or more of them, on or before the twenty-fifth day of March, in the year one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five, which Certificate or Certificates such Governour or Commander-in-Chief is hereby authorized and required to grant. XII. Provided always, and be it enacted, That the River which emptieth itself into Passamacadie or Passamaquadi Bay, on the Western side, and is commonly called and known by the name of Saint Croix River, be held and deemed for all the purposes in this Act contained, to be the boundary between the Provinces of Massachusetts Bay and Nova Scotia. XIII. And whereas, it is the intent and meaning of this Act, that the several prohibitions and restraints herein imposed upon the Trade and Commerce and Fisheries of the said Provinces and Colonies, should be discontinued and cease, so soon as the Trade and Commerce of his Majesty’ s subjects may be carried on without interruption, Be it therefore enacted by the authority aforesaid, That whenever it shall be made appear to the satisfaction of his Majesty’ s Governour or Commander-in-Chief, and the majority of the Council, in the Provinces of New-Hampshire and Massachusetts Bay, respectively, that peace and obedience to the laws shall be so far restored within the said Provinces, or either of them, that the Trade and Commerce of his Majesty’ s subjects may be carried on without interruption within the same, and that Goods, Wares, and Merchandise have been freely imported into the said Provinces, or either of them, from Great Britain, and exposed to sale without any let, hindrance, or molestation, from or by reason of any unlawful combinations to prevent or obstruct the same; and that Goods, Wares, and Merchandise have in like manner been exported from the said Provinces, or either of them, respectively, to Great Britain, for and during the term of one calendar month preceding, that then, and in such case, it shall and may be lawful for the Governour or Commander-in-Chief, with the advice of the Council of such Provinces, respectively, by Proclamation, under the seal of such respective Province, to notify the same to the several Officers of the Customs, and all others; and after such Proclamation, this Act with respect to such Province, within which such Proclamation or Proclamations have been issued as aforesaid, shall be discontinued and cease (except as hereinafter provided;) and all Officers of his Majesty’ s Customs, and all other persons having charge of the execution of this Act, having received due notice of such Proclamation, are hereby directed and required to yield and pay obedience to such Proclamation, and to proceed in the discharge of their respective duties, in admitting to entry, clearing, and discharging all Ships and Vessels, and all Goods, Wares, and Merchandises, into and out of such respective Province; and to permit and suffer any Ships or Vessels to carry on the Fisheries within the limits hereinbefore mentioned, in like manner as if this Act had never been made; any thing herein contained to the contrary notwithstanding. XIV. And be it further enacted, That the Governour or Commander-in-Chief, with the advice of the Council of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, shall and may, and he is hereby authorized and empowered, upon application for and on behalf of the Colonies of Connecticut and Rhode-Island, and Providence Plantation, or either of them, by the Governour or Commander-in-Chief of the said Colonies, respectively, to issue the like publick notice or notices, by Proclamation within the said Colonies, or either of them, if it shall be proved to the said Governour or Commander-in-Chief, and Council of Massachusetts Bay, by the testimony of the Officers of his Majesty’ s Customs in each of the said Colonies respectively, and the said Governour or Commander-in-Chief, and Council, shall be satisfied of the truth thereof, that the lawful Trade between the said Colonies of Connecticut and Rhode-Island, and Providence Plantation, and Great Britain, is and hath been carried on in manner hereinbefore mentioned within the said Colonies, or either of them, for the space of one calendar month preceding the date of such application; and from and after such Proclamation, this Act shall, with respect to such Colonies, or either of them, be discontinued and cease (except as hereinafter provided;) and all Officers of the Customs in the said Colonies, and all others, are hereby required to pay obedience to such publick notice of the said Governour or Commander-in-Chief as aforesaid, and to proceed in the discharge of their respective duties in admitting to entry, clearing, and discharging, all Ships and Vessels, and all Goods, Wares, and Merchandise, into and out of such Colony or Colonies, in like manner as if this Act had never been made; any thing herein contained to the contrary notwithstanding. XV. Provided nevertheless, and it is hereby further enacted and declared by the authority aforesaid, That such Proclamation or Proclamations shall not extend, or be construed to extend, to discharge or suspend any proceedings upon any seizure which shall have been made, or any prosecution which shall have been commenced for any penalty or forfeiture inflicted by this Act before the issuing of such Proclamation or Proclamations. XVI. And it is hereby further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That if any person or persons shall give or grant any false Certificates, Cocket, or Clearance, for any of the purposes required or directed by this Act, such person or persons shall forfeit the sum of five hundred Pounds, and be rendered incapable of serving his Majesty, his heirs and successors, in any office whatsoever; and if any person or persons shall counterfeit, erase, alter, or falsify, any Certificate, Cocket, or Clearance, required or directed by this Act, or shall knowingly or willingly make use of any false Certificate, Cocket, or Clearance, or of any Certificate, Cocket, or Clearance, so counterfeited, erased, altered, or falsified, such person or persons shall, for every such offence, forfeit the sum of five hundred Pounds, and such Certificate, Cocket, or Clearance, shall be invalid and of no effect. XVII. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That the several 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, entituled “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, entituled ‘An Act for the better securing and encouraging the Trade of his Majesty’ 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 expenses 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, entituled’ ‘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;’” and the other passed in the eighth year of his present Majesty’ s reign, entituled “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.” XVIII. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That if any action or suit shall be commenced 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 of 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 non-suited, 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://classroom.monticello.org/view/73322/

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

Continental Association 20 October 1774 The Association entered into by the American [Conti]nental Congress in Behalf of all the Colo[nies] We his Majesty’s most dutiful and loyal Subjects, the Delegates of the several Colonies of New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, the Three Lower Counties of Newcastle, Kent, and Sussex, on Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina, deputed to represent them in a Continental Congress, held in the City of Philadelphia on the 5th Day of September 1774, avowing our Allegiance to his Majesty, our Affection and Regard for our Fellow Subjects in Great Britain and elsewhere, affected with the deepest Anxiety, and most alarming Apprehensions at those Grievances and Distresses with which his Majesty’s American Subjects are oppressed, and having taken under our most serious Deliberation the State of the whole Continent, find that the present unhappy Situation of our Affairs is occasioned by a ruinous System of Colony Administration, adopted by the British Ministry about the Year 1763, evidently calculated for enslaving these Colonies, and, with them, the British Empire: In Prosecution of which System, various Acts of Parliament have been passed for raising a Revenue in America, for depriving the American Subjects, in many Instances, of the constitutional Trial by Jury, exposing their Lives to Danger, by directing a new and illegal Trial beyond the Seas, for Crimes alledged to have been committed in America; and, in Prosecution of the same System, several late, cruel, and oppressive Acts, have been passed respecting the Town of Boston and the Massachusetts Bay, and also an Act for extending the Province of Quebeck, so as to border on the western Frontiers of these Colonies, establishing an arbitrary Government therein, and discouraging the Settlement of British Subjects in that wide-extended Country; thus, by the Influence of civil Principles, and ancient Prejudices, to dispose the Inhabitants to act with Hostility against the free Protestant Colonies, whenever a wicked Ministry shall choose so to direct them. To obtain Redress of these Grievances, which threaten Destruction to the Lives, Liberty, and Property, of his Majesty’s Subjects in North America, we are of Opinion that a Non-importation, Non-consumption, and Non-exportation Agreement, faithfully adhered to, will prove the most speedy, effectual, and peaceable Measure; and therefore we do, for ourselves and the Inhabitants of the several Colonies whom we represent, firmly agree and associate, under the sacred Ties of Virtue, Honour, and Love of our Country, as follows: First. That from and after the first Day of December next we will not import into British America, from Great Britain or Ireland, any Goods, Wares, or Merchandise whatsoever, or from any other Place, any such Goods, Wares, or Merchandise, as shall have been exported from Great Britain or Ireland; nor will we, after that Day, import any East India Tea from any Part of the World, nor any Molosses, Syrups, Paneles, Coffee, or Pimenta, from the British Plantations, or from Dominica, nor Wines from Madeira, or the Western Islands, nor foreign Indigo. Second. That we will neither import nor purchase any Slave imported after the first Day of December next, after which Time we will wholly discontinue the Slave Trade, and will neither be concerned in it ourselves, nor will we hire our Vessels, nor sell our Commodities or Manufactures, to those who are concerned in it. Third. As a Non-consumption Agreement, strictly adhered to, will be an effectual Security for the Observation of the Non-importation, we, as above, solemnly agree and associate, that, from this Day, we will not purchase or use any Tea imported on Account of the East India Company, or any on which a Duty hath been or shall be paid; and, from and after the first Day of March next, we will not purchase or use any East India Tea whatever: Nor will we, nor shall any Person for or under us, purchase or use any of those Goods, Wares, or Merchandise, we have agreed not to import, which we shall know, or have Cause to suspect, were imported after the first Day of December, except such as come under the Rules and Directions of the tenth Article, hereafter mentioned. Fourth. The earnest Desire we have not to injure our Fellow Subjects in Great Britain, Ireland, or the West Indies, induces us to suspend a Non-exportation until the tenth Day of September 1775; at which Time, if the said Acts, and Parts of Acts of the British Parliament herein after mentioned, are not repealed, we will not, directly or indirectly, export any Merchandise, or Commodity whatsoever, to Great Britain, Ireland, or the West Indies, except Rice, to Europe. Fifth. Such as are Merchants, and use the British and Irish Trade, will give Orders, as soon as possible, to their Factors, Agents, and Correspondents, in Great Britain and Ireland, not to ship any Goods to them, on any Pretence whatsoever, as they cannot be received in America; and if any Merchant residing in Great Britain or Ireland shall, directly or indirectly, ship any Goods, Wares, or Merchandise, for America, in Order to break the said Non-importation Agreement, or in any Manner contravene the same, on such unworthy Conduct being well attested, it ought to be made publick; and, on the same being so done, we will not, from thenceforth, have any commercial Connexion with such Merchant. Sixth. That such as are Ow[ners] of Vessels will give positive Orders to their Captains, or Masters, n[ot to] receive on Board their Vessels any Goods prohibited by the said Non-importation Agreement, on Pain of immediate Dismission from their Service. Seventh. We will use our utmost Endeavours to improve the Breed of Sheep, and increase their Number to the greatest Extent; and to that End we will kill them as sparingly as may be, especially those of the most profitable Kind: Nor will we export any to the West Indies, or elsewhere. And those of us who are or may become overstocked with, or can conveniently spare any Sheep, will dispose of them to our Neighbours, especially to the poorer Sort, on moderate Terms. Eighth. That we will, in our several Stations, encourage Frugality Economy, and Industry; and promote Agriculture, Arts, and the Manufactures of this Country, especially that of Wool; and will discountenance and discourage every Species of Extravagance and Dissipation, especially all Horse-racing, and all Kinds of Gaming, Cock-fighting, Exhibitions of Shows, Plays, and other expensive Diversions and Entertainments; and on the Death of any Relation, or Friend, none of us, or any of our Families, will go into any farther Mourning Dress than a black Crape or Riband on the Arm or Hat for Gentlemen, and a black Riband and Necklace for Ladies, and we will discontinue the giving of Gloves and Scarfs at Funerals. Ninth. That such as are Venders of Goods or Merchandise will not take Advantage of the Scarcity of Goods that may be occasioned by this Associacion, but will sell the same at the Rates we have been respectively accustomed to do for twelve Months last past; and if any Venders of Goods or Merchandise shall sell any such Goods on higher Terms, or shall in any Manner, or by any Device whatsoever, violate or depart from this Agreement, no Person ought, nor will any of us deal with any such Person, or his or her Factor or Agent, at any Time thereafter, for any Commodity whatever. Tenth. In Case any Merchant, Trader, or other Persons, shall import any Goods or Merchandise after the first Day of December, and before the first Day of February next, the same ought forthwith, at the Election of the Owner, to be either reshipped or delivered up to the Committee of the County or Town wherein they shall be imported, to be stored at the Risk of the Importer, until the Non-importation Agreement shall cease, or be sold under the Direction of the Committee aforesaid: And, in the last mentioned Case, the Owne[r or owners of such goods shall be reim]bursed (out of the Sales) the [first cost and charges, the profit, if any,] to be applied towards relievi[ng and employing such poor inhabitants of] the Town of Boston as are im[mediate sufferers by the Boston Port Bill,] and a particular Account of all [goods so returned, stored, or sold, to be] inserted in the publick Papers. A[nd if any goods or merchandizes shall be] imported after the said first Day [of February the same ought forthwith] to be sent back again, without br[eaking any of the packages thereof.] Eleventh. That a Committee b[e chosen in every County, City, and] Town, by those who are qualifi[ed to vote for representatives in the] Legislature, whose Business it shall [be attentively to observe the conduct] of all Persons touching this Assoc[iation; and when it shall be made to] appear, to the Satisfaction of a Maj[ority of any such Committee that any] Person within the Limits of their Ap[pointment has violated this associa]tion, that such Majority do forthwith [cause the truth of the case to be] published in the Gazette, to the End [that all such foes to the rights of] British America may be publickly known [and universally contemned as] the Enemies of American Liberty; and th[ence forth we respectively will] break off all Dealings with him, or her. Twelfth. That the Committee of Corre[spondence, in the respective] Colonies do frequently inspect the Entries [of their Custom Houses, and] inform each other, from Time to Time, of t[he true state thereof and of] every other material Circumstance that ma[y occur relative to this asso]ciation. Thirteenth. That all Manufactures of [this country be sold at reason]able Prices, so that no undue Advantage [be taken of a future scarcity of] Goods. Fourteenth. And we do farther agr[ee and resolve, that we will have] no Trade, Commerce, Dealings, o[r intercourse whatsoever, with any] Colony or Province in North Ame[rica, which shall not accede to, or] which shall hereafter violate, thi[s association, but will hold them as] unworthy of the Rights of Free[men, and as inimical to the liberties of] their Country. And we do solemnly bind [ourselves and our Constituents under the] Ties aforesaid, to adhere to th[is Association until such parts of the several] Acts of Parliament, passed sin[ce the Close of the last War as impose or] continue Duties on Tea, Wine, [Molosses, Syrups, paneles], Coffee, Sugar, Pimenta, Indigo, foreign Pap[er, glass] and Painters Colours, imported into America, and extend the Powers of the Admiralty Courts beyond their ancient Limits, deprive the American Subject of Trial by Jury, authorise the Judge’s Certificate to indemnify the Prosecutor from Damages that he might otherwise be liable to from a Trial by his Peers, require oppressive Security from a Claimant of Ships or Goods seized before he shall be allowed to defend his Property, are repealed; and until that Part of the Act of the 12th of George III. Chapter 24th, entitled “An Act for the better securing his Majesty’s Dockyards, Magazines, Ships, Ammunition, and Stores,” by which any Persons charged with committing any of the Offences therein described in America may be tried in any Shire or County within the Realm, is repealed; and until the four Acts passed in the last Session of Parliament, viz. that for stopping the Port and blocking up the Harbour of Boston, that for altering the Charter and Government of Massachusetts Bay; and that which is entitled “An Act for the better Administration of Justice, &c.” and that “For extending the Limits of Quebeck, &c.” are repealed. And we recommend it to the Provincial Conventions, and to the Committees in the respective Colonies, to establish such farther Regulations as they may think proper, for carrying into Execution this Association. The foregoing Association being determined upon by the Congress, was ordered to be subscribed by the several Members thereof; and thereupon, we have hereunto set our respective Names accordingly. Of New Hampshire John Sullivan, Nathaniel Folsom, Of Massachusetts Bay Thomas Cushing, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Of Rhode Island Stephen Hopkins, Samuel Ward, Of Connecticut Eliphalet Dyer, Roger Sherman, Silas Deane, Of New York Isaac Low, John Alsop, John Jay, James Duane, William Floyd, Henry Weisner, S. Boerum, Of New Jersey James Kinsey, William Livingston, Stephen Crane Richard Smith, Of North Carolina William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, R. Caswell, Of Pennsylvania Joseph Galloway, John Dickinson, Charles Humphreys, Thomas Mifflin, Edward Biddle, John Morton, George Ross, Of Newcastle & c. Caesar Rodney, Thomas M’Kean, George Read, Of Maryland Matthew Tilghman, Thomas Johnson, William Paca, Samuel Chase, Of Virginia Richard Henry Lee, George Washington, Patrick Henry, Richard Bland, Benjamin Harrison, Edmund Pendleton, Of South Carolina Henry Middleton, Thomas Lynch, Christopher Gadsden, John Rutledge, Edward Rutledge, Source: https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/01-01-02-0094

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