fore, more particularly consider the nature of the claim and pretension in question. Suppose, then, one person to have in his pocket an hundred Pounds, but another to have the right to take it from him and to put it into his own pocket, or to do with it what he pleases, to whom does that money belong? This needs no answer. Suppose the sum to be a thousand or ten thousand Pounds? That makes no difference. Suppose one person to have a right to demand of another not only one certain sum or what he has about him, but as much as he pleases and as often? This goes to the all of that other. But suppose not one single person only to be subject to such demands from one other, but a number of men, a Colony, or any other community to be so subject to the demands of some other society. What then? Why, then, that will go in like manner to their all. This seems to be so evident, that whoever shall multiply words on the subject, will hardly do it for the sake of being convinced.

But is this case that of the Americans; for if it is said that the money raised on them is to be employed for their own benefit, in their civil service or military defence? let me ask then, Who are in their case to determine, whether any money is at all wanted for such purposes, they who pay it, or they who take it? They who take it. Who are to determine the quantity wanted? They who take it. Who are to determine how often it is wanted? They who take it. Who are to determine whether it is really laid out in the purposes pretended? They who take it. Suppose the Americans should be of opinion, or declare that the money so raised is used not for their advantage, but the contrary, Is that a bar to the raising? No. Suppose them to complain that the money pretended to be laid out in their Civil service is given to corrupt their Governours or Judges, Is that a bar to the raising? No. Suppose them to signify that the money alleged to be used in their Military defence is employed in paying Troops to enslave them, and which they had rather be without, Is that a bar to the raising? No. Wherein, then, does this differ from will and pleasure in the most absolute sense?

This claim affects, therefore, most clearly, the all of the Americans. Two millions of people, subject to twelve different Governments or more, and inhabiting, possessing, and being masters of a country exceedingly larger than that of those who make the claim, or in whose name it is made, have, on this ground, no property at all, nothing which they can truly call their own, nothing but what may at any time be demanded of them, but what they may be deprived of without and against their will and consent. It cannot, therefore, surely be made a question, whether or no this is a matter of such a magnitude as to deserve the most serious discussion? But it might here be, without further words, left to the immediate determination of every man, whether it is on the one hand a reasonable ground whereon to put into confusion all the parts of the British Empire, to throw the mother country and her North American Colonies into the most deadly feuds, and perhaps a direct war with one another; or whether it is not, on the other hand, a proposition inconsistent with the essential laws of nature, subversive of the first and inherent rights of humanity, contrary to the principles whereon our forefathers defended, and under the sanction of which they have, through many civil wars, and with the deposition, banishment, and change of many Princes, delivered down to us the rights and properties which Englishmen now enjoy.

But it is in this dispute very often represented, that a total and absolute dependence on the British Parliament, without any exception whatsoever, either with regard to Taxes or any other, is liberty itself; it is British liberty, which is the best of liberty. I answer, who says otherwise in the case of us, who choose that Parliament; but that in some other cases this position may perhaps be more liable to question. Our North American Colonies are, as to their internal constitution, a very free people—as free as the Venetians, the Dutch, or the Swiss, or perhaps more so than any of them. This proceeds from their Assemblies being not only the nominal but the real Representatives of those whom they govern. These are elected fairly, fully, and often. In these Assemblies their liberty consists, and it is certainly true and genuine. But change the scene a little; let any one Colony be taxed and governed not by their own but by the Assembly of another, what is then become of this their genuine liberty? It is lost and gone with their own Assembly. Let all the Colonies be so subjected to the Assembly of some one among them. That won't mend the matter. Let us take a larger scale. Suppose this power over them to be lodged in the Parliament of Ireland. We are never the nearer. Let us come toward home. Were the Kingdom of Ireland under the taxation and direction of the British Parliament, would they then think themselves to be very free? For an answer to this question, inquire of one of that country. Place, then, the Irish under one of the Assemblies before mentioned; they would be yet further from home, and it might not be better with them. Let us take our own turn. Suppose Great Britain, on the like conditions, under the Parliament of Ireland. God forbid. I think that I have but one more point, before that I am at an end of my combination. Place over our heads, with all these powers in their full force, the Assembly of Massachusetts Bay, what then? I fancy that we should soon change a certain language, and sing another song, than what we do at present. Let me then most seriously question any man, from whose breast all candour and justice are not totally banished, where is as to liberty or property the difference between any of the cases now supposed and that original one which has given occasion to them? I speak this no otherwise than with the utmost reverence and respect towards our own Legislature; but are we to conceive, or would it be a compliment to them, or does any one mean to say that they are not men, or that they are to be excepted and exempted from the reasons and the rules which obtain and take place in the case of all the rest of mankind?

One of the long robe may, perhaps, demand the exact time when these rights begin, in rising and growing states, to take place, and how many years, months, and days a Colony must be first settled. I may venture to promise to resolve such an one, when he shall tell me in how many years, months, and days an oaken plant grows to be an oaken tree, or a boy becomes a man; which seem to be two much easier questions. The boundaries are seldom nicely distinguishable, where nature proceeds with an even and constant hand. But it is not difficult to answer that the event has already taken place, when near two millions of people are in full and peaceable possession of such a country as is occupied by cur North American Colonies.

It may likewise be asked, whether these laws are applicable to all cases of private property between man and man. But the full resolution of this question might demand a Spanish casuist, or a book as big as a volume of our Statutes at large. Any man may for me amuse himself with trying the titles of Nations to the territories and possessions which they fill, enjoy, and inhabit, as he would do those between man and man about a house and garden; and should the process in the first case last as long in proportion as one does in the latter before some Courts of Justice in Europe, the defendants need not perhaps desire a longer or surer possession.

But may not these principles go far, if carried to the extent? That is, indeed, a very serious question, and perhaps well worthy of consideration. Our Colonies are content that we should, at our pleasure, regulate their trade, provided that what we do is bona-fide, really, truly, and sincerely for that purpose, and that only; but they deny that we shall tax them. They assent and agree to the first, but they absolutely refuse the last. These two different points do likewise not stand on the same foundation; they have to the one submitted ever since their origin; it has been corroborated by their perpetual and constant consent and acquiescence; the other is a novelty, against which they have, from its first attempt, most strongly protested and acted. Why cannot we, therefore, content us with the line drawn by themselves, and with the present establishment, from which we receive such prodigious benefit and advantage, now arising and yearly increasing? But may not they in time extend their objections to this also? The course of things, and the flux of years, will certainly produce very many things more extraordinary than that. All the whole of our Colonies must, do doubt, one day, without force or violence, fall off from the parent state, like ripe fruit in the maturity of time. The earth itself, having had a beginning, cannot but decay likewise,