Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub

There never was any occasion of legal exemption from what they never had been subject to.

cept against their demonstration of legal exemp-terest, one of them may endeavour to impose tion." on the other, may cheat him in the accounts, may draw to himself more than his share of the profits, may put upon the other more than an equal share of the expense and burden. Their having a common interest is no security against such injustice. The landholders of Great Britain have a common interest, and yet they injure one another in the inequality of the land tax. The majority in Parliament, being favoured in the proportions, will never consent to do justice to the minority by a more equal assessment.

"But then it is to be further observed, that this same method of arguing is equally favourable to governors as governed, and to the mother

country as the colonies."

Here is the old mistake of all these writers. The people of the mother country are subjects, not governors. The king only is sovereign in both countries.

"The colonies will no longer think it equitable to insist upon immunities which the people of Great Britain do not enjoy."

Why not, if they have a right to them? "To claim a right of being taxed by their assemblies only, appears to have too much the air of independence; and though they are not represented here, would give them an immunity beyond the inhabitants of this island."

It is a right, however; what signifies what air it has? The inhabitants being freeholders ought to have the same. If they have it not, they are injured. Then rectify what is amiss among yourselves; and do not make it a justification of more wrong.

"Or could they hope to procure any advantages from one hundred representatives? Common sense answers all this in the negative."

Why not, as well as Scotland from fortyfive, or rather sixty-one? Common sense, on the contrary, says, that a body of one hundred votes in Parliament will always be worth the attention of any ministry; and the fear of offending them will make every minister cautious of injuring the rights of their country, lest they join with his opposers in Parliament.

"But what reasonable ground of apprehension can there be, that the British Parliament should be ignorant of so plain a matter, as that the interests of Britain and the colonies are the same?"

If the Parliament is so knowing and so just, how comes it to restrain Ireland in its manufactures, America in its trade? Why may not an Irishman or an American make the same manufactures, and carry them to the same ports as an Englishman? In many instances Britain shows a selfish regard to her own interest, in prejudice of the colonies. America therefore has no confidence in her equity.

"But I can conceive no earthly security better, none indeed so good, as that which depends upon the wisdom and integrity of a British king

and Parliament."

hereditary, as those of the House of Lords; Suppose seats in your House of Commons or suppose the Commons to be nominated by the king, or chosen by the lords; could you then rely upon them? If your members were to be chosen by the people of Ireland, could you then rely upon them? Could you depend upon their wisdom and integrity, as a security, the best possible, for your rights? And wherein is our case different, if the peo"Therefore the interest of Great Britain and ple of England choose legislators for the that of the colonies is the same." people of America?

All this argument of the interest of Britain and the colonies being the same is fallacious and unsatisfactory. Partners in trade have a common interest, which is the same, the flourishing of the partnership business; but they may, moreover, have each a separate interest, and, in pursuit of that separate in

"If they have a spark of virtue left, they will blush to be found in a posture of hostility against Great Britain."

There was no posture of hostility in America, but Britain put herself in a posture of hostility against America. Witness the landing of the troops in Boston, 1768.

OBSERVATIONS

ON

PASSAGES IN A LETTER FROM A MERCHANT IN LONDON TO HIS NEPHEW IN NORTH AMERICA.-LONDON, 1766."

“THE honest indignation you express against | those artifices and frauds, those robberies and insults, which lost us the hearts and affections of the Indians, is particularly to be commended; for these were the things, as you justly observed, which involved us in the most bloody and expensive war that ever was known."

This is wickedly intended by the author, Dean Tucker, to represent the North Americans as the cause of the war. Whereas, it was in fact begun by the French, who seized the goods and persons of the English traders on the Ohio, who encroached on the king's land in Nova Scotia, and took a fort from the Ohio Company by force of arms, which induced England to make reprisals at sea, and to send Braddock to recover the fort on the Ohio, whence came on the war.

ever an Englishman resides, that country is England. While an Englishman resides in England, he is undoubtedly subject to its laws. If he goes into a foreign country, he is subject to the laws and government he finds there. If he finds no government or laws there, he is subject there to none, till he and his companions, if he has any, make laws for themselves; and this was the case of the first settlers in America. Otherwise, and if they carried the English laws and power of Parliament with them, what advantage could the Puritans propose to themselves by going, since they would have been as subject to bishops, spiritual courts, tythes, and statutes relating to the church, in America, as in England? Can the dean, on his principles, tell how it happens that those By the spirit of Magna Charta all taxes laid laws, the game acts, the statutes for labouron by Parliament are constitutional, legal taxes." ers, and an infinity of others, made before There is no doubt but taxes laid by Par- and since the emigration, are not in force in liament, where the Parliament has jurisdic-force in America, nor ever were? tion, are legal taxes; but does it follow, that taxes laid by the Parliament of England on Scotland before the union, on Guernsey, Jersey, Ireland, Hanover, or any other dominions of the crown, not within the realm, are therefore legal? These writers against the colonies all bewilder themselves by supposing the colonies within the realm, which is not the case, nor ever was. This then is the spirit of the constitution, that taxes shall not be laid without the consent of those

66

to be taxed. The colonies were not then in

being, and therefore nothing relating to them could be literally expressed. As the Americans are now without the realm, and not of the jurisdiction of Parliament, the spirit of the British constitution dictates, that they should be taxed only by their own representatives, as the English are by theirs.

"Now the first emigrants, who settled in America, were certainly English subjects, subject to the laws and jurisdiction of Parliament, and consequently to parliamentary taxes, before the emigration, and therefore subject afterwards, unless some legal constitutional exemption can be produced."

"Now, upon the first settling of an English colony, and before ever you Americans could have chosen any representatives, and therefore before any assembly of such representatives could have possibly met,-to whose laws and to what legislative power were you then subject? To the English, most undoubtedly; for you could have been subject to no other.”

the fact. The colonies carried no law with The author here appears quite ignorant of them; they carried only a power of making lish law or any other law, as they should laws, or adopting such parts of the Eng

The

first settlers of Connecticut, for instance, at
think suitable to their circumstances.
their first meeting in that country, finding
themselves out of all jurisdiction of other
governments, resolved and enacted, that, till
a code of laws should be prepared and
agreed to, they would be governed by the law
of Moses, as contained in the Old Testament.

If the first settlers had no right to expect a better constitution than the English, what fools were they for going over, to encounter all the hardships and perils of new settlements in a wilderness! For these were so This position supposes, that Englishmen many additions to what they suffered at can never be out of the jurisdiction of Parlia- home from tyrannical and oppressive instiment. It may as well be said, that wher-tutions in church and state; with a subtrac

tion of all their old enjoyments of the conveniences and comforts of an old settled country, friends, neighbours, relations, and homes.

[ocr errors]

"Suppose, therefore, that the crown had been so ill advised as to have granted a charter to any city or county here in England, pretending to exempt them from the power and jurisdiction of an British Parliament. Is it possible for you to believe an absurdity so gross and glaring?"

The American settlers needed no exemption from the power of Parliament; they were necessarily exempted, as soon as they landed out of its jurisdiction. Therefore, all this rhetorical paragraph is founded on a mistake of the author, and the absurdity he talks of is of his own making.

"Good heavens! what a sudden alteration is this! An American pleading for the extension of the prerogative of the crown! Yes, if it could make for his cause; and for extending it, too, beyond all the bounds of the law, of reason, and of common sense!"

What stuff! Why may not an American plead for the just prerogatives of the crown? And is it not a just prerogative of the crown to give the subjects leave to settle in a foreign country, if they think it necessary to ask such leave? Was the Parliament at all considered, or consulted, in making those first settlements? Or did any lawyer then think it necessary?

[merged small][ocr errors]

This is hallooing before you are out of the wood.

"Strange, that though the British Parliament has been, from the beginning, thus unreasonable, thus unjust and cruel towards you, by levying taxes on many commodities outwards and inwards”—

False! Never before the restoration. The Parliament, it is acknowledged, have made which have passed without opposition, partly many oppressive laws relating to America, through the weakness of the colonies, partly through their inattention to the full extent of their rights, while employed in labour to procure the necessaries of life. But that is a wicked guardian, and a shameless one, who first takes advantage of the weakness incident to minority, cheats and imposes on his pupil, and when the pupil comes of age, urges those very impositions as precedents to justify continuing them and adding others.

"But surely you will not dare to say, that we refuse your votes when you come hither to offer them, and choose to poll. You cannot have the face to assert that on an election-day any difference is put between the vote of a man born in America, and of one born here in England."

"Now this clause, which is nothing more than the renunciation of absolute prerogative, is quoted in our newspapers, as if it was a renunciation of the rights of Parliament to raise taxes." This is all banter and insult, when you It was not a renunciation of the rights of know the impossibility of a million of freeParliament. There was no need of such a holders coming over sea to vote here. If renunciation, for Parliament had not even their freeholds in America are within the pretended to such a right. But, since the royal faith was pledged by the king for realm, why have they not, in virtue of these himself and his successors, how can any suc-well as an English freeholder? Sometimes freeholds, a right to vote in your elections, as ceeding king, without violating that faith, ever give his assent to an act of Parliament

for such taxation.

"Nay, many of your colony charters assert quite the contrary, by containing the express reservations of parliamentary rights, particularly that great one of levying taxes."

A fib, Mr. Dean. In one charter only, and that a late one, is the Parliament mentioned; and the right reserved is only that of laying duties on commodities imported into England from the colony or exported to it.

we are told, that our estates are by our charters all in the manor of East Greenwich, and therefore all in England; and yet have we any right to vote among the voters of East Greenwich? Can we trade to the same ports? In this very paragraph, you suppose that we cannot vote in England, if we come hither, till we have by purchase acquired a right; therefore neither we nor our estates are represented in England.

"The cause of your complaint is this; that you live at too great a distance from the mother "And those charters, which do not make such country to be present at our English elections; provisions in express terms, must be supposed and that, in consequence of this distance, the virtually to imply them; because the law and freedom of our towns, or the freeholds in our constitution will not allow, that the king can counties, as far as voting is concerned, are not do more either at home or abroad by the prero-worth attending to. It may be so; but pray gative royal, than the law and constitution consider, if you yourselves choose to make it authorizes him to do." inconvenient for you to come and vote, by reVOL. II.

3 S

43

tiring into distant countries,-what is that to jects are, therefore, not properly vested with rights relating to government.

us?"

This is all beside the mark. The Americans are by their constitutions provided with a representation, and therefore neither need nor desire any in the British Parliament. They have never asked any such thing. They only say, Since we have a right to grant our own money to the king, since we have assemblies where we are represented for such purposes, why will you meddle, out of your sphere, take the money that is ours, and give us yours, without our consent?

[ocr errors]

Yes, it is, and you demand it too with a loud voice, full of anger, of defiance, and denunciation."

An absolute falsehood! We never demanded in any manner, much less in the manner you mention, that the mother country should change her constitution.

"In the great metropolis, and in many other cities, landed property itself hath no representative in Parliament. Copy-holds and lease-holds of various kinds have none likewise, though of ever so great a value."

Copy-holds and lease-holds are supposed to be represented in the original landlord of whom they are held. Thus all the land in England is in fact represented, notwithstanding what he here says. As to those who have no landed property in a county, is the allowing them to vote for legislators an impropriety. They are transient inhabitants, and not so connected with the welfare of the state, which they may quit when they please, as to qualify them properly for such privilege.

"And, besides all this, it is well known that the East India Company, which have such vast settlements, and which dispose of the fate of kings and kingdoms abroad, have not so much as a single member, or even a single vote, quatenus a company, to watch over their interests at home. And may not their property, perhaps a little short of one hundred millions sterling, as much deserve to be represented in Parliament, as the scattered townships or straggling houses of some of your provinces in America?"

"Yet we raise no commotions; we neither ring the alarm-bell, nor sound the trumpet, and submit to be taxed without being represented; and taxed, let me tell you, for your sakes. All was granted when you cried for help.”

This is wickedly false. While the colonies were weak and poor, not a penny or a single soldier was ever spared by Britain for their defence. But as soon as the trade with them became an object, and a fear arose that the French would seize that trade and deprive her of it, she sent troops to America unasked. And she now brings this account of the expense against us, which should be rather carried to her own merchants and manufacturers. We joined our troops and treasure with hers to help her in this war. Of this no notice is taken. To refuse to pay a just debt is knavish; not to return an obligation is ingratitude; but to demand payment of a debt where none has been contracted, to forge a bond or an obligation in order to demand what was never due, is villany. Every year both king and Parliament, during the war, acknowledged that we had done more than our part, and made us some return, which is equivalent to a receipt in full, and entirely sets aside this monstrous claim.

If

By all means redress your own grievances. f you are not just to your own people, how can we trust you? We ask no representation among you; but if you have any thing wrong among yourselves, rectify it, and do not make one injustice a precedent and plea for doing another. That would be increasing evil in the world instead of diminishing it.

You need not be concerned about the number to be added from America. We do not desire to come among you; but you may make some room for your own additional members, by removing those that are sent by the rotten boroughs.

"I must now tell you, that every member of Parliament represents you, and me, and our interests in all essential points, just as much as if we had voted for him. For although one place or one set of men may elect and send him up to Parliament, yet, when once he becomes a member, he is the equal guardian of all.”

In the same manner, Mr. Dean, are the pope and cardinals representatives of the whole Christian church. Why don't you obey them?

By this argument it may be proved, that no man in England has a vote. The clergy have none as clergymen; the lawyers, none as lawyers; the physicians, none as physicians; and so on. But if they have votes as freeholders, that is sufficient; and that no freeholder in America has for a representative in the British Parliament. The stockholders are many of them foreigners, "This, then, being the case, it therefore foland all may be so when they please, as no- lows, that our Birminghams, Manchesters, thing is more easy than the transferring of Leeds, Halifaxes, &c. and your Bostons, Newstock and conveying property beyond sea Yorks, and Philadelphias, are as really, though by bills of exchange. Such uncertain sub-not so nominally, represented, as any part what

soever of the British empire; and that each of | Nay, in order to favour your plantations, I am these places have in fact, instead of one or two, not permitted to plant this herb on my own not less than five hundred and fifty-eight guar- estate, though the soil should be ever so proper dians in the British Senate." for it."

What occasion is there then, my dear sir, of being at the trouble of elections? The peers alone would do as well for our guardians, though chosen by the king, or born such. If their present number is too small, his majesty may be good enough to add five hundred and fifty-eight, or make the present House of Commons and their heirs-male peers for ever. If having a vote in elections would be of no use to us, how is it of any to you? Elections are the cause of much tumult, riot, contention, and mischief. Get rid of them at once, and

for ever.

"It proves that no man ought to pay any tax but that only to which the member of his own town, city, or county hath particularly assented."

You lay a duty on the tobacco of other countries, because you must pay money for that, but get ours in exchange for your manufactures.

Tobacco is not permitted to be planted in England, lest it should interfere with corn necessary for your subsistence. Rice you cannot raise. It requires eleven months. Your summer is too short. Nature, not the laws, denies you this product.

"And what will you say in relation to hemp? The Parliament now gives you a bounty of eight pounds per ton for exporting your hemp from North America, but will allow me nothing for growing it here in England."

Did ever any North American bring his hemp to England for this bounty? We

You seem to take your nephew for a sim-have yet not enough for our own consumppleton, Mr. Dean. Every one, who votes for a representative, knows and intends, that the majority is to govern, and that the consent of the majority is to be understood as the consent of the whole; that being ever the case in all deliberative assemblies. "The doctrine of implication is the very thing to which you object, and against which you have raised so many batteries of popular

tion. We begin to make our own cordage. and would do it by getting the raw material You want to suppress that manufacture, from us. You want to be supplied with demands money. These were the motives hemp for your manufactures, and Russia for giving what you are pleased to call a bounty to us. We thank you for your bounties. We love you, and therefore must be obliged to you for being good to yourselves. noise and clamour." You do not encourage raising hemp in Eng-How far, my dear sir, would you your-land, because you know it impoverishes the self carry the doctrine of implication? If important positions are to be implied, when not expressed, I suppose you can have no objection to their being implied where some expression countenances the implication. If you should say to a friend, "I am your humble servant, sir," ought he to imply from thence that you will clean his shoes? "And consequently you must maintain, that all those in your several provinces who have no votes," &c.

No freeholder in North America is without a vote. Many, who have no freeholds, have nevertheless a vote; which, indeed, I don't think was necessary to be allowed.

"You have your choice whether you will accept of my price for your tobacco; or, after bringing it here, whether you will carry it away, and try your fortune at another market."

A great kindness this, to oblige me first to bring it here, that the expense of another voyage and freight may deter me from carrying it away, and oblige me to take the price you are pleased to offer.

"But I have no alternative allowed, being obliged to buy yours at your own price, or else to pay such a duty for the tobacco of other countries, as must amount to a prohibition.

richest grounds; your landholders are all
against it. What you call bounties given
by Parliament and the society, are nothing
more than inducements offered us, to per-
suade us to leave employments that are
more profitable, and engage in such as would
be less so without your bounty; to quit a
business profitable to ourselves, and engage
in one that shall be profitable to you. This
is the true spirit of all bounties.
your

Your duties on foreign articles are from the same motives. Pitch, tar, and turpentine used to cost you five pounds a barrel when you had them from foreigners, who used you ill into the bargain, thinking you could not do without them. You gave a bounty of five shillings a barrel to the colonies, and they have brought you such plenty as to reduce the price to ten shillings a barrel. Take back your bounties when you please, since you upbraid us with them. Buy your indigo, pitch, silk, and tobacco where you please, and let us buy our manufactures where we please. I fancy we shall be gainers. As to the great kindness of these five hundred and fifty-eight parliamentary guardians of American privileges, who can forbear smiling, that has seen the Navigation Act, the Hatters' Act, the Steel

« AnteriorContinuar »