capable of fighting her own battles and defending herself; and, although ever attached to your Majesty's person, ever at ease under your just government, they cannot forbear taking notice of some circumstances in the present situation of affairs, which nothing but the confidence in your justice could hinder from alarming their most serious apprehensions. Subsidies to foreign princes, when already burdened with a debt scarce to be borne, cannot but be severely felt. An army of foreign troops, a thing unprecedented, unheard of, unknown, brought into England, cannot but alarm," &c., &c. (See the Speech.)

N.B.-These foreign troops were part of the King's subjects, Hanoverians, and all in his service; which is the same thing as

CCCLXXIII

OBSERVATIONS ON PASSAGES IN "AN INQUIRY INTO

THE NATURE AND CAUSES OF THE DISPUTES BE-
TWEEN THE BRITISH COLONIES IN AMERICA AND
THEIR MOTHER COUNTRY."

LONDON, 1769.

Extract. Supreme power and authority must not, cannot, reside equally everywhere throughout an empire.

Observation.-Writers on this subject often confuse themselves with the idea, that all the King's dominions make one state, which they do not, nor

ever did since the conquest. Our kings have ever had dominions not subject to the English Parliament. At first, the provinces of France, of which Jersey and Guernsey remain, always governed by their own laws, appealing to the King in Council only, and not to our courts or the House of Lords. Scotland was in the same situation before the union. It had the same King, but a separate Parliament, and the Parliament of England had no jurisdiction over it. Ireland the same in truth, though the British Parliament has usurped a dominion over it. The colonies were originally settled in the idea of such extrinsic dominions of the King, and of the King only. Hanover is now such a dominion.

If each Assembly in this case, were absolute, they would, it is evident, form not one only, but so many different governments, perfectly independent of one another.

This is the only clear idea of their real present condition. Their only bond of union is the King.

Now that of Great Britain being exactly the kind of government I have been speaking of, the absolute impossibility of vesting the American assemblies with an authority in all respects equal to that of the mother country, without actually dismembering the British empire, must naturally occur to every one.

It would not be dismembering it, if it never was united, as, in truth, it never yet has been. Breaking the present union between England and Scotland would be dismembering the empire; but no

such union has yet been formed between Britain and the colonies.

Where divers remote and distant countries are united under one government, an equal and fair representation becomes almost impracticable, or, at least, extremely inconvenient.

Here appears the excellency of the invention of colony government, by separate, independent legislatures. By this means, the remotest parts of a great empire may be as well governed as the centre; misrule, oppressions of proconsuls, and discontents and rebellions thence arising, prevented. By this means the power of a king may be extended without inconvenience over territories of any dimensions, how great soever. America was thus happily governed in all its different and remote settlements, by the crown and their own assemblies, till the new politics took place, of governing it by one Parliament, which have not succeeded and never will.

Should we carry our supposition much farther, the inconveniencies attending such long journeys would be very great, although not interrupted by water.

Water, so far from being an obstruction, is a means of facilitating such assemblies from distant countries. A voyage of three thousand miles by sea is more easily performed, than a journey of one thousand by land.

It is, in my opinion, by no means impracticable to bring representatives conveniently from America to Britain, but I think the present mode of letting

them govern themselves by their own assemblies much preferable. They will always be better governed; and the Parliament has business enough here with its own internal concerns.

Whether they should not be allowed such a form of government, as will best secure to them their just rights and natural liberties.

They have it already. All the difficulties have arisen from the British Parliament attempting to deprive them of it.

Is it not, let me ask, most egregious folly so loudly to condemn the Stuart family, who would have governed England without a Parliament, when at the same time we would, almost all of us, govern America upon principles not at all more justifiable?

Very just. Only that the arbitrary government of a single person is more eligible than the arbitrary government of a body of men. A single man may be afraid or ashamed of doing injustice; a body is never either one or the other, if it is strong enough. It cannot apprehend assassination, and by dividing the shame among them, it is so little apiece that no one minds it.

And consistently with our rights of sovereignty over them.

I am surprised that a writer, who, in other respects, appears often very reasonable, should talk of our sovereignty over the colonies! As if every indi

vidual in England was a part of a sovereign over America! The King is the sovereign of all.

The Americans 'think that, while they can retain the right of disposing of their own money, they shall thereby secure all their other rights. They have, therefore, not yet disputed your other pretensions.

That England has an undeniable right to consider America as a part of her dominions is a fact, I presume, which can never be questioned.

You do, indeed, presume too much. America is not part of the dominions of England, but of the King's dominion. England is a dominion itself, and has no dominions.

I will only observe at present, that it was England, in some sense, which at first gave them being.

In some sense! In what sense? They were not planted at her expense. As to defence, all parts of the King's dominion have mutually always contributed to the defence one of the other. The man in America, who contributes sixpence towards an armament against the common enemy, contributes as much to the common protection as if he lived in England.

They have always been ready to contribute, but by voluntary grants according to their rights; nor has any Englishman yet had the effrontery to deny this truth.

If they are at liberty to choose what sums to raise, as