Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

be forgot, that by the bill of rights it is declared, 'that it is the right of the subject to petition the king, and all commitments and prosecutions for such petitioning are illegal.'" (2)

Proceedings

of

in opposition to

Aware of the general injunction of the crown to the colonial governors, to prorogue or dissolve their Assemblies, if they manifested any inclination to second the designs of the lower house the Massachusetts circular, the lower house had the duty act. taken care to perfect all their purposes, before they returned this caustic reply. That circular was brought under the consideration of that house, as early as the 8th of June, 1768: and a committee was then appointed, consisting of gentlemen distinguished for their abilities and attachment to the cause of the colonies, to draft a petition to the king, remonstrating against the late impositions. (3) Before the report of that committee had been received, the message of the governor above alluded to was thrown in upon the house, as if for the purpose of checking their proceedings: but the latter discreetly delayed their reply, until their purposes were accomplished. Having perfected their petition to the king, and adopted a series of resolves declaratory of their rights, their reply to the message of the governor was now submitted, adopted, and borne to him by the speaker, attended by the whole house. The governor was at the same time informed, that they were ready for adjournment; and the Assembly was accordingly prorogued: but the transactions of the lower house were so well timed, that the prorogation seemed to have proceeded from their own request. (4) The transactions of this house, at this session, in opposition to the new system of taxation, were characterised by the same unanimity which marked the proceedings of the Assembly in resistance to the stamp act; and their memorials, in vindication of their liberties,

Character

these ings.

of

proceed

(2) Journal of House of Delegates of 22d June, 1768. This message of the lower house was submitted by Thomas Johnson, then a delegate from Anne Arundel, and afterwards the first governor of Maryland under the state government.

(3) This committee consisted of William Murdock of Prince George's, Thomas Johnson of Anne Arundel, Thomas Ringgold of Kent, John Hall of Anne Arundel, James Holyday of Queen Anne's, Mathew Tilghman of Talbot, and Thomas Jennings of Frederick.

(4) Journals of House of Delegates, 8th, 20th, 21st, and 22d June, 1768.

[ocr errors]

are at once firm and temperate, fearless and dignified. Their resolves assert, as the exclusive right of the Assembly, the power to impose taxes, and to regulate the internal polity of the colony; and denounce as unconstitutional all taxes or impositions proceeding from any other authority. Their petition to the king may safely challenge a comparison with any similar paper of that period, as an eloquent and affecting appeal to the justice of the crown. Deducing their claim to relief from their acknowledged rights as British subjects, and the peculiar exemptions of their charter, they press it upon the crown in the following manly and dignified language:

"Our ancestors firmly relying on the royal promise, and upon these plain and express declarations of their inherent, natural, and constitutional rights, at the hazard of their lives and fortunes, transported themselves and families to this country, then scarcely known, and inhabited only by savages. The prospect of a full and peaceable enjoyment of their liberties and properties, softened their toils, and strengthened them to overcome innumerable difficulties. Heaven prospered their endeavors, and has given to your majesty a considerable increase of faithful subjects, improved the trade, and added riches to the mother country.

"Thus happy in the enjoyment of the rights and privileges of natural born subjects, have they and their posterity lived, and been treated as freemen, and thus hath the great fundamental principle of the constitution, that no man shall be taxed, but with his own consent, given by himself, or by his representative, been ever extended, and preserved inviolate in this remote part of your majesty's dominion, until questioned lately by your parlia

ment.

"It is therefore with the deepest sorrow, may it please your most excellent majesty, that we now approach the throne, on behalf of your faithful subjects of this province, with all humility, to represent to your majesty, that by several statutes, lately enacted in the parliament of Great Britain, by which sundry rates and duties are to be raised and collected within your majesty's colonies in America, for the sole and express purpose of raising a revenue, this great fundamental principle of the constitution is in our apprehension infringed.

"The people of this province, royal sire, are not in any manner, nor can they ever possibly be, effectually represented in the British parliament. While, therefore, your majesty's commons of Great Britain continue to give and grant the property of the people in America, your faithful subjects of this, and every other colony, must be deprived of that most invaluable privilege, the power of granting their own money, and of every opportunity of manifesting, by cheerful aids, their attachment to their king, and zeal for his service; they must be cut off from all intercourse with their sovereign, and expect not to hear of the royal approbation; they must submit to the power of the commons of Great Britain; and, precluded the blessings, shall scarcely retain the name of freedom."

This petition, as well as those of the other colonies at this period, speak the language of men, who hoped success for their Non-importation appeals, and trusted to them for relief. Yet such Association. an inference would be erroneous. The recent measures of the English ministry were sufficient to satisfy the most incredulous, that such expectations were delusions. These remonstrances looked to a different purpose. They were the mere cautionary measures of a people, determined to be in the right, and to make the rejection of their entreaties a justification for resistance. The alarm of slaves leads to submission; the apprehensions of the freeman do but arouse his energies and nerve his spirit. The menaces of the English ministry, falling upon such a people as the Americans, were the mere signals for resistance; and the colonies now betook themselves to a mode of opposition, less questionable and dangerous than open rebellion, but far more effectual than mere supplications. They had discovered in their opposition to the stamp act, that the most irresistible appeal to the feelings of a tyrannical government is that which reaches them through its interests; and that the English people were always sensitive and vulnerable, to every measure operating injuriously upon their commerce. This was "the undipped heel," which no armor of laws could protect. During that controversy, the colonists had partially adopted a non-importation system, which was followed by the happiest results. It brought to the side of America the great body of English merchants interested in her trade, who felt the attack upon her liber

[ocr errors]

ties as an attack upon their own fortunes. The history of that struggle leads us to the conclusion, that without the co-operation of the interested merchants, the efforts of the English patriots in parliament, for the protection of the colonies, would in all probability have proved ineffectual. The time had again arrived for the appeal to the pocket nerve; and it was now more appropriate, because besides its indirect consequences, it gave the colonies power to withdraw themselves peaceably from the operation of the new impositions, by declining the consumption of the articles upon which they were laid. A non-importation system had not only the effect of repelling the approach of taxation; but it also compelled them to that most effectual safeguard of their independence, dependence on themselves and their own It made them manufacturers by necessity; and the habit once introduced, the recurrence to it became more easy in any future emergency. Thus recommended by its present and ultimate results, the difficulties of the present crisis soon suggested a return to this system.

resources.

General revival of it.

The proposition to revive it at this period, originated with one of the political clubs of Boston; and, as early as October, 1767, it received the sanction of a public meeting in that city, over which the distinguished James Otis presided as moderator. For reasons which it is not necessary to detail, it did not then enlist the concurrence of the other cities, and was soon abandoned by the Bostonians themselves. (5) But if then premature, it was now the last peaceable resort. Remonstrances had failed; and petitions were called factions. The proposition was therefore revived in April, 1768; and letters were then addressed by several merchants of Boston and New York to the merchants of Philadelphia, soliciting their concurrence in its adoption. By the latter, it was declined as still premature; but the design was not therefore abandoned. On the 1st of August, 1768, a non-importation association was formed in Boston, which was followed, in the course of that month, by similar associations in New York and Connecticut. The measure was not, however, generally adopted, until the ensuing session of parliament had dispelled all hopes of relief from

(5) 1st Gordon, 148. Green's Gazette of 19th November, 1767.

te

the justice of England. Abandoning their scruples upon the results of that session, the merchants of Philadelphia acceded to the association in April, 1769; and their accession was immediately followed by that of Maryland and Virginia. (6)

Maryland.

In Maryland, there had been previously several county associations of this description; but it was now deemed necessary, to Its adoption in give them a more imposing character and effective operation. At the solicitation of many gentlemen of the different counties, a circular was therefore addressed, on the 9th of May, 1769, by Messrs. Dick and Stewart, M'Cubbin, Wallace, and W. Stewart, merchants of Annapolis, to the people of the several counties, inviting a general meeting of the merchants and others at that place, "for the purpose of consulting on the most effectual means of promoting frugality, and lessening the future importation of goods from Great Britain." The meeting was accordingly held on the 20th June, 1769; and was very fully attended. A non-importation association was then established by that meeting, for the whole province; which was similar, in its general character and objects, to those of the other colonies. It contained a general engagement, that the associators would not directly nor indirectly import, nor be concerned in the importation of, any species of merchandise, which then was, or might thereafter be, taxed by parliament, for the purpose of raising a revenue in America, except where orders for the import had already been given; and that they would consider such taxation as an absolute prohibition of the article taxed: and also an agreement not to import a great variety of other enumerated articles, which were to be excluded as luxuries or superfluities. The association was formed upon the principle of excluding every thing not actually necessary to subsistence, and of thus assailing vitally the whole commerce of England with the colonies. It forbade also the purchase of any of the prohibited articles, even if imported by others: and was sustained by a moral sanction, carrying with it, at that period, more efficacy than even the penalties of ordinary legislation. All persons contravening the objects of the association, were to be denounced as enemies

(6) Gordon, 163 and 168. Green's Gazette of 22d September, 1768, and 25th May, 1769.

« ПредишнаНапред »