the best chance we have to fift the truth out of gentlemen under fuch embarraffment, must be by reverfing the practice relating to evidence, and examining them not upon their knowledge, but their belief. I do not introduce thefe obfervations as a new discovery, or a matter of information to the public. The attentive reader, no doubt, has long ago obferved the fame himself. My view is only to put the unwary reader, who is not fo well acquainted with thefe gentlemen, upon his guard against being imposed upon by their reprefentation of facts. Philo Britanniæ, has diftinguished himself, in the Public Ledger of the eighth of Auguft, by his low unmanly abuse of that refpectable body, the Livery of the city of London, on account of their late petition to his Majefty. His attack upon the eighth article of their complaint, may ferve for an example of his method of operation. The fuccefs of this manoeuvre fhall be the subject of our prefent inquiry. To prevent all mifunderstanding, it will be expedient to give a fair and true copy of the eighth article of complaint from the petition itself, rather than to depend upon this author's partial quotation. This charge upon the miniftry is, that "They have eftablished numberlefs unconftitutional regulations and taxations in our colonies. They have caused a revenue to be raised in fome of them by prerogative. They have appointed civil law judgesto try revenue causes, and to be paid from out of the condemnation money." Philo Britanniæ has prudently flipt by the latter part of this complaint; and, perhaps, he would have acted full as wifely, if he had done the fame by the former part of it. But that was too heavy a charge upon his mafters, to be fuffered to pass without fome notice. The following are his remarks. upon it. From hence an impartial reader would infer, that the minifters had raised taxes and promulgated laws over the colonies, without the authority of parliament, or any other than their own mere will and pleafure. If that is the cafe, they are highly culpable and punishable." And again, "If no taxation or reguation has taken place in America without parliamentary authority, who is arraigned by this article? The minifters or their masters?" The laft queftion ftands in need of an explanation. For, really, I am not fo well acquainted with the minifters, as to know whom they call their mafters, or, whether they acknowledge any mafters at all, or not. And yet, I must allow, that ministers of stateare no mafters known to the conftitution of Great Britain. It is evident, this author intended his remarks should be underflood as a flat denial of the fact. He certainly must know they would be fo underfood. For, nobody can believe he would date, publicly, to charge the miniftry with being highly culpable and punishable; which he undoubtedly has effectually done, if he allows the fact to be true. I muft beg leave here, to afk this author one question. Do you not in your confcience believe, that taxes bave been levied, and are now levying, upon our colonists in America, by virtue of the prerogative royal, without any authority by act of parliament? If you were ignorant of the fact, you ought to have been a little more modeft in your abuse. The Livery of the city of London might without any breach of the laws of truth and decency, have been allowed a more refpectful treatment, than you intended by calling them, "The vociferous patriots of Guildhall:" Since I have taken the liberty to ask Philo Britanniæ one queftion as to his belief, I will be fo open with him as freely to tell him my own; which is, that it will anfwer no valuable purpose to himself to convince him of the truth of a fact, which he has had the misfortune to deny. But, as it is a matter of great moment to the public, that they should be fet to rights with regard to a fact fo interefting to them, I here fend you a letter, formerly published in the North Briton, which will establish the fact beyond all difpute. If Philo Britanniæ be not pleased withthis republication, let him reflect, that he should have had more wit than to make it neceffary, by infinuating that the complaint was groundless. 4 I Quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat.. BEG leave to introduce the following reflections, upon a moft interefting fubject, with a quotation from the great Mr. Locke's treatise upon government. "The fupreme power cannot take from any man any part of his property without his own confent. For the preservation of property being the end of government, and that for which men enter into fociety, it neceffarily fuppofes and requires that the people should have property; without which they must be fuppofed to lose that by entering into fociety, which was the end for which they entered into it; too grofs an abfurdity for any man to own! Men therefore in fociety having property, they have fuch a right to the goods which by the law of the community are theirs, that nobody hath a right to take them, or any part of them, from them, without their own confent; without this they have no property at all. For I have truly no property in that which another can by right take from me when he pleafes, against my confent. Hence it is a mistake to think that the fupreme or legislative power of any commonwealth can do what it will, and difpofe of the eftates of the fubject arbitrarily, or take any part of them at pleasure,A man's property is not at all fecue, though there be good and equitable laws to fet the bounds of it between him and his fellow fubjects, if he who commands thofe fubjects, have power to take from any private man what part he pleases of his property, and use and difpofe of it as he thinks good. "But government, into whatsoever hands it may be put, being instituted with this condition, and for this end, that men might have and fecure their properties, the prince and fenate, however it may have power to make laws for regulating property between the fubjects one among another, yet can never have a power to take to themselves the whole or any part of the subject's property, without their confent. For this would be in effect to leave them no property at all. Bb 2 • It "It is true, governments cannot be fupported without great charge, and it is fit every one who enjoys his fhare of the protection, fhould pay out of his eftate his proportion for the maintenance of it. But ftill it must be with his own confent; i. e. the confent of the majority, giving it either themfelves, or by their representatives chofe by them; for if any one fhould claim a power to lay or levy taxes on the people, by his own authority, and without fuch confent of the people, he thereby invades the fundamental law of property, and fubverts the end of government." Thefe judicious obfervations and unanfwerable arguments of Mr. Locke, will be read with the highest pleasure, by every fubject of the crown of Great Britain, when he reflects that the grand point here established is, by the conftitution of the government under which he lives, effectually fecured to every member of the community; and will continue his birthright as long as that conftitution fhall remain inviolate and in its full vigor. But let it be remembered, that it will be in vain to claim this right, although the title to it be ever fo indifputable, when we have by carelefsnefs or complaifance once quitted poffeffion of that power which muft maintain it. "The house of commons is the guardian of the rights and liberties of the commons of Great Britain, a third part of the legislative power, and one of the three eftates of the kingdom; which being inftituted as checks and counterpoifes to one another, for the better fecuring our liberty against all, have their diftinct and feparate rights, privileges, and powers, as well as common, which ought to be kept facred and inviolate; otherwife our conftitution is loft. For whenfoever any one of these becomes fubordinate to, and dependent upon either of the other, the civil balance, wherein lies our fecurity, is deftroyed. "All attempts upon the rights of any of thefe are dangerous to the whole, especially thofe of the commons; who being vaftly the majority, and the only indifpenfably neceffary part of a commonwealth, their fafety and fecurity ought to be confulted and provided for, before that of any branch, and even against it, if ever they fhall happen to be inconfiftent. Our conftitution itself, fo long as it shall be preferved unbroken, is a fufficient guard against any invafion upon any of them, by open violence; no one of the three eftates being intrufted with fo much power, as to be able forcibly to take from either of the other, any of their rights." Hift. of the parl. 170. The greatest or only privilege the commons of Great Britain have referved to themfelves, which can fecure their freedom, and their independence as a branch of the legislature, is the power of granting money for the ufe of government; of appointing the manner in which it fhall be raifed, and the purposes to which it fhall be applied: which includes alfo a right to be informed afterwards how it has been difpofed of. The ftrength of this barrier to the liberty of the fubject is fo fecure and effectual, and has in fact proved fo infurmountable an obftacle to the fchemes of ambitious and defpotic men, that all their wit has been more than once employed in endeavours to re move it, either by force or artifice; though, thank God, hitherto without fuccefs. Minifterial attempts for this purpose, when obftinately purfued, (befides the public vengeance upon themfelves) have already coft one king his head, and another his crown. It ought here to be mentioned to the honour of the reprefentatives of the commons of Great Britain, that, even in the most complaifant times, the house of commons has never yet betrayed its truft in this moft interefting cafe; but always most ftrenuously defended this juft and truly important right of the commons. Nay, when neceffity has required it, they have refifted, even unto blood, rather than fubmit to that unconstitutional claim of the crown, a power of levying money, and impofing taxes upon the people, under pretence of prerogative. And at last when the government was diffolved by James the fecond, the agents for the kingdom, even in that emergency, nobly ftood out from electing even William the third to be their king (although they looked npon him with gratitude as their deliverer) until he had agreed to the following condition, among others, particularly inferted in the declaration of rights. "The levying money to or for the ufe of the crown, by pretence of prerogative, or without grant of parliament, for longer time or in other manner than the fame is or fhall be granted, is illegal." I hope I may now, without offence, fay, that a king of Great Britain has no fuch prerogative. It is a prerogative of the fubjects of Great Britain to tax themfelves; a prerogative, committed in truft by them to their reprefentatives; and is, perhaps, the only prerogative they have, effectually to fecure their independence as a branch of the legiflature. If this is once given up, all pretence to liberty and property afterwards must be ridiculous; and will certainly be treated as fuch, even by thofe men, who are ready enough to promife very fair beforehand, in order to obtain an indulgence with a power which promifes fo very much to the aims of ambition; but which a free people, whilft they continue in their fenfes, will never truft in the hands of the execu tive of the government. Those who are moft defirous of fuch power, are leaft fit to be intrusted with it. They afk for they know not what. If they fhould obtain their requeft; in the firft act, the world would probably be fet on fire; but the next would certainly end with finding themfelves involved in the fate of Phaeton. I am at a lofs to reconcile with the declaration of rights, and those revolution principles upon which our conftitution ftands, the levying money and laying taxes upon the British fubjects in the Weft Indian islands, by virtue of the prerogative royal, for the ufe of the king, his heirs, and fucceffors. It is probable that many readers will are at this intimation, not believing it poffible for a miniftry, at this time of day, and under a British king, to run fo precipitately upon their own ruin. But that I may not appear to talk without book, and as I am unwilling to mifieprefent the cafe, I will give you an e tract from one of the letters patent, which may ferve as a fample of the other four. "Whereas ་ "Whereas the island of Tobago was conquered by us during the late war, and has been ceded and fecured to us by the late treaty of peace, &c. per "We have thought fit, and our royal will and pleasure is, and we do hereby, by virtue of our prerogative royal, order, direct and appoint, that an impoft or cuftom of four and a half cent in fpecie fhall, from and after the 29th day of September next enfuing the date of these presents, be raised and paid to us, our heirs and fucceffors, for and upon all dead commodities of the growth and produce of our faid island of Tobago that shall be fhipped off from the fame. And we do hereby require and command the prefent governor and commander in chief, and the governor and commander in chief for the time being, and the officers of the customs in our faid island of Tobago now and hereafter and for the time being, and all others whom it may concern, that they do respectively take care to collect, levy and receive the said impoft or custom according to our royal will and pleasure fignified by thefe prefents. In witnefs whereof we have caufed thefe our letters to be made patent. Witness ourfelf, at Weftminster, the 20th day of July, in the fourth year of our reign," By writ of privy feal, As I have intimated above, this extract may ferve as a fample of the other four patents, viz. for St. Vincent, St. Dominica, Grenada, and the Grenadines; except that with regard to Grenada, &c. where the French had laid a poll-tax upon the inhabitants, that poll-tax (if I am not mifinformed) is alfo continued upon them, by their respective patents, over and above the four and an half per cent before mentioned. As this is plain matter of fact, let it fpeak for itself. I cannot fay much in its defence. And all I have been able to meet with, as a plea in juftification, is, that thefe were conquered iflands, and by their capitulations agreed to be on the fame footing as the Leeward Islands with regard to taxes, &c, and therefore have virtually confented to this tax, which fome of the Leeward Islands pay. Confequently they have no right to complain that the miniftry have taken them at their word. It is not my bufinefs to enter into the propriety or univerfality of fuch a fort of confent, or how far the terror of fome can in juftice bind the property of all. I will only fay that if the inhabitants fhould fpeak for themfelves, we might probably hear fome fhrewd objections to it. But the grand defect of this plea in juftification, is, that it appears to be entirely foreign to the point, for the queftion is not, what the inhabitants of thofe iflands may, or may not, have reafon to complain of; but the true and important questions in this cafe are; in what hands has the British conftitution entrnfted the power of levying money, ?For what end is it there placed?And what power does it allow the executive of the government to exercife in our foreign colonies, fo as to fecure our own fafety at home, and their profperity abroad? The |