Yours, affectionately,
B. FRANKLIN.
FOOTNOTE:
[96] I cannot pretend to say what is the publication promised in this
letter; unless it alludes to the one given above at p. 225; in which
case there is a mistake in the date of the year. B. V.
_Queries from Mr. Strahan._
TO DR. FRANKLIN[97].
_Nov. 21, 1769._
DEAR SIR,
In the many conversations we have had together about our present
disputes with North America, we perfectly agreed in wishing they may
be brought to a speedy and happy conclusion. How this is to be done,
is not so easily ascertained.
_Two objects_, I humbly apprehend, his majesty's servants have now in
contemplation. 1st. To relieve the colonies from the taxes complained
of, which they certainly had no hand in imposing. 2dly, To preserve
the honour, the dignity, and the supremacy of the British legislature
over all his majesty's dominions.
As I know your singular knowledge of the subject in question, and
am as fully convinced of your cordial attachment to his majesty,
and your sincere desire to promote the happiness equally of all his
subjects, I beg you would in your own clear, brief, and explicit
manner, send me an answer to the following questions: I make this
request now, because this matter is of the utmost importance, and
must very quickly be agitated. And I do it with the more freedom,
as you know me and my motives too well to entertain the most remote
suspicion that I will make an improper use of any information you
shall hereby convey to me.
1st. Will not a repeal of all the duties (that on tea excepted, which
was before paid here on exportation, and of course no new imposition)
fully satisfy the colonists[98]? If you answer in the negative,
2d. Your reasons for that opinion?
3d. Do you think the only effectual way of composing the present
differences is to put the Americans precisely in the situation they
were in before the passing of the late stamp-act?--If that is your
opinion,
4th. Your reasons for that opinion?
5th. If this last method is deemed by the legislature, and his
majesty's ministers, to be repugnant to their duty, as guardians of
the just rights of the crown and of their fellow-subjects; can you
suggest any other way of terminating these disputes, consistent with
the ideas of justice and propriety conceived by the king's subjects
on both sides of the Atlantic?
6. And if this method was actually followed, do you not think it
would actually encourage the violent and factious part of the
colonists to aim at still farther concessions from the mother-country?
7th. If they are relieved in part only, what do you, as a reasonable
and dispassionate man, and an equal friend to both sides, imagine
will be the probable consequences?
The answers to these questions, I humbly conceive, will include all
the information I want; and I beg you will favour me with them as
soon as may be. Every well-wisher to the peace and prosperity of the
British empire, and every friend to our truly happy constitution,
must be desirous of seeing even the most trivial causes of dissention
among our fellow-subjects removed. Our domestic squabbles, in my
mind, are nothing to what I am speaking of. This you know much
better than I do, and therefore I need add nothing farther to
recommend this subject to your serious consideration. I am, with
the most cordial esteem and attachment, dear sir, your faithful and
affectionate humble servant,
W. S.
FOOTNOTES:
[97] These letters have often been copied into our public prints.
Mr. Strahan, the correspondent, is printer to the king, and now
representative in parliament for Malmsbury in Wiltshire. An intimacy
of long standing had subsisted between him and Dr. Franklin. B. V.
It was the father of the present Mr. Strahan, who is also
king's-printer, and member of parliament. The friendship, which so
long subsisted between Mr. Strahan and Dr. Franklin, the latter, in
1775, formally abjured, in a letter addressed to Mr. Strahan, which
will be found in the order of its date, in a subsequent part of this
work. _Editor._
[98] In the year 1767, for the express purpose of raising a revenue
in America, glass, red-lead, white-lead, painters' colours,
paper, and _tea_ (which last article was subject to various
_home_-impositions) became charged by act of parliament, with new
_permanent_ duties payable in the American ports. Soon after, in the
same sessions, (the East-India Company promising indemnification
for the experiment) a _temporary_ alteration was made with respect
to the _home_ customs or excise upon certain teas, in the hope
that a deduction in the nominal imposition, by producing a more
extended consumption, would give an increased sum to the exchequer.
Mr. Strahan, comparing only the _amounts_ of the imposed American
duty, and the deducted home duty, determines that the Americans
had suffered no new imposition. The Americans it seems, thought
otherwise. Had we established this precedent for a revenue, we
thought we had every thing to hope; yet we affect surprise, when the
colonies avoided an acquiescence which by parity of reasoning gave
_them_ every thing to fear. B. V.
_Answer to the preceding Queries._
_Craven Street, Nov. 29, 1769._
DEAR SIR,
Being just returned to town from a little excursion, I find yours
of the 21st, containing a number of queries, that would require
a pamphlet to answer them fully. You, however, desire only brief
answers, which I shall endeavour to give.
Previous to your queries, you tell me, that "you apprehend his
majesty's servants have now in contemplation, 1st, To relieve the
colonists from the taxes complained of; 2d, To preserve the honour,
the dignity, and the supremacy of the British legislature over
all his majesty's dominions." I hope your information is good;
and that what you suppose to be in contemplation will be carried
into execution, by repealing all the laws, that have been made for
raising a revenue in America by authority of parliament without
the consent of the people there. The honour and dignity of the
British legislature will not be hurt by such an act of justice and
wisdom. The wisest councils are liable to be misled, especially in
matters remote from their inspection. It is the persisting in an
error, not the correcting it, that lessens the honour of any man
or body of men. The supremacy of that legislature, I believe, will
be best preserved by making a very sparing use of it; never but
for the evident good of the colonies themselves, or of the whole
British empire; never for the partial advantage of Britain to their
prejudice. By such prudent conduct, I imagine, that supremacy may
be gradually strengthened, and in time fully established; but
otherwise, I apprehend it will be disputed, and lost in the dispute.
At present the colonies consent and submit to it, for the regulations
of general commerce; but a submission to acts of parliament was no
part of their original constitution. Our former kings governed their
colonies, as they had governed their dominions in France, without
the participation of British parliaments. The parliament of England
never presumed to interfere in that prerogative, till the time of the
great rebellion, when they usurped the government of all the king's
other dominions, Ireland, Scotland, &c. The colonies that held for
the king, they conquered by force of arms, and governed afterwards
as conquered countries; but New England, having not opposed the
parliament, was considered and treated as a sister-kingdom, in amity
with England (as appears by the Journals, _March 10, 1642_.)
1st. "Will not a repeal of all the duties (that on tea excepted,
which was before paid here on exportation, and of course no new
imposition) fully satisfy the colonists?"
_Answer_, I think not.
2d. "Your reasons for that opinion?"
_A._ Because it is not the sum paid in that duty on tea that is
complained of as a burden, but the principle of the act, expressed
in the preamble, viz. That those duties were laid for the better
support of government, and the administration of justice in the
colonies[99]. This the colonists think unnecessary, unjust, and
dangerous to their most important rights. _Unnecessary_, because in
all the colonies (two or three new ones excepted[100]) government
and the administration of justice were, and always had been, well
supported without any charge to Britain: _unjust_, as it has made
such colonies liable to pay such charge for others, in which they had
no concern or interest: _dangerous_, as such mode of raising money
for those purposes tended to render their assemblies useless; for
if a revenue could be raised in the colonies for all the purposes
of government by act of parliament, without grants from the people
there, governors, who do not generally love assemblies, would never
call them; they would be laid aside; and when nothing should depend
on the people's good-will to government, their rights would be
trampled on; they would be treated with contempt. Another reason,
why I think they would not be satisfied with such a partial repeal,
is that their agreements, not to import till the repeal takes place,
include the whole; which shows, that they object to the whole; and
those agreements will continue binding on them, if the whole is not
repealed.
3d. "Do you think the only effectual way of composing the present
differences is to put the Americans precisely in the situation they
were in before the passing of the late stamp act?"
_A._ I think so.
4th. "Your reasons for that opinion?"
_A._ Other methods have been tried. They have been refused or rebuked
in angry letters. Their petitions have been refused or rejected by
parliament. They have been threatened with the punishments of treason
by resolves of both houses. Their assemblies have been dissolved
and troops have been sent among them: but all these ways have only
exasperated their minds and widened the breach. Their agreements to
use no more British manufactures have been strengthened; and these
measures, instead of composing differences, and promoting a good
correspondence, have almost annihilated your commerce with those
countries, and greatly endanger the national peace and general
welfare.
5th. "If this last method is deemed by the legislature, and his
majesty's ministers, to be repugnant to their duty as guardians of
the just rights of the crown, and of their fellow-subjects; can you
suggest any other way of terminating these disputes, consistent with
the ideas of justice and propriety conceived by the king's subjects
on _both_ sides the Atlantic?"
_A._ I do not see how that method can be deemed repugnant to the
rights of the crown. If the Americans are put into their former
situation, it must be an act of parliament; in the passing of which
by the king, the rights of the crown are exercised, not infringed. It
is indifferent to the crown, whether the aids received from America
are granted by parliament here, or by the assemblies there, provided
the quantum be the same; and it is my opinion, that more will be
generally granted there voluntarily, than can ever be exacted or
collected from thence by authority of parliament. As to the rights
of fellow-subjects (I suppose you mean the people of Britain) I
cannot conceive how those will be infringed by that method. They will
still enjoy the right of granting their own money, and may still, if
it pleases them, keep up their claim to the right of granting ours;
a right they can never exercise properly, for want of a sufficient
knowledge of us, our circumstances and abilities (to say nothing of
the little likelihood there is that we should ever submit to it)
therefore a right that can be of no good use to them; and we shall
continue to enjoy in fact the right of granting our money, with
the opinion, now universally prevailing among us, that we are free
subjects of the king, and that fellow-subjects of one part of his
dominions are not sovereigns over fellow-subjects in any other part.
If the subjects on the different sides of the Atlantic have different
and opposite ideas of "justice and propriety," no one "method" can
possibly be consistent with both. The best will be, to let each
enjoy their own opinions, without disturbing them, when they do not
interfere with the common good.
6th. "And if this method were actually allowed, do you not think it
would encourage the violent and factious part of the colonists, to
aim at still farther concessions from the mother-country?"
_A._ I do not think it would. There may be a few among them that
deserve the name of factious and violent, as there are in all
countries; but these would have little influence, if the great
majority of sober reasonable people were satisfied. If any colony
should happen to think, that some of your regulations of trade are
inconvenient to the general interest of the empire, or prejudicial
to them without being beneficial to you, they will state these
matters to parliament in petitions as heretofore; but will, I
believe, take no violent steps to obtain what they may hope for in
time from the wisdom of government here. I know of nothing else they
can have in view: the notion that prevails here, of their being
desirous to set up a kingdom or commonwealth of their own, is to
my certain knowledge entirely groundless. I therefore think, that
on a total repeal of all duties, laid expressly for the purpose of
raising a revenue on the people of America without their consent,
the present uneasiness would subside; the agreements not to import
would be dissolved; and the commerce flourish as heretofore; and I
am confirmed in this sentiment by all the letters I have received
from America, and by the opinions of all the sensible people who have
lately come from thence, crown-officers excepted. I know, indeed,
that the people of Boston are grievously offended by the quartering
of troops among them, as they think, contrary to law, and are very
angry with the board of commissioners, who have calumniated them to
government; but as I suppose the withdrawing of those troops may be
a consequence of reconciliating measures taking place; and that the
commission also will be either dissolved, if found useless, or filled
with more temperate and prudent men, if still deemed useful and
necessary; I do not imagine these particulars would prevent a return
of the harmony so much to be wished[101].
7th. "If they are relieved in part only, what do you, as a reasonable
and dispassionate man, and an equal friend to both sides, imagine
will be the probable consequence?"
_A._ I imagine, that repealing the offensive duties in part will
answer no end to this country; the commerce will remain obstructed,
and the Americans go on with their schemes of frugality, industry,
and manufactures, to their own great advantage. How much that may
tend to the prejudice of Britain, I cannot say; perhaps not so much
as some apprehend, since she may in time find new markets. But I
think, if the union of the two countries continues to subsist, it
will not hurt the general interest; for whatever wealth Britain loses
by the failing of its trade with the colonies, America will gain; and
the crown will receive equal aids from its subjects upon the whole,
if not greater.
And now I have answered your questions, as to what may be, in my
opinion, the consequences of this or that supposed measure, I will
go a little further, and tell you, what I fear is more likely to
come to pass in _reality_. I apprehend, that the ministry, at least
the American part of it, being fully persuaded of the right of
parliament, think it ought to be enforced, whatever may be the
consequences; and at the same time do not believe, there is even now
any abatement of the trade between the two countries on account of
these disputes; or that if there is, it is small, and cannot long
continue. They are assured by the crown-officers in America, that
manufactures are impossible there; that the discontented are few,
and persons of little consequence; that almost all the people of
property and importance are satisfied, and disposed to submit quietly
to the taxing power of parliament; and that, if the revenue-acts are
continued, and those duties only that are called anti-commercial be
repealed, and others perhaps laid in their stead, the power ere long
will be patiently submitted to, and the agreements not to import be
broken, when they are found to produce no change of measures here.
From these and similar misinformations, which seem to be credited,
I think it likely, that no thorough redress of grievances will be
afforded to America this session. This may inflame matters still
more in that country; farther rash measures there may create more
resentment here, that may produce not merely ill-advised dissolutions
of their assemblies, as last year, but attempts to dissolve their
constitution[102]; more troops may be sent over, which will create
more uneasiness; to justify the measures of government, your writers
will revile the Americans in your newspapers, as they have already
begun to do, treating them as miscreants, rogues, dastards, rebels,
&c. to alienate the minds of the people here from them, and which
will tend farther to diminish their affections to this country.
Possibly too, some of their warm patriots may be distracted enough
to expose themselves by some mad action to be sent for hither, and
government here be indiscreet enough to hang them, on the act of
Henry VIII[103]. Mutual provocations will thus go on to complete the
separation; and instead of that cordial affection, that once and so
long existed, and that harmony, so suitable to the circumstances,
and so necessary to the happiness, strength, safety, and welfare of
both countries, an implacable malice and mutual hatred, such as we
now see subsisting between the Spaniards and Portuguese, the Genoese
and Corsicans, from the same original misconduct in the superior
governments, will take place: the sameness of nation, the similarity
of religion, manners, and language not in the least preventing in
our case, more than it did in theirs.--I hope, however, that this
may all prove false prophecy, and that you and I may live to see as
sincere and perfect a friendship established between our respective
countries, as has so many years subsisted between Mr. Strahan, and
his truly affectionate old friend,
B. FRANKLIN.
FOOTNOTES:
[99] "Men may lose little property by an act which takes away all
their freedom. When a man is robbed of a trifle on the highway, it is
not the two-pence lost that makes the capital outrage." "Would twenty
shillings have ruined Mr. Hampden's fortune? No! but the payment of
half twenty shillings, on the principle it was demanded, would have
made him a slave." See Mr. Burke's speeches in 1774 and 1775. B. V.
[100] Nova Scotia, Georgia, the Floridas, and Canada. B. V.
[101] "The opposition [to Lord Rockingham's administration]" says
Lord Chesterfield, "are for taking vigorous, as they call them, but
I call them violent measures; not less than _les dragonades_; and to
have the tax collected by the troops we have there. For my part, I
never saw a forward child mended by whipping: and I would not have
the mother become a step-mother." Letter, No. 360.
"Is it a certain maxim," pleads Mr. Burke, "that the fewer causes of
dissatisfaction are left by government, the more the subject will be
inclined to resist and rebel?" "I confess I do not feel the least
alarm from the discontents which are to arise from putting people at
their ease. Nor do I apprehend the destruction of this empire, from
giving, by an act of free grace and indulgence, to two millions of my
fellow-citizens, some share of those rights, upon which I have always
been taught to value myself." Speeches in 1774 and 1775. B. V.
[102] This was afterwards attempted by the British legislature, in
the case of the Massachusett's Bay. B. V.
[103] The lords and commons very prudently concurred in an address
for this purpose, and the king graciously assured them of his
compliance with their wishes. B. V.
_State of the Constitution of the Colonies, by Governor
Pownall[104]; with Remarks by Dr. Franklin._
[PRINCIPLES.]
1. Wherever any Englishmen go forth without the realm, and make
settlements in partibus exteris, "These settlements as English
settlements, and these inhabitants as English subjects (carrying with
them the laws of the land wherever they form colonies, and receiving
his majesty's protection by virtue of his royal charter[105]"
or commissions of government) "have and enjoy all liberties and
immunities of free and natural subjects, to all intents constructions
and purposes whatsoever, as if they and every of them were born
within the realm[106];" and are bound by the like allegiance as every
other subject of the realm.
Remarks. _The settlers of colonies in America did not carry with them
the_ laws of the land, _as being bound by them wherever they should
settle. They left the realm to avoid the inconveniences and hardships
they were under, where some of those laws were in force, particularly
ecclesiastical laws, those for payment of tythes and others. Had it
been understood, that they were to carry these laws with them, they
had better have staid at home among their friends, unexposed to
the risques and toils of a new settlement. They carried with them,
a right to_ such parts _of the_ laws of the land, _as they should
judge advantageous or useful to them; a right to be free from those
they thought hurtful; and a right to make such others, as they should
think necessary, not infringing the general rights of Englishmen: and
such_ new _laws they were to form, as agreeable as might be to the
laws of England_. B. F.
2. Therefore the _common law of England_, and all _such statutes_ as
were enacted and in force at _the time_ in which such settlers went
forth, and such colonies and plantations were established, (except as
hereafter excepted) together with all such alterations and amendments
as the said common law may have received, is from time to time, and
at all times, the law of those colonies and plantations.
Rem. _So far as they adopt it, by express laws or by practice._ B. F.
3. Therefore all statutes, touching the _right of the succession_,
and settlement of the crown, with the statutes of treason relating
thereto[107]; all statutes, _regulating_ or limiting the general
powers and _authority of the crown_, and the exercise of the
jurisdiction thereof; all statutes, _declaratory of the rights and
liberty of the subject_, do extend to all British subjects in the
colonies and plantations as of common right, and as if they and every
of them were born within the realm.
Rem. _It is doubted, whether any settlement of the crown by
parliament, takes place in the colonies, otherwise than by consent
of the assemblies there. Had the rebellion in 1745 succeeded so
far as to settle the Stuart family again on the throne, by act of
parliament, I think the colonies would not have thought themselves
bound by such act. They would still have adhered to the present
family as long as they could._ B. F.
Observation in reply. _They are bound to the king and his successors,
and we know no succession but by act of parliament._ T. P.
4. All statutes enacted _since_ the establishment of colonies and
plantations do extend to and operate within the said colonies and
plantations, in which statutes the same _are specially named_.
Rem. _It is doubted, whether any act of parliament should_ of right
_operate in the colonies_: in fact _several of than have and do
operate_. B. F.