NOTES.

CatherineCHELSEA DERBY PORCELAIN STATUETTE OF CATHERINE MACAULAY

CHELSEA DERBY PORCELAIN STATUETTE OF CATHERINE MACAULAY

The potter's art, which from time immemorial has been the means of transmitting history, furnishes the other illustration and also perpetuates the estimate of Dickinson's character held by William Duesbury, England's greatest manufacturer of porcelain. It pictures a porcelain statuette of Mrs. CatherineMacaulay, a well-known historian, whose "History of England from the Accession of James the First to that of the Brunswick Line" and other historical writings met with great approval among the Whig party in England and whose decided approval of the stand taken by the colonies, gave her great popularity in America. This statuette, measuring 131⁄2inches in height, is modeled to a certain extent after the statue of this lady which was erected in 1777 in the Church of St. Stephen, Walbrook, London. Mrs. Macaulay appears leaning upon her "Histories of England," which rest on the top of a pedestal, on the front of which is the inscription, "Government a Power Delegated for the Happiness of Mankind conducted by Wisdom, Justice and Mercy." Beneath are the words, "American Congress." On the side of the pedestal the name ofDickinsonappears, preceded by the names of those noble writers, England's great advocates and expounders of Constitutional liberty, Sydney, Hampden, Milton, Locke, Harrington, Ludlow and Marvel. This beautiful porcelain statuette was moulded at the Chelsea factory in 1777, the same year in which Boswell chronicles Dr. Johnson's visit there, noting, "The china was beautiful, but Dr. Johnson justly observed it was too dear, for he could have vessels of silver as cheap as were here made of porcelain."

The space at my disposal prevents myquoting many a "Letter to the Printer" appealing for justice for the Colonials as well as numerous contributed articles which appeared during the next few years in the English press, the contents of which clearly show how strongly Dickinson's arguments had influenced their respective authors. While it is true that these sentiments were attacked both at home and abroad, the attacks soon lost their vehemence. Strange as it may seem, more protests against the course of the ministry than denunciations of the doings of the colonial Assemblies are found in the columns of the English press of the period. The demand for the arguments contained in the "Farmer's Letters" was not lessened by subsequent events as their popularity demanded the publishing of another London edition in 1774.

Certainly to John Dickinson for his masterly defence of the rights of the Colonies America owes an everlasting debt of gratitude. The logic of his claims and his warnings as to what must be the ultimate result of the ministerial encroachments upon the liberties of Englishmen did much to win over to the American cause in England that strong ally, the support of a large body of thoughtful Englishmen. These men actively condemned the ministerial actions and during the war which followed caused the course of the government to be bitterly opposed by an influential and constantlygrowing minority in Parliament. Through their efforts was fostered a public sentiment which caused the war to be prosecuted in a half-hearted manner and obliged a power-loving King to fill the depleted ranks of his army with German mercenaries, so impossible was it to force a sufficient number of his own liberty-loving subjects to fight against their kindred living in the land so happily alluded to by a contributor to the London "Chronicle" (June 3-6, 1769), in the following poem:

The Genius ofAmericato her Sons

Who'd know the sweets of Liberty?'Tis to climbe the mountain's brow,Thence to discern rough industry,At the harrow or the plough;'Tis where my sons their crops have sown,Calling the harvest all their own;'Tis where the heart to truth allied,Never felt unmanly fear;'Tis where the eye with milder pride,Nobly sheds sweet pity's tear;Such as America yet shall see,These are the sweets of Liberty.

An address from the Moderator and Freemen of the Town of Providence in the Colony of Rhode-Island, and Providence Plantation convened in open Meeting the 20th day of June, 1768, to the Author of a Series of Letters signed

A FARMER.

Sir,In your Retirement, "near the Banks of the River Delaware," where you are compleating, in a rational way, the Number of Days allotted to you by Divine Goodness, the consciousness of having employed those Talents which God hath bestowed upon You, for the Support of our Rights, must afford you a Satisfaction vastly exceeding that, which is derived to you from the universal Approbation of Your Letters,—However amidst the general Acclamation of your Praise, we the Moderator and Freemen of the ancient Town of Providence cannot be silent; although we would not offend your Delicacy, or incur the Imputation of Flattery in expressing our Gratitude to you.Your Benevolence to Mankind, fully discoverable from your Writings, doubtless caused you to address your countrymen, whom you tenderly callDearandBeloved, in a Series of Letters, wherein you have with a great Judgment, and in the most spirited and forcible Manner explained their Rights and Privileges; and vindicated them against such as would reduce these extensive Dominionsof His Majesty to Poverty, Misery, and Slavery. This Your patriotic Exertion in our Cause and indeed in the Cause of all the human Race in some Degree, hath rendered you very dear to us, although we know not your Person.We deplore the Frailty of human Nature, in that it is necessary that we should be frequently awakened into Attention to our Duty in Matters very plain and incontrovertible, if we would suffer ourselves to consider them. From this Inattention to Things evidently the Duty and Interest of the World, we suppose despotic Rule to have originated, and all the Train of Miseries consequent thereupon.The virtuous and good Man, who rouses an injured Country from their Lethargy, and animates them into active and successful Endeavours for casting off the Burdens imposed on them, and effecting a full Enjoyment of the Rights of Men, which no Human Creature ought to violate, will merit the warmest Expressions of Gratitude from his Countrymen, for his Instrumentality in saving them and their Posterity.As the very Design of instituting civil Government in the World was to secure to Individuals a quiet Enjoyment of their native Rights, wherever there is a Departure from this great and only End, impious Force succeeds. The Blessings of a just Government, and the Horror of brutal Violence are both inexpressible. As the latter is generally brought upon People by Degrees, it will be their Duty to watch against even the smallest attempt to "innovate a single Iota" in their Privilege.With Hearts truly loyal to the King, we feel the greatest concern at divers Acts of the British Parliament, relative to these colonies. We are clear and unanimous in Sentiment that they aresubversive of our Liberties, and derogatory to the Power and Dignity of the several Legislatures established in America.Permit us, Sir, to assure you that we feel an ineffable Gratitude to you, for sending forth your Letters at a Time when the Exercise of great Abilities was necessary. We sincerely wish that You may see the Fruit of your Labours. We on our parts shall be ready at all Times to evince to the World that we will not surrender our privileges to any of our Fellow Subjects, but will earnestly contend for them, hoping that the "Almighty will look upon our righteous contest with gracious approbation." We hope that the Conduct of the Colonies on this Occasion will be "peaceable, prudent, firm, and joint; and such as will show their Loyalty to the best of Sovereigns, and that they know what they owe to themselves as well as to Great-Britain."Signed by OrderJAMES ANGELL, Town Clerk.

Sir,

In your Retirement, "near the Banks of the River Delaware," where you are compleating, in a rational way, the Number of Days allotted to you by Divine Goodness, the consciousness of having employed those Talents which God hath bestowed upon You, for the Support of our Rights, must afford you a Satisfaction vastly exceeding that, which is derived to you from the universal Approbation of Your Letters,—However amidst the general Acclamation of your Praise, we the Moderator and Freemen of the ancient Town of Providence cannot be silent; although we would not offend your Delicacy, or incur the Imputation of Flattery in expressing our Gratitude to you.

Your Benevolence to Mankind, fully discoverable from your Writings, doubtless caused you to address your countrymen, whom you tenderly callDearandBeloved, in a Series of Letters, wherein you have with a great Judgment, and in the most spirited and forcible Manner explained their Rights and Privileges; and vindicated them against such as would reduce these extensive Dominionsof His Majesty to Poverty, Misery, and Slavery. This Your patriotic Exertion in our Cause and indeed in the Cause of all the human Race in some Degree, hath rendered you very dear to us, although we know not your Person.

We deplore the Frailty of human Nature, in that it is necessary that we should be frequently awakened into Attention to our Duty in Matters very plain and incontrovertible, if we would suffer ourselves to consider them. From this Inattention to Things evidently the Duty and Interest of the World, we suppose despotic Rule to have originated, and all the Train of Miseries consequent thereupon.

The virtuous and good Man, who rouses an injured Country from their Lethargy, and animates them into active and successful Endeavours for casting off the Burdens imposed on them, and effecting a full Enjoyment of the Rights of Men, which no Human Creature ought to violate, will merit the warmest Expressions of Gratitude from his Countrymen, for his Instrumentality in saving them and their Posterity.

As the very Design of instituting civil Government in the World was to secure to Individuals a quiet Enjoyment of their native Rights, wherever there is a Departure from this great and only End, impious Force succeeds. The Blessings of a just Government, and the Horror of brutal Violence are both inexpressible. As the latter is generally brought upon People by Degrees, it will be their Duty to watch against even the smallest attempt to "innovate a single Iota" in their Privilege.

With Hearts truly loyal to the King, we feel the greatest concern at divers Acts of the British Parliament, relative to these colonies. We are clear and unanimous in Sentiment that they aresubversive of our Liberties, and derogatory to the Power and Dignity of the several Legislatures established in America.

Permit us, Sir, to assure you that we feel an ineffable Gratitude to you, for sending forth your Letters at a Time when the Exercise of great Abilities was necessary. We sincerely wish that You may see the Fruit of your Labours. We on our parts shall be ready at all Times to evince to the World that we will not surrender our privileges to any of our Fellow Subjects, but will earnestly contend for them, hoping that the "Almighty will look upon our righteous contest with gracious approbation." We hope that the Conduct of the Colonies on this Occasion will be "peaceable, prudent, firm, and joint; and such as will show their Loyalty to the best of Sovereigns, and that they know what they owe to themselves as well as to Great-Britain."

Signed by Order

JAMES ANGELL, Town Clerk.

"Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania, to the Inhabitants of the British Colonies. 8vo. 2s. Almon. 1768.

"We have, in the Letters now before us, a calm yet full inquiry into the right of the British parliament, lately assumed, to tax the American colonies; the unconstitutional nature of which attempt is maintained in a well-connected chain of close and manly reasoning; and though from this character, it is evident that detached passagesmust appear to a disadvantage, yet it is but just to give our Readers some specimens of the manner in which the author asserts the rights of his American brethren; subjects of the British government, as he pleads, carrying their birthrights with them wherever they settle as such.

'Colonies, says he, 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 thenationalobjects 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, upon 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 procuremanufacturesfrom any other part of the globe, or even theproductsofEuropeancountries, 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 ofrepealingany laws that should be enacted: the executive authority of government was also lodged in the crown, and its representatives; and anappealwas 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 be disposed of by none but themselves—or, to use beautiful and emphatic language of the sacred scriptures, "that they should sitevery manunder his vine, and under his fig-tree, andnone should make them afraid."'Can any man of candour and knowledge deny that these institutions form an affinity between Great Britain and her colonies, that sufficiently secures their dependence 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 their first emigration to this moment—and all these things have happened, without one instance ofGreat Britain's laying taxes to levy money upon them.'How many British authors have demonstrated, that the present wealth, power and glory of their country, are founded upon 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 good and wise nation by the sordid arts 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 the passion, which they themselves have basely excited.'Hitherto Great Britain has been contented with her prosperity, moderation has been the rule of her conduct. But now, a generous, humane people, that so often have protected the liberty ofstrangers, 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 her.'It seems extremely probable, that when cool, dispassionate prosperity, 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.'

'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, upon 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 procuremanufacturesfrom any other part of the globe, or even theproductsofEuropeancountries, 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 ofrepealingany laws that should be enacted: the executive authority of government was also lodged in the crown, and its representatives; and anappealwas 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 be disposed of by none but themselves—or, to use beautiful and emphatic language of the sacred scriptures, "that they should sitevery manunder his vine, and under his fig-tree, andnone should make them afraid."

'Can any man of candour and knowledge deny that these institutions form an affinity between Great Britain and her colonies, that sufficiently secures their dependence 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 their first emigration to this moment—and all these things have happened, without one instance ofGreat Britain's laying taxes to levy money upon them.

'How many British authors have demonstrated, that the present wealth, power and glory of their country, are founded upon 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 good and wise nation by the sordid arts 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 the passion, which they themselves have basely excited.

'Hitherto Great Britain has been contented with her prosperity, moderation has been the rule of her conduct. But now, a generous, humane people, that so often have protected the liberty ofstrangers, 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 her.

'It seems extremely probable, that when cool, dispassionate prosperity, 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.'

"As every community possessed of valuable privileges, and desirous to preserve the enjoyment of them, ought to be very cautious of admittinginnovations from their established forms of political administration, our Author does not confine his views to the immediate effects of the laws lately passed regarding America; but considers the necessary tendency of the precedents; thus he says,

'I have looked over everystatuterelating to these colonies, from their first settlement to this time; and I find everyone of them founded on this principle, till thestamp-actadministration.All before, are calculated to regulate trade, and preserve or promote a mutually beneficial intercourse between the several constituent parts of the empire; and though many of them imposed duties on trade, yet those duties were always imposedwith designto restrain the commerce of one part, that was injurious to another, and thus to promote the general welfare. The raising a revenue thereby was never intended. Thus, the king by his judges in his courts of justice, impose fines, which altogether amount to a very considerable sum, and contribute to the support of government; but this is merely a consequence arising from restrictions, that only meant to keep peace, and prevent confusion; and surely a man would argue very loosely, who should conclude from hence, that the king has a right to levy money in general upon his subjects. Never did the British parliament, till the period above mentioned, think of imposing duties in America,for the purpose of raising a revenue. Mr. Grenville first introduced this language, in the preamble to the fourth of George III. chap. 15, which has these words—"and whereas it is just and necessary thata revenue be raised in your majesty's said dominions in America, for defraying the expenses of defending, protecting and securing the same: We your majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects,the commons of Great Britain, in Parliament assembled, being desirous to make some provisions in this present session of parliament,towards raising the said revenue in America, have resolved togiveandgrantunto your majesty the several rates and duties hereinafter mentioned," etc.'A few months after came thestamp-act, which reciting this, proceeds in the same strange mode of expression, thus—"And whereas it is just and necessary, that provision be madefor raising a further revenue within your majesty's dominions in America, towards defraying the said expenses, we your majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, thecommonsofGreat Britain, etc., give and grant," etc., as before.'The last act, granting duties upon paper, etc., carefully pursues these modern precedents. The preamble is, "Whereas it is expedient,that a revenue should be raised in your majesty's dominions in America for making a more certain and adequate provision for defraying the charge of the administration of justice, and the support of civil government in such provinces, where it shall be found necessary; and towards the further defraying of the expences of defending, protecting, and securing the said dominions, we your majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, thecommons of Great Britain, etc. giveand grant," etc. as before.'Here we may observe an authority expresly claimed and exerted to impose duties on these colonies; not for the regulation of trade; not for the preservation or promotion of a mutually beneficial intercourse between the several constituent parts of the empire, heretofore thesole objectsof parliamentary institutions;but for the single purpose of levying money upon us.'

'A few months after came thestamp-act, which reciting this, proceeds in the same strange mode of expression, thus—"And whereas it is just and necessary, that provision be madefor raising a further revenue within your majesty's dominions in America, towards defraying the said expenses, we your majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, thecommonsofGreat Britain, etc., give and grant," etc., as before.

'The last act, granting duties upon paper, etc., carefully pursues these modern precedents. The preamble is, "Whereas it is expedient,that a revenue should be raised in your majesty's dominions in America for making a more certain and adequate provision for defraying the charge of the administration of justice, and the support of civil government in such provinces, where it shall be found necessary; and towards the further defraying of the expences of defending, protecting, and securing the said dominions, we your majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, thecommons of Great Britain, etc. giveand grant," etc. as before.

'Here we may observe an authority expresly claimed and exerted to impose duties on these colonies; not for the regulation of trade; not for the preservation or promotion of a mutually beneficial intercourse between the several constituent parts of the empire, heretofore thesole objectsof parliamentary institutions;but for the single purpose of levying money upon us.'

"Again in another place,

'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 from the colonies? And how clear, how cogent must that reason be, to which every parliament, and every ministry for so long a time submitted, without a single attempt to innovate?'England, in part of that course of years, andGreat Britain, in other parts, was engaged in several 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 dependence and the connections of the whole in good order.'

'England, in part of that course of years, andGreat Britain, in other parts, was engaged in several 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 dependence and the connections of the whole in good order.'

"The amount of present duties exacted in an unusual way is no part of the object in question; for our Pennsylvanian Farmer observes:

'Some persons may think this act of no consequence, because the duties are sosmall. A fatal error.Thatis the very circumstance most alarming to me. For I am convinced, that the authors of this law would never have obtained an act to raise so trifling a sum as it must do, had they not intended by it to establish aprecedentfor future use. To console ourselves with thesmallnessof the duties, is to walk deliberately into the snare that is set for us, praising theneatnessof the workmanship. Suppose the duties imposed by the late act could be paid by these distressed colonies with the utmost ease, and that the purposes to which they are to be applied, were the most reasonable and equitable that can be conceived, the contrary of which I hope to demonstrate before these letters are concluded; yet even in such a supposed case, these colonies ought to regard the act with abhorrence. For who are a free people? Not those, over whom government is reasonably and equitably exercised, but those, who live under a government soconstitutionally checkedand controuled, that proper provision is made against its being otherwise exercised.'The late act is founded on the destruction of this constitutional security. If the parliament have a right to lay a duty of four shillings and eight pence on a hundred weight of glass, or a ream of paper, they have a right to lay a duty of any other sum on either. They may raise the duty, as the author before quoted says has been done in some countries, till it "exceeds seventeen or eighteen times the value of the commodity." In short, if they have a right to levy a tax ofone pennyupon us, they have a right to levy amillionupon us; for where does their right stop? At any given number of pence, shillings or pounds? To attempt to limit their right, after granting it to exist at all, is as contrary to reason—as granting it to exist at all, is contrary to justice. If they have any right to tax us—then, whether our own money shall continue in our pockets or not, depends no longer onus, but onthem, "There is nothing which "we" can call our own; or, to use the words of Mr. Locke—what property have "we" in that which another may, by right, take, when he pleases, to himself?"'These duties which will inevitably be levied upon us—which are now levying upon us—areexpresly laid for the sole purpose of taking money. This is the true definition of "taxes." They are thereforetaxes. This money is to be taken fromus. We are thereforetaxed.Thosewho aretaxedwithout their own consent, expressed by themselves or their representatives areslaves.We are taxedwithout our own consent, expressed by ourselves or representatives.Weare therefore slaves.'

'The late act is founded on the destruction of this constitutional security. If the parliament have a right to lay a duty of four shillings and eight pence on a hundred weight of glass, or a ream of paper, they have a right to lay a duty of any other sum on either. They may raise the duty, as the author before quoted says has been done in some countries, till it "exceeds seventeen or eighteen times the value of the commodity." In short, if they have a right to levy a tax ofone pennyupon us, they have a right to levy amillionupon us; for where does their right stop? At any given number of pence, shillings or pounds? To attempt to limit their right, after granting it to exist at all, is as contrary to reason—as granting it to exist at all, is contrary to justice. If they have any right to tax us—then, whether our own money shall continue in our pockets or not, depends no longer onus, but onthem, "There is nothing which "we" can call our own; or, to use the words of Mr. Locke—what property have "we" in that which another may, by right, take, when he pleases, to himself?"

'These duties which will inevitably be levied upon us—which are now levying upon us—areexpresly laid for the sole purpose of taking money. This is the true definition of "taxes." They are thereforetaxes. This money is to be taken fromus. We are thereforetaxed.Thosewho aretaxedwithout their own consent, expressed by themselves or their representatives areslaves.We are taxedwithout our own consent, expressed by ourselves or representatives.Weare therefore slaves.'

"Further,

'Indeed nations in general are more apt tofeelthan tothink; and therefore nations in general have lost their liberty: for as the violation of the rights of the governed are commonly not onlyspecious, butsmallat the beginning, they spread over the multitude in such a manner, as to touch individuals but slightly; thus they are disregarded. Thepower or profit that arises from these violations,centering in a few persons, is to them considerable. For this reason, theGovernorshaving in view their particular purposes, successively preserve an uniformity of conduct for attaining them: they regularly increase and multiply the first injuries, till at length the inattentive people are compelled to perceive the heaviness of their burthen. They begin to complain and inquire—but too late. They find their oppressions so strengthened by success, and themselves so entangled in examples of express authority on the part of their rulers, and of tacit recognition on their own part, that they are quite confounded: for millions entertain no other idea of thelegalityof power, than that it is founded on the exercise of power. They then voluntarily fasten their chains by adopting a pusillanimous opinion "that there will be too much danger in attempting a remedy"—or another opinion no less fatal, "that the government has arightto treat them as it does." They then seek a wretched relief for their minds, by persuading themselves, that to yield theirobedience, is to discharge theirduty. Thedeplorablepoverty of spirit, that prostrates all the dignity bestowed by Divine Providence on our nature—of course succeeds.'

"With regard to the proper conduct of the colonies on this occasion he premises the following questions:

'Has not the parliamentexpressly avowedtheirintentionof raising money from us forcertainpurposes? Is not this schemepopularin Great Britain? Will the taxes imposed by the late act,answerthose purposes? If it will, must it not take an immense sum from us? If it will not, is it to beexpected, that the parliament will notfully executetheirintention, when it is pleasing at home,and not opposedhere? Must not this be done by imposingnew taxes? Will not every addition thus made to our taxes, be an addition to the power of the British legislature,by increasing the number of officersemployed in the collection?Will not every additional tax therefore render itmore difficultto abrogate any of them? When a branch of revenue is once established, does it not appear to many peopleinvidiousand undutiful, to attempt to abolish it? If taxes sufficient toaccomplishthe intention of the parliament, are imposed by the parliament, what taxes will remain to be imposed by our assemblies? Ifno materialtaxes remain to be imposed by them, what must become ofthem, and the people they represent?'

"Our Author all along, however, asserts that the real interest of English America consists in its proper dependence on the mother country, at the same time that he strenuously exhorts his countrymen to oppose, by all the suitable means in their power, every incroachment on those constitutions under the sanction of which they settled on those remote and uncultivated shores, whereon they have so industriously established themselves. He remarks with a spirit which no one, it is apprehended, can condemn:

'I am no further concerned in anything affecting America, than any one of you; and when liberty leaves it, I can quit it much more conveniently than most of you: but while divine providence, that gave me existence in a land of freedom, permits my head to think, my lips to speak, and my hands to move, I shall so highly and gratefully value the blessing received, as to take care, that my silence and inactivity shall not give my implied assent to any act, degrading my brethren and myself from the birthright, wherewith heaven itself "hath made us free.'

"The consequence of Great Britain exerting this disagreeable power, he shews, in a long train of arguments, to have a tendency very fatal to the liberty of America, which he illustrates by examining into the application of the pensions on theIrish establishment; and sums up his reasoning with the following positions:

'Let thesetruthsbe indelibly impressed on our mind—that we cannot behappy,without beingfree—that we cannot be free,without being secure—in our property—that we cannot be secure in our property, if,without our consent, others may, as by right, take it away—that taxes imposed on us by parliament, do thus take it away—thatduties laid for the sole purposes of raising money, are taxes—that attempts to lay such dutiesshould be instantly and firmly opposed—that this opposition can never be effectual, unless it is the united effort of those provinces—that thereforebenevolence of temper towards each other, andunanimity of counsels, are essential to the welfare of the whole—and lastly, that for this reason, every man amongst us, who in any manner would encourage either dissention, diffidence, or indifference, between these colonies, is an enemy tohimself, and tohis country.'The belief of these truths, I verily think, my countrymen, is indispensably necessary to your happiness. I beseech you, therefore, "teach them diligently unto your children, and talk of them when you sit in your houses, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down and when you rise up."'Whathave these colonies toask, while they continue free? or what have they todread, but insidious attempts to subvert their freedom?Their prosperitydoes not depend onministerial favours doledout to particular provinces.Theyform one political body, of whicheachcolony is amember.Their happinessis founded on their constitution; and is to be promoted by preserving that constitution in unabated vigour,throughout every part. A spot, a speck of decay, however small the limb on which it appears, and however remote it may seem from the vitals, should be alarming. We haveall the rightsrequisite for our prosperity. Thelegal authorityof Great Britain may indeed lay hard restrictionsupon us; but, like the spear of Telephus, it will cure as well as wound. Her unkindness will instruct and compel us, after some time to discover, in ourindustryandfrugality, surprising remedies—if our rights continueunviolated: for as long as theproductsof ourlabour, and therewardsof ourcare, can properly be calledour own, so long will it be worth our while to beindustriousandfrugal. But if we plow—sow—reap—gather and thresh—we find, that we plow—sow—reap—gather and threshfor others, whose pleasure is to be theSOLElimitationhow muchthey shalltakeandhow muchtheyshall leave,WHYshould we repeat the unprofitable toil? Horses and oxen are content withthat portion of the fruits of their work, which theirownersassign to them, in order to keep them strong enough to raise successive crops; but eventhese beastswill not submit to draw for their masters, until they aresubduedwithwhipsandgoads. Let us take care of our rights, and wethereintake care of ourproperty. "Slavery is ever preceded by sleep."Individualsmay bedependenton ministers if they please.States should scorn it; and ifyouare not wanting to yourselves, you will have aproper regardpaidyoubythose, to whom if you are notrespectable, you will infallibly be contemptible. But—if we have already forgotthereasonsthat urged us, with unexampled unanimity, to exert ourselves two years ago—ifour zealfor thepublic goodisworn outbefore thehomespun cloathswhich it caused us to have made—ifourresolutions are so faint, as by our present conduct tocondemnour own latesuccessfulexample—ifwe are not affectedby any reverence for the memory of our ancestors, who transmitted to us that freedom in which they had been blest—ifwe are not animatedby any regard for posterity, to whom, by the most sacred obligations, we are bound to deliver down the invaluable inheritance—THEN, indeed, anyminister, or anytoolof a minister, or anycreatureof a tool of a minister—or anylower instrumentofadministration, if lower there be, is apersonagewhom it may be dangerous to offend.'

'The belief of these truths, I verily think, my countrymen, is indispensably necessary to your happiness. I beseech you, therefore, "teach them diligently unto your children, and talk of them when you sit in your houses, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down and when you rise up."

'Whathave these colonies toask, while they continue free? or what have they todread, but insidious attempts to subvert their freedom?Their prosperitydoes not depend onministerial favours doledout to particular provinces.Theyform one political body, of whicheachcolony is amember.Their happinessis founded on their constitution; and is to be promoted by preserving that constitution in unabated vigour,throughout every part. A spot, a speck of decay, however small the limb on which it appears, and however remote it may seem from the vitals, should be alarming. We haveall the rightsrequisite for our prosperity. Thelegal authorityof Great Britain may indeed lay hard restrictionsupon us; but, like the spear of Telephus, it will cure as well as wound. Her unkindness will instruct and compel us, after some time to discover, in ourindustryandfrugality, surprising remedies—if our rights continueunviolated: for as long as theproductsof ourlabour, and therewardsof ourcare, can properly be calledour own, so long will it be worth our while to beindustriousandfrugal. But if we plow—sow—reap—gather and thresh—we find, that we plow—sow—reap—gather and threshfor others, whose pleasure is to be theSOLElimitationhow muchthey shalltakeandhow muchtheyshall leave,WHYshould we repeat the unprofitable toil? Horses and oxen are content withthat portion of the fruits of their work, which theirownersassign to them, in order to keep them strong enough to raise successive crops; but eventhese beastswill not submit to draw for their masters, until they aresubduedwithwhipsandgoads. Let us take care of our rights, and wethereintake care of ourproperty. "Slavery is ever preceded by sleep."Individualsmay bedependenton ministers if they please.States should scorn it; and ifyouare not wanting to yourselves, you will have aproper regardpaidyoubythose, to whom if you are notrespectable, you will infallibly be contemptible. But—if we have already forgotthereasonsthat urged us, with unexampled unanimity, to exert ourselves two years ago—ifour zealfor thepublic goodisworn outbefore thehomespun cloathswhich it caused us to have made—ifourresolutions are so faint, as by our present conduct tocondemnour own latesuccessfulexample—ifwe are not affectedby any reverence for the memory of our ancestors, who transmitted to us that freedom in which they had been blest—ifwe are not animatedby any regard for posterity, to whom, by the most sacred obligations, we are bound to deliver down the invaluable inheritance—THEN, indeed, anyminister, or anytoolof a minister, or anycreatureof a tool of a minister—or anylower instrumentofadministration, if lower there be, is apersonagewhom it may be dangerous to offend.'

"In justification of the Letter-writer's loyalty, and the integrity of his intentions, he declares in a note:

'If any person shall imagine that he discovers in these letters the least disaffection towards our most excellent sovereign, and the parliament of Great Britain, or the least dislike of the dependence of these colonies on that kingdom, I beg that such person will not form any judgment onparticular expressions, but will consider thetenourof all the letters taken together. In that case, I flatter myself that every unprejudiced reader will beconvinced, that the true interests of Great Britain are as dear to me as they ought to be to every good subject.'If I am an enthusiast in anything, it is in my zeal for theperpetual dependanceof these colonies on the mother country.—A dependance founded on mutual benefits, the continuance of which can be secured only bymutual affections. Therefore it is, that with extreme apprehension I view the smallest seeds of discontent, which are unwarily scattered abroad. Fifty or sixty years will make astonishing alterations in these colonies; and this consideration should render it the business of Great Britain more and more to cultivate our good dispositions toward her: but the misfortune is, that thosegreat men, who are wrestling for power at home, think themselves very slightly interested in the prosperity of their countryfiftyorsixtyyears hence; but are deeply concerned in blowing up a popular clamour for supposedimmediate advantages.'For my part, I regard Great Britain as abulwarkhappily fixed between these colonies and the powerful nations of Europe. That kingdom is our advanced post or fortification,which remaining safe, we under its protection enjoying peace, may diffuse the blessings of religion, science, and liberty, through remote wildernesses. It is, therefore, incontestably ourdutyand ourinterestto support the strength of Great Britain. When, confidingin that strength, she begins to forget from whence it arose, it will be an easy thing to shew the source. She may readily be reminded of the loud alarm spread among her merchants and tradesmen, by the universal association of these colonies, at the time of thestamp-act, not to import any of herMANUFACTURES. In the year 1718, the Russians and Swedes entered into an agreement, not to suffer Great Britain to export any naval stores from their dominions, but in Russian or Swedish ships, and at their own prices. Great Britain was distressed.Pitchandtarrose tothree poundsa barrel. At length she thought of getting these articles from the colonies; and the attempt succeeding, they fell down to fifteen shillings. In the year 1756, Great Britain was threatened with an invasion: An easterly wind blowing for six weeks, she could notMANher fleet; and the whole nation was thrown into the utmost consternation. The wind changed. The American ships arrived. The fleet sailed in ten or fifteen days. There are some other reflections on this subject worthy of the most deliberate attention of the British parliament; but they are of such a nature that I do not chuse to mention them publicly. I thought I discharged my duty to my country, by taking the liberty, in the year 1765, while thestamp-actwas in suspence, of writing my sentiments to a man of the greatest influence at home, who afterwards distinguished himself by espousing our cause in the debates concerning the repeal of that act.'

'If I am an enthusiast in anything, it is in my zeal for theperpetual dependanceof these colonies on the mother country.—A dependance founded on mutual benefits, the continuance of which can be secured only bymutual affections. Therefore it is, that with extreme apprehension I view the smallest seeds of discontent, which are unwarily scattered abroad. Fifty or sixty years will make astonishing alterations in these colonies; and this consideration should render it the business of Great Britain more and more to cultivate our good dispositions toward her: but the misfortune is, that thosegreat men, who are wrestling for power at home, think themselves very slightly interested in the prosperity of their countryfiftyorsixtyyears hence; but are deeply concerned in blowing up a popular clamour for supposedimmediate advantages.

'For my part, I regard Great Britain as abulwarkhappily fixed between these colonies and the powerful nations of Europe. That kingdom is our advanced post or fortification,which remaining safe, we under its protection enjoying peace, may diffuse the blessings of religion, science, and liberty, through remote wildernesses. It is, therefore, incontestably ourdutyand ourinterestto support the strength of Great Britain. When, confidingin that strength, she begins to forget from whence it arose, it will be an easy thing to shew the source. She may readily be reminded of the loud alarm spread among her merchants and tradesmen, by the universal association of these colonies, at the time of thestamp-act, not to import any of herMANUFACTURES. In the year 1718, the Russians and Swedes entered into an agreement, not to suffer Great Britain to export any naval stores from their dominions, but in Russian or Swedish ships, and at their own prices. Great Britain was distressed.Pitchandtarrose tothree poundsa barrel. At length she thought of getting these articles from the colonies; and the attempt succeeding, they fell down to fifteen shillings. In the year 1756, Great Britain was threatened with an invasion: An easterly wind blowing for six weeks, she could notMANher fleet; and the whole nation was thrown into the utmost consternation. The wind changed. The American ships arrived. The fleet sailed in ten or fifteen days. There are some other reflections on this subject worthy of the most deliberate attention of the British parliament; but they are of such a nature that I do not chuse to mention them publicly. I thought I discharged my duty to my country, by taking the liberty, in the year 1765, while thestamp-actwas in suspence, of writing my sentiments to a man of the greatest influence at home, who afterwards distinguished himself by espousing our cause in the debates concerning the repeal of that act.'

"When we review a performance well written, and founded upon laudable principles, if we do not restrain ourselves to a general approbation, which may be given in few words, the article will unavoidably contain more from the author of it, than from ourselves; this, if any excuse is needful for enabling our Readers, in some measure, to judge for themselves, is pleaded as an apology for our copious extracts from these excellent letters.To conclude; ifreasonis to decide between us and our colonies, in the affairs here controverted, our Author, whose name the advertisements inform us is Dickenson,[7]will not perhaps easily meet with a satisfactory refutation."

LETTERSFROMA FARMER.

LETTERSFROMA FARMER inPennsylvania,To the INHABITANTSOF THEBRITISH COLONIES.—————

BOSTON:Printed by Mein and Fleeming, and tobe sold by John Mein, at theLondon Book-store, north-sideof King-street.M DCC LXVIII.

My Dear Countrymen,

I am a farmer, settled after a variety of fortunes, near the banks, of the riverDelaware, in the province ofPennsylvania. I received a liberal education, and have been engaged in the busy scenes of life: But am now convinced, that a man may be as happy without bustle, as with it. My farm is small, my servants are few, and good; I have a little money at interest; I wish for no more: my employment in my own affairs is easy; and with a contented grateful mind, I am compleating the number of days allotted to me by divine goodness.

Being master of my time, I spend a good deal of it in a library, which I think the most valuable part of my small estate; andbeing acquainted with two or three gentlemen of abilities and learning, who honour me with their friendship, I believe I have acquired a greater share of knowledge in history, and the laws and constitution of my country, than is generally attained by men of my class, many of them not being so fortunate as I have been in the opportunities of getting information.

From infancy I was taught to love humanity and liberty. Inquiry and experience have since confirmed my reverence for the lessons then given me, by convincing me more fully of their truth and excellence. Benevolence towards mankind excites wishes for their welfare, and such wishes endear the means of fulfilling them. Those can be found in liberty alone, and therefore her sacred cause ought to be espoused by every man, on every occasion, to the utmost of his power: as a charitable but poor person does not withhold hismite, because he cannot relieveallthe distresses of the miserable, so let not any honest man suppress his sentiments concerning freedom, however small their influence is likely to be. Perhaps he may "[8]touch some wheel" that will have an effect greater than he expects.

These being my sentiments, I am encouraged to offer to you, my countrymen, my thoughts on some late transactions, that inmy opinion are of the utmost importance to you. Conscious of my defects, I have waited some time, in expectation of seeing the subject treated by persons much better qualified for the task; but being therein disappointed, and apprehensive that longer delays will be injurious, I venture at length to request the attention of the public, praying only for one thing,—that is that these lines may bereadwith the same zeal for the happiness of British America, with which they werewrote.

With a good deal of surprise I have observed, that little notice has been taken of an act of parliament, as injurious in its principle to the liberties of these colonies, as theStamp-actwas: I mean the act for suspending the legislation of New-York.

The assembly of that government complied with a former act of parliament, requiring certain provisions to be made for the troops in America, in every particular, I think, except the articles of salt, pepper, and vinegar. In my opinion they acted imprudently, considering all circumstances, in not complying so far, as would have given satisfaction, as several colonies did: but my dislike of their conduct in that instance, has not blinded me so much, that I cannot plainly perceive, that they have been punished in a manner pernicious to American freedom, and justly alarming to all the colonies.

If theBritish Parliamenthas a legal authority to order, that we shall furnish a single article for the troops here, and to compel obedience to that order; they have the same right to order us to supply those troops with arms, cloaths, and every necessary, and to compel obedience to that order also; in short, to layany burdensthey please upon us. What is this buttaxingus at acertain sum, and leaving to us only themannerof raising it? How is this mode more tolerable than theStamp Act? Would that act have appeared more pleasing toAmericans, if being ordered thereby to raise the sum total of the taxes, the mighty privilege had been left to them, of saying how much should be paid for an instrument of writing on paper, and how much for another on parchment?

An act of parliament commanding us to do a certain thing, if it has any validity, is a tax upon us for the expence that accrues in complying with it, and for this reason, I believe, every colony on the continent, that chose to give a mark of their respect forGreat-Britain, in complying with the act relating to the troops, cautiously avoided the mention of that act, lest their conduct should be attributed to its supposed obligation.

The matter being thus stated, the assembly ofNew-Yorkeither had, or had not a right to refuse submission to that act. If theyhad, and I imagine noAmericanwill say, they had not, then the parliament had norightto compel them to execute it.—If they had notthat right, they hadno rightto punish them for not executing it; and therefore hadno rightto suspend their legislation, which is a punishment. In fact, if the people ofNew-Yorkcannot be legally taxed but by their own representatives, they cannot be legally deprived of the privileges of making laws, only for insisting on that exclusive privilege of taxation. If they may be legally deprived in such a case of the privilege of making laws, why may they not, with equal reason, be deprived of every other privilege? Or why may not every colony be treated in the same manner, when any of them shall dare to deny their assent to any impositions that shall be directed? Or what signifies the repeal of theStamp-Act, if these colonies are to lose theirotherprivileges, by not tamely surrendering that oftaxation?

There is one consideration arising from this suspicion, which is not generally attended to, but shews its importance very clearly. It was notnecessarythat this suspension should be caused by an act of parliament. The crown might have restrained the governor ofNew-York, even from calling the assembly together, by its prerogative in the royal governments. This step, I suppose, would havebeen taken, if the conduct of the assembly ofNew-York, had been regarded as an act of disobedienceto the crown alone: but it is regarded as an act of "disobedience to the authority of theBritish Legislature." This gives the suspension a consequence vastly more affecting. It is a parliamentary assertion of thesupreme authorityof theBritish legislatureover these colonies inthe part of taxation; and is intended toCOMPELNew-Yorkunto a submission to that authority. It seems therefore to me as much a violation of the liberty of the people of that province, and consequently of all these colonies, as if the parliament had sent a number of regiments to be quartered upon them till they should comply. For it is evident, that the suspension is meant as a compulsion; and themethodof compelling is totally indifferent. It is indeed probable, that the sight of red coats, and the beating of drums would have been most alarming, because people are generally more influenced by their eyes and ears than by their reason: But whoever seriously considers the matter, must perceive, that a dreadful stroke is aimed at the liberty of these colonies: For the cause ofoneis the cause ofall. If the parliament may lawfully depriveNew-Yorkof any of its rights, it may deprive any, or all the other colonies of their rights; and nothing can possibly so much encourage such attempts, as a mutual inattention to the interestof each other.To divide, and thus to destroy, is the first political maxim in attacking those who are powerful by their union. He certainly is not a wise man, who folds his arms and reposeth himself at home, seeing with unconcern the flames that have invaded his neighbour's house, without any endeavours to extinguish them. When Mr.Hampden'sship-money cause, for three shillings and four-pence, was tried, all the people ofEngland, with anxious expectation, interested themselves in the important decision; and when the slightest point touching the freedom of a single colony is agitated, I earnestly wish, that all the rest may with equal ardour support their sister. Very much may be said on this subject, but I hope, more at present is unnecessary.

With concern I have observed that two assemblies of this province have sat and adjourned, without taking any notice of this act. It may perhaps be asked, what would have been proper for them to do? I am by no means fond of inflammatory measures. I detest them.——I should be sorry that any thing should be done which might justly displease our sovereign or our mother-country. But a firm, modest exertion of a free spirit, should never be wanting on public occasions. It appears to me, that it would have been sufficient for the assembly, to have ordered our agents to represent to the King's ministers, their sense of the suspending act, andto pray for its repeal. Thus we should have borne our testimony against it; and might therefore reasonably expect that on a like occasion, we might receive the same assistance from the other colonies.

Back to Index Next