their precincts, though for the examination and punishment of
offences committed without them, and always appointed an Ad
miral of their own. One of their governors was deposed, for/' ac
cepting a commission under King William, as Judge of the Ad
miralty, when he had, at the same time, a commission from the
Lords proprietaries for the same office."
The Philadelphia charter was next granted, and contained
78 HAMILTON'S WORKS. [JET. IS.
almost an equality of privileges with that of Maryland. There
was, indeed, a reserve in favor of Parliament, perfectly singular
and unprecedented in any foregoing charter ; and which must
either be rejected, or the general tenor of the grant becomes un
intelligible.
It happened that the charter of Massachusetts was vacated
by a decision in Chancery, and a new one was conferred by
William and Mary. The agents for that colony did not accept
it, till they had first consulted the most judicious civilians and
politicians upon the contents of it ; and then drew up an instru
ment in which they assigned the reasons of their acceptance.
The following extract will serve to show their sense of it : " The
colony," say they, " is now made a province ; and the General
Court has, with the King's approbation, as much power in New
England as the King and Parliament have in England. They
have all English privileges and liberties, and can be touched by
no law, and by no tax, but of their own making. All the liberties
of their religion are for ever secured."
You say, that " the power to levy taxes is restrained to pro
vincial and local purposes only ; and to be exercised over such,
only, as are inhabitants and proprietors of the said province."
They are empowered " to levy proportionable and reason
able assessments, rates, and taxes, for our service in the ne
cessary defence and support of the government of the said prov
ince or territory ; and the protection and preservation of the in
habitants there." The defence and support of government, and
their own protection and preservation, are the purposes for
which they are to raise supplies ; and, in my humble opinion,
there are no others to which any society is under an obligation
to contribute its wealth or property.
I shall only make one more observation upon this charter ;
which is, that there was a reservation in it of liberty for the peo
ple of England to fish upon their coasts, which would have been
useless and absurd, had that province been a part of the realm,
and within the jurisdiction of Parliament.
Were it necessary to elucidate, still more, a point which is so
conspicuous from the several charters of the colonies, as well as
>ET. 18.] THE FARMER REFUTED. 79
the express declarations of those princes by whom they were
granted, to wit, " that the colonies are without the realm and juris
diction of Parliament;" I might enumerate many striking cir
cumstances besides those I have already mentioned. But as the
case is by this time sufficiently clear, I shall confine myself to
the recital of only one or two more transactions.
An act of the twenty-fifth of Charles the Second, was the
first that ever imposed duties on the colonies for any purpose ;
and these, as the preamble itself recites, were simply as a regula
tion of trade, and were of a prohibitory nature. Notwithstand
ing this, it was the source of great dissatisfaction ; and was one
of the principal causes of the insurrection in Virginia, under
Colonel Bacon, which after his death subsided; and then the
province sent agents to England, to remonstrate " against taxes
and impositions being laid on the colony, by any authority but
that of the General Assembly." In consequence of this, a de
claration was obtained, under the privy seal of King Charles,
dated nineteenth of April, 1676, to this effect : that " taxes ought
not to be laid upon the proprietors and inhabitants of the colony,
but by the common consent of the General Assembly."
About three years after, when King Charles had occasion to
raise a permanent revenue for the support of Virginia, he did
not attempt to do it by means of a parliamentary donation ; but
framed a bill, and sent it there by Lord Culpepper, who was at
that time governor, to receive the concurrence of their legisla
ture. It was there passed into a law, and " enacted by the King's
most excellent Majesty, by and with the consent of the General Assem
bly of the colony of Virginia." If the Virginians had been sub
jects of the realm, this could not have been done, without a
direct violation of Magna Charta ; which provides, that no Eng
lish subject shall be taxed without the consent of Parliament.
Thus, sir, I have taken a pretty general survey of the Amer
ican charters, and proved, to the satisfaction of every unbiassed
person, that they are entirely discordant with that sovereignty of
Parliament for which you are an advocate. The disingenuity of
your extracts (to give it no harsher name) merits the severest
censure ; and will, no doubt, serve to discredit all your former, as
well as future, labors in your favorite cause of despotism.
80 HAMILTON'S WORKS. [JET. 18.
It is true, that New- York has no charter. But if it could
support its claim to liberty in no other way, it might, with
justice, plead the common principles of colonization : for it
would be unreasonable to exclude one colony from the enjoy
ment of the most important privileges of the rest. There is no
need, however, of this plea. THE SACRED EIGHTS OF MAN
KIND ARE NOT TO ' BE RUMMAGED FOR AMONG OLD PARCHMENTS
OR MUSTY RECORDS. THEY ARE WRITTEN, AS WITH A SUN
BEAM, IN THE WHOLE VOLUME OF HUMAN NATURE, BY THE
HAND OF THE DIVINITY ITSELF; AND CAN NEVER BE ERASED
OR OBSCURED BY MORTAL POWER.
The nations of Turkey, Kussia, France, - Spain, and all other
despotic kingdoms in the world, have an inherent right, when
ever they please, to shake off the yoke of servitude (though
sanctioned by the immemorial usage of their ancestors), and to
model their government upon the principles of civil liberty.
I will now venture to assert, that I have demonstrated, from
the voice of nature, the spirit of the British constitution, and the
charters of the colonies in general, the absolute non-existence of
that parliamentary supremacy for which you contend. I am not
apt to be dogmatical, or too confident of my own opinions ; but,
if I thought it possible for me to be mistaken, when I maintain,
that the Parliament of Great Britain has no sovereign authority
over America, I should distrust every principle of my under
standing, reject every distinction between truth and falsehood,
and fall into a universal skepticism.
Hitherto, I have reasoned against the whole authority of
Parliament, without even excepting the right we have conceded,
of regulating trade. I considered it, in its original state, as
founded in the British constitution, the natural rights of society,
and the several charters of the colonies. The power of regu
lating our trade, was first exercised in the reign of Charles the
Second. I shall not examine upon what principle. It is enough,
we have consented to it. But I shall proceed to consider the
argument you make use of, to establish the propriety of allow
ing special duties to be imposed by way of tribute, for the pro
tection of our commerce.
JET. 18.] THE FARMER REFUTED. 81
You argue thus : " Notwithstanding the large landed estates,
possessed by the British subjects in the different parts of the
world, they must be considered as a commercial, manufacturing
people. The welfare, perhaps the existence, of Great Britain, as
an independent or sovereign State, depends upon her manufac
tures and trade ; and many people in America think, that her
manufactures and commerce depend, in a great measure, on her
intercourse with her colonies ; insomuch, that if this should be
neglected, her commerce would decline and die away ; her
wealth would cease ; and her maritime power be at an end. If
these observations be just, they establish the right of the British
Parliament to regulate the commerce of the whole empire, be
yond possibility of contradiction ; a denial of it, would be a de
nial of a right in the British empire to preserve itself. They
prove, also, that all parts of the empire must be subject to the
British Parliament ; for, otherwise, the trade of the whole can
not be regulated. They point out, also, the best mode of raising
such a revenue as is necessary for the support and defence of the
government, viz., by duties on imports and exports : because
these are attended with the least inconvenience to the subject,
and may be so managed as to raise a revenue and regulate the
trade at the same time.
" When it is considered that Great Britain is a maritime
power ; that the present flourishing state of her trade, and of the
trade of her colonies, depends, in a great measure, upon the pro
tection which they receive from the navy ; that her own security
depends upon her navy ; and that it is, principally, a naval pro
tection we receive from her ; there will appear a peculiar pro
priety in laying the chief burthen of supporting her navy, upon
her commerce ; and in requesting us to bear a part of the ex
pense, proportional to our ability, and to that protection and
security which we receive from it."
The supposition, that a cessation of commerce between Great
Britain and the colonies, would be ruinous and destructive to
the former, is ushered in, as the principal argument for her right
to regulate the commerce of the whole empire. I am willing to
allow it its full weight ; but I cannot conceive how you can pre-
15 6
82 HAMILTON'S WORKS. [JET. 18.
tend, after making such use of it, to deny it the force it ought to
have, when it is urged as affording a moral certainty that our
present measures will be successful. If you tacitly adopt the
principle, and reason from it, in one case, with what propriety
can you reject it in the other ? If the preservation of the British
empire depends, in any material degree, upon the right of Par
liament to regulate the trade of the colonies, what will be the
consequence if the trade ceases altogether? You must either
acknowledge, that you have adduced a very weak and foolish
argument, or that the commercial connection between Great
Britain and the colonies, is essential to her security and pros
perity. You have either failed in proving your point, or you
have furnished me with an ample confutation of all your reason
ing against the probability of success, from the restrictions laid
on our commerce. If our trade be necessary to the welfare of
Great Britain, she must, of course, be ruined by a discontinuance
of it.
But it is granted, that Great Britain has a right to regulate
the trade of the empire. The Congress have acknowledged it,
so far as concerned their constituents. You infer from thence,
that all parts of the empire must be subject to her. They need
only be so far subject, as is necessary for the end proposed, that
is, the regulation of their trade. If you require any further sub
jection, you require means that are disproportionate to the end,
which is unreasonable, and not at all allowable.
With respect to the justice of submitting to impositions on
our trade, for the purpose of raising a revenue to support the
navy by which it is protected ; I answer, that the exclusive reg
ulation of our commerce for her own advantage, is a sufficient
tribute to Great Britain for protecting it. By this means, a vast
accession of wealth is annually thrown into her coffers. It is a
matter of notoriety, that the balance of trade is very much against
us. After ransacking Spain, Portugal, Holland, the English,
French, Spanish, Dutch, and Danish plantations, for money and
Bills of Exchange, as remittances for the commodities we take
from Great Britain ; we are still always greatly in arrears to her.
At a moderate computation, I am well informed, that the profits
MT. 18.] THE FARMER REFUTED. 83
she derives from us every year, exceed two millions and a half
sterling ; and when we reflect, that this sum will be continually
increasing, as we grow more and more populous, it must be evi
dent, that there is not the least justice in raising a revenue upon
us, by the imposition of special duties.
The right of Great Britain to regulate our trade upon this
plan, it is now acknowledged, is not an inconsiderable matter. It
is as much as any free people can concede, and as much as any just
people would require. We are not permitted to procure manu
factures any where else than from Great Britain, or Ireland.
Our trade is limited and prescribed, in every respect, as is most
for her interest. This is a plentiful source of wealth to her, as I
have heretofore shown, and shall hereafter confirm by the testi
mony of some British writers.
But I have found out an argument, which, I imagine, will go
very near convincing yourself of the absurdity of what you have
offered on this head. It is short, but conclusive. " The princi
pal profits of our trade centre in Great Britain"* How can you,
my dear sir, after making this confession, entertain a single
thought, that it is incumbent upon us to suffer her to raise a rev
enue upon our trade ? Are not the principal profits a sufficient re
compense for protecting it ? Surely you would not allow her the
whole. This would be rather too generous. However ardent your
affection to her, and however much it may be your glory to ad
vance her imperial dignity, you ought to moderate it so far, as to
permit us to enjoy some little benefit from our trade. Only a small
portion of the profits will satisfy us. We are willing to let her
have the principal share, and this you acknowledge she already
has. But why will you advise us to let her exhaust the small
pittance we have reserved, as the reward of our own industry,
in burthensome revenues ? This might be liberality and gener
osity, but it would not be prudence : and let me tell you, in this
selfish, rapacious world, a little discretion is, at worst, only a
venial sin. It will be expedient to be more cautious for the
future. It is difficult to combat truth ; and unless you redouble
* See Page 19 of your own letter.
84 HAMILTON'S WORKS. [J&T. 18.
your vigilance, you will (as in the present instance) be extremely
apt to ensnare yourself.
I shall now briefly examine the excellent mode you have pro
posed, for settling our disputes finally and effectually. All inter
nal taxation is to be vested in our own legislatures; and the
right of regulating trade, by duties, bounties, &c., to be left to
the Parliament, together with the right of enacting all general
laws for all the colonies. You imagine that we should then
" have all the security for our rights, liberties, and properties,
which human policy can give us."
Here we widely differ in sentiment. My opinion is, that we
should have no " security besides the good will of our rulers ;
that is, no security at all." Is there no difference between one
system of laws and another ? Are not some more favorable and
beneficial to the subject ; better calculated to preserve his life
and personal liberty than others ? It is evident they are. Sup
pose, instead of the present system established among us, the
French laws were to be introduced, for the good of all the colo
nies : Should we have the same security for our lives which we
now have ? I presume we should not. I presume, also, that a
revolution in our laws might and would gradually take place.
A fondness for power is implanted in most men ; and it is
natural to abuse it, when acquired. This maxim, drawn from
the experience of all ages, makes it the height of folly to intrust
any set of men with power, which is not under every possible
control ; perpetual strides are made after more, as long as there
is any part withheld. We ought not, therefore, to concede any
greater authority to the British Parliament, than is absolutely
necessary. There seems to be a necessity for vesting the regula
tion of our trade there, because, in time, our commercial interests
might otherwise interfere with hers. But with respect to mak
ing laws for us, there is not the least necessity, or even propri
ety in it. Our legislatures are confined to ourselves, and cannot
interfere with Great Britian. We are best acquainted with our
own circumstances, and therefore best qualified to make suitable
regulations. It is of no force to object, that no particular colony
has power to enact general laws for all the colonies. There is
JE.T. 18.] THE FARMER REFUTED. 85
no need of such general laws. Let every colony attend to its
own internal police, and all will be well. How have we man
aged heretofore ? The Parliament has made no general laws for
our good ; and yet our affairs have been conducted much to our
ease and satisfaction. If any discord has sprung up among us,
it is wholly imputable to the incursions of Great Britain. We
should be peaceable and happy, if unmolested by her. We are
not so destitute of wisdom as to be in want of her assistance, to
devise proper and salutary laws for us.
The legislative power of Parliament would at any rate be use
less to us ; and as utility is the prime end of all laws, that power
has no reason for which it should exist. It is not even requisite
for preserving the connection between Great Britain and the co
lonies, for that is sufficiently secured in two ways: by being
united under the same king, and by the important privilege of
regulating our commerce, to which we have submitted.
That it might be prejudicial to us, no reasonable man can
deny. We may trace the evils of it through the whole adminis
tration of justice. Judicial proceedings may be so ordered as to
render our lives and properties dependent on the will and ca
price of court favorites and tools. A wide field for bribery and
corruption of every kind would be opened, and the most enor
mous exactions would take shelter under the garb of law. It is
unnecessary to enter into a particular detail of the different
methods in which all this might be effected ; every man's own
imagination will suggest to him a multiplicity of instances.
Kigorous, oppressive, and tyrannical laws may be thought
expedient, as instruments to humble our rebellious tempers, and
oblige us to submit to further exertions of authority, till the claim
to bind us in all cases whatsoever be fully complied with. This,
do doubt, would be a work of time. The steps would be gradual,
and perhaps imperceptible ; but they would be sure and effectual.
That thirst of power which influenced the Parliament to assert
an unlimited authority over us, without the least plausible foun
dation for it (as I have clearly proved), will authorize us to ap
prehend the worst.
The power of legislating for us, and of raising a revenue upon
86 HAMILTON'S WORKS. [&T. 18.
the articles of commerce, would be a sufficient degree of slavery.
It is absurd to say, that Great Britain could not impose heavy
burthens on our commerce, without immediately feeling the
effect herself. She may enrich herself by reducing us to the
most lamentable state of penury and wretchedness. We are
already forbid to purchase the manufactures of any foreign coun
tries. Great Britain and Ireland must furnish us with the ne
cessaries we want. Those things we manufacture among our
selves may be disallowed. "We should then be compelled to take
the manufactures of Great Britain upon her own conditions.
We could not, in that case, do without them. However exces
sive the duties laid upon them, we should be under an inevitable
necessity to purchase them. How would Great Britain feel the
effects of those impositions, but to her own advantage ? If we
might withdraw our custom, and apply to other nations ; if we
might manufacture our own materials, those expedients would
serve as a refuge to us, and would indeed be a security against
any immoderate exactions. But these resources would be cut
off. There would be no alternative left us. We must submit to
be drained of all our wealth, for those necessaries which we are
not permitted to get elsewhere.
As to our trade with foreign countries, the burthens imposed
on that, however grievous, would in like manner affect Great
Britain only by increasing her public treasure. Her own inha
bitants would pay no part of them ; they would fall solely upon
ourselves. There is no immediate connection between her trade
and ours, of this kind ; they are separate and independent ; and,
of course, the incumbrances on the one would not injure the
other. The superfluity of our products must be exported, to
enable us to pay our debts to her ; and we must submit to be
loaded at her discretion. If we look forward to a period not far
distant, we shall perceive that the productions of our country
will infinitely exceed the demands which Great Britain and her
connections can possibly have for them ; and, as we shall then be
greatly advanced in population, our wants will be proportiona-
bly increased. These circumstances will open an ample field for
extortion and oppression.
jET. 18.] THE FARMER REFUTED. 87
The legislative authority of Parliament would always be
ready to silence our murmurs by. tyrannical edicts. These would
be enforced by a formidable army, kept up among us for the
purpose. The slightest struggles to recover our lost liberty
would become dangerous, and even capital. Those hated things,
Continental Conventions, by which there might be a communion
of councils and measures, would be interdicted. Non-importa
tion and non-exportation agreements would, in effect, be made
seditious, illegal, and treasonable* No remedy would be left, but
in the clemency of our oppressors ; a wretched one, indeed, and
such as no prudent man would confide in ! In whatever light
we consider the matter, we shall find that we must effectually
seal our bondage by adopting the mode you recommend.
Agreeably to your own concessions, Great Britain is abun
dantly recompensed for the naval protection she affords, by the
principal profits of our trade. It can, therefore, with no color of
justice, be urged upon us to permit her to raise a revenue through
that channel.
But, after all, let us suppose that the emolument which arises
from the simple and abstracted regulation of our trade, is inade
quate to the protection we derive from the parent State : does it
follow, that her just demands cannot be satified, unless we put it
in her power to ruin us ? When did the colonies refuse to con
tribute their proportion towards defraying the expenses of gov
ernment? During the war, our contributions were so liberal
and generous, that we were thought to have done more than our
part; and restitution was accordingly made. Massachusetts,
that injured, insulted, and calumniated country, was foremost in
displaying its loyalty ; and was parsimonious neither of its men
nor money. But, notwithstanding this, no confidence, it seems,
is due to our virtue or fidelity ; but every thing is to be trusted
to the wisdom and disinterestedness of a British Parliament.
We do not expect, nor require, that all should depend upon
our integrity or generosity, but only a part ; and this, every rule
of equity entitles us to. We have assented to the exercise of a
* I believe these were the epithets bestowed on them by Gen. Gage.
88 HAMILTON'S WORKS. [^Ei. 18.
power which gives a certainty to Great Britain of a vast annual
income : any further aids that may be necessary, ought to be
intrusted to our fidelity. When the circumstances of two parties
will not admit of precise boundaries to the duty of each, it is not
a dictate of justice to put one entirely into the power of the
other. If the mother country would desist from grasping at too
much, and permit us to enjoy the privileges of freemen, interest
would concur with duty, and lead us to the performance of it.
We should be sensible of the advantages of a mutual intercourse
and connection, and should esteem the welfare of Britain as the
best security for our own. She may, by kind treatment, secure
our attachment in the powerful bands of self-interest. This is
the conduct that prudence and sound policy point out : but,
alas ! to her own misfortune as well as ours, she is blind and
infatuated.
If we take futurity into the account, as we no doubt ought to
do, we shall find, that in fifty or sixty years, America will be in
no need of protection from Great Britain. She will then be
able to protect herself, both at home and abroad. She will have
a plenty of men, and a plenty of materials, to provide and equip
a formidable navy. She will, indeed, owe a debt of gratitude to