Part 4
"When we review a performance well written, and founded upon laudable principles, if we do not restrain ourselves to a general approbation, which may be given in few words, the article will unavoidably contain more from the author of it, than from ourselves; this, if any excuse is needful for enabling our Readers, in some measure, to judge for themselves, is pleaded as an apology for our copious extracts from these excellent letters. To conclude; if _reason_ is to decide between us and our colonies, in the affairs here controverted, our Author, whose name the advertisements inform us is Dickenson,[7] will not perhaps easily meet with a satisfactory refutation."
[7] Of Pennsylvania. See his dispute with Mr. Galloway, Review, vol. xxxii. p. 67.
LETTERS
FROM
A FARMER.
LETTERS
FROM
A FARMER in _Pennsylvania_,
To the INHABITANTS
OF THE
BRITISH COLONIES.
BOSTON:
PRINTED BY MEIN AND FLEEMING, AND TO BE SOLD BY JOHN MEIN, AT THE LONDON BOOK-STORE, NORTH-SIDE OF KING-STREET. M DCC LXVIII.
LETTERS
FROM
A FARMER.
LETTER I.
_My Dear Countrymen_,
I am a farmer, settled after a variety of fortunes, near the banks, of the river _Delaware_, in the province of _Pennsylvania_. I received a liberal education, and have been engaged in the busy scenes of life: But am now convinced, that a man may be as happy without bustle, as with it. My farm is small, my servants are few, and good; I have a little money at interest; I wish for no more: my employment in my own affairs is easy; and with a contented grateful mind, I am compleating the number of days allotted to me by divine goodness.
Being master of my time, I spend a good deal of it in a library, which I think the most valuable part of my small estate; and being acquainted with two or three gentlemen of abilities and learning, who honour me with their friendship, I believe I have acquired a greater share of knowledge in history, and the laws and constitution of my country, than is generally attained by men of my class, many of them not being so fortunate as I have been in the opportunities of getting information.
From infancy I was taught to love humanity and liberty. Inquiry and experience have since confirmed my reverence for the lessons then given me, by convincing me more fully of their truth and excellence. Benevolence towards mankind excites wishes for their welfare, and such wishes endear the means of fulfilling them. Those can be found in liberty alone, and therefore her sacred cause ought to be espoused by every man, on every occasion, to the utmost of his power: as a charitable but poor person does not withhold his _mite_, because he cannot relieve _all_ the distresses of the miserable, so let not any honest man suppress his sentiments concerning freedom, however small their influence is likely to be. Perhaps he may "[8]touch some wheel" that will have an effect greater than he expects.
[8] POPE.
These being my sentiments, I am encouraged to offer to you, my countrymen, my thoughts on some late transactions, that in my opinion are of the utmost importance to you. Conscious of my defects, I have waited some time, in expectation of seeing the subject treated by persons much better qualified for the task; but being therein disappointed, and apprehensive that longer delays will be injurious, I venture at length to request the attention of the public, praying only for one thing,--that is that these lines may be _read_ with the same zeal for the happiness of British America, with which they were _wrote_.
With a good deal of surprise I have observed, that little notice has been taken of an act of parliament, as injurious in its principle to the liberties of these colonies, as the STAMP-ACT was: I mean the act for suspending the legislation of New-York.
The assembly of that government complied with a former act of parliament, requiring certain provisions to be made for the troops in America, in every particular, I think, except the articles of salt, pepper, and vinegar. In my opinion they acted imprudently, considering all circumstances, in not complying so far, as would have given satisfaction, as several colonies did: but my dislike of their conduct in that instance, has not blinded me so much, that I cannot plainly perceive, that they have been punished in a manner pernicious to American freedom, and justly alarming to all the colonies.
If the BRITISH PARLIAMENT has a legal authority to order, that we shall furnish a single article for the troops here, and to compel obedience to that order; they have the same right to order us to supply those troops with arms, cloaths, and every necessary, and to compel obedience to that order also; in short, to lay _any burdens_ they please upon us. What is this but _taxing_ us at a _certain sum_, and leaving to us only the _manner_ of raising it? How is this mode more tolerable than the STAMP ACT? Would that act have appeared more pleasing to AMERICANS, if being ordered thereby to raise the sum total of the taxes, the mighty privilege had been left to them, of saying how much should be paid for an instrument of writing on paper, and how much for another on parchment?
An act of parliament commanding us to do a certain thing, if it has any validity, is a tax upon us for the expence that accrues in complying with it, and for this reason, I believe, every colony on the continent, that chose to give a mark of their respect for GREAT-BRITAIN, in complying with the act relating to the troops, cautiously avoided the mention of that act, lest their conduct should be attributed to its supposed obligation.
The matter being thus stated, the assembly of _New-York_ either had, or had not a right to refuse submission to that act. If they had, and I imagine no AMERICAN will say, they had not, then the parliament had no _right_ to compel them to execute it.--If they had not _that right_, they had _no right_ to punish them for not executing it; and therefore had _no right_ to suspend their legislation, which is a punishment. In fact, if the people of _New-York_ cannot be legally taxed but by their own representatives, they cannot be legally deprived of the privileges of making laws, only for insisting on that exclusive privilege of taxation. If they may be legally deprived in such a case of the privilege of making laws, why may they not, with equal reason, be deprived of every other privilege? Or why may not every colony be treated in the same manner, when any of them shall dare to deny their assent to any impositions that shall be directed? Or what signifies the repeal of the STAMP-ACT, if these colonies are to lose their _other_ privileges, by not tamely surrendering that of _taxation_?
There is one consideration arising from this suspicion, which is not generally attended to, but shews its importance very clearly. It was not _necessary_ that this suspension should be caused by an act of parliament. The crown might have restrained the governor of _New-York_, even from calling the assembly together, by its prerogative in the royal governments. This step, I suppose, would have been taken, if the conduct of the assembly of _New-York_, had been regarded as an act of disobedience _to the crown alone_: but it is regarded as an act of "disobedience to the authority of the BRITISH LEGISLATURE." This gives the suspension a consequence vastly more affecting. It is a parliamentary assertion of the _supreme authority_ of the _British legislature_ over these colonies in _the part of taxation_; and is intended to COMPEL _New-York_ unto a submission to that authority. It seems therefore to me as much a violation of the liberty of the people of that province, and consequently of all these colonies, as if the parliament had sent a number of regiments to be quartered upon them till they should comply. For it is evident, that the suspension is meant as a compulsion; and the _method_ of compelling is totally indifferent. It is indeed probable, that the sight of red coats, and the beating of drums would have been most alarming, because people are generally more influenced by their eyes and ears than by their reason: But whoever seriously considers the matter, must perceive, that a dreadful stroke is aimed at the liberty of these colonies: For the cause of _one_ is the cause of _all_. If the parliament may lawfully deprive _New-York_ of any of its rights, it may deprive any, or all the other colonies of their rights; and nothing can possibly so much encourage such attempts, as a mutual inattention to the interest of each other. _To divide, and thus to destroy_, is the first political maxim in attacking those who are powerful by their union. He certainly is not a wise man, who folds his arms and reposeth himself at home, seeing with unconcern the flames that have invaded his neighbour's house, without any endeavours to extinguish them. When Mr. _Hampden's_ ship-money cause, for three shillings and four-pence, was tried, all the people of _England_, with anxious expectation, interested themselves in the important decision; and when the slightest point touching the freedom of a single colony is agitated, I earnestly wish, that all the rest may with equal ardour support their sister. Very much may be said on this subject, but I hope, more at present is unnecessary.
With concern I have observed that two assemblies of this province have sat and adjourned, without taking any notice of this act. It may perhaps be asked, what would have been proper for them to do? I am by no means fond of inflammatory measures. I detest them.----I should be sorry that any thing should be done which might justly displease our sovereign or our mother-country. But a firm, modest exertion of a free spirit, should never be wanting on public occasions. It appears to me, that it would have been sufficient for the assembly, to have ordered our agents to represent to the King's ministers, their sense of the suspending act, and to pray for its repeal. Thus we should have borne our testimony against it; and might therefore reasonably expect that on a like occasion, we might receive the same assistance from the other colonies.
"_Concordia res parvæ crescunt._" Small things grow great by concord.--
A FARMER.
LETTER II.
_Beloved Countrymen_,
There is another late act of parliament, which seems to me to be as destructive to the liberty of these colonies, as that inserted in my last letter; that is, the act for granting the duties on paper, glass, &c. It appears to me to be unconstitutional.
The parliament unquestionably possesses a legal authority to _regulate_ the trade of _Great-Britain_, and all its colonies. Such an authority is essential to the relation between a mother country and its colonies; and necessary for the common good of all. He, who considers these provinces as states distinct from the _British Empire_, has very slender notions of _justice_ or of _their interests_. We are but parts of _a whole_; and therefore there must exist a power somewhere, to preside, and preserve the connection in due order. This power is lodged in the parliament; and we are as much dependant on _Great-Britain_, as a perfectly free people can be on another.
I have looked over every _statute_ relating to these colonies, from their first settlement to this time; and I find every one of them founded on this principle, till the STAMP-ACT administration[9]. _All before_ are calculated to preserve or promote a mutually beneficial intercourse between the several constituent parts of the empire; and though many of them imposed duties on trade, yet those duties were always imposed _with design_ to restrain the commerce of one part, that was injurious to another, and thus to promote the general welfare. The raising a revenue thereby was never intended. Thus, the king by his judges in his courts of justice, imposes fines, which all together amount to a considerable sum, and contribute to the support of government: but this is merely a consequence arising from restrictions, which only meant to keep peace, and prevent confusion; and surely a man would argue very loosely, who should conclude from hence, that the King has a right to levy money in general upon his subjects; Never did the _British parliament_, till the period abovementioned, think of imposing duties in America FOR THE PURPOSE OF RAISING A REVENUE. Mr. _Greenville's_ sagacity first introduced this language, in the preamble to the 4th of Geo. III. Ch. 15, which has these words--"And whereas it is just and necessary that a REVENUE BE RAISED IN YOUR MAJESTY'S SAID DOMINIONS IN AMERICA, _for defraying the expences of defending, protecting and securing the same_: We your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, THE COMMONS OF GREAT BRITAIN, in parliament assembled, being desirous to make some provision in the present session of parliament, towards raising the said revenue in America, have resolved to give and grant unto your Majesty the several rates and duties herein after mentioned," &c.
[9] For the satisfaction of the reader, recitals from former acts of parliament relating to these colonies are added. By comparing these with the modern acts, he will perceive their great difference in expression and intention.
The 12th Cha. II Chap. 18, which forms the foundation of the laws relating to our trade, by enacting that certain productions of the colonies shall be carried to England only, and that no goods shall be imported from the plantations but in ships belonging to England, Ireland, Wales, Berwick, or the Plantations, &c. begins thus: "For the increase of shipping, and encouragement of the navigation of this nation, wherein, under the good providence and protection of God, the wealth, safety, and strength of this kingdom is so much concerned," &c.
The 15th Cha. II. Chap. 7. enforcing the same regulation, assigns these reasons for it. "In regard to his Majesty's plantations, beyond the seas, are inhabited and peopled by his subjects of this his kingdom of England; for the maintaining a greater correspondence and kindness between them, and keeping them in a firmer dependence upon it, and rendering them yet more beneficial and advantageous unto it, in the further employment and increase of English shipping and seamen, vent of English woolen, and other manufactures and commodities, rendering the navigation to and from the same more safe and cheap, and making this kingdom a staple, not only of the commodities of those plantations, but also of the commodities of other countries and places for the supplying of them; and it being the usage of other nations to keep their plantations trade to themselves," &c.
The 25th Cha. II. Chap. 7, made expressly "for the better securing the plantation trade," which imposes duties on certain commodities exported from one colony to another, mentions this last for imposing them: "Whereas by one act passed in the 12th year of your Majesty's reign, intitled, an act for encouragement of shipping and navigation, and by several other laws, passed since that time, it is permitted to ship, &c. sugars, tobacco, &c. of the growth, &c. of any of your Majesty's plantations in America &c. from the places of their growth, &c. to any other of your Majesty's plantations in those parts, &c. and that without paying of custom for the same, either at the lading or unlading the said commodities, by means whereof the trade and navigation in those commodities from one plantation to another is greatly encreased, and the inhabitants of divers of those colonies, not contenting themselves with being supplied with those commodities for their own use, free from all customs (while the subjects of this your kingdom of England have paid great customs and impositions for what of them hath been spent here) but, contrary to the express letter of the aforesaid laws, have brought into diverse parts of Europe great quantities thereof, and do also vend great quantities thereof to the shipping of other nations, who bring them into divers parts of Europe, to the great hurt and diminution of your Majesty's customs, and of the trade and navigation of this your kingdom; for the prevention thereof, &c."
The 7th and 8th Will. III. Chap. 21, intitled, "An act for preventing frauds, and regulating abuses in the plantation trade," recites that, "notwithstanding diverse acts, &c. great abuses are daily committed, to the prejudice of the English navigation, and the loss of a great part of the plantation trade to this kingdom, by the artifice and cunning of ill disposed persons: for remedy whereof, &c. And whereas in some of his Majesty's American plantations, a doubt or misconstruction has arisen upon the before mentioned acts, made in the 25th year of the reign of Charles II. whereby certain duties are laid upon the commodities therein enumerated (which by law may be transported from one plantation to another, for the supplying of each others wants) as if the same were, by the payment of those duties in one plantation, discharged from giving the securities intended by the aforesaid acts, made in the 12th, 22d and 23d years of the reign of King Charles II. and consequently be at liberty to go to any foreign market in Europe," &c.
The 6th Anne, Chap. 37, reciting the advancement of trade, &c. and encouragement of ships of war, &c. grants to the captors the property of all prizes carried into America, subject to such customs and duties, &c. as if the same had been first imported into any part of Great-Britain, and from thence exported, &c.
This was a gift to persons acting under commissions from the crown, and therefore it was reasonable that the terms prescribed should be complied with----more especially as the payment of such duties was intended to give a preference to the productions of the British colonies, over those of other colonies. However, being found inconvenient to the colonies, about four years afterwards, this act was, for that reason, so far repealed, by another act "all prize goods, imported into any part of Great-Britain, from any of the plantations, were liable to such duties only in Great-Britain, as in case they had been of the growth and produce of the plantations," &c.
The 6th Geo. II. Chap. 13, which imposes duties on foreign rum, sugar and molasses, imported into the colonies, shews the reason thus.--"Whereas the welfare and prosperity of your Majesty's sugar colonies in America, are of the greatest consequence and importance to the trade, navigation and strength of this kingdom; and whereas the planters of the said sugar colonies, have of late years fallen under such great discouragements that they are unable to improve or carry on the sugar trade, upon an equal footing with the foreign sugar colonies, without some advantage and relief be given to them from Great-Britain: For remedy whereof, and for the good and welfare of your Majesty's subjects," &c.
The 29th Geo. II. Chap. 26. and the 1st Geo. III. Chap. 9, which contains 6th Geo. II. Chap. 13, declare, that the said act hath, by experience, been found useful and beneficial, &c. There are all the most considerable statutes relating to the commerce of the colonies; and it is thought to be utterly unnecessary to add any observations to these extracts, to prove that they were all intended solely as regulations of trade.
A few months after came the _Stamp-act_, which reciting this, proceeds in the same strange mode of expression, thus--"And whereas it is just and necessary, that provision be made FOR RAISING A FURTHER REVENUE WITHIN YOUR MAJESTY'S DOMINIONS IN AMERICA, towards defraying the said expences, we your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the COMMONS OF GREAT-BRITAIN, &c. GIVE and GRANT," &c. as before.
The last act, granting duties upon paper, &c. carefully pursues these modern precedents. The preamble is, "Whereas it is expedient that a revenue should be raised in your Majesty's dominions in America, for making a more certain and adequate provision for the defraying the charge of the administration of justice, and the support of civil government in such provinces, where it shall be found necessary; and towards the further defraying the expences of defending, protecting and securing the said dominions, we your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the COMMONS OF GREAT-BRITAIN, &c. give and grant," &c. as before.
Here we may observe an authority _expressly_ claimed to impose duties on these colonies; not for the regulation of trade; not for the preservation or promotion of a mutually beneficial intercourse between the several constituent parts of the empire, heretofore the _sole objects_ of parliamentary institutions; _but for the single purpose of levying money upon us_.
This I call an[10] innovation; and a most dangerous innovation. It may perhaps be objected, that _Great-Britain_ has a right to lay what duties she pleases upon her[11] exports, and it makes no difference to us, whether they are paid here or there.
[10] It is worthy observation how quickly subsidies, granted in forms usual and accustomable (tho' heavy) are borne; such a power hath use and custom. On the other side, what discontentment and disturbances subsidies formed on new moulds do raise (such an inbred hatred novelty doth hatch) is evident by examples of former times. Lord Coke's 2d institute, p. 33.
[11] Some people, whose minds seem incapable of uniting two ideas, think that Great-Britain has the same right to impose duties on the exports to these colonies, as on those to Spain and Portugal, &c. Such persons attend so much to the idea of exportation, that they entirely drop that of the connection between the mother country and her colonies. If Great-Britain had always claimed, and exercised an authority to compel Spain and Portugal to import manufactures from her only, the cases would be parallel: But as she never pretended to such a right, they are at liberty to get them where they please; and if they chuse to take them from her, rather than from other nations, they voluntary consent to pay the duties imposed on them.
To this I answer. These colonies require many things for their use, which the laws of _Great-Britain_ prohibit them from getting any where but from her. Such are paper and glass.
That we may be legally bound to pay any _general_ duties on these commodities, relative to the regulation of trade, is granted; but we being _obliged by her laws_ to take them from Great Britain, any _special_ duties imposed on their exportation _to us only, with intention to raise a revenue from us only_, are as much _taxes_ upon us, as those imposed by the _Stamp-act_.
What is the difference in _substance_ and _right_, whether the same sum is raised upon us by the rates mentioned in the Stamp-act, on the _use_ of the paper, or by these duties, on the _importation_ of it. It is nothing but the edition of a former book, with a new title page.
Suppose the duties were made payable in _Great-Britain_?
It signifies nothing to us, whether they are to be paid here or there. Had the _Stamp-act_ directed, that all the paper should be landed in _Florida_, and the duties paid there, before it was brought to the _British Colonies_, would the act have raised less money upon us, or have been less destructive of our rights? By no means: For as we were under a necessity of using the paper, we should have been under the necessity of paying the duties. Thus, in the present case, a like _necessity_ will subject us, if this act continues in force, to the payment of the duties now imposed.