TWO reasons induce me to address the pub­lic at present. The one is, to clear a few plain arguments on a matter of the utmost consequence, from the objections lately made against them, in a piece call'd "The Speech of Joseph Galloway, Esq &c." The other is, to answer the unjust accusations contain'd in that piece.

To act honestly, and to be traduc'd, hath been the fate of many men. To bear slanders with temper, and to entertain a proper pity or contempt, for their weak or wicked authors, has been the lot of few. I will en­deavour to imitate their example: and by proposing it to myself, I hope I shall be able so far to suppress the resentment naturally arising from a sense of unprovok'd injuries, that my vindication may be presented not un­acceptably, nor uselessly, to candid minds.

COULD I be convinced, that men of sense or virtue, would be persuaded or pleased, by wild declamation or illiberal reflections, I might perhaps be induced to de­fend myself, in the same shattered style and abusive lan­guage, [Page 2] with which I have been attacked: but as these must always offend the wise and good, whose approbation only is worth wishing for, to Mr. Galloway I resign the undisputed glory of excelling in his favorite arts—of writing confusedly, and railing insolently.

Presumptuous indeed must I appear, should I venture into these lists, against a person who wields the weapons of wordy war— the only weapons he dares to wield—with so peculiar a dexterity in his exercise, as to feel no kind of restraint either from sense or truth; the regularity of whose sober discipline would prove, I presume, too great a confinement to this advocate of freedom.

WHEN I perceived, that Mr. Galloway was hardy e­nough to obtrude on the public a pretended speech, of which he never spoke one sentence in the House, I was not surprised to find, that a person who treated his own character with such licence, should not be unspar­ing of others. But— why he should engage in this pre­posterous project— why he should so industriously endea­vour to exhibit me as a villain to my country, for speaking my sentiments in that place where my country had commanded me to speak them— why he has wan­tonly wounded a man, who never designed or wished him an injury; but has always, as far as his power ex­tended, rendered him all the offices of civility—for what reasons, I say, he has thus violated the laws of humanity and decency, his own heart is best able to de­cide—The public, with which he endeavours to establish his character, by destroying that of another, may perhaps be able to guess the secret causes, by which he has been transported into such unjustifiable excesses of rage and rancour against me—For my part, I shall avoid an enquiry, that would only lead me, I fear, to a painful discovery of the depravity, to which the human mind is subject.

[Page 3]LEAVING then to the impartial world the judgement to be passed on Mr. Galloway's conduct—Leaving to him the enjoyment of the solid satisfaction, that must a­rise from the meritorious exploit of stabbing publicly a reputation, which has hitherto escaped his insi­dious attempts, I shall endeavour to perform the task imposed on me by his cruelty, and to defend myself from those darts, which with unfriendly hands he has aim'd at my heart.

WHEN the change of our government, after the ad­journment of the assembly in March last, came to be the general subject of conversation, the importance of the measure filled my mind with the greatest anxiety. A severe fit of sickness had prevented my attendance when the resolves were past: but I considered that at the next meeting of the House, the duties of the post which my country had assign'd me, would call upon me to act a part of more consequence, than perhaps would ever fall to my share again, in the whole course of my life. Mindful of the trust committed to me, I endeavour'd to understand a matter on which so much depended.

I SOON perceiv'd, that if a change took place, there were two things to be wish'd for, which there appear'd to me no probability of obtaining. The first was, that the point on which we lately differ'd with the governor, and some others which have been earnestly urg'd by for­mer assemblies, should be determin'd in our favour. The second was, that our privileges should be perfectly secured.

BUT insurmountable obstructions seem'd to present themselves, at this time, against these attempts. ^* ‘What reasonable hopes of success can we entertain, of hav­ing these points decided in our favour, while those [Page 4] ministers who so repeatedly and warmly have approv'd of the proprietors insisting on them, are still in power?’ Our danger not only is, that these points will not be decided for us; but, if the proprietors, tir­ed and incensed, should think proper to surrender the government and make their own terms with the crown, is it not highly probable, that they have interest enough to make the change in such a manner as will fix upon us forever, those demands which appear so extremely just to the present ministers? Add to this, the ‘de­plorable misfortune under which we now labour, of having incurr'd the displeasure of his majesty and his ministers.’ These reflections induc'd me to think and to say—that this is not the proper time to attempt a change of our government.

MR. Galloway, by way of prelude to his answer to these observations, endeavours to shew that I have con­tradicted myself: but this supposed contradiction is founded on a supposed concession, which I never made— "of the necessity of a change". My approbation of a change, if we can enjoy all the advantages we now do, is call'd, "a confession that a change is necessary". But certainly it would have been more natural to construe it as it was intended, and as the sense requires—"that, if we are to lose nothing by the change, I am as willing to be under the immediate government of the crown, as of the proprietors."

AFTER this unsuccessful attempt to raise a contradic­tion, Mr. Galloway takes the trouble of attacking the "inapposite instance", as he calls it, relating to the duke of Monmouth. This instance was mentioned to con­firm a preceding observation; and Mr. Galloway, in attempting to answer it, unluckily for himself, points out and enforces the very truth for which it was adduced. He says, "the duke failed; and no wonder; for he [Page 5] landed at a time when the king was supported in the ‘warmest manner by the parliament, and no one cir­cumstance to promise him success.’ Thus, I say,— our attempt is made at a time when the proprietors are supported in the warmest manner by the crown, and its ministers; and no one circumstance to promise us success".— But, suppose the duke had waited till the parliament did no longer support the King; but, when they and the whole nation, in the utmost dread of popery and arbitrary power, were looking round with impatient terror for a deliverer; and when many cir­cumstances promised that nobleman success; is it evi­dent that he would not then have succeeded, or that he would have been taken and put to death? Or, if king William had made his attempt, before the nation was properly alarmed, is it certain that the revolution would have been accomplished with such amazing facili­ty? Rashness ruined the one. Caution crowned the other. This is all, I intended to prove.

MR. Galloway then proceeds, and supposes that all the determinations of the ministry, were mistakes occa­sioned by proprietary misrepresentations. He then supposes that these determinations were solely owing to the influence of two friends of the proprietors, lately deceased: And lastly he supposes that now there will be a total alteration in ministerial resolutions.

THESE suppositions, I acknowledge, are as good secu­rities as any we have, that the grand points controver­ted between us and the proprietors, will, in case of a change, be decided in our favour, or that our privi­leges will be preserved. But still they seem to be too sanguine. Let us remember with what unanimity the ministry at different times have expressed their resent­ment of our conduct; and, that it is only guess-work to imagine, their resolutions were dictated by two men.

[Page 6]OF one thing we are sure—that we are in the ut­most discredit with the king and his ministers. The late resolves prove it. Mr. Galloway however flatters himself, ‘that the prejudices against us are not so ineradicably fixed, but they may be easily overcome, and the province restored to her former credit.’ Happy should I be, if I could perceive the least prospect of so great a blessing. By what means these prejudices are to be overcome, we are not informed; nor can I conceive. Men of great abilities, and of the most perfect ac­quaintance with our public affairs, have been em­ployed to remove the force of these misrepresentati­ons, as they are called. Mr. Franklin and Mr. Charles, our Agents spent several years in combating these prejudices; and, even Mr. Galloway himself, as I have been told, elucidated the justice of our cause with his usual perspicuity, in reams of writing. Yet after all these great labours, his majesty and his ministers still retained their former sentiments. Hence, I fear, that any future efforts for this purpose, ‘ ^† will be swallowed up, and sacrificed (as Mr. Galloway most elegantly expresses it) AT the shrine of proprietary in­structions, and the measures of power.’ In short, that they will be but ^* "ideal shadows," and chime­rical "notions."

IN confident expectation of these improbabilities, Mr. Galloway is willing to risque the perpetuating those demands, which have been constantly made by the proprietors—at a time, when we are certain that the crown and its ministers look on these demands as high­ly just and reasonable.

ONE of his arguments for our riding post in this af­fair is— ‘that there are many new colonies to be [Page 7] settled now, and that it would discourage these set­tlements, if our privileges were to be taken away.’

'TIS true it will convince the emigrants, they are not to have such privileges as were granted to us; or, if they have, and shall hereafter petition for a change, that they will be taken from them.

BUT this information, I imagine, will be no discour­agement.—There is not the same ^† reason to grant, nor to wish for privileges now, that existed in the persecuting days of Charles the second. Grants of land on small quit-rents—furnishing the necessaries of life for the first outset—bounties on labour—and immunities from taxes for some years—with the common liberties of other English subjects—will do the business, without the privileges of Pennsylvania.

MR. Galloway, before he quits ^* "this wise policy of settling the extensive newly acquired dominions" as he expresses himself, takes the opportunity of making an historical flourish—but unfortunately furnishes " ^‡ irre­fragable demonstrations" that he is utterly unacquaint­ed with the subject, on which he speaks.

MR. FRANKLIN read in the House, a short extract from Lord Clarendon's life, relating to Barbados. Mr. Galloway catched it as it fell from the learned member, and now confidently asserts—"that the colony of Bar­bados had, in the opinion of the ablest council, forfeited her charter privileges—And yet upon this policy only, her privileges were preserved."

HE referrs to Lord Clarendon's life, for this curious anecdote. What then must a man think of Mr. Gallo­way, [Page 8] who looks into the book, and finds—that the colony of Barbados did not forfeit any right—that such an opinion was never given—and that there is not a word relating to her charter privileges. Yet this is the truth.

THE fact was this. Charles the first granted the island of Barbados by patent to the earl of Carlisle—he di­ed—his son leased it to lord Willoughby for twenty-one years; appointing him governor, and reserving a mo­iety of the profits to himself—the civil war broke out—ended— Charles the second was restor'd—there being eight or nine years of lord Willoughby's lease to come, he pray'd the king to give him a commission to be governor for that time—But the island was now much chang'd—it was compleatly settled during the troubles—and chiefly by officers of the king's army—so that now it was of another consideration and value than it had been— the king's customs yearly amounted to a very large sum—The planters were greatly alarmed at the thought of ^* ‘depending on the earl of Carlisle and lord Willoughby for the enjoyment of their estates, which they had hitherto look'd upon as their own.’ They applied to the king, ^† ‘praying that they might not be opprest by those two lords. They pleaded, that they were the king's subjects; that they had re­paired thither as to a desolate place, and had by their industry obtained a livelihood there, when they could not with a good conscience stay in England. That if they should be now left to those lords to ransom them­selves and compound for their estates, they must leave the country; and the plantation would be destroyed, which yielded his majesty so good a revenue.’

THEY further ^‡ ‘positively insisted, that the charter granted to the earl of Carlisle was void in point of law; [Page 9] and prayed that his majesty would give them leave to prosecute in his name in the exchequer, and at their own charge, to repeal that grant; by which they should be freed from the arbitrary power and oppression which would be exercised upon them under the colour of that charter; and his majesty might receive a great benefit to himself, by taking the sovereignty into his own hands, to which it belonged—and in that case, they offered to make as great an imposition of taxes as the plantation would bear; for the support of the king's governor, and such other uses, as his majesty should think fit to direct.’

UPON this, the king ^* "referr'd the consideration of the validity and legality of the patent, to his council at law; who upon full deliberation, after the hearing of all parties, returned their opinion, that this patent was void, and that his majesty might take the same into his own power;" not that the "colony had forfeited their charter privileges."

ON this report, the determination was formed in the king's council. And what does this case prove—but that the crown would not deprive the proprietors of Barbados of their charter, tho' the people earnestly re­quested it—tho' that people were faithful subjects, who had distinguished their loyalty by suffering in the royal cause—tho' a very great benefit would accrue to the crown—tho' a large salary was to be settled on the king's governor—and lastly, tho' the patent was ab­solutely illegal and void.

IF in such a case, the needy and unprincipled Charles would not seize upon the interests of the proprietors of Barbados, can it be conceived that his present majesty will snatch from the proprietors of Pennsylvania without [Page 10] their consent, the charter that was granted in considera­tion of the services performed by their brave and loyal ancestor.

I THINK every man in the province except Mr. Gallo­way, will immediately discover whether the case he has quoted, will strengthen his reasoning or mine.

ANOTHER of Mr. Galloway's arguments is— ‘that the proprietary estate is daily increasing, and thus their influence will increase; and therefore they will be more likely in future, to oppose with success any measures that may be taken against their op­pression.’

TO finish this argument, he closes it with an imagina­ry contradiction of mine, in my saving, "This is not the proper time for a change," and afterwards declaring, ‘that we are not to expect more success, because the proprietaries will have more dignity, more power; and, as they will think, more law on their side.’

MR. Galloway certainly takes delight in mistakes, or he would never have committed so gross an error as he has done here. I said—it could not be expected, that our success would be greater when our ‘opponents become more numerous, and will have more dignity, more power, and, as they will think, more law on their side.’ This was intended to prove, that we might find it more difficult after a change, to contend for the preservation of our privileges, with the crown and the clergy, (the opponents here meant) than with the proprietors. But Mr. Galloway, with great ad­dress, by changing the word opponents for proprietaries, creates a contradiction for his own diversion, and the deception of his readers.

[Page 11]HOWEVER—let it be supposed, "that the pro­prietary estate and influence will greatly increase, and that they become the richest subjects in England." I most sincerely wish they may, since the ^* increase of their wealth must arise from the increase of the wealth and prosperity of Pennsylvania. These, I presume, are not things to be dreaded. Our power and influence must increase with their power and influence—and therefore, it seems, we shall always be as able to cope with them, as we are now—especially if it be consi­dered, that a family is more liable to accidents, than a people.

BUT granting that the riches of the proprietary family shall increase in a greater proportion than the riches of this province—can it be imagin'd, that they will ob­tain any undue influence over the crown and it's mini­sters? can it be believed, that the king and parliament will suffer two or three subjects to tyrannise over a de­pendant colony, in whose welfare Great-Britain is so much interested? To reduce us to the most abject state of slavery?

THE supposition is too monstrous to be admitted— and I should be surprized to hear such language from any person, but one who thinks and writes in Mr. Gal­loway's shambling way. He ^‖ shudders at my saying ‘ [Page 12] the parliament may perhaps be induced to place us in the same state with the royal governments’— and yet he supposes, they will tamely tolerate our being made slaves.

IF our proprietors are to become such great and dreadful men—if their influence is to grow superior to justice and reason—I cannot conceive how the king's appointment of governors can secure us from them, any more than his approbation.

IF that influence shall ever be so exorbitant as it has been described, will it not prevail in the nomination of governors? Or in determining their conduct? Can even Mr. Galloway think that the king's appointment will protect us against this influence? If he does, I will answer him in his own words—and if they do not convince him, surely he will not be so unreasonable as to expect, that they should convince any one else.

‘ ^† Let us but consider that the experience of ages fully demonstrates wealth to be the parent of power, and the nurse of influence, and that an increase of wealth will as naturally beget an increase of power and influence, as an increase of velocity in the falling stone will produce more certain death.’

‘Let us but take a view of the proprietary estate, what it was fifty, what twenty years ago, and what it is now, and we must be convinced that nothing can prevent their being the richest subjects in the English nation: and therefore subjects of the great­est influence and power, and more likely in future to oppose with success any measures that may be ta­ken against their oppression. Are we to expect the same cause will not produce the same effect, and that [Page 13] wealth by some MAGIC CHARM in future, will, in­stead of producing power and influence, bring forth its contraries? As vain and chimerical as the expec­tation of a future Messiah to the deluded Jews.’

IF there is any force in these arguments of Mr. Gal­loway—if property, from natural causes produces power, and can not fail of having this effect—how vain and ridiculous is it to request the crown—to ^* "separate power from property?" Yet this forsooth! is all Mr. Galloway, or the assembly according to his explanation, desires of his majesty.

CERTAINLY the meaning cannot be, that the king should take away their estates from the proprietors — this would be too glaringly unjust. What then can Mr. Galloway mean, when he desires "that the king may separate power and property," which he de­clares—and, with prodigious labour, strives to prove— "inseparable?" If he means any thing, I imagine, I have discovered his meaning—and, tho' Mr. Galloway has, in his performance, said many things that have surprized me—yet this is so superla­tively extraordinary, that I would not admit the fol­lowing construction, unless his intention was too evi­dent to allow of any doubt. I did not think him capa­ble of such designs. I entertained a better opinion of his loyalty. In short, he plainly means— as he has declared it cannot be done any other way—that his Majesty shall turn MAGICIAN—and contrive ^† ‘some MAGIC CHARM, whereby wealth instead of producing power and influence shall bring forth its contraries’— their contraries I suppose it should be.

THIS dread of future injuries being removed— or at least the vanity of attempting their removal, on [Page 14] Mr. Galloway's own principles being proved—I return to the present situation of affairs.

IT is universally believed, that the present ministry are desirous of vesting the government of this province advantageously in the crown. Mr. Franklin has fre­quently said it. If this be the case, how fair an oppor­tunity is presented to the proprietors of gratifying their resentment, if they entertain any against the province, and securing their interest at the same time, by entering into a contract with the crown, and fixing, by an act of parliament, those points, in which the ministry have constantly supported them— upon all succeeding ages?

MANY words are unnecessary in so clear a case as this is. Mr. Galloway allows, the proprietors have some sense, and that they understand their own inter­est. The sentiments of the ministry have been decla­red in their favor. From thence I think it may be taken for granted, that the proprietors either will not consent to a change—or that their consent will be founded on a perfect security given them for their de­mands, which appear so just to the king and minis­try. What may facilitate this measure is, the proposal of the assembly— ^*" that a full equivalent be made to "the proprietors" upon their parting with the go­vernment. How far these words may be construed to extend, will appear from this consideration. With the approbation of the crown the proprietors now insist on certain points which, in their opinion, tend to pro­mote their interests. This, the authority vested in them at present, enables them to do. If they are divested of this authority, without any stipulations for securing their interests hereafter, as well as they are at this time, it will be said that a full equivalent is not made for the power they resign. This security will therefore without [Page 15] doubt, be required—and that requisition may not ap­pear so unreasonable in Great-Britain as it does here.

THIS full equivalent comprehends something more than the settlement of these points. The government of itself is very valuable—and surely we shall not desire the king to pay the equivalent out of his own pocket. If the change therefore is made, I don't question but it will be thought highly reasonable— that we should pay for the blessing, which we so earnestly request.

The situation of our affairs being such as has been described, I could not perceive any necessity "impel­ling" us to seize this unhappy period, to plunge this province into convulsions, that might while she was thus disordered, be attended with the worst conse­quences. A gentler remedy appeared to me a properer remedy.

BUT here Mr. Galloway exclaims— ‘Shall we pa­tiently wait untill proprietary influence shall be at an end? Shall we submit to proprietary demands?’ By no means! What I desire, is, vigorously to oppose those demands; and to try the force of that influence, WITHOUT RISQUING TOO MUCH IN THE CONTEST.

I THEREFORE made a proposal to the House, of a ve­ry moderate nature, which I had the pleasure of finding highly approved by a ^* gentleman, whose acknowledg­ed integrity, patriotism, abilities, and experience will always give weight to his sentiments with every impar­tial person. The proposal was—"that we should desire his majesty's judgment, on the point that occa­sioned the late unhappy difference between the two branches of the legislature." By taking this st;ep, we should have discovered the sense of the ministry on our [Page 16] late disputes—on other important points which have been controverted with our governors—and respect­ing our privileges.

THUS we should have known what success would at­tend us in any future attempt to effect a change—and what method would be most agreeable to his majesty. But in the present mode of proceeding, we have acted with great zeal, I grant—but we are quite ignorant what the event will be, and whether the censures bestow­ed on the proprietors, may not be thought in Great-Bri­tain to be aimed through them, at the king. In short, we embark in an enterprize of the highest importance; and then look about us to see how it may be carried on. Instead of wandring through a storm in the dark, with so sacred a charge in our custody—I thought it would have been better to have waited, 'till the tempest was a little abated—or, at least, to have procured some light to guide us through the surrounding dangers.

I SHALL now consider the manner in which the pre­sent attempt to change our government is made.

MR. Galloway makes this general objection with great warmth to my arguments, "that they are conjectural and suppositious."

His resentment was to be expected. How absurd must the language of diffidence appear to one, who never doubted—the force of his own sagacity? To one who, castigated, but not convinced, by a discovery of his repeated errors, still dares to decide positively in things he does not understand—and drives boldly through public affairs, like a magnanimous bug, ^† through the blaze that has so often scorcht its wings—how con­temptible in his eyes, must be the man, who modestly [Page 17] pursues a train of enquiry, on the unformed events of futurity—and in his researches after truth, admits a possibility of her escaping him?

MR. Galloway, with a spirit of divination, unassisted by the common modes of reasoning—penetrates into the region of contingencies—and fixes with infallible confi­dence, the uncertainties of the times to come.—Far dif­ferent was the method, which the humble subject of his wrath and reproaches found it proper to pursue. Filled with anxious fears for the welfare of his country— he­sitating and apprehensive,—it was his endeavour to form a ^‡ judgment of things that may hereafter happen, from an attentive consideration of present circumstances and past transactions—the only methods to be practised by those whose disquisitions are not aided by such " ^* active blood" as Mr. Galloway's; to whom hesitation appears ridiculous, and apprehension absurd! And no won­der—for if any mistake is committed, all the injury that follows, is—only the trifling loss of the PRIVI­LEGES OF PENNSYLVANIA.

BUT though Mr. Galloway pierces through futurity with such superior intuition, yet he is subject to a mere mortal frailty in considering present things. Hence he confounds those arguments I used with respect to the manner of attempting a change of our government, with the arguments I offered concerning the time, and does not seem sensible of his mistake.

BY way of explanation and introduction to what I said on the manner of this attempt, it was premised—that [Page 18] some event, arising from the circumstances of the pro­prietary family, or an act of the crown, might hereafter present us with a more happy method of vindicating our rights and privileges than the present. Upon this Mr. Galloway very gravely runs into a calculation of the lives of the proprietors and their families—and proves to his own satisfaction, that their descendents ^† "even they, and every of them" will always be wicked and cunning. One virtue however he must allow them, to take off the force of my observation—and that is— a most uncom­mon harmony among themselves. Yet, after spending four pages on this curious digression, Mr. Galloway himself must grant—that some act of the crown, or a multi­tude of proprietors (as it happened in Carolina) or a dis­sention between them tho' few, will be such a circum­stance, as will produce the conjuncture I mentioned. But I will waive these probabilities. I will indulge Mr. Galloway so far as to suppose, they are too uncertain or remote to be expected or regarded. What will this concession prove? That none of those occurrences will afford a favourable mode of making the attempt. But does it prove the present mode to be a good one? or that any necessity is so urgent as to force us, to make use of it, tho' a bad one. By no means! If I should see a man about to pass a broad, deep ^‡ river, over which I had reason to think he could not swim, would it be an unwise or an unkind act in me, to advise him to walk along the bank, and endeavour to find a bridge, or a narrower or shallower place—tho' I had no certainty that there was such a bridge or such a place? Or would this be acknowledging that he was under a necessity of passing the river? My advice would at least have a chance of saving him, and could do him no harm—for, after being disappointed in his search, he might return to the [Page 19] spot where I found him—and would be at liberty to drown himself at last.

MR. Galloway mixes all points so confusedly together, that he not only leads himself into a variety of errors, but renders it very difficult for another, in answering, to reduce into any order what he has so loosely scattered about. This I shall however endeavour to do.

HAD he attended to the objections against the manner of the present attempt, he might have perceived that they were three. The first was—that the circum­stances attending this proceeding, might cause others to attribute it to such passions, as are always disgrace­ful to public councils, and destructive to the honor and welfare of a people. It certainly will be admitted, that all reproaches or this kind ought to be carefully guarded against—especially by a dependent colony, whose conduct has been frequently and severely reprehended.

MR. Galloway however usurps in his private room, among his chairs and tables, the absurd licence of railing at me on this occasion, for speaking my sentiments with freedom—tho' I spoke in a public council—as the representative of a free people—on a subject in which their reputation and happiness were intimately concern­ed. Any man who thinks, will instantly perceive— that it was my duty to mention every thing, that I ap­prehended would tend to secure these blessings. When the assembly was deliberating on a step that seemed to me likely to bring discredit and loss upon us, would it have become me to have suppressed my opinion? No! But it would have pleased Mr. Galloway and some o­thers —

Great reward for having been a villain!

I SAID— ‘Our messages to the governor, and our resolves would discover the true cause of the present, [Page 20] attempt’—Mr. Galloway grants it; and appeals to, those resolves for my confusion. How is this charge supported? Why, the resolves mention—"public houses—commissions to judges during pleasure— and the great danger of a military force in a proprietary government"—as grievances. In like manner they mention the point lately controverted. Very well! The contents of the resolves are now proved.—But there still remains one point slipped over in silence— Why were these resolves now made? The increase of public houses had frequently been complained of before.—Commis­sions during good behaviour have always been wished for.—The establishment of a military force has been often attempted in the midst of war, when it was vastly more necessary than at this time.—But never 'till now has there been an attempt to change the government. More observations I think unnecessary. Impartial per­sons who read the messages and resolves—and consi­der some other circumstances generally known—will be able to discover the TRUE CAUSE of the present at­tempt—and to judge, whether it may be justly attri­buted to passion of any kind. It his majesty and his mi­nisters, whose present opinion of us is allowed to be extremely unfavorable, should be induced by our late behaviour, to think us a rash, turbulent people—it will be a misfortune to be deplored by all lovers of their country.

THE second objection against the manner of proceed­ing, was the inconsistency in which we should be involv­ed. This inconsistency is twofold. In the first place, our dissention with the governor, and this extraordinary attempt in consequence of it, may be thought by the king and the ministry to have arisen on a matter already determined by the crown. Hence our unwillingness to comply with the royal pleasure, signifyed to us on this head, may be called a very improper foundation of a re­quest ‘ [Page 21] to be more immediately subjected to the royal pleasure.’ But this objection is easily obviated by supposing that the king and ministry will exactly agree with the assembly in construing the controverted stipu­lation. I sincerely hope they may; as our construc­tion appears to me extremely reasonable and equitable. But, of this agreement in sentiments I desired to have some proof before we proceeded any further. We have frequently been disappointed in our warmest expecta­tions. In public as well as in private life, he that ne­ver doubts, will often be wrong.

IN the second place—there appeared to me an in­consistency, in requesting a change of government from the king—and yet insisting on the preservation of privileges derogatory of the royal rights.

WE certainly prefer in our minds one of these things to the other.—Either to continue as we are—or to change, tho' we lose our privileges. If his majesty will not accept of the government in the same state, in which it has been held by the proprietors, what shall be our choice? I don't imagine, that even Mr. Galloway, tho' he ventures to say " ^* We have no cause to dread a change if all "my fears should prove realities," will dare to propose a direct renunciation of our rights. Trifling as he seems to think them—willing as he is to expose them to hazard on guesses and surmises— they are yet held in too much veneration by the good people of Pennsylvania—for him to declare his con­tempt of them. If then his majesty shall be so "unrea­sonable" as to insist upon exercising his authority, in case of a change, as fully in this province, as in any other under his immediate government—and we in­sist that he shall not; the bargain breaks off—"and the worst consequence is (according to Mr. Galloway) [Page 22] that we must then remain (as I would have us remain) in our present situation." A much worse consequence in my opinion will follow. May we not again be re­proached with double dealing and deceit?—The assem­bly's petition to the crown draws a high coloured pic­ture of our present distresses.—But let me suppose Mr. Galloway deputed to plead the public cause—an office which I have some reason to think, would, by no means, be disagreeable to him!— ‘ ^* If the royal ear is not deaf—if it will hear’—these are the pleas­ing—the descriptive—and convincing strains, in which "that Ear" will be addressed.

MOST gracious sovereign! ‘The rights of the people of Pennsylvania— ^† the most scandalous and corrupt of all your subjects— ^‡ are fading and expiring under the baleful influence of proprietary ambition and power— ^‖ our liberties are daily consuming before them— ^§ our privileges are swallowed up and sacri­ficed AT the shrine of proprietary instructions, and the measures of power— ^¶ they are now but ideal shadows and chimerical notions— ^** indeed our li­berties are lost—and ^†† we shall soon be reduced to the servile condition of the parliament of Paris; or of the worst of slaves of the most absolute mo­narch.— ^‡‡ The fever of ambition and arbitrary power is raging with unremitting violence in the soul and active blood, WITH MANY OTHER PARTS of our political institution, so that its conduct and beha­viour [Page 23] ^‖ IS not animated and directed, as THEY ought to be. The effect thereof has nearly destroyed the powers of life and living motion, and nature is no longer capable of struggling for relief. We therefore pray your majesty, that you and the ^* virtuous minis­ter on whom you much rely, will make ^† WEAPONS out of the old contract between the crown and our first proprietor—out of the opinion of some very great men, your servants—and out of the quit rents in the lower counties, to be used for the restoration of our liberties—under ^‡ which circumstances, it will be the highest presumption to oppose the resumption of the no­mination of the governor of this province, which is all the change, we intend you shall make.—Proprietary instructions, with which your majesty is well acquainted, and private interest have imposed ^‖ thraldom and bon­dage upon us. " ^§ The stream of justice is not only become turbid but thick, so that it can no longer dis­charge its duty. Security of life and estate is become an empty name, and the spirit of liberty, distrest, and worn out by ineffectual efforts for her preserva­tion, is verging fast to a dissolution. Nothing, but a medicine administred to this spirit by your royal hands, can possibly revive or restore her. This medicine we now attempt to obtain, before the MIDNIGHT GLOOM approaches, and FATAL DEATH puts an end to our struggles.’ When his majesty shall be so happy as to hear this eloquent address, how much must his pity be excited! If he understands it; and shall be pleased to express his willingness to take us under his immediate care and protection, in the same manner with the rest of his subjects. —how must he be surprized at our refusing, or even hesitating to accept [Page 24] that which we have so warmly requested—unless, particular points are granted to us? How must he be astonished, to find that we are more afraid of being placed upon a footing with other Englishmen under his dominion, than of the ^¶ MIDNIGHT GLOOM and FATAL DEATH which are hastening to overtake us? With what justice may his gracious majesty tell us, "that we have endeavoured to impose on him, by represent­ing ourselves as an oppressed, miserable people, stand­ing on the brink of destruction; when, upon his hear­ing our cries for assistance and safety—mercifully stretching out his hand to relieve us, and offering us to partake of the same happiness enjoyed by the rest of his subjects, we reject his implored protection—and there­by prove the falshood and absurdity of our pretences?"

THUS, by requesting a change, we lay ourselves under the inevitable necessity, either of quietly giving up our rights and privileges, in order to maintain a consis­tency in our conduct; or, of incurring the severe cen­sure above mentioned—unless the king will be so good natur'd, in consideration of the infinite pains we have taken to recommend ourselves to his favor—as to be contented with the same share of power in this pro­vince; which his two subjects Thomas and Richard Penn now have.

MY third objection against the manner of the present attempt to alter our government was— ‘that it might be deemed in Great Britain a surrender of our charter—or at least a sufficient foundation for the parliament's proceeding to form a new constitution for us.’—

[Page 25]NO person can surrender what he has not. This term, therefore, when applied to the people of Penn­sylvania, means a giving up of the peculiar rights deriv­ed to them, under their charter.

THEY can not surrender what belongs to others— and therefore their act can not take away the rights of the proprietors. But should the proprietors, enraged at our behaviour, and fatigued with disputes, make their own terms with the crown, and give up the royal charter—then the surrender may be said to be com­pleated.

MR. Galloway says,—the petitions can not be thought in any manner to surrender our privileges— because "they request the enjoyment of those privi­leges." But, if it be considered, that to procure peace and safety, is the design of forming societies, and of establishing governments—and that these petitions expresly declare— ^† ‘there is no peace and safety among us, and that we have no hopes of either being restored but by the change for which we pray.’—Certainly, if we are thought to be in our senses, it will be concluded that we intend to surrender intirely a government, which does not answer the ends of government—even tho' we should be deprived of some agreeable things tacked to it.—For who but a Bedlamite would shiver in a thin silk coat, in the midst of winter, only because it had a fine lace upon it?—

IT may seem therefore a reasonable construction of these petitions to understand them in this sense— "that the petitioners will be much obliged to his majesty, if he will be so good as to put the lace on warmer coats for them—but, if he will not condescend to do that, he may keep the lace for his trouble—provided he will furnish them with coats of good English broad cloth."

[Page 26]LET it however be supposed—that our petitions, with a resignation of the charter by the proprietors can not be called a surrender of our privileges, in strictness of law—and that the matter comes to be settled by the parliament.

HERE Mr. Galloway launches out on a flood of words.—Here he overwhelms me with his ‘irre­fragable demonstrations.’— ‘ ^* Will the king, lords and commons (says he) be the dupes of the ministry; and, without consideration— ^§§ without the least reason, in an instant pass a law— to blast our liberties—to ^† take away our rights, and ^‡ de­prive an affectionate people of a few privileges?’ ^‖ Will they act so black—so base—so unjust a part?

INCONSISTENCY! that would be astonishing in any man, but him who is the author of it!

HOW can the king and parliament be unjust, in sav­ing us from midnight gloom and fatal death? How can they blast those liberties "which are ^§ already lost?"— Take away our rights when ^¶ "security of life and es­tate is now become an empty name among us?" Or de­prive us of our privileges, ^‖‖ "which are long since swal­lowed up and sacrificed at the shrine of proprietary instruc­tions, and the measures of power, and so turn'd into "i­deal shadows"?

Cunning and cruel king! to strip thy subjects of that which they have not. ^** "Look history through", it cannot furnish an instance of such royal craft and unkindness, except that recorded by Sir Richard Blackmore, of an ancestor of prince Voltiger,

I will not pursue this point any farther. I will suppose in Mr. Galloway's favour, that what he calls his speech was so long, and took so much time in making, that he forgot in forming one part; what he had written in another.

To attend him still farther in his political rambles, for some respect is due, to be sure, to " ^* one of the happy instruments of relieving his country," and its " ^† long supporter," I will grant out of complaisance to him, in order to give his argument its fullest force, that he has told a great many falshoods—that we are not in the deplorable condition he has represented us— and that our liberties, rights and privileges which he has taken so much pains to blast, are still fresh and flourishing.

WHY then (says he) it will be unjust in the king and parliament to deprive us of them; and we have ^‡ "ir­refragable proofs" of the justice of the house of com­mons, because in the years 1718 and 1748, they would not pass an act to give royal instructions the force of laws in America."

THUS he concludes, that because the house of com­mons would not make the king absolute monarch of North-America, which would have been injurious to the rights of Great-Britain—THEREFORE they will not allow him to exercise in one province that authority, which he exercises in every other part of his domini­ons.— Truly, an uncommon, but not a very syl­logistical method, of arguing!

[Page 28]LET Mr. Galloway, when he shall be employed in "supporting the expiring liberties of his country," step into the British senate —and endeavour to convince them of this injustice.

WHEN he has made a speech for this purpose, suppose some unconverted member should thus address him— "Sir, we are perfectly satisfied in what rank we are to place your abilities—the "proofs are irrefraga­ble"—but as to the point you have insisted on, you do not seem to express yourself with clearness. You speak of an "impelling necessity to come under the king's immediate government,"—and yet you say it will be "unjust to bring you under it, on the same conditions with his other subjects." I should therefore be glad to have a short, plain answer to this question— Are the inhabitants of Pennsylvania more or less happy than the inhabitants of the royal governments?"

HOW will our deputy extricate himself from this di­lemma? If we are more happy, why do we desire a change—or why does Mr. Galloway talk of the "expiring liberties of his country?" If we are less happy— why do we dread it? Why are we unwil­ling to become in every respect like those who are hap­pier than ourselves? Or where is the injustice of placing us in the same situation?

BEFORE I quit this point, I must make one observa­tion more, to shew by Mr. Galloway's contradiction of himself (though I am almost tired with taking notice of his contradictions) that notwithstanding the rage with which he has asserted the contrary—he really thinks our privileges will be indangered, if the parlia­ment should take the change of our government into their consideration.

[Page 29]HE employs many pages to prove there is no danger, tho' the affair should come before the parliament.— Yet, speaking of a change in the case of an infant pro­prietor, he says— ^* "Is it to be by a parliamentary en­quiry, and an act of the British legislature, in conse­quence of such enquiry? If it is, the rights of the people may be involved in the enquiry, which the mode intended by the house is calculated to avoid. Hence it appears, that this period of all others, will be attended with most difficulty to the crown, and danger to out privileges."

THUS he acknowledges, that the house of assembly, in making the present attempt, have endeavoured to avoid a parliamentary enquiry, because the rights of the people would be involved in it, to the danger of our privi­leges.—

UPON the whole that has been said with regard to a change—and the safety or the danger of the mea­sure—I thus conclude.

IF it cannot be accomplished—the manner in which it has been attempted will load this province with new disgrace. If it is accomplished, we are utterly ignorant how it will be. The fate of our privileges, and the great points controverted between us and the proprie­tors, are now to be everlastingly determined. Many unhappy circumstances attend us in the enterprize.

HERE then I fix the argument. On this point I re­ly. Whatsoever may be the force of the reasonings on either side—however probable or improbable the success may be—yet after placing every thing in the strongest light against myself— it must be grant­ed—that the event is undoubtedly uncertain—and that the persons desiring a change know no more, what [Page 30] will be the consequences—than they know what will be the figure of next year's clouds.

A MEASURE in which the happiness of so many thou­sands is involved, ought not therefore to have been pur­sued in so hasty and unguarded a manner. Precautions should have been taken. Securities should have been obtained. This was— this is— my firm opinion— and should a change be happily obtained, without in­juring a single privilege, or settling a single point against us—should the conduct of the assembly and the people in this affair be intirely approved by his majesty and his ministers—I shall always rejoice— that I was not concerned in exposing the inestimable in­terests of my country to HAZARD.

I PROCEED to other points. Mr. Galloway takes great pains to prove, that the ^* "representatives of a people have a right to change the constitution, without the [Page 31] consent of the people"; because "almost every govern­ment in the civilized world, has been changed"— by force and injustice: Because "the revolution was brought about"— with such universal consent, that king William was established on the British throne, without fighting a battle: Because "the first frame of our government was altered"— being found impracticable, and that its ^* "pri­vileges could scarcely be exercised or enjoyed": Because "six parts in seven of the assembly, have a right to alter the charter,"— by a law with the Governors assent: Because he dignifies himself and those who join with him, with the title of "long supporters, and lovers of their coun­try"—and charges with great truth, to be sure, all who differ in opinion from them, "with being the friends of ar­bitrary power?"

IN the same striking method of arguing, he attempts to prove— that the petition for a change ought not to alarm a free people, because, "though it calls for a military establishment among us," yet this is only shewing our desire, that a military force may be fixed, which, "already is fixed:" Or in other words, "it is only discovering our hearty approbation of a disagreeable measure"—that " ^† a military establishment is already established" (to use his own words) because there are some soldiers in garrison at our advanced forts—for these he certainly means by the "military establishment already established," or nothing— that a military force in a de­pendant colony, lodged in the hands of the king, is less dangerous to liberty, than in the hands of a subject—that it is the strongest evidence of the prudence and public spi­rit of such a colony, to represent themselves as a sett of ruffians amongst whom there is no safety for men of vir­tue, nor any respect for government, but all things are involved in anarchy—and therefore humbly to [Page 32] pray, that his majesty will be pleased to send over some regiments to instruct them in the gentle lessons of duty and obedience—that this will not furnish a pretence to send over more regiments, than are desired—nor to make us pay for these blessings of swords and bayonets, which we have requested—or if these inconveniences should follow,— that they will be greatly overballanc­ed by the advantages of the civil war that would pro­bably ensue, if these troops should be employed, as Mr. Galloway would wish them to be.

THESE are his arguments, and the tendency of them, on these points. Arguments!—Yielding such ample room for the entertainment of the public, that I hope some gentleman who has more leisure than I have, will divert the world with the strictures upon them they deserve. I pass on to matters, in which I am more particularly concerned—I mean to an­swer those charges, which Mr. Galloway has made against me.

THE first of these, is, "that my late conduct has been influenced by a restless thirst after promotion; a fondness to serve the purposes of power, from an ex­pectation of being rewarded with posts of honour and profit."

IN answering such a charge as this, Mr. Galloway might perhaps have some advantage over me.

'TIS true, I cannot boast of being ^‡ a "long sup­porter of the rights of the people;" since it is but lately, that my youth has been favoured with any pu­blic marks of their approbation. I have not heated the minds of men with inflamatory harangues—and while they have been weakly wondering at my public [Page 33] spirit, found myself rewarded in gold, for the breath I have wasted. I have not every year since I have been a representative, given myself an office of profit—so far from it that I have not taken even a single farthing for my wages, during the whole time I have been in the Assembly, nor in my whole life touched a mite of public money. I have not enriched myself with a most lucrative post, torn from the old age of a worthy man, who was grey-headed, long before my birth. I have not, while the ^* "shop" was open for the sale of laws, and good substantial purchases might have been made— wasted the public wealth, in buying at an exorbitant price, those that would not last a twelve month. I have not lined my pockets, and the pockets of all my depen­dants, with the spoils of my country, infamously plun­dered in vile jobs, while with unbounded confidence she trusted her stores to my faith. I have not bought with the public money, commissions of judges in all the courts where I practise, for my most intimate friends. I have not attempted to abolish that sacred right of englishmen, the right of trial by a jury. I have not juggled in dirty cabals, about the offices of chief justice and attorney gene­ral—with competent salaries to be annexed to them. I have not taken raw councils in taverns, for regulating the conduct of Pennsylvania. In short I have not in all my public conduct had an eye to my private emolument— and therefore I have not the consolation to reflect, that I found this province in credit, and that while I have been druming—merely for her good, as I pretended—my interests have ^§ advanced, as her interests have declin'd, [Page 34] and that I am now possest by my popularity alone, of a considerable estate, while she is sunk into disgrace.

I CANNOT boast indeed of such exploits as these— and I sincerely pray, that my mind may be never taint­ed with the base ambiton of rising by sordid practices. No dignities can adorn his character, who has attained them by meaness.

With equal scorn do I behold him, who endeavours to recommend himself, either to men of power, or to the public, by flattering their passions or errors, and by forfeiting his honor and integerity.

THE good man who is guided through life by his conscience and reason, may in particular instances, offend even honest and wise men—but his virtue will naturally produce an uniformity in his conduct upon the whole, that will discover his probity, and procure him the general approbation of the worthy.

THESE sentiments perhaps may prove destructive to one, who designs to establish his reputation and felicity on the basis of a party— ^* since it is highly improba­ble, [Page 35] that any man will be long esteemed by a party, unless he is bound to it by PREJUDICES, as well as by PRINCI­PLES.

TO support the attrocious charge he has made against me, Mr. Galloway produces no kind of proof—except my differing in opinion from him, be proof. But if this be admitted, then Mr. Norris, Mr. Richardson, and the two other gentlemen who differed from him, are villains also, influenced by the same views, attributed to me.

THIS would be too daring a charge, and more diffi­cult perhaps for Mr. Galloway to support, than to crush by calumnies and conspiracies, a young man, who has excited more than one passion in more than one man's breast.

HAD I intended to recommend myself to the govern­ment, I certainly might have given the sentiments I [Page 36] delivered in the House, a more courtier-like air than they now bear. Had I intended this, I should not have been one of the first and warmest to declare my fixed resolution, not to admit of the governor's construction of the stipulation he disputed with us; nor should I have steadily persisted in this opposition to the last.

HAD I intended this, I should not have been the only man in the House, who constantly refused to assent to the supply bill, because the money emitted by it, was made a legal tender in payment of all demands "except proprietary rents,"—when that exception might have been safely extended (as was granted by the most dis­tinguished members) to the rents of all other persons— who would then have been as well secured as the proprietors, and a distinction in their favour alone, avoided.

ONE thing more I beg leave to mention, since Mr. Galloway compels me to speak of myself. I was ap­pointed to carry the bill to the governor the second time for his assent, after he had once refused it. This was long before the change of government was talked of. On my delivering it, some conversation arose between us on the subject, Mr. Shippen the secretary being present. As the passage of the bill was of the utmost importance to his majesty's service, and the good of the public, I took the liberty, though my acquaintance with the governor was very slight, of mentioning several reasons to prove, that the assembly's construction of the dis­puted stipulation was extremely equitable; consistent with the established rules of explaining a sentence capa­ble of two meanings; and therefore ought to be admit­ted—and that his honour's conduct in passing the bill, as it then was framed, would not be disapproved of in England. I further added, that I was perswaded, his refusal would throw every thing into the greatest confusion

[Page 37]BEING soon after taken ill, and confined to my room, so anxious was I to prevent any difference at that time between the governor and assembly, that I sent for a gentleman, whom I knew to be intimately acquainted with the governor; and urging every thing I could think of, to convince him that our bill ought to be passed as we had formed it, I intreated him to go to the governor, and endeavour to prevail on him to give his assent.

I HOPE this cannot be called the conduct of a man influenced by "mischievous passions destructive of pub­lic liberty."

ANOTHER charge brought against me by Mr. Galloway is, that I neglected my duty of attending in the House, and never spoke my sentiments till it was too late.

MR. Galloway's behaviour in making this charge, is a plain proof to what lengths he will proceed, in hopes of injuring me. The first time, since I have been a representative of this province, that a change of go­vernment was mentioned and debated in the assembly, was on Saturday the 24th day of March last, on the governor's sending down to them his message absolutely refusing to pass the supply bill, unless the stipulation was literally complied with. That day, the assembly's answer was composed and sent—"the frequent motions, with the solemn debate" Mr. Galloway talks of, made—the resolves past—and the House adjourned to the 14th of May.

MR. Galloway must be conscious, that this day, and the day before, I was confined to my chamber, and mostly to my bed, by a severe attack of the fever and ague. He knows, that on the Thursday before, I was so ill, that there not being a sufficient number of members [Page 38] without me, those who were met, intended to come and sit at my house; and that to save the gentlemen this trouble, I determined to wait on them, and was carried up in the late speaker's chariot, which he was so kind as to send for me, it being a rainy day.

THIS state of my health at that time, being a fact well known to many persons, and particularly to Mr. Galloway, how cruel and unjust is it to blame me for not attending, when it was impossible— and when, if it had been possible, I had not the least suspicion, that any thing of such vast importance would come into con­sideration.

ON the meeting of the House, the 14th day of last May, according to their adjournment, I constantly at­tended every day, untill this important matter was de­termined, except on Monday the 21st—on which day there was no House, only eighteen members meet­ing, Mr. Galloway and many others being absent. The following days, the petition for a change came in— were read—as other petitions were—lay on the table—and not a word spoken on the subject.

Thus business went on till Wednesday the 23d, when I was prevented for the first time from attending the House, by a fever—which, as it was very injurious to my health, would also, if Mr. Galloway's charitable and humane wishes could prevail, prove destructive to my reputation. This day the matter was started. In vain did the speaker recommend the deferring to take any resolution, till the House was more full—and the absent members then in town, could attend—He desired that the affair might be put off to the next day— in vain—the debate was begun—quickly de­termined —a committee appointed to prepare a draught of the petition—that draught made— brought in—presented—read—

[Page 39]THE next day, tho' still extremely indisposed, I at­tended—and was surprised to find so much business of the utmost consequence had been done in so short a time—and though I could have wished that such a step had not been taken, without allowing me, and every other member, of whose attendance there was any proba­bility, an opportunity of offering our sentiments; yet I comforted myself with reflecting, that though it had been resolved, "that a petition should be drawn," yet it was not resolved "that any petition should be present­ed," and that I should be at liberty to offer my opinion hereafter. I was determined therefore to attend dili­gently; and to take the first opportunity, which would be on the second reading of the petition, to oppose it. This I was induced to do, by considering, that if I did not say any thing, till the question was put for tran­scribing, or signing in order to be presented, it would look very odd for me to be silent so long, and that it would answer no purpose.

ACCORDINGLY, on the second reading of the petition, which was the first opportunity I ever had, since the change of government was attempted, I spoke against it.

THE only objection then made by Mr. Galloway and every other member who spoke on the occasion, was—that I had offered my sentiments too soon to the House—and that I should have staid for the question to transcribe or sign the petition.

THAT I did not act with any stupid and useless re­serve in lying by till this time, was never dreamt of by any member who knew, why I had been detained at home, whenever I was detained.

HOW vain is his attempt who strives to please all men? Or indeed to please one man at all times? Mr. Galloway [Page 40] and others then said, that I spoke too soon. He and some more now say, I spoke too late. Why too late? Were not my arguments as well understood then, and had they not the same force, as if they had been used be­fore? And if they proved the measure to be dangerous and improper, ought they not in a matter of such impor­tance to the public, to have been as much regarded, as if they were one day older?

IF this affair had not been so quickly decided, I never should have been charged with omitting to speak in time. But I must not quit Mr. Galloway. What must the public think of a man who dares to abuse them by the grossest deceptions, with the pious inten­tion of injuring another? He says "that during the time of the several debates respecting the change of go­vernment, I seldom attended, and was absent when the important one came on, which issued in the resolve, to adjourn and consult the people."

YET the candid Mr. Galloway knows—that there never was any debate in the assembly, since I have been a member, respecting the change of government— untill that which issued in the resolve to adjourn— and that I was then ill. Again, he says, "at the next meeting, (meaning that in May) several motions were made to bring this resolution to an issue, and after great deliberation, it was resolved by a majority of 27 to 3, that a committee should be appointed to bring in the petition to his majesty to resume the powers of go­vernment.—But at none of these debates and resolu­tions was I present, tho' I well knew, or at least had great reason to expect this business was in continual agita­tion."

YET the correct Mr. Galloway knows, that there ne­ver was a motion—or debate—or resolution, concern­ing [Page 41] this matter, upon the meeting of the house in May— untill Wednesday the 23d day of the month, when I was taken sick, as has been mentioned—and that I at­tended as diligently as himself till that day.

THIS Account of the time when every transaction passed in the house—and of my attendance, is taken from the minutes of assembly, and the book for entring the attendance of the members—both which I have carefully looked over, in the presence of Dr. Moore, the clerk, who therefore is perfectly acquainted with the truth of every thing I have averred.

ANOTHER charge against me is, that "I formed my thoughts into order, and reduced what I had to say, in­to writing, in an unparliamentary way."

I ACKNOWLEDGE myself guilty of taking some pains to put my thoughts into order, and that my notes were long and exact, that I might thereby be enabled to de­liver my sentiments with clearness. I regarded this as a duty, upon an occasion where such an interesting sub­ject was to be discussed—and I was encouraged to use this mode—because I once before had used it, and received such public praises from the present speaker, for introducing a method, highly commended, and the next day, imitated by him, as afforded me the sincerest pleasure—and I hope, will " ^* serve to console [Page 42] me, by ballancing the calumny with which I am load­ed, because I would not go THROUGH with measures," which my conscience and reason commanded me to op­pose.—A conduct! I am DETERMINED, whatever "moon" shines on me or "withdraws" her beams, up­on all occasions, STEADILY TO PURSUE.—And as its own reward is sufficient for me, I beg leave to restore to the gentleman's "brows," from which it ^* once fell, the "laurel'd" wreath, that unenvied, unsought and un­wished for by me, he has been pleased— with what design I will not presume to guess—to place upon mine.

MR. Galloway also accuses me of having promised him a copy of my speech, and of not performing my promise. Here he is egregiously mistaken. I told him he should have the copy that night it was delivered, if I could get it ready. The house broke up late in the evening. He soon after called upon me. It was not ready. He told me it would be too late, if he had it not soon. I did not then understand his meaning, as I did not in the least apprehend, the most important matter that ever came before the house of assembly, was to be decided with less deliberation than is generally bestowed on things of much slighter moment. Next morning I took the copy to the House in my pocket. No one called for it. I did the same in the afternoon. The like silence was observed. I did not chuse to shew any forwardness in forcing it on those, who seemed willing to forget it. Had I acted other­wise, I should have been called impudent and conceit­ed, by those who are fond of bestowing epithets.

MR. Galloway says, "that I attempted to deliver my objections against the measure ore tenus; but find­ing every thing I offered judiciously and sensibly refut­ed by several members, I was obliged to retreat to my [Page 43] speech in writing, which after a short introductory apo­logy, I read in a manner, not the most deliberate."

AS to the last part of this whimsical charge, I shall not pretend to give any answer; because that would be in some measure allowing Mr. Galloway capable of judging, what is a "deliberate manner" of speaking.

AS to the first part—any man but Mr. Galloway would have discovered why I began to speak, without recurring to my notes. The resolves were past— and the petition ordered to be drawn in my absence. I never had heard the change spoke of in the house— and did not know but by information of others, the reasons by which the members had been influenced. Before I offered my sentiments, it was therefore neces­sary for me to discover the arguments that would be used against me. On the information I had received, I had prepared my answer; but to make this answer appear with propriety, I thought it requisite to have the arguments of those who desired a change, repeated before the house. I threw out general objections, and desired to know what reasons could be tho't sufficient to engage the house in so hazardous a measure? Then the "judicious and sensible members" Mr. Galloway mentions, and he among them—for that phrase I suppose, is his way of complimenting himself—dis­covered all the arguments on which they relied.—They proved to be the same I expected; and I "retreated to my speech," which was prepared to answer them.

THE last objection made by Mr. Galloway, of which I shall take notice, is, "that the speech, as printed, is different from that delivered—and that the preface sufficiently demostrates, by whose hands it has been drest up, and with what views it has been published."

[Page 44]HERE he is again mistaken. The printed speech is exactly the same with that I pronounced, except the corrections, and additions I made to compleat the sense, the evening before it was to be delivered to the Mem­bers, as is above mentioned—and except some slight alterations in a few places. I further declare, that I have not received the least assistance from any person, in composing or correcting it; not even so much as the addition of a single word; and that no man ever saw it, or knew that I had written it, except my clerk, who transcribed it—untill it was delivered in the House.

AS to the preface, it makes no "demonstrations" that can affect me. Finding that Mr. Galloway and his emissaries were traducing me in every company, and misrepresenting every thing I had said—I thought these aspersions might be removed, by laying before the public, the reasons by which I had been induced to act as I did. This consideration had the more weight with me, on receiving a letter from some gentlemen in this city, desiring a copy of the speech.

THEY being my constituents—and men of the clearest characters, I thought it my duty to comply with their request. I sent a copy to them—and they had it printed with such a title, and in such a manner, as they thought proper, without ever consulting me; which could not conveniently be done as I was out of town.—For immediately after delivering the copy, I was obliged to go into the country for my health. I went to the Jerseys. While I was there, the preface was written, and printed. I never saw it.—I never was made acquainted with its contents, till it was published. I do not even know at this time who wrote it, but by common report.

[Page 45]EVERY thing I have said on these last heads, is known to be true, by my friends; whose virtue and good opinion I too much revere, to appeal to them as witnesses, if I was not conscious of the sincerity with which I speak.

THUS have I faithfully laid before the public, my whole conduct relating to the change of our govern­ment, and the reasons on which it was founded. If sensible and good men approve of my behaviour, I quit without regret the applauses of others, and all the attendant advantages, to those, who think proper to court them.