that the measure it proposes, of an union with the colonies, is a wise
one; but I doubt it will hardly be thought so here, till it is too late
to attempt it. The time has been, when the colonies would have esteemed
it a great advantage, as well as honour to be permitted to send members
to Parliament; and would have asked for that privilege, if they could
have had the least hopes of obtaining it. The time is now come when
they are indifferent about it, and will probably not ask it, though they
might accept it if offered them; and the time will come, when they will
certainly refuse it. But if such an union were now established (which
methinks it highly imports this country to establish) it would probably
subsist as long as Britain shall continue a nation. This people,
however, is too proud, and too much despises the Americans, to bear the
thought of admitting them to such an equitable participation in the
government of the whole.
Then the next best thing seems to be, leaving them in the quiet
enjoyment of their respective constitutions; and when money is wanted
for any public service, in which they ought to bear a part, calling upon
them by requisitorial letters from the crown (according to the
long-established custom) to grant such aids as their loyalty shall
dictate, and their abilities permit. The very sensible and benevolent
author of that paper seems not to have known, that such a constitutional
custom subsists, and has always hitherto been practised in America; or
he would not have expressed himself in this manner; "It is evident,
beyond a doubt, to the intelligent and impartial, that after the very
extraordinary efforts, which were effectually made by Great Britain in
the late war to save the colonists from destruction, and attended of
necessity with an enormous load of debts in consequence, that the same
colonists, now firmly secured from foreign enemies, should be somehow
induced to contribute some proportion towards the exigencies of state in
future." This looks as if he conceived the war had been carried on at
the sole expense of Great Britain, and the colonies only reaped the
benefit, without hitherto sharing the burden, and were therefore now
indebted to Britain on that account. And this is the same kind of
argument that is used by those, who would fix on the colonies the heavy
charge of unreasonableness and ingratitude, which I think your friend
did not intend.
Please to acquaint him, then, that the fact is not so; that, every year
during the war, requisitions were made by the crown on the colonies for
raising money and men; that accordingly they made more extraordinary
efforts, in proportion to their abilities, than Britain did; that they
raised, paid, and clothed, for five or six years, near twenty-five
thousand men, besides providing for other services, as building forts,
equipping guardships, paying transports, &c. And that this was more than
their fair proportion is not merely an opinion of mine, but was the
judgment of government here, in full knowledge of all the facts; for the
then ministry, to make the burthen more equal, recommended the case to
Parliament, and obtained a reimbursement to the Americans of about two
hundred thousand pounds sterling every year; which amounted only to
about two fifths of their expense; and great part of the rest lies still
a load of debt upon them; heavy taxes on all their estates, real and
personal, being laid by acts of their assemblies to discharge it, and
yet will not discharge it in many years.
While, then, these burdens continue; while Britain restrains the
colonies in every branch of commerce and manufactures that she thinks
interferes with her own; while she drains the colonies, by her trade
with them, of all the cash they can procure by every art and industry in
any part of the world, and thus keeps them always in her debt; (for they
can make no law to discourage the importation of your to _them_ ruinous
superfluities, as _you_ do the superfluities of France; since such a law
would immediately be reported against by your Board of Trade, and
repealed by the crown;) I say, while these circumstances continue, and
while there subsists the established method of royal requisitions for
raising money on them by their own assemblies on every proper occasion;
can it be necessary or prudent to distress and vex them by taxes laid
here, in a Parliament wherein they have no representative, and in a
manner which they look upon to be unconstitutional and subversive of
their most valuable rights? And are they to be thought unreasonable and
ungrateful if they oppose such taxes?
Wherewith, they say, shall we show our loyalty to our gracious King, if
our money is to be given by others, without asking our consent? And, if
the Parliament has a right thus to take from us a penny in the pound,
where is the line drawn that bounds that right, and what shall hinder
their calling, whenever they please, for the other nineteen shillings
and eleven pence? Have we then any thing that we can call our own? It is
more than probable, that bringing representatives from the colonies to
sit and act here as members of Parliament, thus uniting and
consolidating your dominions, would in a little time remove these
objections and difficulties, and make the future government of the
colonies easy; but, till some such thing is done, I apprehend no taxes,
laid there by Parliament here, will ever be collected, but such as must
be stained with blood; and I am sure the profit of such taxes will never
answer the expense of collecting them, and that the respect and
affection of the Americans to this country will in the struggle be
totally lost, perhaps never to be recovered; and therewith all the
commercial and political advantages, that might have attended the
continuance of this respect and this affection.
In my own private judgment, I think an immediate repeal of the Stamp Act
would be the best measure for this country; but a suspension of it for
three years, the best for that. The repeal would fill them with joy and
gratitude, reëstablish their respect and veneration for Parliament,
restore at once their ancient and natural love for this country, and
their regard for every thing that comes from it; hence the trade would
be renewed in all its branches; they would again indulge in all the
expensive superfluities you supply them with, and their own new-assumed
home industry would languish. But the suspension, though it might
continue their fears and anxieties, would at the same time keep up their
resolutions of industry and frugality; which in two or three years would
grow into habits, to their lasting advantage. However, as the repeal
will probably not be now agreed to, from what I think a mistaken
opinion, that the honour and dignity of government is better supported
by persisting in a wrong measure once entered into, than by rectifying
an error as soon as it is discovered; we must allow the next best thing
for the advantage of both countries, is the suspension; for, as to
executing the act by force, it is madness, and will be ruin to the
whole.
The rest of your friend's reasonings and propositions appear to me truly
just and judicious. I will therefore only add, that I am as desirous of
his acquaintance and intimacy, as he was of my opinion.
I am, with much esteem,
Your obliged friend,
B. FRANKLIN.
TO LORD KAMES
London, April 11, 1767.
MY DEAR LORD,--
I received your obliging favour of January the 19th. You have kindly
relieved me from the pain I had long been under. You are goodness
itself. I ought to have answered yours of December 25, 1765. I never
received a letter that contained sentiments more suitable to my own. It
found me under much agitation of mind on the very important subject it
treated. It fortified me greatly in the judgment I was inclined to form
(though contrary to the general vogue) on the then delicate and critical
situation of affairs between Great Britain and her Colonies, and on that
weighty point, their _Union_. You guessed aright in supposing that I
would not be a _mute in that play_. I was extremely busy, attending
Members of both Houses, informing, explaining, consulting, disputing, in
a continual hurry from morning to night, till the affair was happily
ended. During the course of it, being called before the House of
Commons, I spoke my mind pretty freely. Inclosed I send you the
imperfect account that was taken of that examination. You will there see
how entirely we agree, except in a point of fact, of which you could not
but be misinformed; the papers at that time being full of mistaken
assertions, that the colonies had been the cause of the war, and had
ungratefully refused to bear any part of the expence of it.
I send it you now, because I apprehend some late incidents are likely to
revive the contest between the two countries. I fear it will be a
mischievous one. It becomes a matter of great importance that clear
ideas should be formed on solid principles, both in Britain and America,
of the true political relation between them, and the mutual duties
belonging to that relation. Till this is done, they will be often
jarring. I know none whose knowledge, sagacity and impartiality qualify
him so thoroughly for such a service, as yours do you. I wish therefore
you would consider it. You may thereby be the happy instrument of great
good to the nation, and of preventing much mischief and bloodshed. I am
fully persuaded with you, that a _Consolidating Union_, by a fair and
equal representation of all the parts of this empire in Parliament, is
the only firm basis on which its political grandeur and prosperity can
be founded. Ireland once wished it, but now rejects it. The time has
been, when the colonies might have been pleased with it: they are now
_indifferent_ about it; and if it is much longer delayed, they too will
_refuse_ it. But the pride of this people cannot bear the thought of it,
and therefore it will be delayed. Every man in England seems to consider
himself as a piece of a sovereign over America; seems to jostle himself
into the throne with the King, and talks of _our subjects in the
Colonies_. The Parliament cannot well and wisely make laws suited to the
Colonies, without being properly and truly informed of their
circumstances, abilities, temper, &c. This it cannot be, without
representatives from thence: and yet it is fond of this power, and
averse to the only means of acquiring the necessary knowledge for
exercising it; which is desiring to be _omnipotent_, without being
_omniscient_.
I have mentioned that the contest is likely to be revived. It is on this
occasion. In the same session with the stamp act, an act was passed to
regulate the quartering of soldiers in America; when the bill was first
brought in, it contained a clause, empowering the officers to quarter
their soldiers in private houses: this we warmly opposed, and got it
omitted. The bill passed, however, with a clause, that empty houses,
barns, &c., should be hired for them, and that the respective provinces
where they were should pay the expence and furnish firing, bedding,
drink, and some other articles to the soldiers _gratis_. There is no way
for any province to do this, but by the Assembly's making a law to
raise the money. The Pennsylvanian Assembly has made such a law: the New
York Assembly has refused to do it: and now all the talk here is of
sending a force to compel them.
The reasons given by the Assembly to the Governor, for the refusal, are,
that they understand the act to mean the furnishing such things to
soldiers, only while on their march through the country, and not to
great bodies of soldiers, to be fixt as at present, in the province; the
burthen in the latter case being greater than the inhabitants can bear:
That it would put it in the power of the Captain-General to oppress the
province at pleasure, &c. But there is supposed to be another reason at
bottom, which they intimate, though they do not plainly express it; to
wit, that it is of the nature of an _internal tax_ laid on them by
Parliament, which has no right so to do. Their refusal is here called
_Rebellion_, and punishment is thought of.
Now waving that point of right, and supposing the Legislatures in
America subordinate to the Legislature of Great Britain, one might
conceive, I think, a power in the superior Legislature to forbid the
inferior Legislatures making particular laws; but to enjoin it to make a
particular law contrary to its own judgment, seems improper; an Assembly
or Parliament not being an _executive_ officer of Government, whose duty
it is, in law-making, to obey orders, but a _deliberative_ body, who are
to consider what comes before them, its propriety, practicability, or
possibility, and to determine accordingly: The very nature of a
Parliament seems to be destroyed, by supposing it may be bound, and
compelled by a law of a superior Parliament, to make a law contrary to
its own judgment.
Indeed, the act of Parliament in question has not, as in other acts,
when a duty is enjoined, directed a penalty on neglect or refusal, and a
mode of recovering that penalty. It seems, therefore, to the people in
America as a mere requisition, which they are at liberty to comply with
or not, as it may suit or not suit the different circumstances of
different provinces. Pennsylvania has therefore voluntarily complied.
New York, as I said before, has refused. The Ministry that made the act,
and all their adherents, call for vengeance. The present Ministry are
perplext, and the measures they will finally take on the occasion, are
yet unknown. But sure I am, that, if _Force_ is used, great mischief
will ensue; the affections of the people of America to this country will
be alienated; your commerce will be diminished; and a total separation
of interests be the final consequence.
It is a common, but mistaken notion here, that the Colonies were planted
at the expence of Parliament, and that therefore the Parliament has a
right to tax them, &c. The truth is, they were planted at the expence of
private adventurers, who went over there to settle, with leave of the
King, given by charter. On receiving this leave, and those charters, the
adventurers voluntarily engaged to remain the King's subjects, though in
a foreign country; a country which had not been conquered by either King
or Parliament, but was possessed by a free people.
When our planters arrived, they purchased the lands of the natives,
without putting King or Parliament to any expence. Parliament had no
hand in their settlement, was never so much as consulted about their
constitution, and took no kind of notice of them, till many years after
they were established. I except only the two modern Colonies, or rather
attempts to make Colonies, (for they succeed but poorly, and as yet
hardly deserve the name of Colonies), I mean Georgia and Nova Scotia,
which have hitherto been little better than Parliamentary jobs. Thus all
the colonies acknowledge the King as their sovereign; his Governors
there represent his person: Laws are made by their Assemblies or little
Parliaments, with the Governor's assent, subject still to the King's
pleasure to confirm or annul them: Suits arising in the Colonies, and
differences between Colony and Colony, are determined by the King in
Council. In this view, they seem so many separate little states, subject
to the same Prince. The _sovereignty of the_ King is therefore easily
understood. But nothing is more common here than to talk of the
_sovereignty_ of PARLIAMENT, and the _sovereignty of_ THIS NATION over
the Colonies; a kind of sovereignty, the idea of which is not so clear,
nor does it clearly appear on what foundation it is established. On the
other hand, it seems necessary for the common good of the empire, that
a power be lodged somewhere, to regulate its general commerce: this can
be placed nowhere so properly as in the Parliament of Great Britain; and
therefore, though that power has in some instances been executed with
great partiality to Britain, and prejudice to the Colonies, they have
nevertheless always submitted to it. Custom-houses are established in
all of them, by virtue of laws made here, and the duties constantly
paid, except by a few smugglers, such as are here and in all countries;
but internal taxes laid on them by Parliament, are still and ever will
be objected to, for the reasons that you will see in the mentioned
Examination.
Upon the whole, I have lived so great a part of my life in Britain, and
have formed so many friendships in it, that I love it, and sincerely
wish it prosperity; and therefore wish to see that Union, on which alone
I think it can be secured and established. As to America, the advantages
of such a union to her are not so apparent. She may suffer at present
under the arbitrary power of this country; she may suffer for a while in
a separation from it; but these are temporary evils that she will
outgrow. Scotland and Ireland are differently circumstanced. Confined by
the sea, they can scarcely increase in numbers, wealth and strength, so
as to overbalance England. But America, an immense territory, favoured
by Nature with all advantages of climate, soil, great navigable rivers,
and lakes, &c. must become a great country, populous and mighty; and
will, in a less time than is generally conceived, be able to shake off
any shackles that may be imposed on her, and perhaps place them on the
imposers. In the mean time, every act of oppression will sour their
tempers, lessen greatly, if not annihilate the profits of your commerce
with them, and hasten their final revolt; for the seeds of liberty are
universally found there, and nothing can eradicate them. And yet, there
remains among that people, so much respect, veneration and affection for
Britain, that, if cultivated prudently, with kind usage, and tenderness
for their privileges, they might be easily governed still for ages,
without force, or any considerable expence. But I do not see here a
sufficient quantity of the wisdom, that is necessary to produce such a
conduct, and I lament the want of it.
I borrowed at Millar's the new edition of your _Principles of Equity_,
and have read with great pleasure the preliminary discourse on the
Principles of Morality. I have never before met with any thing so
satisfactory on the subject. While reading it, I made a few remarks as I
went along. They are not of much importance, but I send you the paper.
I know the lady you mention; having, when in England before, met her
once or twice at Lord Bath's. I remember I then entertained the same
opinion of her that you express. On the strength of your kind
recommendation, I purpose soon to wait on her.
This is unexpectedly grown a long letter. The visit to Scotland, and the
_Art of Virtue_, we will talk of hereafter. It is now time to say, that
I am, with increasing esteem and affection, my dear friend, yours
ever,[72]
B. FRANKLIN.
TO MISS MARY STEVENSON
Paris, Sept. 14, 1767.
DEAR POLLY,
I am always pleas'd with a Letter from you, and I flatter myself you may
be sometimes pleas'd in receiving one from me, tho' it should be of
little Importance, such as this, which is to consist of a few occasional
Remarks made here, and in my Journey hither.
Soon after I left you in that agreable Society at Bromley, I took the
Resolution of making a Trip with Sir John Pringle[73] into France. We
set out the 28th past. All the way to Dover we were furnished with
PostChaises, hung so as to lean forward, the Top coming down over one's
Eyes, like a Hood, as if to prevent one's seeing the Country; which
being one of my great Pleasures, I was engag'd in perpetual Disputes
with the Innkeepers, Hostlers, and Postilions, about getting the Straps
taken up a Hole or two before, and let down as much behind, they
insisting that the Chaise leaning forward was an Ease to the Horses, and
that the contrary would kill them. I suppose the chaise leaning forward
looks to them like a Willingness to go forward, and that its hanging
back shows a Reluctance. They added other Reasons, that were no Reasons
at all, and made me, as upon a 100 other Occasions, almost wish that
Mankind had never been endow'd with a reasoning Faculty, since they know
so little how to make use of it, and so often mislead themselves by it,
and that they had been furnish'd with a good sensible Instinct instead
of it.
At Dover, the next Morning, we embark'd for Calais with a Number of
Passengers, who had never been before at sea. They would previously make
a hearty Breakfast, because, if the Wind should fail, we might not get
over till Supper time. Doubtless they thought that when they had paid
for their Breakfast, they had a Right to it, and that, when they had
swallowed it they were sure of it. But they had scarce been out half an
Hour, before the Sea laid Claim to it, and they were oblig'd to deliver
it up. So it seems there are Uncertainties, even beyond those between
the Cup and the Lip. If ever you go to Sea, take my Advice, and live
sparingly a Day or two beforehand. The Sickness, if any, will be lighter
and sooner over. We got to Calais that Evening.
Various Impositions we suffer'd from Boatmen, Porters, &c. on both Sides
the Water. I know not which are most rapacious, the English or French,
but the latter have, with their Knavery, the most Politeness.
The Roads we found equally good with ours in England, in some Places
pav'd with smooth Stone, like our new Streets, for many Miles together,
and Rows of Trees on each Side, and yet there are no Turnpikes. But then
the poor Peasants complain'd to us grievously, that they were oblig'd to
work upon the Roads full two Months in the Year, without being paid for
their Labour. Whether this is Truth, or whether, like Englishmen, they
grumble Cause or no Cause, I have not yet been able fully to inform
myself.
The Women we saw at Calais, on the Road, at Bouloigne, and in the Inns
and Villages, were generally of dark Complexions; but arriving at
Abbeville we found a sudden Change, a Multitude of both Women and Men in
that Place appearing remarkably fair. Whether this is owing to a small
Colony of Spinners, Wool-combers, and Weavers, brought hither from
Holland with the Woollen Manufacture about 60 Years ago; or to their
being less expos'd to the Sun, than in other Places, their Business
keeping them much within Doors, I know not. Perhaps as in some other
Cases, different Causes may club in producing the Effect, but the Effect
itself is certain. Never was I in a Place of greater Industry, Wheels
and Looms going in every House.
As soon as we left Abbeville, the Swarthiness return'd. I speak
generally, for here are some fair Women at Paris, who I think are not
whiten'd by Art. As to Rouge, they don't pretend to imitate Nature in
laying it on. There is no gradual Diminution of the Colour, from the
full Bloom in the Middle of the Cheek to the faint Tint near the Sides,
nor does it show itself differently in different Faces. I have not had
the Honour of being at any Lady's Toylette to see how it is laid on, but
I fancy I can tell you how it is or may be done. Cut a Hole of 3 Inches
Diameter in a Piece of Paper; place it on the Side of your Face in such
a Manner as that the Top of the Hole may be just under your Eye; then
with a Brush dipt in the Colour, paint Face and Paper together; so when
the Paper is taken off there will remain a round Patch of Red exactly
the Form of the Hole. This is the Mode, from the Actresses on the Stage
upwards thro' all Ranks of Ladies to the Princesses of the Blood, but it
stops there, the Queen not using it, having in the Serenity,
Complacence, and Benignity that shine so eminently in, or rather through
her Countenance, sufficient Beauty, tho' now an old Woman, to do
extreamly well without it.