Let us now take a view of American grievances, and try, by the

sure touchstone of reason and the constitution, whether there be

any act or acts, on the part of the king or parliament, that will

justify the whigs even in _foro conscientiæ_, in thus forcibly

opposing their government. Will the alteration of the mode of

appointing one branch of our provincial legislature furnish so much

as an excuse for it, considering that our politicians, by their

intrigues and machinations, had rendered the assembly incapable

of answering the purpose of government, which is protection, and

our charter was become as inefficacious as an old ballad? Or can

a plea of justification be founded on the parliament's giving us

an exact transcript of English laws for returning jurors, when

our own were insufficient to afford compensation to the injured,

to suppress seditions, or even to restrain rebellion? It has been

heretofore observed, that each member of the community is entitled

to protection; for this he pays taxes, for this he relinquishes

his natural right of revenging injuries and redressing wrongs,

and for this the sword of justice is placed in the hands of the

magistrate. It is notorious that the whigs had usurped the power

of the province in a great measure, and exercised it by revenging

themselves on their opponents, or in compelling them to enlist

under their banners. Recollect the frequency of mobs and riots, the

invasions and demolitions of dwelling houses and other property,

the personal abuse, and frequent necessity of persons abandoning

their habitations, the taking sanctuary on board men of war, or at

the castle, previous to the regulating bill. Consider that these

sufferers were loyal subjects, violators of no law, that many of

them were crown officers, and were thus persecuted for no other

offence, than that of executing the king's law. Consider further,

that if any of the sufferers sought redress in a court of law, he had

the whole whig interest to combat; they gathered like a cloud and

hovered like harpies round the seat of justice, until the suitor was

either condemned to pay cost to his antagonist, or recovered so small

damages, as that they were swallowed up in his own. Consider further,

that these riots were not the accidental or spontaneous risings of

the populace, but the result of the deliberations and mature councils

of the whigs, and were sometimes headed and led to action by their

principals. Consider further, that the general assembly lent no aid

to the executive power. Weigh these things, my friends, and doubt

if you can, whether the act for regulating our government did not

flow from the parental tenderness of the British councils, to enable

us to recover from anarchy, without Britain being driven to the

necessity of inflicting punishment, which is her strange work. Having

taken this cursory view of the convulsed state of the province, let

us advert to our charter form of government, and we shall find its

distributions of power to have been so preposterous, as to render it

next to impossible for the province to recover by its own strength.

The council was elective annually by the house, liable to the

negative of the chair, and the chair restrained from acting, even in

the executive department, without the concurrence of the board. The

political struggle is often between the governor and the house, and

it is a maxim with politicians, that he that is not for us is against

us. Accordingly, when party run high, if a counsellor adhered to the

governor, the house refused to elect him the next year; if he adhered

to the house, the governor negatived him; if he trimmed his bark so

as to steer a middle course between Scylla and Charybdis, he was in

danger of suffering more by the neglect of both parties, than of

being wrecked but on one.

In moderate times, this province has been happy under our charter

form of government; but when the political storm arose, its original

defect became apparent. We have sometimes seen half a dozen sail of

tory navigation unable, on an election day, to pass the bar formed by

the flux and reflux of the tides at the entrance of the harbour, and

as many whiggish ones stranded the next morning on Governor's Island.

The whigs took the lead in this game, and therefore I think the blame

ought to rest upon them, though the tables were turned upon them in

the sequel. A slender acquaintance with human nature will inform,

experience has evinced, that a body of men thus constituted, are

not to be depended upon to act that vigorous, intrepid and decisive

part, which the emergency of the late times required, and which

might have proved the salvation of the province. In short, the board

which was intended to moderate between the governor and the house, or

perhaps rather to support the former, was incapable of doing either

by its original constitution. By the regulating act, the members

of the board are appointed by the king in the council, and are not

liable even to the suspension of the governor; their commissions are

_durante bene placito_, and they are therefore far from independence.

The infant state of the colonies does not admit of a peerage, nor

perhaps of any third branch of legislature wholly independent. In

most of the colonies, the council is appointed by mandamus, and the

members are moreover liable to be suspended by the governor, by

which means they are more dependant, than those appointed according

to the regulating act; but no inconvenience arises from that mode

of appointment. Long experience has evinced its utility. By this

statute, extraordinary powers are devolved upon the chair, to enable

the governor to maintain his authority, and to oppose with vigor

the daring spirit of independance, so manifest in the whigs. Town

meetings are restrained to prevent their passing traitorous resolves.

Had these and many other innovations contained in this act, been made

in moderate times, when due reverence was yielded to the magistrate,

and obedience to the law, they might have been called grievances; but

we have no reason to think, that had the situation of the province

been such that this statute would ever have had an existence--nor

have we any reason to doubt, but that it will be repealed, in whole

or part, should our present form of government be found by experience

to be productive of rapine or oppression. It is impossible that the

king, lords or commons could have any sinister views in regulating

the government of this province. Sometimes we are told that charters

are sacred. However sacred, they are forfeited through negligence or

_abuse_ of their franchises, in which cases the law judges that the

body politic has broken the condition, upon which it was incorporated.

There are many instances of the negligence and abuse, that work the

forfeiture of charters, delineated in law books. They also tell

us, that all charters may be vacated by act of parliament. Had

the form of our provincial legislature been established by act of

parliament, that act might have been constitutionally and equitably

repealed, when it was found to be incapable of answering the end

of its institution. Stronger still is the present case, where the

form of government was established by one branch of the legislature

only, viz. the king, and all three join in the revocation. This act

was however a fatal stroke to the ambitious views of our republican

patriots. The monarchial part of the constitution was so guarded by

it, as to be no longer vulnerable by their shafts, and all their

fancied greatness vanished, like the baseless fabric of a vision.

Many that had been long striving to attain a seat at the board,

with their faces thitherward, beheld, with infinite regret, their

competitors advanced to the honors they aspired to themselves.

These disappointed, ambitious, and envious men, instil the poison

of disaffection into the minds of the lower classes, and as soon

as they are properly impregnated, exclaim, _the people_ never will

submit to it. They now would urge them into certain ruin, to prevent

the execution of an act of parliament, designed and calculated to

restore peace and harmony to the province, and to recal that happy

state, when year rolled round on year, in a continual increase of our

felicity.

The Quebec bill is another capital grievance, because the Canadians

are tolerated in the enjoyment of their religion, which they were

entitled to, by an article of capitulation, when they submitted

to the British arms. This toleration is not an exclusion of the

protestant religion, which is established in every part of the

empire, as firmly as civil polity can establish it. It is a strange

kind of reasoning to argue, from the French inhabitants of the

conquered province of Quebec being tolerated, in the enjoyment of the

Roman Catholic religion, in which they were educated, and in which

alone they repose their hope of eternal salvation; that therefore

government intends to deprive us of the enjoyment of the protestant

religion, in which alone we believe, especially as the political

interests of Britain depend upon protestant connexions, and the

king's being a protestant himself is an indispensable condition of

his wearing the crown. This circumstance however served admirably

for a fresh stimulus, and was eagerly grasped by the disaffected

of all orders. It added pathos to pulpit oratory. We often see

resolves and seditious letters interspersed with _popery_ here

and there in Italics. If any of the clergy have endeavoured, from

this circumstance, to alarm their too credulous audiences, with an

apprehension that their religious privileges were in danger, thereby

to excite them to take up arms, we must lament the depravity of the

best of men; but human nature stands apalled when we reflect upon the

aggravated guilt of prostituting our holy religion to the accursed

purposes of treason and rebellion. As to our lay politicians, I

have long since ceased to wonder at any thing in them; but it

may be observed that there is no surer mark of a bad cause, than

for its advocates to recur to such pitiful shifts to support it.

This instance plainly indicates that their sole dependance is in

preventing the passions subsiding, and cool reason resuming its seat.

It is a mark of their shrewdness however, for whenever reason shall

resume its seat, the political cheat will be detected, stand confest

in its native turpitude, and the political knave be branded with

marks of infamy, adequate, if possible, to the enormity of his crimes.

MASSACHUSETTENSIS.

ADDRESSED

_To the Inhabitants of the Province of Massachusetts Bay_,

February 20, 1775.

MY DEAR COUNTRYMEN,

It would be an endless task to remark minutely upon each of the

fancied grievances, that swarm and cluster, fill and deform the

American chronicles. An adeptness at discovering grievances has

lately been one of the principal recommendations to public notice and

popular applause. We have had geniuses selected for that purpose,

called committees upon grievances; a sagacious set they were, and

discovered a multitude before it was known, that they themselves were

the greatest grievances that the country was infested with. The case

is shortly this; the whigs suppose the colonies to be separate or

distinct states: having fixed this opinion in their minds, they are

at no loss for grievances. Could I agree with them in their first

principle, I should acquiesce in many of their deductions; for in

that case every act of parliament, extending to the colonies, and

every movement of the crown to carry them into execution, would

be really grievances, however wise and salutary they might be in

themselves, as they would be exertions of a power that we were not

constitutionally subject to, and would deserve the name of usurpation

and tyranny; but deprived of this their corner stone, the terrible

fabric of grievances vanishes, like castles raised by enchantment,

and leaves the wondering spectator amazed and confounded at the

deception. He suspects himself to have but just awoke from sleep, or

recovered from a trance, and that the formidable spectre, that had

froze him with horror, was no more than the creature of a vision, or

the delusion of a dream.

Upon this point, whether the colonies are distinct states or not,

our patriots have rashly tendered Great Britain an issue, against

every principle of law and constitution, against reason and common

prudence. There is no arbiter between us but the sword; and that

the decision of that tribunal will be against us, reason foresees,

as plainly as it can discover any event that lies in the womb of

futurity. No person, unless actuated by ambition, pride, malice,

envy, or a malignant combination of the whole, that verges towards

madness, and hurries the man away from himself, would wage war upon

such unequal terms. No honest man would engage himself, much less

plunge his country into the calamities of a war upon equal terms,

without first settling with his conscience, in the retired moments

of reflection, the important question respecting the justice of

his cause. To do this, we must hear and weigh every thing that is

fairly adduced, on either side of the question, with equal attention

and care. A disposition to drink in with avidity, what favours our

hypothesis, and to reject with disgust whatever contravenes it, is

an infallible mark of a narrow, selfish mind. In matters of small

moment, such obstinacy is weakness and folly, in important ones,

fatal madness. There are many among us, that have devoted themselves

to the slavish dominion of prejudice; indeed the more liberal have

seldom had an opportunity of bringing the question to a fair examen.

The eloquence of the bar, the desk and the senate, the charms of

poetry, the expressions of painting, sculpture and statuary have

conspired to fix and rivet ideas of independance upon the mind of the

colonists. The overwhelming torrent, supplied from so many fountains,

rolled on with increasing rapidity and violence, till it became

superior to all restraint. It was the reign of passion; the small,

still voice of reason was refused audience. I have observed that the

press was heretofore open to but one side of the question, which

has given offence to a writer in Edes and Gill's paper, under the

signature of Novanglus, to whom I have many things to say. I would at

present ask him, if the convention of committees for the county of

Worcester, in recommending to the inhabitants of that county not to

take newspapers, published by two of the printers in this town, and

two at New York, have not affected to be licensers of the press? And

whether, by proscribing these printers, and endeavouring to deprive

them of a livelihood, they have not manifested an illiberal, bigoted,

arbitrary, malevolent disposition? And whether, by thus attempting

to destroy the liberty of the press, they have not betrayed a

consciousness of the badness of their cause?

Our warriors tell us, that the parliament shall be permitted to

legislate for the purposes of regulating trade, but the parliament

hath most unrighteously asserted, that it "had, hath, and of right

ought to have, full power and authority to make laws and statutes

of sufficient force and validity to bind the colonies in all

cases whatever," that this claim is without any qualification or

restriction, is an innovation, and inconsistent with liberty. Let

us candidly inquire into these three observations, upon the statute

declaratory of the authority of parliament. As to its universality,

it is true there are no exceptions expressed, but there is no general

rule without exceptions, expressed or implied.

The implied ones in this case are obvious. It is evident that

the intent and meaning of this act, was to assert the supremacy

of parliament in the colonies, that is, that its constitutional

authority to make laws and statutes binding upon the colonies, is,

and ever had been as ample, as it is to make laws binding upon the

realm. No one that reads the declaratory statute, not even prejudice

itself, can suppose that the parliament meant to assert thereby a

right or power to deprive the colonists of their lives, to enslave

them, or to make any law respecting the colonies, that would not be

constitutional, were it made respecting Great Britain. By an act

of parliament passed in the year 1650, it was declared concerning

the colonies and plantations in America, that they had "ever since

the planting thereof been and ought to be subject to such laws,

orders and regulations, as are or shall be made by the parliament of

England." This declaration though differing in expression, is the

same in substance with the other. Our house of representatives, in

their dispute with governor Hutchinson, concerning the supremacy of

parliament, say, "It is difficult, if possible, to draw a line of

distinction between the universal authority of parliament over the

colonies, and no authority at all."

The declaratory statute was intended more especially to assert the

right of parliament, to make laws and statutes for raising a revenue

in America, lest the repeal of the stamp act might be urged as a

disclaimer of the right. Let us now inquire whether a power to raise

a revenue be not the inherent, unalienable right of the supreme

legislative of every well regulated state, where the hereditary

revenues of the crown, or established revenues of the state are

insufficient of themselves; and whether that power be not necessarily

coextensive with the power of legislation, or rather necessarily

implied in it.

The end or design of government, as has been already observed, is

the security of the people from internal violence and rapacity, and

from foreign invasion. The supreme power of a state must necessarily

be so extensive and ample as to answer those purposes, otherwise it

is constituted in vain and degenerates into empty parade and mere

ostentatious pageantry. These purposes cannot be answered without

a power to raise a revenue; for without it neither the laws can be

executed, nor the state defended. This revenue ought, in national

concerns, to be apportioned throughout the whole empire according

to the abilities of the several parts, as the claim of each to

protection, is equal; a refusal to yield the former is as unjust as

the withholding of the latter. Were any part of an empire exempt from

contributing their proportionable part of the revenue, necessary for

the whole, such exemption would be manifest injustice to the rest

of the empire; as it must of course bear more than its proportion

of the public burden, and it would amount to an additional tax. If

the proportion of each part was to be determined only by itself in a

separate legislature, it would not only involve in it the absurdity

of _imperium in imperio_, but the perpetual contention arising

from the predominant principle of self-interest in each, without

having any common arbiter between them, would render the disjointed,

discordant, torn, and dismembered state incapable of collecting or

conducting its force and energy for the preservation of the whole,

as emergencies might require. A government thus constituted, would

contain the seeds of dissolution in its first principles, and must

soon destroy itself.

I have already shewn, that by your first charter, this province was

to be subject to taxation, after the lapse of twenty-one years, and

that the authority of parliament to impose such taxes, was claimed so

early as the year 1642.

In the patent for Pennsylvania, which is now in force, there is this

clause, "And further our pleasure is, and by these presents, for us,

&c. we do covenant and grant to, and with the said William Penn,

&c. that we, &c. shall at no time hereafter set or make, or cause

to be set, any imposition, custom, or other taxation, or rate or

contribution whatsoever, in and upon the dwellers, and inhabitants of

the aforesaid province, for their lands, tenements, goods or chattels

within the said province, or in and upon any goods or merchandise

within the said province, to be laden or unladen within the ports or

harbours of the said province, unless the same be with the consent of

the proprietors, chief governor, or assembly, or _act of parliament_."

These are stubborn facts; they are incapable of being winked out of

existence, how much soever, we may be disposed to shut our eyes upon

them. They prove, that the claim of a right to raise a revenue in the

colonies, exclusive of the grants of their own assemblies, is coeval

with the colonies themselves. I shall next shew, that there has been

an actual, uninterrupted exercise of that right, by the parliament

time immemorial.

MASSACHUSETTENSIS.

ADDRESSED

_To the Inhabitants of the Province of Massachusetts Bay_,

February 27, 1775.

MY DEAR COUNTRYMEN,

By an act of parliament made in the twenty-fifth year of the reign

of Charles 2d. duties are laid upon goods and merchandise of various

kinds, exported from the colonies to foreign countries, or carried

from one colony to another, payable on exportation. I will recite

a part of it, viz: "For so much of the said commodities as shall

be laden and put on board such ship or vessel; that is to say, for

sugar, white, the hundred weight, five shillings; and brown and

Muscovados, the hundred weight, one shilling and six pence; tobacco,

the pound, one penny; cotton wool, the pound, one half-penny; for

indigo, two-pence; ginger, the hundred weight, one shilling; logwood,

the hundred weight, five pounds; fustic, and all other dying wood,

the hundred weight, six-pence; cocoa, the pound, one-penny, to be

_levied, collected, and paid_, at such places, and to such collectors

and other officers, as shall be appointed in the respective

plantations, to collect, levy, and receive the same, before the

landing thereof, and under such penalties, both to the officers,

and upon the goods, as for non-payment of, or _defrauding his

majesty of his customs in England_. And for the better _collecting

of the several rates and duties imposed by this act_, be it enacted

that this whole business shall be ordered and managed, and the

several duties hereby imposed shall be caused _to be levied by the

commissioners of the customs in England_, by and under the authority

of the lord treasurer of England, or commissioners of the treasury."

It is apparent, from the reasoning of this statute, that these duties

were imposed for the sole purpose of revenue. There has lately

been a most ingenious play upon the words and expressions _tax_,

_revenue_, _purpose of raising a revenue_, _sole purpose of raising

a revenue_, _express purpose of raising a revenue_, as though their

being inserted in, or left out of a statute, would make any essential

difference in the statute. This is mere playing with words; for if,

from the whole tenor of the act, it is evident, that the intent of

the legislature was to tax, rather than to regulate the trade, by

imposing duties on goods and merchandise, it is to all intents and

purposes, an instance of taxation, be the form of words, in which

the statute is conceived, what it will. That such was the intent of

the legislature, in this instance, any one that will take the pains

to read it, will be convinced. There have been divers alterations

made in this by subsequent statutes, but some of the above taxes

remain, and are collected and paid in the colonies to this day. By an

act of the 7th. and 8th. of William and Mary, it is enacted, "that

every seaman, whatsoever, that shall serve his majesty, or any other

person whatever in any of his majesty's ships or vessels, whatsoever,

belonging, or to belong to any subjects of England, or any other his

majesty's dominions, shall allow, and there shall be paid out of

the wages of every such seaman, to grow due for such his service,

six-pence per annum for the better support of the said hospital, and

to augment the _revenue_ thereof." This tax was imposed in the reign

of king William 3d. of blessed memory, and is still levied in the

colonies. It would require a volume to recite, or minutely to remark

upon all the revenue acts that relate to America. We find them in

many reigns, imposing new duties, taking off, or reducing old ones,

and making provision for their collection, or new appropriations

of them. By an act of the 7th. and 8th. of William and Mary,

entitled, "an act for preventing frauds and regulating abuses in the

plantations." All former acts respecting the plantations are renewed,

and all ships and vessels coming into any port here, are liable to

the same regulations and restrictions, as ships in the ports in

England are liable to; and enacts, "_That the officers for collecting

and managing his majesty's revenue, and inspecting the plantation

trade in many of the said plantations_, shall have the same powers

and authority for visiting and searching of ships, and taking their

entries, and for seizing, or securing, or bringing on shore any of

the goods prohibited to be imported or exported into or out of any

of the said colonies and plantations, _or for which any duties are

payable, or ought to be paid by any of the before mentioned acts, as

are provided for the officers of the customs in England_."

Novanglus, and Massachusettensis or, Political Essays, Published in the Years 1774 and 1775, on the Principal Points of Controversy, between Great Britain and Her Colonies · 第 23 / 37 段