HAVING lately seen in the Journals of the Assembly of this Colony, held in 1758, a long Memorial, addressed to the Right Honorable the Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plan­tations, by the Merchants of London, in Be­half of themselves and of their Correspondents, Merchants of Bristol, Liverpool and Glasgow, trading and interested in the Colony of Virginia, I cannot help entertaining you with some Observations upon it; and, that you may judge of the Justice with which they are made, I have trascribed the whole Memorial, as it appears on the Journals aforesaid.

AS to the Memorial, by Way of general Observation, I say, it appears from the Complexion of it, to be a Performance wholely dictated by an uncommon Kind of Partiality, and the grossest Species of Weakness imaginable: For from the word­ing of it, it is evident, that it is but of very late Date that any Paper Money was heard of in Virginia. It would there­fore have been but Justice, previou [...] to any Complaint in an Instance so rare, and new, to have made some Enquiry [Page 7] into the Cause of making such an Act; especially if it is attended with such dreadful Consequences as it is represented to be. They would then have found that not only extreme Poverty, but even extreme Danger, united to compel the Colony to fall on some Expedient for raising Money to defray the Expences of an Army that they were under the greatest Necessity imaginable of collecting together, to secure themselves against the rapid Incursions of a cruel and barba­rous Enemy. And that before they attempted to substitute Paper or any Thing in Lieu of what I find is by Merchants only called, Money, they had used every Method of borrow­ing Money at a greater Interest than common, and if I am not much mistaken, Application was even made to some of these complaining Gentlemen, but with very little Success. Such an Enquiry would not only have explained the Cause of making such an Act, by shewing the Dilemma that the Country was in (for altho' many Gentlemen discovered on the Occasion a truly Patriot Spirit, yet it was impossible for private Fortunes to go any serviceable Length in such an Affair) but it might possibly have convinced Men, calling so loudly for Equity, Law, Justice, and what not, that such an Act was exceedingly proper, and indeed well prece­dented; for we find even limited Monarchies and Common­wealths have done the same Thing in such distressed Cir­cumstances: Some have coined in the Field, and others have substituted baser Metals in the Room of Gold and Sil­ver which they had not, to answer their pressing Occasions. Surely then they who shall apply the Words Arbitrary and Unjust to a Transaction truely similar as to its Circumstances, to what has before been deemed necessary and passed uncen­sured, must either be very bad Haberdashers of Epithets, or Men of low and selfish Notions. Should it be said that Virginia ought not to be considered with respect to its Power of making Laws in the Light of a limited Monarchy or Commonwealth; I answer that whenever any People are reduced to the before mentioned Necessity, it is an incon­testable Argument for the Exertion of every Degree of Power, since it is certainly ultimately exercised for the absolute Benefit of that very State from which a Power of the same Nature must necessarily have been granted, had [Page 8] it been near enough to have extended it in a proper Time: Such a Power therefore is always imply'd in the very Nature of Things, let the Degree of Subjection be what it will; and the Consequence of its not being so, would in the Case of any potent and sudden Invasion be the Loss of the Colony to that very State which claims the Subjection, unless Matters shall be conducted hereafter with much greater Precaution, than has hitherto been experienced. To pre­vent any Thing that may be advanced against this Argument with Respect to the distressed Situation of the Colony, on Account of the Assistance sent to it under General Braddock, or the £. 20000 remitted to the Honorable Robert Dinwid­die, the then Governor; I say in the former Instance, it was more distressed by the Defeat suffered, than it was before the Assistance was sent; for the unexpected Victory in­spired the Enemy, with greater Boldness, and if possible lessened their Humanity. In the Instance of the Money, the Person intrusted is perhaps able to assign some Reason why not more than £. 800 was expended, or apply'd to the Use of the Colony, or Maintenance of their Army.

AND here I think I ought to be a little explicit, and disclose a Matter somewhat scandalous in the transacting. Mr. Dinwiddie, from a general Foresight in turning the Penny (always distinguishable in him) having ordered certain Necessaries for the Use of the Forces, under the Command of General Braddock, refused absolutely to discharge the Accounts of the Persons employ'd to procure the same to the Amount of £. 1236-11-2, pretending that he could not regularly carry those Articles to Account with the Government in England, and by frequent Solicitations to the Committee appointed for the Disposal of the Money raised here for the Defence of the Colony, he engaged them to pay that Sum under a most solemn Promise of subjecting to their Order £. 5000 that remained in his Hands out of the above mentioned £. 20000, which he alledged might be regularly done, as that Money was remitted to him for the Use of the Colony; but when the Assembly addressed him to dispose of a Part of that £. 5000 for building a Fort in the Cherokee Country; a Thing recommended to them as necessary to [Page 9] preserve the Friendship of those People, he returned for Answer, that he had no more remaining in his Hands of the above £. 20000 than the £. 800 before mentioned; accord­ingly no more than that Sum was apply'd as is before ex­pressed. So that the Country instead of being benefitted by that Remittance from England, was not a little injured in as much as it was properly speaking the Means of their loosing £. 435-11-2 of their own Money in this instance alone. I might add further, that at the Time the above Sum of £. 20000 was in that Gentleman's Hands, or at his Dis­posal, he was graciously pleased to lend the Country the Sum of £. 3000 at the exorbitant Interest of Six per Cent. which was punctually paid him. These Facts are too true to be deny'd, and although the Sum perhaps may be too trifling for the Enquiry of a British Parliament, yet certain­ly as it was a very glaring Abuse of the good Intentions of the People of England, it seems but just that the Public should be satisfy'd with an impartial Examination into the Conduct of that Gentleman, in this Particular at least, since from his own Mouth, we have been informed that the M—y at Home had complimented him with £. 2000 of that Money as a Recompence for his extraordinary Care in the Disposal of it.

NOW as this was the Situation of the Country, could any Thing but mere Partiality and Weakness dictate a Com­plaint against an Act so immediately conducive to its Pre­servation. Thus far I observe of the Memorial in general, I shall now treat it in a more particular Manner, and pursue it as paragraphically as may be in order to shew that the Partiality with which I charge it, is of such a Nature as will not endure a Disguise even with the false Shew of Rea­soning which seems to have been purposely adapted quite thro' it.

I. WE are told that the Paper Notes emitted by the Act are by it declared to be a lawful Tender in Payment of any Debt or Demand whatever (excepting his Majesty's Quitrents.) I agree it is so declared in the Act, and of what Use would such Notes have been, or to what Purpose should they have [Page 10] been issued at all, if they were not to be Current in all Cases. Gentlemen may attempt to gloss over their Endea­vours by talking of Expedients for making the Act servicea­ble for the military Purposes for which it was intended, and yet not general as to the Currency of these Notes; but I beg Leave to say it is nothing more than a Piece of artful Nonsense; for what are the military Services of Money, but the paying of the Soldiers, and purchasing the Stores necessary for War; and could any Man be hired to fight for a Cash that he could not pay his Debts with, but at the Option of his Creditor? And who is there that would part with any Kind of Stores for a Piece of Paper that should only be use­ful at the Will of another that might think proper to deal with him? If then it is necessary that such Notes should be a current Tender in such Cases; why not in all Cases? Why is a Debt in England of greater Dignity? Kings indeed have a just Right to such Exceptions, their privy Purses ought alawys to be kept sacred from any Touch, but that of the last Instance: But Subjects have no Pretence to Immunities, one more than another, they must all equally enjoy an Advantage, or suffer a Calamity whenever it at­tends a Community. And I hope I am not arguing with Persons who do not think Virginia a Part of the British Com­munity. Had this Law been calculated on the Footing of the Expedient, proposed by the Memorialists to their Lord­ships, it would have carried its own Insignificancy; that is, it would not have answered its Intention of raising Men for the War, which was necessarily aimed at; but I shall treat the Expedient in a more respectful Manner by taking full Notice of it, when it comes in its Turn, and I believe shew, however prettily it might read in a Countinghouse, it would meet with a quite different Fate at a Bar of Equity.

II. WE are told in what Manner the Merchants are affect­ed by the Act. ‘The Inhabitants of the Colony are indebted to them in large Sums of Money. Furthermore the Mer­chants on Account of these Inhabitants are bound to the Tradesmen of Great-Britain in large Sums; both of which were by general Agreement payable in Sterling, or at the Rate of Sterling, and this by Contracts concluded long before the issuing of any Paper Money in Virginia.’

[Page 11]I THINK we have here a Declaration of the whole Cause of their Complaint, that is, 1st, The Planters we indebted to them; 2dly, They are furthermore indebted to them; for I am persuaded however artfully they may have divided on this Article of Debt, it is but one and the same Thing, that is, a Debt to the Merchants from the Planters; but it seems to have been necessary here to represent the whole City, nay the several Kingdoms of Great-Britain, likely to be endangered by this Act, in order to raise the greater Clamor against it. I shall not do Justice to the Weakness of this Paragraph, if I do not here take Notice of a Discovery made by it, that I am sure many Merchants of the City of London, have deny'd to be the Case when charged with it in private Letters. We have had many of us for some Time past, great Reason to own the Thing is unhappily true in the first Instance, of our being indebted. Unhappily in as much as the Generality of Creditors are a Kind of lording Tyrants over their unfortunate Debtors, notwith­standing the undoubted Securities pledged, and the annual Tribute paid in, of a very high tho' lawful Interest. And to this we do attribute (and we presume with great Truth too) the Growth of many Innovations and arbitrary Charges (to use the Gentlemen's own Language) that have been and are every now and then brought to Account to keep the poor Dogs of Debtors deep in their Books, and render the Redemption of their Freedom impossible, by thus lowering the Produce of their Commodity, that they may continue under the Obligation of sending it to them alone, thro' Fear of more apparent Persecutions. I say this we knew, and we have had great Reason to believe (that notwithstand­ing the Merchants always took Care to carry every Article of Goods as soon as shipped to the Account of the Planter) they were nevertheless in Arrears to the Tradesmen for them, from their being so observably rated above the same Things purchased with ready Money; but it was never cer­tainly known to be so till this Declaration made, which I call a Discovery, and I am much mistaken if they were aware of making it, the Time they were endeavouring to interest others in their▪ Complaints Now tho' this artful Division of theirs is but a weak [...]ffort in them; yet it opens [Page 12] to us a prodigious Aggravation of the Misfortunes of those that are indebted to them, in as much as they are not only obliged to pay dearer, for the Necessaries they send for, from the advanced Price of the Tradesmen, always added for long Credit given; but are loaded with Interest in the Mer­chants Accounts on that advanced Price; which must needs be a large annual Sum out of the Profits of the Colony, put into the Pocket of the Merchant; a Practice not so well founded as to admit of a common Justification: But I shall forbear to consider this any further here, as it is an Article that may one Day make a very good Figure amongst many others, in a Complaint from this Side of the Water, when the Leisure of a British Parliament shall admit of an Enquiry into the real Causes of the distressed Situation of their Colonies; and some truly noble Spirit shall glory in exerting itself for that Benefit, which has so long been desired. — Let the Attempt be thine, O FAUQUIER, to complete thy Goodness, thine to explode and remove all unnatural and destructive Jealousies, and by thy Happiness demonstrate to distant and succeeding Delegations, that it is the Patriot GOVERNOR alone that can represent the Patriot KING. Nor deem thou this as a Drop bubling from the nauseous Fountain of Flattery: No 'tis the Dictate of a Mind that enjoys more than Kings can confer, a contented Condition; a Mind that has no Demand against thee but what must centre in its Country's Good; a Mind that disdains all Praise or Commendation to any dignify'd Character but such as is made truly glorious by public Virtue. Now let me ask the Gentlemen how a Debt from the Planters to the Merchants came to be made an Introduction to their Com­plaints. It does indeed shew a Connection they have with the Colony, but I beg Leave to say, they are not in that Connection, in the least affected by any new Thing in the Act. They acknowledge the Debts due from the Colony, were by general Agreement dischargeable in Sterling or at the Rate of Sterling Money; and does this Act say they shall not be so discharged? No, nor was it ever intended to oper­ate in such a Manner; it says indeed, that the Paper Notes so issued, shall be a lawful Tender in Payment of any Debt or Demand whatever, and these Words do expresly imply [Page 13] ad valorem, with Respect to Sterling Debts, and it is not in the Power of the most quibbling Petyfogger to cavil long enough to draw any other Meaning out of them. 'Tis a known Rule in the Construction of Statutes, that two Acts equally subsisting shall only operate in the Manner in which they are truly reconcileable, and this for a very good Reason, otherwise every new Statute must be extended so as to take in all the Laws that are relative to the Matter contained in such Statute, which would be perhaps constructing a Volume every Session of Parliament too large for any one Man's Perusal, and might be productive of great Confusion, which is too often the Case in frequent Revisals. When there­fore a subsisting Act has fully regulated any Matter or Thing, a succeeding Statute not expresly or virtually repealing it, shall not be extended to defeat the Purpose of the preceeding Act. I will exemplify it in the Case before us, to shew the Justice of it, tho' there seems to be little Need of any Exem­plification, as there is scarcely a Book treating of Statutes that does not confirm it. There was an Act made in 1748, which the Memorialists have recited, declaring that Execu­tions for Sterling Debts should be levied in Current Money at the Rate of Twenty-five per Cent. Advance on Sterling, and not otherwise. The Act in the Paper Emission in no Part either virtually or expresly repeals or contradicts it; can the Clause then, allowing the Tender of Paper Notes in Payment of any Debt whatever, mean with Respect to Sterling Debts any Thing else, but that such Tender shall be made according to the Act in Force, before the making the Act for Paper Emission, and was that Law in 1748 still in Force could such Tender made under the Paper Act be good, unless it had been made at the Rate of Twenty-five per Cent. And as this was the then ad valorem between Sterling and Currency, how can the Merchant be affected by the Paper Act, as to his Sterling Debt, Bargain, or Contract. This may be a Method out of the Way of Reasoning with these Gentlemen, but if they will wade in Waters that they are Strangers to, they should apply to those who are acquainted with them, before they rush into Fears and Apprehensions and expose themselves by mere groundless Complaints. From hence it appears any other Construction upon the Act com­plained [Page 14] of would be against the Rule of Law, and I must say, against the Rule of common Sense too, for they might as well in my Opinion, carry the Tender in the Act to a Pay­ment of a Debt in Tobacco, which would be an Absurdity, if there was no Limitation of the Words to be allowed. The Gentlemen must now excuse me if I tell them, that altho' they have laid their Complaint against the Act, in the Defect of it with Respect to a Provision for Sterling Debts; I cannot think that they or their Draftsman were really so ignorant as not to know, that this Act did not stand in Need of any such Clause; but that by the amending Clause in the Expedient proposed to their Lordships, they intended some Thing further, and that their sole Motive for complaining was, that they should not be obliged to take these Notes at any Rate at all, but as they pleased. Should this be the Case, they are not only Men of very inhumane Principles, but not­withstanding their long Practice in the Arts of Profit and Loss, very bad Politicians, as to their particular Interest. Inhumane in that they would either compel a Man to do an Impossibility, (viz.) Pay a Debt in a particular Coin, when it is not in his Power to acquire one Penny of it to do it with, or else pay it in such a Manner, as would oblige him to Part with all that he has: For if there was to be no Restriction set as to the Value of Sterling Money, and the Difference wholly left to the Will of the Creditor, it would be vesting such Creditor with the most arbitrary Rule in the World, and from the very Nature of complaining in all such Cases, it would be giving up the Debtor and his dependent Connec­tions, as a Sacrifice to the certain Cruelty of the Creditor; for he that growls at the wholsome Restrictions Society shall think proper to establish between Man and Man, can only do it from an incompassionate and devouring Temper; in vain is Charity to be expected from him who contends against Laws that have Charity for their Basis. In England indeed where all the Currency they have is a rated Sterling, there can be no Occasion for a Law of this Kind to enable the Debtor to stop the Persecutions of his Creditor; but in Countries where Sterling is a Coin very little seen, such a Law is not only salutary for the Community, but highly Equitable and Just, between Man and Man, that they should [Page 15] be permitted to discharge their Money Debts, of what Kind or Nature soever, in the Currency of the Country in which they live, and it is the true Business of the Legislature to keep such Laws at all Times subsisting; for Man left to his own Will over his Fellow Creatures, may sometimes fall into such Depravations of Mind, as to become more cruel than the most Savage Beast of Prey. As to their Politicks, I need only put a Case founded on a real Fact, to shew how bad they are with Respect to their Debts. Sup­pose a People to be so circumstanced as to have no Sterling at all amongst them, and very little of any other Coin, how can such a People be ever able to pay their Debts; few Com­modities besides their Tobacco can be exported to any certain Market, but in the Way of Barter; their Tobacco seldom yields much more in England in common Crops, than is sufficient to purchase Necessaries and pay Interest; and should an accidental foreign Trade send a little of its Gold into that Country, a Tender ad valorem of that Gold, must necessarily be allowed, or that would be of little Service; if then it must be allowed in the Case of one species of Cur­rency, why should it not in all Kinds; would it not then be much easier for such Merchants to get their Debts paid by an established circulating Currency, than by none at all: A Debt so paid might in the Round of Trade (which Adven­turers are well acquainted with) be carried Home to England, and there centre in Sterling, with a very fair and consider­able Profit. I will now ask where is the material Difference between one Kind of Currency and another with Respect to Trade or Debts; but I bar the Man of miserly Habits from giving any Answer at all, he is first for the most Part a Stranger either to Trade or Debts, because he can scarcely trust himself, how then will he trust another. Again, the Wretch conceives such an inexpressible Pleasure in the counting and poring over his Golden Guineas, that I much question whether double the Sum in Bank-Bills would pur­chase them. 'Tis to the rational Trader alone that I apply, and such Merchants ought to be deemed; to them therefore I address myself, and I am persuaded I have their true Answer in this Memorial.

[Page 16]THEY tell us, the Act for emitting Paper-Money is unjust, by Reason that it depreciates the Nature of Sterling Debts, by making what was payable in a Coin of universal Value, payable in Notes of a local, uncertain, and fluctuating Value: If I understand these Terms right, we are to collect from them, that the Value of Sterling is universally agreed upon; and that Paper Notes have no Value at all, out in the Place they are made current; and that even the Value there is uncertain, because of its Fluctuation with Respect to the Value of Sterling: The material Difference between Paper and Sterling must then lye in the Certainty of the one, and in the Uncertainty of the other. And is it not evident, that all other Species of Coin, with Respect to Sterling, are of the same uncertain Nature as Paper? Neither can Gold and Silver Coin be less so than Paper, as it must be rated by Sterling, the Scarcity or Plenty of which will certainly lower or advance the exchanging Difference; and to say that Gold and Silver Coin is current in more Places than the Paper Currency is, and therefore though local yet less confined, is but a Kind of begging the Question, and when it is granted, it makes very little in the Point, for in those Countries where Gold and Silver Coin are not current by Law, they are only to be considered as a trading Commodity, which is more or less vendible in Proportion to the Gain or Profit that is to be made by it, and there can be no Instance in which a Paper Currency that can be remitted to the Country where it is made current by Law, will not be as good a Commodity in Trade as Gold and Silver, but one; that is, where the trafficking or exchanging Difference between Gold and Sil­ver and Sterling is greater than the intrinsick Difference; and as this can only happen from the too great Scarcity of Sterling Trade, should an Instance or two depending upon such an Accident be made such an Argument of as to decry a Paper Currency, when in every other Case it is equal to all other Coins, except Sterling: And as to Trade or Debts, I beg Leave to say they cannot be affected by it, for the Trader has it always in his Power to suit his Trade to his expected Payments; and the Sterling Debt, when paid in Paper, will always be paid in the exchanging Difference that is then circulating: To be injured, therefore, by the Paper Notes, the Trader or Creditor must put a Case that can only [Page 17] center in his own Neglect or Avarice; his Neglect, in not negociating it away in Time, before Exchange shall rise; Avarice, in keeping it by him, in Expectation that the Ex­change is still falling, and from thence proposing a farther Gain to himself. Those who tell us, that Paper Currency has a farther Difference from Gold and Silver Coins, in that it is difficult to be realized; if they mean it is difficult to turn an Estate in Paper Notes into a landed, or any other permanent Estate, I answer it cannot be more so in that than it would be in other Coins, when the Act is considered; for that does absolutely bar all Difference between them, and when an Estate becomes vendible, it cannot by Law be of more Value in one than another: A Man, indeed, of a miserly Disposition might be tempted to part with a Tract of Land for Gold, when he would not for Paper; but that Gold he must keep useless, or clandestinely exchange it; for if he does it openly, he can get no more for it than if it was Paper. Should a Man want to realize it, as they call it in England, he can as easily exchange it for Bills as Gold, if he does not care to venture it in the Commodity of the Country; and in no Instance does it differ with Respect to realizing from Gold and Silver Coins, but in the before-mentioned one, where the Plenty of such Coin shall so far exceed the Sterling Trade, as to make the exchanging Dif­ference greater than the intrinsick: And thus, at last, does this Difficulty of realizing become greater in the one than the other, by the same Accident which I have before men­tioned, and which must be so rare as scarcely to happen twice in a Man's Life. I am pretty well satisfied, that these Arguments against the Virginia Paper Currency have been adopted from the Practice of other Colonies, where they have both Gold and Silver, and Paper Currencies, at a great Difference with Respect to each other; but it should be con­sidered, that it is there a profitable Trade to the cunning Merchants, and that no Provision (as I am informed) was ever made against it in the Acts that emitted the Paper: But in Virginia this is in a great Measure prevented, and will be more so, as the Iniquities of such Trade shall from Time to Time be discovered; but here I beg Pardon for a Digres­sion; [Page 18] I shall now consider the Arbitrariness, and Injustice charged on the Act by the Memorialists.

THE Act they say not only inverts the Nature of Trade from a certain to an uncertain Value of Profit and Loss; but it extends ex post facto to Debts due on Bargains and Contracts made before the Passing of the Act, and therefore it is arbitrary. I was something puzzled to fix a Meaning to the certain Value of Profit and Loss in Trade, which this Act has overset, because from all the Ideas I could collect of Trade, it can have very little Certainty in it; there is always a Probability in it, and some Trades are more probable as to their Success than others; but as I know it was a Complaint against the Act, I have endeavoured to extract a Meaning out of it: That is, that before the Making of the Act, they used to Trade for Sterling only, which they call a Trade of certain Value, and since the Act they are obliged to Trade for Paper Currency, which is of uncertain Value. If this is the Accusation, I beg Leave to say, it is a Mistake, for they did not, nor could they trade any more for Sterling before the Making of the Act, than they do, or can since the Act; that is before the Act there was always a subsisting Currency in the Country, which they were obliged to take in Exchange for Sterling, trade how they would, and this Act does no more than introduce a new Kind of Currency, which these Gentlemen, as I have already shewn, are only pleased to think meanly of, not that it materially differs from the Currency that subsisted before the making of the Act: Their Accusation therefore as to its inverting of Trade, &c. is vague and idle, and their ex post facto is of the same Stamp; they are Words that do not deserve my Notice, only to expose the Scheme couched in them, they know they give a retrospective Cast to the Act, and such is the popular Cry against a Retrospection in Statutes, that it is like bawling out a mad Dog in the Streets, which has been the Cause of violent Deaths to many an harmless and useful Cur. But I will first satisfy those who shall read me, that it is a Complaint ill founded, and then shew these Gentlemen, that whatever the common and vulgar Opinion may be of retrospective Acts, they may be the most salutary Acts imaginable to a Community in some Instances.

[Page 19]1st, 'TIS said the Act does ex post facto extend to Debts, &c. due before the Making of the Act. I say no Part of this is true, but that the Debts, &c. were contracted before the Act: And how does this Act extend to such Debts? In no other Manner than what they were always extended to, and must from the very Nature of Things have been extended to as soon as ever a Debt, &c. could possibly have been contracted: I say it must from the very Nature and Reason of Things, have been a Rule that every Person trading from Great-Britain in a Country where the particu­lar Currency of that Country was of less Value than Sterling, that such Trader should be obliged to take his Debt or Con­tract in such Country, at some certain Discount, between the Currency of such Country and Sterling, or he must have traded solely by Barter; and if any one will give himself the Trouble of enquiring Back into the History of Exchange and Trade in this Colony, he will find that for a long Time, the Riches of the People, lying more in Sterling than Cur­rency, from that over Balance, the Difference of Exchange was first on the Side of Currency. I can charge my Memory with having read old Letters, wherein one per Cent. Sterling, was given for one Hundred Pounds Currency. And this seems to be the Reason of those Acts now subsisting amongst us (tho' very little regared) prohibiting the Exportation of Cash under large Penalties, and of those other Acts (now so iniquitously extended) giving Encouragement for the Impor­tation of Cash: In Time as the Quantity of Cash encreased, Sterling claimed a superior Value, and as the Riches of the Country declined in Sterling, the exchanging Value en­creased; during all which Time the Trader must have suited himself to the Possibility of his Chapman, and the Creditor to that of his Debtor; but when Men became so extravagant as to pay no Regard to social Good, but governed their Demands wholly by Avarice, let it undo where it would; then the Law in 1748, came in to Remedy the Evil where it could, by taking Cognizance of the Claim of the Creditor, and so ultimately confining the Trader; and if he could not be contented with a reasonable Exchange, the Process brought against the Debtor, ended in a Regulation [Page 20] of the Exchange between Sterling and Currency, as the Legislature then thought was most reasonable: But this Limitation of Exchange to a certain Standard always, was by these very Gentlemen exclaimed against (as I shall shew them presently, to give the World the true Complexion of this Memo­rial) and the Legislature then fell on the best and most equi­table Rule, than can be devised by Man, for the dispensing of Justice to the Creditor and preserving the unfortunate Debtor from his merciless Claws; by directing Courts to Rate the Value of their Sterling Judgments given, in Current Money, according to the general and most known exchang­ing Difference so that the Creditor, was justly dealt with, and always had Cash in such a Proportion, as might enable him to replace his Sterling Debt in England, if he pleased. Thus the Rule, which Reason and Nature dictated should be subsisting, became the Rule established by Law, and did subsist before the Act, for emitting Paper Currency. I hope it is now evident the Act has done nothing ex post facto, it has enacted no new Thing with Regard to any Sort of Debts, but only directed that for such a Time, such Notes should have all the Value, that any other Species of Currency had: If it should be said that although Sterling Judgments were before the Act, to be rated in Currency, yet such Cur­rency was no Tender in Law, at it is in this Act; I answer, it is a mere Lawyer's Quibble, and if it was not expresly declared so in former Acts, yet it was virtually, and conse­quentially so done, in that every Creditor must know he could recover no more than the real Difference of Exchange; and surely that Court where it should appear that the Debtor had made the Creditor a Tender of the full Exchange on his Debt, must have treated such Creditor on his Refusal, as a litigious Person.

AS to retrospective Statutes, I need do no more than mention a common Proposition, to prove that notwithstand­ing popular Clamor, they are often very expedient. Let a preceeding Transaction be what it will, it may be produc­tive of very great Evil to a Community by its Effects, and shall a Community go on to endure this Evil, because it was produced by an Action done before the Evil was experienced: [Page 21] To say they ought is to fix the Infallibility of human Under­standing, as to Causes, Effects, and Consequences, which is an Absurdity. A Retrospection therefore in such Cases, is not only salutary, but absolutely necessary, to destroy such Effects even if it is obliged to reach the Cause: Suppose for Instance there had been no Rule or Law subsisting to oblige a Creditor to accept of an adequate Exchange for his Sterling Debt in Currency; I say from the apparent Necessity there was of making this Act to raise Men and Money, which has been shewn beyond Contradiction, it was absolutely neces­sary for the Good of the Community, that the Act should be so made, as to take in the Creditor before the Act, or else such Creditor might have defeated the main Purpose of the Act (that of providing an Army) in refusing to be satisfy'd for his Debt by the Notes, and would not such a Proceeding in Creditors, have struck at the very Vitals of the Commu­nity, by leaving the Land defenceless, and in the Power of the Ravages of the Enemy.

THE Injustice wherewith this Act is charged, in depreciating Debts, &c. has been fully answered, in the Arguments already used, which shew that neither Trade or Debt, are or can in the least, be affected by the Act; the very Defect they hint at in the Act (that is the Want of a Proviso for paying Sterling Debts ad valorem) is nothing more than a Defect in their own Brain; they either have not read the Laws of the Country, or are disturbed that all the Laws are not every Session brought into one Law, and what a mighty Law would that be! In Fact, the Clause they want was long before this Act enacted, and in some Measure at their own Instance, which I shall now shew in their next Paragraph of Complaint.

IN order to make their Complaint more formidable, they usher in the Act passed in 1748, to shew what Sufferers they are like to be by the Virginia Acts of Assembly. In the short Sketch that I have just now given of the History of Exchange in this Colony, I shewed that it was always a Method in the Country, of paying Currency for Sterling ad valorem, [Page 22] and that whilst Creditors were govern'd by the real or exchang­ing Difference subsisting, it remained only an equitable Rule, necessarilly subsisting in the Nature and Reason of Things; but when Avarice admitted of no Bounds to their Demands, the Assembly in 1748, took the Case under their Consider­ation, and to do Justice to both Creditor and Debtor, made all Executions on Sterling Debts leviable at Twenty-five per Cent. which was then thought the common and reasonable Exchange: But the Law was not long known in England, before the Merchants of London, whom I suppose I may safely call the Memorialists, endeavoured to obtain a Repeal of it, by the King's Proclamation; how­ever they were given to understand it was constitutionally late, for a Repeal by Proclamation, as his Majesty had given his Assent to the Act. And an Instruction was accordingly sent to the Governor, to urge the Assembly (as those Gentlemen term it) to do it by a subsequent Act. The Assembly always endeavouring to avoid giving the least Color for a Complaint against them, then readily embraced the Opportunity, and with great Alacrity, passed a Law to Repeal that in 1748, and so enacted, that all Courts on any Judgment given in Sterling, should at the Time of passing such Judgment, settle at what Rate of Discount, the same should be leviable in Current Money. Now let any candid Man say what these Memorialists would be at: A Clause is wanted in the Paper Act to provide for the Payment of Ster­ling ad valorem, and it is so done and practised before and after the making of the Act. Again, the Act in 1748, is likely to injure them, when in Fact there is no such Law in Being: Surely these Things can hardly be called common Mistakes, no, they are gross Blunders, begotten by a Genius for Clamoring. I now again hope this Act is not only cleared of all Arbitrariness and Injustice, but that it justly rides in Triumph over the Memorial, and all its devilish Machina­tions, for certainly calumniating Insinuations, and false Accusations, are Satan's chief Implements.

I WILL now consider the Expedient proposed by these Gentlemen, and that minutely too, to shew how little de­serving of Regard this Body are in this Instance, however [Page 23] formidably they may have united; and indeed to shew how necessary it is to preserve the Justice due to every Cause, by hearing both Parties fully before a Determination should be given.

TO separate the Expedient from its great Bundle of Preamble, is simply to say, it is an Amendment to the Paper Act. 1st, To secure all Contracts before the passing the Act from any Effect at all by it. 2dly, That in all Cases of Sterling Debts, &c. stipulated payable in Sterling either before or after the Act, such Debts. &c. shall not be effected by a Tender of Paper, or any other Species of Cur­rency not being Sterling at any Rate, unless the Creditor, &c. shall consent to it; and if he does consent to it and takes the Money, that then he shall be deemed in Law, fully satisfy'd for his Debt, &c.

I CANNOT here pass over a Compliment due to the Gentlemen, on Account of their Happiness in the Choice of a Draftsman, who has discovered in the Memorial, a wonderful Dexterity in splitting Unities; that is, dividing one and the same Thing into several Parts, for the Sake of multiplying Sentences: The wiser Part of Mankind has indeed condemned the Practice as non­sensical, but a bad Cause (or rather no Cause at all) for com­plaining, should be rolled up in an abundant Disguise of Words. The first Part of the Amendment proposed is wholly to secure Debts, &c. made before the Act from be­ing affected by it. And what does the second Part of the Amendment propose? Nothing more than to secure all Ster­ling Debts, made both before and after the Act, from being affected by it; for I conceive it wants no written Law to tell a Man if his Creditor is willing to discharge his Debt, for Carrots or Turnips, he may pay them to him; and that after he has paid them, and the Creditor has taken them as such, he is certainly discharged from any further Claim on Account of that Debt or Contract; and for this he has the Law of common Sense to direct him. But now for the Reasonable­ness of such an Amendment, which not only strikes at the Paper Act, but at all Rules and Acts relative to the exchang­ing [Page 24] of current Money, and of Course at the Law of neces­sary Justice, before explained; when I say the Reasonable­ness of such an Amendment, I mean not the Amendment as it is worded, for verily that is mere formal Nonsense, but of any Amendment to secure these Sterling Debts, &c. from being paid by Law in the Currency of the Country ad va­lorem, for that is the certain Drift of the Memorialists; a Drift they did not care to be plain in discovering, when they charged the Paper Act as being defective with Respect to Ster­ling Debts: In this Kind, indeed, it is defective; and had it been otherwise, it would have been the most fallacious Act imaginable, by emitting a Currency that should be no where current, not so current as a Cask of Nails, or any other Com­modity, to be sold only to him that might want to buy them, for any Man might hold what he had to sell at a Sterling De­mand, and then of what Wotrh would the Paper Notes have been? I need say nothing more to such an Amendment, than to remind any Reader of the Necessity that must have always subsisted of exchanging (not only in Virginia, but in every Country where Sterling is not the sole Currency) Sterling for such Currency, at an agreed Rate; and that it was from this Necessity alone that any Law could ever have arisen to establish the Method of doing it, lest the Will of the Cre­ditor should grow too extravagant for the Capacity of the Debtor; all which, I flatter myself, I have fully shewn in my Observations already made on this Memorial. I should now take Leave of the Expedient, but that there is a seeming Arrogancy in concluding that it was impossible for the Assem­bly of Virginia to make any Objections to the Amendment, in so far as it is, bona fide, founded on Principles of common Justice, and the Laws of England. What, do the Principles of common Justice oblige a People, extending the Power of a Mother-Country, by improving her distant Territories, and in doing that, confined (except in some trifling Com­modities) solely to a Trade with that Mother-Country? I say, should such a People, in the Course of such Trade, fall in Debt to such Mother-Country, do the Principles of com­mon Justice enjoin, that Persons so circumstanced should not be allowed any Way of paying such Debts, but in a Coin of which there is hardly an Hundred Pounds to be found [Page 25] amongst them in a Year; or else to pay them according to the extravagant Demands that their Creditors shall make in the Currency they have: Gentlemen that talk so, must be Madmen; is this common Justice? It is, bona fide, unnatural, and against all Justice. Again, the Amendment (they say) is founded on the Laws of England; to this I answer, with­out entering into a critical Enquiry as to the Fact, and with all possible Deference, that if there be such a Law, as the Laws of no People on Earth should be unalterable, every Moment that it has had any Effect in the Manner that these Memorialists propose, it must have been grievously partial and burthensome; and therefore it ought now to change its Face, and smile on those who have deserved all Attention, and every reasonable Indulgence; who, in Spite of Poverty and every unnatural Check, have certainly convinced the World, that they are faithful Subjects, endued with that Nobleness of Spirit that has ever distinguished a true-born Briton.

THE Conclusion is of a Piece with the whole Memorial, that runs on with a very great Air of Importance, but com­plains of nothing real; and this, it is evident, is as pompously inclined to the same Point, Nothing. There is a Request made to their Lordships, that they would be pleased to sus­pend giving Judgment on the Virginia Act as it now stands, by Way of Approbation thereof, till such Time as the Sense of the Assembly of the Province is had upon the Amendments proposed thereto; which, in Fact, is desiring that their Lord­ships would let the Act keep its Force and Efficacy, which every Act must necessarily do that is pssed by the Governor, unless his Majesty shall declare his Dissent by Proclamation, which no Doubt he is in some Cases advised to: But, if the Act lyes for his Majesty's Pleasure, it is necessarily operating here as a Law, unless provided against in the Body of it by a suspending Clause. Their Lordships Approbation of an Act might indeed incline his Majesty to give his Assent to it, and thereby give it a greater Degree of Firmness in the Constitution; but this can hardly be very necessary, in many temporary Laws: Of Course then these Gentlemen have really asked for nothing, with Respect to their Complaint; [Page 26] not only nothing to their Purpose, but so long as their Re­quest is granted; that is, that their Lordships shall be silent as to their Approbation of the Act. It is very mate­rially against them; but I have all along seen they have a latent Meaning in the Memorial, and I suspect here they are praying that their Lordships will suspend their Approbation, in order to offer up another Prayer hereafter, that they will be pleased to advise his Majesty to repeal it; and this Con­struction is not out of the Way of their partial Syste [...] [...]re­fully kept up through the whole: But would not this be a most extraordinary Prayer indeed, first to let an Act emit Money at such a settled Currency and on such a settled Fund, and, when the Money is in Circulation, repeal it, because Lon­don or British Merchants are put on the necessary and just Footing with other People. If I mistake not, it would amount to an entire Forfeiture of publick Faith, with a very sacred Absolution for so doing.

I WILL now recommend both the Memorial, and Observations on it, to the impartial Reader; and let him say if in any Instance he ever met with less Cause of Complaint, less Decency or Gratitude to that Country against whom they com­plain, less Respect to that Board to whom they address them­selves, or less Regard for the Reputation of their own Body: I say less Cause of Complaint, because the very Matter com­plained of (if ever it existed) was not only long before their Complaints fully remedied, but even before the passing the Act; I say less Decency and Gratitude to that Country against whom they complain; 1st, in puffing out how largely they are indebted to them, 2dly, in accusing them with arbitra­rily and iniquitously endeavouring to destroy their Trade, and cheat them of their Debts: For this would be the Con­clusion, had the Facts been true; and not in the least re­flecting how many of them owe their very Being, as Mer­chants, to the Civilities of the Country, and at Times per­haps when their own Credit was not sufficient to have indu­ced any Man but a bold-venturing Virginian to have trusted them: I say less Respect to that Board to whom they address themselves, in presuming to build on Mistakes, Blunders, scandalous Accusations, and what not, in order (if possible) [Page 27] to deceive their Lordships, and less regardful of their own Reputation in rendering it for ever after this a just Matter of Suspicion, whether the Facts on which they shall ground any future Complaint, are truly stated or not.

WAS it for such Uses as these, ye Merchantmen of London, that this Country has submitted to a long and constant Tax on their Commodity, in order to raise a Treasury for the mutual Benefit of the Trade ^*; that instead of assisting them in their greatest Poverty, in the Day of their greatest Distress, wi [...] [...]e Overflowings of that Heap, if properly accounted for ye do not only loudly oppose their Endeavours to pre­serve themselves, but even abuse them, and aim by your Complaint (no Matter whether founded on Truth or False­hood) at particular Exemptions of yourselves, from all Possibility of suffering in the common Calamity, and there­by shew yourselves no otherwise interested in the Country, than in the dirty Demands you have against it.

IF the Gentlemen shall think proper to shew themselves offended at what I have written, I can only say that I am sorry for the Cause of Writing, but not for having done it; for 'tis certainly a Piece of Justice due to the Legislative Body of my Country, to remove from them where it can be done with Truth, every Kind of Reflection against their Honor, their Virtue; and I shall never be affected with any Reply that can be made, having an excellent little Fortress to protect me, one built on a Rock not liable to be shaken with Fears, that of Independency, my Batteries are Facts and Truth, and my Engineer is a Fellow as fit for his Post as any in the World, Reason; thus supported I will conclude with the Words of Cicero, in the Cause he plead for Publius Quinctius.

[Page 28] ‘Hic ego, si Crassi omnes cum Antoniis existant, fi tu L. Philippe, qui inter illos florebas, hanc causam voles cum Hortensio dicere, tamen superior sim necesse est; non enim quemadmodum putatis, omnia sunt in eloquentiâ, est quae­dam tamen ita perspicua veritas, ut eam infirmare nulla res possit.’ Of which I shall give the following modest Translation, by Way of Address to the Lords of Trade, &c.