fusions in America, and therefore he never could consent to it. He readily admitted that the proposition was a contradiction to every thing that Parliament had declared; a shameful prevarication in Ministers, and a mean departure from every declaration they had made. He was, however, willing to purchase peace by any humiliation of Ministers, and, by what was of more moment, even by the humiliation of Parliament. But the measure was mean indeed, yet not at all conciliatory. The mode of argument on the side of Administration, he said was the most ridiculous that ever had been known in Parliament. They attempted to prove to one side of the House, that the measure was a concession; and to the other, that it was a strong assertion of authority—just on the silly principle of the Tea Act, which to Great Britain was to be a duty of supply, to the Americans a tax of regulation. He was equally surprised, he said, by another extraordinary phenomenon. Up to this day, during the whole course of the American debates, the Ministry had daily and hourly denied their having any sort of contest about an American Revenue; that the whole was a dispute for obedience to trade laws, and to the general Legislative authority. Now they turned short, and to console our Manufacturers, and animate our Soldiers, they told them for the first time, "the dispute is put on its true footing, and the grand contest is not for empty honour, but substantial Revenue." But Manufacturers and Soldiers, said he, will not be so consoled or so animated, because the Revenue is as much an empty phantom as the honour, and the whole scheme of the Resolution is oppressive, absurd, impracticable, and what, indeed, the Ministers confess the Americans will not accept; nay, what they own America has already rejected. It is oppressive, because it was never the complaint of the Americans that the mode of taxation was not left to themselves; but that neither the amount and quantum of the grant, nor the application, Was in their free choice. This was their complaint, and their complaint was just. What else is it to be taxed by Act of Parliament, in which they are not represented, but for Parliament to settle the proportion of the payment, and the application of the money? This is the purport of the present Resolution. If an Act of Parliament compelled the City of Amsterdam to raise an hundred thousand Pounds, is not Amsterdam, as effectually taxed without its consent, as if duties to that amount were laid upon that City? To leave them the mode may be of some ease as to the collection; but it is nothing to the freedom of granting, in which the Colonies are so far from being relieved by this Resolution, that their condition is to be ten times worse than ever. I contend that it is a far more oppressive mode of taxing than that hitherto used; for here no determinate demand is made. The Colonies are to be held in durance by Troops, Fleets, and Armies, until singly and separately they shall do—what? Until they shall offer to contribute to a service which they cannot know, in a proportion which they cannot guess, on a standard which they are so far from being able to ascertain, that Parliament which is to hold it, has not ventured to hint what it is they expect. They are to be held prisoners of war, unless they consent to a ransom, by bidding at an auction against each other and against themselves, until the King and Parliament shall strike down the hammer, and say "enough."

This species of auction to be terminated not at the discretion of the bidder, but at the will of the sovereign power, is a kind of absurd tyranny which I challenge the Ministers to produce any example of in the practice of this or of any other Nation. The conduct the most like this method of setting the Colony Assemblies at guessing what contribution may be most agreeable to us in some future time, was the tyranny of Nebuchadnezzar, who, having forgot a dream, ordered the assemblies of his wise men, on pain of death, not only to interpret his dream, but to tell him what his dream was. To set the impracticability and absurdity of this scheme in the stronger light, I ask, in case an Assembly makes an offer which should not be thought sufficient by Parliament, is not the business to go back again to America? and so on backwards and forwards as often as the offer is displeasing to Parliament; and thus, instead of obtaining peace by this proposition, all our distractions will be increased tenfold, and continue forever. It is said, indeed, by the Minister, that this scheme will disunite the Colonies. Tricks in Government have sometimes been successful, but never when they are known, avowed, and hackneyed. The Boston Port Bill was a declared cheat, and accordingly, far from succeeding, it was the very first thing that united all the Colonies against us, from Nova Scotia to Georgia. The idea of deducting the value of Goods supposed to be taken by the Colonists, because we sold cheap, at a time when we did not suffer the Colonies to make a trial, and by such arithmetick to deduce the propriety of their paying in nearly an equal proportion with the people of England, was of a piece with the rest of the policy and the argument of this profound project. I strongly protest against any scheme which shall begin by any mode of extorting Revenue. Every benefit, natural or political, must be had in the order of things, and in its proper season. Revenue from a free people must be the consequence of peace, not the condition on which it is to be obtained. If we attempt to invert this order, we shall have neither peace nor revenue. If we are resolved to eat our grapes crude and sour, instead of obtaining nourishment from them, we shall not only set an edge on our own teeth, but on those of our posterity forever. I am therefore for the reconsideration of the Resolution, until it can be brought to some agreement with common sense.

Mr. Dunning assured the House that he had been much alarmed for the noble Lord (North) in the course of the day; for though the noble Lord had been actually five times on his legs, yet all his eloquence seemed thrown away, and his authority on the point of losing its weight. Young Members and old, nay, even the known phalanx of Ministerial supporters, seemed to totter, and it appeared to him, as if it was going to be, "to your tents, O Israel;" but in the moment of the noble Lord's distress, when all his own eloquence, all his acknowledged authority seemed lost, a gentleman of great abilities arose, (Sir G. Elliot,) but he was too wise to waste his eloquence; he did not attempt to argue, but with great good sense, he warned the party not to divide among themselves. I saw, said Mr. Dunning, the instantaneous good effect of this wholesome admonition; no wit, no argument could have had half the effect—it operated like a charm—and though I do not see well, I could discern from various faces, that the Minister was safe, and was rescued from the disgrace I had begun to apprehend for him, of being in a minority. He then shewed that the new proposition was, indeed, scandalously contradictory to all the professions of the Minister, and therefore justified the opposition of the Minister's old friend; but for his part, he opposed it, not as being conciliatory, which he wished it was, but as being futile and treacherous.

The question then being put,

The Committee divided—for the Resolution, 274, against it, 88.*

Sir Charles Whitworth reported from the Committee, that they had made a further progress in the matters to them referred; and had come to a Resolution, which they had directed him to report, when the House will please to receive the same.

Ordered, That the Report be received upon Friday morning next.

Sir Charles Whitworth also acquainted the House, that he was directed by the Committee to move, that they may have leave to sit again.

Resolved, That this House will, upon this day seven-night, resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole House, to consider further of the said Papers.

FRIDAY, February 24, 1775.

The Order of the Day being read, for receiving the Report from the Committee of the Whole House, to whom it was referred to consider further of the several Papers

* Notwithstanding the general dissatisfaction with which this motion was received by the friends of Administration, who thought their dignity not a little lowered by it, and believed the effects of conciliation or disunion proposed by it, to be very uncertain, it was thought better not to give a triumph to opposition by rejecting a proposition made by the Minister. It was thought, also, that this Resolution being susceptible of a variety of interpretations, as had appeared in the debates, such an interpretation might be hereafter adopted, as should be most suitable to their circumstances. Accordingly, though some of those, who, in the beginning, had openly declared themselves, and could not recede, voted (on grounds totally adverse to them) with the Opposition; the rest of the Members went as usual; and the question was carried on a division, 274 to 88.—Ann. Regis.