'The parent country, with undeviating prudence and virtue,

attentive to the first principles of colonization, drew to

herself the benefits she might reasonably expect, and preserved

to her children the blessings, upon which those benefits were

founded. She made laws, obliging her colonies to carry to her

all those products which she wanted for her own use; and all

those raw materials which she chose herself to work up. Besides

this restriction, she forbade them to procure _manufactures_

from any other part of the globe, or even the _products_ of

_European_ countries, which alone could rival her, without

being first brought to her. In short, by a variety of laws,

she regulated their trade in such a manner as she thought most

conducive to their mutual advantage and her own welfare. A power

was reserved to the crown of _repealing_ any laws that should be

enacted: the executive authority of government was also lodged

in the crown, and its representatives; and an _appeal_ was

secured to the crown from all judgments in the administration of

justice.

'For all these powers, established by the mother country over

the colonies; for all these immense emoluments derived by her

from them; for all their difficulties and distresses in fixing

themselves, what was the recompense made them? A communication

of her rights in general, and particularly of that great one,

the foundation of all the rest--that their property, acquired

with so much pain and hazard, should be disposed of by none

but themselves--or, to use beautiful and emphatic language of

the sacred scriptures, "that they should sit _every man_ under

his vine, and under his fig-tree, and _none should make them

afraid_."

'Can any man of candour and knowledge deny that these

institutions form an affinity between Great Britain and her

colonies, that sufficiently secures their dependence upon her?

Or that for her to levy taxes upon them is to reverse the

nature of things? Or that she can pursue such a measure without

reducing them to a state of vassalage?

'If any person cannot conceive the supremacy of Great Britain

to exist, without the power of laying taxes to levy money upon

us, the history of the colonies, and of Great Britain, since

their settlement, will prove the contrary. He will there find

the amazing advantages arising to her from them--the constant

exercise of her supremacy--and their filial submission to it,

without a single rebellion, or even the thought of one, from

their first emigration to this moment--and all these things have

happened, without one instance of Great Britain's laying taxes

to levy money upon them.

'How many British authors have demonstrated, that the present

wealth, power and glory of their country, are founded upon

these colonies? As constantly as streams tend to the ocean have

they been pouring the fruits of all their labours into their

mother's lap. Good heaven! and shall a total oblivion of former

tendernesses and blessings, be spread over the minds of a good

and wise nation by the sordid arts of intriguing men, who,

covering their selfish projects under pretences of public good,

first enrage their countrymen into a frenzy of passion, and then

advance their own influence and interest, by gratifying the

passion, which they themselves have basely excited.

'Hitherto Great Britain has been contented with her prosperity,

moderation has been the rule of her conduct. But now, a

generous, humane people, that so often have protected the

liberty of _strangers_, is inflamed into an attempt to tear a

privilege from her own children, which if executed, must, in

their opinion, sink them into slaves: _and for what_? for a

pernicious power, not necessary to her as her own experience may

convince her; but horribly dreadful and detestable to her.

'It seems extremely probable, that when cool, dispassionate

prosperity, shall consider the affectionate intercourse, the

reciprocal benefits, and the unsuspecting confidence, that have

subsisted between these colonies and their parent country, for

such a length of time, they will execrate, with the bitterest

curses, the infamous memory of those men, whose pestilential

ambition unnecessarily, wantonly, first opened the sources

of civil discord between them; first turned their love into

jealousy; and first taught these provinces, filled with grief

and anxiety, to enquire.'

"As every community possessed of valuable privileges, and desirous

to preserve the enjoyment of them, ought to be very cautious of

admitting innovations from their established forms of political

administration, our Author does not confine his views to the

immediate effects of the laws lately passed regarding America; but

considers the necessary tendency of the precedents; thus he says,

'I have looked over every _statute_ relating to these colonies,

from their first settlement to this time; and I find everyone

of them founded on this principle, till the _stamp-act_

administration. _All before_, are calculated to regulate trade,

and preserve or promote a mutually beneficial intercourse

between the several constituent parts of the empire; and

though many of them imposed duties on trade, yet those duties

were always imposed _with design_ to restrain the commerce of

one part, that was injurious to another, and thus to promote

the general welfare. The raising a revenue thereby was never

intended. Thus, the king by his judges in his courts of justice,

impose fines, which altogether amount to a very considerable

sum, and contribute to the support of government; but this is

merely a consequence arising from restrictions, that only meant

to keep peace, and prevent confusion; and surely a man would

argue very loosely, who should conclude from hence, that the

king has a right to levy money in general upon his subjects.

Never did the British parliament, till the period above

mentioned, think of imposing duties in America, _for the purpose

of raising a revenue_. Mr. Grenville first introduced this

language, in the preamble to the fourth of George III. chap. 15,

which has these words--"and whereas it is just and necessary

that _a revenue be raised in your majesty's said dominions in

America, for defraying the expenses of defending, protecting

and securing the same_: We your majesty's most dutiful and

loyal subjects, _the commons of Great Britain_, in Parliament

assembled, being desirous to make some provisions in this

present session of parliament, _towards raising the said revenue

in America_, have resolved to _give_ and _grant_ unto your

majesty the several rates and duties hereinafter mentioned,"

etc.

'A few months after came the _stamp-act_, which reciting this,

proceeds in the same strange mode of expression, thus--"And

whereas it is just and necessary, that provision be made _for

raising a further revenue within your majesty's dominions in

America, towards defraying the said expenses_, we your majesty's

most dutiful and loyal subjects, the _commons_ of _Great

Britain, etc., give and grant_," etc., as before.

'The last act, granting duties upon paper, etc., carefully

pursues these modern precedents. The preamble is, "Whereas it is

expedient, _that a revenue should be raised in your majesty's

dominions in America for making a more certain and adequate

provision for defraying the charge of the administration of

justice, and the support of civil government in such provinces,

where it shall be found necessary; and towards the further

defraying of the expences of defending, protecting, and securing

the said dominions_, we your majesty's most dutiful and loyal

subjects, the _commons of Great Britain_, etc. give _and

grant_," etc. as before.

'Here we may observe an authority expresly claimed and exerted

to impose duties on these colonies; not for the regulation of

trade; not for the preservation or promotion of a mutually

beneficial intercourse between the several constituent parts

of the empire, heretofore the _sole objects_ of parliamentary

institutions; _but for the single purpose of levying money upon

us_.'

"Again in another place,

'What but the indisputable, the acknowledged exclusive right

of the colonies to tax themselves, could be the reason, that

in this long period of more than one hundred and fifty years,

no statute was ever passed for the sole purpose of raising a

revenue from the colonies? And how clear, how cogent must that

reason be, to which every parliament, and every ministry for so

long a time submitted, without a single attempt to innovate?

'England, in part of that course of years, and Great Britain,

in other parts, was engaged in several fierce and expensive

wars; troubled with some tumultuous and bold parliaments;

governed by many daring and wicked ministers; yet none of them

ever ventured to touch the Palladium of American liberty.

Ambition, avarice, faction, tyranny, all revered it. Whenever it

was necessary to raise money on the colonies, the requisitions

of the crown were made, and dutifully complied with. The

parliament, from time to time, regulated their trade, and that

of the rest of the empire, to preserve their dependence and the

connections of the whole in good order.'

"The amount of present duties exacted in an unusual way is no part

of the object in question; for our Pennsylvanian Farmer observes:

'Some persons may think this act of no consequence, because

the duties are so _small_. A fatal error. _That_ is the very

circumstance most alarming to me. For I am convinced, that the

authors of this law would never have obtained an act to raise

so trifling a sum as it must do, had they not intended by it to

establish a _precedent_ for future use. To console ourselves

with the _smallness_ of the duties, is to walk deliberately into

the snare that is set for us, praising the _neatness_ of the

workmanship. Suppose the duties imposed by the late act could

be paid by these distressed colonies with the utmost ease, and

that the purposes to which they are to be applied, were the most

reasonable and equitable that can be conceived, the contrary of

which I hope to demonstrate before these letters are concluded;

yet even in such a supposed case, these colonies ought to regard

the act with abhorrence. For who are a free people? Not those,

over whom government is reasonably and equitably exercised, but

those, who live under a government so _constitutionally checked_

and controuled, that proper provision is made against its being

otherwise exercised.

'The late act is founded on the destruction of this

constitutional security. If the parliament have a right to lay

a duty of four shillings and eight pence on a hundred weight

of glass, or a ream of paper, they have a right to lay a duty

of any other sum on either. They may raise the duty, as the

author before quoted says has been done in some countries,

till it "exceeds seventeen or eighteen times the value of the

commodity." In short, if they have a right to levy a tax of

_one penny_ upon us, they have a right to levy a _million_ upon

us; for where does their right stop? At any given number of

pence, shillings or pounds? To attempt to limit their right,

after granting it to exist at all, is as contrary to reason--as

granting it to exist at all, is contrary to justice. If they

have any right to tax us--then, whether our own money shall

continue in our pockets or not, depends no longer on _us_, but

on _them_, "There is nothing which "we" can call our own; or,

to use the words of Mr. Locke--_what property have "we" in that

which another may, by right, take, when he pleases, to himself_?"

'These duties which will inevitably be levied upon us--which are

now levying upon us--are _expresly laid for the sole purpose of

taking money_. This is the true definition of "taxes." They are

therefore _taxes_. This money is to be taken from _us_. We are

therefore _taxed_. _Those_ who are _taxed_ without their own

consent, expressed by themselves or their representatives are

_slaves_. _We are taxed_ without our own consent, expressed by

ourselves or representatives. _We_ are therefore slaves.'

"Further,

'Indeed nations in general are more apt to _feel_ than to

_think_; and therefore nations in general have lost their

liberty: for as the violation of the rights of the governed are

commonly not only _specious_, but _small_ at the beginning,

they spread over the multitude in such a manner, as to touch

individuals but slightly; thus they are disregarded. The

power or profit that arises from these violations, _centering

in a few persons_, is to them considerable. For this reason,

the _Governors_ having in view their particular purposes,

successively preserve an uniformity of conduct for attaining

them: they regularly increase and multiply the first injuries,

till at length the inattentive people are compelled to perceive

the heaviness of their burthen. They begin to complain

and inquire--but too late. They find their oppressions so

strengthened by success, and themselves so entangled in examples

of express authority on the part of their rulers, and of tacit

recognition on their own part, that they are quite confounded:

for millions entertain no other idea of the _legality_ of power,

than that it is founded on the exercise of power. They then

voluntarily fasten their chains by adopting a pusillanimous

opinion "that there will be too much danger in attempting a

remedy"--or another opinion no less fatal, "that the government

has a _right_ to treat them as it does." They then seek a

wretched relief for their minds, by persuading themselves, that

to yield their _obedience_, is to discharge their _duty_. The

_deplorable_ poverty of spirit, that prostrates all the dignity

bestowed by Divine Providence on our nature--of course succeeds.'

"With regard to the proper conduct of the colonies on this occasion

he premises the following questions:

'Has not the parliament _expressly avowed_ their _intention_

of raising money from us for _certain_ purposes? Is not this

scheme _popular_ in Great Britain? Will the taxes imposed by

the late act, _answer_ those purposes? If it will, must it

not take an immense sum from us? If it will not, is it to be

_expected_, that the parliament will not _fully execute_ their

_intention_, when it is pleasing at home, _and not opposed_

here? Must not this be done by imposing _new taxes_? Will not

every addition thus made to our taxes, be an addition to the

power of the British legislature, _by increasing the number of

officers_ employed in the collection? Will not every additional

tax therefore render it _more difficult_ to abrogate any of

them? When a branch of revenue is once established, does it not

appear to many people _invidious_ and undutiful, to attempt to

abolish it? If taxes sufficient to _accomplish_ the intention of

the parliament, are imposed by the parliament, what taxes will

remain to be imposed by our assemblies? If _no material_ taxes

remain to be imposed by them, what must become of _them_, and

the people they represent?'

"Our Author all along, however, asserts that the real interest of

English America consists in its proper dependence on the mother

country, at the same time that he strenuously exhorts his countrymen

to oppose, by all the suitable means in their power, every

incroachment on those constitutions under the sanction of which they

settled on those remote and uncultivated shores, whereon they have

so industriously established themselves. He remarks with a spirit

which no one, it is apprehended, can condemn:

'I am no further concerned in anything affecting America, than

any one of you; and when liberty leaves it, I can quit it much

more conveniently than most of you: but while divine providence,

that gave me existence in a land of freedom, permits my head

to think, my lips to speak, and my hands to move, I shall so

highly and gratefully value the blessing received, as to take

care, that my silence and inactivity shall not give my implied

assent to any act, degrading my brethren and myself from the

birthright, wherewith heaven itself "hath made us free.'

"The consequence of Great Britain exerting this disagreeable power,

he shews, in a long train of arguments, to have a tendency very

fatal to the liberty of America, which he illustrates by examining

into the application of the pensions on the Irish establishment;

and sums up his reasoning with the following positions:

'Let these _truths_ be indelibly impressed on our mind--_that

we cannot be_ happy, _without being_ free--that we cannot be

free, _without being secure_--in our property--that we cannot

be secure in our property, if, _without our consent, others

may, as by right, take it away--that taxes imposed on us by

parliament_, do thus take it away--that _duties laid for the

sole purposes of raising money_, are taxes--that attempts to

lay such duties _should be instantly and firmly opposed_--that

this opposition can never be effectual, unless it is the united

effort of those provinces--that therefore _benevolence of temper

towards each other_, and _unanimity of counsels_, are essential

to the welfare of the whole--and lastly, that for this reason,

every man amongst us, who in any manner would encourage either

dissention, diffidence, or indifference, between these colonies,

is an enemy to _himself_, and to _his country_.

'The belief of these truths, I verily think, my countrymen,

is indispensably necessary to your happiness. I beseech you,

therefore, "teach them diligently unto your children, and talk

of them when you sit in your houses, and when you walk by the

way, and when you lie down and when you rise up."

'_What_ have these colonies to _ask_, while they continue

free? or what have they to _dread_, but insidious attempts to

subvert their freedom? _Their prosperity_ does not depend on

_ministerial favours doled_ out to particular provinces. _They_

form one political body, of which _each_ colony is a _member_.

_Their happiness_ is founded on their constitution; and is to

be promoted by preserving that constitution in unabated vigour,

_throughout every part_. A spot, a speck of decay, however small

the limb on which it appears, and however remote it may seem

from the vitals, should be alarming. We have _all the rights_

requisite for our prosperity. The _legal authority_ of Great

Britain may indeed lay hard restrictions upon us; but, like the

spear of Telephus, it will cure as well as wound. Her unkindness

will instruct and compel us, after some time to discover, in

our _industry_ and _frugality_, surprising remedies--_if our

rights continue_ unviolated: for as long as the _products_ of

our _labour_, and the _rewards_ of our _care_, can properly

be called _our own_, so long will it be worth our while to be

_industrious_ and _frugal_. But if we plow--sow--reap--gather

and thresh--we find, that we plow--sow--reap--gather and thresh

_for others_, whose pleasure is to be the SOLE limitation _how

much_ they shall _take_ and _how much_ they _shall leave_, WHY

should we repeat the unprofitable toil? Horses and oxen are

content with _that portion of the fruits of their work_, which

their _owners_ assign to them, in order to keep them strong

enough to raise successive crops; but even _these beasts_ will

not submit to draw for their masters, until they are _subdued_

with _whips_ and _goads_. Let us take care of our rights, and we

_therein_ take care of our _property_. "SLAVERY IS EVER PRECEDED

BY SLEEP." _Individuals_ may be _dependent_ on ministers if

they please. _States should scorn it_; and if _you_ are not

wanting to yourselves, you will have a _proper regard_ paid

_you_ by _those_, to whom if you are not _respectable_, you will

infallibly be contemptible. But--_if we have already forgot_

the _reasons_ that urged us, with unexampled unanimity, to

exert ourselves two years ago--if _our zeal_ for the _public

good_ is _worn out_ before the _homespun cloaths_ which it

caused us to have made--if _our_ resolutions are so faint, as

by our present conduct to _condemn_ our own late _successful_

example--if _we are not affected_ by any reverence for the

memory of our ancestors, who transmitted to us that freedom

in which they had been blest--if _we are not animated_ by any

regard for posterity, to whom, by the most sacred obligations,

we are bound to deliver down the invaluable inheritance--THEN,

indeed, any _minister_, or any _tool_ of a minister, or any

_creature_ of a tool of a minister--or any _lower instrument_ of

_administration_, if lower there be, is a _personage_ whom it

may be dangerous to offend.'

"In justification of the Letter-writer's loyalty, and the integrity

of his intentions, he declares in a note:

'If any person shall imagine that he discovers in these letters

the least disaffection towards our most excellent sovereign, and

the parliament of Great Britain, or the least dislike of the

dependence of these colonies on that kingdom, I beg that such

person will not form any judgment on _particular expressions_,

but will consider the _tenour_ of all the letters taken

together. In that case, I flatter myself that every unprejudiced

reader will be _convinced_, that the true interests of Great

Britain are as dear to me as they ought to be to every good

subject.

'If I am an enthusiast in anything, it is in my zeal for

the _perpetual dependance_ of these colonies on the mother

country.--A dependance founded on mutual benefits, the

continuance of which can be secured only by _mutual affections_.

Therefore it is, that with extreme apprehension I view the

smallest seeds of discontent, which are unwarily scattered

abroad. Fifty or sixty years will make astonishing alterations

in these colonies; and this consideration should render it

the business of Great Britain more and more to cultivate our

good dispositions toward her: but the misfortune is, that

those _great men_, who are wrestling for power at home, think

themselves very slightly interested in the prosperity of their

country _fifty_ or _sixty_ years hence; but are deeply concerned

in blowing up a popular clamour for supposed _immediate

advantages_.

'For my part, I regard Great Britain as a _bulwark_ happily

fixed between these colonies and the powerful nations of Europe.

That kingdom is our advanced post or fortification, _which

remaining safe_, we under its protection enjoying peace, may

diffuse the blessings of religion, science, and liberty, through

remote wildernesses. It is, therefore, incontestably our _duty_

and our _interest_ to support the strength of Great Britain.

When, confiding in that strength, she begins to forget from

whence it arose, it will be an easy thing to shew the source.

She may readily be reminded of the loud alarm spread among her

merchants and tradesmen, by the universal association of these

colonies, at the time of the _stamp-act_, not to import any of

her MANUFACTURES. In the year 1718, the Russians and Swedes

entered into an agreement, not to suffer Great Britain to export

any naval stores from their dominions, but in Russian or Swedish

ships, and at their own prices. Great Britain was distressed.

_Pitch_ and _tar_ rose to _three pounds_ a barrel. At length

she thought of getting these articles from the colonies; and

the attempt succeeding, they fell down to fifteen shillings. In

the year 1756, Great Britain was threatened with an invasion:

An easterly wind blowing for six weeks, she could not MAN

her fleet; and the whole nation was thrown into the utmost

consternation. The wind changed. The American ships arrived.

The fleet sailed in ten or fifteen days. There are some other

reflections on this subject worthy of the most deliberate

attention of the British parliament; but they are of such a

nature that I do not chuse to mention them publicly. I thought

I discharged my duty to my country, by taking the liberty, in

the year 1765, while the _stamp-act_ was in suspence, of writing

my sentiments to a man of the greatest influence at home, who

afterwards distinguished himself by espousing our cause in the

debates concerning the repeal of that act.'

Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania, to the Inhabitants of the British Colonies · 第 2 / 11 段