you; for if you are in the right, the Sovereign is Tyrant; taxing the Colonists is robbery; and enforcin such taxation by the sword is murder.--We cannot hol up the hands of our soldiers by prayer, without com mitting sin: Nor can they fight with Christian courage which is inseparable from a good conscience, if they suspect that they are sent to rob good men of their pro. perties, liberties, and lives.

Mr. Wesley asserts, "That the supreme power in England has a legal right of laying any tax [I would say any proportionable tax] upon the American Colonies, for any end beneficial to the whole empire,-with or without their consent."-And you reply," If the Americans are indeed subject to such a power as this, their condition differs not from that of the most abject slaves in the universe."

Sir, I venture to assert, that you are mistaken, and that Mr. Wesley's proposition is rational, scriptural, and constitutional. And, promising you to shew in another letter the absurdity of your proposition, I enter upon the proof of my assertion, by an appeal to Reason, Scripture, and your own letter. In following this method, I shall address you as a Man, a Divine, and a Controvertist. First, as a Man :

66

Does not your mistake spring from your inattention to the nature of Civil Government? You represent the power which the King and Parliament claim of disposing of some of the money of the Colonists without their consent, as an encroachment upon British liberty:-as an unjust tyrannical pretension;-nay, as a species of robbery." But did you never consider, Sir, that in the nature of things, our Sovereign in England, (I mean by this word, the King and his Parliament, first jointly making laws not contrary to the laws of God, whose supreme dominion must always be submitted to by all created lawgivers; and secondly, executing the laws which they have made, by imparting to magistrates and other officers of justice, a sufficient power to put them in force;)-did you never consider, 1 say, that our Sovereign, whether we have a vote for parliament-men or

not, has both a right, and a power to dispose, not only of our money, but also of our liberties and lives; so far as that disposal may answer ends agreeable to the law of God, beneficial to the peace of society, and conducive to the general good? If this political doctrine be explained, you will, I am persuaded, assent to it, as an indubitable truth.

Could the Sovereign rule and protect us, if he had not this right and this power? I injure your property, or, what is worse, your reputation. You sue me for damages; but, how can the Sovereign act the part of protector of your property and good name, if he cannot command my property, and take from me by force what I unjustly detain from you, and what may make you satisfaction for the injury done to your character? And suppose you had wronged me, how could the Sovereign protect me, if he could not dispose of your property without your consent?

This is exactly the case with respect to Liberty. If you stop me on the road, and unjustly deprive me of the liberty of going about my business; can the Sovereign protect me, unless he has a right of depriving you of your lawless liberty, that I may quietly enjoy my lawful liberty? And does not equity demand, that if I am the petty tyrant, who pretend to the liberty of tarfeathering you, the Sovereign should have the same power of protecting you, by binding me to my good behaviour, or by ordering me to the stocks or to jail?

This power extends to Life, as well as liberty. I demand your money or your life. How can the Sovereign secure you more effectually than by taking my life, for having attempted to take yours? By the rule of reciprocation, if you endeavour to take away my life, I cannot be protected; and if you murder me, my blood cannot be properly avenged; unless the Sovereign has power to put you to death. Hence it is, that prosecutions for capital offences are carried on in the name of the King, who is the head of the legislative power, and who, as he insists (in his capacity of lawgiver and pro

punishments, has also the royal prerogative of pardo ing criminals condemned to die.

Come we now to taxes. If the Sovereign rules anprotects his subjects; and if it is his office to avert the dangers which threatened them, and to see that justic be done to the oppressed; he has his noble, I had almos said, his divine, business; and he has a right to live by his business; yea, to live in a manner which may an swer to the importance and dignity of his business Hence it follows, that he is not only as much entitled to a royal sustenance from his subjects, as a schoolmaste. is entitled to a schoolmaster's maintenance from his scholars; or a minister to a pastoral supply from his flock; but that his right is so much the more conspicuous, as his rank is higher than theirs. Now, this royal sustenance chiefly arises from custom and taxes. Hence it is evident, that to deny proper taxes to the Sovereign who protects and defends us, is, at least, as gross an act of injustice, as to reap the benefit of a lawyer's study, a physician's attendance, a nurse's care, and a master's instructions; and then to cheat them of the emolument which such study, attendance, care, and instructions reasonably entitle them to. This is

not all:

In a vast empire, where the Sovereign uses thousands of officers to keep the peace and administer justice, there is absolute need of a great revenue for the maintenance of those officers; and the collecting of this revenue is the employment of thousands more. If the state is in danger from external or internal foes; a sufficient force in constant readiness is absolutely necessary to suppress seditions, quell rebellions, obtain restitutions, prevent invasions, and hinder encroachments. Hence, the need of a navy, an army, a militia. Hence, the need of sea-ports, docks, fortifications, garrisons, convoys, flects of observation, ministers at foreign courts, arms, artillery, ammunition, magazines, and warlike stores without end;-hence, in short, prodigious expences. Now, as all these expences are incurred for the protection and dignity of the whole empire, do not reason and

conscience dictate ?,—(1.) That all those who share in the protection and dignity of the empire, should contribute in due proportion towards defraying the national expence:-(2.) That, of consequence, the supreme power has an indubitable right of laying moderate taxes upon the subjects, for any end beneficial to the whole empire: −(3.) That subjects have absolutely no right to complain of taxation, unless they are taxed exorbitantly, or without due proportion:-(4.) That if Colonies of subjects settled by a grant from the Sovereign, within the limits of the empire, have been spared in their state of infancy, either to encourage their growth, or because the revenue, which might have arisen from taxing them at first, would hardly have defrayed the expence of raising taxes; it by no means follows, that, when such Colonies have gathered strength, and are as well able to bear a share in the national burden as the mother country, they should still be excused:-And lastly, that to say, ❝ You shall not tax me without my consent," is as improper a speech from a subject to his Sovereign, as to say, "You shall not protect the empire without my consent; if I steal, you shall not send me to jail without my consent; if I raise a rebellion, you shall not hang me, unless I give you leave; you shall not dispose of my property without my permission; although (by the bye) I will dispose of the property of my fellow-subjects, not only without their permission, but also in full opposition to your authority;—an absurd, unjust disposition this, which too many of the Bostonian patriots evidenced when they imperiously disposed of the cargo of our ships, forcibly threw the goods of our merchants into the sea, to the amount of many thousand pounds, and set all America in a flame, as soon as the Sovereign insisted that the port of Boston should be shut up, till the perpetrators of this daring act were delivered to justice, or, at least, till satisfaction was made to his oppressed subjects, whose ships have been boarded in a piratical manner, and whose property has been feloniously destroyed, when they quietly traded under the

you; for if you are in the right, the Sovereign is Tyrant; taxing the Colonists is robbery; and enforcir such taxation by the sword is murder.--We cannot hol up the hands of our soldiers by prayer, without com mitting sin Nor can they fight with Christian courage which is inseparable from a good conscience, if the suspect that they are sent to rob good men of their pro perties, liberties, and lives.

:

Mr. Wesley asserts, "That the supreme power in England has a legal right of laying any tax [I would say any proportionable tax] upon the American Colonies, for any end beneficial to the whole empire, with or without their consent."-And you reply," If the Americans are indeed subject to such a power as this, their condition differs not from that of the most abject slaves in the universe."

Sir, I venture to assert, that you are mistaken, and that Mr. Wesley's proposition is rational, scriptural, and constitutional. And, promising you to shew in another letter the absurdity of your proposition, I enter upon the proof of my assertion, by an appeal to Reason, Scripture, and your own letter. In following this method, I shall address you as a Man, a Divine, and a Controvertist. First, as a Man :

Does not your mistake spring from your inattention to the nature of Civil Government? You represent the power which the King and Parliament claim of disposing of some of the money of the Colonists without their consent, as an encroachment upon British liberty:-as an unjust tyrannical pretension ;-nay, as a species of "robbery." But did you never consider, Sir, that in the nature of things, our Sovereign in England, (I mean by this word, the King and his Parliament, first jointly making laws not contrary to the laws of God, whose supreme dominion must always be submitted to by all created lawgivers; and secondly, executing the laws which they have made, by imparting to magistrates and other officers of justice, a sufficient power to put them in force;)-did you never consider, 1 say, that our Sovereign, whether we have a vote for parliament-men or