A defence of the Letter from a gentleman at Halifax, to his friend in Rhode-Island. [Eleven lines from Foster]

A Defence of the Halifax Letter, &c.

THE editor of the Halifax letter hath, with much serenity and composure, attended to the illiberal opposition, and multiplied abuse, which he and that pamphlet have received, from various quarters. He was willing to wait the last efforts of his malignant adversaries, before he attempted a reply. Their rage, at length, seems to be near spent, and the troubled sea of controversy hath again almost subsided. He therefore ventures, once more, to embark upon it; and is desirous, for his own ho|nour, as well as for the example of his antagonists, to conduct himself with all possible decency and mo|deration. Thus, when a calm succeeds a storm, we revolve in our minds the past tumult, and cooly sur|vey the confusion it occasioned.

In order to justify the Halifax gentleman's letter, it is necessary to premise, that Great-Britain, during the late war, had lavished the blood of her subjects, and spent immense sums, as well for the security of the colonies, as her own importance and dignity. A few years ago, when Oswego and fort William-Henry were taken, no one can forget, that these colonies

were so terrified and alarmed, that they would gladly have consented to have made even Albany the bar|rier, between the French and them: But, through the smiles of heaven, and the unanimity and bravery of the British councils and arms, the enemy were at last brought to terms, and the colonies secured, and made happy by a peace. The government, in pursuing such measures as it thought necessary, to preserve the colo|nies from future invasions and attacks, became obliged to keep up a large body of troops, cantoned in dif|different parts of the continent. Already plunged in debt, to almost an incredible amount, and availing itself of every expedient, however burdensome, to raise supplies from its distressed subjects in Great-Britain; it was judged reasonable and equitable to draw some advantages from the trade of its colonies, in order to raise a fund for the maintenance and support of those troops, thus employed for our protection. An act of parliament, levying some impositions, was made; and we were given to understand, that the ministry were meditating such further taxes as the exigence of things might require, and such as might, at the same time, be least burdensome to us: Nevertheless, here it was, a discontent first began to appear, and the con|duct of the administration was arraigned, by many, with all the petulance of children, who, by long in|dulgence, become impatient of the smallest restraints.

From censuring the act of parliament, as useless and oppressive, the humour afterwards took a diffe|rent turn; and we were soon told by many, that the parliament of Great-Britain had no constitutional right, no authority, de jure, as some expressed it, to bind us by any act of their making, because we were not re|presented.

Ignorance and conceit first promulged this doctrine; and as it flattered the pride and self-love of the peo|ple, it is no wonder its progress hath been so rapid and successful. To spread the folly and mischief still more, numberless pamphlets and pieces in news-papers were published, in which the parent country and its administration have been treated in the most contu|melious and irreverent manner.

As the editor hath been charged with falshood and misrepresentation in these assertions, he here begs leave, in the first place, to bring together, in one view, several extracts from these pamphlets and news-papers alluded to, that the public may judge for themselves, whether his assertions are well founded.

In a Providence news-paper of August 18, 1764, Great-Britain is treated with the greatest mockery and derision; and in the stile and manner of a fanatick exhorter, the writer begins with this text: "In St. JAMES's, you will find these words, MOTHER COUN|TRY." In the course of this exhortation, the preacher names a certain nobleman of the board of trade, that, a few years ago, (he says) enquired "if New-England was an island." This is a low, scandalous, legendary tale, purposely invented to bring contempt and odium upon the administration. He says,

It must look like a direct design of enslaving us, to talk of the infinite obligation and debt, we are under to Old-England, for prosecuting a war here; and how subservient we ought to be to particular interests in Britain, in consideration thereof. When certain designs are to be answered, dark words and phrases suit best, which really, without sense or meaning, if properly sounded and echoed, become sacred, and effectual machines for bringing about the purpose,

i. e. to enslave the colonies. Again,

Hath the govern|ment of England been at any expence in support|ing the colonies of New-England? No. Is one farthing balance due to them, in the whole ac|count, from the first planting of New-England, to this time? No.

—The tendency of all this, is manifestly to degrade the mother country, to raise suspicions and jealousies against her, and to blot out of the colonies every trace of duty and gratitude.— Again he says, he

could mention many instances of treasons and rebellions in a certain mother coun|try.

It seems a general opinion here, that there can be no rebellion unless the pretender is concerned in it.—Again he says,

the late acts, clogging our trade, are unnatural, highly injurious, and not very motherly. The northern colonies have been most infamously belied, scandalized, and injuriously treat|ed, by a number of ignorant and envious officers in the army and navy,

&c.—What reason can there possibly be, that should make the gentlemen of the army or navy envious against the colonies? The slander against them is groundless and malicious. In|gratitude, more strong than traytors arms, hath swal|lowed up all remembrance of their services. Such are the breathings of our piety to those who have bled for our deliverance.

The Boston gazette of the 24th September, 1764, contains a publication, in which are these words:

I know not what wise measures Mr. Gr—nv—l's political genius may suggest, for the benefit of the colonies; but I would fain whisper in his ear, that there are millions of British subjects in America, who have a warm sense of liberty: Many of them have as much understanding as he himself has, and

have acquired as thorough a knowledge of the British constitution, and the rights of British sub|jects, as he. They smile at the folly and nonsense of him and others, who fancy that American sub|jects are not intitled to all the rights of native Bri|tons. They have never forfeited those rights; and therefore cannot, nay, they will not, consent to part with them.

Mr. Grenville, here maliciously pointed at, is at the head of the treasury; and, to his vigilance and great merit, the nation is much in|debted ever since he presided there: Yet he is charged with folly and nonsense, in express words; and the mother country is set at defiance, for the colonies will not, says the author, consent to part with their rights. Such language as this, from inhabitants of dependant colonies to the superior and sovereign head, is froward, peremptory, and hostile.* 1.1

A pamphlet entitled, "the sentiments of a British North-American," published at Boston, some time past, has the following motto in the title page, taken from Phaedrus's fables.

Asellum in prato timidus pascebat senex, Is hostium clamore subito territus Suadebat asino fugere ne possint capi At ille lentus. Quaeso num binas mihi Clitellas impositurum victorem putas? Senex negavit; ergo quid refert mea Cui serviam, clitellas dum portem meas.

The professed design of this pamphlet, was to arraign the measures of the administration, relative to

taxing the colonies, &c. The application of the above fable to that subject, shews clearly the author's opinion, that under the present parliamentary regula|tions, it is a matter of indifference what prince or power we are subject to, whether a GEORGE or a LEWIS, as a certain gentleman expressed it.

In the Providence gazette, November 10, 1764, is contained, something that is called a dream. The dreamer before he falls asleep, introduces himself in this manner:

He that acknowleges that I am an Englishman, and tells me, at the same time, that I am to live under laws, which I have no hand in making, and am to be taxed where I have no representative, does but mock me.

In the midst of his Dream, speaking of the stamp duty, intended to be laid on the colonies, he compares it to the branding of beasts. The performance is something of the dra|matick kind; and among the persons of the drama, is a master brander and his retinue,. Who this cha|racter means, the reader must discover. In the same scene is also exhibited, a ragged country fellow, grin|ning. The dreamer says,

The master brander, with his retinue, approached the pasture with great pomp, one carrring a large silver brand, in the form of the letter S; and upon entering the field, they began with the asses, and branded them without interruption.

Soon after he adds,

A very rag|ged country fellow said, with a facetious grin, that he always understood till then, that the good peo|ple of England very well knew, that none but asses would stand still to be branded.

The meaning, wrapped up in this low, vulgar allegory, is plain.— The letter S, denotes the Slavery the colonies would be subjected to by the stamp duty, if they, like asses,

should submit to it.—The ragged country fellow de|notes the dreamer himself.

A piece in the New-York gazette, of Thursday, March 7th, 1765, which came in the editor's way, while these sheets were compiling, furnishes him with a recent and palpable instance of that unfilial dispo|sition too prevalent in the colonies. The author of this piece first endeavours to raise a cry against the Halifax letter, and then, exalting the rights and privi|leges of the colonies, he says,

If those rights and privileges are violated, what reason then can re|main, why they should prefer the British to the French government, or any other? They may, indeed, from their present weakness, be compelled to sub|mit to the impositions of ministerial power, but they will certainly consider that power as ty|rannical; they will hate and abhor it, and, as soon as they are able, will throw it off, or perhaps try to obtain better terms from some other power.

Here is an honest, plain spoken gentleman, that does not mince the matter at all; he roundly threatens Great-Britain with the defection of her colonies, as soon as they are able.

To give the last finishings to the opinions and dog|ma's contained in the aforegoing extracts, and many others which might be produced, of the same sort, his honour the governor of Rhode-Island colony, en|tered upon the stage,

Mid the low murmurs of submissive fear, And mingled rage, my H— rais'd his Voice;

and in a solemn, argumentative manner, assumed upon himself to prove, that an act of parliament can|not levy taxes on the colonies, by any other authority,

but that of mere superiority and power. (See page 20 of "rights of colonies examined.") Besides the boldness of such a position, the performance appeared throughout ostentations, in the manner and execution; and in the matter, disrespectful and unthankful to the mother country. The many quotations, from ancient and modern books, abundantly evince the first. The latter shall now be proved, by one or two observations upon it, which were omitted in the Halifax letter.

In page 20, his honour says,

In the year 1746, when Duke D'Anville came out from France, with the most formidable French fleet that ever was in the American seas, enraged at these colonies for the loss of Louisbourg the year before, and with orders to make an attack on them; even in this greatest exigence, these colonies were left to the protection of heaven and their own efforts.

This insinuation is ungrateful and disrespectful. The ad|ministration at that time, it is confessed, was inactive and indolent, and the British honour and interest alike neglected in all places; but the malevolence, in the manner of the expression, is obvious; and the idea intended to be produced, is, that the colonies were particularly sacrificed by Great-Britain at that time, for, says he,

they were left to the protection of heaven and their own efforts.

What other purpose can this effect, but to impress the people with an opinion, that they were at that time neglected by their mother country? What other passions will it kindle, but resentment against her? What more pow|erful argument can be used to withdraw the subjection of the colonies from Great-Britain, than to fill the minds of the people with doubts and distrusts of

that care and protection they might reasonably expect from her? But further, the Duke D'Anville was enraged at these colonies for the loss of Louisbourg; as if these colonies alone were the sole instruments of its reduction. The truth is, without depreciating the services of the Americans, the conquest of that place was, in a great measure, owing to the squadron under Admiral Warren, without which, it's more than pro|bable, it never would have been taken. But this passage of his honour's book, is still further reprehen|sible, for its disingenuity and concealment of the truth. Great-Britain is charged with neglecting the colonies, but not a word is said of the parliamentary reimburse|ment of the whole charges of that expedition.

In page 15, his honour, after censuring the enlarged power of the admiralty, and impeaching the integrity of the judge, makes the following reflection:

Such unbounded protection and encouragement given to informers, must call to every one's remembrance Tacitus's account of the miserable condition of the Romans, in the reign of Tiberius, their emperor, who let loose and encouraged the informers of that age.

Here, the necessary measures, contrived by the government, to suppress the infamous practice of smuggling, is called, an unbounded protection and encouragement given to informers; and the present most happy state of the British nation, under a prince who is the delight of mankind, is associated with, and likened unto, the miserable condition of the Romans under Tiberius, one of the most wicked and voluptu|ous of their emperors. These are not the effusions of a peaceable citizen, or a faithful magistrate; and the editor unfeignedly regrets the occasion, which has pro|duced this remark, because he hoped never to have

seen so great a sacrifice made, by the honourable au|thor, to popular favour. But, alass! the foul path to popularity, must ever be strewed with the spoils ra|vished from the brow of royalty.

These remarks sufficiently prove the charge of disrespect to the mother country, in his honour's book; which, together with the pamphlets and news-papers afore-recited, will strongly mark the complection of too many in the colonies, when the Halifax letter made its appearance. The editor, truly scandalized at such freedoms, and fully sensible of the bad conse|quences which would follow the increase of this temper, which he hath now clearly exposed to view, ventured to publish that letter. He foresaw it would be unpopular, and draw on him a profusion of obloquy and reproach; and the event is conformable to his expectations: but still he is not dismayed, and he will persevere, with unremiting zeal, till time, which will produce his best vindication, shall con|vince his adversaries of their errors and mistakes. Perhaps there never was an instance of so great a prostitution, and debasement of the human faculties, as in the conduct of those who have appeared in this controversy against the Halifax letter. A man might have committed blasphemy and treason, and met with more humane treatment than has been shewn the author, as appears by the Boston pamphlet, and many detached pieces in news-papers, published against him. To apologize for Great-Britain, it seems, is the only unpardonable sin in this meridian. The bitterness of truth is very offensive, and the Halifax letter has dared to speak it out. Had the matters therein contained, been destitute of truth, it would have been treated like the lie of a day, and as soon

disappeared; but the rage and venom thrown out against it, is an unerring proof of its merit, and the authors most honorable testimony. The following points were all the Halifax letter intended to prove, to wit:

That the New-England colonies privileges, as cor|porations created by the crown, are fixed and ascer|tained by their charters.

That these charters give them no exemption from the jurisdiction of parliament.

That no grant of the king could exempt them from this jurisdiction, because the common law, out of which it is derived, confessedly reaches the colonies, and brings with it that jurisdiction, and announces its force and operation over them.

That the house of commons consider themselves as representatives of every British subject, wherever he be; and therefore to every useful and beneficial purpose, the interests of the colonists are as well secured and managed by such a house, as if they had a share in electing them.

That the late act for regulating trade, &c. is founded upon the necessities of the administration, which must be supposed to have adopted the best methods it could, to raise those monies intended to be applied for the protection of the colonies. And,

That the employment of cutters, and enlarging the power of the admiralty, can be accounted for no otherwise, than from the apprehension of the legisla|ture, that smuggling, in some of the colonies, required further and severer remedies.

This was the whole purport and design of the Halifax letter: If any satyr or ridicule, against the author of the rights of colonies, was occasionally in|terspersed,

it was fairly and justly invited, by the vanity of an attempt, which was no less than to anni|hilate the parliamentary jurisdiction in the colonies.

In opposition to this inoffensive pamphlet, the editor of it is assailed by two very distinguished personages; both of them esteemed the exactest models of polite|ness, urbanity, and softness of manners, perhaps in America. The first retailed his labours in the Provi|dence news-papers. The second has fabricated a pamphlet of thirty-two pages, printed at Boston. They shall, in the few following remarks, be called, for brevity's sake, the Providence writer, and the Boston writer. The Providence writer shall be first taken notice of.

He accuses the Halifax gentleman of want of can|dor, for charging the honourable author with main|taining,

that the colonies have rights independant of parliament.

So far from retracting the charge, the editor doth now aver, that this dogma hath been asserted by his honour in the most open and express manner. It can be proved, even from public files and records, that the parliamentary authority hath been ludicrously treated by him. He and his followers, now unable to mantain the doctrine, upon any prin|ciples, founded either upon the nature of government, common sense, or prudence, are at length become ashamed of their indiscretion, and have no means of acquittal, but to deny, with confidence, that they ever maintained it. The editor, however, continues his accusation, upon the expression of his honour's book alone, without availing himself of any foreign aid; but he confesses, it will be difficult to convince the Providence writer of this, till the meaning of words shall be adjusted by some authority, to which his obe|dience

may be exacted. To what purpose will it be to make use of signs, if their signification may be twisted and varied just as a writer pleases? Does not his honour say, in plain English words, that the common people of Great-Britain have not any sort of power over the Ame|ricans, and that they cannot give a power to their representatives which they have not themselves. Is not the inference from these expressions as clear as the sun, that these representatives have no power over the Ame|ricans? And if the representatives, i. e. the house of commons, have no power over the Americans, an act of parliament can have no power over them, for the house of commons is a constituent branch of the legislative, and their concurrence absolutely essential to the making of every act: Yet the Providence writer, with the most inexcuseable prevarication, would fain melt down this plain, striking denial of parliamentary jurisdiction, to mean no more than this, that it was his honour's belief, that according to British principles of government, the subjects of America ought not to be taxed in parliament. This rude and violent perversion of plain English, cannot deceive any body that will consider but a moment.

The editor thinks this a proper place to thank the Boston writer for a little assistance. In page 5 of his book, he

confesses and laments that the aforegoing expressions of his honour involve a sophism, un|worthy of him;

and to do the Boston writer justice he has detected the fallacy which escaped the Halifax gentleman. His honour, however, may not take it so kindly, and will begin to suspect, that he is in perils from false brethren; for certainly, the Boston writer has given a specimen of his disingenuity, to say no worse of it. Every body must allow this is acting a

double, insincere part. A friend should rather have concealed the fault, than exposed it: But the ruling passion of the Boston writer totally absorbs him; and the cause itself is rather to be sacrificed, than a single ray of his superior discernment should be eclipsed.— He is, however, entitled to a further compliment from the editor, for he allows his honour's expression to be an implicit denial of the authority of parliament, which is the same, in substance, as an explicit one; and the editor can see no difference in the two modes, except in the disguise and cunning, which are, by no means, the talents of a fair and candid enquirer after truth. Here, it is hoped, that, with the reinforcement of the Boston writer, the reader will be convinced that the charge upon his honour is fully made out.

But should it be still thought, that his honour has not expresly denied the jurisdiction of parliament, yet the tendency of his pamphlet will be found equally mischievous.

If we are taxed, (says he) without our own consent; we are in the miserable condition of slaves.

Page 4. In this place, he hath combined together the idea of slavery, with that of being taxed without our consent, which is very artful, and an effectu|al way to extinguish all regard to acts of parliament.

It is easy to foresee, from the slightest knowledge of the temper and genius of a free people, as the English are, that whenever they are made to believe, that the authority, which takes money out of their purses, is not founded in equity, they will soon refuse obedience to it. And, therefore, supposing all that has been said on this subject, by his honour, or any other, to have gone no further, than only to question the equity of taxing the colonies without their being represented; the effect of such reasoning, upon the minds of the

people, will be equally as dangerous to the peace and order of government, as a downright denial of the authority of parliament would be. So that it is a poor evasion for the patrons and promoters of such doctrines, to say, they only humbly call in question the equity of exercising the parliamentary jurisdiction; or, that according to British principles of government, the Americans ought not to be taxed in parliament; for the morality of any action is determined by its consequences: And if such opinions, however dressed up, will be found to have weakened the ties of obedi|ence, the mischief is great; and the guilt of it will fall upon the heads of those who have promoted such opinions.

The Halifax gentleman says,

that he had endea|voured to investigate the natural relation, between the colonies and the mother state, abstracted from compact.

The Providence writer, remarkable for the cleanliness of his ideas, says, this is rank nonsense; that the mother country and colony have no natural relation. The editor could, on this occasion, add a modicum to the Providence writer's stock of know|lege, by various extracts from books, and thereby justify the mode of expression in the Halifax letter: But he is relieved from further elucidating this point, by the Boston writer, to whom he again pays his com|pliment of thanks, for his assistance, in transferring to the Providence writer, the rank nonsense charged upon the Halifax gentleman. In page 31, the Boston writer has shewn, that there is a natural relation between a mother state and its colonies; so that the Halifax letter is fairly quit of the absurdity, by a majority of two voices against one: But should it be thought otherwise, the editor leaves the point to be

decided between them. The policy, in the opposition to the Halifax letter, must appear new and singular. The amiable couple, who form this opposition, instead of being united, counteract each other; and, like the legs of Nebuchadnezzar's image, composed of iron and clay, will soon break to pieces.

The Halifax gentleman says, "that acts of parlia|ment derive their authority from the common law." "If so, says the Providence writer, the jurisdiction of parliament must be subordinate to the common law." Not so neither: And the issue of stupidity shall be fairly tried. Sir Edward Coke says, indeed, right, that the jurisdiction of this court is transcendant, &c. But from whence is it derived? Could this jurisdiction form and create itself? No: It is the common law, founded upon long usage and consent, which has placed an uncontroulable, transcendant jurisdiction in that court, even to alter and amend the course and direction of various branches of the common law itself. If the Providence writer could trace a different source of this jurisdiction, or account for it better, he ought to have done it; but his silence is a proof that he could not.

He charges the Halifax gentleman with unbounded folly, and then makes him say, that parliamentary jurisdiction

can be extended, occasionally, into every kingdom of the world.

But there is no expression in the letter that will warrant any such construction. It says,

The jurisdiction of parliament is attached to every British subject, wheresoever he be.

And this is, indeed, true of all subjects in the British colo|nies. It is there, this jurisdiction is now disputed; and they at present are the subject of this controversy. Therefore, the general expressions, wheresoever he be,

according to the rules of argumentation, must mean, and be interpreted, in the colonies. Lord Coke says,

The common law extends to all places granted under the broad seal.

Therefore it necessarily extends to, and operates in, the colonies. It there maintains and asserts the jurisdiction of parliament over them. Shall the editor be still asked for a better, or stronger authority, to justify his opinion?

In one paragraph of the Providence news-paper, the Halifax gentleman is twice charged with impudence, with the most aggressing impudence. This is indeed very clever; and what is it for? Why he has presu|med to say, "that a representation, if allowed, would be of no real use to us." Is this so criminal? Have patience, gentle reader, and be not astonished at the editor's calmness. Michael, the arch-angel, would not bring a railing accusation against the Devil.— Bitter words, and opprobrious epithets, are harmless things, and prove nothing. It is the social and moral conduct of a man, that forms his character in life. The meanest wretches are the most dextrous at all the artillery of low abuse; and to excel in this re|spect, is only to sink in fame.

The Halifax gentleman says,

It is the opinion of the house of commons, and may be considered as a law of parliament, that they are the represen|tatives of every British subject, wherever he be.

In saying this, his intention was merely to conciliate the minds of his countrymen, and to produce in the colonies a quiet submission to the measures of parlia|ment, by letting them know, that they have no reason to complain, because, in the opinion of the house of commons, tho' they are not in fact represented, yet their properties and interests are equally regarded

with those of their fellow subjects in Great-Britain. But it seems this prudent and commendable endea|vour of the Halifax letter, meets with the usual per|sonal invective from the Providence writer. Must not he, and his whole tribe, stand condemned, in the judgment of all sober and moderate men, for wickedly misleading the people, under the deceitful guise of liberty? Is not he a better friend to the colonies, who tells them the plain truth, and would fain pre|vent the increase of those prejudices and idols of the mind, which, if suffered to grow wild, will infalliably be hurtful to the present age, and to posterity.

The Halifax letter says,

that a merchant, tho' worth £.100,000 sterling, if it consists only in personal effects, has no vote in election of parlia|ment members.

The Providence writer says, it is false. To prove that it is false, he cites justice Powys's argument, in the case of Ashby and White, who says,

In some boroughs, every potwaller may vote; in some, residents; and in others, the out|lying burgesses, &c.

What then? Does this prove it false? A man may be worth £. 100,000 ster|ling, personal estate, and yet be neither a freeholder, a burgess, a potwaller, or a freeman, of any corpora|tion in Great-Britain; and therefore may have no right to vote. So that it remains yet undeniably plain, that a man of that fortune may be unqualified to vote; and it is undoubtedly true, that there are many such in Great-Britain, who cannot vote at all. But the matter is scarcely worth the writing of a single word, and should here have been unnoticed, had it not been for the charge of falshood.

The Halifax letter affirms,

that copyholders in England, of £. 1000 sterling per annum, cannot

vote.

Here the Providence writer gives him the lie again.—Thou parragon of truth and goodness, does it follow, that because the statute of the 9th of Anne qualifies a copyholder for life, of £. 600 sterling per annum, to be a knight of the shire, that therefore copyholders may vote? It clearly does not. "Copy|holders are a servile tenure: They are not free and common socage; and therefore fall short of the dig|nity, the immunities, and the independency of that freehold tenure, which, for more than three hundred years, have constituted an elector of knight of the shire." This doctrine was fully established, by a very learned man, with whom the Providence writer is not yet acquainted; and it was confirmed by the statute of the 31st of the late king, which enacted, "That after the 29th day of June, A. D. 1758, no copyholder should vote for a knight of the shire, under penalty of £. 50 sterling," &c.—The lesson of humiliation is hard to learn; but painful as it is, the Providence writer should here begin the work: And, for his encouragement, let him remember that his credit will raise in proportion to the decrease of his pride; and that meekness will restore to him, what he has lost by his arrogance.

The employment of cutters, and enlarging the power of the admiralty, contained in the act of par|liament, was complained of by the honourable author. As these measures seemed grievous to the colonists, the Halifax gentleman conceived, that if he could give any satisfactory account of the motives, which induced the administration to adopt them, it would not be unacceptable to such persons as had not con|sidered of the matter, and would rather soften the colonists, than provoke them against those measures:

Accordingly he resolved the causes of the new regu|lations, into the necessity of the thing. In all states, punishments must rise in proportion to offences. The more flagrant these are, the more severe should those be. This will be admitted by every body. Corrup|tissima respublica, plurimae leges, says Tacitus. But it seems the Providence writer thinks these proceedings arbitrary and useless, because, he says, "there has been, for years past, little or no smuggling carried on in these northern colonies, but in the article of me|lasses." The editor here readily grants, that the trade of foreign melasses, though illicit, is by far the least injurious of any: And he, with truth, can say, that that species of trade entered very little into the charge of smuggling, brought against the northern colonies. But does this Providence writer imagine, that the editor has such a dastardly, temporizing spirit, that he dares not speak out what every body knows to be true? Is it not notorious, that a most iniquitous, smuggling trade has been long carried on, from seve|ral of the colonies, to Holland, and other foreign European countries, to the vast prejudice of Great-Britain, and her manufactures? And there is not the least kind of doubt, if the new instituted court of ad|miralty should be abolished, and the men of war and cutters withdrawn from their stations, but this same trade would be renewed, and practised in such a man|ner, as to elude the contravention of custom-house officers, however faithful and vigilant they might be. Can any one be so ignorant of the world, as not to know, that money is almost become the supreme good; and that the obligations of conscience and duty, are but feeble restraints, when prospects of great gain present themselves? This is true every where.

The inclination to smuggle is equally prevalent in many parts of Great-Britain, the isle of Man, &c. The means used to check it, in those places, are rather more rigorous than here: And the editor is not yet persuaded, "that the people of New-England are such philosophers and divines, compared with those of Great-Britain," that their virtue is proof against the allurements of mammon. He thinks it no breach of charity to say, that if the fear of confiscation and forfeiture was removed, the king's revenue would be as little regarded by these New-England philosophers and divines, as by any other people, though the law of both tables should look them full in the face: And he will pay them no compliment, at the expence of truth.—For such-like sentiments as these, the Hali|fax gentleman is threatened, by the Providence writer, with something that looks like a legal prosecution. He says, there has been little or no smuggling in the colonies. What violence does this unhappy devoted man commit against the dictates of his own heart. The editor here confesseth, he feels some indignation, mixed with pity, towards a person, who is so lost to every manly sentiment,

that the words of his mouth have no interpretation: His tongue and his heart are for ever at variance.

To be threatened with a prosecution, from this Providence writer, is, indeed, enough to try one's patience. The editor thinks, however, he is secure, at present, in his own inno|cence; but when his crimes become so great, that those whom he has betrayed demand restitution in a court of justice, for his falshood and perfidy: When his conscious guilt shall afford no solace to his mind; then he may be driven to take shelter under the wings of a party, to screen himself from the resentment of his injured and abused clients.

The editor here takes his final leave of the Provi|dence writer.

The second that has honoured the Halifax letter with his animadversions, is a Boston writer, who has published a pamphlet, entitled, A vindication of the British colonies, against the aspersions of the Halifax gentleman.

The treatment some of the most respectable cha|racters, in the Massachusetts-Bay, have met with from this writer, left the editor no room to doubt what would be his own fate, and he is not disappointed.

In the first page, he says, all who grow outrageous, are disgustful. This has so great a likeness to the original, that one could take his oath, he was sitting for his own picture. His features open and spread with almost the first stroke of his pen. KNOW THYSELF. This single saying of old Chilo, the Lacedemonian, suitably impressed upon his mind, would have pre|vented his writing this pamphlet, and saved the public much pain, because, all who grow outrageous, are dis|gustful.

"So, J-m—y,—so, so, J-m—y,—so, J-m—y, so.

BOSTON NEWS-PAPER.

The editor hath, with great travail and perseverance, waded through this dreary waste of 32 pages. In at|tempting to explore it, Chaos seemed to be come again. The patience he exercised, on that dark and gloomy occasion, has fitted him for any misfortune or disappointment in life. Pain, he will no more con|sider as an evil. Nay, should he be forced to pass the Stygian river, and drink its poisonous vapours, it would be more than Elysian, compared with the misery of reading through this pamphlet.

How deep the darkness? and the groan how loud? And far, how far! from lambent are the flames?

This pamphlet has answered two purposes: First, to scatter, upon the author of the Halifax letter, the most unprovoked abuse: And secondly, by an unac|countable fatality, to sustain and confirm the principal argument contained in that letter. Though the Boston writer is fairly foiled, he shall find, in the editor, a generous antagonist, for he will not rob him of his weapons.

The Boston writer says, "It is certain, that the parliament of Great-Britain hath a just, clear, equi|table, and constitutional right, power, and authority, to bind the colonies, by all acts wherein they are named. Every lawyer, nay, every tyro, knows this. No less certain is it, that the parliament of Great-Britain have a just and equitable right, power, and authority, to im|pose taxes on the colonies, internal and external, on lands as well as on trade. Here he will certainly appear, in the opinion of his associates and ad|herents, to have surrendered up all at discretion, and betrayed his whole party; for the above passage con|tains a most unreserved and solemn recognition of the absolute, unlimited authority of parliament over the colonies. The warmth of the expression, and the care taken to shun all ambiguity, indicates the zeal of a new convert; for that he is a new convert, will appear from a passage in his first pamphlet, which he cites in page 27 of his present performance, in these words:

When the parliament shall think fit to allow the colonists a representation in the house of com|mons, the equity of their taxing the colonies will be as clear as their power is at present of doing it

without, if they please.

Hence it is evident, that when he wrote his first pamphlet, the equity of taxing the colonies depended, in his opinion, upon their being, in fact, represented in the house of commons: for when that should be allowed, the equity of taxing would be as clear as their power is at present, &c. Thus there was a time, when the Boston writer was a meer tyro; it is a pleasure to acknowlege, that he is now become a lawyer.* 1.2

It will afford some amusement to observe here, that the present Providence writer was the author of the dream, taken notice of in page 8. The reader may recollect, that he there says, "He who tells me, that I am to be taxed where I have no represen|tative, does but mock me." The reader will also re|mark, that, in the preceeding paragraph, the Boston writer says, that the parliament of Great-Britain may constitutionally and equitably tax us, and yet we are not represented. This will naturally produce some very diverting images. The scene, at length, opens, and discovers this amiable pair of writers; one of them dreaming, and the other mocking him. Mercy on us! what a group would this furnish, for the grotesque genius of a Dutch painter?

Upon the whole, the Boston pamphlet, however barren it may be in some respects, affords a large field for the critical talents of a Prosodian, or an Auceps Syllabarum, which was a character given by Cicero to some lawyers of his time; but as the editor does not boast such acquirements, he can have no kind of controversy with the Boston writer, after the inge|nuous

confession he hath made of his new political principles. He has disarmed, by this very commen|dable declaration, the little resentment the editor had against him, for the personal abuse his piece contains: Therefore, he freely forgives, and at the same time congratulates him, on the happy conviction of his errors. But the work of repentance should not stop here; it is to be feared the honourable author is yet an unbeliever, and his conversion should be made a point of. When this is done, his honour and the Boston writer should adjust, together, the fallacy detected in his book: For though the argument was not any ways affected by that fallacy, yet it impeaches his ho|nour's understanding; or, at least, his candor. When this is well settled, the terms, natural relation, between a mother state and its colonies, should be discussed between him and the Providence writer. And when peace and unanimity are restored within their borders, they should form a new plan of operations, and de|pute one of their body to attack the Halifax letter; but they should, in all good policy, agree not to con|tradict or confute each other; for, besides the addi|tional trouble they give their antagonist, they weaken and destroy the ground they stand upon.

As the particular remarks upon the Providence writer are, in a great measure, applicable to the ge|neral contents of the Boston pamphlet; and as this latter contains nothing new, but is rather inferior to the former, both in the method and argument; it would be but dull repetition to say any thing further upon it. The editor, therefore, will take his leave of the Boston writer; but must first balance the sing-song, with part of that celebrated character of Cassius, (to compare small things with great) which Shakespear has put in the mouth of Caesar.

—He hears no musick: Seldom he smiles; and smiles in such a sort, As if he mock'd himself, and scorn'd his spirit, That could be mov'd to smile at any thing. Such men as he, be never at heart's ease, Whilst they behold a greater than themselves. And therefore are they very dangerous.

It is proper here to record, what, perhaps, may appear, a few years hence, almost incredible. At the general assembly of this colony, held at East-Greenwich, on the last Monday of February, A. D. 1765, the deputy-governor went down to the lower house, with this harmless Halifax letter in his hand, and requested them to take it into consideration, and pursue such measures against the printer, or pamphlet, as they should think fit. Some warm members pushed on this motion, and, in their anger, seemed to have forgot, that the liberty of the press was sacred, and the greatest bulwark of British freedom: They represented the pamphlet as a libel, insisted that the printer should be sent for, and some were for burning the pamphlet by the hands of the common hangman. This was in the genuine style of eastern despotism, and reminds the editor, that he has somewhere read of "two young ladies, in India, who were shut up for life in a box, thick set with pointed nails; one for having had a love intrigue, and the other for not disclosing it." The issue of this affair was, there were members in the house, of virtue and moderation, who saw nothing offensive in the pamphlet: And the application of the deputy-governor only served to shew, that our senators, in this instance, were neither acquainted with, or actuated by, the true principles of the British constitution.

While we lament how thin the partition is, between excess of liberty and absolute tyranny, it should be a pleasing consideration, to every man in the colony, that his liberty and property are subject, in the last resort, to the care and animadversion of the mother country.

The opposition to the Halifax letter, however cholerick and fretful it be, bodes no evil to the editor. He does not mean to be vain, when he says, that he is independant in spirit, and in circumstances; he has not a wish which seeks its gratification from the smiles of popularity: If he had, the arts of adulation and duplicity lie open to his choice, and would yield him the same harvest which brings a triumph to those, who prefer present fame to all other considerations. —He now takes leave of the public, and of his ad|versaries, his private concerns will not permit him to continue the dispute any longer, whatever insults he may receive. Besides, he thinks it wisdom to discon|tinue a controversy, which his antagonists have already made personal, and therefore can answer no end, but to sour and provoke one against the other: Recrimi|nation throws no light upon the enquiry, and the subject becomes lost in a torrent of abuse. Hae nugae, seria ducunt in mala. "The madness of others shall be a lesson to him." He will give no occasion for the further production of human depravity and base|ness, lest he should lose that philanthropy, which, at present, administers to him the greatest contentment, next to that he derives from the esteem and friendship of good and virtuous men.

Notes

• * 1.1

  The paper here cited, was censured by the present Providence writer, in the Providence gazette of October 6, 1764, a little while before his apostacy.
• * 1.2

  The rights of colonies asserted, of which this Boston writer was the author, was almost universally censured at home. This sufficiently accounts for his veering about.