No More Learning

After all our broils, foreign and domestick, we may, at last, hope to
remain awhile in quiet, amused with the view of our own success. We have
gained political strength, by the increase of our reputation; we have
gained real strength, by the reparation of our navy; we have shown
Europe, that ten years of war have not yet exhausted us; and we have
enforced our settlement on an island on which, twenty years ago, we
durst not venture to look.

These are the gratifications only of honest minds; but there is a time,
in which hope comes to all. From the present happiness of the publick,
the patriots themselves may derive advantage. To be harmless, though by
impotence, obtains some degree of kindness: no man hates a worm as he
hates a viper; they were once dreaded enough to be detested, as serpents
that could bite; they have now shown that they can only hiss, and may,
therefore, quietly slink into holes, and change their slough, unmolested
and forgotten.




THE PATRIOT. [30]

ADDRESSED TO THE ELECTORS OF GREAT BRITAIN. 1774.

They bawl for freedom in their senseless mood,
Yet still revolt when truth would set them free;
License they mean, when they cry liberty,
For who loves that must first be wise and good.

MILTON.


To improve the golden moment of opportunity, and catch the good that is
within our reach, is the great art of life. Many wants are suffered,
which might once have been supplied; and much time is lost in regretting
the time which had been lost before.

At the end of every seven years comes the saturnalian season, when the
freemen of great Britain may please themselves with the choice of their
representatives. This happy day has now arrived, somewhat sooner than it
could be claimed.

To select and depute those, by whom laws are to be made, and taxes to be
granted, is a high dignity, and an important trust; and it is the
business of every elector to consider, how this dignity may be well
sustained, and this trust faithfully discharged.

It ought to be deeply impressed on the minds of all who have voices in
this national deliberation, that no man can deserve a seat in
parliament, who is not a patriot. No other man will protect our rights:
no other man can merit our confidence.

A patriot is he whose publick conduct is regulated by one single motive,
the love of his country; who, as an agent in parliament, has, for
himself, neither hope nor fear, neither kindness nor resentment, but
refers every thing to the common interest.

That of five hundred men, such as this degenerate age affords, a
majority can be found thus virtuously abstracted, who will affirm? Yet
there is no good in despondence: vigilance and activity often effect
more than was expected. Let us take a patriot, where we can meet him;
and, that we may not flatter ourselves by false appearances, distinguish
those marks which are certain, from those which may deceive; for a man
may have the external appearance of a patriot, without the constituent
qualities; as false coins have often lustre, though they want weight.
Some claim a place in the list of patriots, by an acrimonious and
unremitting opposition to the court.

This mark is by no means infallible. Patriotism is not necessarily
included in rebellion. A man may hate his king, yet not love his
country. He that has been refused a reasonable, or unreasonable request,
who thinks his merit underrated, and sees his influence declining,
begins soon to talk of natural equality, the absurdity of "many made for
one," the original compact, the foundation of authority, and the majesty
of the people. As his political melancholy increases, he tells, and,
perhaps, dreams, of the advances of the prerogative, and the dangers of
arbitrary power; yet his design, in all his declamation, is not to
benefit his country, but to gratify his malice.

These, however, are the most honest of the opponents of government;
their patriotism is a species of disease; and they feel some part of
what they express. But the greater, far the greater number of those who
rave and rail, and inquire and accuse, neither suspect nor fear, nor
care for the publick; but hope to force their way to riches, by
virulence and invective, and are vehement and clamorous, only that they
may be sooner hired to be silent.

A man sometimes starts up a patriot, only by disseminating discontent,
and propagating reports of secret influence, of dangerous counsels, of
violated rights, and encroaching usurpation.

This practice is no certain note of patriotism. To instigate the
populace with rage beyond the provocation, is to suspend publick
happiness, if not to destroy it. He is no lover of his country, that
unnecessarily disturbs its peace. Few errours and few faults of
government, can justify an appeal to the rabble; who ought not to judge
of what they cannot understand, and whose opinions are not propagated by
reason, but caught by contagion.

The fallaciousness of this note of patriotism is particularly apparent,
when the clamour continues after the evil is past. They who are still
filling our ears with Mr. Wilkes, and the freeholders of Middlesex,
lament a grievance that is now at an end. Mr. Wilkes may be chosen, if
any will choose him, and the precedent of his exclusion makes not any
honest, or any decent man, think himself in clanger.

It may be doubted, whether the name of a patriot can be fairly given, as
the reward of secret satire, or open outrage. To fill the newspapers
with sly hints of corruption and intrigue, to circulate the Middlesex
Journal, and London Pacquet, may, indeed, be zeal; but it may, likewise,
be interest and malice. To offer a petition, not expected to be granted;
to insult a king-with a rude remonstrance, only because there is no
punishment for legal insolence, is not courage, for there is no danger;
nor patriotism, for it tends to the subversion of order, and lets
wickedness loose upon the land, by destroying the reverence due to
sovereign authority.

It is the quality of patriotism to be jealous and watchful, to observe
all secret machinations, and to see publick dangers at a distance. The
true lover of his country is ready to communicate his fears, and to
sound the alarm, whenever he perceives the approach of mischief. But he
sounds no alarm, when there is no enemy; he never terrifies his
countrymen till he is terrified himself. The patriotism, therefore, may
be justly doubted of him, who professes to be disturbed by
incredibilities; who tells, that the last peace was obtained by bribing
the princess of Wales; that the king is grasping at arbitrary power;
and, that because the French, in the new conquests, enjoy their own
laws, there is a design at court of abolishing, in England, the trial by
juries.

Still less does the true patriot circulate opinions which he knows to be
false. No man, who loves his country, fills the nation with clamorous
complaints, that the protestant religion is in danger, because "popery
is established in the extensive province of Quebec," a falsehood so open
and shameless, that it can need no confutation among those who know that
of which it is almost impossible for the most unenlightened zealot to be
ignorant:

That Quebec is on the other side of the Atlantick, at too great a
distance to do much good or harm to the European world:

That the inhabitants, being French, were always papists, who are
certainly more dangerous as enemies than as subjects:

That though the province be wide, the people are few, probably not so
many as may be found in one of the larger English counties:

That persecution is not more virtuous in a protestant than a papist; and
that, while we blame Lewis the fourteenth, for his dragoons and his
galleys, we ought, when power comes into our hands, to use it with
greater equity:

That when Canada, with its inhabitants, was yielded, the free enjoyment
of their religion was stipulated; a condition, of which king William,
who was no propagator of popery, gave an example nearer home, at the
surrender of Limerick:

That in an age, where every mouth is open for _liberty of conscience_,
it is equitable to show some regard to the conscience of a papist, who
may be supposed, like other men, to think himself safest in his own
religion; and that those, at least, who enjoy a toleration, ought not to
deny it to our new subjects.

If liberty of conscience be a natural right, we have no power to
withhold it; if it be an indulgence, it may be allowed to papists, while
it is not denied to other sects.

A patriot is necessarily and invariably a lover of the people. But even
this mark may sometimes deceive us.

The people is a very heterogeneous and confused mass of the wealthy and
the poor, the wise and the foolish, the good and the bad. Before we
confer on a man, who caresses the people, the title of patriot, we must
examine to what part of the people he directs his notice. It is
proverbially said, that he who dissembles his own character, may be
known by that of his companions. If the candidate of patriotism
endeavours to infuse right opinions into the higher ranks, and, by their
influence, to regulate the lower; if he consorts chiefly with the wise,
the temperate, the regular, and the virtuous, his love of the people may
be rational and honest. But if his first or principal application be to
the indigent, who are always inflammable; to the weak, who are naturally
suspicious; to the ignorant, who are easily misled; and to the
profligate, who have no hope but from mischief and confusion; let his
love of the people be no longer boasted. No man can reasonably be
thought a lover of his country, for roasting an ox, or burning a boot,
or attending the meeting at Mile-end, or registering his name in the
lumber troop. He may, among the drunkards, be a hearty fellow, and,
among sober handicraftsmen, a free-spoken gentleman; but he must have
some better distinction, before he is a patriot.

A patriot is always ready to countenance the just claims, and animate
the reasonable hopes of the people; he reminds them, frequently, of
their rights, and stimulates them to resent encroachments, and to
multiply securities.

But all this may be done in appearance, without real patriotism. He that
raises false hopes to serve a present purpose, only makes a way for
disappointment and discontent. He who promises to endeavour, what he
knows his endeavours unable to effect, means only to delude his
followers by an empty clamour of ineffectual zeal.

A true patriot is no lavish promiser: he undertakes not to shorten
parliaments; to repeal laws; or to change the mode of representation,
transmitted by our ancestors; he knows that futurity is not in his
power, and that all times are not alike favourable to change.

Much less does he make a vague and indefinite promise of obeying the
mandates of his constituents. He knows the prejudices of faction, and
the inconstancy of the multitude. He would first inquire, how the
opinion of his constituents shall be taken. Popular instructions are,
commonly, the work, not of the wise and steady, but the violent and
rash; meetings held for directing representatives are seldom attended
but by the idle and the dissolute; and he is not without suspicion, that
of his constituents, as of other numbers of men, the smaller part may
often be the wiser.

He considers himself as deputed to promote the publick good, and to
preserve his constituents, with the rest of his countrymen, not only
from being hurt by others, but from hurting themselves.

The common marks of patriotism having been examined, and shown to be
such as artifice may counterfeit, or folly misapply, it cannot be
improper to consider, whether there are not some characteristical modes
of speaking or acting, which may prove a man to be not a patriot.

In this inquiry, perhaps, clearer evidence may be discovered, and firmer
persuasion attained; for it is, commonly, easier to know what is wrong
than what is right; to find what we should avoid, than what we should
pursue.

As war is one of the heaviest of national evils, a calamity in which
every species of misery is involved; as it sets the general safety to
hazard, suspends commerce, and desolates the country; as it exposes
great numbers to hardships, dangers, captivity, and death; no man, who
desires the publick prosperity, will inflame general resentment by
aggravating minute injuries, or enforcing disputable rights of little
importance.

It may, therefore, be safely pronounced, that those men are no patriots,
who, when the national honour was vindicated in the sight of Europe, and
the Spaniards having invaded what they call their own, had shrunk to a
disavowal of their attempt, and a relaxation of their claim, would still
have instigated us to a war, for a bleak and barren spot in the
Magellanick ocean, of which no use could be made, unless it were a place
of exile for the hypocrites of patriotism.

Yet let it not be forgotten, that, by the howling violence of patriotick
rage, the nation was, for a time, exasperated to such madness, that, for
a barren rock under a stormy sky, we might have now been fighting and
dying, had not our competitors been wiser than ourselves; and those who
are now courting the favour of the people, by noisy professions of
publick spirit, would, while they were counting the profits of their
artifice, have enjoyed the patriotick pleasure of hearing, sometimes,
that thousands had been slaughtered in a battle, and, sometimes, that a
navy had been dispeopled by poisoned air and corrupted food. He that
wishes to see his country robbed of its rights cannot be a patriot.

That man, therefore, is no patriot, who justifies the ridiculous claims
of American usurpation; who endeavours to deprive the nation of its
natural and lawful authority over its own colonies; those colonies,
which were settled under English protection; were constituted by an
English charter; and have been defended by English arms.

To suppose, that by sending out a colony, the nation established an
independent power; that when, by indulgence and favour, emigrants are
become rich, they shall not contribute to their own defence, but at
their own pleasure; and that they shall not be included, like millions
of their fellow-subjects, in the general system of representation;
involves such an accumulation of absurdity, as nothing but the show of
patriotism could palliate.

He that accepts protection, stipulates obedience. We have always
protected the Americans; we may, therefore, subject them to government.

The less is included in the greater. That power which can take away
life, may seize upon property. The parliament may enact, for America, a
law of capital punishment; it may, therefore, establish a mode and
proportion of taxation.

But there are some who lament the state of the poor Bostonians, because
they cannot all be supposed to have committed acts of rebellion, yet all
are involved in the penalty imposed. This, they say, is to violate the
first rule of justice, by condemning the innocent to suffer with the
guilty.

This deserves some notice, as it seems dictated by equity and humanity,
however it may raise contempt by the ignorance which it betrays of the
state of man, and the system of things. That the innocent should be
confounded with the guilty, is, undoubtedly, an evil; but it is an evil
which no care or caution can prevent. National crimes require national
punishments, of which many must necessarily have their part, who have
not incurred them by personal guilt. If rebels should fortify a town,
the cannon of lawful authority will endanger, equally, the harmless
burghers and the criminal garrison.

In some cases, those suffer most who are least intended to be hurt. If
the French, in the late war, had taken an English city, and permitted
the natives to keep their dwellings, how could it have been recovered,
but by the slaughter of our friends? A bomb might as well destroy an
Englishman as a Frenchman; and, by famine, we know that the inhabitants
would be the first that should perish.

This infliction of promiscuous evil may, therefore, be lamented, but
cannot be blamed. The power of lawful government must be maintained; and
the miseries which rebellion produces, can be charged only on the
rebels.

That man, likewise, is not a patriot, who denies his governours their
due praise, and who conceals from the people the benefits which they
receive. Those, therefore, can lay no claim to this illustrious
appellation, who impute want of publick spirit to the late parliament;
an assembly of men, whom, notwithstanding some fluctuation of counsel,
and some weakness of agency, the nation must always remember with
gratitude, since it is indebted to them for a very ample concession, in
the resignation of protections, and a wise and honest attempt to improve
the constitution, in the new judicature instituted for the trial of
elections.

The right of protection, which might be necessary, when it was first
claimed, and was very consistent with that liberality of immunities, in
which the feudal constitution delighted, was, by its nature, liable to
abuse, and had, in reality, been sometimes misapplied to the evasion of
the law, and the defeat of justice. The evil was, perhaps, not adequate
to the clamour; nor is it very certain, that the possible good of this
privilege was not more than equal to the possible evil. It is, however,
plain, that, whether they gave any thing or not to the publick, they, at
least, lost something from themselves. They divested their dignity of a
very splendid distinction, and showed that they were more willing than
their predecessors to stand on a level with their fellow-subjects.

The new mode of trying elections, if it be found effectual, will diffuse
its consequences further than seems yet to be foreseen. It is, I
believe, generally considered as advantageous only to those who claim
seats in parliament; but, if to choose representatives be one of the
most valuable rights of Englishmen, every voter must consider that law
as adding to his happiness, which makes his suffrage efficacious; since
it was vain to choose, while the election could be controlled by any
other power.

With what imperious contempt of ancient rights, and what audaciousness
of arbitrary authority former parliaments have judged the disputes about
elections, it is not necessary to relate. The claim of a candidate, and
the right of electors, are said scarcely to have been, even in
appearance, referred to conscience; but to have been decided by party,
by passion, by prejudice, or by frolick. To have friends in the borough
was of little use to him, who wanted friends in the house; a pretence
was easily found to evade a majority, and the seat was, at last, his,
that was chosen, not by his electors, but his fellow-senators.

Thus the nation was insulted with a mock election, and the parliament
was filled with spurious representatives one of the most important
claims, that of right to sit in the supreme council of the kingdom, was
debated in jest, and no man could be confident of success from the
justice of his cause.

A disputed election is now tried with the same scrupulousness and
solemnity, as any other title. The candidate that has deserved well of
his neighbours, may now be certain of enjoying the effect of their
approbation; and the elector, who has voted honestly for known merit,
may be certain, that he has not voted in vain.

Such was the parliament, which some of those, who are now aspiring to
sit in another, have taught the rabble to consider as an unlawful
convention of men, worthless, venal, and prostitute, slaves of the
court, and tyrants of the people.

That the next house of commons may act upon the principles of the last,
with more constancy and higher spirit, must be the wish of all who wish
well to the publick; and, it is surely not too much to expect, that the
nation will recover from its delusion, and unite in a general abhorrence
of those, who, by deceiving the credulous with fictitious mischiefs,
overbearing the weak by audacity of falsehood, by appealing to the
judgment of ignorance, and flattering the vanity of meanness, by
slandering honesty, and insulting dignity, have gathered round them
whatever the kingdom can supply of base, and gross, and profligate; and
"raised by merit to this bad eminence," arrogate to themselves the name
of patriots.




TAXATION NO TYRANNY;

An answer [31] to the resolutions and address of the American congress.
1775.


In all the parts of human knowledge, whether terminating in science
merely speculative, or operating upon life, private or civil, are
admitted some fundamental principles, or common axioms, which,
being-generally received, are little doubted, and, being little doubted,
have been rarely proved.

Of these gratuitous and acknowledged truths, it is often the fate to
become less evident by endeavours to explain them, however necessary
such endeavours may be made by the misapprehensions of absurdity, or the
sophistries of interest. It is difficult to prove the principles of
science; because notions cannot always be found more intelligible than
those which are questioned. It is difficult to prove the principles of
practice, because they have, for the most part, not been discovered by
investigation, but obtruded by experience; and the demonstrator will
find, after an operose deduction, that he has been trying to make that
seen, which can be only felt.

Of this kind is the position, that "the supreme power of every community
has the right of requiring, from all its subjects, such contributions as
are necessary to the publick safety or publick prosperity," which was
considered, by all mankind, as comprising the primary and essential
condition of all political society, till it became disputed by those
zealots of anarchy, who have denied, to the parliament of Britain the
right of taxing the American colonies.

In favour of this exemption of the Americans from the authority of their
lawful sovereign, and the dominion of their mother-country, very loud
clamours have been raised, and many wild assertions advanced, which, by
such as borrow their opinions from the reigning fashion, have been
admitted as arguments; and, what is strange, though their tendency is to
lessen English honour and English power, have been heard by Englishmen,
with a wish to find them true. Passion has, in its first violence,
controlled interest, as the eddy for awhile runs against the stream.

To be prejudiced is always to be weak; yet there are prejudices so near
to laudable, that they have been often praised, and are always pardoned.
To love their country has been considered as virtue in men, whose love
could not be otherwise than blind, because their preference was made
without a comparison; but it has never been my fortune to find, either
in ancient or modern writers, any honourable mention of those, who have,
with equal blindness, hated their country.

These antipatriotick prejudices are the abortions of folly impregnated
by faction, which, being produced against the standing order of nature,
have not strength sufficient for long life. They are born only to scream
and perish, and leave those to contempt or detestation, whose kindness
was employed to nurse them into mischief.

To perplex the opinion of the publick many artifices have been used,
which, as usually happens, when falsehood is to be maintained by fraud,
lose their force by counteracting one another.

The nation is, sometimes, to be mollified by a tender tale of men, who
fled from tyranny to rocks and deserts, and is persuaded to lose all
claims of justice, and all sense of dignity, in compassion for a
harmless people, who, having worked hard for bread in a wild country,
and obtained, by the slow progression of manual industry, the
accommodations of life, are now invaded by unprecedented oppression, and
plundered of their properties by the harpies of taxation.

We are told how their industry is obstructed by unnatural restraints,
and their trade confined by rigorous prohibitions; how they are
forbidden to enjoy the products of their own soil, to manufacture the
materials which nature spreads before them, or to carry their own goods
to the nearest market; and surely the generosity of English virtue will
never heap new weight upon those that are already overladen; will never
delight in that dominion, which cannot be exercised, but by cruelty and
outrage.

But, while we are melting in silent sorrow, and, in the transports of
delirious pity, dropping both the sword and balance from our hands,
another friend of the Americans thinks it better to awaken another
passion, and tries to alarm our interest, or excite our veneration, by
accounts of their greatness and their opulence, of the fertility of
their land, and the splendour of their towns. We then begin to consider
the question with more evenness of mind, are ready to conclude that
those restrictions are not very oppressive, which have been found
consistent with this speedy growth of prosperity; and begin to think it
reasonable, that they who thus flourish under the protection of our
government, should contribute something towards its expense.

But we are soon told, that the Americans, however wealthy, cannot be
taxed; that they are the descendants of men who left all for liberty,
and that they have constantly preserved the principles and stubbornness
of their progenitors; that they are too obstinate for persuasion, and
too powerful for constraint; that they will laugh at argument, and
defeat violence; that the continent of North America contains three
millions, not of men merely, but of whigs, of whigs fierce for liberty,
and disdainful of dominion; that they multiply with the fecundity of
their own rattlesnakes, so that every quarter of a century doubles their
numbers.

Men accustomed to think themselves masters do not love to be threatened.
This talk is, I hope, commonly thrown away, or raises passions different
from those which it was intended to excite. Instead of terrifying the
English hearer to tame acquiescence, it disposes him to hasten the
experiment of bending obstinacy, before it is become yet more obdurate,
and convinces him that it is necessary to attack a nation thus
prolifick, while we may yet hope to prevail. When he is told, through
what extent of territory we must travel to subdue them, he recollects
how far, a few years ago, we travelled in their defence. When it is
urged, that they will shoot up, like the hydra, he naturally considers
how the hydra was destroyed.

Nothing dejects a trader like the interruption of his profits. A
commercial people, however magnanimous, shrinks at the thought of
declining traffick and an unfavourable balance. The effect of this
terrour has been tried. We have been stunned with the importance of our
American commerce, and heard of merchants, with warehouses that are
never to be emptied, and of manufacturers starving for want of work.

That our commerce with America is profitable, however less than
ostentatious or deceitful estimates have made it, and that it is our
interest to preserve it, has never been denied; but, surely, it will
most effectually be preserved, by being kept always in our own power.
Concessions may promote it for a moment, but superiority only can ensure
its continuance. There will always be a part, and always a very large
part of every community, that have no care but for themselves, and whose
care for themselves reaches little further than impatience of immediate
pain, and eagerness for the nearest good. The blind are said to feel
with peculiar nicety. They who look but little into futurity, have,
perhaps, the quickest sensation of the present. A merchant's desire is
not of glory, but of gain; not of publick wealth, but of private
emolument; he is, therefore, rarely to be consulted about war and peace,
or any designs of wide extent and distant consequence.

Yet this, like other general characters, will sometimes fail. The
traders of Birmingham have rescued themselves from all imputation of
narrow selfishness, by a manly recommendation to parliament of the
rights and dignity of their native country.

To these men I do not intend to ascribe an absurd and enthusiastick
contempt of interest, but to give them the rational and just praise of
distinguishing real from seeming good; of being able to see through the
cloud of interposing difficulties, to the lasting and solid happiness of
victory and settlement.

Lest all these topicks of persuasion should fail, the greater actor of
patriotism has tried another, in which terrour and pity are happily
combined, not without a proper superaddition of that admiration which
latter ages have brought into the drama. The heroes of Boston, he tells
us, if the stamp act had not been repealed, would have left their town,
their port, and their trade, have resigned the splendour of opulence,
and quitted the delights of neighbourhood, to disperse themselves over
the country, where they would till the ground, and fish in the rivers,
and range the mountains, and be free.

These, surely, are brave words. If the mere sound of freedom can operate
thus powerfully, let no man, hereafter, doubt the story of the Pied
Piper. The removal of the people of Boston into the country, seems, even
to the congress, not only difficult in its execution, but important in
its consequences. The difficulty of execution is best known to the
Bostonians themselves; the consequence alas! will only be, that they
will leave good houses to wiser men.

Yet, before they quit the comforts of a warm home, for the sounding
something which they think better, he cannot be thought their enemy who
advises them, to consider well whether they shall find it. By turning
fishermen or hunters, woodmen or shepherds, they may become wild, but it
is not so easy to conceive them free; for who can be more a slave than
he that is driven, by force, from the comforts of life, is compelled to
leave his house to a casual comer, and, whatever he does, or wherever he
wanders, finds, every moment, some new testimony of his own subjection?
If choice of evil be freedom, the felon in the galleys has his option of
labour or of stripes. The Bostonian may quit his house to starve in the
fields; his dog may refuse to set, and smart under the lash, and they
may then congratulate each other upon the smiles of liberty, "profuse of
bliss, and pregnant with delight. "

To treat such designs as serious, would be to think too contemptuously
of Bostonian understandings. The artifice, indeed, is not new: the
blusterer, who threatened in vain to destroy his opponent, has,
sometimes, obtained his end, by making it believed, that he would hang
himself.

But terrours and pity are not the only means by which the taxation of
the Americans is opposed. There are those, who profess to use them only
as auxiliaries to reason and justice; who tell us, that to tax the
colonies is usurpation and oppression, an invasion of natural and legal
rights, and a violation of those principles which support the
constitution of English government.

This question is of great importance. That the Americans are able to
bear taxation, is indubitable; that their refusal may be overruled, is
highly probable; but power is no sufficient evidence of truth. Let us
examine our own claim, and the objections of the recusants, with caution
proportioned to the event of the decision, which must convict one part
of robbery, or the other of rebellion.

A tax is a payment, exacted by authority, from part of the community,
for the benefit of the whole. From whom, and in what proportion such
payment shall be required, and to what uses it shall be applied, those
only are to judge to whom government is intrusted. In the British
dominions taxes are apportioned, levied, and appropriated by the states
assembled in parliament.

Of every empire all the subordinate communities are liable to taxation,
because they all share the benefits of government, and, therefore, ought
all to furnish their proportion of the expense.

This the Americans have never openly denied. That it is their duty to
pay the costs of their own safety, they seem to admit; nor do they
refuse their contribution to the exigencies, whatever they may be, of
the British empire; but they make this participation of the publick
burden a duty of very uncertain extent, and imperfect obligation, a duty
temporary, occasional, and elective, of which they reserve to themselves
the right of settling the degree, the time, and the duration; of judging
when it may be required, and when it has been performed.

They allow to the supreme power nothing more than the liberty of
notifying to them its demands or its necessities. Of this notification
they profess to think for themselves, how far it shall influence their
counsels; and of the necessities alleged, how far they shall endeavour
to relieve them. They assume the exclusive power of settling not only
the mode, but the quantity, of this payment. They are ready to cooperate
with all the other dominions of the king; but they will cooperate by no
means which they do not like, and at no greater charge than they are
willing to bear.

This claim, wild as it may seem; this claim, which supposes dominion
without authority, and subjects without subordination, has found among
the libertines of policy, many clamorous and hardy vindicators. The laws
of nature, the rights of humanity, the faith of charters, the danger of
liberty, the encroachments of usurpation, have been thundered in our
ears, sometimes by interested faction, and sometimes by honest
stupidity.

It is said by Fontenelle, that if twenty philosophers shall resolutely
deny that the presence of the sun makes the day, he will not despair but
whole nations may adopt the opinion. So many political dogmatists have
denied to the mother-country the power of taxing the colonies, and have
enforced their denial with so much violence of outcry, that their sect
is already very numerous, and the publick voice suspends its decision.

In moral and political questions, the contest between interest and
justice has been often tedious and often fierce, but, perhaps, it never
happened before, that justice found much opposition, with interest on
her side.

For the satisfaction of this inquiry, it is necessary to consider, how a
colony is constituted; what are the terms of migration, as dictated by
nature, or settled by compact; and what social or political rights the
man loses or acquires, that leaves his country to establish himself hi a
distant plantation.

Of two modes of migration the history of mankind informs us, and so far
as I can yet discover, of two only. In countries where life was yet
unadjusted, and policy unformed, it sometimes happened, that, by the
dissensions of heads of families, by the ambition of daring adventurers,
by some accidental pressure of distress, or by the mere discontent of
idleness, one part of the community broke off from the rest, and
numbers, greater or smaller, forsook their habitations, put themselves
under the command of some favourite of fortune, and with, or without the
consent of their countrymen or governours, went out to see what better
regions they could occupy, and in what place, by conquest or by treaty,
they could gain a habitation.

Sons of enterprise, like these, who committed to their own swords their
hopes and their lives, when they left their country, became another
nation, with designs, and prospects, and interests, of their own. They
looked back no more to their former home; they expected no help from
those whom they had left behind; if they conquered, they conquered for
themselves; if they were destroyed, they were not by any other power
either lamented or revenged.

Of this kind seem to have been all the migrations of the early world,
whether historical or fabulous, and of this kind were the eruptions of
those nations, which, from the north, invaded the Roman empire, and
filled Europe with new sovereignties.

But when, by the gradual admission of wiser laws and gentler manners,
society became more compacted and better regulated, it was found, that
the power of every people consisted in union, produced by one common
interest, and operating in joint efforts and consistent counsels.

From this time independence perceptibly wasted away. No part of the
nation was permitted to act for itself. All now had the same enemies and
the same friends; the government protected individuals, and individuals
were required to refer their designs to the prosperity of the
government.

By this principle it is, that states are formed and consolidated. Every
man is taught to consider his own happiness, as combined with the
publick prosperity, and to think himself great and powerful, in
proportion to the greatness and power of his governours.

Had the western continent been discovered between the fourth and tenth
century, when all the northen world was in motion; and had navigation
been, at that time, sufficiently advanced to make so long a passage
easily practicable, there is little reason for doubting, but the
intumescence of nations would have found its vent, like all other
expansive violence, where there was least resistance; and that Huns and
Vandals, instead of fighting their way to the south of Europe, would
have gone, by thousands and by myriads, under their several chiefs, to
take possession of regions smiling with pleasure, and waving with
fertility, from which the naked inhabitants were unable to repel them.

Every expedition would, in those days of laxity, have produced a
distinct and independent state. The Scandinavian heroes might have
divided the country among them, and have spread the feudal subdivision
of regality from Hudson's bay to the Pacifick ocean.

But Columbus came five or six hundred years too late for the candidates
of sovereignty. When he formed his project of discovery, the
fluctuations of military turbulence had subsided, and Europe began to
regain a settled form, by established government and regular
subordination. No man could any longer erect himself into a chieftain,
and lead out his fellow-subjects, by his own authority, to plunder or to
war. He that committed any act of hostility, by land or sea, without the
commission of some acknowledged sovereign, was considered, by all
mankind, as a robber or pirate, names which were now of little credit,
and of which, therefore, no man was ambitious.

Columbus, in a remoter time, would have found his way to some
discontented lord, or some younger brother of a petty sovereign, who
would have taken fire at his proposal, and have quickly kindled, with
equal heat, a troop of followers: they would have built ships, or have
seized them, and have wandered with him, at all adventures, as far as
they could keep hope in their company. But the age being now past of
vagrant excursion and fortuitous hostility, he was under the necessity
of travelling from court to court, scorned and repulsed as a wild
projector, an idle promiser of kingdoms in the clouds; nor has any part
of the world yet had reason to rejoice that he found, at last, reception
and employment.

In the same year, in a year hitherto disastrous to mankind, by the
Portuguese was discovered the passage of the Indies, and by the
Spaniards the coast of America.
The nations of Europe were fired with
boundless expectations, and the discoverers, pursuing their enterprise,
made conquests in both hemispheres of wide extent. But the adventurers
were not contented with plunder: though they took gold and silver to
themselves, they seized islands and kingdoms in the name of their
sovereigns. When a new region was gained, a governour was appointed by
that power, which had given the commission to the conqueror; nor have I
met with any European, but Stukely, of London, that formed a design of
exalting himself in the newly found countries to independent dominion.

To secure a conquest, it was always necessary to plant a colony, and
territories, thus occupied and settled, were rightly considered, as mere
extensions, or processes of empire; as ramifications which, by the
circulation of one publick interest, communicated with the original
source of dominion, and which were kept flourishing and spreading by the
radical vigour of the mother-country.

The colonies of England differ no otherwise from those of other nations,
than as the English constitution differs from theirs. All government is
ultimately and essentially absolute, but subordinate societies may have
more immunities, or individuals greater liberty, as the operations of
government are differently conducted. An Englishman in the common course
of life and action feels no restraint. An English colony has very
liberal powers of regulating its own manners, and adjusting its own
affairs. But an English individual may, by the supreme authority, be
deprived of liberty, and a colony divested of its powers, for reasons of
which that authority is the only judge.

In sovereignty there are no gradations. There may be limited royalty,
there may be limited consulship; but there can be no limited government.
There must, in every society, be some power or other, from which there
is no appeal, which admits no restrictions, which pervades the whole
mass of the community, regulates and adjusts all subordination, enacts
laws or repeals them, erects or annuls judicatures, extends or contracts
privileges, exempt itself from question or control, and bounded only by
physical necessity.

By this power, wherever it subsists, all legislation and jurisdiction is
animated and maintained. From this all legal rights are emanations,
which, whether equitably or not, may be legally recalled. It is not
infallible, for it may do wrong; but it is irresistible, for it can be
resisted only by rebellion, by an act which makes it questionable, what
shall be thenceforward the supreme power.

An English colony is a number of persons, to whom the king grants a
charter, permitting them to settle in some distant country, and enabling
them to constitute a corporation enjoying such powers as the charter
grants, to be administered in such forms as the charter prescribes. As a
corporation, they make laws for themselves; but as a corporation,
subsisting by a grant from higher authority, to the control of that
authority they continue subject.

As men are placed at a greater distance from the supreme council of the
kingdom, they must be intrusted with ampler liberty of regulating their
conduct by their own wisdom. As they are more secluded from easy
recourse to national judicature, they must be more extensively
commissioned to pass judgment on each other.

For this reason our more important and opulent colonies see the
appearance, and feel the effect, of a regular legislature, which, in
some places, has acted so long with unquestioned authority, that it has
forgotten whence that authority was originally derived.

To their charters the colonies owe, like other corporations, their
political existence. The solemnities of legislation, the administration
of justice, the security of property, are all bestowed upon them by the
royal grant. Without their charter, there would be no power among them,
by which any law could be made, or duties enjoined; any debt recovered,
or criminal punished.

A charter is a grant of certain powers or privileges, given to a part of
the community for the advantage of the whole, and is, therefore, liable,
by its nature, to change or to revocation. Every act of government aims
at publick good. A charter, which experience has shown to be detrimental
to the nation, is to be repealed; because general prosperity must always
be preferred to particular interest. If a charter be used to evil
purposes, it is forfeited, as the weapon is taken away which is
injuriously employed.

The charter, therefore, by which provincial governments are constituted,
may be always legally, and, where it is either inconvenient in its
nature, or misapplied in its use, may be equitably repealed; by such
repeal the whole fabrick of subordination is immediately destroyed, and
the constitution sunk at once into a chaos; the society is dissolved
into a tumult of individuals, without authority to command, or
obligation to obey, without any punishment of wrongs, but by personal
resentment, or any protection of right, but by the hand of the
possessor.

A colony is to the mother-country, as a member to the body, deriving its
action and its strength from the general principle of vitality;
receiving from the body, and communicating to it, all the benefits and
evils of health and disease; liable, in dangerous maladies, to sharp
applications, of which the body, however, must partake the pain; and
exposed, if incurably tainted, to amputation, by which the body,
likewise, will be mutilated.

The mother-country always considers the colonies, thus connected, as
parts of itself; the prosperity or unhappiness of either, is the
prosperity or unhappiness of both; not, perhaps, of both in the same
degree, for the body may subsist, though less commodiously, without a
limb, but the limb must perish, if it be parted from the body.

Our colonies, therefore, however distant, have been, hitherto, treated
as constituent parts of the British empire. The inhabitants incorporated
by English charters are entitled to all the rights of Englishmen. They
are governed by English laws, entitled to English dignities, regulated
by English counsels, and protected by English arms; and it seems to
follow, by consequence not easily avoided, that they are subject to
English government, and chargeable by English taxation.

To him that considers the nature, the original, the progress, and the
constitution of the colonies, who remembers that the first discoverers
had commissions from the crown, that the first settlers owe to a charter
their civil forms and regular magistracy, and that all personal
immunities and legal securities, by which the condition of the subject
has been, from time to time, improved, have been extended to the
colonists, it will not be doubted, but the parliament of England has a
right to bind them by statutes, and to bind them in all cases
whatsoever; and has, therefore, a natural and constitutional power of
laying upon them any tax or impost, whether external or internal, upon
the product of land, or the manufactures of industry, in the exigencies
of war, or in the time of profound peace, for the defence of America,
for the purpose of raising a revenue, or for any other end beneficial to
the empire.

There are some, and those not inconsiderable for number, nor
contemptible for knowledge, who except the power of taxation from the
general dominion of parliament, and hold, that whatever degress of
obedience may be exacted, or whatever authority may be exercised in
other acts of government, there is still reverence to be paid to money,
and that legislation passes its limits when it violates the purse.

Of this exception, which, by a head not fully impregnated with
politicks, is not easily comprehended, it is alleged, as an unanswerable
reason, that the colonies send no representatives to the house of
commons.

It is, say the American advocates, the natural distinction of a freeman,
and the legal privilege of an Englishman, that he is able to call his
possessions his own, that he can sit secure in the enjoyment of
inheritance or acquisition, that his house is fortified by the law, and
that nothing can be taken from him, but by his own consent. This consent
is given for every man by his representative in parliament. The
Americans, unrepresented, cannot consent to English taxations, as a
corporation, and they will not consent, as individuals.

Of this argument, it has been observed by more than one, that its force
extends equally to all other laws, for a freeman is not to be exposed to
punishment, or be called to any onerous service, but by his own consent.
The congress has extracted a position from the fanciful Montesquieu
that, "in a free state, every man, being a free agent, ought to be
concerned in his own government. " Whatever is true of taxation, is true
of every other law, that he who is bound by it, without his consent, is
not free, for he is not concerned in his own government.

He that denies the English parliament the right of taxation, denies it,
likewise, the right of making any other laws, civil or criminal, yet
this power over the colonies was never yet disputed by themselves. They
have always admitted statutes for the punishment of offences, and for
the redress or prevention of inconveniencies; and the reception of any
law draws after it, by a chain which cannot be broken, the unwelcome
necessity of submitting to taxation.

That a freeman is governed by himself, or by laws to which he has
consented, is a position of mighty sound; but every man that utters it,
with whatever confidence, and every man that hears it, with whatever
acquiescence, if consent be supposed to imply the power of refusal,
feels it to be false. We virtually and implicitly allow the institutions
of any government, of which we enjoy the benefit, and solicit the
protection. In wide extended dominions, though power has been diffused
with the most even hand, yet a very small part of the people are either
primarily or secondarily consulted in legislation. The business of the
publick must be done by delegation. The choice of delegates is made by a
select number, and those who are not electors stand idle and helpless
spectators of the commonweal, "wholly unconcerned in the government of
themselves. "

Of the electors the hap is but little better. They are often far from
unanimity in their choice; and where the numbers approach to equality,
almost half must be governed not only without, but against their choice.

How any man can have consented to institutions established in distant
ages, it will be difficult to explain. In the most favourite residence
of liberty, the consent of individuals is merely passive; a tacit
admission, in every community, of the terms which that community grants
and requires. As all are born the subjects of some state or other, we
may be said to have been all born consenting to some system of
government. Other consent than this the condition of civil life does not
allow. It is the unmeaning clamour of the pedants of policy, the
delirious dream of republican fanaticism.

But hear, ye sons and daughters of liberty, the sounds which the winds
are wafting from the western continent. The Americans are telling one
another, what, if we may judge from their noisy triumph, they have but
lately discovered, and what yet is a very important truth: "That they
are entitled to life, liberty, and property; and that they have never
ceded to any sovereign power whatever a right to dispose of either
without their consent. "

While this resolution stands alone, the Americans are free from
singularity of opinion; their wit has not yet betrayed them to heresy.
While they speak as the naked sons of nature, they claim but what is
claimed by other men, and have withheld nothing but what all withhold.
They are here upon firm ground, behind entrenchments which never can be
forced.

Humanity is very uniform. The Americans have this resemblance to
Europeans, that they do not always know when they are well. They soon
quit the fortress, that could neither have been ruined by sophistry, nor
battered by declamation. Their next resolution declares, that "Their
ancestors, who first settled the 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. "

This, likewise, is true; but when this is granted, their boast of
original rights is at an end; they are no longer in a state of nature.
These lords of themselves, these kings of ME, these demigods of
independence sink down to colonists, governed by a charter. If their
ancestors were subjects, they acknowledged a sovereign; if they had a
right to English privileges, they were accountable to English laws; and,
what must grieve the lover of liberty to discover, had ceded to the king
and parliament, whether the right or not, at least, the power of
disposing, "without their consent, of their lives, liberties, and
properties. " It, therefore, is required of them to prove, that the
parliament ever ceded to them a dispensation from that obedience, which
they owe as natural-born subjects, or any degree of independence or
immunity, not enjoyed by other Englishmen.

They say, 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. "

That they who form a settlement by a lawful charter, having committed no
crime, forfeit no privileges, will be readily confessed; but what they
do not forfeit by any judicial sentence, they may lose by natural
effects. As man can be but in one place, at once, he cannot have the
advantages of multiplied residence. He that will enjoy the brightness of
sunshine, must quit the coolness of the shade. He who goes voluntarily
to America, cannot complain of losing what he leaves in Europe. He,
perhaps, had a right to vote for a knight or burgess; by crossing the
Atlantick, he has not nullified his right; but he has made its exertion
no longer possible. [32] By his own choice he has left a country, where
he had a vote and little property, for another, where he has great
property, but no vote. But as this preference was deliberate and
unconstrained, he is still "concerned in the government of himself;" he
has reduced himself from a voter, to one of the innumerable multitude
that have no vote. He has truly "ceded his right," but he still is
governed by his own consent; because he has consented to throw his atom
of interest into the general mass of the community. Of the consequences
of his own act he has no cause to complain; he has chosen, or intended
to choose, the greater good; he is represented, as himself desired, in
the general representation.

But the privileges of an American scorn the limits of place; they are
part of himself, and cannot be lost by departure from his country; they
float in the air, or glide under the ocean:

"Doris amara suam non intermisceat undam. "

A planter, wherever he settles, is not only a freeman, but a legislator:
"ubi imperator, ibi Roma. " "As the English colonists are not represented
in the British parliament, they are entitled to a free and exclusive
power of legislation in their several legislatures, in all cases of
taxation and internal polity, subject only to the negative of the
sovereign, in such manner as has been heretofore used and accustomed. We
cheerfully consent to the operation of such acts of the British
parliament, as are, bona fide, restrained to the regulation of our
external commerce--excluding every idea of taxation, internal or
external, for raising a revenue on the subjects of America, without
their consent. "

Their reason for this claim is, "that the foundation of English liberty,
and of all government, is a right in the people to participate in their
legislative council. "

"They inherit," they say, "from their ancestors, the right which their
ancestors possessed, of enjoying all the privileges of Englishmen. " That
they inherit the right of their ancestors is allowed; but they can
inherit no more. Their ancestors left a country, where the
representatives of the people were elected by men particularly
qualified, and where those who wanted qualifications, or who did not use
them, were bound by the decisions of men, whom they had not deputed.

The colonists are the descendants of men, who either had no vote in
elections, or who voluntarily resigned them for something, in their
opinion, of more estimation; they have, therefore, exactly what their
ancestors left them, not a vote in making laws, or in constituting
legislators, but the happiness of being protected by law, and the duty
of obeying it.

What their ancestors did not carry with them, neither they nor their
descendants have since acquired. They have not, by abandoning their part
in one legislature, obtained the power of constituting another,
exclusive and independent, any more than the multitudes, who are now
debarred from voting, have a right to erect a separate parliament for
themselves.

Men are wrong for want of sense, but they are wrong by halves for want
of spirit. Since the Americans have discovered that they can make a
parliament, whence comes it that they do not think themselves equally
empowered to make a king? If they are subjects, whose government is
constituted by a charter, they can form no body of independent
legislature. If their rights are inherent and underived, they may, by
their own suffrages, encircle, with a diadem, the brows of Mr. Cushing.

It is further declared, by the congress of Philadelphia, "that his
majesty's colonies are entitled to all the privileges and immunities
granted and confirmed to them by royal charters, or secured to them by
their several codes of provincial laws. "

The first clause of this resolution is easily understood, and will be
readily admitted. To all the privileges which a charter can convey, they
are, by a royal charter, evidently entitled. The second clause is of
greater difficulty; for how can a provincial law secure privileges or
immunities to a province? Provincial laws may grant, to certain
individuals of the province, the enjoyment of gainful, or an immunity
from onerous offices; they may operate upon the people to whom they
relate; but no province can confer provincial privileges on itself. They
may have a right to all which the king has given them; but it is a
conceit of the other hemisphere, that men have a right to all which they
have given to themselves.

A corporation is considered, in law, as an individual, and can no more
extend its own immunities, than a man can, by his own choice, assume
dignities or titles.

The legislature of a colony (let not the comparison be too much
disdained) is only the vestry of a larger parish, which may lay a cess
on the inhabitants, and enforce the payment; but can extend no influence
beyond its own district, must modify its particular regulations by the
general law, and, whatever may be its internal expenses, is still liable
to taxes laid by superiour authority.

The charters given to different provinces are different, and no general
right can be extracted from them. The charter of Pennsylvania, where
this congress of anarchy has been impudently held, contains a clause
admitting, in express terms, taxation by the parliament. If, in the
other charters, no such reserve is made, it must have been omitted, as
not necessary, because it is implied in the nature of subordinate
government. They who are subject to laws, are liable to taxes. If any
such immunity had been granted, it is still revocable by the
legislature, and ought to be revoked, as contrary to the publick good,
which is, in every charter, ultimately intended.

Suppose it true, that any such exemption is contained in the charter of
Maryland, it can be pleaded only by the Marylanders. It is of no use for
any other province; and, with regard even to them, must have been
considered as one of the grants in which the king has been deceived; and
annulled, as mischievous to the publick, by sacrificing to one little
settlement the general interest of the empire; as infringing the system
of dominion, and violating the compact of government. But Dr. Tucker has
shown, that even this charter promises no exemption from parliamentary
taxes.

In the controversy agitated about the beginning of this century, whether
the English laws could bind Ireland, Davenant, who defended against
Molyneux the claims of England, considered it as necessary to prove
nothing more, than that the present Irish must be deemed a colony.

The necessary connexion of representatives with taxes, seems to have
sunk deep into many of those minds, that admit sounds, without their
meaning.

Our nation is represented in parliament by an assembly as numerous as
can well consist with order and despatch, chosen by persons so
differently qualified in different places, that the mode of choice seems
to be, for the most part, formed by chance, and settled by custom. Of
individuals, far the greater part have no vote, and, of the voters, few
have any personal knowledge of him to whom they intrust their liberty
and fortune.

Yet this representation has the whole effect expected or desired, that
of spreading so wide the care of general interest, and the participation
of publick counsels, that the advantage or corruption of particular men
can seldom operate with much injury to the publick.

For this reason many populous and opulent towns neither enjoy nor desire
particular representatives: they are included in the general scheme of
publick administration, and cannot suffer but with the rest of the
empire.

It is urged, that the Americans have not the same security, and that a
British legislator may wanton with their property; yet, if it be true,
that their wealth is our wealth, and that their ruin will be our ruin,
the parliament has the same interest in attending to them, as to any
other part of the nation. The reason why we place any confidence in our
representatives is, that they must share in the good or evil which their
counsels shall produce. Their share is, indeed, commonly consequential
and remote; but it is not often possible that any immediate advantage
can be extended to such numbers as may prevail against it. We are,
therefore, as secure against intentional depravations of government, as
human wisdom can make us, and upon this security the Americans may
venture to repose.

It is said, by the old member who has written an appeal against the tax,
that "as the produce of American labour is spent in British
manufactures, the balance of trade is greatly against them; whatever you
take directly in taxes is, in effect, taken from your own commerce. If
the minister seizes the money, with which the American should pay his
debts, and come to market, the merchant cannot expect him as a customer,
nor can the debts, already contracted, be paid. --Suppose we obtain from
America a million, instead of one hundred thousand pounds, it would be
supplying one personal exigence by the future ruin of our commerce. "

Part of this is true; but the old member seems not to perceive, that, if
his brethren of the legislature know this as well as himself, the
Americans are in no danger of oppression, since by men commonly
provident they must be so taxed, as that we may not lose one way, what
we gain another.

The same old member has discovered, that the judges formerly thought it
illegal to tax Ireland, and declares that no cases can be more alike
than those of Ireland and America; yet the judges whom he quotes have
mentioned a difference. Ireland, they say, "hath a parliament of its
own. " When any colony has an independent parliament, acknowledged by the
parliament of Britain, the cases will differ less. Yet, by the sixth of
George the first, chapter fifth, the acts of the British parliament bind
Ireland.

It is urged, that when Wales, Durham, and Chester were divested of their
particular privileges, or ancient government, and reduced to the state
of English counties, they had representatives assigned them.

To those from whom something had been taken, something in return might
properly be given. To the Americans their charters are left, as they
were, nor have they lost any thing, except that of which their sedition
has deprived them. If they were to be represented in parliament,
something would be granted, though nothing is withdrawn.

The inhabitants of Chester, Durham, and Wales were invited to exchange
their peculiar institutions for the power of voting, which they wanted
before. The Americans have voluntarily resigned the power of voting, to
live in distant and separate governments; and what they have voluntarily
quitted, they have no right to claim.

It must always be remembered, that they are represented by the same
virtual representation as the greater part of Englishmen; and that, if
by change of place, they have less share in the legislature than is
proportionate to their opulence, they, by their removal, gained that
opulence, and had originally, and have now, their choice of a vote at
home, or riches at a distance.

We are told, what appears to the old member and to others, a position
that must drive us into inextricable absurdity: that we have either no
right, or the sole right, of taxing the colonies. The meaning is, that
if we can tax them, they cannot tax themselves; and that if they can tax
themselves, we cannot tax them. We answer, with very little hesitation,
that, for the general use of the empire, we have the sole right of
taxing them. If they have contributed any thing in their own assemblies,
what they contributed was not paid, but given; it was not a tax or
tribute, but a present. Yet they have the natural and legal power of
levying money on themselves for provincial purposes, of providing for
their own expense at their own discretion. Let not this be thought new
or strange; it is the state of every parish in the kingdom.

The friends of the Americans are of different opinions. Some think,
that, being unrepresented, they ought to tax themselves; and others,
that they ought to have representatives in the British parliament.

If they are to tax themselves, what power is to remain in the supreme
legislature? That they must settle their own mode of levying their money
is supposed. May the British parliament tell them how much they shall
contribute? If the sum may be prescribed, they will return few thanks
for the power of raising it; if they are at liberty to grant or to deny,
they are no longer subjects.

If they are to be represented, what number of these western orators are
to be admitted? This, I suppose, the parliament must settle; yet, if men
have a natural and unalienable right to be represented, who shall
determine the number of their delegates? Let us, however, suppose them
to send twenty-three, half as many as the kingdom of Scotland, what will
this representation avail them? To pay taxes will be still a grievance.
The love of money will not be lessened, nor the power of getting it
increased.

Whither will this necessity of representation drive us? Is every petty
settlement to be out of the reach of government, till it has sent a
senator to parliament; or may two of them, or a greater number, be
forced to unite in a single deputation? What, at last, is the difference
between him that is taxed, by compulsion, without representation, and
him that is represented, by compulsion, in order to be taxed?

For many reigns the house of commons was in a state of fluctuation: new
burgesses were added, from time to time, without any reason now to be
discovered; but the number has been fixed for more than a century and a
half, and the king's power of increasing it has been questioned. It will
hardly be thought fit to new-model the constitution in favour of the
planters, who, as they grow rich, may buy estates in England, and,
without any innovation, effectually represent their native colonies.

The friends of the Americans, indeed, ask for them what they do not ask
for themselves. This inestimable right of representation they have never
solicited. They mean not to exchange solid money for such airy honour.
They say, and say willingly, that they cannot conveniently be
represented; because their inference is, that they cannot be taxed. They
are too remote to share the general government, and, therefore, claim
the privilege of governing themselves.

Of the principles contained in the resolutions of the congress, however
wild, indefinite, and obscure, such has been the influence upon American
understanding, that, from New England to South Carolina, there is formed
a general combination of all the provinces against their mother-country.
The madness of independence has spread from colony to colony, till order
is lost, and government despised; and all is filled with misrule,
uproar, violence, and confusion. To be quiet is disaffection, to be
loyal is treason.

The congress of Philadelphia, an assembly convened by its own authority,
has promulgated a declaration, in compliance with which the
communication between Britain and the greatest part of North America, is
now suspended. They ceased to admit the importation of English goods, in
December, 1774, and determine to permit the exportation of their own no
longer than to November, 1775.

This might seem enough; but they have done more: they have declared,
that they shall treat all as enemies who do not concur with them in
disaffection and perverseness; and that they will trade with none that
shall trade with Britain.

They threaten to stigmatize, in their gazette, those who shall consume
the products or merchandise of their mother-country, and are now
searching suspected houses for prohibited goods.

These hostile declarations they profess themselves ready to maintain by
force. They have armed the militia of their provinces, and seized the
publick stores of ammunition. They are, therefore, no longer subjects,
since they refuse the laws of their sovereign, and, in defence of that
refusal, are making open preparations for war.

Being now, in their own opinion, free states, they are not only raising
armies, but forming alliances, not only hastening to rebel themselves,
but seducing their neighbours to rebellion. They have published an
address to the inhabitants of Quebec, in which discontent and resistance
are openly incited, and with very respectful mention of "the sagacity of
Frenchmen," invite them to send deputies to the congress of
Philadelphia; to that seat of virtue and veracity, whence the people of
England are told, that to establish popery, "a religion fraught with
sanguinary and impious tenets," even in Quebec, a country of which the
inhabitants are papists, is so contrary to the constitution, that it
cannot be lawfully done by the legislature itself; where it is made one
of the articles of their association, to deprive the conquered French of
their religious establishment; and whence the French of Quebec are, at
the same time, flattered into sedition, by professions of expecting
"from the liberality of sentiment distinguishing their nation, that
difference of religion will not prejudice them against a hearty amity,
because the transcendant nature of freedom elevates all, who unite in
the cause, above such low-minded infirmities. "

Quebec, however, is at a great distance. They have aimed a stroke, from
which they may hope for greater and more speedy mischief. They have
tried to infect the people of England with the contagion of disloyalty.
Their credit is, happily, not such as gives them influence proportionate
to their malice. When they talk of their pretended immunities
"guaranteed by the plighted faith of government, and the most solemn
compacts with English sovereigns," we think ourselves at liberty to
inquire, when the faith was plighted, and the compact made; and, when we
can only find, that king James and king Charles the first promised the
settlers in Massachusetts bay, now famous by the appellation of
Bostonians, exemption from taxes for seven years, we infer, with Mr.
Mauduit, that, by this "solemn compact," they were, after expiration of
the stipulated term, liable to taxation.

When they apply to our compassion, by telling us, that they are to be
carried from their own country to be tried for certain offences, we are
not so ready to pity them, as to advise them not to offend. While they
are innocent they are safe.

When they tell of laws made expressly for their punishment, we answer,
that tumults and sedition were always punishable, and that the new law
prescribes only the mode of execution.

When it is said, that the whole town of Boston is distressed for a
misdemeanor of a few, we wonder at their shamelessness; for we know that
the town of Boston and all the associated provinces, are now in
rebellion to defend or justify the criminals.

If frauds in the imposts of Boston are tried by commission without a
jury, they are tried here in the same mode; and why should the
Bostonians expect from us more tenderness for them than for ourselves?

If they are condemned unheard, it is because there is no need of a
trial. The crime is manifest and notorious. All trial is the
investigation of something doubtful. An Italian philosopher observes,
that no man desires to hear what he has already seen.

If their assemblies have been suddenly dissolved, what was the reason?
Their deliberations were indecent, and their intentions seditious. The
power of dissolution is granted and reserved for such times of
turbulence. Their best friends have been lately soliciting the king to
dissolve his parliament; to do what they so loudly complain of
suffering.

That the same vengeance involves the innocent and guilty, is an evil to
be lamented; but human caution cannot prevent it, nor human power always
redress it. To bring misery on those who have not deserved it, is part
of the aggregated guilt of rebellion.

That governours have been sometimes given them, only that a great man
might get ease from importunity, and that they have had judges, not
always of the deepest learning, or the purest integrity, we have no
great reason to doubt, because such misfortunes happen to ourselves.
Whoever is governed, will, sometimes, be governed ill, even when he is
most "concerned in his own government. "

That improper officers or magistrates are sent, is the crime or folly of
those that sent them. When incapacity is discovered, it ought to be
removed; if corruption is detected, it ought to be punished.