Quebec, for obtaining an Assembly, has the following hint: "The vast
enlargement of the province of Quebec by adding to it a new territory
that contains, according to Lord Hillsborough's estimation, of it,
five hundred and eleven millions of acres (that is, more land than
Spain, Italy, France, and Germany put together, and most of it good
land) is a measure that would require an ample discussion."----That
the reader may not suspect that these dimensions were convenient
for uncommon purposes of government, I shall quote the motives
assigned upon this occasion by the act regulating the government
of Quebec. "By the arrangements made by the royal proclamation, a
very large extent of [outlying] country, within which there were
several colonies and settlements of the subjects of France, who
claimed to remain therein under the faith of the said treaty, was
left without any provision being made for the administration of civil
government therein:" _i. e._ a few Indian traders were a pretext for
this appropriation of a tract of country, which, according to the
minister's estimate, was more than thirteen times larger than England
and Wales united, nearly one hundred and twenty eight times larger
than Jamaica, almost one-eighth part of Europe, and considerably more
than one-thirty-eighth part of the whole habitable earth (comparing
it with the several calculations in The Political Survey of Great
Britain, by Dr. Campbell, and in that of Jamaica, by Mr. Long.) "Now
_all_ the inhabitants of the province of Quebec," says this very
act, "amounted at the conquest to above sixty-five thousand [only,]
professing the religion of the church of Rome, and enjoying an
established form of constitution and system of laws." B.V.
[6] "Dr. Franklin (says Mr. Kalm the Swede,) and several other
gentlemen, frequently told me, that a powerful Indian, who possessed
Rhode Island, had sold it to the English for a pair of spectacles:
it is large enough for a prince's domain, and makes a peculiar
government at present. This Indian knew how to set a true value upon
a pair of spectacles: for undoubtedly if those glasses were not so
plentiful, and only a few of them could be found, they would, on
account of their great use, bear the same price with diamonds."
See Kalm's Travels into North America, Vol. I. p. 386, 387. "At
the time when the Swedes first arrived, they bought land at a very
inconsiderable price. For a piece of baize, or a pot full of brandy,
or the like, they could get a piece of ground, which at present would
be worth more than 290_l._ sterling." Ib. Vol. II. p. 118.--The truth
is, that the Indians considered their lands as mere _hunting-manors_,
and not as farms. B. V.
[7] To guard against the incursions of the Indians, a plan was
sent over to America (and, as I think, by authority) suggesting
the expediency of clearing away the woods and bushes from a tract
of land, a mile in breadth, and extending along the back of
the colonies. Unfortunately, besides the large expence of this
undertaking (which, if one acre cost 2_l._ sterling, and six hundred
and forty acres make a square mile, is 128,000_l._ _first cost_ for
every 100 miles) it was forgotten, that the Indians, like other
people, knew the difference between day and night, and that a mile of
advance and another of retreat were nothing to the celerity of such
an enemy.--This plan, it is said, was the work of Dean Tucker; and
possibly might contain many other particulars. The plans of Doctor
Franklin and Governor Pownall appear much more feasible. B. V.
[8] "According to a plan which had been proposed by Governor Pownall,
and approved of by congress."--Administration of the Colonies, Vol.
II. p. 143. B. V.
[9] This plan of union, it will appear from the next page, was
rejected; and another proposed to be substituted by the English
minister, which had for its chief object, the taking power from the
_people_ in the colonies in order to give it to the _crown_. B. V.
ALBANY PAPERS CONTINUED.
I. LETTER _to Governor Shirley, concerning the Imposition of direct
Taxes upon the Colonies, without their Consent_.[10]
_Tuesday Morning._
SIR,
I return you the loose Sheets of the plan, with thanks to your
excellency for communicating them.
I apprehend, that excluding the people of the colonies from all share
in the choice of the grand council will give extreme dissatisfaction;
as well as the taxing them by act of parliament, where they have no
representation. It is very possible, that this general government
might be as well and faithfully administered without the people, as
with them; but where heavy burdens are to be laid upon them, it has
been found useful, to make it as much as possible their own act; for
they bear better, when they have, or think they have, some share in
the direction; and when any public measures are generally grievous,
or even distasteful, to the people, the wheels of government move
more heavily.
FOOTNOTE:
[10] These letters to Governor Shirley first appeared in the London
Chronicle for Feb. 6-8, 1766, with an introduction signed _A Lover of
Britain_. In the beginning of the year 1776, they were republished
in Almon's Remembrancer, with an additional prefatory piece, under
the signature of _A Mourner over our Calamities_.--I shall explain
the subject of them in the words of one of these writers. "The Albany
Plan of Union was sent to the government here for approbation: had
it been approved and established by authority from hence, English
America thought itself sufficiently able to cope with the French,
without other assistance; several of the colonies having alone, in
former wars, withstood the whole power of the enemy, unassisted
not only by the mother-country, but by any of the neighbouring
provinces.--The plan, however, was not approved here; but a _New
one_ was formed instead of it; by which it was proposed, that 'the
governors of all the colonies, attended by one or two members of
their respective councils, should assemble, and concert measures
for the defence of the whole, erect forts where they judged proper,
and raise what troops they thought necessary, with power to draw
on the treasury here for the sums that should be wanted, and the
treasury to be reimbursed by a _tax laid on the colonies by act of
parliament_.'--This _New plan_ being communicated by Governor Shirley
to a gentleman of Philadelphia (Dr. Franklin) then in Boston (who
hath very eminently distinguished himself, before and since that
time, in the literary world, and whose judgment, penetration, and
candor, as well as his readiness and ability to suggest, forward,
or carry into execution, every scheme of public utility, hath most
deservedly endeared him, not only to our fellow-subjects throughout
the continent of North America, but to his numberless friends on
this side the Atlantic) occasioned the following remarks from him,
which perhaps may contribute in some degree to its being laid aside.
As they very particularly show the then sentiments of the Americans
on the subject of a parliamentary tax, before the French power in
that country was subjected, and before the late restraints on their
commerce; they satisfy me, and I hope they will convince your readers
(contrary to what has been advanced by some of your correspondents)
that those particulars have had no share in producing the present
opposition to such a tax, nor in disturbances occasioned by it,
which these papers indeed do almost prophetically foretel. For
this purpose, having accidentally fallen into my hands, they are
communicated to you by one who is, not _partially_, but in the _most
enlarged sense_,
"A LOVER OF BRITAIN." B. V.
II. LETTER _to the same; concerning direct Taxes in the Colonies
imposed without Consent, indirect Taxes, and the Albany Plan of
Union_.
_Wednesday Morning._
SIR,
I mentioned it yesterday to your excellency as my opinion, that
excluding the people of the colonies from all share in the choice
of the grand council would probably give extreme dissatisfaction,
as well as the taxing them by act of parliament, where they have
no representation. In matters of general concern to the people, and
especially where burdens are to be laid upon them; it is of use to
consider, as well what they will be apt to think and say, as what
they ought to think: I shall therefore, as your excellency requires
it of me, briefly mention what of either kind occurs to me on this
occasion.
First, they will say, and perhaps with justice, that the body of the
people in the colonies are as loyal, and as firmly attached to the
present constitution, and reigning family, as any subjects in the
king's dominions.
That there is no reason to doubt the readiness and willingness of
the representatives they may choose, to grant from time to time
such supplies for the defence of the country, as shall be judged
necessary, so far as their abilities will allow.
That the people in the colonies, who are to feel the immediate
mischiefs of invasion and conquest by an enemy, in the loss of their
estates, lives, and liberties, are likely to be better judges of the
quantity of forces necessary to be raised and maintained, forts to be
built and supported, and of their own abilities to bear the expence
than the parliament of England, at so great a distance.
That governors often come to the colonies merely to make fortunes,
with which they intend to return to Britain; are not always men of
the best abilities or integrity; have many of them no estates here,
nor any natural connections with us, that should make them heartily
concerned for our welfare; and might possibly be fond of raising and
keeping up more forces than necessary, from the profits accruing to
themselves, and to make provision for their friends and dependents.
That the counsellors in most of the colonies, being appointed by
the crown, on the recommendation of governors, are often persons of
small estates, frequently dependent on the governors for offices, and
therefore too much under influence.
That there is therefore great reason to be jealous of a power, in
such governors and councils, to raise such sums as they shall judge
necessary, by drafts on the lords of the treasury, to be afterwards
laid on the colonies by act of parliament, and paid by the people
here; since they might abuse it, by projecting useless expeditions,
harassing the people, and taking them from their labour to execute
such projects, merely to create offices and employments, and gratify
their dependents, and divide profits.
That the parliament of England is at a great distance, subject to
be misinformed and misled by such governors and councils, whose
united interests might probably secure them against the effect of any
complaint from hence.
That it is supposed an undoubted right of Englishmen, not to be taxed
but by their own consent, given through their representatives:
That the colonies have no representatives in parliament.
That to propose taxing them by parliament, and refuse them the
liberty of choosing a representative council, to meet in the
colonies, and consider and judge of the necessity of any general tax,
and the quantum, shows a suspicion of their loyalty to the crown,
or of their regard for their country, or of their common sense and
understanding; which they have not deserved.
That compelling the colonies to pay money without their consent,
would be rather like raising contributions in an enemy's country,
than taxing of Englishmen for their own public benefit.
That it would be treating them as a conquered people, and not as true
British subjects.
That a tax laid by the representatives of the colonies might be
easily lessened as the occasions should lessen; but, being once laid
by parliament under the influence of the representations made by
governors, would probably be kept up, and continued for the benefit
of governors; to the grievous burthen and discontentment of the
colonies, and prevention of their growth and increase.
That a power in governors, to march the inhabitants from one end of
the British and French colonies to the other, being a country of at
least one thousand five hundred miles long, without the approbation
or the consent of their representatives first obtained to such
expeditions, might be grievous and ruinous to the people, and would
put them upon a footing with the subjects of France in Canada, that
now groan under such oppression from their governor, who for two
years past has harrassed them with long and destructive marches to
Ohio.
That if the colonies in a body may be well governed by governors and
councils appointed by the crown, without representatives; particular
colonies may as well, or better be so governed; a tax may be laid
upon them all by act of parliament for support of government;
and their assemblies may be dismissed as an useless part of the
constitution.
That the powers proposed by the Albany plan of union, to be vested
in a grand council representative of the people, even with regard to
military matters, are not so great, as those which the colonies of
Rhode Island and Connecticut are entrusted with by their charters,
and have never abused; for by this plan, the president general is
appointed by the crown, and controls all by his negative; but in
those governments, the people choose the governor, and yet allow him
no negative.
That the British colonies bordering on the French are properly
frontiers of the British empire; and the frontiers of an empire are
properly defended at the joint expence of the body of the people in
such empire:--it would now be thought hard by act of parliament to
oblige the Cinque ports or sea coasts of Britain, to maintain the
whole navy, because they are more immediately defended by it, not
allowing them at the same time a vote in choosing members of the
parliament; and, as the frontiers of America bear the expence of
their own defence, it seems hard to allow them no share in voting the
money, judging of the necessity and sum, or advising the measures.
That besides the taxes necessary for the defence of the frontiers,
the colonies pay yearly great sums to the mother-country
unnoticed:--for 1. Taxes paid in Britain by the landholder or
artificer must enter into and increase the price of the produce of
land and manufactures made of it; and great part of this is paid by
consumers in the colonies, who thereby pay a considerable part of the
British taxes.
2. We are restrained in our trade with foreign nations; and where we
could be supplied with any manufacture cheaper from them, but must
buy the same dearer from Britain, the difference of price is a clear
tax to Britain.
3. We are obliged to carry a great part of our produce directly to
Britain; and where the duties laid upon it lessen its price to the
planter, or it sells for less than it would in foreign markets, the
difference is a tax paid to Britain.
4. Some manufactures we could make, but are forbidden, and must take
them of British merchants: the whole price is a tax paid to Britain.
5. By our greatly encreasing the demand and consumption of British
manufactures, their price is considerably raised of late years; the
advantage is clear profit to Britain, and enables its people better
to pay great taxes; and much of it being paid by us, is clear tax to
Britain.
6. In short, as we are not suffered to regulate our trade, and
restrain the importation and consumption of British superfluities
(as Britain can the consumption of foreign superfluities) our whole
wealth centers finally amongst the merchants and inhabitants of
Britain; and if we make them richer, and enable them better to pay
their taxes, it is nearly the same as being taxed ourselves, and
equally beneficial to the crown.
These kind of secondary taxes, however, we do not complain of, though
we have no share in the laying or disposing of them: but to pay
immediate heavy taxes, in the laying, appropriation, and disposition
of which, we have no part, and which perhaps we may know to be as
unnecessary as grievous, must seem hard measure to Englishmen, who
cannot conceive, that by hazarding their lives and fortunes in
subduing and settling new countries, extending the dominion, and
increasing the commerce of the mother-nation, they have forfeited
the native rights of Britons; which they think ought rather to be
given to them, as due to such merit, if they had been before in a
state of slavery. -- -- --
These, and such kinds of things as these, I apprehend, will be
thought and said by the people, if the proposed alteration of the
Albany plan should take place. Then the administration of the board
of governors and council so appointed, not having the representative
body of the people to approve and unite in its measures, and
conciliate the minds of the people to them, will probably become
suspected and odious; dangerous animosities and feuds will arise
between the governors and governed; and every thing go into confusion.
Perhaps I am too apprehensive in this matter; but having freely given
my opinion and reasons, your excellency can judge better than I,
whether there be any weight in them, and the shortness of the time
allowed me will I hope in some degree excuse the imperfections of
this scrawl.
With the greatest respect and fidelity, I have the honour to be
your excellency's most obedient,
and most humble servant,
B. FRANKLIN.
III. LETTER _to the same, on the Subject of uniting the
Colonies more intimately with Great Britain, by allowing them
Representatives in Parliament_.
_Boston, Dec. 22, 1754._
SIR,
Since the conversation your excellency was pleased to honour me
with, on the subject of _uniting the colonies_ more intimately with
Great Britain, by allowing them _representatives in parliament_, I
have something further considered that matter, and am of opinion,
that such an union would be very acceptable to the colonies,
provided they had a reasonable number of representatives allowed
them; and that all the old acts of parliament restraining the trade
or cramping the manufactures of the colonies be at the same time
repealed, and the British subjects _on this side the water_ put, in
those respects, on the same footing with those in Great Britain,
till the new parliament, representing the whole, shall think it
for the interest of the whole to re-enact some or all of them: it
is not that I imagine so many representatives will be allowed the
colonies, as to have any great weight by their numbers; but I think
there might be sufficient to occasion those laws to be better and
more impartially considered, and perhaps to overcome the interest
of a petty corporation, or of any particular set of artificers or
traders in England, who heretofore seem, in some instances, to have
been more regarded than all the colonies, or than was consistent with
the general interest, or best natural good. I think too, that the
government of the colonies by a parliament, in which they are fairly
represented, would be vastly more agreeable to the people, than the
method lately attempted to be introduced by royal instruction; as
well as more agreeable to the nature of an English constitution, and
to English liberty; and that such laws, as now seem to bear hard on
the colonies, would (when judged by such a parliament for the best
interest of the whole) be more cheerfully submitted to, and more
easily executed.
I should hope too, that by such an union, the people of Great
Britain, and the people of the colonies, would learn to consider
themselves, as not belonging to different communities with different
interest, but to one community with one interest; which I imagine
would contribute to strengthen the whole, and greatly lessen the
danger of future separations.
It is, I suppose, agreed to be the general interest of any state,
that its people be numerous and rich; men enow to fight in its
defence, and enow to pay sufficient taxes to defray the charge;
for these circumstances tend to the security of the state, and
its protection from foreign power. But it seems not of so much
importance, whether the fighting be done by John or Thomas, or the
tax paid by William or Charles. The iron manufacture employs and
enriches British subjects, but is it of any importance to the state,
whether the manufacturer lives at Birmingham or Sheffield, or both;
since they are still within its bounds, and their wealth and persons
still at its command? Could the Goodwin Sands be laid dry by banks,
and land equal to a large country thereby gained to England, and
presently filled with English inhabitants, would it be right to
deprive such inhabitants of the common privileges enjoyed by other
Englishmen, the right of vending their produce in the same ports,
or of making their own shoes; because a merchant or a shoemaker,
living on the old land, might fancy it more for his advantage to
trade or make shoes for them? Would this be right, even if the land
were gained at the expence of the state? And would it not seem less
right, if the charge and labour of gaining the additional territory
to Britain had been borne by the settlers themselves? and would not
the hardship appear yet greater, if the people of the new country
should be allowed no representatives in the parliament enacting
such impositions? Now I look on the colonies as so many countries
gained to Great Britain, and more advantageous to it, than if they
had been gained out of the seas around its coasts, and joined to its
lands; for being in different climates, they afford greater variety
of produce, and materials for more manufactures; and being separated
by the ocean, they increase much more its shipping and seamen: and,
since they are all included in the British empire, which has only
extended itself by their means; and the strength and wealth of the
parts is the strength and wealth of the whole; what imports it to the
general state, whether a merchant, a smith, or a hatter, grow rich in
Old or New England? and if, through increase of people, two smiths
are wanted for one employed before, why may not the _new_ smith be
allowed to live and thrive in the _new_ country, as well as the _old_
one in the _old_? In fine, why should the countenance of a state be
_partially_ afforded to its people, unless it be most in favour of
those who have most merit? and if there be any difference, those
who have most contributed to enlarge Britain's empire and commerce,
increase her strength, her wealth, and the numbers of her people, at
the risque of their own lives and private fortunes in new and strange
countries, methinks ought rather to expect some preference. With the
greatest respect and esteem, I have the honour to be
Your Excellency's most obedient
and humble Servant,
B. FRANKLIN.
_Plan for settling two Western Colonies in North America, with
Reasons for the Plan, 1754[11]._
The great country back of the Apalachian mountains, on both sides
the Ohio, and between that river and the lakes is now well known,
both to the English and French, to be one of the finest in North
America, for the extreme richness and fertility of the land; the
healthy temperature of the air, and mildness of the climate; the
plenty of hunting, fishing, and fowling; the facility of trade
with the Indians; and the vast convenience of inland navigation or
water-carriage by the lakes and great rivers, many hundred of leagues
around.
From these natural advantages it must undoubtedly (perhaps in less
than another century) become a populous and powerful dominion; and a
great accession of power, either to England or France.
The French are now making open encroachments on these territories, in
defiance of our known rights; and, if we longer delay to settle that
country, and suffer them to possess it,--these _inconveniences and
mischiefs_ will probably follow:
1. Our people, being confined to the country between the sea and the
mountains, cannot much more increase in number; people increasing
in proportion to their room and means of subsistence. (See the
Observations on the Increase of Mankind, &c. Vol. II.)
2. The French will increase much more, by that acquired room and
plenty of subsistence, and become a great people behind us.