by Nathan Allen
I could wish my lord, that the colonists were able to yield ten times the aids for the support of the common cause ever yet granted by, or required of, them. But to pay heavy provincial taxes in peace and in war, and also external and internal parliamentary assessments, is absolutely out of the people’s power. The burden of the stamp act will certainly fall chiefly on the middling, more necessitous, and labouring people. The widow, the orphan, and others, who have few on earth to help, or even pity them, must pay heavily to this tax. An instance or two will give some idea of the weight of this imposition. A rheam of printed bail bonds is now sold for about fifteen shillings sterling; with the stamps, the same quantity will, I am told, amount to near one hundred pounds sterling. A rheam of printed policies of assurance, is now about two pounds sterling; with the stamps it will be one hundred and ninety pounds sterling. Many other articles in common use here, are in the same proportion. The fees in the probate offices, with the addition of the stamps, will, in most provinces, be three times what has been hitherto paid. Surely these, and many other considerations that must be obvious to all who are versed in the course of American business, are far from being any evidence of the boasted equality and equity, of this kind of taxation. I do not mean to insinuate that there is, or hath been, any thing intentionally wrong, in the views of administration; far from it, I detest the thought. I am convinced that every Englishman, as ‘tis his interest, really wishes and means well to the colonies, and I shall ever have full confidence in the wisdom and rectitude of the present truly British administration. But I have a very contemptible opinion of divers vile informers and informations, that have been transported and re-transported, within these seven years. I know some of the former to be most infamous fellows, and not a few of the latter to be most infernal falsehoods. How many low and insignificant persons, have, on their landing in Britain, been instantaneously metamorphosed into wise politicians, or suddenly transformed into hugeously sage connoisseurs in the administration of the colonies at this crisis? Some have had the assurance on their return to assert, that they were permitted to attend, and even frequent, lord Greenlaurel’s levy, and dine with duke Humphry? Credat Judeus Appella. Two hopeful young brother surgeons, who lately went over, wrote to their friends, that they had laid aside all thoughts of going into an ordinary hospital of invalids having had overtures from the Critical Reviewers, to assist them in a new project of
theirs, for dissecting the colonies and all writers in their favour. An apothecary, a quack and a fortune-hunter, not long since arrived, say they were closeted by this, and that, and t’other great man, who made most marvellous shrewd enquiries concerning the luxurious taste of our cods, crabs, muscles, eels, and smelts. They even add, that as a reward for their important discoveries and informations, in the nature of American shrimps and serpents, they are to be admitted members of the society for the encouragement of arts, &. One swears he has obtained ample promises of high preferment, as soon as ever the finance tres grande toute novelle et admirable shall receive its long predicted completion in America. Another says, he is to be farmer general of a tax of his own projecting, on all colony gold finders. A third says, he shall accept of nothing less than the place of Intendant extraordinaire of the much expected duty on all North American manufactured mouse traps, he having given the first hint.—But be these things as they may: this however, is certain, that a set of fribbling people, and some others in the colonies, who are become to the last degree detestable to all true Americans, affect to use their sage advice, and surprising influence, in order to conciliate good and worthy men to measures, which if ever so just and salutary, these contemptible persons would bring into disgrace.
Mr. J______s says, “imposing taxes on our colonies has been called harsh and arbitrary.” By whom? I never heard one man of sense and knowledge, in the laws and British constitution, call the parliamentary authority arbitrary. The power and authority of parliament is not to be questioned. Nay, after all the bustle, the authority of that august body really never has been questioned by one of the colony writers, when duly attended to. The mode of exercising this authority, and the manner of proceeding, may in some instances have been thought a little hard and grevous, and may be again, notwithstanding what Mr. J______s has said. He objects to the assertion of some, that “it would have seemed less hard if the administration or the parliament had been pleased to settle the respective quota of each colony, and left it to each one to assess the inhabitants, as easily to themselves as might be, on penalty of being taxed by parliament in case of any unreasonable noncompliance with the just requisitions of the crown, of which the parliament is, and must, in the nature of things, be the final judge.”—Mr. J______s asks, “what would have been the consequence of this?” I answer, neither he nor I can tell. It will be time enough to answer this when the experiment is made; but I believe there would have been found a chearful compliance on the part of the colonies, and that they would exert their utmost abilities. He most insolently asks if the “assemblies have shown so much obedience to the orders of the crown, that we could reasonably expect they would tax themselves on the arbitrary commands of a minister?” I hope he holds the proper difference between the lawful commands of our sovereign, the just orders of the crown, and “the arbitrary commands of a minister,” though he has so strangely tacked them together? ‘Tis our indispensible duty to yield every aid in our power to our gracious prince, and to the state, and to obey the just orders of the crown: but the arbitrary commands of a minister, are no more obligatory, than the bulls of the pope. However, I have seen the time when the flower of our youth have been annually impressed and dragged forth by thousands and tens of thousands, to certain misery and want, if not death and destruction. I have also seen immense provincial taxes levied, and all these things effected, by a (no English) speech of a governor, the military mandate of a general, or, if possible, the more haughty dictate of a minister. What have we got by all our compliances? Precisely what by many wise and good men, was foreseen and foretold, we should get. Canada is conquered, the colony trade is more than ever restricted, we are taxed without our actual consent in person, or any representation in fact, and in many instances are to be tried without a jury. The remains of those tribes of savages, the French used to keep in pay, to scalp us, and cut our throats, are, in the estimation of some great men, more respectable than his majesty’s ancient, and ever loyal colonists.
Mr. J______s asks if it would be “possible to settle the quota’s of an American tax with justice?” Why not? The whole used to be commensurate with all the parts. Is it not nearly as easy to say what each part ought to pay, as to determine what ought to be paid by the whole? The gentleman will not insinuate that administration can ever act so preposterous a part, as to guess what the whole should pay, as must be the case, if ignorant of the ability of each part. He also asks, if “anyone of the colonies would submit to their quota, if ever so just?” What doubt can there be of the loyalty and submission, passive obedience, and non-resistance, of the colonies, in all cases and contingences, so far as the laws of God, of nature, and of their country require? I have none. Is not the obligation to submission the same in one case as in the other? If an act of parliament says A shall pay ten shillings, and B ten shillings, would any man in his right mind say it was less binding, than if A and B were by the same authority ordered conjointly to pay twenty. His odious comparison of “the Roman tyrants,” is left with its author, with this single remark: that “the choice of a dose, a dagger, or a halter is most certainly preferable to the sudden obtrusion of either singly, without time allowed to say a short pater noster.” The gentleman has made himself quite merry with the modest proposal some have made, though I find it generally much disliked in the colonies, and thought impracticable, namely-an American representation in parliament. But if he is now sober, I would humbly ask him, if there be really and naturally any greater absurdity in this plan, than in a Welsh and Scotch representation? I would by no means, at any time be understood
to intend by an American representation, the return of half a score ignorant, worthless persons, who like some colony agents, might be induced to sell their country and their God, for a golden calf. An American representation, in my sense of the terms, and as I ever used them, implies a thorough beneficial union of these colonies to the realm, or mother country, so that all the parts of the empire may be compacted and consolidated, and the constitution flourish with new vigor, and the national strength, power and importance, shine with far greater splendor than ever yet hath been seen by the sons of men. An American representation implies every real advantage to the subject abroad, as well as at home.
It may be a problem what state will be of longest duration, greatest glory, and domestic happiness. I am not at leisure fully to consider this question at present. Time shall show. I can now only say, it will be that state, which, like Great-Britain, Heaven shall have favoured with every conceivable advantage, and gave it wisdom and integrity enough to see and embrace an opportunity, which once lost, can never be regained. Every mountain must be removed, and every path be made smooth and strait. Every region, nation and people, must to all real intents and purposes, be united, knit, and worked into the very bones and blood of the original system, as fast as subdued, settled or allied. Party views and short sighted politicians, should be discarded with the ignominy and contempt they deserve.
Mr. J______s seems to be seized with an immense pannic lest “a sudden importation of American eloquence” should interfere with those who are fond of monopolizing the place and pension business. He even insinuates that it would cost more to pay our orators, than a standing army here. I will ease him of this difficulty. There would not be many worth the high prices of Britain. When trimmers, time servers, scepticks, cock fighters, architects, fiddlers and castle builders, who commonly sell cheap, were bought off, there might not be more than three or four worth purchasing; and if they should sell as cheap in Britain as I have known some of them in America, it would fall infinitely short of the blood and treasure a standing army may one day cost. From any danger therefore Mr. J ______s is in, from “the sudden importation of
American eloquence”, he may speechify and scribble for or against administration, abuse the colonies, turn and return, shift, wind and change as usual, no man will trust him, and ‘tis hoped that in secula seculorum by the eternal fitness of things, and the constructure of the cells of his cerebellum, and moral aptitude, he will be kept down just where he is and ought to be, He seems to have no idea of revenue, but that of drawing money into the public coffers, per fas aut nefas, meerly to squander away ad libitum. Riches returning from the four winds of the earth in heavier showers than the poets ever dreamt of, into the pockets of the worthy and opulent British merchant will, according to him, give a griping minister too much trouble before he has extracted and “squeezed it out again by various domestic taxes”. His own words: “Perhaps” says he “in the mean time, it may enable the merchant, by augmenting his influence, together with his wealth, to plunge us into new wars and new debts, for his private advantage.” By this ‘tis plain Mr. J______s’s plan is to stop the rivulets, and leave the cistern dry. Do you not see this, British colonists, British merchants, and British manufacturers? Consider this, before it is too late! it is the sum total of Mr. J______s’s political logic and arithmetic! It is too absurd to require a more particular refutation. He concludes, ad captandum, both the great and small vulgar, thus; “it is”, says he, “to be hoped, that in this great and important question, all parties and factions, or in the more polite and fashionable term, all connections will cordially unite; that every member of the British parliament, whether in or out of humour with the administration, whether he has been turned out because he opposed, or whether he opposed because he has been turned out, will endeavour to the utmost of his power to support this measure. A measure which must not only be approved by every man who has any property or common sense, but which ought to be required by every English subject of an English administration.” —I thought all subjects were now British, and the administration too. I cannot tell whether the exhorter was ever “turned out because he opposed, or opposed because he was turned out;” but certainly among other species of readers, he has omitted to address himself to the hopeful young men and promising candidates for preferment, who have as it were perished in embrio, by discovering too great an insolence and avidity of power, by assuming the advowson, nomination and induction of their fellow servants, before they themselves have been taken into place.
My Lord, we have heard much said of a virtual representation. What can it mean? If a society of a thousand men are united from a state of nature and all meet to transact the business of the society they are on a perfect level and equality, and the majority must conclude the minority. If they find themselves too numerous to transact their business, they have a right to devolve the care of their concerns on a part of the society to act for the whole. Here commences the first idea of an actual trust or representation in fact. The trustees councilor senate, so chosen are in fact representatives of and agents for the whole society. If the society agrees to have but one trustee, representative or agent, he is a monarch. If they make choice of a councilor senate, they are joint agents, trustees or representatives of the whole community. Upon so simple a principle are all governments originally built. When a man chuses to act for himself he has no representative, agent or trustee. When the individuals of a community chose to take care of their own concerns, they are in no wise represented; but being their own factors in person, form that
society which the learned wrangle about under the name of a democracy. When two or more are appointed joint factors, agents for, trustees and representatives of, the whole society, they are called noble, and politicians denominate this form an aristocracy. When the trust is as above observed devolved on one, it is called a monarchy, i.e. one great or chief man is in fact trustee, representative of, and agent for the whole state. And he has a right to act for them so long as he may be chosen to act by the society. Which society being originally the constitutents of their agent or representative, have an absolute right and power to lay him under such limitations and restrictions as they may think reasonable. In all this we find no mystery, no occasion for occult qualties, no want of the terms virtual representation as distinguished from a representation in fact, or any other jargon. If the society find each of the simple forms of administration inconvenient or dangerous, as they all are, and agree on a mixture of those simple forms, as it is commonly expressed, but in plainer English, to have different divisions, ranks and orders of trustees or representatives, they proceed thus. When they chuse a monarch or senate, they entrust him or them with the necessary powers of government, to act for the good and welfare of the whole society. So in a government constructed like that of Great-Britain, the society hath made two divisions of the supreme power: the first is the supreme legislative, consisting of three ranks of branches, viz., King, lords and commons. The supreme executive, which is solely monarchial, and admits of no division or different ranks. Both these divisions, and all the ranks of the former, derive their power originally from the whole community. This at least is all the idea a philosopher can form. As to the jus divinum, the indefeasible inheritance, the indelible character, and other nonsense of the schools, they are only for the entertainment of old women, and changelings.—The King’s share in the legislative and executive trusts by the British constitution is perpetual, and his royal dignity is hereditable. So are the titles of the house of Lords. The honorable house of Commons, the third rank or branch of our universal legislative, are elective, and the deliciae populi. God grant they may be always viewed in this light. These several branches and divisions are all subject to further alterations, limitations and restrictions from time to time. In the original idea and frame of our happy constitution, it was immaterial as to the succession to the crown, whether the heir apparent, were Pagan, Turk, Jew, Infidel or Christian. But now Papists, and all but Protestants, are very
justly excluded from the succession, as for the best reasons they are from a seat in either house of the august parliament of Great-Britain.—The number of the two houses of parliament, is not by nature nor by any thing I can discover in the British constitution, definite. The families of the peers may be extinct. The constitution, has on such events left it to the crown to supply the vacancies by new families and new creations. And as reason requires, when places have grown to be considerable, they have been called to a share in the legislature of their country by a precept to return members to the great council of the nation. So when a territory hath been conquered, as was the case of Wales, or united, as was the kingdom of Scotland, they have had their full share in the legislative. The wisdom of ages hath left Ireland to be governed by its own parliaments, and the colonies by their own assemblies, both however, subordinate to Great-Britain, and subject to the negative of both the supreme legislative and supreme executive powers there. Is not this a sufficient subordination? The fears of our independency must be affected or imaginary. We all acknowledge ourselves to be not only controulable by his majesty’s negative on all our acts, but more especially so by that august, and by all true British subjects, ever to be dearly esteemed and highly reverenced body, that high court the parliament of Great-Britain. In all this, however, we find nothing of virtual representation.
