money in the colonies. It was well known, that the colonists
universally were of opinion, that no money could be levied from
English subjects but by their own consent, given by themselves or
their chosen representatives; that therefore whatever money was to be
raised from the people in the colonies must first be granted by their
assemblies, as the money raised in Britain is first to be granted by
the house of commons; that this right of granting their own money was
essential to English liberty; and that if any man, or body of men in
which they had no representative of their choosing, could tax them
at pleasure, they could not be said to have any property, any thing
they could call their own. But as these opinions did not hinder their
granting money voluntarily and amply, whenever the crown, by its
servants, came into their assemblies (as it does into its parliaments
of Britain or Ireland) and demanded aids; therefore that method was
chosen, rather than the hateful one of arbitrary taxes.
I do not undertake here to support these opinions of the Americans;
they have been refuted by a late act of parliament, declaring its own
power; which very parliament, however, showed wisely so much tender
regard to those inveterate prejudices, as to repeal a tax that had
militated against them. And those prejudices are still so fixed and
rooted in the Americans, that it has been supposed, not a single
man among them has been convinced of his error, even by that act of
parliament.
The person then, who first projected to lay aside the accustomed
method of requisition, and to raise money on America by _stamps_,
seems not to have acted wisely, in deviating from that method
(which the colonists looked upon as constitutional) and thwarting
unnecessarily the fixed prejudices of so great a number of the king's
subjects. It was not, however, for want of knowledge, that what he
was about to do would give them offence; he appears to have been
very sensible of this, and apprehensive that it might occasion some
disorders; to prevent or suppress which, he projected another bill,
that was brought in the same session with the stamp act, whereby
it was to be made lawful for military officers in the colonies to
quarter their soldiers in private houses. This seemed intended to awe
the people into a compliance with the other act. Great opposition
however being raised here against the bill by the agents from the
colonies and the merchants trading thither (the colonists declaring,
that under such a power in the army, no one could look on his house
as his own, or think he had a home, when soldiers might be thrust
into it and mixed with his family at the pleasure of an officer) that
part of the bill was dropped; but there still remained a clause, when
it passed into a law, to oblige the several assemblies to provide
quarters for the soldiers, furnishing them with firing, bedding,
candles, small beer or rum, and sundry other articles, at the expence
of the several provinces. And this act continued in force when the
stamp act was repealed; though, if obligatory on the assemblies, it
equally militated against the American principle above mentioned,
that money is not to be raised on English subjects without their
consent.
The colonies, nevertheless, being put into high good humour by the
repeal of the stamp act, chose to avoid a fresh dispute upon the
other, it being temporary and soon to expire, never, as they hoped,
to revive again; and in the mean time they, by various ways, in
different colonies, provided for the quartering of the troops, either
by acts of their own assemblies, without taking notice of the act
of parliament, or by some variety or small diminution, as of salt
and vinegar, in the supplies required by the act; that what they
did might appear a voluntary act of their own, and not done in due
obedience to an act of parliament, which, according to their ideas of
their rights, they thought hard to obey.
It might have been well if the matter had then passed without
notice; but a governor having written home an angry and aggravating
letter upon this conduct in the assembly of his province, the
outed [proposer[76]] of the stamp act and his adherents (then in
the opposition) raised such a clamour against America, as being in
rebellion, and against those who had been for the repeal of the stamp
act, as having thereby been encouragers of this supposed rebellion;
that it was thought necessary to enforce the quartering act by
another act of parliament, taking away from the province of New York
(which had been the most explicit in its refusal) all the powers of
legislation, till it should have complied with that act. The news
of which greatly alarmed the people every where in America, as the
language of such an act seemed to them to be--obey implicitly laws
made by the parliament of Great Britain to raise money on you without
your consent, or you shall enjoy no rights or privileges at all.
At the same time a person lately in high office[77] projected the
levying more money from America, by new duties on various articles
of our own manufacture (as glass, paper, painters' colours, &c.)
appointing a new board of customs, and sending over a set of
commissioners, with large salaries, to be established at Boston,
who were to have the care of collecting those duties, which were by
the act expressly mentioned to be intended for the payment of the
salaries of governors, judges, and other officers of the crown in
America; it being a pretty general opinion here, that those officers
ought not to depend on the people there, for any part of their
support.
It is not my intention to combat this opinion. But perhaps it may be
some satisfaction to your readers, to know what ideas the Americans
have on the subject. They say then, as to governors, that they
are not like princes whose posterity have an inheritance in the
government of a nation, and therefore an interest in its prosperity;
they are generally strangers to the provinces they are sent to
govern; have no estate, natural connection, or relation there, to
give them an affection for the country; that they come only to make
money as fast as they can; are sometimes men of vicious characters
and broken fortunes, sent by a minister merely to get them out of the
way; that as they intend staying in the country no longer than their
government continues, and purpose to leave no family behind them,
they are apt to be regardless of the good-will of the people, and
care not what is said or thought of them after they are gone. Their
situation at the same time gives them many opportunities of being
vexatious; and they are often so, notwithstanding their dependence
on the assemblies for all that part of their support, that does not
arise from fees established by law, but would probably be much more
so, if they were to be supported by money drawn from the people
without their consent or good-will, which is the professed design of
this new act. That if by means of these forced duties, government
is to be supported in America, without the intervention of the
assemblies, their assemblies will soon be looked upon as useless; and
a governor will not call them, as having nothing to hope from their
meeting, and perhaps something to fear from their inquiries into,
and remonstrances against, his mal-administration. That thus the
people will be deprived of their most essential right. That it being
(as at present) a governor's interest to cultivate the good-will,
by promoting the welfare of the people he governs, can be attended
with no prejudice to the mother-country, since all the laws he may be
prevailed on to give his assent to are subject to revision here, and
if reported against by the board of trade, are immediately repealed
by the crown; nor dare he pass any law contrary to his instructions;
as he holds his office during the pleasure of the crown, and his
securities are liable for the penalties of their bonds, if he
contravenes those instructions. This is what they say as to governors.
As to _judges_, they alledge, that being appointed from hence, and
holding their commissions not during good behaviour, as in Britain,
but during pleasure: all the weight of interest or influence would
be thrown into one of the scales (which ought to be held even) if
the salaries are also to be paid out of duties raised upon the
people without their consent, and independent of their assemblies
approbation or disapprobation of the judges behaviour. That it is
true, judges should be free from all influence; and therefore,
whenever government here will grant commissions to able and honest
judges during good behaviour, the assemblies will settle permanent
and ample salaries on them during their commissions; but at present,
they have no other means of getting rid of an ignorant or an unjust
judge (and some of scandalous characters have, they say, been
sometimes sent them) left, but by starving them out.
I do not suppose these reasonings of theirs will appear here to have
much weight. I do not produce them with an expectation of convincing
your readers. I relate them merely in pursuance of the task I have
imposed on myself, to be an impartial historian of American facts and
opinions. -- --
The colonists being thus greatly alarmed, as I said before, by the
news of the act for abolishing the legislature of New York, and the
imposition of these new duties, professedly for such disagreeable
purposes (accompanied by a new set of revenue officers, with large
appointments, which gave strong suspicions, that more business of
the same kind was soon to be provided for them, that they might
earn their salaries) began seriously to consider their situation;
and to revolve afresh in their minds, grievances, which, from their
respect and love for this country, they had long borne and seemed
almost willing to forget. They reflected how lightly the interest
of _all_ America had been estimated here, when the interests of
a _few_ of the inhabitants of Great Britain happened to have the
smallest competition with it. That the whole American people was
forbidden the advantage of a direct importation of wine, oil, and
fruit, from Portugal; but must take them loaded with all the expence
of a voyage one thousand leagues round about, being to be landed
first in England, to be re-shipped for America; expences amounting,
in war-time, at least to thirty pounds per cent more than otherwise
they would have been charged with; and all this merely, that a few
Portugal merchants in London may gain a commission on those goods
passing through their hands. (Portugal merchants, by the bye, that
can complain loudly of the smallest hardships laid on their trade by
foreigners, and yet even in the last year could oppose with all their
influence the giving ease to their fellow-subjects labouring under so
heavy an oppression!) That on a slight complaint of a few Virginia
merchants, nine colonies had been restrained from making paper-money,
become absolutely necessary to their internal commerce, from the
constant remittance of their gold and silver to Britain.--But not
only the interest of a particular body of _merchants_, but the
interest of any small body of British _tradesmen or artificers_ has
been found, they say, to outweigh that of all the king's subjects in
the colonies. There cannot be a stronger natural right than that of
a man's making the best profit he can of the natural produce of his
lands, provided he does not thereby hurt the state in general. Iron
is to be found every where in America, and beaver are the natural
produce of that country: hats, and nails and steel are wanted there
as well as here. It is of no importance to the common welfare of the
empire, whether a subject of the king gets his living by making hats
on this, or on that side of the water. Yet the hatters of England
have prevailed to obtain an act in their own favour, restraining
that manufacture in America; in order to oblige the Americans to
send their beaver to England to be manufactured, and purchase back
the hats, loaded with the charges of a double transportation. In
the same manner have a few nail-makers, and still a smaller body of
steel-makers (perhaps there are not half a dozen of these in England)
prevailed totally to forbid by an act of parliament the erecting of
slitting-mills, or steel furnaces in America; that the Americans may
be obliged to take all their nails for their buildings, and steel for
their tools, from these artificers, under the same disadvantages.[78]
Added to these, the Americans remembered the act authorizing the most
cruel insult that perhaps was ever offered by one people to another,
that of _emptying our gaols_ into their settlements; Scotland too
having within these two years obtained the privilege it had not
before, of sending its rogues and villains also to the plantations--I
say, reflecting on these things, they said one to another (their
newspapers are full of such discourses) "These people are not content
with making a monopoly of us (forbidding us to trade with any other
country of Europe, and compelling us to buy every thing of them,
though in many articles we could furnish ourselves ten, twenty, and
even to fifty per cent cheaper elsewhere;) but now they have as good
as declared they have a right to tax us ad libitum, internally and
externally; and that our constitutions and liberties shall all be
taken away, if we do not submit to that claim.
"They are not content with the high prices at which they sell us
their goods, but have now begun to enhance those prices by new
duties, and by the expensive apparatus of a new set of officers,
appear to intend an augmentation and multiplication of those
burthens, that shall still be more grievous to us. Our people have
been foolishly fond of their superfluous modes and manufactures,
to the impoverishing our own country, carrying off all our cash,
and loading us with debt; they will not suffer us to restrain the
luxury of our inhabitants, as they do that of their own, by laws:
they can make laws to discourage or prohibit the importation of
French superfluities: but though those of England are as ruinous to
us as the French ones are to them, if we make a law of that kind,
they immediately repeal it. Thus they get all our money from us by
trade; and every profit we can any where make by our fisheries,
our produce, or our commerce, centres finally with them;--but this
does not satisfy.--It is time then to take care of ourselves by
the best means in our power. Let us unite in solemn resolution and
engagements with and to each other, that we will give these new
officers as little trouble as possible, by not consuming the British
manufactures on which they are to levy the duties. Let us agree to
consume no more of their expensive gewgaws. Let us live frugally,
and let us industriously manufacture what we can for ourselves:
thus we shall be able honourably to discharge the debts we already
owe them; and after that, we may be able to keep some money in
our country, not only for the uses of our internal commerce, but
for the service of our gracious sovereign, whenever he shall have
occasion for it, and think proper to require it of us in the old
constitutional manner.--For notwithstanding the reproaches thrown
out against us in their public papers and pamphlets, notwithstanding
we have been reviled in their senate as rebels and traitors, we are
truly a loyal people. Scotland has had its rebellions, and England
its plots against the present royal family; but _America is untainted
with those crimes_; there is in it scarce a man, there is not a
single native of our country, who is not firmly attached to his King
by principle and by affection. But a new kind of loyalty seems to
be required of us, a loyalty to parliament; a loyalty, that is to
extend, it is said, to a surrender of all our properties, whenever
a house of commons, in which there is not a single member of our
chusing, shall think fit to grant them away without our consent, and
to a patient suffering the loss of our privileges as Englishmen, if
we cannot submit to make such surrender. We were separated too far
from Britain by the ocean, but we were united to it by respect and
love; so that we could at any time freely have spent our lives and
little fortunes in its cause: but this unhappy new system of politics
tends to dissolve those bands of union, and to sever us for ever."
These are the wild ravings of the, at present, half-distracted
Americans. To be sure, no reasonable man in England can approve
of such sentiments, and, as I said before, I do not pretend to
support or justify them: but I sincerely wish, for the sake of the
manufactures and commerce of Great Britain, and for the sake of the
strength, which a firm union with our growing colonies would give us,
that these people had never been thus needlessly driven out of their
senses.
I am, yours, &c.
F. S.[79]
FOOTNOTES:
[75] This letter first appeared in a London paper, January 7, 1768,
and was afterwards reprinted as a postscript to The true Sentiments
of America, printed for Almon, 1768. B. V.
[76] Mr. George Grenville. B. V.
[77] Mr. Charles Townsend. B. V.
[78] I shall here give the reader the note at the end of the fourth
paragraph of the farmer's seventh letter (written by Mr. Dickenson.)
"Many remarkable instances might be produced of the extraordinary
inattention with which bills of great importance concerning these
colonies have passed in parliament; which is owing, as it is
supposed, to the bills being brought in, by the persons who have
points to carry, so artfully framed, that it is not easy for the
members in general in the haste of business, to discover their
tendency.
"The following instances show the truth of this remark.
"When Mr. Grenville, in the violence of reformation and innovation,
formed the 4th George III. chap. 15th, for regulating the American
trade, the word 'Ireland' was dropt in the clause relating to our
iron and lumber, so that we could send these articles to no other
part of Europe, but to Great Britain. This was so unreasonable a
restriction, and so contrary to the sentiments of the legislature,
for many years before, that it is surprising it should not have been
taken notice of in the house. However, the bill passed into a law.
But when the matter was explained, this restriction was taken off in
a subsequent act.
"I cannot say, how long after the taking off this restriction, as I
have not the acts, but I think in less than eighteen months, another
act of parliament passed, in which the word 'Ireland' was left out as
it had been before. The matter being a second time explained was a
second time regulated.
"Now if it be considered, that the omission mentioned, struck off,
with one word, so very great a part of our trade, it must appear
remarkable: and equally so is the method by which rice became an
enumerated commodity, and therefore could be carried to Great Britain
only.
"The enumeration was obtained, (says Mr. Gee on Trade, p. 32) by
one Cole, a captain of a ship, employed by a company then trading
to Carolina; for several ships going from England thither, and
purchasing rice for Portugal, prevented the aforesaid captain of a
loading. Upon his coming home he possessed one Mr. Lowndes, a member
of parliament, (who was frequently employed to prepare bills) with an
opinion, that carrying rice directly to Portugal was a prejudice to
the trade of England, and privately got a clause into an act to make
it an enumerated commodity, by which means he secured a freight to
himself. But the consequence proved a vast loss to the nation.
"I find that this clause, 'privately got into an act, for the benefit
of Captain Cole, to the vast loss of the nation,' is foisted into the
3d Anne, chapter 5th, intitled, 'an act for granting to her majesty
a further subsidy on wines and merchandizes imported,' with which
it has no more connection, than with 34th Edward I. 34th and 35th
of Henry VIII. or the 25th Charles II. which provide that no person
shall be taxed but by himself or his representatives." B. V.
[79] F. S. possibly means Franklin's Seal. The paper, however, is
undoubtedly the production of Dr. Franklin.
In the _collection of tracts on the subjects of taxing the British
colonies in America, and regulating their trade_ (printed in 1773,
in 4 vols. 8vo. by Almon) I find _two_ papers, said there to have
been published originally in 1739, and to have been drawn up by a
club of American merchants, at the head of whom were Sir William
Keith (governor of Pensylvania), Joshua Gee, and many other eminent
persons. The _first_ paper proposes the raising a small body of
regular troops under the command of an officer appointed by the
crown and independent of the governors (who were nevertheless to
assist him in council on emergent occasions) in order to protect the
Indian trade, and take care of the boundaries and back settlements.
They were to be supported by a revenue to be established by _act of
parliament_, in America; which revenue was to arise out of a duty
on _stampt paper and parchment_. The _second_ paper goes into the
particulars of this proposed stamp duty, offers reasons for extending
it over all the British plantations, and recites its supposed
advantages. If these papers are at all genuine (a fact about which I
am not in the least informed) Mr. George Grenville does not appear to
have been original in conceiving _stamps_ as a proper subject for his
new tax. See ib. vol. I. B. V.
_Letter concerning the Gratitude of America, and the probability
and effects of an Union with Great Britain; and concerning the
Repeal or Suspension of the Stamp-Act._[80]
_Jan. 6, 1766._
SIR,