Thomas Jefferson on Rights

Resolved, that it be an instruction to the said deputies, when assembled in

general congress with the deputies from the other states of British America,

to propose to the said congress that an humble and dutiful address be

presented to his majesty, begging leave to lay before him, as chief

magistrate of the British empire, the united complaints of his majesty’s

subjects in America; complaints which are excited by many unwarrantable

encroachments and usurpations, attempted to be made by the legislature of

one part of the empire, upon those rights which God and the laws have given

equally and independently to all. To represent to his majesty that these his

states have often individually made humble application to his imperial

throne to obtain, through its intervention, some redress of their injured

rights, to none of which was ever even an answer condescended; humbly to

hope that this their joint address, penned in the language of truth, and

divested of those expressions of servility which would persuade his majesty

that we are asking favors, and not rights, shall obtain from his majesty a

more respectful acceptance. And this his majesty will think we have reason

to expect when he reflects that he is no more than the chief officer of the

people, appointed by the laws, and circumscribed with definite powers, to

assist in working the great machine of government, erected for their use,

and consequently subject to their superintendance. And in order that these

our rights, as well as the invasions of them, may be laid more fully before

his majesty, to take a view of them from the origin and first settlement of

these countries.

 

To remind him that our ancestors, before their emigration to America, were

the free inhabitants of the British dominions in Europe, and possessed a

right which nature has given to all men, of departing from the country in

which chance, not choice, has placed them, of going in quest of new

habitations, and of there establishing new societies, under such laws and

regulations as to them shall seem most likely to promote public happiness.

That their Saxon ancestors had, under this universal law, in like manner

left their native wilds and woods in the north of Europe, had possessed

themselves of the island of Britain, then less charged with inhabitants, and

had established there that system of laws which has so long been the glory

and protection of that country. Nor was ever any claim of superiority or

dependence asserted over them by that mother country from which they had

migrated; and were such a claim made, it is believed that his majesty’s

subjects in Great Britain have too firm a feeling of the rights derived to

them from their ancestors, to bow down the sovereignty of their state before

such visionary pretensions. And it is thought that no circumstance has

occurred to distinguish materially the British from the Saxon emigration.

America was conquered, and her settlements made, and firmly established, at

the expense of individuals, and not of the British public. Their own blood

was spilt in acquiring lands for their settlement, their own fortunes

expended in making that settlement effectual; for themselves they fought,

for themselves they conquered, and for themselves alone they have right to

hold. Not a shilling was ever issued from the public treasures of his

majesty, or his ancestors, for their assistance, till of very late times,

after the colonies had become established on a firm and permanent footing.

That then, indeed, having become valuable to Great Britain for her

commercial purposes, his parliament was pleased to lend them assistance

against an enemy, who would fain have drawn to herself the benefits of their

commerce, to the great aggrandizement of herself, and danger of Great

Britain. Such assistance, and in such circumstances, they had often before

given to Portugal, and other allied states, with whom they carry on a

commercial intercourse; yet these states never supposed, that by calling in

her aid, they thereby submitted themselves to her sovereignty. Had such

terms been proposed, they would have rejected them with disdain, and trusted

for better to the moderation of their enemies, or to a vigorous exertion of

their own force. We do not, however, mean to under-rate those aids, which to

us were doubtless valuable, on whatever principles granted; but we would

shew that they cannot give a title to that authority which the British

parliament would arrogate over us, and that they may amply be repaid by our

giving to the inhabitants of Great Britain such exclusive privileges in

trade as may be advantageous to them, and at the same time not too

restrictive to ourselves. That settlements having been thus effected in the

wilds of America, the emigrants thought proper to adopt that system of laws

under which they had hitherto lived in the mother country, and to continue

their union with her by submitting themselves to the same common sovereign,

who was thereby made the central link connecting the several parts of the

empire thus newly multiplied.

 

But that not long were they permitted, however far they thought themselves

removed from the hand of oppression, to hold undisturbed the rights thus

acquired, at the hazard of their lives, and loss of their fortunes. A family

of princes was then on the British throne, whose treasonable crimes against

their people brought on them afterwards the exertion of those sacred and

sovereign rights of punishment reserved in the hands of the people for cases

of extreme necessity, and judged by the constitution unsafe to be delegated

to any other judicature. While every day brought forth some new and

unjustifiable exertion of power over their subjects on that side the water,

it was not to be expected that those here, much less able at that time to

oppose the designs of despotism, should be exempted from injury.

 

Accordingly that country, which had been acquired by the lives, the labours,

and the fortunes, of individual adventurers, was by these princes, at

several times, parted out and distributed among the favorites and

followers[1] of their fortunes, and, by an assumed right of the crown alone,

were erected into distinct and independent governments; a measure which it

is believed his majesty’s prudence and understanding would prevent him from

imitating at this day, as no exercise of such a power, of dividing and

dismembering a country, has ever occurred in his majesty’s realm of England,

though now of very antient standing; nor could it be justified or acquiesced

under there, or in any other part of his majesty’s empire.

 

That the exercise of a free trade with all parts of the world, possessed by

the American colonists, as of natural right, and which no law of their own

had taken away or abridged, was next the object of unjust encroachment. Some

of the colonies having thought proper to continue the administration of

their government in the name and under the authority of his majesty king

Charles the first, whom, notwithstanding his late deposition by the

commonwealth of England, they continued in the sovereignty of their state;

the parliament for the commonwealth took the same in high offence, and

assumed upon themselves the power of prohibiting their trade with all other

parts of the world, except the island of Great Britain. This arbitrary act,

however, they soon recalled, and by solemn treaty, entered into on the 12th

day of March, 1651, between the said commonwealth by their commissioners,

and the colony of Virginia by their house of burgesses, it was expressly

stipulated, by the 8th article of the said treaty, that they should have

“free trade as the people of England do enjoy to all places and with all

nations, according to the laws of that commonwealth.” But that, upon the

restoration of his majesty king Charles the second, their rights of free

commerce fell once more a victim to arbitrary power; and by several acts[2]

of his reign, as well as of some of his successors, the trade of the

colonies was laid under such restrictions, as shew what hopes they might

form from the justice of a British parliament, were its uncontrolled power

admitted over these states. History has informed us that bodies of men, as

well as individuals, are susceptible of the spirit of tyranny. A view of

these acts of parliament for regulation, as it has been affectedly called,

of the American trade, if all other evidence were removed out of the case,

would undeniably evince the truth of this observation. Besides the duties

they impose on our articles of export and import, they prohibit our going to

any markets northward of Cape Finesterre, in the kingdom of Spain, for the

sale of commodities which Great Britain will not take from us, and for the

purchase of others, with which she cannot supply us, and that for no other

than the arbitrary purposes of purchasing for themselves, by a sacrifice of

our rights and interests, certain privileges in their commerce with an

allied state, who in confidence that their exclusive trade with America will

be continued, while the principles and power of the British parliament be

the same, have indulged themselves in every exorbitance which their avarice

could dictate, or our necessities extort; have raised their commodities,

called for in America, to the double and treble of what they sold for before

such exclusive privileges were given them, and of what better commodities of

the same kind would cost us elsewhere, and at the same time give us much

less for what we carry thither than might be had at more convenient ports.

That these acts prohibit us from carrying in quest of other purchasers the

surplus of our tobaccos remaining after the consumption of Great Britain is

supplied; so that we must leave them with the British merchant for whatever

he will please to allow us, to be by him reshipped to foreign markets, where

he will reap the benefits of making sale of them for full value. That to

heighten still the idea of parliamentary justice, and to shew with what

moderation they are like to exercise power, where themselves are to feel no

part of its weight, we take leave to mention to his majesty certain other

acts of British parliament, by which they would prohibit us from

manufacturing for our own use the articles we raise on our own lands with

our own labor. By an act[3] passed in the 5th Year of the reign of his late

majesty king George the second, an American subject is forbidden to make a

hat for himself of the fur which he has taken perhaps on his own soil; an

instance of despotism to which no parallel can be produced in the most

arbitrary ages of British history. By one other act,[4] passed in the 23d

year of the same reign, the iron which we make we are forbidden to

manufacture, and heavy as that article is, and necessary in every branch of

husbandry, besides commission and insurance, we are to pay freight for it to

Great Britain, and freight for it back again, for the purpose of supporting

not men, but machines, in the island of Great Britain. In the same spirit of

equal and impartial legislation is to be viewed the act of parliament,[5]

passed in the 5th year of the same reign, by which American lands are made

subject to the demands of British creditors, while their own lands were

still continued unanswerable for their debts; from which one of these

conclusions must necessarily follow, either that justice is not the same in

America as in Britain, or else that the British parliament pay less regard

to it here than there. But that we do not point out to his majesty the

injustice of these acts, with intent to rest on that principle the cause of

their nullity; but to shew that experience confirms the propriety of those

political principles which exempt us from the jurisdiction of the British

parliament. The true ground on which we declare these acts void is, that the

British parliament has no right to exercise authority over us.

 

That these exercises of usurped power have not been confined to instances

alone, in which themselves were interested, but they have also intermeddled

with the regulation of the internal affairs of the colonies. The act of the

9th of Anne for establishing a post office in America seems to have had

little connection with British convenience, except that of accommodating his

majesty’s ministers and favorites with the sale of a lucrative and easy

office.

 

That thus have we hastened through the reigns which preceded his majesty’s,

during which the violations of our right were less alarming, because

repeated at more distant intervals than that rapid and bold succession of

injuries which is likely to distinguish the present from all other periods

of American story. Scarcely have our minds been able to emerge from the

astonishment into which one stroke of parliamentary thunder has involved us,

before another more heavy, and more alarming, is fallen on us. Single acts

of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series

of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period, and pursued unalterably

through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate and

systematical plan of reducing us to slavery.

 

That the act[6] passed in the 4th year of his majesty’s reign, entitled “An

act for granting certain duties in the British colonies and plantations in

America, &c.”

 

One other act,[7] passed in the 5th year of his reign, entitled “An act for

granting and applying certain stamp duties and other duties in the British

colonies and plantations in America, &c.”

 

One other act,[8] passed in the 6th year of his reign, entitled “An act for

the better securing the dependency of his majesty’s dominions in America

upon the crown and parliament of Great Britain;” and one other act,[9]

passed in the 7th year of his reign, entitled “An act for granting duties on

paper, tea, &c.” form that connected chain of parliamentary usurpation,

which has already been the subject of frequent applications to his majesty,

and the houses of lords and commons of Great Britain; and no answers having

yet been condescended to any of these, we shall not trouble his majesty with

a repetition of the matters they contained.

 

But that one other act,[10] passed in the same 7th year of the reign, having

been a peculiar attempt, must ever require peculiar mention; it is entitled

“An act for suspending the legislature of New York.” One free and

independent legislature hereby takes upon itself to suspend the powers of

another, free and independent as itself; thus exhibiting a phenomenon

unknown in nature, the creator and creature of its own power. Not only the

principles of common sense, but the common feelings of human nature, must be

surrendered up before his majesty’s subjects here can be persuaded to

believe that they hold their political existence at the will of a British

parliament. Shall these governments be dissolved, their property

annihilated, and their people reduced to a state of nature, at the imperious

breath of a body of men, whom they never saw, in whom they never confided,

and over whom they have no powers of punishment or removal, let their crimes

against the American public be ever so great? Can any one reason be assigned

why 160,000 electors in the island of Great Britain should give law to four

millions in the states of America, every individual of whom is equal to

every individual of them, in virtue, in understanding, and in bodily

strength? Were this to be admitted, instead of being a free people, as we

have hitherto supposed, and mean to continue ourselves, we should suddenly

be found the slaves, not of one, but of 160,000 tyrants, distinguished too

from all others by this singular circumstance, that they are removed from

the reach of fear, the only restraining motive which may hold the hand of a

tyrant.

 

That by “an act[11] to discontinue in such manner and for such time as are

therein mentioned the landing and discharging, lading or shipping, of goods,

wares, and merchandize, at the town and within the harbour of Boston, in the

province of Massachusetts Bay, in North America,” which was passed at the

last session of British parliament; a large and populous town, whose trade

was their sole subsistence, was deprived of that trade, and involved in

utter ruin. Let us for a while suppose the question of right suspended, in

order to examine this act on principles of justice: An act of parliament had

been passed imposing duties on teas, to be paid in America, against which

act the Americans had protested as inauthoritative. The East India company,

who till that time had never sent a pound of tea to America on their own

account, step forth on that occasion the assertors of parliamentary right,

and send hither many ship loads of that obnoxious commodity. The masters of

their several vessels, however, on their arrival in America, wisely attended

to admonition, and returned with their cargoes. In the province of New

England alone the remonstrances of the people were disregarded, and a

compliance, after being many days waited for, was flatly refused. Whether in

this the master of the vessel was governed by his obstinacy, or his

instructions, let those who know, say. There are extraordinary situations

which require extraordinary interposition. An exasperated people, who feel

that they possess power, are not easily restrained within limits strictly

regular. A number of them assembled in the town of Boston, threw the tea

into the ocean, and dispersed without doing any other act of violence. If in

this they did wrong, they were known and were amenable to the laws of the

land, against which it could not be objected that they had ever, in any

instance, been obstructed or diverted from their regular course in favor of

popular offenders. They should therefore not have been distrusted on this

occasion. But that ill fated colony had formerly been bold in their enmities

against the house of Stuart, and were now devoted to ruin by that unseen

hand which governs the momentous affairs of this great empire. On the

partial representations of a few worthless ministerial dependents, whose

constant office it has been to keep that government embroiled, and who, by

their treacheries, hope to obtain the dignity of the British knighthood,

without calling for a party accused, without asking a proof, without

attempting a distinction between the guilty and the innocent, the whole of

that antient and wealthy town is in a moment reduced from opulence to

beggary. Men who had spent their lives in extending the British commerce,

who had invested in that place the wealth their honest endeavors had

merited, found themselves and their families thrown at once on the world for

subsistence by its charities. Not the hundredth part of the inhabitants of

that town had been concerned in the act complained of; many of them were in

Great Britain and in other parts beyond sea; yet all were involved in one

indiscriminate ruin, by a new executive power, unheard of till then, that of

a British parliament. A property, of the value of many millions of money,

was sacrificed to revenge, not repay, the loss of a few thousands. This is

administering justice with a heavy hand indeed! and when is this tempest to

be arrested in its course? Two wharfs are to be opened again when his

majesty shall think proper. The residue which lined the extensive shores of

the bay of Boston are forever interdicted the exercise of commerce. This

little exception seems to have been thrown in for no other purpose than that

of setting a precedent for investing his majesty with legislative powers. If

the pulse of his people shall beat calmly under this experiment, another and

another will be tried, till the measure of despotism be filled up. It would

be an insult on common sense to pretend that this exception was made in

order to restore its commerce to that great town. The trade which cannot be

received at two wharfs alone must of necessity be transferred to some other

place; to which it will soon be followed by that of the two wharfs.

Considered in this light, it would be an insolent and cruel mockery at the

annihilation of the town of Boston.

 

By the act[12] for the suppression of riots and tumults in the town of

Boston, passed also in the last session of parliament, a murder committed

there is, if the governor pleases, to be tried in the court of King’s Bench,

in the island of Great Britain, by a jury of Middlesex. The witnesses, too,

on receipt of such a sum as the governor shall think it reasonable for them

to expend, are to enter into recognizance to appear at the trial. This is,

in other words, taxing them to the amount of their recognizance, and that

amount may be whatever a governor pleases; for who does his majesty think

can be prevailed on to cross the Atlantic for the sole purpose of bearing

evidence to a fact? His expenses are to be borne, indeed, as they shall be

estimated by a governor; but who are to feed the wife and children whom he

leaves behind, and who have had no other subsistence but his daily labor?

Those epidemical disorders, too, so terrible in a foreign climate, is the

cure of them to be estimated among the articles of expense, and their danger

to be warded off by the almighty power of parliament? And the wretched

criminal, if he happen to have offended on the American side, stripped of

his privilege of trial by peers of his vicinage, removed from the place

where alone full evidence could be obtained, without money, without counsel,

without friends, without exculpatory proof, is tried before judges

predetermined to condemn. The cowards who would suffer a countryman to be

torn from the bowels of their society, in order to be thus offered a

sacrifice to parliamentary tyranny, would merit that everlasting infamy now

fixed on the authors of the act! A clause[13] for a similar purpose had been

introduced into an act, passed in the 12th year of his majesty’s reign,

entitled “An act for the better securing and preserving his majesty’s

dockyards, magazines, ships, ammunition, and stores;” against which, as

meriting the same censures, the several colonies have already protested.

 

That these are the acts of power, assumed by a body of men, foreign to our

constitutions, and unacknowledged by our laws, against which we do, on

behalf of the inhabitants of British America, enter this our solemn and

determined protest; and we do earnestly entreat his majesty, as yet the only

mediatory power between the several states of the British empire, to

recommend to his parliament of Great Britain the total revocation of these

acts, which, however nugatory they be, may yet prove the cause of further

discontents and jealousies among us.

 

That we next proceed to consider the conduct of his majesty, as holding the

executive powers of the laws of these states, and mark out his deviations

from the line of duty: By the constitution of Great Britain, as well as of

the several American states, his majesty possesses the power of refusing to

pass into a law any bill which has already passed the other two branches of

legislature. His majesty, however, and his ancestors, conscious of the

impropriety of opposing their single opinion to the united wisdom of two

houses of parliament, while their proceedings were unbiased by interested

principles, for several ages past have modestly declined the exercise of

this power in that part of his empire called Great Britain. But by change of

circumstances, other principles than those of justice simply have obtained

an influence on their determinations; the addition of new states to the

British empire has produced an addition of new, and sometimes opposite

interests. It is now, therefore, the great office of his majesty, to resume

the exercise of his negative power, and to prevent the passage of laws by

any one legislature of the empire, which might bear injuriously on the

rights and interests of another. Yet this will not excuse the wanton

exercise of this power which we have seen his majesty practice on the laws

of the American legislatures. For the most trifling reasons, and sometimes

for no conceivable reason at all, his majesty has rejected laws of the most

salutary tendency. The abolition of domestic slavery is the great object of

desire in those colonies, where it was unhappily introduced in their infant

state. But previous to the enfranchisement of the slaves we have, it is

necessary to exclude all further importations from Africa; yet our repeated

attempts to effect this by prohibitions, and by imposing duties which might

amount to a prohibition, have been hitherto defeated by his majesty’s

negative: Thus preferring the immediate advantages of a few African corsairs

to the lasting interests of the American states, and to the rights of human

nature, deeply wounded by this infamous practice. Nay, the single

interposition of an interested individual against a law was scarcely ever

known to fail of success, though in the opposite scale were placed the

interests of a whole country. That this is so shameful an abuse of a power

trusted with his majesty for other purposes, as if not reformed, would call

for some legal restrictions.

 

With equal inattention to the necessities of his people here has his majesty

permitted our laws to lie neglected in England for years, neither confirming

them by his assent, nor annulling them by his negative; so that such of them

as have no suspending clause we hold on the most precarious of all tenures,

his majesty’s will, and such of them as suspend themselves till his

majesty’s assent be obtained, we have feared, might be called into existence

at some future and distant period, when time, and change of circumstances,

shall have rendered them destructive to his people here. And to render this

grievance still more oppressive, his majesty by his instructions has laid

his governors under such restrictions that they can pass no law of any

moment unless it have such suspending clause; so that, however immediate may

be the call for legislative interposition, the law cannot be executed till

it has twice crossed the Atlantic, by which time the evil may have spent its

whole force.

 

But in what terms, reconcilable to majesty, and at the same time to truth,

shall we speak of a late instruction to his majesty’s governor of the colony

of Virginia, by which he is forbidden to assent to any law for the division

of a county, unless the new county will consent to have no representative in

assembly? That colony has as yet fixed no boundary to the westward. Their

western counties, therefore, are of indefinite extent; some of them are

actually seated many hundred miles from their eastern limits. Is it

possible, then, that his majesty can have bestowed a single thought on the

situation of those people, who, in order to obtain justice for injuries,

however great or small, must, by the laws of that colony, attend their

county court, at such a distance, with all their witnesses, monthly, till

their litigation be determined? Or does his majesty seriously wish, and

publish it to the world, that his subjects should give up the glorious right

of representation, with all the benefits derived from that, and submit

themselves the absolute slaves of his sovereign will? Or is it rather meant

to confine the legislative body to their present numbers, that they may be

the cheaper bargain whenever they shall become worth a purchase.

 

One of the articles of impeachment against Tresilian, and the other judges

of Westminister Hall, in the reign of Richard the second, for which they

suffered death, as traitors to their country, was, that they had advised the

king that he might dissolve his parliament at any time; and succeeding kings

have adopted the opinion of these unjust judges. Since the establishment,

however, of the British constitution, at the glorious revolution, on its

free and antient principles, neither his majesty, nor his ancestors, have

exercised such a power of dissolution in the island of Great Britain; and

when his majesty was petitioned, by the united voice of his people there, to

dissolve the present parliament, who had become obnoxious to them, his

ministers were heard to declare, in open parliament, that his majesty

possessed no such power by the constitution. But how different their

language and his practice here! To declare, as their duty required, the

known rights of their country, to oppose the usurpations of every foreign

judicature, to disregard the imperious mandates of a minister or governor,

have been the avowed causes of dissolving houses of representatives in

America. But if such powers be really vested in his majesty, can he suppose

they are there placed to awe the members from such purposes as these? When

the representative body have lost the confidence of their constituents, when

they have notoriously made sale of their most valuable rights, when they

have assumed to themselves powers which the people never put into their

hands, then indeed their continuing in office becomes dangerous to the

state, and calls for an exercise of the power of dissolution. Such being the

causes for which the representative body should, and should not, be

dissolved, will it not appear strange to an unbiased observer, that that of

Great Britain was not dissolved, while those of the colonies have repeatedly

incurred that sentence?

 

But your majesty, or your governors, have carried this power beyond every

limit known, or provided for, by the laws: After dissolving one house of

representatives, they have refused to call another, so that, for a great

length of time, the legislature provided by the laws has been out of

existence. From the nature of things, every society must at all times

possess within itself the sovereign powers of legislation. The feelings of

human nature revolt against the supposition of a state so situated as that

it may not in any emergency provide against dangers which perhaps threaten

immediate ruin. While those bodies are in existence to whom the people have

delegated the powers of legislation, they alone possess and may exercise

those powers; but when they are dissolved by the lopping off one or more of

their branches, the power reverts to the people, who may exercise it to

unlimited extent, either assembling together in person, sending deputies, or

in any other way they may think proper. We forbear to trace consequences

further; the dangers are conspicuous with which this practice is replete.

 

That we shall at this time also take notice of an error in the nature of our

land holdings, which crept in at a very early period of our settlement. The

introduction of the feudal tenures into the kingdom of England, though

antient, is well enough understood to set this matter in a proper light. In

the earlier ages of the Saxon settlement feudal holdings were certainly

altogether unknown; and very few, if any, had been introduced at the time of

the Norman conquest. Our Saxon ancestors held their lands, as they did their

personal property, in absolute dominion, disencumbered with any superior,

answering nearly to the nature of those possessions which the feudalists

term allodial. William, the Norman, first introduced that system generally.

The lands which had belonged to those who fell in the battle of Hastings,

and in the subsequent insurrections of his reign, formed a considerable

proportion of the lands of the whole kingdom. These he granted out, subject

to feudal duties, as did he also those of a great number of his new

subjects, who, by persuasions or threats, were induced to surrender them for

that purpose. But still much was left in the hands of his Saxon subjects;

held of no superior, and not subject to feudal conditions. These, therefore,

by express laws, enacted to render uniform the system of military defense,

were made liable to the same military duties as if they had been feuds; and

the Norman lawyers soon found means to saddle them also with all the other

feudal burthens. But still they had not been surrendered to the king, they

were not derived from his grant, and therefore they were not holden of him.

A general principle, indeed, was introduced, that “all lands in England were

held either mediately or immediately of the crown,” but this was borrowed

from those holdings, which were truly feudal, and only applied to others for

the purposes of illustration. Feudal holdings were therefore but exceptions

out of the Saxon laws of possession, under which all lands were held in

absolute right. These, therefore, still form the basis, or ground-work, of

the common law, to prevail wheresoever the exceptions have not taken place.

America was not conquered by William the Norman, nor its lands surrendered

to him, or any of his successors. Possessions there are undoubtedly of the

allodial nature. Our ancestors, however, who migrated hither, were farmers,

not lawyers. The fictitious principle that all lands belong originally to

the king, they were early persuaded to believe real; and accordingly took

grants of their own lands from the crown. And while the crown continued to

grant for small sums, and on reasonable rents; there was no inducement to

arrest the error, and lay it open to public view. But his majesty has lately

taken on him to advance the terms of purchase, and of holding to the double

of what they were; by which means the acquisition of lands being rendered

difficult, the population of our country is likely to be checked. It is

time, therefore, for us to lay this matter before his majesty, and to

declare that he has no right to grant lands of himself. From the nature and

purpose of civil institutions, all the lands within the limits which any

particular society has circumscribed around itself are assumed by that

society, and subject to their allotment only. This may be done by

themselves, assembled collectively, or by their legislature, to whom they

may have delegated sovereign authority; and if they are allotted in neither

of these ways, each individual of the society may appropriate to himself

such lands as he finds vacant, and occupancy will give him title.

 

That in order to enforce the arbitrary measures before complained of, his

majesty has from time to time sent among us large bodies of armed forces,

not made up of the people here, nor raised by the authority of our laws: Did

his majesty possess such a right as this, it might swallow up all our other

rights whenever he should think proper. But his majesty has no right to land

a single armed man on our shores, and those whom he sends here are liable to

our laws made for the suppression and punishment of riots, routs, and

unlawful assemblies; or are hostile bodies, invading us in defiance of law.

When in the course of the late war it became expedient that a body of

Hanoverian troops should be brought over for the defense of Great Britain,

his majesty’s grandfather, our late sovereign, did not pretend to introduce

them under any authority he possessed. Such a measure would have given just

alarm to his subjects in Great Britain, whose liberties would not be safe if

armed men of another country, and of another spirit, might be brought into

the realm at any time without the consent of their legislature. He therefore

applied to parliament, who passed an act for that purpose, limiting the

number to be brought in and the time they were to continue. In like manner

is his majesty restrained in every part of the empire. He possesses, indeed,

the executive power of the laws in every state; but they are the laws of the

particular state which he is to administer within that state, and not those

of any one within the limits of another. Every state must judge for itself

the number of armed men which they may safely trust among them, of whom they

are to consist, and under what restrictions they shall be laid.

 

To render these proceedings still more criminal against our laws, instead of

subjecting the military to the civil powers, his majesty has expressly made

the civil subordinate to the military. But can his majesty thus put down all

law under his feet? Can he erect a power superior to that which erected

himself? He has done it indeed by force; but let him remember that force

cannot give right.

 

That these are our grievances which we have thus laid before his majesty,

with that freedom of language and sentiment which becomes a free people

claiming their rights, as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the

gift of their chief magistrate: Let those flatter who fear; it is not an

American art. To give praise which is not due might be well from the venal,

but would ill beseem those who are asserting the rights of human nature.

They know, and will therefore say, that kings are the servants, not the

proprietors of the people. Open your breast, sire, to liberal and expanded

thought. Let not the name of George the third be a blot in the page of

history. You are surrounded by British counsellors, but remember that they

are parties. You have no ministers for American affairs, because you have

none taken from among us, nor amenable to the laws on which they are to give

you advice. It behoves you, therefore, to think and to act for yourself and

your people. The great principles of right and wrong are legible to every

reader; to pursue them requires not the aid of many counsellors. The whole

art of government consists in the art of being honest. Only aim to do your

duty, and mankind will give you credit where you fail. No longer persevere

in sacrificing the rights of one part of the empire to the inordinate

desires of another; but deal out to all equal and impartial right. Let no

act be passed by any one legislature which may infringe on the rights and

liberties of another. This is the important post in which fortune has placed

you, holding the balance of a great, if a well poised empire. This, sire, is

the advice of your great American council, on the observance of which may

perhaps depend your felicity and future fame, and the preservation of that

harmony which alone can continue both to Great Britain and America the

reciprocal advantages of their connection. It is neither our wish, nor our

interest, to separate from her. We are willing, on our part, to sacrifice

every thing which reason can ask to the restoration of that tranquility for

which all must wish. On their part, let them be ready to establish union and

a generous plan. Let them name their terms, but let them be just. Accept of

every commercial preference it is in our power to give for such things as we

can raise for their use, or they make for ours. But let them not think to

exclude us from going to other markets to dispose of those commodities which

they cannot use, or to supply those wants which they cannot supply. Still

less let it be proposed that our properties within our own territories shall

be taxed or regulated by any power on earth but our own. The God who gave us

life gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy, but

cannot disjoin them. This, sire, is our last, our determined resolution; and

that you will be pleased to interpose with that efficacy which your earnest

endeavors may ensure to procure redress of these our great grievances, to

quiet the minds of your subjects in British America, against any

apprehensions of future encroachment, to establish fraternal love and

harmony through the whole empire, and that these may continue to the latest

ages of time, is the fervent prayer of all British America!

 

______

 

1. 1632 Maryland was granted to lord Baltimore, 14. c. 2. Pennsylvania to

Penn, and the province of Carolina was in the year 1663 granted by letters

patent of majesty, king Charles II. in the 15th year of his reign, in

propriety, unto the right honorable Edward earl of Clarendon, George duke

of Albemarle, William earl of Craven, John lord Berkeley, Anthony lord

Ashley, sir George Carteret, sir John Coleton, knight and baronet, and sir

William Berkeley, knight; by which letters patent the laws of England were

to be in force in Carolina: But the lords proprietors had power, with the

consent of the inhabitants, to make bye-laws for the better government of

the said province; so that no money could be received, or law made, without

the consent of the inhabitants, or their representatives.

 

2. 12. c. 2. c. 18. 15. c. 2. c. II. 25. c. 2. c. 7. 7. 8. W. M. c. 22. II.

W. 3. 4. Anne. 6. G. 2. c. 13.

3. 5. G. 2.

4. 23. G. 2. c. 29.

5. 5. G. 270.

6. 4. G. 3. c. 15.

7. 5. G. 3. c. 12.

8. 6. G. 3. c. 12.

9. 7. G. 3.

10. 7. G. 3. c. 59.

11. 14. G. 3.

12. 14. G. 3.

13. 12. G. 3. c. 24.