CH. I.]

and check the luxuriance of our imperial plant. It is to deprive us of our natural equality with the rest of mankind, by "establishing" every state as a part of the British Empire." In short, your Excellencies invite men of common sense, to exchange an independent station for a servile and dangerous dependence? But, when we recollect, that the king of Great Britain has, from the throne, declared his "firm and steadfast resolutions to withstand every attempt to weaken or impair the supreme authority of that legislature over all the dominions of his crown ;" that his hirelings in Parliament and tools in office, abhorred by the English nation, have echoed the sentiment; and that America, for ten years, has experienced that king's total want of candor, humanity, and justice; it is, I confess, a matter of wonder, that your Excellencies can submit to appear so lost to decency, as to hold out subjection as the only condition of peace: and that you could condescend to sully your personal honor, by inviting us to trust a government, in which you are conscious we cannot, in the nature of things, place any confidence; a government that you are sensible, has been, now is, and ever must be jealous of our prosperity and natural growth; a government that you know is absolutely abandoned to corruption Take it not amiss, if I hint to your Excellencies, that your very appearing in support of such a proposal, furnishes cause to doubt even of your integrity; and to reject your allurements, lest they decoy us into slavery.

The Declaration says, "the king is most graciously pleased to direct a revision of such of his royal instructions to his governors," etc., "and to concur in the revisal of all acts, by which His Majesty's subjects may think themselves aggrieved." But what of all this? Your Excellencies have not told the people, who "think themselves aggrieved," that they are to be a party in the revision. You have not even told them

who are to be revisers. If you had, it would be nothing to the purpose; for you have not, and cannot tell them, and engage that even any of the instructions and acts, being revised, shall be revoked, and repealed, particularly those by which people "may think themselves aggrieved." But, if such are not to be repealed, why have you mentioned "think themselves aggrieved?" If they are intended to be repealed, why did not your Excellencies come to the point at once, and say

447

so? It is evident your Excellencies are by your superiors, precipitated into a dilemma. You have not been accustomed to dirty jobs, and plain dealing does not accord with your instructions; otherwise, in the latter case, I think you are men of too much sense and honor, to have overlooked or suppressed so material a point of information. However, you say instructions and acts are to be revised. We see that you have laid an ambuscade for our liberties; the clause is carefully constructed, without the least allusion to the revisors, or to the words redress, revoke, repeal. In short, it appears to be drawn up entirely on the plan of a declaration by King James the Second, after his abdication, as confidentially explained by James' secretary of state, the earl of Melford, to Lord Dundee, in Scotland. For Melford writes to Dundee, "that notwithstanding of what was promised in the declaration, indemnity and indul gence, yet he had couched things so, that the king would break them when he pleased; nor would he think himself obliged to stand to them." And your Excellencies have "couched things so," that more words upon this subject are unnecessary.

"It is recommended to the inhabitants at large, to reflect seriously upon their present condition." Is it possible your Excellencies can be serious, and mean any thing by this recommendation? Can you be ignorant, that ever since the birth of the Stamp Act, the inhabitants at large, have been reflecting upon their deplorable condition? Can you have an idea, that, after such a length of time, during which they have been continually kept to their reflections, by the declaratory law, the Tea Act, the Boston Port Bill, and those then passed to annihilate the charter of Massachusetts Bay, the Quebec Bill to establish Popery, the Fishery Bill, to coerce by famine, the British commencement of the late civil war, and the Act of Parliament, in December last, declaring the inhabitants rebels; I say, after such a series of causes for reflection, and that your Excellencies now find us in arms against you, determined on independence or death, can you possibly entertain an idea, that we have not reflected seriously? On the contrary, you know, that we are prepared to offer up our lives in evidence of our serious reflections! In addressing a world, you ought to have some attention to the propriety of your recommendations, if only from a regard to your own reputation.

You are pleased to term our cause "unjust." In this there is nothing so surprising, as your being lured to give such a sentiment under your hands, signing your own disgrace with posterity. You know, that the virtuous characters throughout Europe, on this point, differ with your Excellencies; and I most respectfully submit, whether there is not some little degree of presumption in your signing an opinion, in contradiction to the opinion of thousands, who, without derogating from your Excellencies, are, at least, as well able to judge upon the point as you are?

But you add, that our cause is "precarious." | Allow me to make a proper return to your Excellencies, by informing you, that all the affairs of men are precarious, and that war is particularly so. However, if your Excellencies meant to insinuate, that our cause is precarious, from an inability in us to maintain it, I beg leave to ask General Howe what progress his arms made during his command at Boston? And what shining victories, and important conquests you have achieved since your junction at Staten Island? The eulogium,

duo fulmina belli Scipiadas

cannot yet be applied to your Excellencies. General Howe's repulse from the lines on Long Island, and his victory over the advanced guard of three thousand men, reflect no great degree of glory on the corps of at least twelve thousand men that he commanded. Nor can you boast much of the action on New York Island on the 15th of September, when a few more than eight hundred Americans, attacking three companies of light troops, supported by two regiments, the one Scotch, the other Hessian, drove them from hill to hill, back to your lines, and carried off three pieces of brass cannon as trophies of their victory. And when General Washington, on the second of October, caused a large detachment to draw up to Harlaem plains, to cover the inhabitants between the two armies, while they carried off their effects, the march and continuance of the British troops in order of battle, within long shot, without firing a gun to interrupt the service, is at least some slight degree of evidence, that they respect and stand in awe of the American arms. In short, without being unreasonable, I think I may be allowed to say, that these particulars do not show, that our cause is so precarious as your

Excellencies would insinuate it to be; and to recommend that your Excellencies "reflect seriously upon your present condition,” and abandon "the unjust cause in which you are engaged," while you yet may preserve your reputation from the reproaches of posterity.

Your Excellencies call upon the inhabitants at large "to return to their allegiance." It is as if you had commanded a body of troops to advance to the assault, before you had put them in order of battle. I tell your Excellencies, that protection must precede allegiance; for the latter is founded on the benefit of the former. That the operations of the forces by sea and land, under your orders, demonstrate that your king is not our protector. And, that the allegiance of America. to the king of Great Britain is now utterly out of the question.

But you attempt to allure the inhabitants, by telling them they may telling them they may "be secured in a free enjoyment of their liberties and properties, upon the true principles of the Constitution." Will your Excellencies tell us where those principles are to be found? You must say they are not to be found in the present British government. Do we not know that the majority of the two houses of Parliament are absolutely under the king of Great Britain's direction? They make and repeal laws; they agree with or reject motions they vote money even without limitation of sum, at the pleasure of that king's minister, in whose pay they actually are; and your Excellencies, as men of honor, dare not deny these things. Will you then say, that, where there is such a dependence, the true principles of the Constitution operate! The history of the present reign, all Europe would witness against you. Those principles have been long despised by the rulers, and lost to the people; otherwise, even at the commencement of the present reign, we should not have seen the dismission of the virtuous chancellor of the exchequer, LEGGE, because he would not quit his seat in Parliament at the instigation of the last Prince of Wales; nor the massacre in St. George's fields, and the royal thanks to the assassins; nor the repeated and unredressed complaints to the throne; nor the unheard of profusion of the public treasure, far exceeding the extravagance of a Caligula, or a Nero; nor the present ruinous situation of Great Britain · nor the present war in America, for the worst of pur

But, unanswerable as the reasons are against America returning to a subjection under the British crown, now in fact become despotic; and America, after unheard of injuries, infinite toil, hazard and expense, her inhabitants called cowards by your master's servants, civil and military, having declared herself independent; did not your Excellencies feel a little for our honor, when you, at the head of your armies, held out to us, subjection and peace! Did not you feel the dignity of your characters affected, when you, under the guise of a security upon the true principles of the Constitution, recommend to "the inhabitants at large," to rescind their decree, and BY THEIR OWN MOUTHS DECLARE themselves the most contemptible people in history, which gives no example of such baseness-RENDER their name a term of reproach among all nations, and FORBID each other from placing any, the least degree of confidence in, and all foreign states from paying the least degree of credit to, their most solemn declarations! In short, to submit to a govern

ment abandoned to corruption, lost to a sense of justice, and already but a step behind absolute despotism; a government that has long been, and ever must be, jealous of our rise, and studious to depress our natural growth! Did not your Excellencies blush, and shrink within yourselves, when you asked men, who had been almost ruined by your gracious master, to abandon the honorable and natural station of independence, and stoop to kiss his hand, now daily BATHED in, and which ever must continue stained by, the blood of a friend, a brother, a son, a father !

That your Excellencies may "reflect seriously" upon the unjust cause in which you are engaged;" and that the name of Howe may be enrolled with the names of MARLBOROUGH and ErFINGHAM, are the wishes of,

A CAROLINIAN. [Judge Drayton.]

CHARLESTON, October 22, 1776.