having offered nothing to the purpose, I shall take leave to examine this important question, with all candour and attention, and submit the result to my much interested country.

Dependance of one man or State upon another is either absolute, or limited by some certain terms of agreement. The dependance of these Colonies, which Great Britain calls constitutional, as declared by act of Parliament, is absolute. If the contrary of this be the bugbear so many have been declaiming against, I could wish my countrymen would consider the consequence of so stupid a profession. If a limited dependance is intended, I would be much obliged to any one who will show me the Britanno-American Magna-Charta wherein the terms of our limited dependance are precisely stated. If no such thing can be found, and absolute dependance be accounted inadmissible, the sound we are squabbling about has certainly no determinate meaning. If any say we mean that kind of dependance we acknowledged at and before the year 1763, I answer, vague and uncertain laws, and, more especially, Constitutions, are the very instruments of slavery. The Magna-Charta of England was very explicit, considering the time it was formed, and yet much blood was spilled in disputes concerning its meaning.

Besides the danger of an indefinite dependance upon an undetermined power, it might be worth while to consider what the characters are on whom we are so ready to acknowledge ourselves dependant. The votaries for this idol tell us, upon the good people of our mother country, whom they represent as the most just, humane, and affectionate friends we can have in the world. Were this true, it were some encouragement; but who can pretend ignorance that these just and humane friends are as much under the tyranny of men of a reverse character as we should be could these miscreants gain their ends? I disclaim any more than a mutual dependance on any man or number of men on earth; but an indefinite dependance upon a combination of men, who have, in the face of the sun, broken through the most solemn covenants, debauched the hereditary and corrupted the elective guardians of the people's rights; who have, in fact, established an absolute tyranny in Great Britain and Ireland, and openly declared themselves competent to bind the Colonists in all cases whatsoever—I say, indefinite dependance on such a combination of usurping innovators is evidently as dangerous to liberty, as fatal to civil and social happiness, as any one step that could be proposed, even by the destroyer of men. The utmost that the honest party in Great Britain can do is to warn us to avoid this dependance at all hazards. Does not even a Duke of Grafton declare the Ministerial measures illegal and dangerous? And shall America, no way connected with this Administration, press our submission to such measures, and reconciliation to the authors of them? Would not such pigeon-hearted wretches equally forward the recall of the Stuart family, and the establishment of Popery throughout Christendom, did they conceive the party in favour of those loyal measures the strongest? Shame on the men who can court exemption from present trouble and expense, at the price of their own posterity's liberty! The honest party in England cannot wish for the reconciliation proposed. It is as unsafe to them as to us, and they thoroughly apprehend it. What check have they now upon the Crown, and what shadow of control can they pretend, when the Crown can command fifteen or twenty millions a year, which they have nothing to say to? A proper proportion of our commerce is all that can benefit any good man in Britain or Ireland; and God forbid we should be so cruel as to furnish bad men with power to enslave both Britain and America. Administration has now fairly dissevered the dangerous tie. Execrated will he be by the latest posterity who again joins the fatal cord!

But, say the puling, pusillanimous cowards, "we shall be subject to a long and bloody war if we declare independence." On the contrary, I affirm it the only step that can bring the contest to a speedy and happy issue. By declaring independence, we put ourselves on a footing for an equal negotiation. Now, we are called a pack of villanous Rebels, who, like the St. Vincent's Indians, can expect nothing more than a pardon for our lives, and the sovereign favour respecting freedom and property to be at the King's will. Grant, Almighty God, that I may be numbered with the dead before that sable day dawns on North America!

All Europe knows the illegal and inhuman treatment we have received from Britons. All Europe wishes the haughty Empress of the main reduced to a more humble deportment. After herself has thrust her Colonies from her, the maritime Powers cannot be such idiots as to suffer her to reduce them to a more absolute obedience of her dictates than they were heretofore obliged to yield. Does not the most superficial politician know that, while we profess ourselves the subjects of Great Britain, and yet hold arms against her, they have a right to treat us as Rebels, and that, according to the laws of nature and nations, no other State has a right to interfere in the dispute? But, on the other hand, on our declaration of independence, the maritime States, at least, will find it their interest (which always secures the question of inclination) to protect a people who can be so advantageous to them. So that those short-sighted politicians, who conclude that this step will involve us in slaughter and devastation, may plainly perceive that no measure in our power will so naturally and effectually work our deliverance. The motion of a finger of the Grand Monarch would procure as gentle a temper in the omnipotent British Minister as appeared in the Manilla ransom and Falkland Islands affairs. From without, certainly, we have every thing to hope, nothing to fear: from within, some tell us the Presbyterians, if freed from the restraining power of Great Britain, would overrun the peaceable Quakers in this Government. For my own part, I despise and detest the bickerings of sectaries, and am apprehensive of no trouble from that quarter, especially while no peculiar honours or emoluments are annexed to either. I heartily wish too many of the Quakers did not give cause of complaint, by endeavouring to counteract the measures of their fellow-citizens for the common safety. If they profess themselves only pilgrims here, let them walk through the men of this world without interfering with their actions on either side. If they would not pull down Kings, let them not support tyrants; for, whether they understand it or not, there is, and ever has been, an essential difference in the characters.

Finally, with M. de Vattel, I account a State a moral person, having an interest and will of its own; and I think that State a monster whose prime mover has an interest and will in direct opposition to its prosperity and security. This position has been so clearly demonstrated in the pamphlet first mentioned in this essay, that I shall only add, if there are any arguments in favour of returning to a state of dependance on Great Britain, that is, on the present Administration of Great Britain, I could wish they were timely offered, that they may be soberly considered before the cunning proposals of the Cabinet set all the timid, lazy, and irresolute members of the community into a clamour for peace at any rate.

CANDIDUS.

TO THE PRIVATES OF THE MILITARY ASSOCIATION BELONGING TO THE PROVINCE OF PENNSYLVANIA.

Philadelphia, February 3, 1776.

The Committee of the Privates of the Association belonging to the City and Liberties of Philadelphia are of opinion that the best thing which can be done at present for the good of the general cause of American liberty, and the support of our Military Association, is, that the Associators sign the Articles of Association given out by the honourable House of Assembly, with all convenient expedition, and they do most heartily recommend the same to every Associator throughout the Province; and as the honourable House of Assembly have expressed an intention of changing or altering the Articles as occasion may require, and as the defects and imperfections of any law are best ascertained by experience, and a reciprocation of sentiments upon it, the Committee would gladly enter into a friendly correspondence with the privates of those battalions throughout the Province which sign the Articles, that they may know the sense of the Associators in general on any part of the Articles which may need amendment, and that any future application to the honourable House of Assembly may express the desires of the whole body of Associators. But they most earnestly recommend the most per-