lord had not attended to the distinction which it was his intention to inculcate. He acquiesced in the propriety of detention, when exercised on men absolutely found in arms, but that persons only suspected should be liable to the same seve rity, was the ground of his objection. The Earl of Sandwich observed, that as to the point in question, he believed he and the noble lord nearly coincided; namely, that all persons properly suspected of rebellion, should be subject to the terms of the Act. He said he had a very different account of this Mr. Platt. He was told that he was a committee man at Georgia, and an active instrument of rebellion; that he contributed in seizing, by force, the military stores that were contained in his Majesty's ship Philippi; that the commander of that vessel came over to London, when he was first brought to England, to authenticate his guilt; and that it was from motives of pure delicacy, that the judges had thought proper to defer his trial. out a possibility of redress to the unfortunate sufferer. The Habeas Corpus being extinct, there was no power of justifying himself, and there he must lie till the term specified in the Act arrive; that is, till the conclusion of the impending war. He himself stood within its lash, and was at this time at the mercy of any little dealing magistrate; he had been last year on the high seas on a party of pleasure, and was therefore obnoxious to the letter of the Act. He illustrated the disadvantages consequent on such an Act, with the history of one Mr. Platt, a merchant of Georgia. This young man, while he was in that capacity, had been concerned in the unloading a vessel, that contained, among other things, horses sent from England: he interested himself in this business, only from an inclination to serve the owner; and yet going soon after on his mercantile occasions to Jamaica, and having in the course of a jovial evening offended some one of the company, he was next day apprehended as a person within the cognizance of this Act. He was secured as a rebel, sent to England, and carried before sir John Fielding, who recommitted him, without suffering him to be confronted with his accusers. All he asks is to be brought to trial; this justice has been denied; and it is now near two years since this, perhaps, innocent person has been subject to the disgrace and inconvenience of a common prison. His Grace said he would appeal only to the feelings of gentlemen in administration, and hoped they would interest themselves for a final determination concerning this unhappy man. The Lord Chancellor said, if ever there was an Act that deserved the appellation of humanity, it was this; it regarded America in every respect, not as a rebel country, but as a country at war. It was certainly necessary that some punishment should be inflicted on persons taken in the act of enmity against us; but what ought it to be? since it was plainly not expedient that they should be discharged, and not political, from the apprehensions of retaliation, to put them to immediate death. What was the alternative? In his opinion the only just medium had been adopted; that of preserving them until the conclusion of the war, so that they might retain the power of punishing without doing it at a time when the consequences might fall upon such of our subjects as were now in a similar situation in America. The Duke of Richmond said, the noble [VOL. XIX.] The Earl of Suffolk said, that in the beginning of this unhappy war, it was the current opinion of the three legislative powers of this realm, that an extraordinary privilege should be lodged in the executive part, in the King; that if it was the opinion of the House, that the present emergency is less dangerous than it was a year ago, they would doubtless revoke this as an useless Act; if not, a similar necessity would certainly justify the continuation. It was called a dangerous Act; let the event prove that; few had fallen under its cognizance; few had been punished in consequence of it; apprehensions, therefore, from it were groundless. The Duke of Richmond replied, that lenity in the execution was the strongest argument against the continuation; for that tyranny became more acceptable by being gently exercised; so that when a prince of more despotic temper had the rule, he would plead prescription, and justify arbitrary measures, even with the sanction of his parliament, and the consent of his people. The Duke of Manchester read a petition he had received from Mr. Platt; the account given there nearly coincided with that given by the duke of Richmond; his grace corroborated the duke's arguments, and added, that he appealed in this instance, not only to the humanity, but the justice of administration. The Bill was read a second time. [20] Scarcely a hint of a wish for peace has been made by any member of administration. I will not, however, Sir, be dispirited. Some late events, unknown to the House at that time, may induce the most violent to listen to those healing measures, which, in the insolence of our imagined triumphs, we rejected with disdain. The preliminary of peace, which I shali take the liberty of submitting to the House, strikes at the root of the evil, the confessed cause and origin of the American war. I mean, Sir, the right of taxation, which is enacted in the Declaratory Act, the repeal of which I shall presently move. I believe, Sir, according to the forms of the House, I must first desire the clerk to read that Act. It is the 6th of the King, ch. 12. [The Clerk reads.] To make laws to bind the colonies and people of America in all cases whatsoever!" I believe, Sir, this is the shortest compendium of slavery ever given. It is the broadest basis of tyranny. In all cases whatsoever! therefore in taxation. Three I chose, Sir, from motives of policy to delay the motion, which I mean now to submit to the House, till the establishments both of the navy and army for the ensuing year were completed. After such prodigious preparations for war, after every single article which the ministers have asked, has been granted, we are armed at every point for the vigorous prosecution of hostilities, we may, with more appearance of dignity, hold out propositions for peace. This House, Sir, has voted 60,000 seamen, including near 12,000 marines, above 20,000 effective landmen, commission and non-commission officers included, for guards, garrisons, and the forces to be kept up in Great Britain, Jersey, and Guernsey. We have besides in our pay five battalions of Hanoverians, actually in garrison, to the eternal reproach of England, at Gibraltar and Minorca; the various troops of Hesse Cassel, Hanau, Waldeck, Brandebourg-millions of freemen to be taxed at the arAnspach, and Anhalt-Zerbst, amounting bitrary will and pleasure of this House, to above 69,000 of those mercenaries; in without a single person to represent them, all, a land army of more than 89,000 men. or to control the expenditure of their moThis House has not yet been assembled ney! If the Americans could tamely subthree weeks, and we have already voted mit to this, they would deserve to be slaves. away of the people's money no less a sum They ought to be more contemned than the than 8,643,0041. I believe this is only Cappadocians of infamous memory, who rethe sixteenth day since the opening of fused the liberty which was offered them the session. Every day of the present ses- by the Romans. If we can take a part of sion has therefore, on an average, cost their property without their consent, we the people above 500,000l. What a re- can take the whole. It is impossible to lief to their fears, Sir, will be the adjourn- draw the line. This House might vote ment, which ministers have just men- away the whole property of America withtioned, of near six weeks? How much out the consent of one man on that vast it will augment the festivity of the season? continent. The very supposition is not Yet I fear, Sir, it will prove only a tempo-only repugnant to every idea of the comrary relief; and that ministers retreat for mon rights of mankind, but it is against a short time, to return with redoubled the franchises of the land for freemen to force and fury, to lay fresh burdens and be taxed but by their consent in parliaadditional impositions on this exhausted ment," as lord Coke declares. We know by the law of England, that the Protestant subjects of our colonies in America are intitled to all the liberties, privileges, and immunities, of the natural-born subjects of this kingdom. The next step to taxation naturally follows. Ministers might apply an American revenue to the ad. vancement of their own profligate plans, perhaps to the same base purposes as the taxes levied among us, to the augmentation of an enormous civil list, to increase the overgrown influence of the crown, and corrupt the representatives of the people. Even without any taxation we have expe nation. Amidst all these amazing preparations for war, scarcely a thought of, or a sigh for, peace, seems to obtrude upon, or escape, any one of our ministers. What single step has been taken by administration to put an end to this ruinous war, and to prevent the farther effusion of human blood? A noble marquis (of Granby) on this side the House, who is the worthy heir of the patriotic virtues of an illustrious father, proposed on the first day of this session an immediate cessation of arms; but the proposition was rejected by a great majority. rienced that the whole produce of American industry centered in Great Britain. I do not intend, Sir, to go into a disquisition of the stale question of taxation and representation, nor the wretched nonsense of a virtual representation here of three millions of subjects on the other side the Atlantic. I remember once before to have fully argued those questions. I shall now confine myself to the repeal of the Declaratory Act, and the other Acts injurious to the freedom of America. Without this repeal we cannot, I am satisfied, have peace, nor I believe would the Americans treat with you on any other terms. They proceeded, at the beginning, with wonderful temper and coolness; but at last they summed up all their injuries as comprised in the Declaratory Act, which they reprobated with spirit. While this Act remains in the Statute Book, you never can think of any negociation with the Congress. The first Congress, which met in 1774, acted with prudence and calm dignity, with moderation and magnanimity. They did not directly attack the Declaratory Act. They knew it had passed in an administration composed of men who had declared themselves friends to American freedom, and had actually repealed the Stamp Act. They considered it as a brutum fulmen on the part of this country. They, in dutiful terms, solicited the repeal of the Boston Port Bill, the Massachuset's Charter Bill, and that monster of despotism and popery, the Quebec Act; but they passed over in silence the Declaratory Act. Yet, Sir, although no express mention was made of that Act, they put in the strongest protest against the claim, or exercise, of any such powers in their very first resolution. It is of Oct. 14, 1774. "The inhabitants of the English colonies in North America, by the immutable laws of nature, the principles of the English constitution, and the several charters or compacts, have the following rights. Resolved, nem con. that they are entitled to life, liberty, and property, and they have never ceded to any sovereign power whatever a right to dispose of either without their consent." In the year following, the second Congress, finding all their endeavours here for a redress of their grievances ineffectual, thought it necessary to hold out a kind of ultimatum to this country, and to speak the plain, full, manly language of injured free men. In a "Declaration by the representatives of the united colonies of North America, now met in Congress at Philadelphia, setting forth the causes and necessity of their taking up arms," July 6, 1775, it is said, "we for ten years incessantly and ineffectually besieged the throne as supplicants; we reasoned, we remonstrated with parliament, in the most mild and decent language. Parliament have undertaken to give and grant our money without our consent, though we have ever exercised an exclusive right to dispose of our own property, &c. &c. &c. But why should we enumerate our injuries in detail? By one statute it is declared, that parliament can of right make laws to bind us in all cases whatsoever. What is to defend us against so enormous, so unlimited a power? Not a single man of those who assume it, is chosen by us, or is subject to our control or influence; but on the contrary, they are all of them exempt from the operation of such laws, and an American revenue, if not diverted from the ostensible purposes for which it is raised, would actually lighten their own burdens in proportion as they increase ours." This one statute, the Declaratory Act, is the fountain, from which not only waters of bitterness, but rivers of blood, have flowed. I ought, Sir, in justice to the Congress, to take notice, that even after this they presented a most humble and dutiful petition to the King. From the ill-judged reply of the American secretary," that no answer would be given," I suppose every idea of obtaining a redress of their numerous grievances vanished. Yet in this very Declaration they say, "we shall lay down our arms, when hostilities shall cease on the part of the aggressors, and all danger of their being renewed shall be removed, and not before." I will venture, Sir, to do this much injured body of men justice on another subject against the false and malevolent assertions of the noble lord (G. Germain) at the head of the American department. His lordship declared to us in the most explicit terms," that the Congress had endeavoured to engage the Indian savages in their service, and would have employed them in the war." It is well known in what manner they must always be employed, not in the use of the sword and bayonet, of which they are ig norant, but of the scalping knife and tomahawk, in which they are expert. The Congress, Sir, in the true heroic spirit of bravery, which mercy always accompanies, reprobated the idea of torture and cruelty. They determined on fair, honourable war, | England, that we died for having violated unstained by murder or massacre. I will her holy constitution;" for such, in my convict his lordship on the fullest evidence opinion, is the case of every man, who of the grossest imposition on this House, has in this civil war drawn his sword and of a violation of truth. The Journals against our brethren in America, and of the Congress, Sir, both that of 1774 perished in the conflict. The situation, and 1775, have been as regularly published Sir, of those who survive, is to be comto the world, as the Votes of the House of miserated, not so much for the calamiCommons are by you, Mr. Speaker. In ties which they have suffered, calamities the Journal of June 30, 1775, I find the brought on by themselves, as for the loss following words, "Resolved, that the of honour, which, if we are rightly inCommittee for Indian affairs do prepare formed, has accompanied the circumstances proper talks to the several tribes of Indians, of their defeat and surrender. The terms for engaging the continuance of their of the capitulation for general Burgoyne, friendship to us, and neutrality in our pre- and the veteran troops under his command, sent unhappy dispute with Great Britain." are stated to be, delivering up their arms, This, was, Sir, after the provocations of being permitted without molestation to the repeated slaughter of their friends embark for Europe, and not serving against at Lexington, Concord, and Bunker's the Americans during the war. They Hill. But, Sir, although the Con- have then put themselves hors de combat. gress refused to ask the barbarous aid of They have agreed no more to face these the savages, the King's general most rea- cowardly Americans. They consent, not dily and with eagerness employed them. to measure swords again with their conHe boasts of it in his proclamation of last querors during the war; not to make a June. No man, Sir, who has read that single effort to recover their lost laurels. proclamation, and major general Gates's If they had surrendered prisoners of war, letter, will shed the tear of pity over the they might have been exchanged, and the misfortunes of Mr. Burgoyne. Major gefortune of war crowned them with future neral Gates says in his letter of Aug. 28, victories. That chance they have given to Mr. President Hancock, "the horrid up as well as their arms. We have now murders and scalpings paid for and en- scarcely a company of foot in arms in all couraged by lieutenant general Burgoyne, the northern colonies, except Canada. previous to his defeat at Bennington, will The English at the battles of Preston-Pans for ever stain the honour of the British and Falkirk suffered two most ignominious arms. In one house the parents with six defeats. There was however no capituchildren were most cruelly butchered." lation that the vanquished troops should Is this, Sir, the mercy of the King, which not serve against the same enemies during general Burgoyne in his proclamation the remainder of the war. At Culloden says, "his Majesty's numerous armies they washed away the foul stain of that and fleets in every quarter of America national disgrace in the blood of those were to display as well as his power and perjured Scots, rebels against a mild justice?" He succeeded to irritate, not to prince, and an equal system of laws. It intimidate his enemies. But, Sir, al- is, Sir, very remarkable, that the same though I do not feel the least spark of men, who stiled at that time the Scottish compassion for the fate of Mr. Burgoyne, rebels insurgents, now call the American I truly commiserate the situation of the insurgents by the name of rebels. I will troops with him. I regret the loss of the never, Sir, adopt the appellation. I think brave soldiers who perished in the action, the Americans are fighting in a good and I pity those who survive. I am sorry cause for the defence of their just privithat 800 valiant English and Germans leges, and chartered, as well as innate, were killed in a bad cause, in fighting rights. I am sure the proudest and most against the best constitution on earth. despotic court in Europe, that of Vienna, Sir, it was inscribed on the tombs of the would not have treated their subjects in 300 Spartans, who at Thermopyla de- the manner this court has treated the voted themselves to a glorious death for Americans, I mean as rebels. When the the liberties of Greece, " Passenger, go present empress queen, then only queen of tell at Sparta, that we died for having Hungary, succeeded her father, the emobeyed her holy laws." It ought to be peror Charles 6, in 1740, she secured the engraven on the tombs of the 800 who fell affections of her Hungarian subjects by in the late action, "Passenger, go tell in readily taking the old oath of the sovereign of that country, established in 1222. The not fill up our vacancies, as the late House greatest genius in Europe gives it us at of Commons indeed did in the case of the full length." If I, or any of my succes- Middlesex election, but all good men absors, at any time, should attempt to in- horred the usurpation, and the nation fringe your privileges, you, and your pos- were almost unanimous in their remonterity, are permitted, by virtue of this strances against it. We are merely a promise, to defend yourselves, without delegated power from the people, and in being liable to be treated as rebels." If that capacity only a third part of the lethe ancestors of the present empress queen gislature. We cannot therefore surrender had been as wise, the House of Austria their share of power, by whose favour would not have lost Switzerland, as they alone we acquire the right of giving any did by injustice and oppression. The vote in this House. It would be treachery, Americans, Sir, I think, are now defend- and even rebellion, in the servant against ing the privileges of every subject of the the master. Can we, Sir, repeal Magna British empire, as well as their own. If Charta? Has this House the power to this country did justice to the same spirit establish the Mahometan religion? Goof freedom in them, which we applaud vernment is only a trust from the people in our ancestors, we should admire their for their good, and in several instances, so heroism, and be eager to repeal all those far from possessing an absolute power, we Acts which are undoubted badges of ought to acknowledge, that we have no slavery, particularly the Declaratory Act, power at all. I will never admit arbitrary which I shall always consider as an inva- power to be lodged in any man, or body sion of the people's rights. Till we do of men. Many things are so closely that, we can have no rational hope of any woven in with the constitution, like the reconciliation. The desperate situation of trial by jury, that they cannot be sepaour affairs, from the variety of circum-rated, unless the body of the people exstances which have been stated, and the late capitulation of a whole army, prove the absolute necessity of terminating this bloody civil war, this general savage Indian massacre. The Declaratory Act, which we had no right to pass, will never be submitted to by the freemen on the other side the Atlantic. The spirit of it is hostile in the extreme to liberty. To bind the subject in all cases whatsoever! It is a charter of slavery. I deny the principle of this Act as much at home as in America. We ridiculously of late bewilder ourselves with frantic, high-flown, sonorous expressions of the omnipotence of parliament. The gentlest natures appear too fond of power, although they do not abuse it. There are many things, which parliament cannot do; many cases, in which it has no power. We cannot vote ourselves perpetual. We can * Voltaire says, "Marie-Thérèse, épouse du Grand Duc de Toscane François de Lorraine, gagna surtout l'esprit des Hongrois en se soumettant à prêter l'ancien serment du roi André 2, fait l'au 1222. Si moi ou quelques uns de mes successeurs, en quelque tems que ce soit, vent enfraindre vos priviléges, qu'il vous soit 'permise n vertu de cette promesse, à vous et à vos descendans, de vous detendre, sans pouvoir être traites de rebelles."" In the margin he adds these words, "serment singulier et qui ne devait pas l'être." Voltaire, Siécle de Louis 14, tom. 3, p. 429. The pressly declare otherwise, after free and full consideration. There are fundamental inalienable rights, land-marks of the constitution, which cannot be removed. omnipotence of parliament therefore, which is contended for, seems to me a false and dangerous doctrine. I have great reverence, Sir, for the memory of that Whig administration, which passed the Declaratory Act. I speak as a public man. I honour them for their spirited resolutions against General Warrants, and the Seizure of Papers, by which the personal liberty of the subject, and the most important secrets of life, were rendered sacred and inviolable. I highly applaud the turning the exciseman out of private houses by the repeal of the Cyder Tax. The negociation for the Manilla ransom, which so deeply interested many of our bravest men in the navy and army, revived under their auspices; but alas! after many faint and feeble efforts it languished and expired. Many excellent regulations of trade and commerce were made by them. But, Sir, I should have thought all their glories sullied by the passing of this Declaratory Act, which tends to establish a claim of unlimited authority over the colonies, if I did not believe it was a kind of force on that administration, a sort of compromise with the traitors at home for the repeal of the Stamp Act, which had thrown the whole empire pre |