Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania to the Inhabitants of the British Colonies

VI. "That all supplies to the crown being free gifts of the people, it is unreasonable and inconsistent with the principles and spirit of the British constitution, for the people of Great-Britain to grant to his Majesty the property of the colonies."

Here is no distinction made, between internal and external taxes. It is evident from the short reasoning thrown into these resolves that every imposition "to grant to his Majesty the property of the colonies," was thought a "tax;" and that every such imposition if laid any other way "but with their consent, given personally, or by their representatives;" was not only "unreasonable, and inconsistent with the principles and spirit of the British constitution," but destructive "to the freedom of a people."

This language is clear and important. A "tax" means an imposition to raise money. Such persons therefore as speak of internal and external "taxes," I pray may pardon me, if I object to that expression as applied to the privileges and interests of these colonies. There may be external and internal impositions, founded on different principles, and having different tendencies; every "tax" being an imposition, tho' every imposition is not a "tax." But all "taxes" are founded on the same principle, and have the same tendency.

"External impositions for the regulation of our trade, do not grant to his Majesty the property of the colonies." They only prevent the colonies acquiring property in things not necessary, and in a manner judged to be injurious to the welfare of the whole empire. But the last statute respecting us, "grants to his Majesty the property of these colonies," by laying duties on manufactures of Great-Britain, which they must take, and which he settled them, in order that they should take.

What[21 - It seems to be evident, that Mr. Pitt, in his defence of America, during the debate concerning the repeal of the Stamp-act, by "internal taxes" meant any duties "for the purpose of raising a revenue;" and by "external taxes," meant "duties imposed for the regulation of trade." His expressions are these. – "If the gentleman does not understand the difference between internal and external taxes, I cannot help it; but there is a plain distinction between taxes levied for the purposes of raising a revenue, and duties imposed for the regulation of trade, for the accommodation of the subject; altho' in the consequences, some revenue might incidentally arise from the latter."These words were in Mr. Pitt's reply to Mr. Grenville, who said he could not understand the difference between external and internal taxes. But Mr. Pitt in his first speech, had made no such distinction; and his meaning, when he mentions the distinction, appears to be – that by "external taxes," he intended impositions, for the purpose of regulating the intercourse of the colonies with others; and by "internal taxes," he intended impositions, for the purpose of taking money from them.In every other part of his speeches on that occasion, his words confirm this construction of his expressions. The following extracts will shew how positive and general were his assertions of our right."It is my opinion that this kingdom has no right to lay a tax upon the colonies." "The Americans are the sons not the bastards of England. Taxation is no part of the Governing or legislative power." "The taxes are a voluntary gift and grant of the Commons alone. In legislation the three estates of the realm are alike concerned, but the concurrence of the peers and the crown to a tax, is only necessary to close with the form of a law. The gift and grant is of the Commons alone." "The distinction between legislation and taxation is essentially necessary to liberty." "The Commons of America represented in their several assemblies have ever been in possession of the exercise of this, their constitutional right, of giving and granting their own money. They would have been slaves, if they had not enjoyed it." "The idea of a virtual representation of America in this house, is the most contemptible idea that ever entered into the head of man. It does not deserve a serious refutation."He afterwards shews the unreasonableness of Great-Britain taxing America, thus – "When I had the honour of serving his Majesty, I availed myself of the means of information, which I derived from my office: I speak therefore from knowledge. My materials were good, I was at pains to collect, to digest, to consider them: and I will be bold to affirm that the profit to Great-Britain from the trade of the colonies, thro' all its branches, is two millions a year. This is the fund that carried you triumphantly thro' the last war. The estates that were rented at two thousand pounds a year, threescore years ago, are at three thousand pounds at present. Those estates sold then from fifteen to eighteen years purchase; the same may now be sold for thirty. YOU OWE THIS TO AMERICA. THIS IS THE PRICE THAT AMERICA PAYS YOU FOR HER PROTECTION," – "I dare not say how much higher these profits may be augmented." – "Upon the whole, I will beg leave to tell the house what is really my opinion: it is, THAT THE STAMP-ACT BE REPEALED ABSOLUTELY, TOTALLY, AND IMMEDIATELY. That the reason for the repeal be assigned, because it was founded on an erroneous principle."] "tax" can be more "internal" than this? Here is money drawn without their consent from a society, who have constantly enjoyed a constitutional mode of raising all money among themselves. The payment of this tax they have no possible method of avoiding, as they cannot do without the commodities on which it is laid, and they cannot manufacture these commodities themselves; besides, if this unhappy country should be so lucky as to elude this act, by getting parchment enough to use in the place of paper, or reviving the antient method of writing on wax and bark, and by inventing something to serve instead of glass, her ingenuity would stand her in little stead; for then the parliament would have nothing to do, but to prohibit manufactures, or to lay a tax on hats and woollen cloths, which they have already prohibited the colonies from supplying each other with; or on instruments and tools of steel and iron, which they have prohibited the provincials from manufacturing at all[22 - "And that pig and bar iron made in his Majesty's colonies in America may be further manufactured in this kingdom, be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that from and after the twenty-fourth day of June, 1750, no mill or other engine for slitting or rolling of iron, or any plaiting forge to work with a tilt hammer, or any furnace for making steel, shall be erected, or after such erection continued, in any of his Majesty's colonies in America."3 Geo. II. chap. 29. sect. 9.] And then what little gold and silver they have, must be torn from their hands, or they will not be able in a short time, to get an ax[23 - Though these particulars are mentioned as being so absolutely necessary, yet perhaps they are not more so than glass, in our severe winters, to keep out the cold, from our houses; or than paper, without which such inexpressible confusion must ensue.] for cutting their firewood, nor a plough for raising their food. – In what respect therefore, I beg leave to ask, is the late act preferable to the Stamp-act, or more consistent with the liberties of the colonies? "I regard them both with equal apprehension, and think they ought to be in the same manner opposed."

"Habemus quidem senatus consultum – tanquam gladium in vagina repositum"

We have a statute like a sword in the scabbard.

    A FARMER.

LETTER V

Beloved Countrymen,

Perhaps the objection to the late act, imposing duties upon paper, &c. might have been safely rested on the arguments drawn from the universal conduct of parliaments and ministers, from the first existence of these colonies, to the administration of Mr. Grenville.

What but the indisputable, the acknowledged exclusive right of the colonies to tax themselves, could be the reason, that in this long period of more than one hundred and fifty years, no statute was ever passed for the sole purpose of raising a revenue on the colonies? And how clear, how cogent must that reason be, to which every parliament and every minister, for so long a time submitted, without a single attempt to innovate?

England in part of that course of years, and Great Britain, in other parts, was engaged in fierce and expensive wars; troubled with some tumultuous and bold parliaments; governed by many daring and wicked ministers; yet none of them ever ventured to touch the PALLADIUM of American Liberty. Ambition, avarice, faction, tyranny, all revered it. Whenever it was necessary to raise money on the colonies, the requisitions of the crown were made, and dutifully complied with. The parliament from time to time regulated their trade, and that of the rest of the empire, to preserve their dependencies, and the connection of the whole in good order.

The people of Great-Britain in support of their privileges, boast much of their antiquity. Yet it may well be questioned, if there is a single privilege of a British subject, supported by longer, more solemn, or more uninterrupted testimony, than the exclusive right of taxation in these colonies. The people of Great-Britain consider that kingdom as the sovereign of these colonies, and would now annex to that sovereignty a prerogative never heard of before. How would they bear this, was the case their own? What would they think of a new prerogative claimed by the crown? We may guess what their conduct would be from the transports of passion into which they fell about the late embargo, laid to remove the most emergent necessities of state, admitting of no delay; and for which there were numerous precedents. Let our liberties be treated with the same tenderness, and it is all we desire.

Explicit as the conduct of parliaments, for so many ages, is, to prove that no money can be levied on these colonies, by parliament for the purpose of raising a revenue; yet it is not the only evidence in our favour.

Every one of the most material arguments against the legality of the Stamp-act operates with equal force against the act now objected to; but as they are well known, it seems unnecessary to repeat them here.

This general one only shall be considered at present. That tho' these colonies are dependant on Great-Britain; and tho' she has a legal power to make laws for preserving that dependance; yet it is not necessary for this purpose, nor essential to the relation between a mother-country and her colonies, as was eagerly contended by the advocates for the Stamp-act, that she should raise money upon them without their consent.

Colonies were formerly planted by warlike nations, to keep their enemies in awe; to relieve their country overburthened with inhabitants; or to discharge a number of discontented and troublesome citizens. But in more modern ages, the spirit of violence being in some measure, if the expression may be allowed, sheathed in commerce, colonies have been settled by the nations of Europe for the purposes of trade. These purposes were to be attained by the colonies raising for their mother country those things which she did not produce herself; and by supplying themselves from her with things they wanted. These were the national objects in the commencement of our colonies, and have been uniformly so in their promotion.

To answer these grand purposes, perfect liberty was known to be necessary; all history proving, that trade and freedom are nearly related to each other. By a due regard to this wise and just plan, the infant colonies exposed in the unknown climates, and unexplored wildernesses of this new world, lived, grew, and flourished.

The parent country with undeviating prudence and virtue, attentive to the first principles of colonization, drew to herself the benefits she might reasonably expect, and preserved to her children the blessings, on which those benefits were founded. She made laws obliging her colonies to carry to her all those products which she wanted for her own use; and all those raw materials which she chose herself to work up. Besides this restriction, she forbade them to procure manufactures from any other part of the globe; or even the products of European countries, which alone could rival her, without being first brought to her. In short, by a variety of laws, she regulated their trade in such a manner, as she thought most conducive to their mutual advantage, and her own welfare. A power was reserved to the crown of repealing any laws that should be enacted. The executive authority of government was all lodged in the crown and its representatives; and an appeal was secured to the crown from all judgments in the administration of justice.

For all these powers established by the mother country over the colonies; for all these immense emoluments derived by her from them; for all their difficulties and distresses in fixing themselves, what was the recompense made them? A communication of her rights in general, and particularly of that great one, the foundation of all the rest – that their property, acquired with so much pain and hazard, should not be disposed of by[24 - The power of taxing themselves, was the privileges of which the English were, with reason, particularly jealous.Hume's hist. of England.] any one but themselves – or to use the beautiful and emphatic language of the sacred scriptures, "that they should sit every man under his vine, and under his fig tree, and none should make them afraid."[25 - Mic. iv. 4.]

Can any man of candour and knowledge deny, that these institutions, form an affinity between Great-Britain and her colonies, that sufficiently secures their dependance upon her? or that for her to levy taxes upon them, is to reverse the nature of things? or that she can pursue such a measure, without reducing them to a state of vassalage?

If any person cannot conceive the supremacy of Great Britain to exist, without the power of laying taxes to levy money upon us, the history of the colonies and of Great-Britain since their settlement will prove the contrary. He will there find the amazing advantages arising to her from them – The constant exercise of her supremacy – and their filial submission to it, without a single rebellion, or even the thought of one, from the first emigration to this moment – and all these things have happened, without an instance of Great-Britain laying taxes to levy money upon them.

How many British authors[26 - It has been said in the house of commons, when complaints have been made of the decay of trade to any part of Europe, "That such things were not worth regard, as Great-Britain was possest of colonies that could consume more of her manufactures than she was able to supply them with.""As the case now stands, we shall shew that the plantations are a spring of wealth to this nation, that they work for us, that their treasure centers all here, and that the laws have tied them fast enough to us; so that it must be through our own fault and mismanagement, if they become independent of England."Davenant on the plantat. trade."It is better that the islands should be supplied from the Northern Colonies than from England, for this reason; the provisions we might send to Barbados, Jamaica, &c. would be unimproved product of the earth, as grain of all kinds, or such product where there is little got by the improvement, as malt, salt, beef and pork; indeed the exportation of salt fish thither would be more advantageous, but the goods which we send to the northern colonies are such, whose improvement may be justly said, one with another to be near four fifths of the value of the whole commodity, as apparel, household furniture, and many other things."Idem."New-England is the most prejudicial plantation to the kingdom of England; and yet, to do right to that most industrious English colony, I must confess, that though we lose by their unlimited trade with other foreign plantations, yet we are very great gainers by their direct trade to and from Old England. Our yearly exportations of English manufactures, malt and other goods, from hence thither, amounting, in my opinion, to ten times the value of what is imported from thence; which calculation I do not make at random, but upon mature consideration, and peradventure, upon as much experience in this very trade, as any other person will pretend to; and therefore, whenever reformation of our correspondency in trade with that people shall be thought on, it will, in my poor judgment, require great tenderness, and very serious circumspection."Sir Josiah Child's discourse on trade."Our plantations spend mostly our English manufactures, and those of all sorts almost imaginable, in egregious quantities, and employ near two thirds of all our English shipping; so that we have more people in England, by reason of our plantations in America."Idem.Sir Josiah Child says, in another part of his work, "that not more than fifty families are maintained in England by the refining of sugar." From whence, and from what Davenant says, it is plain, that the advantages here said to be derived from the plantations by England, must be meant chiefly of the continental colonies."I shall sum up my whole remarks on our American colonies, with this observation, that as they are a certain annual revenue of several millions sterling to their mother country, they ought carefully to be protected, duly encouraged, and every opportunity that presents, improved for their increasment and advantage, as every one they can possibly reap, must at least return to us with interest."Beawes's Lex merc. red."We may safely advance, that our trade and navigation are greatly increased by our colonies, and that they really are a source of treasure and naval power to this kingdom, since they work for us, and their treasure centers here. Before their settlement, our manufactures were few, and those but indifferent; the number of English merchants very small, and the whole shipping of the nation much inferior to what now belongs to the northern colonies only. These are certain facts. But since their establishment, our condition has altered for the better, almost to a degree beyond credibility. Our manufactures are prodigiously encreased, chiefly by the demand for them in the plantations, where they at least take off one half, and supply us with many valuable commodities for exportation, which is as great an emolument to the mother kingdom, as to the plantations themselves."Postlethwait's universal dict. of trade and commerce."Most of the nations of Europe have interfered with us more or less, in divers of our staple manufactures, within half a century, not only in our woollen, but in our lead and tin manufactures, as well as our fisheries."Idem."The inhabitants of our colonies, by carrying on a trade with their foreign neighbours, do not only occasion a greater quantity of the goods and merchandizes of Europe being sent from hence to them, and a greater quantity of the product of America to be sent from them thither, which would otherways be carried from, and brought to Europe by foreigners, but an increase of the seamen and navigation in those parts, which is of great strength and security, as well as of great advantage to our plantations in general. And though some of our colonies are not only for preventing the importations of all goods of the same species they produce, but suffer particular planters to keep great runs of land in their possession uncultivated with design to prevent new settlements, whereby they imagine the prices of their commodities may be affected; yet if it be considered, that the markets of Great-Britain depend on the markets of all Europe in general, and that the European markets in general depend on the proportion between the annual consumption and the whole quantity of each species annually produced by all nations; it must follow, that whether we or foreigners, are the producers, carriers, importers and exporters of American produce, yet their respective prices in each colony (the difference of freight, customs and importations considered) will always bear proportion to the general consumption of the whole quantity of each sort, produced in all colonies, and in all parts, allowing only for the usual contingencies, that trade and commerce, agriculture and manufactures are liable to in all countries."Idem."It is certain, that from the very time Sir Walter Raleigh, the father of our English colonies, and his associates, first projected these establishments, there have been persons who have found an interest, in misrepresenting, or lessening the value of them. – The attempts were called chimerical and dangerous. Afterwards many malignant suggestions were made, about sacrificing so many Englishmen to the obstinate desire of settling colonies in countries which then produced very little advantage. But as these difficulties were gradually surmounted, those complaints vanished. No sooner were these lamentations over, but others arose in their stead; when it could be no longer said, that the colonies were useless, it was alledged that they were not useful enough to their mother country; that while we were loaded with taxes, they were absolutely free; that the planters lived like princes, when the inhabitants of England laboured hard for a tolerable subsistence."Idem."Before the settlement of these colonies," says Postlethwayt, "our manufactures were few, and those but indifferent. In those days we had not only our naval stores, but our ships from our neighbours. Germany furnished us with all things made of metal, even to nails. Wine, paper, linens, and a thousand other things came from France. Portugal supplied us with sugar; all the products of America were poured into us from Spain; and the Venetians and Genoese retailed to us the commodities of the East-Indies, at their own price.""If it be asked, whether foreigners for what goods they take of us, do not pay on that consumption a great portion of our taxes? It is admitted they do."Postlethwayt's Great-Britain's true system."If we are afraid that one day or other the colonies will revolt, and set up for themselves, as some seem to apprehend, let us not drive them to a necessity to feel themselves independant of us; as they will do, the moment they perceive that they can be supplied with all things from within themselves, and do not need our assistance. If we would keep them still dependant upon their mother country, and in some respects subservient to their views and welfare, let us make it their interest always to be so."Tucker on trade."Our colonies, while they have English blood in their veins, and have relations in England, and while they can get by trading with us, the stronger and greater they grow, the more this crown and kingdom will get by them; and nothing but such an arbitrary power as shall make them desperate can bring them to rebel."Davenant on the plantation trade."The northern colonies are not upon the same footing as those of the south; and having a worse soil to improve, they must find the recompence some other way, which only can be in property and dominion. Upon which score, any innovations in the form of government there, should be cautiously examined, for fear of entering upon measures, by which the industry of the inhabitants may be quite discouraged. 'Tis always unfortunate for a people, either by consent or upon compulsion, to depart from their primitive institutions, and those fundamental, by which they were first united together."Idem.All wise states will well consider how to preserve the advantages arising from colonies, and avoid the evils. And I conceive that there can be but two ways in nature to hinder them from throwing off their dependence; one to keep it out of their power, and the other, out of their will. The first must be by force; and the latter by using them well, and keeping them employed in such productions, and making such manufactures, as will support themselves and families comfortably, and procure them wealth too, and at least not prejudice their mother country.Force can never be used effectually to answer the end, without destroying the colonies themselves. Liberty and encouragement are necessary to carry people thither, and to keep them together when they are there; and violence will hinder both. Any body of troops considerable enough to awe them, and keep them in subjection, under the direction too of a needy governor, often sent thither to make his fortune, and at such a distance from any application for redress, will soon put an end to all planting, and leave the country to the soldiers alone, and if it did not, would eat up all the profit of the colony. For this reason, arbitrary countries have not been equally successful in planting colonies with free ones; and what they have done in that kind, has either been by force at a vast expence, or by departing from the nature of their government, and giving such privileges to planters as were denied to their other subjects. And I dare say, that a few prudent laws, and a little prudent conduct, would soon give us far the greatest share of the riches of all America, perhaps drive many of other nations out of it, or into our colonies for shelter.There are so many exigencies in all states, so many foreign wars and domestic disturbances, that these colonies can never want opportunities, if they watch for them, to do what they shall find their interest to do; and therefore we ought to take all the precautions in our power, that it shall never be their interest to act against that of their native country; an evil which can no otherways be averted, than by keeping them fully employed in such trades as will increase their own, as well as our wealth; for it is much to be feared, if we do not find employment for them, they may find it for us. The interest of the mother country is always to keep them dependent, and so employed; and it requires all her address to do it; and it is certainly more easily and effectually done by gentle and insensible methods, than by power alone.Cato's letters.] have remonstrated that the present wealth, power and glory of their country are founded on these colonies? As constantly as streams tend to the ocean, have they been pouring the fruits of all their labours into their mother's lap. Good Heaven! And shall a total oblivion of former tendernesses and blessings be spread over the minds of a wise people, by the sordid acts of intriguing men, who covering their selfish projects under pretences of public good, first enrage their countrymen into a frenzy of passion, and then advance their own influence and interest, by gratifying that passion, which they themselves have barely excited?

Hitherto Great-Britain has been contented with her prosperity. Moderation has been the rule of her conduct. But now a generous and humane people that so often has protected the liberty of strangers, is inflamed into an attempt to tear a privilege from her own children, which, if executed, must in their opinion, sink them into slaves: And for what? For a pernicious power, not necessary to her, as her own experience may convince her; but horribly dreadful and detestable to them.

It seems extremely probable, that when cool, dispassionate posterity shall consider the affectionate intercourse, the reciprocal benefits, and the unsuspecting confidence, that have subsisted between these colonies and their parent country, for such a length of time, they will execrate with the bitterest curses the infamous memory of those men, whose pestilential ambition, unnecessarily, wantonly, first opened the sources of civil discord, between them; first turned their love into jealousy; and first taught these provinces, filled with grief and anxiety, to enquire,

"Mens ubi materna est?"

Where is maternal affection.

    A FARMER.

LETTER VI

Beloved Countrymen,

It may perhaps be objected against the arguments that have been offered to the public concerning the legal power of the parliament, that it has always exercised the power of imposing duties for the purposes of raising a revenue on the productions of these colonies carried to Great-Britain, which may be called a tax on them. To this I answer; that is no more a violation of the rights of the colonies, than their being ordered to carry certain of their productions to Great-Britain, which is no violation at all; it being implied in the relation between them, that the colonies should not carry such commodities to other nations, as should enable them to interfere with the mother country. The duties imposed on these commodities when brought to her, are only a consequence of her paternal right; and if the point is thoroughly examined, will be found to be laid on the people of the mother country, and not at all dangerous to the liberties of the colonies. Whatever these duties are, they must proportionably raise the price of the goods, and consequently the duties must be paid by the consumers. In this light they were considered by the parliament in the 25 Char. II. Chap. 7, sec. 2, which says, that the productions of the plantations were carried from one to another free from all customs "while the subjects of this your kingdom of England have paid great customs and impositions for what of them have been spent here, &c." Such duties therefore can never be injurious to the liberties of the colonies.

Besides, if Great-Britain exports these commodities again, the duties will injure her own trade, so that she cannot hurt us without plainly and immediately hurting herself; and this is our check against her acting arbitrarily in this respect.

It[27 - 'If any one should observe, that no opposition has been made to the legality of the 4th Geo. III. ch. 15, which is the first act of parliament that ever imposed duties on the importations in America, for the express purpose of raising a revenue there, I answer, first, that tho' that act expressly mentions the raising a revenue in America, yet it seems that it had as much in view, "the improving and securing the trade between the same and Great-Britain," which words are part of its title, and the preamble says, "Whereas it is expedient that new provisions and regulations should be established for improving the revenue of this kingdom, and for extending and securing the navigation and commerce between Great-Britain and your Majesty's dominions in America, which, by the peace, have been so happily extended and enlarged, &c." 'Secondly, all the duties mentioned in that act, are imposed solely on the productions and manufactures of foreign countries, and not a single duty laid on any production or manufacture of our mother country. Thirdly, the authority of the provincial assemblies is not therein so plainly attacked, as by the last act, which makes provision for defraying the charges of the administration of justice, and the support of civil government, 4thly, That it being doubtful whether the intention of the 4th Geo. III. ch. 15, was not as much to regulate trade as to raise a revenue, the minds of the people here were wholly engrossed by the terror of the Stamp-act, then impending over them, about the intention of which they could be in no doubt.''These reasons so far distinguish 4th Geo. III. ch. 15, from the last act, that it is not to be wondered at, that the first should have been submitted to, though the last should excite the most universal and spirited opposition. For this will be found on the strictest examination to be, in the principle on which it is founded, and in the consequences that must attend it, if possible, more destructive than the Stamp-act. It is, to speak plainly, a prodigy in our laws, not having one British feature.'] may, perhaps, be further objected, "that it being granted that statutes made for regulating trade are binding upon us, it will be difficult for any persons but the makers of the laws to determine, which of them are made for the regulating of trade, and which for raising a revenue; and that from hence may arise confusion."

To this I answer, that the objection is of no force in the present case, or such as resemble it, because the act now in question is formed expressly for the sole purpose of raising a revenue.

However, supposing the design of the parliament had not been expressed, the objection seems to me of no weight, with regard to the influence, which those who may make it, might expect it ought to have on the conduct of the colonies.

It is true, that impositions for raising a revenue, may be hereafter called regulations of trade, but names will not change the nature of things. Indeed we ought firmly to believe, what is an undoubted truth, confirmed by the unhappy experience of many states heretofore free, that unless the most watchful attention be exerted, a new servitude may be slipped upon us under the sanction of usual and respectable terms.

Thus the Cæsars ruined Roman liberty, under the titles of tribunical and dictatorial authorities, – old and venerable dignities, known in the most flourishing times of freedom. In imitation of the same policy, James II. when he meant to establish popery, talked of liberty of conscience, the most sacred of all liberties; and had thereby almost deceived the dissenters into destruction.

All artful rulers, who strive to extend their own power beyond its just limits, endeavour to give to their attempts, as much semblance of legality as possible. Those who succeed them may venture to go a little farther; for each new encroachment will be strengthened by a former,[28 - Tacitus.]"That which is now supported by examples, growing old, will become an example itself," and thus support fresh usurpations.

A free people, therefore, can never be too quick in observing, nor too firm in opposing the beginnings of alterations, either in form or reality, respecting institutions formed for their security. The first leads to the last; on the other hand nothing is more certain, than that forms of liberty may be retained, when the substance is gone. In government as well as in religion, "the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life."[29 - 2 Cor. iii. 6.]

I will beg leave to enforce this remark by a few instances. The crown, by the constitution, has the prerogative of creating peers; the existence of that order in due number and dignity, is essential to the constitution; and if the crown did not exercise that prerogative, the peerage must have long since decreased so much, as to have lost its proper influence. Suppose a prince for some unjust purposes, should from time to time advance many needy profligate wretches, to that rank, that all the independance of the house of Lords should be destroyed, there would then be a manifest violation of the constitution, under the appearance of using legal prerogative.

The house of Commons claim the privilege of forming all money-bills, and will not suffer either of the other branches of the legislature to add to or alter them; contending that their power, simply extends to an acceptance or rejection of them. This privilege appears to be just; but under pretence of this just privilege, the house of Commons has claimed a licence of tacking to money bills, clauses relating to many things of a totally different kind, and have thus forced them, in a manner, on the crown and lords. This seems to be an abuse of that privilege, and it may be vastly more abused. Suppose a future house; influenced by some displaced discontented demagogues, in a time of danger, should tack to a money bill something so injurious to the king and peers, that they would not assent to it and yet the Commons should obstinately insist on it; the whole kingdom would be exposed to ruin, under the appearance of maintaining a valuable privilege.

In these cases it might be difficult for a while to determine, whether the King intended to exercise his prerogative in a constitutional manner or not; or whether the Commons insisted on the demand factitiously, or for the public good: But surely the conduct of the crown, or of the house, would in time sufficiently explain itself.

Ought not the people therefore to watch to observe facts? to search into causes? to investigate designs? and have they not a right of judging from the evidence before them, on no slighter points than their liberty and happiness? It would be less than trifling, wherever a British government is established, to make use of any other arguments to prove such a right. It is sufficient to remind the reader of the day on which King William landed at Torbay.[30 - November 5, 1688.]

I will now apply what has been said to the present question. The nature of any impositions laid by parliament on the colonies, must determine the design in laying them. It may not be easy in every instance to discover that design. Whenever it is doubtful, I think submission cannot be dangerous; nay, it must be right: for, in my opinion, there is no privilege the colonies claim, which they ought, in duty and prudence, more earnestly to maintain and defend, than the authority of the British parliament to regulate the trade of all her dominions. Without this authority, the benefits she enjoys from our commerce, must be lost to her: The blessings we enjoy from our dependance upon her, must be lost to us; her strength must decay; her glory vanish; and she cannot suffer, without our partaking in her misfortune. – "Let us therefore cherish her interest as our own, and give her every thing that it becomes FREEMEN to give or to receive."

The nature of any impositions she may lay upon us, may in general be known, considering how far they relate to the preserving, in due order, the connexion between the several parts of the British empire. One thing we may be assured of, which is this; whenever a statute imposes duties on commodities, to be paid only upon their exportation from Great-Britain to these colonies, it is not a regulation of trade, but a design to raise a revenue upon us. Other instances may happen, which it may not be necessary to dwell on. I hope these colonies will never, to their latest existence, want understanding sufficient to discover the intentions of those who rule over them, nor the resolution necessary for asserting their interests. They will always have the same right that all free states have, of judging when their privileges are invaded, and of using all prudent measures for preserving them.

"Quocirca vivite fortes"
"Fortiaque adversis opponite pectora rebus,"

Wherefore keep up your spirits, and gallantly oppose this adverse course of affairs.

    A FARMER.

LETTER VII