COMMON SENSE
by
Thomas Paine
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
OF THE ORIGIN AND DESIGN OF GOVERNMENT IN
GENERAL,
WITH CONCISE REMARKS ON THE ENGLISH CONSTITUTION
OF MONARCHY AND HEREDITARY SUCCESSION
THOUGHTS ON THE PRESENT STATE OF AMERICAN
AFFAIRS
OF THE PRESENT _ABILITY_ OF _AMERICA_, WITH
SOME
MISCELLANEOUS _REFLECTIONS_
APPENDIX
INTRODUCTION
Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following
pages, are not YET
sufficiently fashionable to procure them general
favour; a long habit
of not thinking a thing WRONG, gives it a
superficial appearance of
being RIGHT, and raises at first a formidable
outcry in defense of
custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time
makes more converts than
reason.
As a long and violent abuse of power, is generally
the Means of calling
the right of it in question (and in Matters
too which might never have
been thought of, had not the Sufferers been
aggravated into the
inquiry) and as the King of England hath undertaken
in his OWN RIGHT,
to support the Parliament in what he calls
THEIRS, and as the good
people of this country are grievously oppressed
by the combination,
they have an undoubted privilege to inquire
into the pretensions of
both, and equally to reject the usurpation
of either.
In the following sheets, the author hath studiously
avoided every thing
which is personal among ourselves. Compliments
as well as censure to
individuals make no part thereof. The wise,
and the worthy, need not
the triumph of a pamphlet; and those whose
sentiments are injudicious,
or unfriendly, will cease of themselves unless
too much pains are
bestowed upon their conversion.
The cause of America is in a great measure
the cause of all mankind.
Many circumstances hath, and will arise, which
are not local, but
universal, and through which the principles
of all Lovers of Mankind
are affected, and in the Event of which, their
Affections are
interested. The laying a Country desolate
with Fire and Sword,
declaring War against the natural rights of
all Mankind, and
extirpating the Defenders thereof from the
Face of the Earth, is the
Concern of every Man to whom Nature hath given
the Power of feeling; of
which Class, regardless of Party Censure,
is the AUTHOR.
P.S. The Publication of this new Edition hath
been delayed, with a
View of taking notice (had it been necessary)
of any Attempt to refute
the Doctrine of Independance: As no Answer
hath yet appeared, it is now
presumed that none will, the Time needful
for getting such a
Performance ready for the Public being considerably
past.
Who the Author of this Production is, is wholly
unnecessary to the
Public, as the Object for Attention is the
DOCTRINE ITSELF, not the
MAN. Yet it may not be unnecessary to say,
That he is unconnected with
any Party, and under no sort of Influence
public or private, but the
influence of reason and principle.
Philadelphia, February 14, 1776
OF THE ORIGIN AND DESIGN OF GOVERNMENT IN
GENERAL,
WITH CONCISE REMARKS ON THE ENGLISH CONSTITUTION
Some writers have so confounded society with
government, as to leave
little or no distinction between them; whereas
they are not only
different, but have different origins. Society
is produced by our
wants, and government by our wickedness; the
former promotes our
happiness POSITIVELY by uniting our affections,
the latter NEGATIVELY
by restraining our vices. The one encourages
intercourse, the other
creates distinctions. The first a patron,
the last a punisher.
Society in every state is a blessing, but
government even in its best
state is but a necessary evil; in its worst
state an intolerable one;
for when we suffer, or are exposed to the
same miseries BY A
GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country
WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our
calamity is heightened by reflecting that
we furnish the means by which
we suffer. Government, like dress, is the
badge of lost innocence; the
palaces of kings are built on the ruins of
the bowers of paradise. For
were the impulses of conscience clear, uniform,
and irresistibly
obeyed, man would need no other lawgiver;
but that not being the case,
he finds it necessary to surrender up a part
of his property to furnish
means for the protection of the rest; and
this he is induced to do by
the same prudence which in every other case
advises him out of two
evils to choose the least. WHEREFORE, security
being the true design
and end of government, it unanswerably follows,
that whatever FORM
thereof appears most likely to ensure it to
us, with the least expense
and greatest benefit, is preferable to all
others.
In order to gain a clear and just idea of
the design and end of
government, let us suppose a small number
of persons settled in some
sequestered part of the earth, unconnected
with the rest, they will
then represent the first peopling of any country,
or of the world. In
this state of natural liberty, society will
be their first thought. A
thousand motives will excite them thereto,
the strength of one man is
so unequal to his wants, and his mind so unfitted
for perpetual
solitude, that he is soon obliged to seek
assistance and relief of
another, who in his turn requires the same.
Four or five united would
be able to raise a tolerable dwelling in the
midst of a wilderness, but
one man might labour out of the common period
of life without
accomplishing any thing; when he had felled
his timber he could not
remove it, nor erect it after it was removed;
hunger in the mean time
would urge him from his work, and every different
want call him a
different way. Disease, nay even misfortune
would be death, for though
neither might be mortal, yet either would
disable him from living, and
reduce him to a state in which he might rather
be said to perish than
to die.
Thus necessity, like a gravitating power,
would soon form our newly
arrived emigrants into society, the reciprocal
blessings of which,
would supersede, and render the obligations
of law and government
unnecessary while they remained perfectly
just to each other; but as
nothing but heaven is impregnable to vice,
it will unavoidably happen,
that in proportion as they surmount the first
difficulties of
emigration, which bound them together in a
common cause, they will
begin to relax in their duty and attachment
to each other; and this
remissness will point out the necessity of
establishing some form of
government to supply the defect of moral virtue.
Some convenient tree will afford them a State-House,
under the branches
of which, the whole colony may assemble to
deliberate on public
matters. It is more than probable that their
first laws will have the
title only of REGULATIONS, and be enforced
by no other penalty than
public disesteem. In this first parliament
every man, by natural
right, will have a seat.
But as the colony increases, the public concerns
will increase
likewise, and the distance at which the members
may be separated, will
render it too inconvenient for all of them
to meet on every occasion as
at first, when their number was small, their
habitations near, and the
public concerns few and trifling. This will
point out the convenience
of their consenting to leave the legislative
part to be managed by a
select number chosen from the whole body,
who are supposed to have the
same concerns at stake which those who appointed
them, and who will act
in the same manner as the whole body would
act, were they present. If
the colony continues increasing, it will become
necessary to augment
the number of the representatives, and that
the interest of every part
of the colony may be attended to, it will
be found best to divide the
whole into convenient parts, each part sending
its proper number; and
that the ELECTED might never form to themselves
an interest separate
from the ELECTORS, prudence will point out
the propriety of having
elections often; because as the ELECTED might
by that means return and
mix again with the general body of the ELECTORS
in a few months, their
fidelity to the public will be secured by
the prudent reflection of not
making a rod for themselves. And as this frequent
interchange will
establish a common interest with every part
of the community, they will
mutually and naturally support each other,
and on this (not on the
unmeaning name of king) depends the STRENGTH
OF GOVERNMENT, AND THE
HAPPINESS OF THE GOVERNED.
Here then is the origin and rise of government;
namely, a mode rendered
necessary by the inability of moral virtue
to govern the world; here
too is the design and end of government, viz.
freedom and security.
And however our eyes may be dazzled with show,
or our ears deceived by
sound; however prejudice may warp our wills,
or interest darken our
understanding, the simple voice of nature
and of reason will say, it is
right.
I draw my idea of the form of government from
a principle in nature,
which no art can overturn, viz. that the more
simple any thing is, the
less liable it is to be disordered; and the
easier repaired when
disordered; and with this maxim in view, I
offer a few remarks on the
so much boasted constitution of England. That
it was noble for the
dark and slavish times in which it was erected,
is granted. When the
world was overrun with tyranny the least remove
therefrom was a
glorious rescue. But that it is imperfect,
subject to convulsions, and
incapable of producing what it seems to promise,
is easily demonstrated.
Absolute governments (tho' the disgrace of
human nature) have this
advantage with them, that they are simple;
if the people suffer, they
know the head from which their suffering springs,
know likewise the
remedy, and are not bewildered by a variety
of causes and cures. But
the constitution of England is so exceedingly
complex, that the nation
may suffer for years together without being
able to discover in which
part the fault lies; some will say in one
and some in another, and
every political physician will advise a different
medicine.
I know it is difficult to get over local or
long standing prejudices,
yet if we will suffer ourselves to examine
the component parts of the
English constitution, we shall find them to
be the base remains of two
ancient tyrannies, compounded with some new
republican materials.
FIRST - The remains of monarchial tyranny
in the person of the king.
SECONDLY - The remains of aristocratical tyranny
in the persons of the
peers. THIRDLY - The new republican materials
in the persons of the
commons,
on whose virtue depends the freedom of England.
The two first, by being hereditary, are independent
of the people;
wherefore in a CONSTITUTIONAL SENSE they contribute
nothing towards the
freedom of the state.
To say that the constitution of England is
a UNION of three powers
reciprocally CHECKING each other, is farcical,
either the words have no
meaning, or they are flat contradictions.
To say that the commons is a check upon the
king, presupposes two
things:
FIRST - That the king is not to be trusted
without being looked after,
or in other words, that a thirst for absolute
power is the natural
disease of monarchy.
SECONDLY - That the commons, by being appointed
for that purpose, are
either wiser or more worthy of confidence
than the crown.
But as the same constitution which gives the
commons a power to check
the king by withholding the supplies, gives
afterwards the king a power
to check the commons, by empowering him to
reject their other bills; it
again supposes that the king is wiser than
those whom it has already
supposed to be wiser than him. A mere absurdity!
There is something exceedingly ridiculous
in the composition of
monarchy; it first excludes a man from the
means of information, yet
empowers him to act in cases where the highest
judgment is required.
The state of a king shuts him from the world,
yet the business of a
king requires him to know it thoroughly; wherefore
the different parts,
by unnaturally opposing and destroying each
other, prove the whole
character to be absurd and useless.
Some writers have explained the English constitution
thus: The king,
say they, is one, the people another; the
peers are a house in behalf
of the king, the commons in behalf of the
people; but this hath all the
distinctions of a house divided against itself;
and though the
expressions be pleasantly arranged, yet when
examined, they appear idle
and ambiguous; and it will always happen,
that the nicest construction
that words are capable of, when applied to
the description of some
thing which either cannot exist, or is too
incomprehensible to be
within the compass of description, will be
words of sound only, and
though they may amuse the ear, they cannot
inform the mind, for this
explanation includes a previous question,
viz. HOW CAME THE KING BY A
POWER WHICH THE PEOPLE ARE AFRAID TO TRUST,
AND ALWAYS OBLIGED TO
CHECK? Such a power could not be the gift
of a wise people, neither
can any power, WHICH NEEDS CHECKING, be from
God; yet the provision,
which the constitution makes, supposes such
a power to exist.
But the provision is unequal to the task;
the means either cannot or
will not accomplish the end, and the whole
affair is a felo de se; for
as the greater weight will always carry up
the less, and as all the
wheels of a machine are put in motion by one,
it only remains to know
which power in the constitution has the most
weight, for that will
govern; and though the others, or a part of
them, may clog, or, as the
phrase is, check the rapidity of its motion,
yet so long as they cannot
stop it, their endeavours will be ineffectual;
the first moving power
will at last have its way, and what it wants
in speed, is supplied by
time.
That the crown is this overbearing part in
the English constitution,
needs not be mentioned, and that it derives
its whole consequence
merely from being the giver of places and
pensions, is self-evident,
wherefore, though we have been wise enough
to shut and lock a door
against absolute monarchy, we at the same
time have been foolish enough
to put the crown in possession of the key.
The prejudice of Englishmen in favour of their
own government by king,
lords, and commons, arises as much or more
from national pride than
reason. Individuals are undoubtedly safer
in England than in some
other countries, but the WILL of the king
is as much the LAW of the
land in Britain as in France, with this difference,
that instead of
proceeding directly from his mouth, it is
handed to the people under
the more formidable shape of an act of parliament.
For the fate of
Charles the First hath only made kings more
subtle--not more just.
Wherefore, laying aside all national pride
and prejudice in favour of
modes and forms, the plain truth is, that
IT IS WHOLLY OWING TO THE
CONSTITUTION OF THE PEOPLE, AND NOT TO THE
CONSTITUTION OF THE
GOVERNMENT, that the crown is not as oppressive
in England as in Turkey.
An inquiry into the CONSTITUTIONAL ERRORS
in the English form of
government is at this time highly necessary;
for as we are never in a
proper condition of doing justice to others,
while we continue under
the influence of some leading partiality,
so neither are we capable of
doing it to ourselves while we remain fettered
by any obstinate
prejudice. And as a man, who is attached to
a prostitute, is unfitted
to choose or judge a wife, so any prepossession
in favour of a rotten
constitution of government will disable us
from discerning a good one.
OF 
MONARCHY AND HEREDITARY SUCCESSION
Mankind being originally equals in the order
of creation, the equality
could only be destroyed by some subsequent
circumstance; the
distinctions of rich, and poor, may in a great
measure be accounted
for, and that without having recourse to the
harsh, ill-sounding names
of oppression and avarice. Oppression is often
the CONSEQUENCE, but
seldom or never the MEANS of riches; and though
avarice will preserve a
man from being necessitously poor, it generally
makes him too timorous
to be wealthy.
But there is another and greater distinction,
for which no truly
natural or religious reason can be assigned,
and that is, the
distinction of men into KINGS and SUBJECTS.
Male and female are the
distinctions of nature, good and bad the distinctions
of heaven; but
how a race of men came into the world so exalted
above the rest, and
distinguished like some new species, is worth
inquiring into, and
whether they are the means of happiness or
of misery to mankind.
In the early ages of the world, according
to the scripture chronology,
there were no kings; the consequence of which
was, there were no wars;
it is the pride of kings which throw mankind
into confusion. Holland
without a king hath enjoyed more peace for
this last century than any
of the monarchial governments in Europe. Antiquity
favours the same
remark; for the quiet and rural lives of the
first patriarchs hath a
happy something in them, which vanishes away
when we come to the
history of Jewish royalty.
Government by kings was first introduced into
the world by the
Heathens, from whom the children of Israel
copied the custom. It was
the most prosperous invention the Devil ever
set on foot for the
promotion of idolatry. The Heathens paid divine
honours to their
deceased kings, and the Christian world hath
improved on the plan, by
doing the same to their living ones. How impious
is the title of
sacred majesty applied to a worm, who in the
midst of his splendor is
crumbling into dust!
As the exalting one man so greatly above the
rest cannot be justified
on the equal rights of nature, so neither
can it be defended on the
authority of scripture; for the will of the
Almighty, as declared by
Gideon and the prophet Samuel, expressly disapproves
of government by
kings. All anti-monarchical parts of scripture
have been very smoothly
glossed over in monarchical governments, but
they undoubtedly merit the
attention of countries which have their governments
yet to form.
RENDER UNTO CAESAR THE THINGS WHICH ARE CAESAR'S
is the scripture
doctrine of courts, yet it is no support of
monarchical government, for
the Jews at that time were without a king,
and in a state of vassalage
to the Romans.
Now three thousand years passed away from
the Mosaic account of the
creation, till the Jews under a national delusion
requested a king.
Till then their form of government (except
in extraordinary cases,
where the Almighty interposed) was a kind
of republic administered by a
judge and the elders of the tribes. Kings
they had none, and it was
held sinful to acknowledge any being under
that title but the Lord of
Hosts. And when a man seriously reflects on
the idolatrous homage
which is paid to the persons of kings, he
need not wonder that the
Almighty, ever jealous of his honour, should
disapprove of a form of
government which so impiously invades the
prerogative of heaven.
Monarchy is ranked in scripture as one of
the sins of the Jews, for
which a curse in reserve is denounced against
them. The history of
that transaction is worth attending to.
The children of Israel being oppressed by
the Midianites, Gideon
marched against them with a small army, and
victory, through the divine
interposition, decided in his favour. The
Jews, elate with success,
and attributing it to the generalship of Gideon,
proposed making him a
king, saying, RULE THOU OVER US, THOU AND
THY SON AND THY SON'S SON.
Here was temptation in its fullest extent;
not a kingdom only, but an
hereditary one, but Gideon in the piety of
his soul replied, I WILL NOT
RULE OVER YOU, NEITHER SHALL MY SON RULE OVER
YOU _THE LORD SHALL RULE
OVER YOU._ Words need not be more explicit;
Gideon doth not decline the
honour, but denieth their right to give it;
neither doth he compliment
them with invented declarations of his thanks,
but in the positive
style of a prophet charges them with disaffection
to their proper
Sovereign, the King of heaven.
About one hundred and thirty years after this,
they fell again into the
same error. The hankering which the Jews had
for the idolatrous
customs of the Heathens, is something exceedingly
unaccountable; but so
it was, that laying hold of the misconduct
of Samuel's two sons, who
were entrusted with some secular concerns,
they came in an abrupt and
clamorous manner to Samuel, saying, BEHOLD
THOU ART OLD, AND THY SONS
WALK NOT IN THY WAYS, NOW MAKE US A KING TO
JUDGE US, LIKE ALL OTHER
NATIONS. And here we cannot but observe that
their motives were bad,
viz. that they might be LIKE unto other nations,
i.e. the Heathens,
whereas their true glory laid in being as
much UNLIKE them as possible.
BUT THE THING DISPLEASED SAMUEL WHEN THEY
SAID, GIVE US A KING TO JUDGE
US; AND SAMUEL PRAYED UNTO THE LORD, AND THE
LORD SAID UNTO SAMUEL,
HEARKEN UNTO THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE IN ALL
THAT THEY SAY UNTO THEE,
FOR THEY HAVE NOT REJECTED THEE, BUT THEY
HAVE REJECTED ME, _THAT I
SHOULD NOT REIGN OVER THEM._ ACCORDING TO
ALL THE WORKS WHICH THEY
HAVE SINCE THE DAY THAT I BROUGHT THEM UP
OUT OF EGYPT, EVEN UNTO THIS
DAY; WHEREWITH THEY HAVE FORSAKEN ME AND SERVED
OTHER GODS; SO DO THEY
ALSO UNTO THEE. NOW THEREFORE HEARKEN UNTO
THEIR VOICE, HOWBEIT,
PROTEST SOLEMNLY UNTO THEM AND SHEW THEM THE
MANNER OF THE KING THAT
SHALL REIGN OVER THEM, I.E. not of any particular
king, but the
general manner of the kings of the earth,
whom Israel was so eagerly
copying after. And notwithstanding the great
distance of time and
difference of manners, the character is still
in fashion. AND SAMUEL
TOLD ALL THE WORDS OF THE LORD UNTO THE PEOPLE,
THAT ASKED OF HIM A
KING. AND HE SAID, THIS SHALL BE THE MANNER
OF THE KING THAT SHALL
REIGN OVER YOU; HE WILL TAKE YOUR SONS AND
APPOINT THEM FOR HIMSELF,
FOR HIS CHARIOTS, AND TO BE HIS HORSEMAN,
AND SOME SHALL RUN BEFORE HIS
CHARIOTS (this description agrees with the
present mode of impressing
men) AND HE WILL APPOINT HIM CAPTAINS OVER
THOUSANDS AND CAPTAINS OVER
FIFTIES, AND WILL SET THEM TO EAR HIS GROUND
AND REAP HIS HARVEST, AND
TO MAKE HIS INSTRUMENTS OF WAR, AND INSTRUMENTS
OF HIS CHARIOTS; AND HE
WILL TAKE YOUR DAUGHTERS TO BE CONFECTIONARIES,
AND TO BE COOKS AND TO
BE BAKERS (this describes the expense and
luxury as well as the
oppression of kings) AND HE WILL TAKE YOUR
FIELDS AND YOUR OLIVE YARDS,
EVEN THE BEST OF THEM, AND GIVE THEM TO HIS
SERVANTS; AND HE WILL TAKE
THE TENTH OF YOUR SEED, AND OF YOUR VINEYARDS,
AND GIVE THEM TO HIS
OFFICERS AND TO HIS SERVANTS (by which we
see that bribery, corruption,
and favouritism are the standing vices of
kings) AND HE WILL TAKE THE
TENTH OF YOUR MEN SERVANTS, AND YOUR MAID
SERVANTS, AND YOUR GOODLIEST
YOUNG MEN AND YOUR ASSES, AND PUT THEM TO
HIS WORK; AND HE WILL TAKE
THE TENTH OF YOUR SHEEP, AND YE SHALL BE HIS
SERVANTS, AND YE SHALL CRY
OUT IN THAT DAY BECAUSE OF YOUR KING WHICH
YE SHALL HAVE CHOSEN, _AND
THE LORD WILL NOT HEAR YOU IN THAT DAY._ This
accounts for the
continuation of monarchy; neither do the characters
of the few good
kings which have lived since, either sanctify
the title, or blot out
the sinfulness of the origin; the high encomium
given of David takes no
notice of him OFFICIALLY AS A KING, but only
as a MAN after God's own
heart. NEVERTHELESS THE PEOPLE REFUSED TO
OBEY THE VOICE OF SAMUEL,
AND THEY SAID, NAY, BUT WE WILL HAVE A KING
OVER US, THAT WE MAY BE
LIKE ALL THE NATIONS, AND THAT OUR KING MAY
JUDGE US, AND GO OUT BEFORE
US, AND FIGHT OUR BATTLES. Samuel continued
to reason with them, but
to no purpose; he set before them their ingratitude,
but all would not
avail; and seeing them fully bent on their
folly, he cried out, I WILL
CALL UNTO THE LORD, AND HE SHALL SEND THUNDER
AND RAIN (which then was
a punishment, being in the time of wheat harvest)
THAT YE MAY PERCEIVE
AND SEE THAT YOUR WICKEDNESS IS GREAT WHICH
YE HAVE DONE IN THE SIGHT
OF THE LORD, AND THE LORD SENT THUNDER AND
RAIN THAT DAY, AND ALL THE
PEOPLE GREATLY FEARED THE LORD AND SAMUEL.
AND ALL THE PEOPLE SAID
UNTO SAMUEL, PRAY FOR THY SERVANTS UNTO THE
LORD THY GOD THAT WE DIE
NOT, FOR _WE HAVE ADDED UNTO OUR SINS THIS
EVIL, TO ASK A KING._ These
portions of scripture are direct and positive.
They admit of no
equivocal construction. That the Almighty
hath here entered his
protest against monarchical government, is
true, or the scripture is
false. And a man hath good reason to believe
that there is as much of
kingcraft, as priestcraft, in withholding
the scripture from the public
in Popish countries. For monarchy in every
instance is the Popery of
government.
To the evil of monarchy we have added that
of hereditary succession;
and as the first is a degradation and lessening
of ourselves, so the
second, claimed as a matter of right, is an
insult and an imposition on
posterity. For all men being originally equals,
no ONE by BIRTH could
have a right to set up his own family in perpetual
preference to all
others for ever, and though himself might
deserve SOME decent degree of
honours of his contemporaries, yet his descendants
might be far too
unworthy to inherit them. One of the strongest
NATURAL proofs of the
folly of hereditary right in kings, is, that
nature disapproves it,
otherwise she would not so frequently turn
it into ridicule by giving
mankind an ASS FOR A LION.
Secondly, as no man at first could possess
any other public honours
than were bestowed upon him, so the givers
of those honours could have
no power to give away the right of posterity.
And though they might
say, "We choose you for OUR head," they could
not, without manifest
injustice to their children, say, "that your
children and your
children's children shall reign over OURS
for ever." Because such an
unwise, unjust, unnatural compact might (perhaps)
in the next
succession put them under the government of
a rogue or a fool. Most
wise men, in their private sentiments, have
ever treated hereditary
right with contempt; yet it is one of those
evils, which when once
established is not easily removed; many submit
from fear, others from
superstition, and the more powerful part shares
with the king the
plunder of the rest.
This is supposing the present race of kings
in the world to have had an
honourable origin; whereas it is more than
probable, that could we take
off the dark covering of antiquities, and
trace them to their first
rise, that we should find the first of them
nothing better than the
principal ruffian of some restless gang, whose
savage manners or
preeminence in subtlety obtained the title
of chief among plunderers;
and who by increasing in power, and extending
his depredations,
overawed the quiet and defenseless to purchase
their safety by frequent
contributions. Yet his electors could have
no idea of giving
hereditary right to his descendants, because
such a perpetual exclusion
of themselves was incompatible with the free
and unrestrained
principles they professed to live by. Wherefore,
hereditary succession
in the early ages of monarchy could not take
place as a matter of
claim, but as something casual or complemental;
but as few or no
records were extant in those days, and traditional
history stuffed
with fables, it was very easy, after the lapse
of a few generations, to
trump up some superstitious tale, conveniently
timed, Mahomet like, to
cram hereditary right down the throats of
the vulgar. Perhaps the
disorders which threatened, or seemed to threaten,
on the decease of a
leader and the choice of a new one (for elections
among ruffians could
not be very orderly) induced many at first
to favour hereditary
pretensions; by which means it happened, as
it hath happened since,
that what at first was submitted to as a convenience,
was afterwards
claimed as a right.
England, since the conquest, hath known some
few good monarchs, but
groaned beneath a much larger number of bad
ones; yet no man in his
senses can say that their claim under William
the Conqueror is a very
honourable one. A French bastard landing with
an armed banditti, and
establishing himself king of England against
the consent of the
natives, is in plain terms a very paltry rascally
original. It
certainly hath no divinity in it. However,
it is needless to spend
much time in exposing the folly of hereditary
right; if there are any
so weak as to believe it, let them promiscuously
worship the ass and
lion, and welcome. I shall neither copy their
humility, nor disturb
their devotion.
Yet I should be glad to ask how they suppose
kings came at first? The
question admits but of three answers, viz.
either by lot, by election,
or by usurpation. If the first king was taken
by lot, it establishes a
precedent for the next, which excludes hereditary
succession. Saul was
by lot, yet the succession was not hereditary,
neither does it appear
from that transaction there was any intention
it ever should be. If
the first king of any country was by election,
that likewise
establishes a precedent for the next; for
to say, that the RIGHT of all
future generations is taken away, by the act
of the first electors, in
their choice not only of a king, but of a
family of kings for ever,
hath no parallel in or out of scripture but
the doctrine of original
sin, which supposes the free will of all men
lost in Adam; and from
such comparison, and it will admit of no other,
hereditary succession
can derive no glory. For as in Adam all sinned,
and as in the first
electors all men obeyed; as in the one all
mankind were subjected to
Satan, and in the other to Sovereignty; as
our innocence was lost in
the first, and our authority in the last;
and as both disable us from
reassuming some former state and privilege,
it unanswerably follows
that original sin and hereditary succession
are parallels.
Dishonourable rank! Inglorious connection!
Yet the most subtle sophist
cannot produce a juster simile.
As to usurpation, no man will be so hardy
as to defend it; and that
William the Conqueror was an usurper is a
fact not to be contradicted.
The plain truth is, that the antiquity of
English monarchy will not
bear looking into.
But it is not so much the absurdity as the
evil of hereditary
succession which concerns mankind. Did it
ensure a race of good and
wise men it would have the seal of divine
authority, but as it opens a
door to the FOOLISH, the WICKED, and the IMPROPER,
it hath in it the
nature of oppression. Men who look upon themselves
born to reign, and
others to obey, soon grow insolent; selected
from the rest of mankind
their minds are early poisoned by importance;
and the world they act in
differs so materially from the world at large,
that they have but
little opportunity of knowing its true interests,
and when they succeed
to the government are frequently the most
ignorant and unfit of any
throughout the dominions.
Another evil which attends hereditary succession
is, that the throne is
subject to be possessed by a minor at any
age; all which time the
regency, acting under the cover of a king,
have every opportunity and
inducement to betray their trust. The same
national misfortune
happens, when a king, worn out with age and
infirmity, enters the last
stage of human weakness. In both these cases
the public becomes a prey
to every miscreant, who can tamper successfully
with the follies either
of age or infancy.
The most plausible plea, which hath ever been
offered in favour of
hereditary succession, is, that it preserves
a nation from civil wars;
and were this true, it would be weighty; whereas,
it is the most
barefaced falsity ever imposed upon mankind.
The whole history of
England disowns the fact. Thirty kings and
two minors have reigned in
that distracted kingdom since the conquest,
in which time there have
been (including the Revolution) no less than
eight civil wars and
nineteen rebellions. Wherefore instead of
making for peace, it makes
against it, and destroys the very foundation
it seems to stand on.
The contest for monarchy and succession, between
the houses of York and
Lancaster, laid England in a scene of blood
for many years. Twelve
pitched battles, besides skirmishes and sieges,
were fought between
Henry and Edward. Twice was Henry prisoner
to Edward, who in his turn
was prisoner to Henry. And so uncertain is
the fate of war and the
temper of a nation, when nothing but personal
matters are the ground of
a quarrel, that Henry was taken in triumph
from a prison to a palace,
and Edward obliged to fly from a palace to
a foreign land; yet, as
sudden transitions of temper are seldom lasting,
Henry in his turn was
driven from the throne, and Edward recalled
to succeed him. The
parliament always following the strongest
side.
This contest began in the reign of Henry the
Sixth, and was not
entirely extinguished till Henry the Seventh,
in whom the families were
united. Including a period of 67 years, viz.
from 1422 to 1489.
In short, monarchy and succession have laid
(not this or that kingdom
only) but the world in blood and ashes. 'Tis
a form of government
which the word of God bears testimony against,
and blood will attend it.
If we inquire into the business of a king,
we shall find that in some
countries they have none; and after sauntering
away their lives without
pleasure to themselves or advantage to the
nation, withdraw from the
scene, and leave their successors to tread
the same idle ground. In
absolute monarchies the whole weight of business,
civil and military,
lies on the king; the children of Israel in
their request for a king,
urged this plea "that he may judge us, and
go out before us and fight
our battles." But in countries where he is
neither a judge nor a
general, as in England, a man would be puzzled
to know what IS his
business.
The nearer any government approaches to a
republic the less business
there is for a king. It is somewhat difficult
to find a proper name
for the government of England. Sir William
Meredith calls it a
republic; but in its present state it is unworthy
of the name, because
the corrupt influence of the crown, by having
all the places in its
disposal, hath so effectually swallowed up
the power, and eaten out the
virtue of the house of commons (the republican
part in the
constitution) that the government of England
is nearly as monarchical
as that of France or Spain. Men fall out with
names without
understanding them. For it is the republican
and not the monarchical
part of the constitution of England which
Englishmen glory in, viz. the
liberty of choosing an house of commons from
out of their own body--and
it is easy to see that when republican virtue
fails, slavery ensues.
Why is the constitution of England sickly,
but because monarchy hath
poisoned the republic, the crown hath engrossed
the commons?
In England a king hath little more to do than
to make war and give away
places; which in plain terms, is to impoverish
the nation and set it
together by the ears. A pretty business indeed
for a man to be allowed
eight hundred thousand sterling a year for,
and worshipped into the
bargain! Of more worth is one honest man to
society and in the sight
of God, than all the crowned ruffians that
ever lived.
THOUGHTS ON THE PRESENT STATE OF AMERICAN
AFFAIRS
In the following pages I offer nothing more
than simple facts, plain
arguments, and common sense; and have no other
Preliminaries to settle
with the reader, than that he will divest
himself of prejudice and
prepossession, and suffer his reason and his
feelings to determine for
themselves; that he will put ON, or rather
that he will not put OFF the
true character of a man, and generously enlarge
his views beyond the
present day.
Volumes have been written on the subject of
the struggle between
England and America. Men of all ranks have
embarked in the
controversy, from different motives, and with
various designs; but all
have been ineffectual, and the period of debate
is closed. Arms, as
the last resource, decide this contest; the
appeal was the choice of
the king, and the continent hath accepted
the challenge.
It hath been reported of the late Mr. Pelham
(who tho' an able minister
was not without his faults) that on his being
attacked in the house of
commons, on the score, that his measures were
only of a temporary kind,
replied "THEY WILL LAST MY TIME." Should a
thought so fatal and unmanly
possess the colonies in the present contest,
the name of ancestors will
be remembered by future generations with detestation.
The sun never shined on a cause of greater
worth. 'Tis not the affair
of a city, a county, a province, or a kingdom,
but of a continent--of
at least one eighth part of the habitable
globe. 'Tis not the concern
of a day, a year, or an age; posterity are
virtually involved in the
contest, and will be more or less affected,
even to the end of time, by
the proceedings now. Now is the seed-time
of continental union, faith
and honour. The least fracture now will be
like a name engraved with
the point of a pin on the tender rind of a
young oak; the wound will
enlarge with the tree, and posterity read
it in full grown characters.
By referring the matter from argument to arms,
a new aera for politics
is struck; a new method of thinking hath arisen.
All plans, proposals,
&c. prior to the nineteenth of April, i. e.
to the commencement of
hostilities, are like the almanacs of the
last year; which, though
proper then are superseded and useless now.
Whatever was advanced by
the advocates on either side of the question
then, terminated in one
and the same point. viz. a union with Great-Britain:
the only
difference between the parties was the method
of effecting it; the one
proposing force, the other friendship; but
it hath so far happened that
the first hath failed, and the second hath
withdrawn her influence.
As much hath been said of the advantages of
reconciliation which, like
an agreeable dream, hath passed away and left
us as we were, it is but
right, that we should examine the contrary
side of the argument, and
inquire into some of the many material injuries
which these colonies
sustain, and always will sustain, by being
connected with, and
dependent on Great Britain: To examine that
connection and dependence,
on the principles of nature and common sense,
to see what we have to
trust to, if separated, and what we are to
expect, if dependant.
I have heard it asserted by some, that as
America hath flourished under
her former connection with Great Britain that
the same connection is
necessary towards her future happiness, and
will always have the same
effect. Nothing can be more fallacious than
this kind of argument. We
may as well assert that because a child has
thrived upon milk that it
is never to have meat, or that the first twenty
years of our lives is
to become a precedent for the next twenty.
But even this is admitting
more than is true, for I answer roundly, that
America would have
flourished as much, and probably much more,
had no European power had
any thing to do with her. The commerce, by
which she hath enriched
herself, are the necessaries of life, and
will always have a market
while eating is the custom of Europe.
But she has protected us, say some. That she
has engrossed us is true,
and defended the continent at our expense
as well as her own is
admitted, and she would have defended Turkey
from the same motive, viz.
the sake of trade and dominion.
Alas, we have been long led away by ancient
prejudices, and made large
sacrifices to superstition. We have boasted
the protection of Great
Britain, without considering, that her motive
was INTEREST not
ATTACHMENT; that she did not protect us from
OUR ENEMIES on OUR
ACCOUNT, but from HER ENEMIES on HER OWN ACCOUNT,
from those who had no
quarrel with us on any OTHER ACCOUNT, and
who will always be our
enemies on the SAME ACCOUNT. Let Britain wave
her pretensions to the
continent, or the continent throw off the
dependence, and we should be
at peace with France and Spain were they at
war with Britain. The
miseries of Hanover last war ought to warn
us against connections.
It has lately been asserted in parliament,
that the colonies have no
relation to each other but through the parent
country, i. e. that
Pennsylvania and the Jerseys, and so on for
the rest, are sister
colonies by the way of England; this is certainly
a very round-about
way of proving relationship, but it is the
nearest and only true way of
proving enemyship, if I may so call it. France
and Spain never were,
nor perhaps ever will be our enemies as AMERICANS,
but as our being the
subjects of GREAT BRITAIN.
But Britain is the parent country, say some.
Then the more shame upon
her conduct. Even brutes do not devour their
young, nor savages make
war upon their families; wherefore the assertion,
if true, turns to her
reproach; but it happens not to be true, or
only partly so and the
phrase PARENT or MOTHER COUNTRY hath been
jesuitically adopted by the
king and his parasites, with a low papistical
design of gaining an
unfair bias on the credulous weakness of our
minds. Europe, and not
England, is the parent country of America.
This new world hath been
the asylum for the persecuted lovers of civil
and religious liberty
from EVERY PART of Europe. Hither have they
fled, not from the tender
embraces of the mother, but from the cruelty
of the monster; and it is
so far true of England, that the same tyranny
which drove the first
emigrants from home, pursues their descendants
still.
In this extensive quarter of the globe, we
forget the narrow limits of
three hundred and sixty miles (the extent
of England) and carry our
friendship on a larger scale; we claim brotherhood
with every European
Christian, and triumph in the generosity of
the sentiment.
It is pleasant to observe by what regular
gradations we surmount the
force of local prejudice, as we enlarge our
acquaintance with the
world. A man born in any town in England divided
into parishes, will
naturally associate most with his fellow-parishioners
(because their
interests in many cases will be common) and
distinguish him by the name
of NEIGHBOUR; if he meet him but a few miles
from home, he drops the
narrow idea of a street, and salutes him by
the name of TOWNSMAN; if he
travel out of the county, and meet him in
any other, he forgets the
minor divisions of street and town, and calls
him COUNTRYMAN, i. e.
COUNTRYMAN; but if in their foreign excursions
they should associate in
France or any other part of EUROPE, their
local remembrance would be
enlarged into that of ENGLISHMEN. And by a
just parity of reasoning,
all Europeans meeting in America, or any other
quarter of the globe,
are COUNTRYMEN; for England, Holland, Germany,
or Sweden, when compared
with the whole, stand in the same places on
the larger scale, which the
divisions of street, town, and county do on
the smaller ones;
distinctions too limited for continental minds.
Not one third of the
inhabitants, even of this province, are of
English descent. Wherefore
I reprobate the phrase of parent or mother
country applied to England
only, as being false, selfish, narrow and
ungenerous.
But admitting, that we were all of English
descent, what does it amount
to? Nothing. Britain, being now an open enemy,
extinguishes every
other name and title: And to say that reconciliation
is our duty, is
truly farcical. The first king of England,
of the present line
(William the Conqueror) was a Frenchman, and
half the Peers of England
are descendants from the same country; therefore,
by the same method of
reasoning, England ought to be governed by
France.
Much hath been said of the united strength
of Britain and the colonies,
that in conjunction they might bid defiance
to the world. But this is
mere presumption; the fate of war is uncertain,
neither do the
expressions mean any thing; for this continent
would never suffer
itself to be drained of inhabitants, to support
the British arms in
either Asia, Africa, or Europe.
Besides what have we to do with setting the
world at defiance? Our
plan is commerce, and that, well attended
to, will secure us the peace
and friendship of all Europe; because, it
is the interest of all Europe
to have America a FREE PORT. Her trade will
always be a protection,
and her barrenness of gold and silver secure
her from invaders.
I challenge the warmest advocate for reconciliation,
to shew, a single
advantage that this continent can reap, by
being connected with Great
Britain. I repeat the challenge, not a single
advantage is derived.
Our corn will fetch its price in any market
in Europe, and our imported
goods must be paid for, buy them where we
will.
But the injuries and disadvantages we sustain
by that connection, are
without number; and our duty to mankind at
large, as well as to
ourselves, instruct us to renounce the alliance:
Because, any
submission to, or dependence on Great Britain,
tends directly to
involve this continent in European wars and
quarrels; and sets us at
variance with nations, who would otherwise
seek our friendship, and
against whom, we have neither anger nor complaint.
As Europe is our
market for trade, we ought to form no partial
connection with any part
of it. It is the true interest of America
to steer clear of European
contentions, which she never can do, while
by her dependence on
Britain, she is made the make-weight in the
scale of British politics.
Europe is too thickly planted with kingdoms
to be long at peace, and
whenever a war breaks out between England
and any foreign power, the
trade of America goes to ruin, BECAUSE OF
HER CONNECTION WITH ENGLAND.
The next war may not turn out like the last,
and should it not, the
advocates for reconciliation now, will be
wishing for separation then,
because, neutrality in that case, would be
a safer convoy than a man of
war. Every thing that is right or natural
pleads for separation. The
blood of the slain, the weeping voice of nature
cries, 'TIS TIME TO
PART. Even the distance at which the Almighty
hath placed England and
America, is a strong and natural proof, that
the authority of the one,
over the other, was never the design of Heaven.
The time likewise at
which the continent was discovered, adds weight
to the argument, and
the manner in which it was peopled increases
the force of it. The
reformation was preceded by the discovery
of America, as if the
Almighty graciously meant to open a sanctuary
to the Persecuted in
future years, when home should afford neither
friendship nor safety.
The authority of Great Britain over this continent,
is a form of
government, which sooner or later must have
an end: And a serious mind
can draw no true pleasure by looking forward
under the painful and
positive conviction, that what he calls "the
present constitution" is
merely temporary. As parents, we can have
no joy, knowing that THIS
GOVERNMENT is not sufficiently lasting to
ensure any thing which we may
bequeath to posterity: And by a plain method
of argument, as we are
running the next generation into debt, we
ought to do the work of it,
otherwise we use them meanly and pitifully.
In order to discover the
line of our duty rightly, we should take our
children in our hand, and
fix our station a few years farther into life;
that eminence will
present a prospect, which a few present fears
and prejudices conceal
from our sight.
Though I would carefully avoid giving unnecessary
offense, yet I am
inclined to believe, that all those who espouse
the doctrine of
reconciliation, may be included within the
following descriptions.
Interested men, who are not to be trusted;
weak men, who CANNOT see;
prejudiced men, who WILL NOT see; and a certain
set of moderate men,
who think better of the European world than
it deserves; and this last
class, by an ill-judged deliberation, will
be the cause of more
calamities to this continent, than all the
other three.
It is the good fortune of many to live distant
from the scene of
sorrow; the evil is not sufficient brought
to their doors to make THEM
feel the precariousness with which all American
property is possessed.
But let our imaginations transport us for
a few moments to Boston, that
seat of wretchedness will teach us wisdom,
and instruct us for ever to
renounce a power in whom we can have no trust.
The inhabitants of that
unfortunate city, who but a few months ago
were in ease and affluence,
have now, no other alternative than to stay
and starve, or turn and
beg. Endangered by the fire of their friends
if they continue within
the city, and plundered by the soldiery if
they leave it. In their
present condition they are prisoners without
the hope of redemption,
and in a general attack for their relief,
they would be exposed to the
fury of both armies.
Men of passive tempers look somewhat lightly
over the offenses of
Britain, and, still hoping for the best, are
apt to call out, "COME,
COME, WE SHALL BE FRIENDS AGAIN, FOR ALL THIS."
But examine the
passions and feelings of mankind, Bring the
doctrine of reconciliation
to the touchstone of nature, and then tell
me, whether you can
hereafter love, honor, and faithfully serve
the power that hath carried
fire and sword into your land? If you cannot
do all these, then are
you only deceiving yourselves, and by your
delay bringing ruin upon
posterity. Your future connection with Britain,
whom you can neither
love nor honor will be forced and unnatural,
and being formed only on
the plan of present convenience, will in a
little time fall into a
relapse more wretched than the first. But
if you say, you can still
pass the violations over, then I ask, Hath
your house been burnt? Hath
your property been destroyed before your face!
Are your wife and
children destitute of a bed to lie on, or
bread to live on? Have you
lost a parent or a child by their hands, and
yourself the ruined and
wretched survivor! If you have not, then are
you not a judge of those
who have. But if you have, and still can shake
hands with the
murderers, then are you unworthy of the name
of husband, father,
friend, or lover, and whatever may be your
rank or title in life, you
have the heart of a coward, and the spirit
of a sycophant.
This is not inflaming or exaggerating matters,
but trying them by those
feelings and affections which nature justifies,
and without which, we
should be incapable of discharging the social
duties of life, or
enjoying the felicities of it. I mean not
to exhibit horror for the
purpose of provoking revenge, but to awaken
us from fatal and unmanly
slumbers, that we may pursue determinately
some fixed object. It is
not in the power of Britain or of Europe to
conquer America, if she do
not conquer herself by DELAY and TIMIDITY.
The present winter is worth
an age if rightly employed, but if lost or
neglected, the whole
continent will partake of the misfortune;
and there is no punishment
which that man will not deserve, be he who,
or what, or where he will,
that may be the means of sacrificing a season
so precious and useful.
It is repugnant to reason, to the universal
order of things, to all
examples from former ages, to suppose, that
this continent can longer
remain subject to any external power. The
most sanguine in Britain
does not think so. The utmost stretch of human
wisdom cannot, at this
time, compass a plan short of separation,
which can promise the
continent even a year's security. Reconciliation
is NOW a fallacious
dream. Nature hath deserted the connection,
and Art cannot supply her
place. For, as Milton wisely expresses, "never
can true reconcilement
grow, where wounds of deadly hate have pierced
so deep."
Every quiet method for peace hath been ineffectual.
Our prayers have
been rejected with disdain; and only tended
to convince us, that
nothing flatters vanity, or confirms obstinacy
in Kings more than
repeated petitioning--and nothing hath contributed
more than that very
measure to make the Kings of Europe absolute:
Witness Denmark and
Sweden. Wherefore, since nothing but blows
will do, for God's sake,
let us come to a final separation, and not
leave the next generation to
be cutting throats, under the violated unmeaning
names of parent and
child.
To say, they will never attempt it again is
idle and visionary, we
thought so at the repeal of the stamp-act,
yet a year or two undeceived
us; as well may we suppose that nations, which
have been once defeated,
will never renew the quarrel.
As to government matters, it is not in the
power of Britain to do this
continent justice: The business of it will
soon be too weighty, and
intricate, to be managed with any tolerable
degree of convenience, by a
power so distant from us, and so very ignorant
of us; for if they
cannot conquer us, they cannot govern us.
To be always running three
or four thousand miles with a tale or a petition,
waiting four or five
months for an answer, which when obtained
requires five or six more to
explain it in, will in a few years be looked
upon as folly and
childishness--There was a time when it was
proper, and there is a
proper time for it to cease.
Small islands not capable of protecting themselves,
are the proper
objects for kingdoms to take under their care;
but there is something
very absurd, in supposing a continent to be
perpetually governed by an
island. In no instance hath nature made the
satellite larger than its
primary planet, and as England and America,
with respect to each other,
reverses the common order of nature, it is
evident they belong to
different systems; England to Europe, America
to itself.
I am not induced by motives of pride, party,
or resentment to espouse
the doctrine of separation and independance;
I am clearly, positively,
and conscientiously persuaded that it is the
true interest of this
continent to be so; that every thing short
of THAT is mere patchwork,
that it can afford no lasting felicity, --that
it is leaving the sword
to our children, and shrinking back at a time,
when, a little more, a
little farther, would have rendered this continent
the glory of the
earth.
As Britain hath not manifested the least inclination
towards a
compromise, we may be assured that no terms
can be obtained worthy the
acceptance of the continent, or any ways equal
to the expense of blood
and treasure we have been already put to.
The object, contended for, ought always to
bear some just proportion to
the expense. The removal of North, or the
whole detestable junto, is a
matter unworthy the millions we have expended.
A temporary stoppage of
trade, was an inconvenience, which would have
sufficiently balanced the
repeal of all the acts complained of, had
such repeals been obtained;
but if the whole continent must take up arms,
if every man must be a
soldier, it is scarcely worth our while to
fight against a contemptible
ministry only. Dearly, dearly, do we pay for
the repeal of the acts,
if that is all we fight for; for in a just
estimation, it is as great a
folly to pay a Bunker-hill price for law,
as for land. As I have
always considered the independancy of this
continent, as an event,
which sooner or later must arrive, so from
the late rapid progress of
the continent to maturity, the event could
not be far off. Wherefore,
on the breaking out of hostilities, it was
not worth while to have
disputed a matter, which time would have finally
redressed, unless we
meant to be in earnest; otherwise, it is like
wasting an estate on a
suit at law, to regulate the trespasses of
a tenant, whose lease is
just expiring. No man was a warmer wisher
for reconciliation than
myself, before the fatal nineteenth of April
1775, but the moment the
event of that day was made known, I rejected
the hardened, sullen
tempered Pharaoh of England for ever; and
disdain the wretch, that with
the pretended title of FATHER OF HIS PEOPLE
can unfeelingly hear of
their slaughter, and composedly sleep with
their blood upon his soul.
But admitting that matters were now made up,
what would be the event?
I answer, the ruin of the continent. And that
for several reasons.
FIRST. The powers of governing still remaining
in the hands of the
king, he will have a negative over the whole
legislation of this
continent. And as he hath shewn himself such
an inveterate enemy to
liberty, and discovered such a thirst for
arbitrary power; is he, or is
he not, a proper man to say to these colonies,
"YOU SHALL MAKE NO LAWS
BUT WHAT I PLEASE." And is there any inhabitant
in America so ignorant
as not to know, that according to what is
called the PRESENT
CONSTITUTION, that this continent can make
no laws but what the king
gives leave to; and is there any man so unwise,
as not to see, that
(considering what has happened) he will suffer
no law to be made here,
but such as suit HIS purpose. We may be as
effectually enslaved by the
want of laws in America, as by submitting
to laws made for us in
England. After matters are made up (as it
is called) can there be any
doubt, but the whole power of the crown will
be exerted, to keep this
continent as low and humble as possible? Instead
of going forward we
shall go backward, or be perpetually quarrelling
or ridiculously
petitioning. --WE are already greater than
the king wishes us to be,
and will he not hereafter endeavour to make
us less? To bring the
matter to one point. Is the power who is jealous
of our prosperity, a
proper power to govern us? Whoever says No
to this question, is an
INDEPENDANT, for independancy means no more,
than, whether we shall
make our own laws, or whether the king, the
greatest enemy this
continent hath, or can have, shall tell us
"THERE SHALL BE NO LAWS BUT
SUCH AS I LIKE."
But the king you will say has a negative in
England; the people there
can make no laws without his consent. In point
of right and good
order, there is something very ridiculous,
that a youth of twenty-one
(which hath often happened) shall say to several
millions of people,
older and wiser than himself, I forbid this
or that act of yours to be
law. But in this place I decline this sort
of reply, though I will
never cease to expose the absurdity of it,
and only answer, that
England being the King's residence, and America
not so, makes quite
another case. The king's negative HERE is
ten times more dangerous and
fatal than it can be in England, for THERE
he will scarcely refuse his
consent to a bill for putting England into
as strong a state of defense
as possible, and in America he would never
suffer such a bill to be
passed.
America is only a secondary object in the
system of British politics,
England consults the good of THIS country,
no farther than it answers
her OWN purpose. Wherefore, her own interest
leads her to suppress the
growth of OURS in every case which doth not
promote her advantage, or
in the least interferes with it. A pretty
state we should soon be in
under such a secondhand government, considering
what has happened! Men
do not change from enemies to friends by the
alteration of a name: And
in order to shew that reconciliation now is
a dangerous doctrine, I
affirm, THAT IT WOULD BE POLICY IN THE KING
AT THIS TIME, TO REPEAL THE
ACTS FOR THE SAKE OF REINSTATING HIMSELF IN
THE GOVERNMENT OF THE
PROVINCES; in order, that HE MAY ACCOMPLISH
BY CRAFT AND SUBTLETY, IN
THE LONG RUN, WHAT HE CANNOT DO BY FORCE AND
VIOLENCE IN THE SHORT ONE.
Reconciliation and ruin are nearly related.
SECONDLY. That as even the best terms, which
we can expect to obtain,
can amount to no more than a temporary expedient,
or a kind of
government by guardianship, which can last
no longer than till the
colonies come of age, so the general face
and state of things, in the
interim, will be unsettled and unpromising.
Emigrants of property will
not choose to come to a country whose form
of government hangs but by a
thread, and who is every day tottering on
the brink of commotion and
disturbance; and numbers of the present inhabitants
would lay hold of
the interval, to dispense of their effects,
and quit the continent.
But the most powerful of all arguments, is,
that nothing but
independence, i.e. a continental form of government,
can keep the
peace of the continent and preserve it inviolate
from civil wars. I
dread the event of a reconciliation with Britain
now, as it is more
than probable, that it will be followed by
a revolt somewhere or other,
the consequences of which may be far more
fatal than all the malice of
Britain.
Thousands are already ruined by British barbarity;
(thousands more will
probably suffer the same fate.) Those men
have other feelings than us
who have nothing suffered. All they NOW possess
is liberty, what they
before enjoyed is sacrificed to its service,
and having nothing more to
lose, they disdain submission. Besides, the
general temper of the
colonies, towards a British government, will
be like that of a youth,
who is nearly out of his time; they will care
very little about her.
And a government which cannot preserve the
peace, is no government at
all, and in that case we pay our money for
nothing; and pray what is it
that Britain can do, whose power will be wholly
on paper, should a
civil tumult break out the very day after
reconciliation! I have heard
some men say, many of whom I believe spoke
without thinking, that they
dreaded an independence, fearing that it would
produce civil wars. It
is but seldom that our first thoughts are
truly correct, and that is
the case here; for there are ten times more
to dread from a patched up
connection than from independence. I make
the sufferers case my own,
and I protest, that were I driven from house
and home, my property
destroyed, and my circumstances ruined, that
as man, sensible of
injuries, I could never relish the doctrine
of reconciliation, or
consider myself bound thereby.
The colonies have manifested such a spirit
of good order and obedience
to continental government, as is sufficient
to make every reasonable
person easy and happy on that head. No man
can assign the least
pretence for his fears, on any other grounds,
than such as are truly
childish and ridiculous, viz. that one colony
will be striving for
superiority over another.
Where there are no distinctions there can
be no superiority, perfect
equality affords no temptation. The republics
of Europe are all (and
we may say always) in peace. Holland and Switzerland
are without wars,
foreign or domestic: Monarchical governments,
it is true, are never
long at rest; the crown itself is a temptation
to enterprising ruffians
at HOME; and that degree of pride and insolence
ever attendant on regal
authority, swells into a rupture with foreign
powers, in instances,
where a republican government, by being formed
on more natural
principles, would negotiate the mistake.
If there is any true cause of fear respecting
independence, it is
because no plan is yet laid down. Men do not
see their way out--
Wherefore, as an opening into that business,
I offer the following
hints; at the same time modestly affirming,
that I have no other
opinion of them myself, than that they may
be the means of giving rise
to something better. Could the straggling
thoughts of individuals be
collected, they would frequently form materials
for wise and able men
to improve into useful matter.
LET the assemblies be annual, with a President
only. The
representation more equal. Their business
wholly domestic, and subject
to the authority of a Continental Congress.
Let each colony be divided into six, eight,
or ten, convenient
districts, each district to send a proper
number of delegates to
Congress, so that each colony send at least
thirty. The whole number
in Congress will be at least 390. Each Congress
to sit and to choose a
president by the following method. When the
delegates are met, let a
colony be taken from the whole thirteen colonies
by lot, after which,
let the whole Congress choose (by ballot)
a president from out of the
delegates of that province. In the next Congress,
let a colony be
taken by lot from twelve only, omitting that
colony from which the
president was taken in the former Congress,
and so proceeding on till
the whole thirteen shall have had their proper
rotation. And in order
that nothing may pass into a law but what
is satisfactorily just not
less than three fifths of the Congress to
be called a majority-- He
that will promote discord, under a government
so equally formed as
this, would have joined Lucifer in his revolt.
But as there is a peculiar delicacy, from
whom, or in what manner, this
business must first arise, and as it seems
most agreeable and
consistent, that it should come from some
intermediate body between the
governed and the governors, that is, between
the Congress and the
people. Let a CONTINENTAL CONFERENCE be held,
in the following manner,
and for the following purpose.
A committee of twenty-six members of Congress,
viz. two for each
colony. Two Members from each House of Assembly,
or Provincial
Convention; and five representatives of the
people at large, to be
chosen in the capital city or town of each
province, for and in behalf
of the whole province, by as many qualified
voters as shall think
proper to attend from all parts of the province
for that purpose; or,
if more convenient, the representatives may
be chosen in two or three
of the most populous parts thereof. In this
conference, thus
assembled, will be united, the two grand principles
of business
KNOWLEDGE and POWER. The members of Congress,
Assemblies, or
Conventions, by having had experience in national
concerns, will be
able and useful counsellors, and the whole,
being empowered by the
people, will have a truly legal authority.
The conferring members being met, let their
business be to frame a
CONTINENTAL CHARTER, or Charter of the United
Colonies; (answering to
what is called the Magna Carta of England)
fixing the number and manner
of choosing members of Congress, members of
Assembly, with their date
of sitting, and drawing the line of business
and jurisdiction between
them: (Always remembering, that our strength
is continental, not
provincial:) Securing freedom and property
to all men, and above all
things, the free exercise of religion, according
to the dictates of
conscience; with such other matter as is necessary
for a charter to
contain. Immediately after which, the said
Conference to dissolve, and
the bodies which shall be chosen comformable
to the said charter, to be
the legislators and governors of this continent
for the time being:
Whose peace and happiness may God preserve,
Amen.
Should any body of men be hereafter delegated
for this or some similar
purpose, I offer them the following extracts
from that wise observer on
governments DRAGONETTI. "The science" says
he "of the politician
consists in fixing the true point of happiness
and freedom. Those men
would deserve the gratitude of ages, who should
discover a mode of
government that contained the greatest sum
of individual happiness,
with the least national expense."[1]
But where, says some, is the King of America?
I'll tell you. Friend,
he reigns above, and doth not make havoc of
mankind like the Royal
Brute of Britain. Yet that we may not appear
to be defective even in
earthly honors, let a day be solemnly set
apart for proclaiming the
charter; let it be brought forth placed on
the divine law, the word of
God; let a crown be placed thereon, by which
the world may know, that
so far as we approve of monarchy, that in
America THE LAW IS KING. For
as in absolute governments the King is law,
so in free countries the
law OUGHT to be King; and there ought to be
no other. But lest any ill
use should afterwards arise, let the crown
at the conclusion of the
ceremony, be demolished, and scattered among
the people whose right it
is.
A government of our own is our natural right:
And when a man seriously
reflects on the precariousness of human affairs,
he will become
convinced, that it is infinitely wiser and
safer, to form a
constitution of our own in a cool deliberate
manner, while we have it
in our power, than to trust such an interesting
event to time and
chance. If we omit it now, some[2] Massanello
may hereafter arise,
who laying hold of popular disquietudes, may
collect together the
desperate and the discontented, and by assuming
to themselves the
powers of government, may sweep away the liberties
of the continent
like a deluge. Should the government of America
return again into the
hands of Britain, the tottering situation
of things will be a
temptation for some desperate adventurer to
try his fortune; and in
such a case, that relief can Britain give?
Ere she could hear the
news, the fatal business might be done; and
ourselves suffering like
the wretched Britons under the oppression
of the Conqueror. Ye that
oppose independence now, ye know not what
ye do; ye are opening a door
to eternal tyranny, by keeping vacant the
seat of government. There
are thousands, and tens of thousands, who
would think it glorious to
expel from the continent that barbarous and
hellish power, which hath
stirred up the Indians and Negroes to destroy
us; the cruelty hath a
double guilt, it is dealing brutally by us,
and treacherously by them.
To talk of friendship with those in whom our
reason forbids us to have
faith, and our affections wounded through
a thousand pores instruct us
to detest, is madness and folly. Every day
wears out the little
remains of kindred between us and them, and
can there be any reason to
hope, that as the relationship expires, the
affection will increase, or
that we shall agree better, when we have ten
times more and greater
concerns to quarrel over than ever?
Ye that tell us of harmony and reconciliation,
can ye restore to us the
time that is past? Can ye give to prostitution
its former innocence?
Neither can ye reconcile Britain and America.
The last cord now is
broken, the people of England are presenting
addresses against us.
There are injuries which nature cannot forgive;
she would cease to be
nature if she did. As well can the lover forgive
the ravisher of his
mistress, as the continent forgive the murders
of Britain. The
Almighty hath implanted in us these unextinguishable
feelings for good
and wise purposes. They are the guardians
of his image in our hearts.
They distinguish us from the herd of common
animals. The social
compact would dissolve, and justice be extirpated
the earth, or have
only a casual existence were we callous to
the touches of affection.
The robber, and the murderer, would often
escape unpunished, did not
the injuries which our tempers sustain, provoke
us into justice.
O ye that love mankind! Ye that dare oppose,
not only the tyranny, but
the tyrant, stand forth! Every spot of the
old world is overrun with
oppression. Freedom hath been hunted round
the globe. Asia, and
Africa, have long expelled her--Europe regards
her like a stranger, and
England hath given her warning to depart.
O! receive the fugitive, and
prepare in time an asylum for mankind.
OF THE PRESENT _ABILITY_ OF _AMERICA_, WITH
SOME
MISCELLANEOUS _REFLECTIONS_
I have never met with a man, either in England
or America, who hath not
confessed his opinion that a separation between
the countries, would
take place one time or other: And there is
no instance, in which we
have shewn less judgement, than in endeavouring
to describe, what we
call the ripeness or fitness of the Continent
for independence.
As all men allow the measure, and vary only
in their opinion of the
time, let us, in order to remove mistakes,
take a general survey of
things, and endeavour, if possible, to find
out the VERY time. But we
need not go far, the inquiry ceases at once,
for, the TIME HATH FOUND
US. The general concurrence, the glorious
union of all things prove
the fact.
It is not in numbers, but in unity, that our
great strength lies; yet
our present numbers are sufficient to repel
the force of all the world.
The Continent hath, at this time, the largest
body of armed and
disciplined men of any power under Heaven;
and is just arrived at that
pitch of strength, in which no single colony
is able to support itself,
and the whole, when united, can accomplish
the matter, and either more,
or, less than this, might be fatal in its
effects. Our land force is
already sufficient, and as to naval affairs,
we cannot be insensible,
that Britain would never suffer an American
man of war to be built,
while the continent remained in her hands.
Wherefore, we should be no
forwarder an hundred years hence in that branch,
than we are now; but
the truth is, we should be less so, because
the timber of the country
is every day diminishing, and that, which
will remain at last, will be
far off and difficult to procure.
Were the continent crowded with inhabitants,
her sufferings under the
present circumstances would be intolerable.
The more seaport towns we
had, the more should we have both to defend
and to lose. Our present
numbers are so happily proportioned to our
wants, that no man need be
idle. The diminution of trade affords an army,
and the necessities of
an army create a new trade.
Debts we have none; and whatever we may contract
on this account will
serve as a glorious memento of our virtue.
Can we but leave posterity
with a settled form of government, an independent
constitution of its
own, the purchase at any price will be cheap.
But to expend millions
for the sake of getting a few vile acts repealed,
and routing the
present ministry only, is unworthy the charge,
and is using posterity
with the utmost cruelty; because it is leaving
them the great work to
do, and a debt upon their backs, from which
they derive no advantage.
Such a thought is unworthy of a man of honor,
and is the true
characteristic of a narrow heart and a peddling
politician.
The debt we may contract doth not deserve
our regard, if the work be
but accomplished. No nation ought to be without
a debt. A national
debt is a national bond; and when it bears
no interest, is in no case a
grievance. Britain is oppressed with a debt
of upwards of one hundred
and forty millions sterling, for which she
pays upwards of four
millions interest. And as a compensation for
her debt, she has a large
navy; America is without a debt, and without
a navy; yet for the
twentieth part of the English national debt,
could have a navy as large
again. The navy of England is not worth, at
this time, more than three
millions and an half sterling.
The first and second editions of this pamphlet
were published without
the following calculations, which are now
given as a proof that the
above estimation of the navy is just.[3]
The charge of building a ship of each rate,
and furnishing her with
masts, yards, sails and rigging, together
with a proportion of eight
months boatswain's and carpenter's seastores,
as calculated by Mr.
Burchett, Secretary to the navy.
pounds Sterling
For a ship of a 100 guns - 35,553
90 - - 29,886
80 - - 23,638
70 - - 17,795
60 - - 14,197
50 - - 10,606
40 - - 7,558
30 - - 5,846
20 - - 3,710
And from hence it is easy to sum up the value,
or cost rather, of the
whole British navy, which in the year 1757,
when it was at its greatest
glory consisted of the following 
ships 
and guns:
Ships. Guns. Cost 
of one. Cost of all
6 - 100 - 35,553 - 213,318
12 - 90 - 29,886 - 358,632
12 - 80 - 23,638 - 283,656
43 - 70 - 17,785 - 764,755
35 - 60 - 14,197 - 496,895
40 - 50 - 10,606 - 424,240
45 - 40 - 7,558 - 340,110
58 - 20 - 3,710 - 215,180
85 Sloops, bombs,
and fireships, one 2,000 170,000
with another, _________
Cost 3,266,786
Remains for guns, _________ 233,214
_________
3,500,000
No country on the globe is so happily situated,
or so internally
capable of raising a fleet as America. Tar,
timber, iron, and cordage
are her natural produce. We need go abroad
for nothing. Whereas the
Dutch, who make large profits by hiring out
their ships of war to the
Spaniards and Portuguese, are obliged to import
most of their materials
they use. We ought to view the building a
fleet as an article of
commerce, it being the natural manufactory
of this country. It is the
best money we can lay out. A navy when finished
is worth more than it
cost. And is that nice point in national policy,
in which commerce and
protection are united. Let us build; if we
want them not, we can sell;
and by that means replace our paper currency
with ready gold and silver.
In point of manning a fleet, people in general
run into great errors;
it is not necessary that one fourth part should
he sailors. The
Terrible privateer, Captain Death, stood the
hottest engagement of any
ship last war, yet had not twenty sailors
on board, though her
complement of men was upwards of two hundred.
A few able and social
sailors will soon instruct a sufficient number
of active landmen in the
common work of a ship. Wherefore, we never
can be more capable to
begin on maritime matters than now, while
our timber is standing, our
fisheries blocked up, and our sailors and
shipwrights out of employ.
Men of war of seventy and eighty guns were
built forty years ago in
New-England, and why not the same now? Ship-building
is America's
greatest pride, and in which she will in time
excel the whole world.
The great empires of the east are mostly inland,
and consequently
excluded from the possibility of rivalling
her. Africa is in a state
of barbarism; and no power in Europe hath
either such an extent of
coast, or such an internal supply of materials.
Where nature hath
given the one, she has withheld the other;
to America only hath she
been liberal of both. The vast empire of Russia
is almost shut out
from the sea: wherefore, her boundless forests,
her tar, iron, and
cordage are only articles of commerce.
In point of safety, ought we to be without
a fleet? We are not the
little people now, which we were sixty years
ago; at that time we might
have trusted our property in the streets,
or fields rather; and slept
securely without locks or bolts to our doors
or windows. The case now
is altered, and our methods of defense ought
to improve with our
increase of property. A common pirate, twelve
months ago, might have
come up the Delaware, and laid the city of
Philadelphia under instant
contribution, for what sum he pleased; and
the same might have happened
to other places. Nay, any daring fellow, in
a brig of fourteen or
sixteen guns might have robbed the whole continent,
and carried off
half a million of money. These are circumstances
which demand our
attention, and point out the necessity of
naval protection.
Some, perhaps, will say, that after we have
made it up with Britain,
she will protect us. Can we be so unwise as
to mean, that she shall
keep a navy in our harbours for that purpose?
Common sense will tell
us, that the power which hath endeavoured
to subdue us, is of all
others the most improper to defend us. Conquest
may be effected under
the pretence of friendship; and ourselves
after a long and brave
resistance, be at last cheated into slavery.
And if her ships are not
to be admitted into our harbours, I would
ask, how is she to protect
us? A navy three or four thousand miles off
can be of little use, and
on sudden emergencies, none at all. Wherefore,
if we must hereafter
protect ourselves, why not do it for ourselves?
The English list of ships of war, is long
and formidable, but not a
tenth part of them are at any one time fit
for service, numbers of them
not in being; yet their names are pompously
continued in the list, if
only a plank be left of the ship: and not
a fifth part of such as are
fit for service, can be spared on any one
station at one time. The
East and West Indies, Mediterranean, Africa,
and other parts over which
Britain extends her claim, make large demands
upon her navy. From a
mixture of prejudice and inattention, we have
contracted a false notion
respecting the navy of England, and have talked
as if we should have
the whole of it to encounter at once, and
for that reason, supposed,
that we must have one as large; which not
being instantly practicable,
have been made use of by a set of disguised
Tories to discourage our
beginning thereon. Nothing can be farther
from truth than this; for if
America had only a twentieth part of the naval
force of Britain, she
would be by far an overmatch for her; because,
as we neither have, nor
claim any foreign dominion, our whole force
would be employed on our
own coast, where we should, in the long run,
have two to one the
advantage of those who had three or four thousand
miles to sail over,
before they could attack us, and the same
distance to return in order
to refit and recruit. And although Britain,
by her fleet, hath a check
over our trade to Europe, we have as large
a one over her trade to the
West Indies, which, by laying in the neighbourhood
of the continent, is
entirely at its mercy.
Some method might be fallen on to keep up
a naval force in time of
peace, if we should not judge it necessary
to support a constant navy.
If premiums were to be given to merchants,
to build and employ in their
service ships mounted with twenty, thirty,
forty or fifty guns, (the
premiums to be in proportion to the loss of
bulk to the merchants)
fifty or sixty of those ships, with a few
guardships on constant duty,
would keep up a sufficient navy, and that
without burdening ourselves
with the evil so loudly complained of in England,
of suffering their
fleet, in time of peace to lie rotting in
the docks. To unite the
sinews of commerce and defense is sound policy;
for when our strength
and our riches play into each other's hand,
we need fear no external
enemy.
In almost every article of defense we abound.
Hemp flourishes even to
rankness, so that we need not want cordage.
Our iron is superior to
that of other countries. Our small arms equal
to any in the world.
Cannon we can cast at pleasure. Saltpetre
and gunpowder we are every
day producing. Our knowledge is hourly improving.
Resolution is our
inherent character, and courage hath never
yet forsaken us. Wherefore,
what is it that we want? Why is it that we
hesitate? From Britain we
can expect nothing but ruin. If she is once
admitted to the government
of America again, this Continent will not
be worth living in.
Jealousies will be always arising; insurrections
will be constantly
happening; and who will go forth to quell
them? Who will venture his
life to reduce his own countrymen to a foreign
obedience? The
difference between Pennsylvania and Connecticut,
respecting some
unlocated lands, shews the insignificance
of a British government, and
fully proves, that nothing but Continental
authority can regulate
Continental matters.
Another reason why the present time is preferable
to all others, is,
that the fewer our numbers are, the more land
there is yet unoccupied,
which instead of being lavished by the king
on his worthless
dependants, may be hereafter applied, not
only to the discharge of the
present debt, but to the constant support
of government. No nation
under heaven hath such an advantage at this.
The infant state of the Colonies, as it is
called, so far from being
against, is an argument in favour of independance.
We are sufficiently
numerous, and were we more so, we might be
less united. It is a matter
worthy of observation, that the more a country
is peopled, the smaller
their armies are. In military numbers, the
ancients far exceeded the
moderns: and the reason is evident. For trade
being the consequence of
population, men become too much absorbed thereby
to attend to anything
else. Commerce diminishes the spirit, both
of patriotism and military
defence. And history sufficiently informs
us, that the bravest
achievements were always accomplished in the
non-age of a nation. With
the increase of commerce, England hath lost
its spirit. The city of
London, notwithstanding its numbers, submits
to continued insults with
the patience of a coward. The more men have
to lose, the less willing
are they to venture. The rich are in general
slaves to fear, and
submit to courtly power with the trembling
duplicity of a Spaniel.
Youth is the seed time of good habits, as
well in nations as in
individuals. It might be difficult, if not
impossible, to form the
Continent into one government half a century
hence. The vast variety
of interests, occasioned by an increase of
trade and population, would
create confusion. Colony would be against
colony. Each being able
might scorn each other's assistance: and while
the proud and foolish
gloried in their little distinctions, the
wise would lament, that the
union had not been formed before. Wherefore,
the PRESENT TIME is the
TRUE TIME for establishing it. The intimacy
which is contracted in
infancy, and the friendship which is formed
in misfortune, are, of all
others, the most lasting and unalterable.
Our present union is marked
with both these characters: we are young and
we have been distressed;
but our concord hath withstood our troubles,
and fixes a memorable area
for posterity to glory in.
The present time, likewise, is that peculiar
time, which never happens
to a nation but once, viz. the time of forming
itself into a
government. Most nations have let slip the
opportunity, and by that
means have been compelled to receive laws
from their conquerors,
instead of making laws for themselves. First,
they had a king, and
then a form of government; whereas, the articles
or charter of
government, should be formed first, and men
delegated to execute them
afterward but from the errors of other nations,
let us learn wisdom,
and lay hold of the present opportunity --TO
BEGIN GOVERNMENT AT THE
RIGHT END.
When William the Conqueror subdued England,
he gave them law at the
point of the sword; and until we consent,
that the seat of government,
in America, be legally and authoritatively
occupied, we shall be in
danger of having it filled by some fortunate
ruffian, who may treat us
in the same manner, and then, where will be
our freedom? where our
property? As to religion, I hold it to be
the indispensable duty of
all government, to protect all conscientious
professors thereof, and I
know of no other business which government
hath to do therewith, Let a
man throw aside that narrowness of soul, that
selfishness of principle,
which the niggards of all professions are
so unwilling to part with,
and he will be at delivered of his fears on
that head. Suspicion is
the companion of mean souls, and the bane
of all good society. For
myself, I fully and conscientiously believe,
that it is the will of the
Almighty, that there should be diversity of
religious opinions among
us: It affords a larger field for our Christian
kindness. Were we all
of one way of thinking, our religious dispositions
would want matter
for probation; and on this liberal principle,
I look on the various
denominations among us, to be like children
of the same family,
differing only, in what is called, their Christian
names.
In page forty, I threw out a few thoughts
on the propriety of a
Continental Charter, (for I only presume to
offer hints, not plans) and
in this place, I take the liberty of rementioning
the subject, by
observing, that a charter is to be understood
as a bond of solemn
obligation, which the whole enters into, to
support the right of every
separate part, whether of religion, personal
freedom, or property. A
firm bargain and a right reckoning make long
friends.
In a former page I likewise mentioned the
necessity of a large and
equal representation; and there is no political
matter which more
deserves our attention. A small number of
electors, or a small number
of representatives, are equally dangerous.
But if the number of the
representatives be not only small, but unequal,
the danger is
increased. As an instance of this, I mention
the following; when the
Associators petition was before the House
of Assembly of Pennsylvania;
twenty-eight members only were present, all
the Bucks county members,
being eight, voted against it, and had seven
of the Chester members
done the same, this whole province had been
governed by two counties
only, and this danger it is always exposed
to. The unwarrantable
stretch likewise, which that house made in
their last sitting, to gain
an undue authority over the delegates of that
province, ought to warn
the people at large, how they trust power
out of their own hands. A
set of instructions for the Delegates were
put together, which in point
of sense and business would have dishonoured
a schoolboy, and after
being approved by a FEW, a VERY FEW without
doors, were carried into
the House, and there passed IN BEHALF OF THE
WHOLE COLONY; whereas, did
the whole colony know, with what ill-will
that House hath entered on
some necessary public measures, they would
not hesitate a moment to
think them unworthy of such a trust.
Immediate necessity makes many things convenient,
which if continued
would grow into oppressions. Expedience and
right are different
things. When the calamities of America required
a consultation, there
was no method so ready, or at that time so
proper, as to appoint
persons from the several Houses of Assembly
for that purpose; and the
wisdom with which they have proceeded hath
preserved this continent
from ruin. But as it is more than probable
that we shall never be
without a CONGRESS, every well wisher to good
order, must own, that the
mode for choosing members of that body, deserves
consideration. And I
put it as a question to those, who make a
study of mankind, whether
representation and election is not too great
a power for one and the
same body of men to possess? When we are planning
for posterity, we
ought to remember, that virtue is not hereditary.
It is from our enemies that we often gain
excellent maxims, and are
frequently surprised into reason by their
mistakes, Mr. Cornwall (one
of the Lords of the Treasury) treated the
petition of the New-York
Assembly with contempt, because THAT House,
he said, consisted but of
twenty-six members, which trifling number,
he argued, could not with
decency be put for the whole. We thank him
for his involuntary
honesty.[4]
TO CONCLUDE, however strange it may appear
to some, or however
unwilling they may be to think so, matters
not, but many strong and
striking reasons may be given, to shew, that
nothing can settle our
affairs so expeditiously as an open and determined
declaration for
independance. Some of which are,
FIRST. - It is the custom of nations, when
any two are at war, for some
other powers, not engaged in the quarrel,
to step in as mediators, and
bring about the preliminaries of a peace:
but while America calls
herself the Subject of Great Britain, no power,
however well disposed
she may be, can offer her mediation. Wherefore,
in our present state
we may quarrel on for ever.
SECONDLY. - It is unreasonable to suppose,
that France or Spain will
give us any kind of assistance, if we mean
only, to make use of that
assistance for the purpose of repairing the
breach, and strengthening
the connection between Britain and America;
because, those powers would
be sufferers by the consequences.
THIRDLY. - While we profess ourselves the
subjects of Britain, we must,
in the eye of foreign nations, be considered
as rebels. The precedent
is somewhat dangerous to THEIR PEACE, for
men to be in arms under the
name of subjects; we, on the spot, can solve
the paradox: but to unite
resistance and subjection, requires an idea
much too refined for common
understanding.
FOURTHLY. - Were a manifesto to be published,
and despatched to foreign
courts, setting forth the miseries we have
endured, and the peaceable
methods we have ineffectually used for redress;
declaring, at the same
time, that not being able, any longer, to
live happily or safely under
the cruel disposition of the British court,
we had been driven to the
necessity of breaking off all connections
with her; at the same time,
assuring all such courts of our peaceable
disposition towards them, and
of our desire of entering into trade with
them: Such a memorial would
produce more good effects to this Continent,
than if a ship were
freighted with petitions to Britain.
Under our present denomination of British
subjects, we can neither be
received nor heard abroad: The custom of all
courts is against us, and
will be so, until, by an independance, we
take rank with other nations.
These proceedings may at first appear strange
and difficult; but, like
all other steps which we have already passed
over, will in a little
time become familiar and agreeable; and, until
an independance is
declared, the Continent will feel itself like
a man who continues
putting off some unpleasant business from
day to day, yet knows it must
be done, hates to set about it, wishes it
over, and is continually
haunted with the thoughts of its necessity.
APPENDIX
Since the publication of the first edition
of this pamphlet, or rather,
on the same day on which it came out, the
King's Speech made its
appearance in this city. Had the spirit of
prophecy directed the birth
of this production, it could not have brought
it forth, at a more
seasonable juncture, or a more necessary time.
The bloody mindedness
of the one, shew the necessity of pursuing
the doctrine of the other.
Men read by way of revenge. And the Speech,
instead of terrifying,
prepared a way for the manly principles of
Independance.
Ceremony, and even, silence, from whatever
motive they may arise, have
a hurtful tendency, when they give the least
degree of countenance to
base and wicked performances; wherefore, if
this maxim be admitted, it
naturally follows, that the King's Speech,
as being a piece of finished
villany, deserved, and still deserves, a general
execration both by the
Congress and the people. Yet, as the domestic
tranquillity of a
nation, depends greatly, on the CHASTITY of
what may properly be called
NATIONAL MANNERS, it is often better, to pass
some things over in
silent disdain, than to make use of such new
methods of dislike, as
might introduce the least innovation, on that
guardian of our peace and
safety. And, perhaps, it is chiefly owing
to this prudent delicacy,
that the King's Speech, hath not, before now,
suffered a public
execution. The Speech if it may be called
one, is nothing better than
a wilful audacious libel against the truth,
the common good, and the
existence of mankind; and is a formal and
pompous method of offering up
human sacrifices to the pride of tyrants.
But this general massacre of
mankind is one of the privileges, and the
certain consequence of Kings;
for as nature knows them NOT, they know NOT
HER, and although they are
beings of our OWN creating, they know not
US, and are become the gods
of their creators. The Speech hath one good
quality, which is, that it
is not calculated to deceive, neither can
we, even if we would, be
deceived by it. Brutality and tyranny appear
on the face of it. It
leaves us at no loss: And every line convinces,
even in the moment of
reading, that He, who hunts the woods for
prey, the naked and untutored
Indian, is less a Savage than the King of
Britain.
Sir John Dalrymple, the putative father of
a whining jesuitical piece,
fallaciously called, "THE ADDRESS OF THE PEOPLE
OF _ENGLAND_ TO THE
INHABITANTS OF _AMERICA_," hath, perhaps,
from a vain supposition, that
the people here were to be frightened at the
pomp and description of a
king, given, (though very unwisely on his
part) the real character of
the present one: "But" says this writer, "if
you are inclined to pay
compliments to an administration, which we
do not complain of,"
(meaning the Marquis of Rockingham's at the
repeal of the Stamp Act)
"it is very unfair in you to withhold them
from that prince by WHOSE
_NOD ALONE_ THEY WERE PERMITTED TO DO ANY
THING." This is toryism with
a witness! Here is idolatry even without a
mask: And he who can calmly
hear, and digest such doctrine, hath forfeited
his claim to rationality
an apostate from the order of manhood; and
ought to be considered as
one, who hath not only given up the proper
dignity of man, but sunk
himself beneath the rank of animals, and contemptibly
crawl through the
world like a worm.
However, it matters very little now, what
the king of England either
says or does; he hath wickedly broken through
every moral and human
obligation, trampled nature and conscience
beneath his feet; and by a
steady and constitutional spirit of insolence
and cruelty, procured for
himself an universal hatred. It is NOW the
interest of America to
provide for herself. She hath already a large
and young family, whom
it is more her duty to take care of, than
to be granting away her
property, to support a power who is become
a reproach to the names of
men and christians--YE, whose office it is
to watch over the morals of
a nation, of whatsoever sect or denomination
ye are of, as well as ye,
who, are more immediately the guardians of
the public liberty, if ye
wish to preserve your native country uncontaminated
by European
corruption, ye must in secret wish a separation--But
leaving the moral
part to private reflection, I shall chiefly
confine my farther remarks
to the following heads.
First. That it is the interest of America
to be separated from Britain.
Secondly. Which is the easiest and most practicable
plan,
RECONCILIATION OR INDEPENDANCE? With some
occasional remarks.
In support of the first, I could, if I judged
it proper, produce the
opinion of some of the ablest and most experienced
men on this
continent; and whose sentiments, on that head,
are not yet publicly
known. It is in reality a self-evident position:
For no nation in a
state of foreign dependance, limited in its
commerce, and cramped and
fettered in its legislative powers, can ever
arrive at any material
eminence. America doth not yet know what opulence
is; and although the
progress which she hath made stands unparalleled
in the history of
other nations, it is but childhood, compared
with what she would be
capable of arriving at, had she, as she ought
to have, the legislative
powers in her own hands. England is, at this
time, proudly coveting
what would do her no good, were she to accomplish
it; and the Continent
hesitating on a matter, which will be her
final ruin if neglected. It
is the commerce and not the conquest of America,
by which England is to
be benefited, and that would in a great measure
continue, were the
countries as independant of each other as
France and Spain; because in
many articles, neither can go to a better
market. But it is the
independance of this country of Britain or
any other, which is now the
main and only object worthy of contention,
and which, like all other
truths discovered by necessity, will appear
clearer and stronger every
day.
First. Because it will come to that one time
or other.
Secondly. Because, the longer it is delayed
the harder it will be to
accomplish.
I have frequently amused myself both in public
and private companies,
with silently remarking, the specious errors
of those who speak without
reflecting. And among the many which I have
heard, the following seems
the most general, viz. that had this rupture
happened forty or fifty
years hence, instead of NOW, the Continent
would have been more able to
have shaken off the dependance. To which I
reply, that our military
ability, AT THIS TIME, arises from the experience
gained in the last
war, and which in forty or fifty years time,
would have been totally
extinct. The Continent, would not, by that
time, have had a General,
or even a military officer left; and we, or
those who may succeed us,
would have been as ignorant of martial matters
as the ancient Indians:
And this single position, closely attended
to, will unanswerably prove,
that the present time is preferable to all
others. The argument turns
thus--at the conclusion of the last war, we
had experience, but wanted
numbers; and forty or fifty years hence, we
should have numbers,
without experience; wherefore, the proper
point of time, must be some
particular point between the two extremes,
in which a sufficiency of
the former remains, and a proper increase
of the latter is obtained:
And that point of time is the present time.
The reader will pardon this digression, as
it does not properly come
under the head I first set out with, and to
which I again return by the
following position, viz.
Should affairs be patched up with Britain,
and she to remain the
governing and sovereign power of America,
(which, as matters are now
circumstanced, is giving up the point entirely)
we shall deprive
ourselves of the very means of sinking the
debt we have, or may
contract. The value of the back lands which
some of the provinces are
clandestinely deprived of, by the unjust extension
of the limits of
Canada, valued only at five pounds sterling
per hundred acres, amount
to upwards of twenty-five millions, Pennsylvania
currency; and the
quit-rents at one penny sterling per acre,
to two millions yearly.
It is by the sale of those lands that the
debt may be sunk, without
burthen to any, and the quit-rent reserved
thereon, will always lessen,
and in time, will wholly support the yearly
expence of government. It
matters not how long the debt is in paying,
so that the lands when sold
be applied to the discharge of it, and for
the execution of which, the
Congress for the time being, will be the continental
trustees.
I proceed now to the second head, viz. Which
is the easiest and most
practicable plan, RECONCILIATION or INDEPENDANCE;
With some occasional
remarks.
He who takes nature for his guide is not easily
beaten out of his
argument, and on that ground, I answer GENERALLY--THAT
_INDEPENDANCE_
BEING A _SINGLE SIMPLE LINE,_ CONTAINED WITHIN
OURSELVES; AND
RECONCILIATION, A MATTER EXCEEDINGLY PERPLEXED
AND COMPLICATED, AND IN
WHICH, A TREACHEROUS CAPRICIOUS COURT IS TO
INTERFERE, GIVES THE ANSWER
WITHOUT A DOUBT.
The present state of America is truly alarming
to every man who is
capable of reflexion. Without law, without
government, without any
other mode of power than what is founded on,
and granted by courtesy.
Held together by an unexampled concurrence
of sentiment, which, is
nevertheless subject to change, and which,
every secret enemy is
endeavouring to dissolve. Our present condition,
is, Legislation
without law; wisdom without a plan; a constitution
without a name; and,
what is strangely astonishing, perfect Independance
contending for
dependance. The instance is without a precedent;
the case never
existed before; and who can tell what may
be the event? The property
of no man is secure in the present unbraced
system of things. The mind
of the multitude is left at random, and seeing
no fixed object before
them, they pursue such as fancy or opinion
starts. Nothing is
criminal; there is no such thing as treason;
wherefore, every one
thinks himself at liberty to act as he pleases.
The Tories dared not
have assembled offensively, had they known
that their lives, by that
act, were forfeited to the laws of the state.
A line of distinction
should be drawn, between, English soldiers
taken in battle, and
inhabitants of America taken in arms. The
first are prisoners, but the
latter traitors. The one forfeits his liberty,
the other his head.
Notwithstanding our wisdom, there is a visible
feebleness in some of
our proceedings which gives encouragement
to dissensions. The
Continental Belt is too loosely buckled. And
if something is not done
in time, it will be too late to do any thing,
and we shall fall into a
state, in which, neither RECONCILIATION nor
INDEPENDANCE will be
practicable. The king and his worthless adherents
are got at their old
game of dividing the Continent, and there
are not wanting among us,
Printers, who will be busy in spreading specious
falsehoods. The
artful and hypocritical letter which appeared
a few months ago in two
of the New York papers, and likewise in two
others, is an evidence that
there are men who want either judgment or
honesty.
It is easy getting into holes and corners
and talking of
reconciliation: But do such men seriously
consider, how difficult the
task is, and how dangerous it may prove, should
the Continent divide
thereon. Do they take within their view, all
the various orders of men
whose situation and circumstances, as well
as their own, are to be
considered therein. Do they put themselves
in the place of the
sufferer whose ALL is ALREADY gone, and of
the soldier, who hath
quitted ALL for the defence of his country.
If their ill judged
moderation be suited to their own private
situations only, regardless
of others, the event will convince them, that
"they are reckoning
without their Host."
Put us, says some, on the footing we were
on in sixty-three: To which I
answer, the request is not now in the power
of Britain to comply with,
neither will she propose it; but if it were,
and even should be
granted, I ask, as a reasonable question,
By what means is such a
corrupt and faithless court to be kept to
its engagements? Another
parliament, nay, even the present, may hereafter
repeal the obligation,
on the pretense, of its being violently obtained,
or unwisely granted;
and in that case, Where is our redress?--No
going to law with nations;
cannon are the barristers of Crowns; and the
sword, not of justice, but
of war, decides the suit. To be on the footing
of sixty-three, it is
not sufficient, that the laws only be put
on the same state, but, that
our circumstances, likewise, be put on the
same state; Our burnt and
destroyed towns repaired or built up, our
private losses made good, our
public debts (contracted for defence) discharged;
otherwise, we shall
be millions worse than we were at that enviable
period. Such a
request, had it been complied with a year
ago, would have won the heart
and soul of the Continent--but now it is too
late, "The Rubicon is
passed."
Besides, the taking up arms, merely to enforce
the repeal of a
pecuniary law, seems as unwarrantable by the
divine law, and as
repugnant to human feelings, as the taking
up arms to enforce obedience
thereto. The object, on either side, doth
not justify the means; for
the lives of men are too valuable to be cast
away on such trifles. It
is the violence which is done and threatened
to our persons; the
destruction of our property by an armed force;
the invasion of our
country by fire and sword, which conscientiously
qualifies the use of
arms: And the instant, in which such a mode
of defence became
necessary, all subjection to Britain ought
to have ceased; and the
independancy of America, should have been
considered, as dating its
aera from, and published by, THE FIRST MUSKET
THAT WAS FIRED AGAINST
HER. This line is a line of consistency; neither
drawn by caprice, nor
extended by ambition; but produced by a chain
of events, of which the
colonies were not the authors.
I shall conclude these remarks with the following
timely and well
intended hints. We ought to reflect, that
there are three different
ways by which an independancy may hereafter
be effected; and that ONE
of those THREE, will one day or other, be
the fate of America, viz. By
the legal voice of the people in Congress;
by a military power; or by a
mob--It may not always happen that OUR soldiers
are citizens, and the
multitude a body of reasonable men; virtue,
as I have already remarked,
is not hereditary, neither is it perpetual.
Should an independancy be
brought about by the first of those means,
we have every opportunity
and every encouragement before us, to form
the noblest purest
constitution on the face of the earth. We
have it in our power to
begin the world over again. A situation, similar
to the present, hath
not happened since the days of Noah until
now. The birthday of a new
world is at hand, and a race of men, perhaps
as numerous as all Europe
contains, are to receive their portion of
freedom from the event of a
few months. The Reflexion is awful--and in
this point of view, How
trifling, how ridiculous, do the little, paltry
cavillings, of a few
weak or interested men appear, when weighed
against the business of a
world.
Should we neglect the present favourable and
inviting period, and an
Independance be hereafter effected by any
other means, we must charge
the consequence to ourselves, or to those
rather, whose narrow and
prejudiced souls, are habitually opposing
the measure, without either
inquiring or reflecting. There are reasons
to be given in support of
Independance, which men should rather privately
think of, than be
publicly told of. We ought not now to be debating
whether we shall be
independant or not, but, anxious to accomplish
it on a firm, secure,
and honorable basis, and uneasy rather that
it is not yet began upon.
Every day convinces us of its necessity. Even
the Tories (if such
beings yet remain among us) should, of all
men, be the most solicitous
to promote it; for, as the appointment of
committees at first,
protected them from popular rage, so, a wise
and well established form
of government, will be the only certain means
of continuing it securely
to them. WHEREFORE, if they have not virtue
enough to be WHIGS, they
ought to have prudence enough to wish for
Independance.
In short, Independance is the only BOND that
can tye and keep us
together. We shall then see our object, and
our ears will be legally
shut against the schemes of an intriguing,
as well, as a cruel enemy.
We shall then too, be on a proper footing,
to treat with Britain; for
there is reason to conclude, that the pride
of that court, will be less
hurt by treating with the American states
for terms of peace, than with
those, whom she denominates, "rebellious subjects,"
for terms of
accommodation. It is our delaying it that
encourages her to hope for
conquest, and our backwardness tends only
to prolong the war. As we
have, without any good effect therefrom, withheld
our trade to obtain a
redress of our grievances, let us now try
the alternative, by
independantly redressing them ourselves, and
then offering to open the
trade. The mercantile and reasonable part
in England, will be still
with us; because, peace with trade, is preferable
to war without it.
And if this offer be not accepted, other courts
may be applied to.
On these grounds I rest the matter. And as
no offer hath yet been made
to refute the doctrine contained in the former
editions of this
pamphlet, it is a negative proof, that either
the doctrine cannot be
refuted, or, that the party in favour of it
are too numerous to be
opposed. WHEREFORE, instead of gazing at each
other with suspicious or
doubtful curiosity; let each of us, hold out
to his neighbour the
hearty hand of friendship, and unite in drawing
a line, which, like an
act of oblivion shall bury in forgetfulness
every former dissension.
Let the names of Whig and Tory be extinct;
and let none other be heard
among us, than those of A GOOD CITIZEN, AN
OPEN AND RESOLUTE FRIEND,
AND A VIRTUOUS SUPPORTER OF THE RIGHTS OF
MANKIND AND OF THE _FREE AND
INDEPENDANT STATES OF AMERICA_.
To the Representatives of the Religious Society
of the People called
Quakers, or to so many of them as were concerned
in publishing the late
piece, entitled "THE ANCIENT TESTIMONY and
PRINCIPLES of the People
called QUAKERS renewed, with Respect to the
KING and GOVERNMENT, and
touching the COMMOTIONS now prevailing in
these and other parts of
AMERICA addressed to the PEOPLE IN GENERAL."
The Writer of this, is one of those few, who
never dishonours religion
either by ridiculing, or cavilling at any
denomination whatsoever. To
God, and not to man, are all men accountable
on the score of religion.
Wherefore, this epistle is not so properly
addressed to you as a
religious, but as a political body, dabbling
in matters, which the
professed Quietude of your Principles instruct
you not to meddle with.
As you have, without a proper authority for
so doing, put yourselves in
the place of the whole body of the Quakers,
so, the writer of this, in
order to be on an equal rank with yourselves,
is under the necessity,
of putting himself in the place of all those,
who, approve the very
writings and principles, against which, your
testimony is directed:
And he hath chosen this singular situation,
in order, that you might
discover in him that presumption of character
which you cannot see in
yourselves. For neither he nor you can have
any claim or title to
POLITICAL REPRESENTATION.
When men have departed from the right way,
it is no wonder that they
stumble and fall. And it is evident from the
manner in which ye have
managed your testimony, that politics, (as
a religious body of men) is
not your proper Walk; for however well adapted
it might appear to you,
it is, nevertheless, a jumble of good and
bad put unwisely together,
and the conclusion drawn therefrom, both unnatural
and unjust.
The two first pages, (and the whole doth not
make four) we give you
credit for, and expect the same civility from
you, because the love and
desire of peace is not confined to Quakerism,
it is the natural, as
well the religious wish of all denominations
of men. And on this
ground, as men labouring to establish an Independant
Constitution of
our own, do we exceed all others in our hope,
end, and aim. OUR PLAN
IS PEACE FOR EVER. We are tired of contention
with Britain, and can
see no real end to it but in a final separation.
We act consistently,
because for the sake of introducing an endless
and uninterrupted peace,
do we bear the evils and burthens of the present
day. We are
endeavoring, and will steadily continue to
endeavour, to separate and
dissolve a connexion which hath already filled
our land with blood; and
which, while the name of it remains, will
be the fatal cause of future
mischiefs to both countries.
We fight neither for revenge nor conquest;
neither from pride nor
passion; we are not insulting the world with
our fleets and armies, nor
ravaging the globe for plunder. Beneath the
shade of our own vines are
we attacked; in our own houses, and on our
own lands, is the violence
committed against us. We view our enemies
in the character of
Highwaymen and Housebreakers, and having no
defence for ourselves in
the civil law, are obliged to punish them
by the military one, and
apply the sword, in the very case, where you
have before now, applied
the halter-- Perhaps we feel for the ruined
and insulted sufferers in
all and every part of the continent, with
a degree of tenderness which
hath not yet made its way into some of your
bosoms. But be ye sure
that ye mistake not the cause and ground of
your Testimony. Call not
coldness of soul, religion; nor put the BIGOT
in the place of the
CHRISTIAN.
O ye partial ministers of your own acknowledged
principles. If the
bearing arms be sinful, the first going to
war must be more so, by all
the difference between wilful attack, and
unavoidable defence.
Wherefore, if ye really preach from conscience,
and mean not to make a
political hobbyhorse of your religion convince
the world thereof, by
proclaiming your doctrine to our enemies,
FOR THEY LIKEWISE BEAR
_ARMS_. Give us proof of your sincerity by
publishing it at St.
James's, to the commanders in chief at Boston,
to the Admirals and
Captains who are piratically ravaging our
coasts, and to all the
murdering miscreants who are acting in authority
under HIM whom ye
profess to serve. Had ye the honest soul of
BARCLAY ye would preach
repentance to YOUR king; Ye would tell the
Royal Wretch his sins, and
warn him of eternal ruin.[5] Ye would not
spend your partial invectives
against the injured and the insulted only,
but, like faithful
ministers, would cry aloud and SPARE NONE.
Say not that ye are
persecuted, neither endeavour to make us the
authors of that reproach,
which, ye are bringing upon yourselves; for
we testify unto all men,
that we do not complain against you because
ye are Quakers, but because
ye pretend to be and are NOT Quakers.
Alas! it seems by the particular tendency
of some part of your
testimony, and other parts of your conduct,
as if, all sin was reduced
to, and comprehended in, THE ACT OF BEARING
ARMS, and that by the
people only. Ye appear to us, to have mistaken
party for conscience;
because, the general tenor of your actions
wants uniformity--And it is
exceedingly difficult to us to give credit
to many of your pretended
scruples; because, we see them made by the
same men, who, in the very
instant that they are exclaiming against the
mammon of this world, are
nevertheless, hunting after it with a step
as steady as Time, and an
appetite as keen as Death.
The quotation which ye have made from Proverbs,
in the third page of
your testimony, that, "when a man's ways please
the Lord, he maketh
even his enemies to be at peace with him";
is very unwisely chosen on
your part; because, it amounts to a proof,
that the king's ways (whom
ye are desirous of supporting) do NOT please
the Lord, otherwise, his
reign would be in peace.
I now proceed to the latter part of your testimony,
and that, for which
all the foregoing seems only an introduction
viz.
"It hath ever been our judgment and principle,
since we were called to
profess the light of Christ Jesus, manifested
in our consciences unto
this day, that the setting up and putting
down kings and governments,
is God's peculiar prerogative; for causes
best known to himself: And
that it is not our business to have any hand
or contrivance therein;
nor to be busy bodies above our station, much
less to plot and contrive
the ruin, or overturn of any of them, but
to pray for the king, and
safety of our nation, and good of all men--That
we may live a peaceable
and quiet life, in all godliness and honesty;
UNDER THE GOVERNMENT
WHICH GOD IS PLEASED TO SET OVER US"--If these
are REALLY your
principles why do ye not abide by them? Why
do ye not leave that,
which ye call God's Work, to be managed by
himself? These very
principles instruct you to wait with patience
and humility, for the
event of all public measures, and to receive
that event as the divine
will towards you. Wherefore, what occasion
is there for your POLITICAL
TESTIMONY if you fully believe what it contains?
And the very
publishing it proves, that either, ye do not
believe what ye profess,
or have not virtue enough to practise what
ye believe.
The principles of Quakerism have a direct
tendency to make a man the
quiet and inoffensive subject of any, and
every government WHICH IS SET
OVER HIM. And if the setting up and putting
down of kings and
governments is God's peculiar prerogative,
he most certainly will not
be robbed thereof by us: wherefore, the principle
itself leads you to
approve of every thing, which ever happened,
or may happen to kings as
being his work. OLIVER CROMWELL thanks you.
CHARLES, then, died not
by the hands of man; and should the present
Proud Imitator of him, come
to the same untimely end, the writers and
publishers of the Testimony,
are bound, by the doctrine it contains, to
applaud the fact. Kings are
not taken away by miracles, neither are changes
in governments brought
about by any other means than such as are
common and human; and such as
we are now using. Even the dispersion of the
Jews, though foretold by
our Saviour, was effected by arms. Wherefore,
as ye refuse to be the
means on one side, ye ought not to be meddlers
on the other; but to
wait the issue in silence; and unless ye can
produce divine authority,
to prove, that the Almighty who hath created
and placed this new world,
at the greatest distance it could possibly
stand, east and west, from
every part of the old, doth, nevertheless,
disapprove of its being
independent of the corrupt and abandoned court
of Britain, unless I
say, ye can shew this, how can ye on the ground
of your principles,
justify the exciting and stirring up the people
"firmly to unite in the
abhorrence of all such writings, and measures,
as evidence a desire and
design to break off the happy connexion we
have hitherto enjoyed, with
the kingdom of Great-Britain, and our just
and necessary subordination
to the king, and those who are lawfully placed
in authority under him."
What a slap of the face is here! the men,
who in the very paragraph
before, have quietly and passively resigned
up the ordering, altering,
and disposal of kings and governments, into
the hands of God, are now,
recalling their principles, and putting in
for a share of the business.
Is it possible, that the conclusion, which
is here justly quoted, can
any ways follow from the doctrine laid down?
The inconsistency is too
glaring not to be seen; the absurdity too
great not to be laughed at;
and such as could only have been made by those,
whose understandings
were darkened by the narrow and crabby spirit
of a despairing political
party; for ye are not to be considered as
the whole body of the Quakers
but only as a factional and fractional part
thereof.
Here ends the examination of your testimony;
(which I call upon no man
to abhor, as ye have done, but only to read
and judge of fairly;) to
which I subjoin the following remark; "That
the setting up and putting
down of kings," most certainly mean, the making
him a king, who is yet
not so, and the making him no king who is
already one. And pray what
hath this to do in the present case? We neither
mean to set up nor to
pull down, neither to make nor to unmake,
but to have nothing to do
with them. Wherefore, your testimony in whatever
light it is viewed
serves only to dishonor your judgement, and
for many other reasons had
better have been let alone than published.
First, Because it tends to the decrease and
reproach of all religion
whatever, and is of the utmost danger to society
to make it a party in
political disputes.
Secondly, Because it exhibits a body of men,
numbers of whom disavow
the publishing political testimonies, as being
concerned therein and
approvers thereof.
Thirdly, because it hath a tendency to undo
that continental harmony
and friendship which yourselves by your late
liberal and charitable
donations hath lent a hand to establish; and
the preservation of which,
is of the utmost consequence to us all.
And here without anger or resentment I bid
you farewell. Sincerely
wishing, that as men and christians, ye may
always fully and
uninterruptedly enjoy every civil and religious
right; and be, in your
turn, the means of securing it to others;
but that the example which ye
have unwisely set, of mingling religion with
politics, MAY BE DISAVOWED
AND REPROBATED BY EVERY INHABITANT OF _AMERICA._
[1] Dragonetti on virtue and rewards.
[2] Thomas Anello otherwise Massanello a fisherman
of Naples, who after
spiriting up his countrymen in the public
marketplace, against the
oppressions of the Spaniards, to whom the
place was then subject
prompted them to revolt, and in the space
of a day became king.
[3] See Entic's naval history, intro. page
56.
[4] Those who would fully understand of what
great consequence a large
and equal representation is to a state, should
read Burgh's political
disquisitions.
[5] "Thou hast tasted of prosperity and adversity;
thou knowest what it
is to be banished thy native country, to be
over-ruled as well as to
rule, and set upon the throne; and being oppressed
thou hast reason to
know how hateful the oppressor is both to
God and man: If after all
these warnings and advertisements, thou dost
not turn unto the Lord
with all thy heart, but forget him who remembered
thee in thy distress,
and give up thyself to fallow lust and vanity,
surely great will be thy
condemnation.-- Against which snare, as well
as the temptation of those
who may or do feed thee, and prompt thee to
evil, the most excellent
and prevalent remedy will be, to apply thyself
to that light of Christ
which shineth in thy conscience, and which
neither can, nor will
flatter thee, nor suffer thee to be at ease
in thy sins."--Barclay's
address to Charles II.
F I N I S.
