desires it, and would be much safer without it; and because she is to receive the duties arising from the regulation of trade? Her trade is regulated and restrained by the Parliament, to Britain’s great advantage, and to America’s great prejudice, and this without any charge to Britain; so America owes her nothing for this. The duties America pays upon the regulations of her trade, to her own disadvantage, she ought in all reason and equity to pay to herself. And this plan proposes to give them to her; but then it artfully takes them back double from her by other duties payable to Britain. This plan is a betrayer of America’s liberty and safety; whether designedly so or not, no ways concerns the publick to inquire.

REMARKS ON THE PROPOSED AMERICAN COMPACT.

New-York, April 18, 1776.

A gentleman, who styles himself An English American, in his plan of compact, proposes, thirdly: “The Crown shall appoint the officers of Government during good behaviour, &c.” But whence have all our troubles sprung? Have not our Governours, appointed by the Crown, been the principal source of all our calamities, by their ambition and covetousness, their misrepresentation and calumny? They want larger salaries, and Regulars to keep the people in awe; and instead of being the fathers of their people, have been their betrayers, oppressors, and murderers. The Continent would have been in peace, had it not been for these appointed Governours. It never was worth while to take up arms at all, unless these can be expelled. They are like the roots of a cancer, which, if not entirely eradicated, soon spread as bad as ever. These men, if reconciliation was immediately to take place, would never rest until they had embroiled us again. They have had their reign already, and have been banished for their oppression and tyranny. Let us never receive them, nor any of their order again, who have proved such vipers. We should be fools, indeed, if, after all their schemes to subdue the several Colonies to arbitrary power, and even to spirit up the Indians and Negroes to murder us in our peaceable habitations, we should ever suffer them to remain among us.

But they shall continue only during good behaviour. But who is to judge of their good behaviour? The good people of the Massachusetts-Bay judged that Bernard and Hutchinson did not behave well, and preferred a complaint against them to his Majesty. But what did it avail? The Governours were acquitted, and the complaint dismissed as a false and scandalous libel. If Governours are diligent and resolute in enlarging the power of the Crown, and lessening the liberties of the subject, it is to no purpose at all to complain against them. Sundry noblemen in Scotland, in the reign of Charles II., accused Lauderdale of many horrid oppressions and unheard-of cruelties; but the King, after hearing the case, acquitted him, saying, though they had proved many damned things against him, yet they had not proved that he had intended to lessen his prerogative. Nay, the bloody Marquis of Antrim, who encouraged and headed the Irish Papists in the massacre, when they murdered almost all the Piotestants of Ireland, was acquitted by the express order of his Majesty. Now, there cannot be worse men in this world than the Marquis of Antrim, Lauderdale, Hutchinson, and Bernard.

In article sixth: He thinks it would be useful for us, that the King should have a right to keep ten or twelve thousand troops to repel any sudden invasion, &c. But a Standing Army is one of the greatest grievances. The Praetorian Guards at Rome were, I believe, not a larger body, if so large; yet they kept the whole world in slavery for many ages, raised any one to be Emperor whom they pleased, and cut him off if he happened to disoblige them, and set up another in his room. Yet there were ten times as many soldiers in the Empire as are now in America and Great Britain together, whom this handful of Prætorian Guards thus insulted and abused for sundry centuries. A Standing Army have great power to do mischief and enslave countries, because they are already raised, and disposed to follow an ambitious leader, where there is no danger. They are greedy of large fees and plunder. As to their repelling a sudden invasion, they have no great inclination for that business. Living in idleness, they become effeminate and cowardly, and ready to flee at the approach of a brave enemy. Their chief business seems to be drunkenness and lewdness, to insult the inhabitants, promote riot, and debauch the women. Let Boston tell the great benefit she has derived from having two or three regiments quartered there.

Professor Duncan, speaking of the Armies of the several nations of Europe, says, “that the soldiers are the dregs of every nation.” This was not suggested by passion and prejudice, but fact. (See his Cæsar’s Commentaries.) What benefit, security, or defence, could we expect from those who are the diegs of mankind? They ought not to be named with the Provincials and Militia, who are freemen, sons of liberty, property, and bravery. Why should the riches of a country be expended to support a useless Army of debauchees.

There is no doubt but there are great deficiencies in the regulation of the Militia. The ancient Greeks served till they were seventy; the Romans till they were forty-five years of age. Perhaps a medium between these two extremities would be best. Many will often do as good service at fifty-five, as ever they could. But in many places, even in New-England, you will scarcely find a man that is forty years of age. This method tends to weaken the country. Suppose, after they had arrived at thirty-five or forty years of age, they were to be advanced into a more respectable body, or had some little privilege granted them, to raise their ambition, but still kept in the roll. Surely the Assemblies should take this affair into immediate consideration. The Militia do not train enough to make them expert at arms. Some writers propose that they should be trained steadily two years; others, that they should train fifty days every year. But such plans would be too burdensome and expensive. It would be sufficient for them to train an afternoon every week, including two days of a general review, one in the spring and another in the fall, of each regiment. This would amount in the whole but to twenty-seven days in a year, and would hinder but very little business. There would not, perhaps, be one acre of land less ploughed and improved, if such a plan were to take place, than there is now. And there would be no need of any other expenses more than if they were at home. It is not harder work to handle the musket than the flail, the axe, the plough, or the hoe. If the Colonies should adopt some such plan, they will always be able and ready to repel any sudden invasion. Indeed, the very report of such a plan of training Militia would prevent any nation from invading us, where there are no riches to plunder, and where they must be sure to be knocked on the head. No need at all then of ten thousand Regulars, debauchees and cowards, to protect the Colonies against the whole world.

AN INDEPENDENT WHIG.

REPLY TO REMARKS OF RATIONAL1S, ON “COMMON SENSE.”

New-York, April 18, 1776.

This writer censures Common Sense as unjust in representing Monarchical Government as disapproved by Heaven, and endeavours to show, on the contrary, that it is equally approved with any other form that men may devise. A little attention to the Scriptures will clear this matter. God foresaw that his nation would in time insist upon having a King, like the other nations, and, therefore, in his laws, gave rules for him to govern himself by. Deuteronomy xvii, 14–20: “He shall not multiply horses to himself, neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away; neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold. He shall write himself a copy of the law, and he shall read therein all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God—to keep all the words of this law, and these statutes to do them; that his heart may not be lifted up above his brethren, and that he turn not aside from the commandment to the right hand or to the left.” Kings thus governing themselves and their people, in the fear of the Lord, are accepted with him, and loved and honoured by their subjects. Had Britain’s King done so, America would have been in peace this day. Where will you find such a King? They are all turned aside and apostatized. How are they lifted above their brethren? When Israel, weary of the moderate and gracious government God had hitherto exercised over them by their Judges and Elders, and, stimulated by worldly ambition, insisted on having Kings over them, like the rest of the nations; God, foreseeing that