_COMMON SENSE_

by

Thomas Paine

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

OF THE ORIGIN AND DESIGN OF GOVERNMENT IN GENERAL, WITH CONCISE REMARKS ON THE ENGLISH CONSTITUTION

OF MONARCHY AND HEREDITARY SUCCESSION

THOUGHTS ON THE PRESENT STATE OF AMERICAN AFFAIRS

OF THE PRESENT _ABILITY_ OF _AMERICA_, WITH SOME MISCELLANEOUS _REFLECTIONS_

APPENDIX

INTRODUCTION

Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YETsufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour; a long habitof not thinking a thing WRONG, gives it a superficial appearance ofbeing RIGHT, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense ofcustom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts thanreason. 

As a long and violent abuse of power, is generally the Means of callingthe right of it in question (and in Matters too which might never havebeen thought of, had not the Sufferers been aggravated into theinquiry) and as the King of England hath undertaken in his OWN RIGHT, to support the Parliament in what he calls THEIRS, and as the goodpeople of this country are grievously oppressed by the combination, they have an undoubted privilege to inquire into the pretensions ofboth, and equally to reject the usurpation of either. 

In the following sheets, the author hath studiously avoided every thingwhich is personal among ourselves. Compliments as well as censure toindividuals make no part thereof. The wise, and the worthy, need notthe triumph of a pamphlet; and those whose sentiments are injudicious, or unfriendly, will cease of themselves unless too much pains arebestowed upon their conversion. 

The cause of America is in a great measure the cause of all mankind. Many circumstances hath, and will arise, which are not local, butuniversal, and through which the principles of all Lovers of Mankindare affected, and in the Event of which, their Affections areinterested. The laying a Country desolate with Fire and Sword, declaring War against the natural rights of all Mankind, andextirpating the Defenders thereof from the Face of the Earth, is theConcern of every Man to whom Nature hath given the Power of feeling; ofwhich Class, regardless of Party Censure, is the AUTHOR. 

P. S. The Publication of this new Edition hath been delayed, with aView of taking notice (had it been necessary) of any Attempt to refutethe Doctrine of Independance: As no Answer hath yet appeared, it is nowpresumed that none will, the Time needful for getting such aPerformance ready for the Public being considerably past. 

Who the Author of this Production is, is wholly unnecessary to thePublic, as the Object for Attention is the DOCTRINE ITSELF, not theMAN. Yet it may not be unnecessary to say, That he is unconnected withany Party, and under no sort of Influence public or private, but theinfluence of reason and principle. 

Philadelphia, February 14, 1776

OF THE ORIGIN AND DESIGN OF GOVERNMENT IN GENERAL, WITH CONCISE REMARKS ON THE ENGLISH CONSTITUTION

Some writers have so confounded society with government, as to leavelittle or no distinction between them; whereas they are not onlydifferent, but have different origins. Society is produced by ourwants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes ourPOSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY byrestraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the othercreates distinctions. The first a patron, the last a punisher. 

Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its beststate is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one;for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY AGOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, ourcalamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by whichwe suffer. Government, like dress, is the badge of lost innocence; thepalaces of kings are built on the ruins of the bowers of paradise. Forwere the impulses of conscience clear, uniform, and irresistiblyobeyed, man would need no other lawgiver; but that not being the case, he finds it necessary to surrender up a part of his property to furnishmeans for the protection of the rest; and this he is induced to do bythe same prudence which in every other case advises him out of twoevils to choose the least. WHEREFORE, security being the true designand end of government, it unanswerably follows, that whatever FORMthereof appears most likely to ensure it to us, with the least expenseand greatest benefit, is preferable to all others. 

In order to gain a clear and just idea of the design and end ofgovernment, let us suppose a small number of persons settled in somesequestered part of the earth, unconnected with the rest, they willthen represent the first peopling of any country, or of the world. Inthis state of natural liberty, society will be their first thought. Athousand motives will excite them thereto, the strength of one man isso unequal to his wants, and his mind so unfitted for perpetualsolitude, that he is soon obliged to seek assistance and relief ofanother, who in his turn requires the same. Four or five united wouldbe able to raise a tolerable dwelling in the midst of a wilderness, butone man might labour out of the common period of life withoutaccomplishing any thing; when he had felled his timber he could notremove it, nor erect it after it was removed; hunger in the mean timewould urge him from his work, and every different want call him adifferent way. Disease, nay even misfortune would be death, for thoughneither might be mortal, yet either would disable him from living, andreduce him to a state in which he might rather be said to perish thanto die. 

Thus necessity, like a gravitating power, would soon form our newlyarrived emigrants into society, the reciprocal blessings of which, would supersede, and render the obligations of law and governmentunnecessary while they remained perfectly just to each other; but asnothing but heaven is impregnable to vice, it will unavoidably happen, that in proportion as they surmount the first difficulties ofemigration, which bound them together in a common cause, they willbegin to relax in their duty and attachment to each other; and thisremissness will point out the necessity of establishing some form ofgovernment to supply the defect of moral virtue. 

Some convenient tree will afford them a State-House, under the branchesof which, the whole colony may assemble to deliberate on publicmatters. It is more than probable that their first laws will have thetitle only of REGULATIONS, and be enforced by no other penalty thanpublic disesteem. In this first parliament every man, by naturalright, will have a seat. 

But as the colony increases, the public concerns will increaselikewise, and the distance at which the members may be separated, willrender it too inconvenient for all of them to meet on every occasion asat first, when their number was small, their habitations near, and thepublic concerns few and trifling. This will point out the convenienceof their consenting to leave the legislative part to be managed by aselect number chosen from the whole body, who are supposed to have thesame concerns at stake which those who appointed them, and who will actin the same manner as the whole body would act, were they present. Ifthe colony continues increasing, it will become necessary to augmentthe number of the representatives, and that the interest of every partof the colony may be attended to, it will be found best to divide thewhole into convenient parts, each part sending its proper number; andthat the ELECTED might never form to themselves an interest separatefrom the ELECTORS, prudence will point out the propriety of havingelections often; because as the ELECTED might by that means return andmix again with the general body of the ELECTORS in a few months, theirfidelity to the public will be secured by the prudent reflection of notmaking a rod for themselves. And as this frequent interchange willestablish a common interest with every part of the community, they willmutually and naturally support each other, and on this (not on theunmeaning name of king) depends the STRENGTH OF GOVERNMENT, AND THEHAPPINESS OF THE GOVERNED. 

Here then is the origin and rise of government; namely, a mode renderednecessary by the inability of moral virtue to govern the world; heretoo is the design and end of government, viz. Freedom and security. And however our eyes may be dazzled with show, or our ears deceived bysound; however prejudice may warp our wills, or interest darken ourunderstanding, the simple voice of nature and of reason will say, it isright. 

I draw my idea of the form of government from a principle in nature, which no art can overturn, viz. That the more simple any thing is, theless liable it is to be disordered; and the easier repaired whendisordered; and with this maxim in view, I offer a few remarks on theso much boasted constitution of England. That it was noble for thedark and slavish times in which it was erected, is granted. When theworld was overrun with tyranny the least remove therefrom was aglorious rescue. But that it is imperfect, subject to convulsions, andincapable of producing what it seems to promise, is easily demonstrated. 

Absolute governments (tho' the disgrace of human nature) have thisadvantage with them, that they are simple; if the people suffer, theyknow the head from which their suffering springs, know likewise theremedy, and are not bewildered by a variety of causes and cures. Butthe constitution of England is so exceedingly complex, that the nationmay suffer for years together without being able to discover in whichpart the fault lies; some will say in one and some in another, andevery political physician will advise a different medicine. 

I know it is difficult to get over local or long standing prejudices, yet if we will suffer ourselves to examine the component parts of theEnglish constitution, we shall find them to be the base remains of twoancient tyrannies, compounded with some new republican materials. 

FIRST - The remains of monarchial tyranny in the person of the king. SECONDLY - The remains of aristocratical tyranny in the persons of thepeers. THIRDLY - The new republican materials in the persons of thecommons, on whose virtue depends the freedom of England. 

The two first, by being hereditary, are independent of the people;wherefore in a CONSTITUTIONAL SENSE they contribute nothing towards thefreedom of the state. 

To say that the constitution of England is a UNION of three powersreciprocally CHECKING each other, is farcical, either the words have nomeaning, or they are flat contradictions. 

To say that the commons is a check upon the king, presupposes twothings:

FIRST - That the king is not to be trusted without being looked after, or in other words, that a thirst for absolute power is the naturaldisease of monarchy. 

SECONDLY - That the commons, by being appointed for that purpose, areeither wiser or more worthy of confidence than the crown. 

But as the same constitution which gives the commons a power to checkthe king by withholding the supplies, gives afterwards the king a powerto check the commons, by empowering him to reject their other bills; itagain supposes that the king is wiser than those whom it has alreadysupposed to be wiser than him. A mere absurdity!

There is something exceedingly ridiculous in the composition ofmonarchy; it first excludes a man from the means of information, yetempowers him to act in cases where the highest judgment is required. The state of a king shuts him from the world, yet the business of aking requires him to know it thoroughly; wherefore the different parts, by unnaturally opposing and destroying each other, prove the wholecharacter to be absurd and useless. 

Some writers have explained the English constitution thus: The king, say they, is one, the people another; the peers are a house in behalfof the king, the commons in behalf of the people; but this hath all thedistinctions of a house divided against itself; and though theexpressions be pleasantly arranged, yet when examined, they appear idleand ambiguous; and it will always happen, that the nicest constructionthat words are capable of, when applied to the description of something which either cannot exist, or is too incomprehensible to bewithin the compass of description, will be words of sound only, andthough they may amuse the ear, they cannot inform the mind, for thisexplanation includes a previous question, viz. HOW CAME THE KING BY APOWER WHICH THE PEOPLE ARE AFRAID TO TRUST, AND ALWAYS OBLIGED TOCHECK? Such a power could not be the gift of a wise people, neithercan any power, WHICH NEEDS CHECKING, be from God; yet the provision, which the constitution makes, supposes such a power to exist. 

But the provision is unequal to the task; the means either cannot orwill not accomplish the end, and the whole affair is a felo de se; foras the greater weight will always carry up the less, and as all thewheels of a machine are put in motion by one, it only remains to knowwhich power in the constitution has the most weight, for that willgovern; and though the others, or a part of them, may clog, or, as thephrase is, check the rapidity of its motion, yet so long as they cannotstop it, their endeavours will be ineffectual; the first moving powerwill at last have its way, and what it wants in speed, is supplied bytime. 

That the crown is this overbearing part in the English constitution, needs not be mentioned, and that it derives its whole consequencemerely from being the giver of places and pensions, is self-evident, wherefore, though we have been wise enough to shut and lock a dooragainst absolute monarchy, we at the same time have been foolish enoughto put the crown in possession of the key. 

The prejudice of Englishmen in favour of their own government by king, lords, and commons, arises as much or more from national pride thanreason. Individuals are undoubtedly safer in England than in someother countries, but the WILL of the king is as much the LAW of theland in Britain as in France, with this difference, that instead ofproceeding directly from his mouth, it is handed to the people underthe more formidable shape of an act of parliament. For the fate ofCharles the First hath only made kings more subtle--not more just. 

Wherefore, laying aside all national pride and prejudice in favour ofmodes and forms, the plain truth is, that IT IS WHOLLY OWING TO THECONSTITUTION OF THE PEOPLE, AND NOT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THEGOVERNMENT, that the crown is not as oppressive in England as in Turkey. 

An inquiry into the CONSTITUTIONAL ERRORS in the English form ofgovernment is at this time highly necessary; for as we are never in aproper condition of doing justice to others, while we continue underthe influence of some leading partiality, so neither are we capable ofdoing it to ourselves while we remain fettered by any obstinateprejudice. And as a man, who is attached to a prostitute, is unfittedto choose or judge a wife, so any prepossession in favour of a rottenconstitution of government will disable us from discerning a good one. 

OF MONARCHY AND HEREDITARY SUCCESSION

Mankind being originally equals in the order of creation, the equalitycould only be destroyed by some subsequent circumstance; thedistinctions of rich, and poor, may in a great measure be accountedfor, and that without having recourse to the harsh, ill-sounding namesof oppression and avarice. Oppression is often the CONSEQUENCE, butseldom or never the MEANS of riches; and though avarice will preserve aman from being necessitously poor, it generally makes him too timorousto be wealthy. 

But there is another and greater distinction, for which no trulynatural or religious reason can be assigned, and that is, thedistinction of men into KINGS and SUBJECTS. Male and female are thedistinctions of nature, good and bad the distinctions of heaven; buthow a race of men came into the world so exalted above the rest, anddistinguished like some new species, is worth inquiring into, andwhether they are the means of happiness or of misery to mankind. 

In the early ages of the world, according to the scripture chronology, there were no kings; the consequence of which was, there were no wars;it is the pride of kings which throw mankind into confusion. Hollandwithout a king hath enjoyed more peace for this last century than anyof the monarchial governments in Europe. Antiquity favours the sameremark; for the quiet and rural lives of the first patriarchs hath ahappy something in them, which vanishes away when we come to thehistory of Jewish royalty. 

Government by kings was first introduced into the world by theHeathens, from whom the children of Israel copied the custom. It wasthe most prosperous invention the Devil ever set on foot for thepromotion of idolatry. The Heathens paid divine honours to theirdeceased kings, and the Christian world hath improved on the plan, bydoing the same to their living ones. How impious is the title ofsacred majesty applied to a worm, who in the midst of his splendor iscrumbling into dust!

As the exalting one man so greatly above the rest cannot be justifiedon the equal rights of nature, so neither can it be defended on theauthority of scripture; for the will of the Almighty, as declared byGideon and the prophet Samuel, expressly disapproves of government bykings. All anti-monarchical parts of scripture have been very smoothlyglossed over in monarchical governments, but they undoubtedly merit theattention of countries which have their governments yet to form. RENDER UNTO CAESAR THE THINGS WHICH ARE CAESAR'S is the scripturedoctrine of courts, yet it is no support of monarchical government, forthe Jews at that time were without a king, and in a state of vassalageto the Romans. 

Now three thousand years passed away from the Mosaic account of thecreation, till the Jews under a national delusion requested a king. Till then their form of government (except in extraordinary cases, where the Almighty interposed) was a kind of republic administered by ajudge and the elders of the tribes. Kings they had none, and it washeld sinful to acknowledge any being under that title but the Lord ofHosts. And when a man seriously reflects on the idolatrous homagewhich is paid to the persons of kings, he need not wonder that theAlmighty, ever jealous of his honour, should disapprove of a form ofgovernment which so impiously invades the prerogative of heaven. 

Monarchy is ranked in scripture as one of the sins of the Jews, forwhich a curse in reserve is denounced against them. The history ofthat transaction is worth attending to. 

The children of Israel being oppressed by the Midianites, Gideonmarched against them with a small army, and victory, through the divineinterposition, decided in his favour. The Jews, elate with success, and attributing it to the generalship of Gideon, proposed making him aking, saying, RULE THOU OVER US, THOU AND THY SON AND THY SON'S SON. Here was temptation in its fullest extent; not a kingdom only, but anhereditary one, but Gideon in the piety of his soul replied, I WILL NOTRULE OVER YOU, NEITHER SHALL MY SON RULE OVER YOU _THE LORD SHALL RULEOVER YOU. _ Words need not be more explicit; Gideon doth not decline thehonour, but denieth their right to give it; neither doth he complimentthem with invented declarations of his thanks, but in the positivestyle of a prophet charges them with disaffection to their properSovereign, the King of heaven. 

About one hundred and thirty years after this, they fell again into thesame error. The hankering which the Jews had for the idolatrouscustoms of the Heathens, is something exceedingly unaccountable; but soit was, that laying hold of the misconduct of Samuel's two sons, whowere entrusted with some secular concerns, they came in an abrupt andclamorous manner to Samuel, saying, BEHOLD THOU ART OLD, AND THY SONSWALK NOT IN THY WAYS, NOW MAKE US A KING TO JUDGE US, LIKE ALL OTHERNATIONS. And here we cannot but observe that their motives were bad, viz. That they might be LIKE unto other nations, i. E. The Heathens, whereas their true glory laid in being as much UNLIKE them as possible. BUT THE THING DISPLEASED SAMUEL WHEN THEY SAID, GIVE US A KING TO JUDGEUS; AND SAMUEL PRAYED UNTO THE LORD, AND THE LORD SAID UNTO SAMUEL, HEARKEN UNTO THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE IN ALL THAT THEY SAY UNTO THEE, FOR THEY HAVE NOT REJECTED THEE, BUT THEY HAVE REJECTED ME, _THAT ISHOULD NOT REIGN OVER THEM. _ ACCORDING TO ALL THE WORKS WHICH THEYHAVE SINCE THE DAY THAT I BROUGHT THEM UP OUT OF EGYPT, EVEN UNTO THISDAY; WHEREWITH THEY HAVE FORSAKEN ME AND SERVED OTHER GODS; SO DO THEYALSO UNTO THEE. NOW THEREFORE HEARKEN UNTO THEIR VOICE, HOWBEIT, PROTEST SOLEMNLY UNTO THEM AND SHEW THEM THE MANNER OF THE KING THATSHALL REIGN OVER THEM, I. E. Not of any particular king, but thegeneral manner of the kings of the earth, whom Israel was so eagerlycopying after. And notwithstanding the great distance of time anddifference of manners, the character is still in fashion. AND SAMUELTOLD ALL THE WORDS OF THE LORD UNTO THE PEOPLE, THAT ASKED OF HIM AKING. AND HE SAID, THIS SHALL BE THE MANNER OF THE KING THAT SHALLREIGN OVER YOU; HE WILL TAKE YOUR SONS AND APPOINT THEM FOR HIMSELF, FOR HIS CHARIOTS, AND TO BE HIS HORSEMAN, AND SOME SHALL RUN BEFORE HISCHARIOTS (this description agrees with the present mode of impressingmen) AND HE WILL APPOINT HIM CAPTAINS OVER THOUSANDS AND CAPTAINS OVERFIFTIES, AND WILL SET THEM TO EAR HIS GROUND AND REAP HIS HARVEST, ANDTO MAKE HIS INSTRUMENTS OF WAR, AND INSTRUMENTS OF HIS CHARIOTS; AND HEWILL TAKE YOUR DAUGHTERS TO BE CONFECTIONARIES, AND TO BE COOKS AND TOBE BAKERS (this describes the expense and luxury as well as theoppression of kings) AND HE WILL TAKE YOUR FIELDS AND YOUR OLIVE YARDS, EVEN THE BEST OF THEM, AND GIVE THEM TO HIS SERVANTS; AND HE WILL TAKETHE TENTH OF YOUR SEED, AND OF YOUR VINEYARDS, AND GIVE THEM TO HISOFFICERS AND TO HIS SERVANTS (by which we see that bribery, corruption, and favouritism are the standing vices of kings) AND HE WILL TAKE THETENTH OF YOUR MEN SERVANTS, AND YOUR MAID SERVANTS, AND YOUR GOODLIESTYOUNG MEN AND YOUR ASSES, AND PUT THEM TO HIS WORK; AND HE WILL TAKETHE TENTH OF YOUR SHEEP, AND YE SHALL BE HIS SERVANTS, AND YE SHALL CRYOUT IN THAT DAY BECAUSE OF YOUR KING WHICH YE SHALL HAVE CHOSEN, _ANDTHE LORD WILL NOT HEAR YOU IN THAT DAY. _ This accounts for thecontinuation of monarchy; neither do the characters of the few goodkings which have lived since, either sanctify the title, or blot outthe sinfulness of the origin; the high encomium given of David takes nonotice of him OFFICIALLY AS A KING, but only as a MAN after God's ownheart. NEVERTHELESS THE PEOPLE REFUSED TO OBEY THE VOICE OF SAMUEL, AND THEY SAID, NAY, BUT WE WILL HAVE A KING OVER US, THAT WE MAY BELIKE ALL THE NATIONS, AND THAT OUR KING MAY JUDGE US, AND GO OUT BEFOREUS, AND FIGHT OUR BATTLES. Samuel continued to reason with them, butto no purpose; he set before them their ingratitude, but all would notavail; and seeing them fully bent on their folly, he cried out, I WILLCALL UNTO THE LORD, AND HE SHALL SEND THUNDER AND RAIN (which then wasa punishment, being in the time of wheat harvest) THAT YE MAY PERCEIVEAND SEE THAT YOUR WICKEDNESS IS GREAT WHICH YE HAVE DONE IN THE SIGHTOF THE LORD, AND THE LORD SENT THUNDER AND RAIN THAT DAY, AND ALL THEPEOPLE GREATLY FEARED THE LORD AND SAMUEL. AND ALL THE PEOPLE SAIDUNTO SAMUEL, PRAY FOR THY SERVANTS UNTO THE LORD THY GOD THAT WE DIENOT, FOR _WE HAVE ADDED UNTO OUR SINS THIS EVIL, TO ASK A KING. _ Theseportions of scripture are direct and positive. They admit of noequivocal construction. That the Almighty hath here entered hisprotest against monarchical government, is true, or the scripture isfalse. And a man hath good reason to believe that there is as much ofkingcraft, as priestcraft, in withholding the scripture from the publicin Popish countries. For monarchy in every instance is the Popery ofgovernment. 

To the evil of monarchy we have added that of hereditary succession;and as the first is a degradation and lessening of ourselves, so thesecond, claimed as a matter of right, is an insult and an imposition onposterity. For all men being originally equals, no ONE by BIRTH couldhave a right to set up his own family in perpetual preference to allothers for ever, and though himself might deserve SOME decent degree ofhonours of his contemporaries, yet his descendants might be far toounworthy to inherit them. One of the strongest NATURAL proofs of thefolly of hereditary right in kings, is, that nature disapproves it, otherwise she would not so frequently turn it into ridicule by givingmankind an ASS FOR A LION. 

Secondly, as no man at first could possess any other public honoursthan were bestowed upon him, so the givers of those honours could haveno power to give away the right of posterity. And though they mightsay, "We choose you for OUR head, " they could not, without manifestinjustice to their children, say, "that your children and yourchildren's children shall reign over OURS for ever. " Because such anunwise, unjust, unnatural compact might (perhaps) in the nextsuccession put them under the government of a rogue or a fool. Mostwise men, in their private sentiments, have ever treated hereditaryright with contempt; yet it is one of those evils, which when onceestablished is not easily removed; many submit from fear, others fromsuperstition, and the more powerful part shares with the king theplunder of the rest. 

This is supposing the present race of kings in the world to have had anhonourable origin; whereas it is more than probable, that could we takeoff the dark covering of antiquities, and trace them to their firstrise, that we should find the first of them nothing better than theprincipal ruffian of some restless gang, whose savage manners orpreeminence in subtlety obtained the title of chief among plunderers;and who by increasing in power, and extending his depredations, overawed the quiet and defenseless to purchase their safety by frequentcontributions. Yet his electors could have no idea of givinghereditary right to his descendants, because such a perpetual exclusionof themselves was incompatible with the free and unrestrainedprinciples they professed to live by. Wherefore, hereditary successionin the early ages of monarchy could not take place as a matter ofclaim, but as something casual or complemental; but as few or norecords were extant in those days, and traditional history stuffedwith fables, it was very easy, after the lapse of a few generations, totrump up some superstitious tale, conveniently timed, Mahomet like, tocram hereditary right down the throats of the vulgar. Perhaps thedisorders which threatened, or seemed to threaten, on the decease of aleader and the choice of a new one (for elections among ruffians couldnot be very orderly) induced many at first to favour hereditarypretensions; by which means it happened, as it hath happened since, that what at first was submitted to as a convenience, was afterwardsclaimed as a right. 

England, since the conquest, hath known some few good monarchs, butgroaned beneath a much larger number of bad ones; yet no man in hissenses can say that their claim under William the Conqueror is a veryhonourable one. A French bastard landing with an armed banditti, andestablishing himself king of England against the consent of thenatives, is in plain terms a very paltry rascally original. Itcertainly hath no divinity in it. However, it is needless to spendmuch time in exposing the folly of hereditary right; if there are anyso weak as to believe it, let them promiscuously worship the ass andlion, and welcome. I shall neither copy their humility, nor disturbtheir devotion. 

Yet I should be glad to ask how they suppose kings came at first? Thequestion admits but of three answers, viz. Either by lot, by election, or by usurpation. If the first king was taken by lot, it establishes aprecedent for the next, which excludes hereditary succession. Saul wasby lot, yet the succession was not hereditary, neither does it appearfrom that transaction there was any intention it ever should be. Ifthe first king of any country was by election, that likewiseestablishes a precedent for the next; for to say, that the RIGHT of allfuture generations is taken away, by the act of the first electors, intheir choice not only of a king, but of a family of kings for ever, hath no parallel in or out of scripture but the doctrine of originalsin, which supposes the free will of all men lost in Adam; and fromsuch comparison, and it will admit of no other, hereditary successioncan derive no glory. For as in Adam all sinned, and as in the firstelectors all men obeyed; as in the one all mankind were subjected toSatan, and in the other to Sovereignty; as our innocence was lost inthe first, and our authority in the last; and as both disable us fromreassuming some former state and privilege, it unanswerably followsthat original sin and hereditary succession are parallels. Dishonourable rank! Inglorious connection! Yet the most subtle sophistcannot produce a juster simile. 

As to usurpation, no man will be so hardy as to defend it; and thatWilliam the Conqueror was an usurper is a fact not to be contradicted. The plain truth is, that the antiquity of English monarchy will notbear looking into. 

But it is not so much the absurdity as the evil of hereditarysuccession which concerns mankind. Did it ensure a race of good andwise men it would have the seal of divine authority, but as it opens adoor to the FOOLISH, the WICKED, and the IMPROPER, it hath in it thenature of oppression. Men who look upon themselves born to reign, andothers to obey, soon grow insolent; selected from the rest of mankindtheir minds are early poisoned by importance; and the world they act indiffers so materially from the world at large, that they have butlittle opportunity of knowing its true interests, and when they succeedto the government are frequently the most ignorant and unfit of anythroughout the dominions. 

Another evil which attends hereditary succession is, that the throne issubject to be possessed by a minor at any age; all which time theregency, acting under the cover of a king, have every opportunity andinducement to betray their trust. The same national misfortunehappens, when a king, worn out with age and infirmity, enters the laststage of human weakness. In both these cases the public becomes a preyto every miscreant, who can tamper successfully with the follies eitherof age or infancy. 

The most plausible plea, which hath ever been offered in favour ofhereditary succession, is, that it preserves a nation from civil wars;and were this true, it would be weighty; whereas, it is the mostbarefaced falsity ever imposed upon mankind. The whole history ofEngland disowns the fact. Thirty kings and two minors have reigned inthat distracted kingdom since the conquest, in which time there havebeen (including the Revolution) no less than eight civil wars andnineteen rebellions. Wherefore instead of making for peace, it makesagainst it, and destroys the very foundation it seems to stand on. 

The contest for monarchy and succession, between the houses of York andLancaster, laid England in a scene of blood for many years. Twelvepitched battles, besides skirmishes and sieges, were fought betweenHenry and Edward. Twice was Henry prisoner to Edward, who in his turnwas prisoner to Henry. And so uncertain is the fate of war and thetemper of a nation, when nothing but personal matters are the ground ofa quarrel, that Henry was taken in triumph from a prison to a palace, and Edward obliged to fly from a palace to a foreign land; yet, assudden transitions of temper are seldom lasting, Henry in his turn wasdriven from the throne, and Edward recalled to succeed him. Theparliament always following the strongest side. 

This contest began in the reign of Henry the Sixth, and was notentirely extinguished till Henry the Seventh, in whom the families wereunited. Including a period of 67 years, viz. From 1422 to 1489. 

In short, monarchy and succession have laid (not this or that kingdomonly) but the world in blood and ashes. 'Tis a form of governmentwhich the word of God bears testimony against, and blood will attend it. 

If we inquire into the business of a king, we shall find that in somecountries they have none; and after sauntering away their lives withoutpleasure to themselves or advantage to the nation, withdraw from thescene, and leave their successors to tread the same idle ground. Inabsolute monarchies the whole weight of business, civil and military, lies on the king; the children of Israel in their request for a king, urged this plea "that he may judge us, and go out before us and fightour battles. " But in countries where he is neither a judge nor ageneral, as in England, a man would be puzzled to know what IS hisbusiness. 

The nearer any government approaches to a republic the less businessthere is for a king. It is somewhat difficult to find a proper namefor the government of England. Sir William Meredith calls it arepublic; but in its present state it is unworthy of the name, becausethe corrupt influence of the crown, by having all the places in itsdisposal, hath so effectually swallowed up the power, and eaten out thevirtue of the house of commons (the republican part in theconstitution) that the government of England is nearly as monarchicalas that of France or Spain. Men fall out with names withoutunderstanding them. For it is the republican and not the monarchicalpart of the constitution of England which Englishmen glory in, viz. Theliberty of choosing an house of commons from out of their own body--andit is easy to see that when republican virtue fails, slavery ensues. Why is the constitution of England sickly, but because monarchy hathpoisoned the republic, the crown hath engrossed the commons?

In England a king hath little more to do than to make war and give awayplaces; which in plain terms, is to impoverish the nation and set ittogether by the ears. A pretty business indeed for a man to be allowedeight hundred thousand sterling a year for, and worshipped into thebargain! Of more worth is one honest man to society and in the sightof God, than all the crowned ruffians that ever lived. 

THOUGHTS ON THE PRESENT STATE OF AMERICAN AFFAIRS

In the following pages I offer nothing more than simple facts, plainarguments, and common sense; and have no other Preliminaries to settlewith the reader, than that he will divest himself of prejudice andprepossession, and suffer his reason and his feelings to determine forthemselves; that he will put ON, or rather that he will not put OFF thetrue character of a man, and generously enlarge his views beyond thepresent day. 

Volumes have been written on the subject of the struggle betweenEngland and America. Men of all ranks have embarked in thecontroversy, from different motives, and with various designs; but allhave been ineffectual, and the period of debate is closed. Arms, asthe last resource, decide this contest; the appeal was the choice ofthe king, and the continent hath accepted the challenge. 

It hath been reported of the late Mr. Pelham (who tho' an able ministerwas not without his faults) that on his being attacked in the house ofcommons, on the score, that his measures were only of a temporary kind, replied "THEY WILL LAST MY TIME. " Should a thought so fatal and unmanlypossess the colonies in the present contest, the name of ancestors willbe remembered by future generations with detestation. 

The sun never shined on a cause of greater worth. 'Tis not the affairof a city, a county, a province, or a kingdom, but of a continent--ofat least one eighth part of the habitable globe. 'Tis not the concernof a day, a year, or an age; posterity are virtually involved in thecontest, and will be more or less affected, even to the end of time, bythe proceedings now. Now is the seed-time of continental union, faithand honour. The least fracture now will be like a name engraved withthe point of a pin on the tender rind of a young oak; the wound willenlarge with the tree, and posterity read it in full grown characters. 

By referring the matter from argument to arms, a new aera for politicsis struck; a new method of thinking hath arisen. All plans, proposals, &c. Prior to the nineteenth of April, i. E. To the commencement ofhostilities, are like the almanacs of the last year; which, thoughproper then are superseded and useless now. Whatever was advanced bythe advocates on either side of the question then, terminated in oneand the same point. Viz. A union with Great-Britain: the onlydifference between the parties was the method of effecting it; the oneproposing force, the other friendship; but it hath so far happened thatthe first hath failed, and the second hath withdrawn her influence. 

As much hath been said of the advantages of reconciliation which, likean agreeable dream, hath passed away and left us as we were, it is butright, that we should examine the contrary side of the argument, andinquire into some of the many material injuries which these coloniessustain, and always will sustain, by being connected with, anddependent on Great Britain: To examine that connection and dependence, on the principles of nature and common sense, to see what we have totrust to, if separated, and what we are to expect, if dependant. 

I have heard it asserted by some, that as America hath flourished underher former connection with Great Britain that the same connection isnecessary towards her future happiness, and will always have the sameeffect. Nothing can be more fallacious than this kind of argument. Wemay as well assert that because a child has thrived upon milk that itis never to have meat, or that the first twenty years of our lives isto become a precedent for the next twenty. But even this is admittingmore than is true, for I answer roundly, that America would haveflourished as much, and probably much more, had no European power hadany thing to do with her. The commerce, by which she hath enrichedherself, are the necessaries of life, and will always have a marketwhile eating is the custom of Europe. 

But she has protected us, say some. That she has engrossed us is true, and defended the continent at our expense as well as her own isadmitted, and she would have defended Turkey from the same motive, viz. The sake of trade and dominion. 

Alas, we have been long led away by ancient prejudices, and made largesacrifices to superstition. We have boasted the protection of GreatBritain, without considering, that her motive was INTEREST notATTACHMENT; that she did not protect us from OUR ENEMIES on OURACCOUNT, but from HER ENEMIES on HER OWN ACCOUNT, from those who had noquarrel with us on any OTHER ACCOUNT, and who will always be ourenemies on the SAME ACCOUNT. Let Britain wave her pretensions to thecontinent, or the continent throw off the dependence, and we should beat peace with France and Spain were they at war with Britain. Themiseries of Hanover last war ought to warn us against connections. 

It has lately been asserted in parliament, that the colonies have norelation to each other but through the parent country, i. E. ThatPennsylvania and the Jerseys, and so on for the rest, are sistercolonies by the way of England; this is certainly a very round-aboutway of proving relationship, but it is the nearest and only true way ofproving enemyship, if I may so call it. France and Spain never were, nor perhaps ever will be our enemies as AMERICANS, but as our being thesubjects of GREAT BRITAIN. 

But Britain is the parent country, say some. Then the more shame uponher conduct. Even brutes do not devour their young, nor savages makewar upon their families; wherefore the assertion, if true, turns to herreproach; but it happens not to be true, or only partly so and thephrase PARENT or MOTHER COUNTRY hath been jesuitically adopted by theking and his parasites, with a low papistical design of gaining anunfair bias on the credulous weakness of our minds. Europe, and notEngland, is the parent country of America. This new world hath beenthe asylum for the persecuted lovers of civil and religious libertyfrom EVERY PART of Europe. Hither have they fled, not from the tenderembraces of the mother, but from the cruelty of the monster; and it isso far true of England, that the same tyranny which drove the firstemigrants from home, pursues their descendants still. 

In this extensive quarter of the globe, we forget the narrow limits ofthree hundred and sixty miles (the extent of England) and carry ourfriendship on a larger scale; we claim brotherhood with every EuropeanChristian, and triumph in the generosity of the sentiment. 

It is pleasant to observe by what regular gradations we surmount theforce of local prejudice, as we enlarge our acquaintance with theworld. A man born in any town in England divided into parishes, willnaturally associate most with his fellow-parishioners (because theirinterests in many cases will be common) and distinguish him by the nameof NEIGHBOUR; if he meet him but a few miles from home, he drops thenarrow idea of a street, and salutes him by the name of TOWNSMAN; if hetravel out of the county, and meet him in any other, he forgets theminor divisions of street and town, and calls him COUNTRYMAN, i. E. COUNTRYMAN; but if in their foreign excursions they should associate inFrance or any other part of EUROPE, their local remembrance would beenlarged into that of ENGLISHMEN. And by a just parity of reasoning, all Europeans meeting in America, or any other quarter of the globe, are COUNTRYMEN; for England, Holland, Germany, or Sweden, when comparedwith the whole, stand in the same places on the larger scale, which thedivisions of street, town, and county do on the smaller ones;distinctions too limited for continental minds. Not one third of theinhabitants, even of this province, are of English descent. WhereforeI reprobate the phrase of parent or mother country applied to Englandonly, as being false, selfish, narrow and ungenerous. 

But admitting, that we were all of English descent, what does it amountto? Nothing. Britain, being now an open enemy, extinguishes everyother name and title: And to say that reconciliation is our duty, istruly farcical. The first king of England, of the present line(William the Conqueror) was a Frenchman, and half the Peers of Englandare descendants from the same country; therefore, by the same method ofreasoning, England ought to be governed by France. 

Much hath been said of the united strength of Britain and the colonies, that in conjunction they might bid defiance to the world. But this ismere presumption; the fate of war is uncertain, neither do theexpressions mean any thing; for this continent would never sufferitself to be drained of inhabitants, to support the British arms ineither Asia, Africa, or Europe. 

Besides what have we to do with setting the world at defiance? Ourplan is commerce, and that, well attended to, will secure us the peaceand friendship of all Europe; because, it is the interest of all Europeto have America a FREE PORT. Her trade will always be a protection, and her barrenness of gold and silver secure her from invaders. 

I challenge the warmest advocate for reconciliation, to shew, a singleadvantage that this continent can reap, by being connected with GreatBritain. I repeat the challenge, not a single advantage is derived. Our corn will fetch its price in any market in Europe, and our importedgoods must be paid for, buy them where we will. 

But the injuries and disadvantages we sustain by that connection, arewithout number; and our duty to mankind at large, as well as toourselves, instruct us to renounce the alliance: Because, anysubmission to, or dependence on Great Britain, tends directly toinvolve this continent in European wars and quarrels; and sets us atvariance with nations, who would otherwise seek our friendship, andagainst whom, we have neither anger nor complaint. As Europe is ourmarket for trade, we ought to form no partial connection with any partof it. It is the true interest of America to steer clear of Europeancontentions, which she never can do, while by her dependence onBritain, she is made the make-weight in the scale of British politics. 

Europe is too thickly planted with kingdoms to be long at peace, andwhenever a war breaks out between England and any foreign power, thetrade of America goes to ruin, BECAUSE OF HER CONNECTION WITH ENGLAND. The next war may not turn out like the last, and should it not, theadvocates for reconciliation now, will be wishing for separation then, because, neutrality in that case, would be a safer convoy than a man ofwar. Every thing that is right or natural pleads for separation. Theblood of the slain, the weeping voice of nature cries, 'TIS TIME TOPART. Even the distance at which the Almighty hath placed England andAmerica, is a strong and natural proof, that the authority of the one, over the other, was never the design of Heaven. The time likewise atwhich the continent was discovered, adds weight to the argument, andthe manner in which it was peopled increases the force of it. Thereformation was preceded by the discovery of America, as if theAlmighty graciously meant to open a sanctuary to the Persecuted infuture years, when home should afford neither friendship nor safety. 

The authority of Great Britain over this continent, is a form ofgovernment, which sooner or later must have an end: And a serious mindcan draw no true pleasure by looking forward under the painful andpositive conviction, that what he calls "the present constitution" ismerely temporary. As parents, we can have no joy, knowing that THISGOVERNMENT is not sufficiently lasting to ensure any thing which we maybequeath to posterity: And by a plain method of argument, as we arerunning the next generation into debt, we ought to do the work of it, otherwise we use them meanly and pitifully. In order to discover theline of our duty rightly, we should take our children in our hand, andfix our station a few years farther into life; that eminence willpresent a prospect, which a few present fears and prejudices concealfrom our sight. 

Though I would carefully avoid giving unnecessary offense, yet I aminclined to believe, that all those who espouse the doctrine ofreconciliation, may be included within the following descriptions. Interested men, who are not to be trusted; weak men, who CANNOT see;prejudiced men, who WILL NOT see; and a certain set of moderate men, who think better of the European world than it deserves; and this lastclass, by an ill-judged deliberation, will be the cause of morecalamities to this continent, than all the other three. 

It is the good fortune of many to live distant from the scene ofsorrow; the evil is not sufficient brought to their doors to make THEMfeel the precariousness with which all American property is possessed. But let our imaginations transport us for a few moments to Boston, thatseat of wretchedness will teach us wisdom, and instruct us for ever torenounce a power in whom we can have no trust. The inhabitants of thatunfortunate city, who but a few months ago were in ease and affluence, have now, no other alternative than to stay and starve, or turn andbeg. Endangered by the fire of their friends if they continue withinthe city, and plundered by the soldiery if they leave it. In theirpresent condition they are prisoners without the hope of redemption, and in a general attack for their relief, they would be exposed to thefury of both armies. 

Men of passive tempers look somewhat lightly over the offenses ofBritain, and, still hoping for the best, are apt to call out, "COME, COME, WE SHALL BE FRIENDS AGAIN, FOR ALL THIS. " But examine thepassions and feelings of mankind, Bring the doctrine of reconciliationto the touchstone of nature, and then tell me, whether you canhereafter love, honor, and faithfully serve the power that hath carriedfire and sword into your land? If you cannot do all these, then areyou only deceiving yourselves, and by your delay bringing ruin uponposterity. Your future connection with Britain, whom you can neitherlove nor honor will be forced and unnatural, and being formed only onthe plan of present convenience, will in a little time fall into arelapse more wretched than the first. But if you say, you can stillpass the violations over, then I ask, Hath your house been burnt? Hathyour property been destroyed before your face! Are your wife andchildren destitute of a bed to lie on, or bread to live on? Have youlost a parent or a child by their hands, and yourself the ruined andwretched survivor! If you have not, then are you not a judge of thosewho have. But if you have, and still can shake hands with themurderers, then are you unworthy of the name of husband, father, friend, or lover, and whatever may be your rank or title in life, youhave the heart of a coward, and the spirit of a sycophant. 

This is not inflaming or exaggerating matters, but trying them by thosefeelings and affections which nature justifies, and without which, weshould be incapable of discharging the social duties of life, orenjoying the felicities of it. I mean not to exhibit horror for thepurpose of provoking revenge, but to awaken us from fatal and unmanlyslumbers, that we may pursue determinately some fixed object. It isnot in the power of Britain or of Europe to conquer America, if she donot conquer herself by DELAY and TIMIDITY. The present winter is worthan age if rightly employed, but if lost or neglected, the wholecontinent will partake of the misfortune; and there is no punishmentwhich that man will not deserve, be he who, or what, or where he will, that may be the means of sacrificing a season so precious and useful. 

It is repugnant to reason, to the universal order of things, to allexamples from former ages, to suppose, that this continent can longerremain subject to any external power. The most sanguine in Britaindoes not think so. The utmost stretch of human wisdom cannot, at thistime, compass a plan short of separation, which can promise thecontinent even a year's security. Reconciliation is NOW a fallaciousdream. Nature hath deserted the connection, and Art cannot supply herplace. For, as Milton wisely expresses, "never can true reconcilementgrow, where wounds of deadly hate have pierced so deep. "

Every quiet method for peace hath been ineffectual. Our prayers havebeen rejected with disdain; and only tended to convince us, thatnothing flatters vanity, or confirms obstinacy in Kings more thanrepeated petitioning--and nothing hath contributed more than that verymeasure to make the Kings of Europe absolute: Witness Denmark andSweden. Wherefore, since nothing but blows will do, for God's sake, let us come to a final separation, and not leave the next generation tobe cutting throats, under the violated unmeaning names of parent andchild. 

To say, they will never attempt it again is idle and visionary, wethought so at the repeal of the stamp-act, yet a year or two undeceivedus; as well may we suppose that nations, which have been once defeated, will never renew the quarrel. 

As to government matters, it is not in the power of Britain to do thiscontinent justice: The business of it will soon be too weighty, andintricate, to be managed with any tolerable degree of convenience, by apower so distant from us, and so very ignorant of us; for if theycannot conquer us, they cannot govern us. To be always running threeor four thousand miles with a tale or a petition, waiting four or fivemonths for an answer, which when obtained requires five or six more toexplain it in, will in a few years be looked upon as folly andchildishness--There was a time when it was proper, and there is aproper time for it to cease. 

Small islands not capable of protecting themselves, are the properobjects for kingdoms to take under their care; but there is somethingvery absurd, in supposing a continent to be perpetually governed by anisland. In no instance hath nature made the satellite larger than itsprimary planet, and as England and America, with respect to each other, reverses the common order of nature, it is evident they belong todifferent systems; England to Europe, America to itself. 

I am not induced by motives of pride, party, or resentment to espousethe doctrine of separation and independance; I am clearly, positively, and conscientiously persuaded that it is the true interest of thiscontinent to be so; that every thing short of THAT is mere patchwork, that it can afford no lasting felicity, --that it is leaving the swordto our children, and shrinking back at a time, when, a little more, alittle farther, would have rendered this continent the glory of theearth. 

As Britain hath not manifested the least inclination towards acompromise, we may be assured that no terms can be obtained worthy theacceptance of the continent, or any ways equal to the expense of bloodand treasure we have been already put to. 

The object, contended for, ought always to bear some just proportion tothe expense. The removal of North, or the whole detestable junto, is amatter unworthy the millions we have expended. A temporary stoppage oftrade, was an inconvenience, which would have sufficiently balanced therepeal of all the acts complained of, had such repeals been obtained;but if the whole continent must take up arms, if every man must be asoldier, it is scarcely worth our while to fight against a contemptibleministry only. Dearly, dearly, do we pay for the repeal of the acts, if that is all we fight for; for in a just estimation, it is as great afolly to pay a Bunker-hill price for law, as for land. As I havealways considered the independancy of this continent, as an event, which sooner or later must arrive, so from the late rapid progress ofthe continent to maturity, the event could not be far off. Wherefore, on the breaking out of hostilities, it was not worth while to havedisputed a matter, which time would have finally redressed, unless wemeant to be in earnest; otherwise, it is like wasting an estate on asuit at law, to regulate the trespasses of a tenant, whose lease isjust expiring. No man was a warmer wisher for reconciliation thanmyself, before the fatal nineteenth of April 1775, but the moment theevent of that day was made known, I rejected the hardened, sullentempered Pharaoh of England for ever; and disdain the wretch, that withthe pretended title of FATHER OF HIS PEOPLE can unfeelingly hear oftheir slaughter, and composedly sleep with their blood upon his soul. 

But admitting that matters were now made up, what would be the event?I answer, the ruin of the continent. And that for several reasons. 

FIRST. The powers of governing still remaining in the hands of theking, he will have a negative over the whole legislation of thiscontinent. And as he hath shewn himself such an inveterate enemy toliberty, and discovered such a thirst for arbitrary power; is he, or ishe not, a proper man to say to these colonies, "YOU SHALL MAKE NO LAWSBUT WHAT I PLEASE. " And is there any inhabitant in America so ignorantas not to know, that according to what is called the PRESENTCONSTITUTION, that this continent can make no laws but what the kinggives leave to; and is there any man so unwise, as not to see, that(considering what has happened) he will suffer no law to be made here, but such as suit HIS purpose. We may be as effectually enslaved by thewant of laws in America, as by submitting to laws made for us inEngland. After matters are made up (as it is called) can there be anydoubt, but the whole power of the crown will be exerted, to keep thiscontinent as low and humble as possible? Instead of going forward weshall go backward, or be perpetually quarrelling or ridiculouslypetitioning. --WE are already greater than the king wishes us to be, and will he not hereafter endeavour to make us less? To bring thematter to one point. Is the power who is jealous of our prosperity, aproper power to govern us? Whoever says No to this question, is anINDEPENDANT, for independancy means no more, than, whether we shallmake our own laws, or whether the king, the greatest enemy thiscontinent hath, or can have, shall tell us "THERE SHALL BE NO LAWS BUTSUCH AS I LIKE. "

But the king you will say has a negative in England; the people therecan make no laws without his consent. In point of right and goodorder, there is something very ridiculous, that a youth of twenty-one(which hath often happened) shall say to several millions of people, older and wiser than himself, I forbid this or that act of yours to belaw. But in this place I decline this sort of reply, though I willnever cease to expose the absurdity of it, and only answer, thatEngland being the King's residence, and America not so, makes quiteanother case. The king's negative HERE is ten times more dangerous andfatal than it can be in England, for THERE he will scarcely refuse hisconsent to a bill for putting England into as strong a state of defenseas possible, and in America he would never suffer such a bill to bepassed. 

America is only a secondary object in the system of British politics, England consults the good of THIS country, no farther than it answersher OWN purpose. Wherefore, her own interest leads her to suppress thegrowth of OURS in every case which doth not promote her advantage, orin the least interferes with it. A pretty state we should soon be inunder such a secondhand government, considering what has happened! Mendo not change from enemies to friends by the alteration of a name: Andin order to shew that reconciliation now is a dangerous doctrine, Iaffirm, THAT IT WOULD BE POLICY IN THE KING AT THIS TIME, TO REPEAL THEACTS FOR THE SAKE OF REINSTATING HIMSELF IN THE GOVERNMENT OF THEPROVINCES; in order, that HE MAY ACCOMPLISH BY CRAFT AND SUBTLETY, INTHE LONG RUN, WHAT HE CANNOT DO BY FORCE AND VIOLENCE IN THE SHORT ONE. Reconciliation and ruin are nearly related. 

SECONDLY. That as even the best terms, which we can expect to obtain, can amount to no more than a temporary expedient, or a kind ofgovernment by guardianship, which can last no longer than till thecolonies come of age, so the general face and state of things, in theinterim, will be unsettled and unpromising. Emigrants of property willnot choose to come to a country whose form of government hangs but by athread, and who is every day tottering on the brink of commotion anddisturbance; and numbers of the present inhabitants would lay hold ofthe interval, to dispense of their effects, and quit the continent. 

But the most powerful of all arguments, is, that nothing butindependence, i. E. A continental form of government, can keep thepeace of the continent and preserve it inviolate from civil wars. Idread the event of a reconciliation with Britain now, as it is morethan probable, that it will be followed by a revolt somewhere or other, the consequences of which may be far more fatal than all the malice ofBritain. 

Thousands are already ruined by British barbarity; (thousands more willprobably suffer the same fate. ) Those men have other feelings than uswho have nothing suffered. All they NOW possess is liberty, what theybefore enjoyed is sacrificed to its service, and having nothing more tolose, they disdain submission. Besides, the general temper of thecolonies, towards a British government, will be like that of a youth, who is nearly out of his time; they will care very little about her. And a government which cannot preserve the peace, is no government atall, and in that case we pay our money for nothing; and pray what is itthat Britain can do, whose power will be wholly on paper, should acivil tumult break out the very day after reconciliation! I have heardsome men say, many of whom I believe spoke without thinking, that theydreaded an independence, fearing that it would produce civil wars. Itis but seldom that our first thoughts are truly correct, and that isthe case here; for there are ten times more to dread from a patched upconnection than from independence. I make the sufferers case my own, and I protest, that were I driven from house and home, my propertydestroyed, and my circumstances ruined, that as man, sensible ofinjuries, I could never relish the doctrine of reconciliation, orconsider myself bound thereby. 

The colonies have manifested such a spirit of good order and obedienceto continental government, as is sufficient to make every reasonableperson easy and happy on that head. No man can assign the leastpretence for his fears, on any other grounds, than such as are trulychildish and ridiculous, viz. That one colony will be striving forsuperiority over another. 

Where there are no distinctions there can be no superiority, perfectequality affords no temptation. The republics of Europe are all (andwe may say always) in peace. Holland and Switzerland are without wars, foreign or domestic: Monarchical governments, it is true, are neverlong at rest; the crown itself is a temptation to enterprising ruffiansat HOME; and that degree of pride and insolence ever attendant on regalauthority, swells into a rupture with foreign powers, in instances, where a republican government, by being formed on more naturalprinciples, would negotiate the mistake. 

If there is any true cause of fear respecting independence, it isbecause no plan is yet laid down. Men do not see their way out--Wherefore, as an opening into that business, I offer the followinghints; at the same time modestly affirming, that I have no otheropinion of them myself, than that they may be the means of giving riseto something better. Could the straggling thoughts of individuals becollected, they would frequently form materials for wise and able mento improve into useful matter. 

LET the assemblies be annual, with a President only. Therepresentation more equal. Their business wholly domestic, and subjectto the authority of a Continental Congress. 

Let each colony be divided into six, eight, or ten, convenientdistricts, each district to send a proper number of delegates toCongress, so that each colony send at least thirty. The whole numberin Congress will be at least 390. Each Congress to sit and to choose apresident by the following method. When the delegates are met, let acolony be taken from the whole thirteen colonies by lot, after which, let the whole Congress choose (by ballot) a president from out of thedelegates of that province. In the next Congress, let a colony betaken by lot from twelve only, omitting that colony from which thepresident was taken in the former Congress, and so proceeding on tillthe whole thirteen shall have had their proper rotation. And in orderthat nothing may pass into a law but what is satisfactorily just notless than three fifths of the Congress to be called a majority-- Hethat will promote discord, under a government so equally formed asthis, would have joined Lucifer in his revolt. 

But as there is a peculiar delicacy, from whom, or in what manner, thisbusiness must first arise, and as it seems most agreeable andconsistent, that it should come from some intermediate body between thegoverned and the governors, that is, between the Congress and thepeople. Let a CONTINENTAL CONFERENCE be held, in the following manner, and for the following purpose. 

A committee of twenty-six members of Congress, viz. Two for eachcolony. Two Members from each House of Assembly, or ProvincialConvention; and five representatives of the people at large, to bechosen in the capital city or town of each province, for and in behalfof the whole province, by as many qualified voters as shall thinkproper to attend from all parts of the province for that purpose; or, if more convenient, the representatives may be chosen in two or threeof the most populous parts thereof. In this conference, thusassembled, will be united, the two grand principles of businessKNOWLEDGE and POWER. The members of Congress, Assemblies, orConventions, by having had experience in national concerns, will beable and useful counsellors, and the whole, being empowered by thepeople, will have a truly legal authority. 

The conferring members being met, let their business be to frame aCONTINENTAL CHARTER, or Charter of the United Colonies; (answering towhat is called the Magna Carta of England) fixing the number and mannerof choosing members of Congress, members of Assembly, with their dateof sitting, and drawing the line of business and jurisdiction betweenthem: (Always remembering, that our strength is continental, notprovincial:) Securing freedom and property to all men, and above allthings, the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates ofconscience; with such other matter as is necessary for a charter tocontain. Immediately after which, the said Conference to dissolve, andthe bodies which shall be chosen comformable to the said charter, to bethe legislators and governors of this continent for the time being:Whose peace and happiness may God preserve, Amen. 

Should any body of men be hereafter delegated for this or some similarpurpose, I offer them the following extracts from that wise observer ongovernments DRAGONETTI. "The science" says he "of the politicianconsists in fixing the true point of happiness and freedom. Those menwould deserve the gratitude of ages, who should discover a mode ofgovernment that contained the greatest sum of individual happiness, with the least national expense. "[1]

But where, says some, is the King of America? I'll tell you. Friend, he reigns above, and doth not make havoc of mankind like the RoyalBrute of Britain. Yet that we may not appear to be defective even inearthly honors, let a day be solemnly set apart for proclaiming thecharter; let it be brought forth placed on the divine law, the word ofGod; let a crown be placed thereon, by which the world may know, thatso far as we approve of monarchy, that in America THE LAW IS KING. Foras in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries thelaw OUGHT to be King; and there ought to be no other. But lest any illuse should afterwards arise, let the crown at the conclusion of theceremony, be demolished, and scattered among the people whose right itis. 

A government of our own is our natural right: And when a man seriouslyreflects on the precariousness of human affairs, he will becomeconvinced, that it is infinitely wiser and safer, to form aconstitution of our own in a cool deliberate manner, while we have itin our power, than to trust such an interesting event to time andchance. If we omit it now, some[2] Massanello may hereafter arise, who laying hold of popular disquietudes, may collect together thedesperate and the discontented, and by assuming to themselves thepowers of government, may sweep away the liberties of the continentlike a deluge. Should the government of America return again into thehands of Britain, the tottering situation of things will be atemptation for some desperate adventurer to try his fortune; and insuch a case, that relief can Britain give? Ere she could hear thenews, the fatal business might be done; and ourselves suffering likethe wretched Britons under the oppression of the Conqueror. Ye thatoppose independence now, ye know not what ye do; ye are opening a doorto eternal tyranny, by keeping vacant the seat of government. Thereare thousands, and tens of thousands, who would think it glorious toexpel from the continent that barbarous and hellish power, which hathstirred up the Indians and Negroes to destroy us; the cruelty hath adouble guilt, it is dealing brutally by us, and treacherously by them. 

To talk of friendship with those in whom our reason forbids us to havefaith, and our affections wounded through a thousand pores instruct usto detest, is madness and folly. Every day wears out the littleremains of kindred between us and them, and can there be any reason tohope, that as the relationship expires, the affection will increase, orthat we shall agree better, when we have ten times more and greaterconcerns to quarrel over than ever?

Ye that tell us of harmony and reconciliation, can ye restore to us thetime that is past? Can ye give to prostitution its former innocence?Neither can ye reconcile Britain and America. The last cord now isbroken, the people of England are presenting addresses against us. There are injuries which nature cannot forgive; she would cease to benature if she did. As well can the lover forgive the ravisher of hismistress, as the continent forgive the murders of Britain. TheAlmighty hath implanted in us these unextinguishable feelings for goodand wise purposes. They are the guardians of his image in our hearts. They distinguish us from the herd of common animals. The socialcompact would dissolve, and justice be extirpated the earth, or haveonly a casual existence were we callous to the touches of affection. The robber, and the murderer, would often escape unpunished, did notthe injuries which our tempers sustain, provoke us into justice. 

O ye that love mankind! Ye that dare oppose, not only the tyranny, butthe tyrant, stand forth! Every spot of the old world is overrun withoppression. Freedom hath been hunted round the globe. Asia, andAfrica, have long expelled her--Europe regards her like a stranger, andEngland hath given her warning to depart. O! receive the fugitive, andprepare in time an asylum for mankind. 

OF THE PRESENT _ABILITY_ OF _AMERICA_, WITH SOME MISCELLANEOUS _REFLECTIONS_

I have never met with a man, either in England or America, who hath notconfessed his opinion that a separation between the countries, wouldtake place one time or other: And there is no instance, in which wehave shewn less judgement, than in endeavouring to describe, what wecall the ripeness or fitness of the Continent for independence. 

As all men allow the measure, and vary only in their opinion of thetime, let us, in order to remove mistakes, take a general survey ofthings, and endeavour, if possible, to find out the VERY time. But weneed not go far, the inquiry ceases at once, for, the TIME HATH FOUNDUS. The general concurrence, the glorious union of all things provethe fact. 

It is not in numbers, but in unity, that our great strength lies; yetour present numbers are sufficient to repel the force of all the world. The Continent hath, at this time, the largest body of armed anddisciplined men of any power under Heaven; and is just arrived at thatpitch of strength, in which no single colony is able to support itself, and the whole, when united, can accomplish the matter, and either more, or, less than this, might be fatal in its effects. Our land force isalready sufficient, and as to naval affairs, we cannot be insensible, that Britain would never suffer an American man of war to be built, while the continent remained in her hands. Wherefore, we should be noforwarder an hundred years hence in that branch, than we are now; butthe truth is, we should be less so, because the timber of the countryis every day diminishing, and that, which will remain at last, will befar off and difficult to procure. 

Were the continent crowded with inhabitants, her sufferings under thepresent circumstances would be intolerable. The more seaport towns wehad, the more should we have both to defend and to lose. Our presentnumbers are so happily proportioned to our wants, that no man need beidle. The diminution of trade affords an army, and the necessities ofan army create a new trade. 

Debts we have none; and whatever we may contract on this account willserve as a glorious memento of our virtue. Can we but leave posteritywith a settled form of government, an independent constitution of itsown, the purchase at any price will be cheap. But to expend millionsfor the sake of getting a few vile acts repealed, and routing thepresent ministry only, is unworthy the charge, and is using posteritywith the utmost cruelty; because it is leaving them the great work todo, and a debt upon their backs, from which they derive no advantage. Such a thought is unworthy of a man of honor, and is the truecharacteristic of a narrow heart and a peddling politician. 

The debt we may contract doth not deserve our regard, if the work bebut accomplished. No nation ought to be without a debt. A nationaldebt is a national bond; and when it bears no interest, is in no case agrievance. Britain is oppressed with a debt of upwards of one hundredand forty millions sterling, for which she pays upwards of fourmillions interest. And as a compensation for her debt, she has a largenavy; America is without a debt, and without a navy; yet for thetwentieth part of the English national debt, could have a navy as largeagain. The navy of England is not worth, at this time, more than threemillions and an half sterling. 

The first and second editions of this pamphlet were published withoutthe following calculations, which are now given as a proof that theabove estimation of the navy is just. [3]

The charge of building a ship of each rate, and furnishing her withmasts, yards, sails and rigging, together with a proportion of eightmonths boatswain's and carpenter's seastores, as calculated by Mr. Burchett, Secretary to the navy. 

 pounds Sterling For a ship of a 100 guns - 35, 553 90 - - 29, 886 80 - - 23, 638 70 - - 17, 795 60 - - 14, 197 50 - - 10, 606 40 - - 7, 558 30 - - 5, 846 20 - - 3, 710

And from hence it is easy to sum up the value, or cost rather, of thewhole British navy, which in the year 1757, when it was at its greatestglory consisted of the following ships and guns:

 Ships. Guns. Cost of one. Cost of all 6 - 100 - 35, 553 - 213, 318 12 - 90 - 29, 886 - 358, 632 12 - 80 - 23, 638 - 283, 656 43 - 70 - 17, 785 - 764, 755 35 - 60 - 14, 197 - 496, 895 40 - 50 - 10, 606 - 424, 240 45 - 40 - 7, 558 - 340, 110 58 - 20 - 3, 710 - 215, 180

 85 Sloops, bombs, and fireships, one 2, 000 170, 000 with another, _________ Cost 3, 266, 786 Remains for guns, _________ 233, 214 _________ 3, 500, 000

No country on the globe is so happily situated, or so internallycapable of raising a fleet as America. Tar, timber, iron, and cordageare her natural produce. We need go abroad for nothing. Whereas theDutch, who make large profits by hiring out their ships of war to theSpaniards and Portuguese, are obliged to import most of their materialsthey use. We ought to view the building a fleet as an article ofcommerce, it being the natural manufactory of this country. It is thebest money we can lay out. A navy when finished is worth more than itcost. And is that nice point in national policy, in which commerce andprotection are united. Let us build; if we want them not, we can sell;and by that means replace our paper currency with ready gold and silver. 

In point of manning a fleet, people in general run into great errors;it is not necessary that one fourth part should he sailors. TheTerrible privateer, Captain Death, stood the hottest engagement of anyship last war, yet had not twenty sailors on board, though hercomplement of men was upwards of two hundred. A few able and socialsailors will soon instruct a sufficient number of active landmen in thecommon work of a ship. Wherefore, we never can be more capable tobegin on maritime matters than now, while our timber is standing, ourfisheries blocked up, and our sailors and shipwrights out of employ. Men of war of seventy and eighty guns were built forty years ago inNew-England, and why not the same now? Ship-building is America'sgreatest pride, and in which she will in time excel the whole world. The great empires of the east are mostly inland, and consequentlyexcluded from the possibility of rivalling her. Africa is in a stateof barbarism; and no power in Europe hath either such an extent ofcoast, or such an internal supply of materials. Where nature hathgiven the one, she has withheld the other; to America only hath shebeen liberal of both. The vast empire of Russia is almost shut outfrom the sea: wherefore, her boundless forests, her tar, iron, andcordage are only articles of commerce. 

In point of safety, ought we to be without a fleet? We are not thelittle people now, which we were sixty years ago; at that time we mighthave trusted our property in the streets, or fields rather; and sleptsecurely without locks or bolts to our doors or windows. The case nowis altered, and our methods of defense ought to improve with ourincrease of property. A common pirate, twelve months ago, might havecome up the Delaware, and laid the city of Philadelphia under instantcontribution, for what sum he pleased; and the same might have happenedto other places. Nay, any daring fellow, in a brig of fourteen orsixteen guns might have robbed the whole continent, and carried offhalf a million of money. These are circumstances which demand ourattention, and point out the necessity of naval protection. 

Some, perhaps, will say, that after we have made it up with Britain, she will protect us. Can we be so unwise as to mean, that she shallkeep a navy in our harbours for that purpose? Common sense will tellus, that the power which hath endeavoured to subdue us, is of allothers the most improper to defend us. Conquest may be effected underthe pretence of friendship; and ourselves after a long and braveresistance, be at last cheated into slavery. And if her ships are notto be admitted into our harbours, I would ask, how is she to protectus? A navy three or four thousand miles off can be of little use, andon sudden emergencies, none at all. Wherefore, if we must hereafterprotect ourselves, why not do it for ourselves?

The English list of ships of war, is long and formidable, but not atenth part of them are at any one time fit for service, numbers of themnot in being; yet their names are pompously continued in the list, ifonly a plank be left of the ship: and not a fifth part of such as arefit for service, can be spared on any one station at one time. TheEast and West Indies, Mediterranean, Africa, and other parts over whichBritain extends her claim, make large demands upon her navy. From amixture of prejudice and inattention, we have contracted a false notionrespecting the navy of England, and have talked as if we should havethe whole of it to encounter at once, and for that reason, supposed, that we must have one as large; which not being instantly practicable, have been made use of by a set of disguised Tories to discourage ourbeginning thereon. Nothing can be farther from truth than this; for ifAmerica had only a twentieth part of the naval force of Britain, shewould be by far an overmatch for her; because, as we neither have, norclaim any foreign dominion, our whole force would be employed on ourown coast, where we should, in the long run, have two to one theadvantage of those who had three or four thousand miles to sail over, before they could attack us, and the same distance to return in orderto refit and recruit. And although Britain, by her fleet, hath a checkover our trade to Europe, we have as large a one over her trade to theWest Indies, which, by laying in the neighbourhood of the continent, isentirely at its mercy. 

Some method might be fallen on to keep up a naval force in time ofpeace, if we should not judge it necessary to support a constant navy. If premiums were to be given to merchants, to build and employ in theirservice ships mounted with twenty, thirty, forty or fifty guns, (thepremiums to be in proportion to the loss of bulk to the merchants)fifty or sixty of those ships, with a few guardships on constant duty, would keep up a sufficient navy, and that without burdening ourselveswith the evil so loudly complained of in England, of suffering theirfleet, in time of peace to lie rotting in the docks. To unite thesinews of commerce and defense is sound policy; for when our strengthand our riches play into each other's hand, we need fear no externalenemy. 

In almost every article of defense we abound. Hemp flourishes even torankness, so that we need not want cordage. Our iron is superior tothat of other countries. Our small arms equal to any in the world. Cannon we can cast at pleasure. Saltpetre and gunpowder we are everyday producing. Our knowledge is hourly improving. Resolution is ourinherent character, and courage hath never yet forsaken us. Wherefore, what is it that we want? Why is it that we hesitate? From Britain wecan expect nothing but ruin. If she is once admitted to the governmentof America again, this Continent will not be worth living in. Jealousies will be always arising; insurrections will be constantlyhappening; and who will go forth to quell them? Who will venture hislife to reduce his own countrymen to a foreign obedience? Thedifference between Pennsylvania and Connecticut, respecting someunlocated lands, shews the insignificance of a British government, andfully proves, that nothing but Continental authority can regulateContinental matters. 

Another reason why the present time is preferable to all others, is, that the fewer our numbers are, the more land there is yet unoccupied, which instead of being lavished by the king on his worthlessdependants, may be hereafter applied, not only to the discharge of thepresent debt, but to the constant support of government. No nationunder heaven hath such an advantage at this. 

The infant state of the Colonies, as it is called, so far from beingagainst, is an argument in favour of independance. We are sufficientlynumerous, and were we more so, we might be less united. It is a matterworthy of observation, that the more a country is peopled, the smallertheir armies are. In military numbers, the ancients far exceeded themodems: and the reason is evident. For trade being the consequence ofpopulation, men become too much absorbed thereby to attend to anythingelse. Commerce diminishes the spirit, both of patriotism and militarydefence. And history sufficiently informs us, that the bravestachievements were always accomplished in the non-age of a nation. Withthe increase of commerce, England hath lost its spirit. The city ofLondon, notwithstanding its numbers, submits to continued insults withthe patience of a coward. The more men have to lose, the less willingare they to venture. The rich are in general slaves to fear, andsubmit to courtly power with the trembling duplicity of a Spaniel. 

Youth is the seed time of good habits, as well in nations as inindividuals. It might be difficult, if not impossible, to form theContinent into one government half a century hence. The vast varietyof interests, occasioned by an increase of trade and population, wouldcreate confusion. Colony would be against colony. Each being ablemight scorn each other's assistance: and while the proud and foolishgloried in their little distinctions, the wise would lament, that theunion had not been formed before. Wherefore, the PRESENT TIME is theTRUE TIME for establishing it. The intimacy which is contracted ininfancy, and the friendship which is formed in misfortune, are, of allothers, the most lasting and unalterable. Our present union is markedwith both these characters: we are young and we have been distressed;but our concord hath withstood our troubles, and fixes a memorable areafor posterity to glory in. 

The present time, likewise, is that peculiar time, which never happensto a nation but once, viz. The time of forming itself into agovernment. Most nations have let slip the opportunity, and by thatmeans have been compelled to receive laws from their conquerors, instead of making laws for themselves. First, they had a king, andthen a form of government; whereas, the articles or charter ofgovernment, should be formed first, and men delegated to execute themafterward but from the errors of other nations, let us learn wisdom, and lay hold of the present opportunity --TO BEGIN GOVERNMENT AT THERIGHT END. 

When William the Conqueror subdued England, he gave them law at thepoint of the sword; and until we consent, that the seat of government, in America, be legally and authoritatively occupied, we shall be indanger of having it filled by some fortunate ruffian, who may treat usin the same manner, and then, where will be our freedom? where ourproperty? As to religion, I hold it to be the indispensable duty ofall government, to protect all conscientious professors thereof, and Iknow of no other business which government hath to do therewith, Let aman throw aside that narrowness of soul, that selfishness of principle, which the niggards of all professions are so unwilling to part with, and he will be at delivered of his fears on that head. Suspicion isthe companion of mean souls, and the bane of all good society. Formyself, I fully and conscientiously believe, that it is the will of theAlmighty, that there should be diversity of religious opinions amongus: It affords a larger field for our Christian kindness. Were we allof one way of thinking, our religious dispositions would want matterfor probation; and on this liberal principle, I look on the variousdenominations among us, to be like children of the same family, differing only, in what is called, their Christian names. 

In page forty, I threw out a few thoughts on the propriety of aContinental Charter, (for I only presume to offer hints, not plans) andin this place, I take the liberty of rementioning the subject, byobserving, that a charter is to be understood as a bond of solemnobligation, which the whole enters into, to support the right of everyseparate part, whether of religion, personal freedom, or property. Afirm bargain and a right reckoning make long friends. 

In a former page I likewise mentioned the necessity of a large andequal representation; and there is no political matter which moredeserves our attention. A small number of electors, or a small numberof representatives, are equally dangerous. But if the number of therepresentatives be not only small, but unequal, the danger isincreased. As an instance of this, I mention the following; when theAssociators petition was before the House of Assembly of Pennsylvania;twenty-eight members only were present, all the Bucks county members, being eight, voted against it, and had seven of the Chester membersdone the same, this whole province had been governed by two countiesonly, and this danger it is always exposed to. The unwarrantablestretch likewise, which that house made in their last sitting, to gainan undue authority over the delegates of that province, ought to warnthe people at large, how they trust power out of their own hands. Aset of instructions for the Delegates were put together, which in pointof sense and business would have dishonoured a schoolboy, and afterbeing approved by a FEW, a VERY FEW without doors, were carried intothe House, and there passed IN BEHALF OF THE WHOLE COLONY; whereas, didthe whole colony know, with what ill-will that House hath entered onsome necessary public measures, they would not hesitate a moment tothink them unworthy of such a trust. 

Immediate necessity makes many things convenient, which if continuedwould grow into oppressions. Expedience and right are differentthings. When the calamities of America required a consultation, therewas no method so ready, or at that time so proper, as to appointpersons from the several Houses of Assembly for that purpose; and thewisdom with which they have proceeded hath preserved this continentfrom ruin. But as it is more than probable that we shall never bewithout a CONGRESS, every well wisher to good order, must own, that themode for choosing members of that body, deserves consideration. And Iput it as a question to those, who make a study of mankind, whetherrepresentation and election is not too great a power for one and thesame body of men to possess? When we are planning for posterity, weought to remember, that virtue is not hereditary. 

It is from our enemies that we often gain excellent maxims, and arefrequently surprised into reason by their mistakes, Mr. Cornwall (oneof the Lords of the Treasury) treated the petition of the New-YorkAssembly with contempt, because THAT House, he said, consisted but oftwenty-six members, which trifling number, he argued, could not withdecency be put for the whole. We thank him for his involuntaryhonesty. [4]

TO CONCLUDE, however strange it may appear to some, or howeverunwilling they may be to think so, matters not, but many strong andstriking reasons may be given, to shew, that nothing can settle ouraffairs so expeditiously as an open and determined declaration forindependance. Some of which are, FIRST. - It is the custom of nations, when any two are at war, for someother powers, not engaged in the quarrel, to step in as mediators, andbring about the preliminaries of a peace: but while America callsherself the Subject of Great Britain, no power, however well disposedshe may be, can offer her mediation. Wherefore, in our present statewe may quarrel on for ever. 

SECONDLY. - It is unreasonable to suppose, that France or Spain willgive us any kind of assistance, if we mean only, to make use of thatassistance for the purpose of repairing the breach, and strengtheningthe connection between Britain and America; because, those powers wouldbe sufferers by the consequences. 

THIRDLY. - While we profess ourselves the subjects of Britain, we must, in the eye of foreign nations, be considered as rebels. The precedentis somewhat dangerous to THEIR PEACE, for men to be in arms under thename of subjects; we, on the spot, can solve the paradox: but to uniteresistance and subjection, requires an idea much too refined for commonunderstanding. 

FOURTHLY. - Were a manifesto to be published, and despatched to foreigncourts, setting forth the miseries we have endured, and the peaceablemethods we have ineffectually used for redress; declaring, at the sametime, that not being able, any longer, to live happily or safely underthe cruel disposition of the British court, we had been driven to thenecessity of breaking off all connections with her; at the same time, assuring all such courts of our peaceable disposition towards them, andof our desire of entering into trade with them: Such a memorial wouldproduce more good effects to this Continent, than if a ship werefreighted with petitions to Britain. 

Under our present denomination of British subjects, we can neither bereceived nor heard abroad: The custom of all courts is against us, andwill be so, until, by an independance, we take rank with other nations. 

These proceedings may at first appear strange and difficult; but, likeall other steps which we have already passed over, will in a littletime become familiar and agreeable; and, until an independance isdeclared, the Continent will feel itself like a man who continuesputting off some unpleasant business from day to day, yet knows it mustbe done, hates to set about it, wishes it over, and is continuallyhaunted with the thoughts of its necessity. 

APPENDIX

Since the publication of the first edition of this pamphlet, or rather, on the same day on which it came out, the King's Speech made itsappearance in this city. Had the spirit of prophecy directed the birthof this production, it could not have brought it forth, at a moreseasonable juncture, or a more necessary time. The bloody mindednessof the one, shew the necessity of pursuing the doctrine of the other. Men read by way of revenge. And the Speech, instead of terrifying, prepared a way for the manly principles of Independance. 

Ceremony, and even, silence, from whatever motive they may arise, havea hurtful tendency, when they give the least degree of countenance tobase and wicked performances; wherefore, if this maxim be admitted, itnaturally follows, that the King's Speech, as being a piece of finishedvillany, deserved, and still deserves, a general execration both by theCongress and the people. Yet, as the domestic tranquillity of anation, depends greatly, on the CHASTITY of what may properly be calledNATIONAL MANNERS, it is often better, to pass some things over insilent disdain, than to make use of such new methods of dislike, asmight introduce the least innovation, on that guardian of our peace andsafety. And, perhaps, it is chiefly owing to this prudent delicacy, that the King's Speech, hath not, before now, suffered a publicexecution. The Speech if it may be called one, is nothing better thana wilful audacious libel against the truth, the common good, and theexistence of mankind; and is a formal and pompous method of offering uphuman sacrifices to the pride of tyrants. But this general massacre ofmankind is one of the privileges, and the certain consequence of Kings;for as nature knows them NOT, they know NOT HER, and although they arebeings of our OWN creating, they know not US, and are become the godsof their creators. The Speech hath one good quality, which is, that itis not calculated to deceive, neither can we, even if we would, bedeceived by it. Brutality and tyranny appear on the face of it. Itleaves us at no loss: And every line convinces, even in the moment ofreading, that He, who hunts the woods for prey, the naked and untutoredIndian, is less a Savage than the King of Britain. 

Sir John Dalrymple, the putative father of a whining jesuitical piece, fallaciously called, "THE ADDRESS OF THE PEOPLE OF _ENGLAND_ TO THEINHABITANTS OF _AMERICA_, " hath, perhaps, from a vain supposition, thatthe people here were to be frightened at the pomp and description of aking, given, (though very unwisely on his part) the real character ofthe present one: "But" says this writer, "if you are inclined to paycompliments to an administration, which we do not complain of, "(meaning the Marquis of Rockingham's at the repeal of the Stamp Act)"it is very unfair in you to withhold them from that prince by WHOSE_NOD ALONE_ THEY WERE PERMITTED TO DO ANY THING. " This is toryism witha witness! Here is idolatry even without a mask: And he who can calmlyhear, and digest such doctrine, hath forfeited his claim to rationalityan apostate from the order of manhood; and ought to be considered asone, who hath not only given up the proper dignity of man, but sunkhimself beneath the rank of animals, and contemptibly crawl through theworld like a worm. 

However, it matters very little now, what the king of England eithersays or does; he hath wickedly broken through every moral and humanobligation, trampled nature and conscience beneath his feet; and by asteady and constitutional spirit of insolence and cruelty, procured forhimself an universal hatred. It is NOW the interest of America toprovide for herself. She hath already a large and young family, whomit is more her duty to take care of, than to be granting away herproperty, to support a power who is become a reproach to the names ofmen and christians--YE, whose office it is to watch over the morals ofa nation, of whatsoever sect or denomination ye are of, as well as ye, who, are more immediately the guardians of the public liberty, if yewish to preserve your native country uncontaminated by Europeancorruption, ye must in secret wish a separation--But leaving the moralpart to private reflection, I shall chiefly confine my farther remarksto the following heads. 

First. That it is the interest of America to be separated from Britain. 

Secondly. Which is the easiest and most practicable plan, RECONCILIATION OR INDEPENDANCE? With some occasional remarks. 

In support of the first, I could, if I judged it proper, produce theopinion of some of the ablest and most experienced men on thiscontinent; and whose sentiments, on that head, are not yet publiclyknown. It is in reality a self-evident position: For no nation in astate of foreign dependance, limited in its commerce, and cramped andfettered in its legislative powers, can ever arrive at any materialeminence. America doth not yet know what opulence is; and although theprogress which she hath made stands unparalleled in the history ofother nations, it is but childhood, compared with what she would becapable of arriving at, had she, as she ought to have, the legislativepowers in her own hands. England is, at this time, proudly covetingwhat would do her no good, were she to accomplish it; and the Continenthesitating on a matter, which will be her final ruin if neglected. Itis the commerce and not the conquest of America, by which England is tobe benefited, and that would in a great measure continue, were thecountries as independant of each other as France and Spain; because inmany articles, neither can go to a better market. But it is theindependance of this country of Britain or any other, which is now themain and only object worthy of contention, and which, like all othertruths discovered by necessity, will appear clearer and stronger everyday. 

First. Because it will come to that one time or other. 

Secondly. Because, the longer it is delayed the harder it will be toaccomplish. 

I have frequently amused myself both in public and private companies, with silently remarking, the specious errors of those who speak withoutreflecting. And among the many which I have heard, the following seemsthe most general, viz. That had this rupture happened forty or fiftyyears hence, instead of NOW, the Continent would have been more able tohave shaken off the dependance. To which I reply, that our militaryability, AT THIS TIME, arises from the experience gained in the lastwar, and which in forty or fifty years time, would have been totallyextinct. The Continent, would not, by that time, have had a General, or even a military officer left; and we, or those who may succeed us, would have been as ignorant of martial matters as the ancient Indians:And this single position, closely attended to, will unanswerably prove, that the present time is preferable to all others. The argument turnsthus--at the conclusion of the last war, we had experience, but wantednumbers; and forty or fifty years hence, we should have numbers, without experience; wherefore, the proper point of time, must be someparticular point between the two extremes, in which a sufficiency ofthe former remains, and a proper increase of the latter is obtained:And that point of time is the present time. 

The reader will pardon this digression, as it does not properly comeunder the head I first set out with, and to which I again return by thefollowing position, viz. 

Should affairs be patched up with Britain, and she to remain thegoverning and sovereign power of America, (which, as matters are nowcircumstanced, is giving up the point entirely) we shall depriveourselves of the very means of sinking the debt we have, or maycontract. The value of the back lands which some of the provinces areclandestinely deprived of, by the unjust extension of the limits ofCanada, valued only at five pounds sterling per hundred acres, amountto upwards of twenty-five millions, Pennsylvania currency; and thequit-rents at one penny sterling per acre, to two millions yearly. 

It is by the sale of those lands that the debt may be sunk, withoutburthen to any, and the quit-rent reserved thereon, will always lessen, and in time, will wholly support the yearly expence of government. Itmatters not how long the debt is in paying, so that the lands when soldbe applied to the discharge of it, and for the execution of which, theCongress for the time being, will be the continental trustees. 

I proceed now to the second head, viz. Which is the easiest and mostpracticable plan, RECONCILIATION or INDEPENDANCE; With some occasionalremarks. 

He who takes nature for his guide is not easily beaten out of hisargument, and on that ground, I answer GENERALLY--THAT _INDEPENDANCE_BEING A _SINGLE SIMPLE LINE, _ CONTAINED WITHIN OURSELVES; ANDRECONCILIATION, A MATTER EXCEEDINGLY PERPLEXED AND COMPLICATED, AND INWHICH, A TREACHEROUS CAPRICIOUS COURT IS TO INTERFERE, GIVES THE ANSWERWITHOUT A DOUBT. 

The present state of America is truly alarming to every man who iscapable of reflexion. Without law, without government, without anyother mode of power than what is founded on, and granted by courtesy. Held together by an unexampled concurrence of sentiment, which, isnevertheless subject to change, and which, every secret enemy isendeavouring to dissolve. Our present condition, is, Legislationwithout law; wisdom without a plan; a constitution without a name; and, what is strangely astonishing, perfect Independance contending fordependance. The instance is without a precedent; the case neverexisted before; and who can tell what may be the event? The propertyof no man is secure in the present unbraced system of things. The mindof the multitude is left at random, and seeing no fixed object beforethem, they pursue such as fancy or opinion starts. Nothing iscriminal; there is no such thing as treason; wherefore, every onethinks himself at liberty to act as he pleases. The Tories dared nothave assembled offensively, had they known that their lives, by thatact, were forfeited to the laws of the state. A line of distinctionshould be drawn, between, English soldiers taken in battle, andinhabitants of America taken in arms. The first are prisoners, but thelatter traitors. The one forfeits his liberty, the other his head. 

Notwithstanding our wisdom, there is a visible feebleness in some ofour proceedings which gives encouragement to dissensions. TheContinental Belt is too loosely buckled. And if something is not donein time, it will be too late to do any thing, and we shall fall into astate, in which, neither RECONCILIATION nor INDEPENDANCE will bepracticable. The king and his worthless adherents are got at their oldgame of dividing the Continent, and there are not wanting among us, Printers, who will be busy in spreading specious falsehoods. Theartful and hypocritical letter which appeared a few months ago in twoof the New York papers, and likewise in two others, is an evidence thatthere are men who want either judgment or honesty. 

It is easy getting into holes and corners and talking ofreconciliation: But do such men seriously consider, how difficult thetask is, and how dangerous it may prove, should the Continent dividethereon. Do they take within their view, all the various orders of menwhose situation and circumstances, as well as their own, are to beconsidered therein. Do they put themselves in the place of thesufferer whose ALL is ALREADY gone, and of the soldier, who hathquitted ALL for the defence of his country. If their ill judgedmoderation be suited to their own private situations only, regardlessof others, the event will convince them, that "they are reckoningwithout their Host. "

Put us, says some, on the footing we were on in sixty-three: To which Ianswer, the request is not now in the power of Britain to comply with, neither will she propose it; but if it were, and even should begranted, I ask, as a reasonable question, By what means is such acorrupt and faithless court to be kept to its engagements? Anotherparliament, nay, even the present, may hereafter repeal the obligation, on the pretense, of its being violently obtained, or unwisely granted;and in that case, Where is our redress?--No going to law with nations;cannon are the barristers of Crowns; and the sword, not of justice, butof war, decides the suit. To be on the footing of sixty-three, it isnot sufficient, that the laws only be put on the same state, but, thatour circumstances, likewise, be put on the same state; Our burnt anddestroyed towns repaired or built up, our private losses made good, ourpublic debts (contracted for defence) discharged; otherwise, we shallbe millions worse than we were at that enviable period. Such arequest, had it been complied with a year ago, would have won the heartand soul of the Continent--but now it is too late, "The Rubicon ispassed. "

Besides, the taking up arms, merely to enforce the repeal of apecuniary law, seems as unwarrantable by the divine law, and asrepugnant to human feelings, as the taking up arms to enforce obediencethereto. The object, on either side, doth not justify the means; forthe lives of men are too valuable to be cast away on such trifles. Itis the violence which is done and threatened to our persons; thedestruction of our property by an armed force; the invasion of ourcountry by fire and sword, which conscientiously qualifies the use ofarms: And the instant, in which such a mode of defence becamenecessary, all subjection to Britain ought to have ceased; and theindependancy of America, should have been considered, as dating itsaera from, and published by, THE FIRST MUSKET THAT WAS FIRED AGAINSTHER. This line is a line of consistency; neither drawn by caprice, norextended by ambition; but produced by a chain of events, of which thecolonies were not the authors. 

I shall conclude these remarks with the following timely and wellintended hints. We ought to reflect, that there are three differentways by which an independancy may hereafter be effected; and that ONEof those THREE, will one day or other, be the fate of America, viz. Bythe legal voice of the people in Congress; by a military power; or by amob--It may not always happen that OUR soldiers are citizens, and themultitude a body of reasonable men; virtue, as I have already remarked, is not hereditary, neither is it perpetual. Should an independancy bebrought about by the first of those means, we have every opportunityand every encouragement before us, to form the noblest purestconstitution on the face of the earth. We have it in our power tobegin the world over again. A situation, similar to the present, hathnot happened since the days of Noah until now. The birthday of a newworld is at hand, and a race of men, perhaps as numerous as all Europecontains, are to receive their portion of freedom from the event of afew months. The Reflexion is awful--and in this point of view, Howtrifling, how ridiculous, do the little, paltry cavillings, of a fewweak or interested men appear, when weighed against the business of aworld. 

Should we neglect the present favourable and inviting period, and anIndependance be hereafter effected by any other means, we must chargethe consequence to ourselves, or to those rather, whose narrow andprejudiced souls, are habitually opposing the measure, without eitherinquiring or reflecting. There are reasons to be given in support ofIndependance, which men should rather privately think of, than bepublicly told of. We ought not now to be debating whether we shall beindependant or not, but, anxious to accomplish it on a firm, secure, and honorable basis, and uneasy rather that it is not yet began upon. Every day convinces us of its necessity. Even the Tories (if suchbeings yet remain among us) should, of all men, be the most solicitousto promote it; for, as the appointment of committees at first, protected them from popular rage, so, a wise and well established formof government, will be the only certain means of continuing it securelyto them. WHEREFORE, if they have not virtue enough to be WHIGS, theyought to have prudence enough to wish for Independance. 

In short, Independance is the only BOND that can tye and keep ustogether. We shall then see our object, and our ears will be legallyshut against the schemes of an intriguing, as well, as a cruel enemy. We shall then too, be on a proper footing, to treat with Britain; forthere is reason to conclude, that the pride of that court, will be lesshurt by treating with the American states for terms of peace, than withthose, whom she denominates, "rebellious subjects, " for terms ofaccommodation. It is our delaying it that encourages her to hope forconquest, and our backwardness tends only to prolong the war. As wehave, without any good effect therefrom, withheld our trade to obtain aredress of our grievances, let us now try the alternative, byindependantly redressing them ourselves, and then offering to open thetrade. The mercantile and reasonable part in England, will be stillwith us; because, peace with trade, is preferable to war without it. And if this offer be not accepted, other courts may be applied to. 

On these grounds I rest the matter. And as no offer hath yet been madeto refute the doctrine contained in the former editions of thispamphlet, it is a negative proof, that either the doctrine cannot berefuted, or, that the party in favour of it are too numerous to beopposed. WHEREFORE, instead of gazing at each other with suspicious ordoubtful curiosity; let each of us, hold out to his neighbour thehearty hand of friendship, and unite in drawing a line, which, like anact of oblivion shall bury in forgetfulness every former dissension. Let the names of Whig and Tory be extinct; and let none other be heardamong us, than those of A GOOD CITIZEN, AN OPEN AND RESOLUTE FRIEND, AND A VIRTUOUS SUPPORTER OF THE RIGHTS OF MANKIND AND OF THE _FREE ANDINDEPENDANT STATES OF AMERICA_. 

To the Representatives of the Religious Society of the People calledQuakers, or to so many of them as were concerned in publishing the latepiece, entitled "THE ANCIENT TESTIMONY and PRINCIPLES of the Peoplecalled QUAKERS renewed, with Respect to the KING and GOVERNMENT, andtouching the COMMOTIONS now prevailing in these and other parts ofAMERICA addressed to the PEOPLE IN GENERAL. "

The Writer of this, is one of those few, who never dishonours religioneither by ridiculing, or cavilling at any denomination whatsoever. ToGod, and not to man, are all men accountable on the score of religion. Wherefore, this epistle is not so properly addressed to you as areligious, but as a political body, dabbling in matters, which theprofessed Quietude of your Principles instruct you not to meddle with. As you have, without a proper authority for so doing, put yourselves inthe place of the whole body of the Quakers, so, the writer of this, inorder to be on an equal rank with yourselves, is under the necessity, of putting himself in the place of all those, who, approve the verywritings and principles, against which, your testimony is directed:And he hath chosen this singular situation, in order, that you mightdiscover in him that presumption of character which you cannot see inyourselves. For neither he nor you can have any claim or title toPOLITICAL REPRESENTATION. 

When men have departed from the right way, it is no wonder that theystumble and fall. And it is evident from the manner in which ye havemanaged your testimony, that politics, (as a religious body of men) isnot your proper Walk; for however well adapted it might appear to you, it is, nevertheless, a jumble of good and bad put unwisely together, and the conclusion drawn therefrom, both unnatural and unjust. 

The two first pages, (and the whole doth not make four) we give youcredit for, and expect the same civility from you, because the love anddesire of peace is not confined to Quakerism, it is the natural, aswell the religious wish of all denominations of men. And on thisground, as men labouring to establish an Independant Constitution ofour own, do we exceed all others in our hope, end, and aim. OUR PLANIS PEACE FOR EVER. We are tired of contention with Britain, and cansee no real end to it but in a final separation. We act consistently, because for the sake of introducing an endless and uninterrupted peace, do we bear the evils and burthens of the present day. We areendeavoring, and will steadily continue to endeavour, to separate anddissolve a connexion which hath already filled our land with blood; andwhich, while the name of it remains, will be the fatal cause of futuremischiefs to both countries. 

We fight neither for revenge nor conquest; neither from pride norpassion; we are not insulting the world with our fleets and armies, norravaging the globe for plunder. Beneath the shade of our own vines arewe attacked; in our own houses, and on our own lands, is the violencecommitted against us. We view our enemies in the character ofHighwaymen and Housebreakers, and having no defence for ourselves inthe civil law, are obliged to punish them by the military one, andapply the sword, in the very case, where you have before now, appliedthe halter-- Perhaps we feel for the ruined and insulted sufferers inall and every part of the continent, with a degree of tenderness whichhath not yet made its way into some of your bosoms. But be ye surethat ye mistake not the cause and ground of your Testimony. Call notcoldness of soul, religion; nor put the BIGOT in the place of theCHRISTIAN. 

O ye partial ministers of your own acknowledged principles. If thebearing arms be sinful, the first going to war must be more so, by allthe difference between wilful attack, and unavoidable defence. Wherefore, if ye really preach from conscience, and mean not to make apolitical hobbyhorse of your religion convince the world thereof, byproclaiming your doctrine to our enemies, FOR THEY LIKEWISE BEAR_ARMS_. Give us proof of your sincerity by publishing it at St. James's, to the commanders in chief at Boston, to the Admirals andCaptains who are piratically ravaging our coasts, and to all themurdering miscreants who are acting in authority under HIM whom yeprofess to serve. Had ye the honest soul of BARCLAY ye would preachrepentance to YOUR king; Ye would tell the Royal Wretch his sins, andwarn him of eternal ruin. [5] Ye would not spend your partial invectivesagainst the injured and the insulted only, but, like faithfulministers, would cry aloud and SPARE NONE. Say not that ye arepersecuted, neither endeavour to make us the authors of that reproach, which, ye are bringing upon yourselves; for we testify unto all men, that we do not complain against you because ye are Quakers, but becauseye pretend to be and are NOT Quakers. 

Alas! it seems by the particular tendency of some part of yourtestimony, and other parts of your conduct, as if, all sin was reducedto, and comprehended in, THE ACT OF BEARING ARMS, and that by thepeople only. Ye appear to us, to have mistaken party for conscience;because, the general tenor of your actions wants uniformity--And it isexceedingly difficult to us to give credit to many of your pretendedscruples; because, we see them made by the same men, who, in the veryinstant that they are exclaiming against the mammon of this world, arenevertheless, hunting after it with a step as steady as Time, and anappetite as keen as Death. 

The quotation which ye have made from Proverbs, in the third page ofyour testimony, that, "when a man's ways please the Lord, he maketheven his enemies to be at peace with him"; is very unwisely chosen onyour part; because, it amounts to a proof, that the king's ways (whomye are desirous of supporting) do NOT please the Lord, otherwise, hisreign would be in peace. 

I now proceed to the latter part of your testimony, and that, for whichall the foregoing seems only an introduction viz. 

"It hath ever been our judgment and principle, since we were called toprofess the light of Christ Jesus, manifested in our consciences untothis day, that the setting up and putting down kings and governments, is God's peculiar prerogative; for causes best known to himself: Andthat it is not our business to have any hand or contrivance therein;nor to be busy bodies above our station, much less to plot and contrivethe ruin, or overturn of any of them, but to pray for the king, andsafety of our nation, and good of all men--That we may live a peaceableand quiet life, in all godliness and honesty; UNDER THE GOVERNMENTWHICH GOD IS PLEASED TO SET OVER US"--If these are REALLY yourprinciples why do ye not abide by them? Why do ye not leave that, which ye call God's Work, to be managed by himself? These veryprinciples instruct you to wait with patience and humility, for theevent of all public measures, and to receive that event as the divinewill towards you. Wherefore, what occasion is there for your POLITICALTESTIMONY if you fully believe what it contains? And the verypublishing it proves, that either, ye do not believe what ye profess, or have not virtue enough to practise what ye believe. 

The principles of Quakerism have a direct tendency to make a man thequiet and inoffensive subject of any, and every government WHICH IS SETOVER HIM. And if the setting up and putting down of kings andgovernments is God's peculiar prerogative, he most certainly will notbe robbed thereof by us: wherefore, the principle itself leads you toapprove of every thing, which ever happened, or may happen to kings asbeing his work. OLIVER CROMWELL thanks you. CHARLES, then, died notby the hands of man; and should the present Proud Imitator of him, cometo the same untimely end, the writers and publishers of the Testimony, are bound, by the doctrine it contains, to applaud the fact. Kings arenot taken away by miracles, neither are changes in governments broughtabout by any other means than such as are common and human; and such aswe are now using. Even the dispersion of the Jews, though foretold byour Saviour, was effected by arms. Wherefore, as ye refuse to be themeans on one side, ye ought not to be meddlers on the other; but towait the issue in silence; and unless ye can produce divine authority, to prove, that the Almighty who hath created and placed this new world, at the greatest distance it could possibly stand, east and west, fromevery part of the old, doth, nevertheless, disapprove of its beingindependent of the corrupt and abandoned court of Britain, unless Isay, ye can shew this, how can ye on the ground of your principles, justify the exciting and stirring up the people "firmly to unite in theabhorrence of all such writings, and measures, as evidence a desire anddesign to break off the happy connexion we have hitherto enjoyed, withthe kingdom of Great-Britain, and our just and necessary subordinationto the king, and those who are lawfully placed in authority under him. "What a slap of the face is here! the men, who in the very paragraphbefore, have quietly and passively resigned up the ordering, altering, and disposal of kings and governments, into the hands of God, are now, recalling their principles, and putting in for a share of the business. Is it possible, that the conclusion, which is here justly quoted, canany ways follow from the doctrine laid down? The inconsistency is tooglaring not to be seen; the absurdity too great not to be laughed at;and such as could only have been made by those, whose understandingswere darkened by the narrow and crabby spirit of a despairing politicalparty; for ye are not to be considered as the whole body of the Quakersbut only as a factional and fractional part thereof. 

Here ends the examination of your testimony; (which I call upon no manto abhor, as ye have done, but only to read and judge of fairly;) towhich I subjoin the following remark; "That the setting up and puttingdown of kings, " most certainly mean, the making him a king, who is yetnot so, and the making him no king who is already one. And pray whathath this to do in the present case? We neither mean to set up nor topull down, neither to make nor to unmake, but to have nothing to dowith them. Wherefore, your testimony in whatever light it is viewedserves only to dishonor your judgement, and for many other reasons hadbetter have been let alone than published. 

First, Because it tends to the decrease and reproach of all religionwhatever, and is of the utmost danger to society to make it a party inpolitical disputes. 

Secondly, Because it exhibits a body of men, numbers of whom disavowthe publishing political testimonies, as being concerned therein andapprovers thereof. 

Thirdly, because it hath a tendency to undo that continental harmonyand friendship which yourselves by your late liberal and charitabledonations hath lent a hand to establish; and the preservation of which, is of the utmost consequence to us all. 

And here without anger or resentment I bid you farewell. Sincerelywishing, that as men and christians, ye may always fully anduninterruptedly enjoy every civil and religious right; and be, in yourturn, the means of securing it to others; but that the example which yehave unwisely set, of mingling religion with politics, MAY BE DISAVOWEDAND REPROBATED BY EVERY INHABITANT OF _AMERICA. _

[1] Dragonetti on virtue and rewards. 

[2] Thomas Anello otherwise Massanello a fisherman of Naples, who afterspiriting up his countrymen in the public marketplace, against theoppressions of the Spaniards, to whom the place was then subjectprompted them to revolt, and in the space of a day became king. 

[3] See Entic's naval history, intro. Page 56. 

[4] Those who would fully understand of what great consequence a largeand equal representation is to a state, should read Burgh's politicaldisquisitions. 

[5] "Thou hast tasted of prosperity and adversity; thou knowest what itis to be banished thy native country, to be over-ruled as well as torule, and set upon the throne; and being oppressed thou hast reason toknow how hateful the oppressor is both to God and man: If after allthese warnings and advertisements, thou dost not turn unto the Lordwith all thy heart, but forget him who remembered thee in thy distress, and give up thyself to fallow lust and vanity, surely great will be thycondemnation. -- Against which snare, as well as the temptation of thosewho may or do feed thee, and prompt thee to evil, the most excellentand prevalent remedy will be, to apply thyself to that light of Christwhich shineth in thy conscience, and which neither can, nor willflatter thee, nor suffer thee to be at ease in thy sins. "--Barclay'saddress to Charles II. 

F I N I S.