book of Spirit of Laws.
The third, fourth, fifth, and sixth resolves are thus expressed.
III. "That it is inseparably essential to the freedom of a people
and the undoubted right of Englishmen, that no tax be imposed on
them, but with their own consent, given personally or by their
representatives."
IV. "That the people of the colonies are not, and from their local
circumstances cannot be represented in the House of Commons, in
Great-Britain."
V. "That the only representatives of the people of the colonies, are
the persons chosen therein by themselves; and that no taxes ever
have been, or can be constitutionally imposed on them, but by their
respective legislatures."
VI. "That all supplies to the crown being free gifts of the people,
it is unreasonable and inconsistent with the principles and spirit
of the British constitution, for the people of Great-Britain to
grant to his Majesty the property of the colonies."
Here is no distinction made, between internal and external taxes.
It is evident from the short reasoning thrown into these resolves
that every imposition "to grant to his Majesty the property of the
colonies," was thought a "tax;" and that every such imposition if
laid any other way "but with their consent, given personally, or by
their representatives;" was not only "unreasonable, and inconsistent
with the principles and spirit of the British constitution," but
destructive "to the freedom of a people."
This language is clear and important. A "tax" means an imposition
to raise money. Such persons therefore as speak of internal and
external "taxes," I pray may pardon me, if I object to that
expression as applied to the privileges and interests of these
colonies. There may be external and internal impositions, founded
on different principles, and having different tendencies; every
"tax" being an imposition, tho' every imposition is not a "tax." But
all "taxes" are founded on the same principle, and have the same
tendency.
"External impositions for the regulation of our trade, do not grant
to his Majesty the property of the colonies." They only prevent the
colonies acquiring property in things not necessary, and in a manner
judged to be injurious to the welfare of the whole empire. But the
last statute respecting us, "grants to his Majesty the property of
these colonies," by laying duties on manufactures of Great-Britain,
which they must take, and which he settled them, in order that they
should take.
What[21] "tax" can be more "internal" than this? Here is money drawn
without their consent from a society, who have constantly enjoyed
a constitutional mode of raising all money among themselves. The
payment of this tax they have no possible method of avoiding, as
they cannot do without the commodities on which it is laid, and
they cannot manufacture these commodities themselves; besides, if
this unhappy country should be so lucky as to elude this act, by
getting parchment enough to use in the place of paper, or reviving
the antient method of writing on wax and bark, and by inventing
something to serve instead of glass, her ingenuity would stand
her in little stead; for then the parliament would have nothing
to do, but to prohibit manufactures, or to lay a tax on hats and
woollen cloths, which they have already prohibited the colonies
from supplying each other with; or on instruments and tools of
steel and iron, which they have prohibited the provincials from
manufacturing at all[22] And then what little gold and silver they
have, must be torn from their hands, or they will not be able in a
short time, to get an ax[23] for cutting their firewood, nor a plough
for raising their food.--In what respect therefore, I beg leave to
ask, is the late act preferable to the Stamp-act, or more consistent
with the liberties of the colonies? "I regard them both with equal
apprehension, and think they ought to be in the same manner opposed."
"_Habemus quidem senatus consultum--tanquam
gladium in vagina repositum_"
We have a statute like a sword in the scabbard.
A FARMER.
[21] It seems to be evident, that Mr. Pitt, in his defence
of America, during the debate concerning the repeal of the
Stamp-act, by "_internal taxes_" meant any duties "_for the
purpose of raising a revenue_;" and by "_external taxes_," meant
"_duties imposed for the regulation of trade_." His expressions
are these.--"If the gentleman does not understand the difference
between internal and external taxes, I cannot help it; but there
is a plain distinction between taxes levied for the purposes
of raising a revenue, and duties imposed for the regulation
of trade, for the accommodation of the subject; altho' in the
consequences, some revenue might incidentally arise from the
latter."
These words were in Mr. Pitt's reply to Mr. Grenville, who
said he could not understand the difference between external
and internal taxes. But Mr. Pitt in his first speech, had
made no such distinction; and his meaning, when he mentions
the distinction, appears to be--that by "_external taxes_,"
he intended impositions, for the purpose of regulating the
intercourse of the colonies with others; and by "_internal
taxes_," he intended impositions, for the purpose of taking
money from them.
In every other part of his speeches on that occasion, his words
confirm this construction of his expressions. The following
extracts will shew how positive and general were his assertions
of our right.
"IT IS MY OPINION THAT THIS KINGDOM HAS NO RIGHT TO LAY A TAX
UPON THE COLONIES." "THE AMERICANS ARE THE SONS NOT THE BASTARDS
OF ENGLAND. TAXATION IS NO PART OF THE GOVERNING OR LEGISLATIVE
POWER." "The taxes are a voluntary gift and grant of the Commons
alone. In legislation the three estates of the realm are alike
concerned, but the concurrence of the peers and the crown to a
tax, is only necessary to close with the form of a law. The gift
and grant is of the Commons alone." "The distinction between
legislation and taxation is essentially necessary to liberty."
"_The Commons of America represented in their several assemblies
have ever been in possession of the exercise of this, their
constitutional right, of giving and granting their own money.
They would have been slaves, if they had not enjoyed it._" "The
idea of a virtual representation of America in this house, is
the most contemptible idea that ever entered into the head of
man. It does not deserve a serious refutation."
He afterwards shews the unreasonableness of Great-Britain taxing
America, thus--"When I had the honour of serving his Majesty, I
availed myself of the means of information, which I derived from
my office: I speak therefore from knowledge. My materials were
good, I was at pains to collect, to digest, to consider them:
_and I will be bold to affirm that the profit to Great-Britain
from the trade of the colonies, thro' all its branches, is two
millions a year. This is the fund that carried you triumphantly
thro' the last war._ The estates that were rented at two
thousand pounds a year, threescore years ago, are at three
thousand pounds at present. Those estates sold then from fifteen
to eighteen years purchase; the same may now be sold for thirty.
YOU OWE THIS TO AMERICA. THIS IS THE PRICE THAT AMERICA PAYS
YOU FOR HER PROTECTION,"--"I dare not say how much higher these
profits may be augmented."--"Upon the whole, I will beg leave
to tell the house what is really my opinion: it is, THAT THE
STAMP-ACT BE REPEALED ABSOLUTELY, TOTALLY, AND IMMEDIATELY. That
the reason for the repeal be assigned, because it was founded on
an erroneous principle."
[22] "And that pig and bar iron made in his Majesty's colonies
in America may be further manufactured in this kingdom, be it
further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that from and after
the twenty-fourth day of June, 1750, no mill or other engine
for slitting or rolling of iron, or any plaiting forge to work
with a tilt hammer, or any furnace for making steel, shall
be erected, or after such erection continued, in any of his
Majesty's colonies in America."
3 Geo. II. chap. 29. sect. 9.
[23] Though these particulars are mentioned as being so
absolutely necessary, yet perhaps they are not more so than
glass, in our severe winters, to keep out the cold, from
our houses; or than paper, without which such inexpressible
confusion must ensue.
LETTER V.
_Beloved Countrymen_,
Perhaps the objection to the late act, imposing duties upon paper,
&c. might have been safely rested on the arguments drawn from the
universal conduct of parliaments and ministers, from the first
existence of these colonies, to the administration of Mr. Grenville.
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 on the colonies?
And how clear, how cogent must that reason be, to which every
parliament and every minister, 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 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 dependencies, and the
connection of the whole in good order.
The people of Great-Britain in support of their privileges, boast
much of their antiquity. Yet it may well be questioned, if there is
a single privilege of a British subject, supported by longer, more
solemn, or more uninterrupted testimony, than the exclusive right
of taxation in these colonies. The people of Great-Britain consider
that kingdom as the sovereign of these colonies, and would now annex
to that sovereignty a prerogative never heard of before. How would
they bear this, was the case their own? What would they think of
a new prerogative claimed by the crown? We may guess what their
conduct would be from the transports of passion into which they fell
about the late embargo, laid to remove the most emergent necessities
of state, admitting of no delay; and for which there were numerous
precedents. Let our liberties be treated with the same tenderness,
and it is all we desire.
Explicit as the conduct of parliaments, for so many ages, is, to
prove that no money can be levied on these colonies, by parliament
for the purpose of raising a revenue; yet it is not the only
evidence in our favour.
Every one of the most material arguments against the legality of the
Stamp-act operates with equal force against the act now objected to;
but as they are well known, it seems unnecessary to repeat them here.
This general one only shall be considered at present. That tho'
these colonies are dependant on Great-Britain; and tho' she has a
legal power to make laws for preserving that dependance; yet it
is not necessary for this purpose, nor essential to the relation
between a mother-country and her colonies, as was eagerly contended
by the advocates for the Stamp-act, that she should raise money upon
them without their consent.
Colonies were formerly planted by warlike nations, to keep
their enemies in awe; to relieve their country overburthened
with inhabitants; or to discharge a number of discontented and
troublesome citizens. But in more modern ages, the spirit of
violence being in some measure, if the expression may be allowed,
sheathed in commerce, colonies have been settled by the nations of
Europe for the purposes of trade. These purposes were to be attained
by the colonies raising for their mother country those things which
she did not produce herself; and by supplying themselves from her
with things they wanted. These were the national objects in the
commencement of our colonies, and have been uniformly so in their
promotion.
To answer these grand purposes, perfect liberty was known to be
necessary; all history proving, that trade and freedom are nearly
related to each other. By a due regard to this wise and just plan,
the infant colonies exposed in the unknown climates, and unexplored
wildernesses of this new world, lived, grew, and flourished.
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, on 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 all 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 not be disposed of by[24] any one but themselves--or
to use the 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."[25]
[24] The power of taxing themselves, was the privileges of which
the English were, with reason, particularly jealous.
Hume's hist. of England.
[25] Mic. iv. 4.
Can any man of candour and knowledge deny, that these institutions,
form an affinity between Great-Britain and her colonies, that
sufficiently secures their dependance 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 the first emigration to
this moment--and all these things have happened, without an instance
of Great-Britain laying taxes to levy money upon them.
How many British authors[26] have remonstrated that the present
wealth, power and glory of their country are founded on 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 wise people, by the
sordid acts 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 that passion, which they themselves have
barely excited?
[26] It has been said in the house of commons, when complaints
have been made of the decay of trade to any part of Europe,
"That such things were not worth regard, as Great-Britain was
possest of colonies that could consume more of her manufactures
than she was able to supply them with."
"As the case now stands, we shall shew that the plantations are
a spring of wealth to this nation, that they work for us, that
their treasure centers all here, and that the laws have tied
them fast enough to us; so that it must be through our own fault
and mismanagement, if they become independent of England."
Davenant on the plantat. trade.
"It is better that the islands should be supplied from the
Northern Colonies than from England, for this reason; the
provisions we might send to Barbados, Jamaica, &c. would be
unimproved product of the earth, as grain of all kinds, or such
product where there is little got by the improvement, as malt,
salt, beef and pork; indeed the exportation of salt fish thither
would be more advantageous, but the goods which we send to the
northern colonies are such, whose improvement may be justly
said, one with another to be near four fifths of the value of
the whole commodity, as apparel, household furniture, and many
other things."
Idem.
"New-England is the most prejudicial plantation to the kingdom
of England; and yet, to do right to that most industrious
English colony, I must confess, that though we lose by their
unlimited trade with other foreign plantations, yet we are very
great gainers by their direct trade to and from Old England.
Our yearly exportations of English manufactures, malt and
other goods, from hence thither, amounting, in my opinion,
to ten times the value of what is imported from thence;
which calculation I do not make at random, but upon mature
consideration, and peradventure, upon as much experience in this
very trade, as any other person will pretend to; and therefore,
whenever reformation of our correspondency in trade with that
people shall be thought on, it will, in my poor judgment,
require great tenderness, and very serious circumspection."
Sir Josiah Child's discourse on trade.
"Our plantations spend mostly our English manufactures, and
those of all sorts almost imaginable, in egregious quantities,
and employ near two thirds of all our English shipping; so that
we have more people in England, by reason of our plantations in
America."
Idem.
Sir Josiah Child says, in another part of his work, "that not
more than fifty families are maintained in England by the
refining of sugar." From whence, and from what Davenant says, it
is plain, that the advantages here said to be derived from the
plantations by England, must be meant chiefly of the continental
colonies.
"I shall sum up my whole remarks on our American colonies, with
this observation, that as they are a certain annual revenue
of several millions sterling to their mother country, they
ought carefully to be protected, duly encouraged, and every
opportunity that presents, improved for their increasment and
advantage, as every one they can possibly reap, must at least
return to us with interest."
Beawes's Lex merc. red.
"We may safely advance, that our trade and navigation are
greatly increased by our colonies, and that they really are
a source of treasure and naval power to this kingdom, since
they work for us, and their treasure centers here. Before
their settlement, our manufactures were few, and those but
indifferent; the number of English merchants very small, and the
whole shipping of the nation much inferior to what now belongs
to the northern colonies only. These are certain facts. But
since their establishment, our condition has altered for the
better, almost to a degree beyond credibility. Our manufactures
are prodigiously encreased, chiefly by the demand for them
in the plantations, where they at least take off one half,
and supply us with many valuable commodities for exportation,
which is as great an emolument to the mother kingdom, as to the
plantations themselves."
Postlethwait's universal dict. of
trade and commerce.
"Most of the nations of Europe have interfered with us more
or less, in divers of our staple manufactures, within half
a century, not only in our woollen, but in our lead and tin
manufactures, as well as our fisheries."
Idem.
"The inhabitants of our colonies, by carrying on a trade with
their foreign neighbours, do not only occasion a greater
quantity of the goods and merchandizes of Europe being sent from
hence to them, and a greater quantity of the product of America
to be sent from them thither, which would otherways be carried
from, and brought to Europe by foreigners, but an increase of
the seamen and navigation in those parts, which is of great
strength and security, as well as of great advantage to our
plantations in general. And though some of our colonies are not
only for preventing the importations of all goods of the same
species they produce, but suffer particular planters to keep
great runs of land in their possession uncultivated with design
to prevent new settlements, whereby they imagine the prices of
their commodities may be affected; yet if it be considered, that
the markets of Great-Britain depend on the markets of all Europe
in general, and that the European markets in general depend on
the proportion between the annual consumption and the whole
quantity of each species annually produced by all nations; it
must follow, that whether we or foreigners, are the producers,
carriers, importers and exporters of American produce, yet their
respective prices in each colony (the difference of freight,
customs and importations considered) will always bear proportion
to the general consumption of the whole quantity of each sort,
produced in all colonies, and in all parts, allowing only for
the usual contingencies, that trade and commerce, agriculture
and manufactures are liable to in all countries."
Idem.
"It is certain, that from the very time Sir Walter Raleigh,
the father of our English colonies, and his associates, first
projected these establishments, there have been persons who
have found an interest, in misrepresenting, or lessening
the value of them.--The attempts were called chimerical and
dangerous. Afterwards many malignant suggestions were made,
about sacrificing so many Englishmen to the obstinate desire of
settling colonies in countries which then produced very little
advantage. But as these difficulties were gradually surmounted,
those complaints vanished. No sooner were these lamentations
over, but others arose in their stead; when it could be no
longer said, that the colonies were useless, it was alledged
that they were not useful enough to their mother country; that
while we were loaded with taxes, they were absolutely free; that
the planters lived like princes, when the inhabitants of England
laboured hard for a tolerable subsistence."
Idem.
"Before the settlement of these colonies," says Postlethwayt,
"our manufactures were few, and those but indifferent. In those
days we had not only our naval stores, but our ships from our
neighbours. Germany furnished us with all things made of metal,
even to nails. Wine, paper, linens, and a thousand other things
came from France. Portugal supplied us with sugar; all the
products of America were poured into us from Spain; and the
Venetians and Genoese retailed to us the commodities of the
East-Indies, at their own price."
"If it be asked, whether foreigners for what goods they take of
us, do not pay on that consumption a great portion of our taxes?
It is admitted they do."
Postlethwayt's Great-Britain's true system.