As Britain hath not manifested the least inclination towards a compromise, we may be assured that no terms can be obtained worthy the acceptance of the Continent, or any ways equal to the expense of blood and treasure we have been already put to.

The object contended for ought always to bear some just proportion to the expense. The removal of North, or the whole detestable junto, is a matter unworthy the millions we have expended. A temporary stoppage of trade was an inconvenience which would have sufficiently balanced the repeal of all the acts complained of, had such repeals been obtained; but if the whole Continent must take up arms, if every man must be a soldier, it is scarcely worth our while to fight against a contemptible Ministry only. Dearly, dearly, do we pay for the repeal of the acts, if that is all we fight for; for, in a just estimation, it is as great a folly to pay a Bunker-Hill price for law as for land. As I have always considered the independency of this Continent as an event which, sooner or later, must arrive, so, from the late rapid progress of the Continent to maturity, the event could not be far off; wherefore, on the breaking out of hostilities, it was not worth the while to have disputed a matter which time would have finally redressed, unless we meant to be in earnest; otherwise, it is like wasting an estate on a suit at law to regulate the trespasses of a tenant whose lease is just expiring. No man was a warmer wisher for reconciliation than myself, before the fatal 19th of April, 1775; but the moment the event of that day was made known, I rejected the hardened, sullentempered Pharaoh of England forever, and disdained the wretch that, with the pretended title of Father of his People, can unfeelingly hear of their slaughter, and composedly sleep with their blood upon his soul.

But admitting that matters were now made up, what would be the event ? I answer, the ruin of the Continent; and that for several reasons:

First. The powers of governing still remaining in the hands of the King, he will have a negative over the whole legislation of this Continent; and as he hath shown himself such an inveterate enemy to liberty, and discovered such a thirst for arbitrary power, is he, or is he not, a proper man to say to these Colonies, "You shall make no laws but what I please?" And is there any inhabitant in America so ignorant as not to know that, according to what is called the present Constitution, that this Continent can make no laws but what the King gives leave to ? And is there any man so unwise as not to see that (considering what has happened) he will suffer no laws to be made here, but such as suit his purpose. We may be as effectually enslaved by the want of laws in America, as by submitting to laws made for us in England. After matters are made up, (as it is called,) can there be any doubt but the whole power of the Crown will be exerted to keep this Continent as low and humble as possible? Instead of going for ward, we shall go backward, or be perpetually quarrelling, or ridiculously petitioning. We are already greater than the King wishes us to be; and will he not, hereafter, endeavour to make us less ? To bring the matter to one point: Is the Power who is jealous of our prosperity, a proper Power to govern us ? Whoever says No to this question is an Independent; for independency means no more than whether we shall make our own laws, or whether the King, the greatest enemy this Continent hath, or can have, shall tell us, "There shall be no laws but such as I like."

But the King, you will say, hath a negative in England; the people there can make no laws without his consent. In point of right and good order, there is something very ridiculous that a youth of twenty-one (which hath often happened) shall say to six millions of people, older and wiser than himself, "I forbid this, or that act of yours, to be law." But, in this place, I decline this sort of reply, though I will never cease to expose the absurdity of it, and only answer, that England being the King's residence, and America, not so, makes quite another case. The King's negative here is ten times more dangerous and fatal than it can be in England; for there he will scarcely refuse his consent to a bill for putting England into as strong a state of deference as possible; and here he would never suffer such a bill to be passed.

America is only a secondary object in the system of British politicks. England consults the good of this country no further than it answers her own purpose; wherefore, her own interest leads her to suppress the growth of ours, in every case which doth not promote her advantage, or in the least interferes with it. A pretty state we should be in, under such, a second-hand Government, considering what has happened! Men do not change from enemies to friends by the alteration of a name; and in order to show that reconciliation now is a dangerous doctrine, I affirm that it would be policy in the King, at this time, to repeal the acts, for the sake of reinstating himself in the government of the Provinces, in order that he may accomplish by craft and subtilty, in the long run, what he cannot do by force and violence, in the short one. Reconciliation and ruin are nearly related.

Secondly. That as even the best terms, which we can expect to obtain can amount to no more than a temporary expedient, or a kind of Government by guardianship, which can last no longer than till the Colonies come of age, so the general face and state of things, in the interim, will be unsettled and unpromising. Emigrants of property will not choose to come to a country whose form of Government hangs but by a thread, and who is every day tottering on the brink of commotion and disturbance; and numbers of the present inhabitants would lay hold of the interval to dispose of their effects, and quit the Continent.

But the most powerful of all arguments is, that nothing but independence, i. e. a Continental form of Government, can keep the peace of the Continent, and preserve it inviolate from civil wars. I dread the event of a reconciliation with Britain now, as it is more than probable that it will be followed by a revolt, somewhere or other, the consequences of which may be far more fatal than all the rnalice of Britain.

Thousands are already ruined by British barbarity; (thousands more will probably suffer the same fate.) Those men have other feelings than us, who have nothing suffered. All they now possess is liberty. What they before enjoyed is sacrificed to its service, and having nothing more to lose, they disdain submission. Besides, the general temper of the Colonies towards a British Government will be like that of a youth who is nearly out of his time: they will care very little about her; and a Government which cannot preserve the peace is no Government at all; and, in that case, we pay our money for nothing, And pray what is it that Britain can do, whose power will be wholly on paper, should a civil tumult break out the very day after reconciliation? I have heard some men gay, many of whom 1 believe spoke without thinking, that they dreaded an independence, fearing that it would produce civil wars. It is but seldom that our first thoughts are truly correct, and that is the case here; for there are ten times more to dread from a patched-up connection than from independence. I make the sufferer's case my own, and I protest, that were I driven from house and home, my property destroyed, and my circumstances ruined, that, as a man sensible of injuries, I could never relish the doctrine of reconciliation, or consider myself bound thereby.

The Colonies hath manifested such a spirit of good order, and obedience to Continental Government, as is sufficient to make every reasonable person easy and happy on that head. No man can assign the least pretence for his fears, on any other grounds than such as are truly childish and ridiculous, viz: that one Colony will be striving for superiority over another.

Where there are no distinctions, there can be no superiority; perfect equality affords no temptation. The Republicks of Europe are all (and we may say always) in, peace. Holland and Switzerland are without wars, foreign or dotnestick. Monarchical Governments, it is true, are never long at rest. The Crown itself is a temptation to enterprising ruffians at home; and that degree of pride and insolence, ever attendant on regal authority, swells into, a rupture with foreign Powers in instances where a Republican Government, by being formed on more natural principles, would negotiate the mistake.

If there is any true cause for fear respecting independence, it is because no plan is yet laid down. Men do not see their way out—wherefore, as an opening into that business I offer the following hints; at the same time modestly affirming, that I have no other opinion of them