and wish to become "mighty hunters" in the woods of America. What Kingdom or State will interpose for our relief? The preservation of our freedom, and of every attendant blessing, must be wrought out, under Providence, by ourselves. Let not this consideration discourage us. We cannot be false to each other, without being false to ourselves. We have the firmest foundation of union and fidelity—that we wish to attain the same things—to avoid the same things. The friendship of others might be precarious, suspected, deceitful.

The infinitely great, wise, and good Being, who gave us our existence, certainly formed us for a state of society. He certainly designed us for such a state of society as would be productive of happiness. Liberty is essential to the happiness of a society, and therefore is our right. The Father of Mercies never intended men to hold unlimited authority over men.* Craft and cruelty have indeed triumphed over simplicity and innocence, in disobedience to his holy laws. The Father of Mercies never intended us for the slaves of Britons. Craft and cruelty, indeed, are striving to brand us with marks infamously denoting us to be their property as absolutely as their cattle. Their pretensions to a right of such power, not only oppose constitutional principles, but even partake of impiety. The sentence of bondage against us is only issued by the frail omnipotence† of Parliament.

"Non sic inflectere sensus
Humanos edicta, valent."‡

We cannot question the justice of our cause. This consideration will afford comfort and encouragement to our minds. Let us, therefore, in the first place, humbling ourselves before our gracious Creator, devoutly beseech his divine protection of us his afflicted servants, most unreasonably and cruelly oppressed. Let us seriously reflect on our manifold transgressions, and by a sincere repentance, and an entire amendment of our lives, strive to recommend ourselves to divine favour.

In the next place, let us cherish and cultivate sentiments of brotherly love and tenderness among us. To whom, under the cope of Heaven, can we look for help in these days of "darkness and trouble," but one to another. O my countrymen! Have pity one on another. Have pity on yourselves and your children. Let us, by every tender tie, implore you; let us mutually excuse and forgive each other our weakness and prejudices, (for who is free from weakness and prejudices?) and utterly abolishing all former dissensions and distinctions, wisely and kindly unite in one firm band, in one common cause.

If there are any men, or any bodies of men, on this Continent, who think that an accommodation between us and Great Britain, or that their own particular interest may be advanced by withdrawing themselves from the counsels of their countrymen, I would wish them most deliberately to consider the consequences that may attend such a conduct. What step can possibly be taken more directly tending to prevent an accommodation between us and Great Britain than supplying Administration with proofs of our intestine divisions? What do our enemies so ardently wish for as for these divisions? Has not the expectation of these events encouraged the Ministry to treat us with such unexampled contempt and barbarity? Will not the certainty of these events excite resolution in them to press us, to take every advantage of a people so industriously studying and labouring to weaken and destroy themselves? Then a Minister may with reason call upon the House of Commons, "Now is our time to stand out—to defy them—to proceed with firmness and without fear—to produce a conviction to all America that we are now in earnest, and that we will proceed with firmness and vigour until she shall be laid at our feet."*

I appeal to every man of common sense, whether any measure will be so likely to induce Administration to think of an accommodation with us, as our unanimity. Must not, therefore, every measure impeaching the credit and weight of this unanimity, in the same degree obstruct all accommodation? Will not every such measure naturally produce haughtiness, perseverance and fresh rigour in our oppressors? Will not these still more enrage us, and place us farther from an accommodation? If the protection and peace we wish to derive from our unanimity be taken from us by the imprudence of our brethren who break that unanimity, or destroy all respect for it in Great Britain, and thereby encourage her to seize what she will certainly think the lucky opportunity for pursuing her blows, what must be the consequence. We held up a shield for our defence. If our brethren have pierced it through, and rendered it useless, their imprudence will, according to the usual course of human affairs, compel us to change the mode of defence, and drive us into all the evils of civil discords.

What advantages can they gain that can compensate to men of any understanding or virtue, for the miseries occasioned by their bad policy. Their numbers will be too small in any manner whatever to controul the sentiments or measures of America. Their conduct never can prevent the exertions of these Colonies in vindication of their liberty. It may by provocations render those exertions more rash and imprudent; but their numbers will be so extravagantly exaggerated, as all facts have been against us, on the other side of the Atlantic, that Great Britain may be deceived, and emboldened into measures destructive to herself and to us. We are now strenuously endeavouring, in a peaceable manner, by this single power, the force of our unanimity, to preserve our freedom. Those who lessen that unanimity detract from its force, will prevent its effect, and must be, therefore, justly chargeable with all the dreadful consequences to these Colonies.

The third important consideration I beg leave to recommend to my countrymen is, to draw such reflections from their situation as will confirm their minds in that manly noble fortitude so absolutely necessary for the maintenance

* "To live by one man's will became the cause of all men's misery."—Hooker's Eccles. Pol.

"Is not universal misery and ruin the same, whether it comes from the hands of many or of one?"—Bishop Hoadly's Disc, on Gov.

"Of so contrary an opinion was this good man (Hooker) to that of some others, who can never oppose one extreme, without running into another, as bad, if not worse, and think they cannot enough condemn rebellion without giving the divine sanction to tyranny and oppression. This judgment ought likewise to be of the more weight with such as profess the most profound veneration for the memory of Charles the First, and the honour of the old Church of England; because this treatise in which it was to be found was chosen out of many others, by that Prince, to be recommended to his children as the best instructer they could converse with, and was had in such estimation by all churchmen, from the time of its appearance, that it may well pass, not only for his own judgment in particular, but for the judgment of the whole Church of England at that time."—Bishop Hoadly, ibid.

"Would not the unhappiness of this Nation in particular have been the same, whether a late King, alone, or by a former law, has subjected it to the religion of Rome and the maxims of France? And, upon supposition of such an attempt, would not our late deliverance have been as glorious, as great, and justifiable, as much wanted, and as truly beneficial, as it was upon the attempt of the King alone? Would not the invitation of the Prince of Orange, the election and meeting of the persons who made the Convention, and the consequent establishment in the Protestant line, have been as requisite and as useful? Nay, would not the ends of Government have been more effectually answered this way, than by submission to a total dissolution of all happiness at present, and of all hopes for the future? How than can it be said that the ends of Government require that degree of submission upon the one supposition, which they are allowed not to do upon the other, when the same misery and destruction must follow a submission in both cases, and the nine universal happiness must in both be the consequence of a just and well managed defence? Or would the ends of Government be destroyed, should the miserable condition of the whole people of France, which hath proceeded from the King's being absolute, awaken the thoughts of the wisest heads amongst them, and move them all to exert themselves, so as that those ends should be better answered for the time to come?"—Bishop Hoadly, ibid.

It was resolved by the House of Commons, that this Bishop, then Mr. Hoadly, and Rector of St. Peter's Poor, London, "for having often strenuously justified the principles on which her Majesty and the Nation proceeded in the late happy revolution, had justly merited the favour and recommendation of the House;" and accordingly addressed Queen Anne, "that she would be graciously pleased to bestow some dignity in the Church on the said Mr. Hoadly, for his eminent services both to the Church and State."

"Whatever dishonours human nature, dishonours the policy of a Government which permits it; and a free State which doss not communicate the natural right of liberty to all its subjects, who have not deserved by their crimes to lose it, hardly seems to be worthy of that honourable name."—Lord Littleton's History of Henry II.

"Without goodness power would be tyranny and oppression, and wisdom would degenerate into craft and mischievous contrivance."—Archbishop Tillotson's Sermons.

"Etiamsi non sit molestus dominus, tamen est miserrimum, posse, si velit," Cicero. Even if a Sovereign does not oppress, yet it is a most miserable condition for the subjects that ho has the power, if he has the will.

† 1 Blackstone, 161.

‡ Edicts cannot so bend the common sense of human nature.

* Lord North's Speech.