throne of the Cœsars. Whoever will calmly examine those precedents, must be convinced that the like causes must have similar effects. Oppressed by an overgrown Army the liberty of America and Ireland (for that stands next in the Ministerial plan) and afterwards that of Great Britain will follow of course; the monster of Despotism will only grant even to the latter the favour intended for Ulysses, that of being last devoured.

I have now, sir, to the best of my ability, agitated this great question on tie ground proposed by Administration, in a constitutional as well as in a political light; and will venture to assert that it appears in both those views formidable and destructive; and that it becomes absolutely necessary to retract the unconstitutional and impolitick steps which Administration have hitherto taken, founded evidently upon Tory and arbitrary principles. Let us, therefore, at length return back to those glorious maxims of universal liberty, established by our great deliverer King William the Third—that friend to mankind; to whom we owe that this Nation, by adhering heretofore to those maxims, had become the most powerful and illustrious on earth; and by whose wisdom the sceptre of this Empire has been placed in the hands of the family who now wield it; which may they ever do with honour and perfect safety, whilst they remain enthroned in the hearts of all the loyal, freeborn, independent, and Whiggish subjects throughout Great Britain, Ireland, and America.

Mr. William Adam spoke against the motion. He recurred to first principles; said he was a Whig; declared his readiness to support the Constitution of Great Britain, in which America was included; spoke of the doctrine of resistance; declared the Americans never had a legal power of resistance in their Constitution.

Mr. Scott represented the dangers of a civil war, but pressed the necessity of violent measures on the present occasion.

Governour Johnstone. Before you pronounce this dreadful sentence upon a meritorious, sober, and industrious people, I hope the House will indulge me with a few words in discharge of the duty I owe myself, and likewise with a view of transmitting my character, fair to posterity, when those black scenes shall be examined without prejudice.

The real question before us, in upon the proper measures to be pursued respecting our fellow-subjects in America. In order to judge of this, we must consider the real cause of dispute. I say the substantial difference turns upon the right of Taxation. Most of the advocates on the other side, have endeavoured to slur this point, and allege" that the claims of the Americans extend far beyond this article, and that the" Act of Navigation itself is in danger." But it is impossible for a judicious mind to read the material papers, and not to see that this is illusory. The Congress has expressly told us, "they are willing to acquiesce in those laws which "secure to us the monopoly of their trade, as necessary in the mutual connection;" and the instructions from Philadelphia on which the proceedings of the Congress are chiefly formed, avow these doctrines in more full and explicit terms. This method of condemning men by inference and conjecture, contrary to their repeated declarations, I cannot approve; I shall therefore bend the whole force of my argument to the original cause of quarrel—Taxation.

The great and only secret yet found out for preserving the liberties of, mankind from the encroachments of that power which is necessary for the Executive in large Kingdoms, is the power of the purse. This was the subject of contention in the civil wars of Charles the First. It is this privilege alone which makes the House of Commons respectable. This is the point which Hampden obtained for us! And I leave every one acquainted with the history of those memorable times, to determine in his own mind, "whether we should ever have enjoyed this blessing, if he had tamely paid the tax, and had not resisted?" From this power we derive the certainty of assembling the Representative of the people; by this, redress of grievances may precede supplies; and the security that the exercise will not be abused, is derived from hence, that the House cannot impose on others what they are not to feel themselves. By the principles of the Constitution, every man should Represented; but the deviation from a rule too nice for practice, is safely borne, because the interest of every particular member remains as a pledge, that no individual can be over-burthened. When this security is removed, there is no longer any safety for those to whom the fact does not apply. What is the case respecting the Americans? Does any Member feel himself affected by the impositions he shall lay on them? Nay, does not the contrary principle prevail? The more he shall burthen America, the more he will relieve himself. Judge Robert says, "if an Act of Parliament was made constituting a man a judge in his own cause, it would be void by the law of nature." Yet such is the precise situation in which we contend we ought to be placed respecting the Americans, and for the denial of which we are ready to condemn our fellow-subjects to all the tortures enacted by the laws of treason.

Let us look round, and view the fate of different slates that have yielded or preserved the privileges for which the Americans contend. So soon as the Cortes lost this power, their slavery was complete. Portugal has now no vestige of this palladium—here is tyranny supreme! In France, where the traces are left, (as in the païs d'etat) their happiness is distinguishable from the misery of other parts. In Britain we are yet free, because we retain it. In Holland, Switzerland, and the other states of Europe, they are more or less so as they preserve it.

What are the circumstances that distinguish and protect the British Colonies from those of other Nations? The Representatives of the people met in General Assembly, and the trial by Jury. If the system of taxation by the Parliament of Great Britain, takes place, what being can be so credulous as to expect the assemblies of the people will ever meet; and it is confessed, that Admiralty Courts, disclaiming trials by Jury, are necessary to enforce this species of taxation. Here, then, are all the essential privileges of an Englishman dependent on this question, and the real interest of the state is in no way concerned in the contrary scale, since the prosperity of the Colonies must ever prove the riches and glory of England. Nothing but the absurd pride or narrow ignorance of the present Administration can be thrown: into it. When once this system takes place, we shall then feel the tyranny and oppression of Governours, with all their, train of dependants, as in the Provinces of Rome, which are now quoted as an example.

Thus much supposing the Americans right in the dispute (as I believe they are;) but supposing them wrong, I shall now state their excuse, and see what heart can condemn them, and retain any claims to humanity.

The question concerning the right to tax the Colonies, though clear to those who are accustomed to think deeply on the principles of free Governments, is difficult to common apprehensions. Montesquieu has observed, "that in Despotism every thing ought to depend on two or three ideas." As for instance, is there any thing so fit to solve this dispute, as the unity of the British Empire, the supremacy of the Legislative authority of Great Britain, the omnipotence of Parliament? Is there any man so ignorant, after having heard those sounding words, as not clearly to comprehend the whole of the controversy? Plodding, thinking creatures, who are accustomed to consider the complicated privileges in a free Government, from whence the harmony of the whole springs, may be puzzled; but men who have never disturbed their repose with such dry considerations, can have no doubt on the matter; be that as it may, certain it is, that the discussion of this most important question was debated in this assembly by the greatest abilities, after the fullest information that ever accompanied any political question. The decision was in favour of the Americans; the Stamp Act was repealed. I admit that "principles of expediency" are alleged as the reason, in the preamble of the Bill; but the men who boldly denied, during this discussion, the power of taxing the Colonies, as constitutionally existing in the Commons of Great Britain, namely, Lord Chatham and Lord Camden, (men of as extraordinary talents as ever adorned society) the one was made Prime Minister, the other was created1 a Peer and Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, the keeper of the King's conscience! What American could have retained any doubt of his cause in the mind of his Majesty, or the Nation, after such a decision? The Compromising Act soon followed, (for the sake of gratifying a party) violating all the principles of commerce and policy in the lump—