"OUR civil government (says an excellent English Writer) is happily placed between the two extremes of despotic power and popular licentiousness: it is wisely composed of such a due mixture of the several simple forms of government, those of one, of a few, and of many, as to retain as far as possible the advantages, and to ex­clude the inconveniencies, peculiar to each; and the parts are so nicely combined and adjusted, that the several powers co-operate and move on together in concert and agreement, mutually tempering, limiting, and restraining, yet at the same time aiding, support­ing, and strengthening each other."

This frame of government, for the admirable wis­dom of its structure, has always been the wonder of the world; and under its protection and mild influ­ence, the subjects of Great-Britain are the happiest people on earth. But of all the subjects of Great Britain, those who reside in the American Colonies have been, and, were they sensible of their own ad­vantages, might still be, by far the happiest: Sur­rounded with the blessings of peace, health, and ne­ver-failing plenty—enjoying the benefits of an equi­table and free constitution—secured by the protec­tion and patronage of the greatest maritime power in the world—and contributing, in but a small propor­tion, to the support of the necessary public expences.

[Page 4]Under these advantages, the colonies have hither­to flourished beyond example. They have become populous, both by natural increase and the yearly influx of foreigners, the sure indications of a happy country; and they have become rich, by practicing, at their case, the peaceful arts of agriculture and commerce. And were they to pursue the same path which has brought them thus far, there is no doubt but they would go on to flourish and prosper in the same proportion, till, in process of time, they would excite either the admiration or envy of the whole hu­man race. The advice therefore of MOSES to a peo­ple highly favoured of Heaven, is justly applicable to them; and nothing can be wanting to their hap­piness but hearts to follows it. ‘Only take heed to thyself, says he, and keep thy soul diligently, lest thou forget the things which thine eyes have seen, and lest they depart from thine heart, all the days of thy life.’

But a far different prospect, at this time, presents it­self to view. The darkness of a rising tempest is be­ginning to overspread our land. The thunder roars at a distance, and appears to be swiftly approaching. It is high time therefore to awaken the thoughtless to a sense of their danger, and to think of providing for our common safety.

There is, there can be, but one way to prevent the ruin that threatens us. Our own misconduct has brought it forward; and our immediate reformation must stop it progress. He must be blind, that is not convinced of this; and he must be infatuated, that will pursue the road, which evidently terminates in darkness and destruction.

[Page 5]Whether the British Parliament has been right or wrong in its late proceedings, towards the Colonies; our behaviour has been such as every government must and will think intolerable. If the supreme power of any kingdom or state, through want of due information or attention, should adopt measures that are wrong or oppressive, the subjects may complain and remonstrate against them in a respectful manner; but they are bound, by the laws of Heaven and Earth, not to behave undutifully, much more not to behave insolently and rebelliously. The bands of society would be dissolved, the harmony of the world con­founded, and the order of nature subverted, if re­verence, respect, and obedience, might be refused to those whom the constitution has vested with the high­est authority. The ill consequences of open disre­spect to government are so great, that no misconduct of the administration can justify or excuse it. The guilt of it is so aggravated, that Christians are requir­ed, under the heaviest penalty to avoid it, and to be subject to the higher powers, of whatever character, for conscience's sake. No tyrant was ever more despotic and cruel, than NERO, and no Court ever more cor­rupted than his; aod yet to the government of this cruel and despotic tyrant, and his corrupt ministry, peaceable submission was enjoined by an Apostle, who had a due regard for the rights and liberties of mankind. To disturb or threaten an established go­vernment, by popular insurrections and tumults, has always been consinered and treated, in every age and nation of the world, as an unpardonable crime; and were we the subjects of the Grand Turk, it is as cer­tain that we ought not to encourage such practices, as that St. Paul and St. Peter, who condemned them, were inspired men.

[Page 6]But my design is not to consider, how far the con­duct of the Colonies is, or is not, conformable to the rules and precepts of the Christian religion; but, how far it is to be condemned or justified by the maxims of sound policy and prudence. Our tem­poral interest and safety are considerations which all will regard, how much soever they may slight or de­spise the obligations of religion.

The voice of complaint, to call it no worse, is now heard through every corner of our land; and we are daily exhorted to prepare for the defence of our li­berties, and all that is sacred, with united efforts.— But before we proceed, it concerns us to be well in­formed, both as to our real danger, and the steps proper to be taken.

Were the Americans actually in a state of oppres­sion, it would shew their wisdom and prudence, to submit with patience to their present condition, rather than to provoke the power that oppresses them, without some fair prospect of obtaining relief. One degree of distress, in consequence or the weight of illegal power, is a grievance; ten degrees of distress are proportionably a greater evil; but bad as it is, he must be an idiot or a madman, who would not prefer them to twenty. But it appears to me that, of all people under Heaven, the King's subjects in America, have hitherto had the least ground for com­plaint; and that the present confusion of the Colo­nies has been occasioned by misinformations and false alarms. If none of our legal rights have been invad­ed, no injury has been done us; if we have not been injured, we have no room for complaint; and we can never be justified in resenting that, which it would be unreasonable to complain of.

[Page 7]My Friends, Countrymen, and Fellow Subjects! suffer, for a few minutes, an American, one who has often gloried in the title, who loves his country as much, and has as great a regard for its honour, as any of you, to reason and expostulate with you, in plain language, on a subject now of the highest im­portance, both to you and him.

You are taught to exclaim loudly against ‘the arbitrary proceedings of the British Parliament.’ But consider; wherein have they been arbitrary, and in what do you suffer? Why, it seems, ‘a duty of three pence a pound, has been laid, by Parliament, upon their teas exported to America; and we can­not purchase the tea, without paying the duty.’ But if this may be called a burden, so may the weight of an atom on the shoulders of a giant: Besides, this burden may be easily avoided; for we have no occa­sion to purchase the tea, and unless we purchase it, we are under no obligations to pay the duty.

You will say, ‘the Parliament had no right to lay the duty.’ But I suspect we are, most of us, but indifferent judges of the rights of Parliament; or however, the Parliament must act according to their own judgment, and not according to ours, if it be different from theirs. They assert, and believe, that they have the right in question; and we have never proved that they have not. Nay, we ourselves have always believed and allowed that they have it, till the present occasion. I might add, that we have always allowed that they had a right to regulate not only the trade, but all concerns of the Colonies; such a power they have always exercised, and we have submitted to their acts. Thus, for instance, we have paid a duty on wine and melasses, in obedience to Parliament, and without protestations or remonstran­ces; and, for the same reasons, we are as much ob­liged [Page 8] to pay the duty on tea. If we would act con­sistently, we should either refuse to pay the duty on wine and molasses, or consent to pay it on tea; for it is, in both cases, imposed from the same principle, and has the same effect.

Perhaps it will be replied, ‘These and all other duties ought to be rejected, because they are pre­cedents, and intended to prepare the way for high­er demands; and if Parliament has a right to take from us one penny, without our consent, it has a right to strip us of our whole property, and to make us absolute slaves.’

This, I believe, is the first time that a sovereign power has been in want of precedents, to justify its making laws to govern any part of its dominions. It is a contradiction in the nature of things, and as absurd as that a part should be greater than the whole, to suppose that the supreme legislative power of any Kingdom does not extend to the utmost bounds of that kingdom. If these Colonies, which originally belonged to England, are not now to be regulated and governed by the authority of Great Britain, then the consequences are plain; they are not dependant upon Great Britain—they are not included within its territories—they are no part of its dominions— the inhabitants are not English, they can have no claim to the privileges of Englishmen; they are, with regard to England, foreigners and aliens; nay, worse, as they have never been legally discharged from the duty they owed it, they are rebels and apo­states. On the above supposition, they are, at best; as much the dominions of Denmark or Russia, as of Great Britain; for there can be no difference in this case, unless one has an authority over them, which the others have not. But if Great Britain possesses [Page 9] a sovereignty over the Colonies, she certainly has a right, at least, to regulate our commerce; and espe­cially to regulate the importation of such articles of mere luxury, as we can choose whether we will be concerned with, or not, with but little inconvenience to ourselves. Now the present duty on tea is exactly such a regulation.

You allow that this duty is a thing that is but trifl­ing in itself; but then you conceit that you ought to oppose it, because it is a precedent, which hereafter may be used to your disadvantage. I am sorry to see that men can be so easily deluded by such sophistry. Can you imagine that Parliament will not do what­ever they think right to be done by them, without waiting for precedents? Yet precedents of their own for regulating the trade of the Colonies, are not wanting. Every reign, since the settlement of the Colonies has produced them; in consequence of which you are daily paying duties this, in every view, are as liable to exception, as the duty on tea. From hence it is evident, that you yourselves have no incli­nation to be governed by precedents, whatever regard the Parliament may be supposed to have for them.

As to the argument that, ‘If Parliament has a right to take from us one penny, without our con­sent, it has a right to strip us of our whole pro­perty,’ although so great a man as Mr. LOCKE was the father of it, it appears to me to be weak and so­phistical. A right to do what is reasonable, implies not a right to do what is unreasonable. A father may have a right over his son, so far as to send him on an errand, or upon any reasonable service, without hav­ing such an absolute authority as can oblige him to throw himself down a precipice, or to hang himself. In like manner, cases may happen, in which it would [Page 10] be reasonable for Parliament to take from us some small matter, though we were unwilling to part with it; but the case can hardly be supposed, in which it would be reasonable to take from us every thing, unless we should have forfeited it. Every society has a right to make a moderate use of its power over its own members, but not to abuse it.— There can be no right to do what is unquestionably wrong.

But you will say, it is wrong to tax us at all, with­out our consent. But the duty on tea, which has oc­casioned all our confusions, is not such a tax; for unless you consent to the tax, you are not to pay the duty. You may refuse it, if you please, without in­curring any penalty, or considerable inconvenience. As to such taxes as arise from the general regulation of American commerce, they must be imposed with­out our formal consent, if they are imposed at all. For if all the Colonies must be consulted, and all must agree, before such a regulation can take place; it is easy to foresee, that nothing of this kind can be es­tablished, as nothing can be proposed, in which all the Colonies, having each its peculiar views and interests, would be likely to agree. Therefore Great-Britain must either impose such duties upon our imports and exports, as may be thought proper for the good of the whole community, without our consent, or she must not attempt to regulate our trade; and if she is not to superintend and regulate our trade, she had better relinquish at once her claim of authority over her colonies; after which they cannot expect to enjoy her protection.

But you further object, that ‘if we are to be bound by laws to which we have never consented, we have not the rights of Englishmen.’ In answer [Page 11] to this, let me remind you, first of all, that it never was, nor can it be, the right of Englishmen to be ex­empted from the authority of an English or British Parliament. It is not a proper consent to the laws enacted by the British Parliament, but the being bound by those laws, that distinguishes a British sub­ject from a foreigner. So long as a man resides with­in any dominion, he is a subject of it, and is oblig­ed to submit to its laws, as far as they concern him, whether he approves of them or not. There are many people in England, who are natives of the country, that do not consent to acts of Parliament that are passed, unless by a bare fiction of the law; which can make a nominal consent, but not a real one. This is always the case of the Minority, where there is a division, whose votes are over-ruled by the major part; for the law necessarily passes, not only with­out, but contrary to, their consent.

Besides, there are millions of people residing in England, who have no votes in elections, and are ne­ver consulted about the expediency of laws. I hope these are all Englishmen, although they give no other consent to acts of Parliament to which they are bound to submit, than what is implied in their freely residing within the jurisdiction and protection of Parliament. In this sense, the Americans, by fixing themselves, and continuing to reside, within the Bri­tish dominions, consent to be governed by the British laws. When the Colonists first settled on English American ground, they well knew that the authority of Parliament was not to be suspended or withdrawn, in their favour; and they knew too, that they had no power of sending representatives to Parliament of their own choosing. On these terms they willingly settled here; and they have always enjoyed every [Page 12] advantage which they originally expected ro receive, and which was contracted for in their stipulation with the Crown, and they can have no just reason to complain on this account. Yet notwithstanding all this, they have been lately told by their agents, who had it from the best authority, that if they chose to send over persons to represent them in Parliament, they should be admitted to seats in the House. In my opinion, they have done wisely in not accepting of the offer; but after refusing it, they have surely no reason to complain, that they have no representatives in the Parliament that must govern them.

It has been frequently asserted, in justification of your claim, that, ‘as the charters granted by the Crown, have allowed a legislative authority to the several Colonies, the inhabitants are to be bound by no laws, but what are made by their respective provincial legislatures, to which they consent by representation.’ With regard to this doctrine, I beg leave only to ask a few questions. Can you be made to believe, that it was ever the intention of the Crown, to establish by charter a power of legislation, in any of the Colonies, that is sovereign, independent, and incontrolable by the supreme authority of the nation? Can you imagine, that in any instance, more than a subordinate right of jurisdiction was meant, for the internal regulation of the district mentioned in the charter; or conceive that such a grant can place you beyond the reach of parliamentary autho­rity? Would not, the arguments that perhaps have deceived you, prove as strongly, that the charter of the city of Albany, granting a power to make laws for its internal regulation, provided they are not con­trary to the laws of the Province, places the inhabi­tants of that city beyond the reach of laws made by the assembly of New-York?

[Page 13]You, one and all▪ talk of your rights by charter; but are not some of the Colonies without charters? And do all the charters convey exactly, the same privileges and rights? Do any of them say, that you shall not be bound by laws made in Great Britain? Nay, does not the charter of Pennsylvania say ex­pressly, that taxes may be laid upon the inhabitants by act of Parliament? None therefore have a right to plead their charters, in the present controversy, with the mother country, who reside in the colonies that are without charters, or in Pennsylvania; and it is high time for those who reside in the other colo­nies, to furnish some kind of evidence, that their charters give them the right for which they contend. They have not yet done this; they have not attempted to do it; I suspect they never will attempt it; and I challenge them to do it, if they can. You may have heard some of them declaim on this topic, and you may hear them again; but, if you expect the proof called for, you will be disappointed.

What has been offered is in order to shew, that, in reality, no proper right of the colonies is infringed by the late act of Parliament, that imposes a small duty on the teas exported to America. And here it is worthy of notice, and we ought to attend to it all along as we proceed, that the colonies of Rhode-Island, Connecticut, New-York, New-Jersey, Pennsyl­vania, Maryland, Virginia, the Carolinas and Georgia, are not affected by any other of the late acts of Parliament; and have no dispute of their own with the mother country, but what arises from the tea-act.

But let us now suppose, that we have been really injured by this act; and that our paying the duty would be dangerous to our constitutional liberties. [Page 14] On that supposition, which the Americans in general seem to have adopted as the true state of the case, the great question is,— What method the colonies ought in wisdom to pursue, in order to get rid of the duty?

Different measures have been already taken, in the different colonies, to avoid the operation of the act. In South-Carolina, the obnoxious tea was landed; but the inhabitants formed a resolution, to which they have the virtue punctually to adhere, not to pur­chase it. Happy would it have been for the colo­nies, if this measure had been universally taken! In that case, we should still have enjoyed tranquility, uninterrupted by seditious alarms; and the black cloud, charged with storm and thunder, that now darkens our land, would not have collected.

In most of the other colonies, the tea was not suffered to enter their ports; but it was sent back unhurt. This indeed, in all its circumstances, must be considered as a kind of insult upon government; but yet it was such a species of misbehaviour, as, in all probability, the nation would have overlooked, and many of the friends of America would have thought worthy of commendation. But, as the evil genius of the colonies would have it, the tea that was sent to Boston, was neither stored, nor sent back, but outrageously destroyed by the hands of violence.

Whatever may be thought of confining, or sending back the tea, there are but few people so abandoned to all sentiments of fitness, propriety, and justice, as to think the destruction of it excuse­able; and the government at home, as all govern­ments would in the like case, thought it unsuffera­ble.—It was soon determined, to inflict an exemplary punishment upon the town that was guilty of such [Page 15] shameful and flagrant injustice; and an act was passed, for shutting up the port of Boston, till pro­per satisfaction should be made for so provoking an outrage.

It is certain, that all the Americans are out of the reach of this act; that it was not intended to affect them; and therefore that they have nothing immediately to do with it, excepting the inhabitants of Boston themselves. Accordingly I should have passed it by, as foreign from our part of the dispute, had it not been voted by all our county and provin­cial COMMITTEES, to be dangerous to the liberties of the British colonies. For this reason I shall offer some observations on what appears to have been the policy of the act; which I shall address to those only, who are so reasonable and modest as to allow, that the tea ought not to have been destroyed.

If the conduct of the Bostonians, in destroying the tea, was criminal, it deserved punishment; and punishments should always be regulated by the na­ture and degree of the crimes for which they are inflicted, and the circumstances that attended the commission of them. Now the crime of the Bosto­nians was a compound of the grossest injury and insult. It was an act of the highest insolence towards government; such as mildness itself cannot overlook or forgive. The injustice of the deed was also most atrocious; as it was the destruction of pro­perty to a vast amount, when it was known that the nation was obliged in honor to protect it. At the same time it was very notorious, that the inten­tion of the perpetrators was, by this example to lead and excite others, when the expected opportunity should present, to the same wanton excess of riot and licentiousness. Under these circumstances, sound po­licy [Page 16] was thought to require, that both a severe and a speedy punishment should be inflicted—severe▪ that it might bear some proportion to the guilt; and speedy, that it might prevent the like mischief in other in­stances.

Many, I know, who admit that Boston ought to have been punished, yet exclaim loudly against the punishment decreed by Parliament, as being too severe in its manner: And if any other punishment had been inflicted, many of them, I dare say, would have exclaimed still. For when people are once disaffected towards an administration, whether with or without just reason, they will always find some pretence for blaming any measure that can be taken by it.

As to the severity of the punishment in question, it was no more than shutting up a port, till satis­faction should be made for a flagrant injury and insult, of which it had been guilty. While this re­straint was laid, a free use of all the neighbouring ports was allowed; so that no people but the inhabi­tants of the town of Boston were intended to be punished by this act; and a sufficient time was in­dulged them to remove all their vessels out of their harbour, that they might be usefully employed dur­ing the restraint of their port. And as soon as compensation should be made for the injury done, and a proper acknowledgment of the offence com­mitted, every appearance shews that government intended to be satisfied, and to remove the punish­ment. [...] provision was made, that, on such an event, the king might immediately suspend the ope­ration of the act, without waiting for the meeting, or the formal proceedings of the Parliament, which might require time. Surely none, who have as high [Page 17] a sense of public guilt, as of private, can think this punishment too severe for the crime, considered under all its aggravations. For, no people are en­titled to the use of any advantage, which they wan­tonly abuse to the injury of others.

An outcry is also made, that ‘the punishment of the Bostonians was hasty and precipitant, offering no alternative, and not suffering the party to be heard.’ It is freely confessed that, in common cases, none ought to be punished without a regular trial and conviction. But here the case was uncom­mon and extraordinary. The most essential rights of government were audaciously invaded—the crime was notorious and unquestionable—a regular trial must have been the work of time—and while this would be depending, it was imagined the evil would spread. Both the letter and spirit of the law had been openly insulted and defied, by the people in Boston; and, in such a case, the forms of the law, in bringing them back to a sense of their duty, when it was apprehended that the delay of punishment would be dangerous to the community, were thought to be dispensible. Such considerations indeed will not authorise a judge, or any court of justice, to pro­ceed in this compendious manner; but when a case comes before the whole legislative body, they have always the power to dispense with the ordinary forms, and to do what is conceived to be most conducive to the public safety. For, to use the words of the justly celebrated Dr. BLACKSTONE, ‘The bare idea of a state, without a power, somewhere vested, to alter every part of its laws, is the height of poli­tical absurdity.’

It is moreover objected, that ‘such a mode of punishment involves the innocent in the same cala­mity [Page 18] with the guilty.’ In answer to which, it is sufficient to observe, that this inconvenience must always attend all punishments inflicted on a people, whether by God or man, and necessarily arises from the condition of the world. There is no body of people so bad, but many innocent per­sons are intermixed with them. At the very worst, there is always a number of innocent children, who are connected with, and dependent upon, the proper delinquents. The consequence of which is, that no people, and commonly no individual, can possi­bly be punished, without hurting some innocent persons. The objection therefore, if it has any weight, will hold good against all public, and most private punishments, of what kind soever. In the town of Boston there are many innocent, worthy and respectable persons (many more than is commonly imagined) who are as free from the public guilt, and hold it in as much abomination, as any men within his Majesty's dominions. For their sake, more espe­cially, those who have the greatest regard for the ho­nor of government, wish that the punishment could have been avoided. But as this was politically im­possible, they must bear their own share, with pru­dence and patience, as well as they can,—enjoying a consciousness of their own innocence,—maintaining their integrity, ‘in the midst of a crooked and per­verse generation’ —and looking forward to that time, which I hope is not distant, when they may expect to be distinguished with such favours as the public can give.

The resolves of the above-mentioned committees al­so express, that their brethren in Boston, meaning the offenders against government, are to be considered ‘as suffering in the common cause of American [Page 19] liberty.’ But I hope the licentiousness of their be­haviour, is not avowed to be any part of the system of American liberty; and I should be extremely sorry to find, that the common cause of the colonies requires such defences as theirs. If a raving enthusiast, in order to promote the cause of American liberty, should take it in his head to assassinate his Prince, and afterwards should be punished for his treason; he might with equal propriety, be considered as suf­fering in the cause of American liberty. But, in that case, I believe no sober Americans would think themselves bound to abet the assassination; and for the same reasons, we are under no obligations to abet the destructive violence of the people in Boston, or to endeavor to skreen it from public justice. So far as they meant well, they ought to be commended; but so far as they did wrong, they ought to be con­demned. And we both expose ourselves, and injure our cause, by appearing to countenance their lawless and unwarrantable proceedings.

The same resolves also condemn, as oppressive and dangerous, the other act for altering the administration of justice in the Massachusetts-Bay; and it has been used as an instrument, in the hands of our popular incendiaries, for farther inflaming the minds of the Americans against the King and his Ministers. But it deserves notice, that the alteration made by the act, is rather an imaginary than a real evil. For it introduces into that province a regulation, which is far from being inconsistent with the happiness of the people; as it only reduces them to a form of pro­ceedings, under which the inhabitants of New-York and New-Jersey have been as happy as any people in America. Indeed it abridges them of some privi­leges that had been granted by charter. But no pri­vileges [Page 20] are curtailed by the act, but such as had been abused and forfeited over and over, and such as probably would continue to be abused, to the great injury and disturbance of that province, as well as to the dishonour and reproach of the nation. It is the opinion of the best friends to the rights of man­kind, that charters may be forfeited; and, it is a proof of the mildness, not of the rigour, of the administration, that the Massachusetts charter, after so many abuses and provocations, has not been to­tally vacated, rather than abridged.

Besides the two last-mentioned acts, there is a third, for settling the government of Quebec, which has been as successfully applied to the same noble purpose of enraging the Americans against the measures of government; and more lies and misre­presentations concerning this act have been circulated, than one would think malice and falsehood could invent. It is positively asserted, and generally be­lieved, on the evidence of positive assertions, that by this act the Popish religion is established, through­out the vast extent of country now subject to the government of Quebec; and that the Protestant re­ligion is there obliged to skulk in corners, not daring to lift up its head. Whereas, if we have recourse to the words of the act, we shall see, that the Popish religion is no more than tolerated within that domi­nion; which was one of the conditions on which the country surrendered itself to the crown of Great-Britian; and that a proper foundation is laid for the establishment of the Protestant religion, which is meant to take place. Tithes, which are the property of the tolerated Romish church in all the parishes, are indeed ordered to be paid, as formerly, to the minister of the parish; but the very moment a man [Page 21] declares himself a Protestant, he is freed, by the act, from the obligation to pay tithes to the Popish in­cumbent. In that case, it is provided, that ‘his Majesty, his heirs or successors, may make such provision out of the—accustomed dues and rights, for the encouragement of the Protestant religion, and for the maintenance of a Protestant clergy within the said province, as he or they shall, from time to time, think necessory and expedient.’ It is true, the Papists in Canada might have had a tole­ration less generous than is granted them, without the Parliament's allowing to the clergy their tithes, or to the parishes their churches. But such a tolera­tion, although it might have filled the letter of the articles of the treaty, would not have answered their expectations, nor have left upon their minds favourable impressions of the British justice and honor. If we had taken from them their churches, or stripped the clergy of their tithes, which might have been done with equal propriety, it would pro­bably have encreased the number of his Majesty's disaffected American subjects; which appears to be too great without them. And as to trials by juries, they are affirmed to be excluded by the act; but the assertion is groundless and false. Juries are no more excluded from Canada, than they are excluded from the other American colonies. They have never been established by act of Parliament in any of the colo­nies, excepting the late act for the regulation of the Massachusetts-Bay. They owe their being in America to acts of our provincial Assemblies, confirmed at ome; and the provincial legislature of Canada may introduce them as soon as they please, and it is ex­pected that they will, as soon as the inhabitants de­sire [Page 22] them, or the state of the country will admit of them. ^*

I have taken this notice of the three last acts re­lating to the colonies, in order to shew, that in them­selves they are not of so alarming a nature as has been represented, and that they wear not that tre­mendous aspect which our wild imaginations have given them. Two of them were meant as punish­ments for crimes against the state, and to make ex­amples of those who were considered as the greatest offenders, and from whose republican spirit a general mischief was apprehended. The design of the other act was to secure to a new colony the religious tole­ration it had a right to demand, and otherwise to ease the minds of a numerous body of people, whose behaviour towards government had been decent and unexceptionable since they owed it allegiance, and who were likely to prove his Majesty's most loyal and faithful subjects in his American dominions.

Notwithstanding all that has been suggested, and in spite of all that can be said, I am aware our poli­tical incendiaries will go on in their own way, and still contend, that these acts are tyrannical and arbi­trary, and threaten the destruction of American liberty. But if we would recollect ourselves, and attend a moment to the conduct and characters of these men, we should be convinced that no represen­tations [Page 23] of theirs are worthy of regard. For, in all their motions they discover themselves to be under the undue influence of prejudice and passion. Thro' this dark and misty medium every object appears to them under a violent distortion; and as thus distorted, they must describe it to others. No wonder then, that they put the very worst constructions upon, and assign the very worst motives for, all the proceed­ings of the British Parliament.

However, let us now suppose the truth and reality of the facts as stated by them; yet the inferences they intend, will by no means follow. Supposing Popery were actually established in Canada, on the request of the inhabitants; would it follow, that it was designed also to establish it in the other colonies, where the inhabitants are averse to it? Can any man, in his senses, believe this to be the design of Parlia­ment? Again: supposing the punishment inflicted on the Bostonians to be arbitrary and severe; yet those who are free from their guilt, and mean not to contract it, have no reason to fear the like punish­ment. ‘For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? Do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: for he is the mini­ster of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain; for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil.’ So far as we are innocent, we are safe; but if we undertake to justify or abet the crimes of others, we share in their guilt; and particularly, if we are fomenters of the sedition that rages in Boston, we must take the consequence.

[Page 24]But the Bostonians, you say, are over punished. If that be the case, they are intitled to our pity, and to our influence in obtaining a mitigation of their pu­nishment. But this can be no reason, for our put­ing ourselves in the same predicament with them, for making ourselves partners in their guilt, or for bringing upon ourselves a similar punishment. We must be fools to think of doing this; and if they desire us to do it, their modesty is like that of the fox in the fable, who, because he happened to have lost his own tail, requested of his brother foxes, that they would all suffer their tails to be cut off too. But the foxes had more wisdom than to comply; and so should we have. As the punishment of the Bostonians was designed to be local, and peculiar to them; we have no business to cause it to be ge­neral. Their case is not yet ours; and, God grant that it never may be!

The proper dispute subsisting between Great Bri­tain and any of her colonies, excepting that of the Massachusetts Bay, is only de Lana Caprina, about an act imposing a duty of three pence a pound upon tea. This is the only ground we have for complaining of the administration; and yet this has occasioned, throughout our colonies, such an indecent and vio­lent opposition to government as is truly astonish­ing. Can such behaviour on so slight a provocation, proceed from dutiful and loyal subjects? No; it is impossible. Whatever we may think, or say, of ourselves; if we had any true principles of loyalty, or any tolerable sense of the duty that is due to the supreme legislative power, under which the provi­dence of God, and our consent, have placed us, no trifling considerations could prevail with us to behave towards it in so petulent and disrespectful a [Page 25] manner. But there is two much reason to believe, that our minds are unprincipled, and our hearts disposed for rebellion. Ever since the reduction of Canada, we have been bloated with a vain opinion of our own power and importance. Our ease has pro­duced pride and wantonness. We have been intoxi­cated with such draughts of liberty, as our consti­tutions would not bear; and under this intoxication, we have conceited that all the privileges indulged us were the effects of fear. From thinking, we have proceeded to speaking, disrespectfully of our mother country; and our language now is— ‘It is contrary to reason and nature that the petty island of Bri­tain should govern, and give laws to the exten­sive and mighty regions of America.’

Yet whatever time may produce, at present the petty island of Britain is able to govern ten such Americas as this, if she will exert her power. But she wishes by lenity and forbearance and indulgence (I will venture to use these words, notwithstanding her demand of a duty of three pence a pound upon her tea, if we see fit to make use of it) I say, she wishes by lenity, forbearance and indulgence to se­cure our affections, and to render us sensible, that our greatest political happiness must arise from her smiles and fostering protection. We should be fully con­vinced of this, were it not for our ignorance, and want of consideration; and willing to confess it, were it not for our pride. But if we determine to deny her authority, or to question her right to command us; she will prove to the world, and bring us to con­fess, that though she is ancient, she is not superan­nuated or exhausted; and that she still possesses the spirit and vigour that have animated her best years.

[Page 26]Were she only to do nothing, but barely to leave the Colonies to themselves with their jarring prin­ciples, and interests, and projects; we should soon see province waging war against province, and our country would be involved in such misery and distress as are beyond all our present conceptions. Should it be known abroad that Great-Britain had withdrawn her protection, and would no longer interest herself in our preservation and safety; within the compass of one year our sea ports would be ravaged, and our vessels plundered or seized as soon as they left our harbours. We should therefore soon feel the neces­sity of purchasing the protection of some maritime power, and on terms not of our proposing, but of theirs; and which could never be able to secure us against any hostile attempts of Great-Britain, should she see fit to make any; while she maintains that Empire of the sea which she now holds, and of which all the Maritime powers of the world are un­able to dispossess her.

But replies the ignorant and deluded American: ‘Notwithstanding all that can be said of the naval strength of Great-Britain, it is asserted by our patriotic leaders, and we have reason to think, that these colonies, of themselves, are able to withstand all her force.’ The judgmnet of Hea­ven visibly appears in this dreadful infatuation. It was but a few years ago, that we believed, and found by experience, that the colonies were unable to with­stand the militia of Canada, supported by a few regiments of regular troops from France. That this was the general opinion, most of us may remember; and it is evident from the messages that passed between Governor SHIRLEY and the House of Representa­tives of Boston, from the address of the assembly of [Page 27] Virginia to the King at the beginning of the late war, and from many other authentic documents of that period. The Colonies then humbly and ardently implored that Great-Britain would speedily step in to their rescue, and preserve them from a destruction that threatened to overwhelm them. Their prayers were soon heard; and what was the consequence we all know. The strong bulwarks and fortresses of Canada were stormed, and the country conquered by the discipline and invincible bravery of but a small part of the British troops.

There is no room to doubt but such an army as was employed in the reduction of Canada would be more than sufficient for the conquest of all the dis­affected American Colonies, should such a resolution become necessary in order to reduce them to obedience. For they are open and accessable on every quarter, and have not a single fortress to cover them, nor one regiment of regular troops to defend them; and they are without military stores, without magazines, and without the skill that is necessary for supporting an army. Under such circumstances what would the boasted numbers of our inhabitants avail us against an attack from Great-Britain? If an army was sent in upon us, which a body of forty thousand of our militia was unable to withstand (for it is impossible that a greater number of undisciplined men could act to advantage) it would be able to carry desolati­on thro' the whole country; and all the men in the Colonies were they firmly united, would not be able to oppose it. But yet if the army here supposed, should be found unequal to the design of reducing the Colonies, Great-Britain could send of her own trops a second, of equal strength to the assistance of the first; to these she could add a third of Ilessians, [Page 28] a fourth of Hanoverians, and so on till the work were compleated. She could easily take possession of all our sea-coasts where our wealth is principally seated, and force us to fly into the back parts of the country for immediate safety. There an army of Canadians might be ordered to meet us, and unnumbered tribes of savages might be let loose upon us at the same time, while our lands would lie uncultivated, our stores exhausted, our families unsheltered, and those that happened to escape the sword, glittering and flaming both in the front and rear of our settlements, would soon perish by sickness or famine.

All that is here mentioned Great-Britain is able to do; and all this I believe she would do, should she be obliged to enter into a war with the Colonies— provided the Americans had resolution and firmness enough (for so some would call it) to hold out to such extremity. But I am too well acquainted with their character to expect that they would prove thus obstinate in the day of trial. When they come to find that on their side there can be no prospect of victory, but that every day must deepen their distress and render their condition worse and worse; their natural understandings will return to them, and ir­resistibly plead the necessity of a submission as soon as possible. In that case happy would it be for them if they could be considered only as conquered enemies; but alas! they must be viewed in the light of van­quished rebels, and treated accordingly. Their leaders must be given up into the executioner's hands; con­fiscations of their estates forfeited by rebellion, must follow, and all must be left at the mercy of ther vanquishers. When one people is conquered by another in war, private property is restored to its former possessors; but when rebellions are crushed, the most to be expected is, that the lives of those that belong to the lower classes will be spared.

[Page 29]To this wretched and accursed state of rebellion, the principles that have been propagated, and several steps that have been taken in the American Colonies directly tend. Nay a rebellion is evidently commenced in New-England, in the county of Suffolk, without room for retreating. The inhabitants of that large and populous county have openly bid defiance to the united authority of the King, Lords and Com­mons assembled in Parliament; they have most con­temptuously rejected the regulations of their courts of justice, &c. established by Parliament; and not only so, but they have set up in direct opposition to their authority, a government of their own. In the spirit of outrageous licentiousness, they have com­pelled by brutal violence, those respectable gentlemen that held Commissions under the Crown, to resign them in forms of their own inditing, and to relin­quish their stations; and they have appointed others of the same factious and turbulent disposition with themselves to fill their places, till their long-projected Republic ² shall be settled, which is the glorious ob­ject. They have already if we may believe credible [Page 30] information, marked out the inland town of Worcester for the seat of this Republic, they are now collecting an artillery for its defence, and some of them have nominated the man who is to be their PROTECTOR.

Whether this be so or not, it appears from au­thentic intelligence, dated Boston September 27th, that [Page 31] they have done as bad. ^* For the SELECT MEN and the COMMITTEE of CORRESPONDENCE have pro­claimed the King's troops to be public ENEMIES, and declared to Mr. SCOT that he DESERVED immediate DEATH, for selling warlike stores to them; and the people actually did assemble to put THIS sentence in execution, but Mr. SCOT was so fortunate as to make his escape. And besides this the King's General and Governor farther complains of their continual acts of hostility. ‘Orders, says he, are given to prevent all supplies for English troops: Straw purchased for their use is daily burnt, vessels with bricks sunk, carts with wood overturned, and thus even the King's property is destroyed in every manner in which it can be effected.’ And he justly observes that all this is ‘not the effect of rash tumult, but of evident system.’

Now these rebellious Republicans, these hair­brained fanaticks, as mad and distracted as the ANABAPTISTS OF MUNSTER, are the people whom the American Colonies wish to support! It seems to be a mark of judicial infatuation inflicted on us by the righteous judgment of Almighty God, that we of the other Colonies can think of espousing such a cause, and of risquing every thing that is dear, against such inexpressible odds—in support of a scheme which all of us, but a few Presbyterians and Independents, in our hours of reflection, if we have any, must despise and abhor.

The hopes of all moderate and considerate persons among us, whose numbers I believe are not small, were long fixed upon the general American Congress. They imagined it to be the business and design of [Page 32] this grand COMMITTEE OF COMMITTEES to find out some way consistent with our claims for obtaining the restoration of our common tranquility, and a happy reconciliation of Great-Britain to her colonies. The known character of some Gentlemen appointed as Delegates, and the supposed character of most of the others, led us to expect from them all that we wanted; and to believe that the united wisdom of the Ameircans would shine in full splendor at the Congress, and that the prudence and policy of the Counsels there taken would be such, as would have done honor to an assembly of the greatest sages of antiquity. But—the poor Americans are doomed to disappointment. The first discovery of the senti­ments of the Congress was shocking. Every thing was kept secret for some weeks, and we flattered ourselves with hoping for the best. But when the news arrived at Philadelphia, that the people of SUFFOLK had OPENLY REVOLTED FROM THEIR AL­LEGIANCE to the King and his government; in a sudden transport of joy, the veil of the Congress was drawn back, and a mystery revealed that filled the minds of many with surprize and astonishment; the mystery was, that the Gentlemen of the Congress, in whom we consided as the faithful guardians of the safety, as well as rights of America, were disposed to enter into a league offensive and defensive, with its worst enemies the New-England and other Presbyterian Republicans. This fact is notorious to the world; it neither can be denied nor palliated; for they hastily and eagerly published, (and it was the first thing that they did publish) their cordial approbation of the Suffolk Resolves for erecting an Independent Go­vernment in New-England; and recommended to the Americans the support of those measures with united [Page 33] efforts. From that time every moderate man among us has despaired of seeing any good produced by the Congress; and from that time every thing that was bad has been growing worse.

Friends, Countrymen and Fellow-Subjects! let me entreat you to rouse up at last from your slumber, and to open your eyes to the danger that surrounds you—the danger of your being hurried into a state of rebellion before you are aware of it, and of suf­fering all that resentment which a mighty nation can discharge upon a defenceless people. Whether Great-Britain did right or not, in imposing the duty on tea, and whether we pay it or not, are matters of trifling consequence: But whether we shall bring down upon our own heads the full weight of her vengeance, and undergo all the horrors of a civil war, or not, are matters of dreadful importance to us. If you persist in the steps which many of you have taken; and especially if you go on to encourage the New-England fanaticks to attack the King's troops, whenever they can meet them; the time cannot be distant, in which both you and they will be legally proclaimed Rebels and Traitors—they as principals, and you as their abettors. You may still profess yourselves to be his Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, as you did in your late RESOLVES, and as the leaders in the grand rebellion of 1641 did, in their messages to the King immediately after the battle of Edge-Hill, where they had fought against him in person; but this will not skreen you from vengeance. No: HAVOC will be the cry; and the dogs of war will be let loose to tear out your vitals. Then, if not before then, the Daemon of discord will rise to distract you. Brother must fight against [Page 34] brother, and friend against the friend of his bosom. In short, the country that is now "fair as Eden," will become a field of blood, overspread with deso­lation and slaughter. I tremble, and my blood retires to my heart at the prospect of such amazing anguish and misery. The sun and the moon begin already to be darkened, and the stars to withdraw their shin­ing. O, all-pitying Heaven! Preserve me! Preserve my friends! Preserve my country!

If we are now upon the brink of a horrid civil war, and there be no hopes of relief from the wis­dom, prudence and good temper of the Congress, there can be but one way of safety left; which is, that we all endeavour to see with our own eyes, and make use of our own understandings, and resume the liberty of thinking, and speaking, and acting for ourselves. Let us then like men of sense, sit down calmly and count the cost, in the first place, before we under­take to finish the work proposed to us. Let us con­sider, before we proceed farther and get more deeply embarrassed, whether we are able to go through with our enterprize against Great-Britain, or not: And, I am persuaded, it will soon appear to be impossible.

What then remains to be done? Our blessed Saviour, for our instruction, supposes a case, in which the in­equality of strength was not comparable with ours, and tells us how common sense would determine. ‘What King, says he, going to make war against another King, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand? Or else, while the other is a great way off, he send­eth an ambassage, and desireth conditions of peace. ^*’

[Page 35]Here one independent state is supposed to be at war with another; but, upon conviction of the superior power of its antagonist, instead of rushing on to de­struction, it proposes a treaty of accomodation, upon such conditions as the situation of affairs would admit of, and as speedily as possible. This divine parable instructs us, that when it appears that we are not able, without the utmost hazard, to go forward with any warlike design, the only way is to retreat from it as soon as we can, and secure to ourselves such ad­vantages as may be still in our power. This would shew our wisdom and discretion, were our cause allowed to be ever so just, and had we no peculiar connection with the power we were disposed to con­tend with. For it is an eternal maxim, which holds in all cases, that a less evil is to be chosen, when it frees us from a greater. But in our case, where the justice of our cause is at best but doubtful; and when the power to be opposed is that, which has cherished us in its bosom, and kindly protected us from our earliest infancy—which we have always heretofore acknowledged our obligations to obey—to which many of us have solemnly sworn allegiance—and which has seldom thwarted our inclinations at all, and never but in matters of comparatively trifling consequence:—In this case, I say, the necessity of such accommodating measures strikes us with still more irresistible evidence.

If those who have been most active among us, in raising seditious tumults, and in filling the country with distraction, will not be persuaded, by the fore­going considerations to recede, it is hoped that others will; and it would be no small point gained, in favor of the Colonies, if those who are friends to order and government, and enemies to the riots and [Page 36] disturbances of abusive mobs, would assume the cou­rage openly to declare their sentiments. All those who are still loyal to their sovereign, should do the same. His Majesty's good subjects of the town of Rye, ^* to their lasting honor, have set the example. Not only their names, but their numbers, are very respectable; and, were the example to be followed, through all the towns and districts of our several Colonies, I doubt not but it would appear, to the confusion of some among us, that, in every province, there are more than seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee, and who will not bow it, to the Baal of independency. And I now congratulate all such on the pleasure of finding, from the information of Gentlemen of unquestionable veracity, that the Re­solves from Georgia were far from expressing the sense of the inhabitants of that grateful and loyal Province; but that they were framed only by a company of hot-headed fellows, met together in a tavern. ^†

I will only observe farther on this subject, that all who have the courage now to declare themselves friends to Government, will undoubtedly think them­selves bound in honor, interest and conscience to resort to the King's Standard, when it comes to be erected in our different Colonies, should that melan­cholly event happen; and these, of themselves, will compose a body, which, in a good cause, will be for­midable to its opposers But many thousands of others, and indeed the greater part of those who shall not have rendered their cases desperate, when they see the danger thus nearly approaching, and the storm ready to burst, will be glad to fly for shelter [Page 37] too to the Royal standard, if human nature continues the same that it ever has been; and they will be zealous to signalize themselves in the King's service, in order to render unquestionable that loyalty which was formerly suspicious. It is morally certain that, in the day of trial, a large majority of the Ameri­cans will heartily unite with the King's troops, in re­ducing America to order. Our violent republicans will then find themselves deserted by thousands and thousands in whom they now confide; and inexpres­sibly dreadful must be their disappointment. ‘O! that they were wise, that they understood this, that they would consider their LATTER END!’

I shall say no more on the supposed case of our waging WAR AGAINST THE KING, and entering into a STATE OF REBELLION; the thoughts of which, all sober men, and all conscientious men, and all who prefer the good of their country to the gratification of their own obstinate humors, must reject with horror.

But another scheme is proposed, at first view less shocking, which also appears to be recommended by the Congress, and which many at present are inclined to adopt; I mean, a general non-importation agreement throughout the Colonies. Against a proposal of this nature I have two objections to offer: Namely, that it will greatly distress a country which I love; and that it will not answer the purpose.

In order (N. B.) to get rid of a duty of three pence a pound on tea, it is proposed to stop all importation from Great-Britain, and even from the West-India Islands, till the act imposing it shall be repealed. But a remedy of this kind is ten thousand times worse than the disease. It is, for the wisdom of it, like cutting off an arm, in order to get rid of a small sore in one of the fingers.

[Page 38]On a late trial of non-importation from Great-Britain only, as soon as the stores of English goods began to be exhausted, every family among us ex­perienced such inconveniences and difficulties, as produced a general murmur and complaint. For although the articles imported from England are not absolutely necessary to support animal life; yet it was found that the civilized life we had been used to, and which is necessary to the happiness of all but savages, depended, in no small degree, upon our importations from Great-Britain. And had the non-importation continued much longer, it would have excited in­surrections in most parts of the country.

But a non-importation from the West Indies would still more tenderly affect us. For to say nothing of Rum or of Melasses for the use of our distilleries, without which more than a hundred thousand Ame­rican dram-drinkers would soon be clamorous; the want of the single article Sugar would distress every family upon this Continent. For this, in the quantity that is necessary, we could find no sufficient substitute: The hardened juice of our Maple, where it could be had, would be but a sorry one; and as to Honey, we all know its use; and were our stock of it ever so large, it would prove but a bad sweetner of the bitter draught of a non-importation.

Here then it is proposed, that, to the non-importa­tion which we have experienced and could hardly bear, another should be added, that would affect us still worse; and that a double weight should be fastened upon those shoulders, which were ready to give way under a single one. But this is not the worst of the case. It is generally believed, and inti­mations from England have confirmed the opinion, that if the Colonies should resolve to import nothing [Page 39] from Great-Britain and the West-Indies, they will not be suffered to import from any other quarter—not even the salt that is necessary to cure their winter's provisions, or to season their porridge: And besides this, that an absolute non-exportation will be ordered, and not a single vessel suffered to go out of our har­bours. Such an order, we know, can effectually be executed, with the greatest case. It is but command­ing the several Custom-Houses to grant no clearan­ces; and then every vessel that offered to sail, would be a lawful seizure. A few of the King's frigates would be sufficient to do the business, for all the Co­lonies on the Continent. Two or three of them sta­tioned at the Capes of Virginia, would command every vessel belonging to the ports, and to the fine navi­gable rivers, of Virginia and Maryland. As many sta­tioned at the Capes of Delaware, would secure Penn­sylvania and West-Jersey—and so of the rest.

Now a total stagnation of all foreign commerce, would at once place us in a glorious and blessed state. In the first place, all that live by this commerce would be thrown out of employ. Our sailors would be turned ashore; our ships would rot in our harbours; and our estates, which consist of wharfs or ware­houses, would become as worthless, as those of the same nature are at present in the town of Boston. Our ship-builders, and their attendants, their smiths, carmen, &c. with all that are employed in the business of cor­dage and rigging, must be immediately discharged. The numerous body pilots and boatmen must be turned adrift. Nor would it fare much better with our shop-keepers and merchants, whose families are supported by the profits arising from their respective occupations. The expensive business of all our iron-works must stop; and the many thousands which they [Page 40] provide for, must, unprincipled as those wretches commonly are, be let loose upon the country, to get their living as they can.

Now all these classes of people, and many others which I have not enumerated, must have a support, and but few of them will be able to support them­selves; and if their poverty is not relieved to their satisfaction, they will soon learn to carve for them­selves. There are but few parishes and counties among us, which have not complained of the burthen of their own poor. But what will they say, when the burthen comes to be encreased an hundred fold, as it necessarily must; when a general non-importation and non-exportation takes place; and all their wonted resources fail them at the same time. The want of the money, of which we have been lately drained, in order to pamper the Boston fanaticks, will then be severely felt: Nor can we expect any return of assist­ance in our distress from that Province, as their sufferings will be much greater than ours.

In the Province of the Massachusetts-Bay, there is a large number of populous sea-port towns, which have no other support than their fishery. The town of Gloucester has three hundred schooners employed in that service, with a proportionable number of hands. In the town of Marblehead there are supposed to be near four thousand men, and many of them with families, that know of no other means of subsistence than the cod-fishery. I might mention Plymouth, Salem, Beverly and a number of other towns, that are nearly in the same situation. Now, when all these fishermen are turned ashore, and their vessels become useless; they must, with their unprovided families disperse themselves amongst the inhabitants, and while the country affords any thing to eat, they will not starve.

[Page 41]But to return to these Colonies. I have mentioned the distress that must immediately overwhelm many orders of people, on a general stagnation of com­merce; but have said nothing of our Farmers, or those that live by the cultivation of their lands.— These may think themselves a kind of privileged per­sons, and imagine that such a revolution of affairs will affect them but little; yet a very short experience will open their eyes, and convince them of the con­trary. It is their farms, as all other resources will fail, that must support all the abovementioned thou­sands of distressed people. Who must furnish them with food? None can do it, but, THE FARMERS. Who must supply them with cloathing? THE FAR­MERS. Who must shelter many of them in their Houses? THE FARMERS. And can they expect pay for all this? Alas! those poor creatures will have nothing to make payment with. And if they are employed as labourers, they are all unacquainted with the Business; and their labour will turn to but little account. Indeed, were the markets abroad open, the farmer might somewhat increase the quan­tity of his beef, his wheat and other produce, by their means, so that his bargain would be less into­lerable. But the foreign consumption, on which he is now growing rich, will entirely cease; and there will be no demand for his beef, and his wheat and other produce. All that he raises must perish on his hands, except what he expends in his own family, and on the poor that will be pressing upon him.

When all people are thus distressed; when every mind is uneasy and discontented; it will be natural for them to fall to reproaching one another, with be­ing the authors of this general calamity. This will be productive of eternal quarrels, and riots, and dis­turbances, [Page 42] and acts of violence, amongst ourselves, and then our misery will be compleat.

Yet after all, were it likely that these political ago­nies and convulsions would produce a repeal of the act in dispute, it would be some alleviation of our misfortunes to consider, that we should gain by them Three pence a pound, on all the tea we should have occasion to purchase. But my second objection against a general non-importation agreement is, that it will not answer the purpose.

After what has been said and done by the Colonies, a general non-importation agreement will be consider­ed by Great-Britain as an act of hostility, intended to compel her to relinquish her claim; and she will not submit to be conquered by such weapons, any more than by force of arms. It is not pretended that she is altogether invulnerable in this part. The blow would reach her, and be felt by her; but the wound would not be mortal. The strength and vigour of her constitution would bear much more, than we are able to inflict. But—the shaft, ungraciously aimed at the vitals of our Mother, on the rebound may prove fatal to ourselves.

A total stagnation of commerce would affect Great Britain, in much the same manner, that it would affect her colonies, or any other commercial people; that is, it would rob her of her subsistance. But a partial stagnation could not affect her in the same manner that we should be affected by a total stag­nation. Now, the non-importation in question, while it would cause a total stagnation of our com­merce, would produce no more than a partial stagna­tion of hers; and consequently would not place her in a situation so distressing, as it would place us. Her trade is not confined to her American Colonies. [Page 43] She has ships and factories in every quarter of the Globe; and the treasures of the East and West are perpetually flowing in upon her. She receives no necessary or useful articles from these Colonies, but what she formerly received, and may at any time be supplied with, from foreign nations. Her manufac­tures that are consumed in the Colonies, she can shortly find ways to dispose of at other markets.

There is one branch of this hopeful project, that will contribute immediately and directly to the ad­vantage of Great-Britain, almost in the same propor­tion that it will distress ourselves. The Reader scarce­ly needs to be told, that what is here meant is the stopping all intercourse and communication between the colonies and the West-Indies. As soon as this takes place, the markets of Great Britain will be supplied, not only with the quantity of Goods from the West-Indies which they have formerly received, but with the addition of all that is now consumed in the American Colonies. The British merchants will likewise have the advantage of supplying the Islands with many articles, which at present are not scored in any of their invoices.

The West-Indians themselves indeed may be some­what injured and disconcerted at first, by the execu­tion of this part of the plan; but far less, than seems to be generally expected and intended by us. The Island of Jamaica can supply her Planters with all kinds of provisions, but butter and flour; and with all the lumber that may be required, for a hundred years to come, excepting staves and heading for their R [...]m Puncheons. These she has often received from Hamburgh, from whence she might receive them again. But their will be no occasion for sending so far. Ca­nada can supply her, and all the other Islands, with [Page 44] these articles, as well as with flour, in any quantity that may be ordered; to say nothing of Georgia and the two Floridas, which abound in common lumber, at the service of the Windward, Leeward, and Caribbe [...] Islands. So that after the first year, new channels may be opened, plans formed, and correspondences settled, in such a manner, that the West-Indies may be nearly as well supplied without our assistance, as they now are with it, and with some articles, perhaps better.

But supposing the contrary; yet what should we gain by this curious bargain? Why the ill-will and resentment of all the West-Indians. For some years past, they have cultivated a peculiar friendship with the North-American Colonies, and proposed to them­selves much happiness from a closer alliance.

They have sent hither their children, in large numbers, for their education; and many of them have brought over their families, and liberally spent the incomes of their estates among us. But when they find that, we can so ingeniously contrive schemes to distress them without benefiting ourselves; as they are generally not wanting in spirit, they will be apt to resent such ill usage, by withdrawing their sons and their families from among us, and perhaps by break­ing off all further connection with us in the way of commerce.

From what has been said, it will naturally be con­cluded, that by a general non-importation agreement we shall carry on a very unequal warfare with Great Britain; which will much sooner compel us to yield, than her to comply. The want of her North-Ame­rican trade may hurt her, but it will not reduce her to extremity; and, if I may judge from my own feel­ings, nothing but the utmost extremity will induce [Page 45] her, where she believes she has right of her side, and where her honour is deeply at stake, to give up the point in dispute.

At the time of our former non-importation, the case was materially different. The Stamp-act was so contrary to all our ideas of American rights, and so much was offered against the policy of the act, both here and at home, that there was no difficulty in re­pealing it. Afterwards when we exclaimed against the duties imposed upon paper, glass, &c. and agreed not to import the several articles loaded with duties; our views were comparatively moderate, and we had a large body of friends in England to support us. And were the proposition now only not to import, or to consume, the tea that is charged with the duty; the case would be the same that it was then—we should have the same friends that we then had—and the duty would probably be removed, on the same principle that those duties then were. But our con­duct now is so wild and distracted—our tumults and disorders are carried to so unreasonable and unwar­rantable a length—nay, such a spirit of rebellion has broke forth among us, and such a determined enmity against the supremacy of Great-Britain now predomi­nates in the Colonies, that we have hardly a single friend remaining in England. Even the Manafactu­rers join with all other orders of people, in condem­ning our extravagance; and, which is still more, the Writers and Speakers against the King's ministry, allow that it is inexcusable.

It appears, therefore, that nothing will be likely to procure a repeal of the Tea-act, or the removal of any other grievances of the like kind, but, the resto­ration of peace and order amongst ourselves—a can­did acknowledgment of our political errors and of­fences [Page 46] —a formal allowance of the rightful supremacy in general, of Great-Britain, over the American Co­lonies—a declaration of our aversion to a state of in­depency, with a corresponding behaviour—a respect­ful remonstrance on the subject of taxation—an as­surance of our willingness to contribute, in some equitable proportion, towards defraying the public expences—and the proposal of a reasonable plan for a general American constitution. This, it is hum­bly conceived, was to have been the business of the Congress; and if they have acted upon these princi­ples, and with such views, not only the present, but all future generations, would call them blessed.

Notwithstanding all unfavorable symptoms and appearances, I would not presume to form a final judgment of the Congress, till their whole plan of proceedings shall be known. It is possible, that all that has been wrong may be rectified in the end; and that moderate and wise measures, tending to restore the tranquility, the happiness, the honour and safety of the Colonies, may at last be concerted. Should this appear, in the general result of their councils, the members will be intitled to the greatful respect of every American, and the mistakes made in the former part of their proceedings ought never to be mentioned to their disadvantage. But, on the other hand, should it appear, that they mean to encourage acts of hostility against Great-Britain, or to support the madmen of New-England in their scheme of an Independent Republic: in that case, I affirm, that the Original Contract between them and the most respectable part of their constituants will be dissolved—that we shall be at full liberty to consult our own safety, in the manner we shall think most conducive to that end— and that we shall owe them no greater respect and [Page 47] obedience, than they themselves pay to the British Parliament.

The foregoing considerations are addessed—not to those obstinate, hot-headed Zealots, who are at the bottom of all our confusions; for arguments would be as much wasted upon them, as upon men that are intoxicated with liquor—but to all reasonable Americans, to those who are still in the exercise of their understandings, and whose minds are open to con­viction. People of this character, it is presumed, will see the necessity of giving up the present system of American politics, as essentially wrong and destruc­tive; and of entering unanimously upon moderate and conciliating measures, as they regard the resto­ration of peace and tranquility in this, heretofore, happy country.

The great object in view, should be a general American constitution, on a free and generous Plan, worthy of Great-Britain to give, and of the colonies to receive. This is now become necessary to the mutual interest and honor, both of the Parent Kingdom and its American offspring. Such an establishment is only to be attained by decent, can­did and respectful application; and not by compul­sion or threatning. To think of succeeding by force of arms, or by starving the nation into compliance, is a proof of shameful ignorance, pride and stupidi­ty. All such projects must operate ten times more forceably against ourselves, than against Great-Britain. They are, at best, but Penny wise, and Pound foolish; and therefore inconsistent with every maxim of sound wisdom and genuine Patriotism.

All violent opposition to lawful authority partakes of the nature of rebellion; and a rebellion of the Co­lonies, whether it should prove successful or unsuc­cessful, [Page 48] would necessarily terminate in ruin and de­struction. We are now in the utmost danger of be­ing hurried, before we are sensible of it, into this desperate and dreadful state ^*, when most of us think that we have grievances to complain of, in conse­quence of the exercise of unconstitutional power; and when many are practicing every wicked art to seduce us from our allegiance. It therefore highly concerns us to be upon our guard, at such a criti­cal season as this. A small decree of reflection would covince us, that the grievances in question, supposing them to be real, are, at most, no more than a just ground for decent remonstrance, but not a sufficient reason for forcible resistance. These two [Page 49] things are widely and essentially different; and if we mistake one for the other, the consequence may be fatal.

It has been fully shewn, that a rebellion of the colonies can have no reasonable prospect of succeeding; and that it must prove the destruction of all that are concerned in it. But sup­posing that [...] were likely to succeed, it is of the utmost impor­tance to consider, what we should gain by it; which would be, after the desolation of our country, and the sacrifice of thou­sands of lives, an exemption from the authority of the British Parliament, and subjection to the authority of an American re­public. A blessed exchange this! especially if we take into the account the character of our future masters. The principal authority in the republic; and these are men, whose tyrannical conducters of the rebellion, would naturally have the principal usurpation would be more oppressive, than the scorpion power of the most despotic Prince in Europe. There would be no peace in the colonies, till we all submitted to the republican zea­lots and bigots of New-England; whose tender mercies, when they had power in their hands, have been ever cruel, towards all that presumed to differ from them in matters either of religi­on or government.

As soon therefore, as people of this stamp come to be in pos­session of an established authority, which would be the case should the rebellion succeed, the dire effects of their persecuting, and intolerant spirit will be dismally felt by all that shall have cou­rage to dissent; particularly, the members of the Church of England, the Friends or people called Quakers, the Baptists, those that belong to the German and Dutch Churches, and the moderate and candid part of the Presbyterians themselves. All these classes of people then, by promoting the present scheme for an independent government, are absurdly acting against their own interest and honour, and contributing to prepare yokes for their own necks.

O my infatuated Countrymen! My deluded Fellow-Subjects, and Fellow Christians! Open your Eyes, I entreat you; awake from your dreams, and regard your own safety!

As to you, who are members of the Church of England; it is amazing, that any of you should be so blind to your own in­terests, and such apostates from common sense, as to counte­nance and co-operate with a plan of proceedings, which, if it succeeds, will at once distress and disgrace you. You are en­deavouring to provide arms for your enemies, and to put power into the hands of those who will use it against you. You are setting up a sort of people for your masters, whose principles you despise, and who were always fond of subduing by the iron [Page 50] rod of oppression, all those, whose principles or sentiments, were different from their own. Their inveterate enmity to the Church of England, has polluted the annals of the British history. Their intolerance in England, towards the members of the Church, when the sovereign power was usurped by them, is recorded in characters of Blood; and the same spirit was dreadfully trium­phant in New-England, from the first settlement of the coun­try, till the mild disposition of Parliamentary power interposed to restrain it. In 1629, they banished and transported even some of the original patantees of New-England, who were men of abilities and of a respectable character, merely because they discovered them to be Churchmen, declaring to them as they sent them off, that NEW-ENGLAND was NO PLACE FOR SUCH AS THEY ^*. Their descendents, who inherit their principles, are the very persons that will govern you, if the projected re­volution should take place. As they have now broke loose from the authority of Parliament, which for some time past restrained them from mischief, they begin to appear in their natural co­lours. They have already resumed the old work of persecuting the Church of England, by every method in their power. The members of it are daily misrepresented, insulted and abu­sed by them; and they have lately driven several of its clergy from their parishes and families, which are left in a state that is truly deplorable.

The pretence indeed is, that the members of the Church in New-England are thus roughly treated, on account of their political, and not of their religious principles. But, Good God▪ is there to be no liberty of the press, no liberty of speaking, no liberty even of thinking, on political subjects, where those re­publicans have the ascendant? This is despotism with a ven­geance; and such as we must be all fools if we voluntarily sub­mit to. Nor will the case be at all better, with regard to re­ligion. For it is a truth, which the history, of all ages con­firms, that those who will distress men on account of their politi­cal principles, will not scruple to persecute them for the sake of their religious principles, when they have it in their power.

You then, who are members of the Church of England, must ronounce your principles relating both to religion and govern­ment, or you can expect no quarter under the administration of such intemperate zealots. You must cease to be Churchmen, [Page 51] or become victims of their intolerance. Indeed it must be con­fessed, and I am sorry to say, that many of you appear already to have renounced one half of your principles; or you could not proceed, as you do, in direct opposition to the established rules and doctrines of the Church. The principles of submis­sion and obedience to lawful authority, are as inseperable from a sound, genuine member of the Church of England, as any reli­gious principles whatever. This Church has always been famed and respected for its loyalty, and its regard to order and government. Its annals have been never stained with the history of plots and conspiracies, treasons and rebellions. Its members are instructed in their duty to government, by Three Homilies on Obedience, and six against Rebellion, which are so many standing lessons to secure their fidelity. They are also taught to pray in the Litany, that the Almighty would preserve them, "from all sedition, privy conspiracy and Rebellion." And more than one solemn office is provided, for the annual commemoration of former deliverances from the Power of those, whether Papists or Protestants, ‘who turn religion into rebel­lion, and faith into faction.’ But if you regard none of these things, you are untoward, undutiful, and degenerate sons of the Church; and she will be ashamed to own you for her Children.

However, even those of you who are but half-principled in the doctrines of the Church, will be looked upon with an evil eye, under the intended republic; and they must give up the other moiety of their principles, before they can be secure against harm or molestation. The Church of England has always been the great obstacle in the way of those republican fanaticks; and when once they are established, no appearance of a Church man will escape their resentment, or be tolerated among them.

Nor will it fare better with the Friends, or people called Quakers; however peaceable in their disposition, or however use­ful members of society. What they formerly suffered in New-England under the same sort of men that must and will govern this country, if it should be withdrawn from the Jurisdiction of the British parliament, is too well known, and can never be forgotten. You▪ my respected friends, have experienced the genuine spirit and temper of their authority; and you can never wish to have your necks again encumbered with that Presbyte­rian yoke of bondage, which neither you nor your fathers were able to bear. On the other hand, you have the sense to see, and the gratitude to confess, that you have been happy un­der the relief and protection afforded you by the King and Par­liament, in common with other good subjects. You will there­fore [Page 52] remember (to use your own expressive language) "that, as under divine Providence, you are indebted to the King and his royal ancestors, for the continued favour of enjoying your religious liberties, you are under deep obligations (on this oc­casion) to manifest your loyalty and fidelity; and to discou­rage every attempt which may be made by any, to excite dis­affection, or disrespect to him."

The Baptists have never had fair quarter allowed them by the demagogues of New-England; and they are perpetually complaining, from year to year, of the acts of oppression and violence with which they are harassed by them. Now if the people of New-England have been thus intolerant, towards those that differed from them only with regard to the case of baptism, while they possessed an authority that was subordi­nate to the British Parliament; what cruelty, towards all that dissent from them, may be expected, should they be armed with absolute and incontrolable power?

As to the Germans and Dutch, to whose industry and good behaviour the Colonies are greatly indebted; if they should be­come subject to the jurisdiction abovementioned, they will be considered as persons, not only of a different religion, but of different nations and languages, from whom they have such an aversion, that they have never admitted them to settle in New-England; and consequently all the Colonists who are of a foreign growth or extraction, must expect to meet with double portion of rancour and severity from their new masters.

Nor can the moderate part of the Presbyterians, and Congrega­tionalists themselves, have any prospect of continuing free from molestation under their government. Nothing can be more odious to bigots, then generosity and candour; or more intole­rable in the opinion of the furious, than moderation and meek­ness. This assertion might be supported by the history of all ages and nations; but we need not go far for a confirmation of it. For among the Presbyterians and independents in the Co­lonies, when the meek and the moderate, the candid and gene­rous have been brought before the tribunals of the bigotted and furious, as has frequently happened; they have been treated with as much unrelenting rancour and roughness, as if they had been Mahometans and Heathens. So that there is no chance or pro­bability, if the latter should come to the possession of despotic power, which is the aim of the revolution they propose; that their dispensation, towards the former, would be less cruel than they commonly have been.

[Page 53]In a word; no order or denomination of men amongst us would enjoy liberty or safety, if su [...]cted to the fiery genius of a New-England Republican Government; the little finger of which we should soon experience to be heavier than the loins of Parlia­ment. This has sometimes chastised us with whips, when we de­served punishment; but that would torment us with scorpions, whether we deserved it or not.