they have found there was little or no prospect of their being employed to greater advantage. No one need now be at a loss to assign the true cause of the "want of native ministers."

But if Bishops should be sent to the Colonies, the people would generally turn Church-men; — the Ecclesiastical state of things would soon be inverted; - Episcoparians would quickly exceed the other denominations of Christians, as much as they now exceed them.

This, without all doubt, is the grand point aimed at; and there may be some, both at home and here, who really think all this would speedily come into event. But those who are best acquainted with the genius, temper and principles of the Colonists, at least in those parts where they are most numerous, have not the least motion of fear excited in them from the prospect of any such effect of the mission of Bishops. They are rather concerned, least it should be the occasion of hurtful consequences both to them and us. Such consequences would certainly be the effect, if these Bishops should make use of their SUPERIORITY, as most probably they would, sooner or later, to influence our great men here, and much greater ones at home, to project, and endeavour to carry into execution, measures to force the growth of the Church. It may be relied on, our people would not be easy, if rest[r]ained in the exercise of that "liberty wherewith Christ has made them free;" yea, they would hazard every thing dear to them, their estates, their very lives, rather than suffer their necks to be put under that yoke of bondage, which was so sadly galling to their fathers, and occasioned their retreat into this distant land, that they might enjoy the freedom of men and christians. . .

But they have "no Bishops." Very true; and they have no just reason for complaint upon this head. For, let it be considered, Throughout an extent of territory more than 500 miles in length, comprehending seven Provinces, the four New-England ones, and those of New-York, the Jersies, and Pensylvania; I say, throughout these largely extended Provinces, so well inhabited that they contain more than a million of souls, there are not, by the best information I can get, more than eight or nine Episcopal churches that support themselves. All the rest, to the amount of about sixty, more or less, chiefly made up of converts from the other denominations of Christians, are so far upheld in their existence by the Society at home, at the expence of not less than some thousands sterling per annum, that, should this be withdrawn, they would soon sink away for want of needed assistance. Instead now

of being contented with the receipt of so much pious charity, they think it hard, and complain of it as a most lamentable thing, that as many thousands sterling more are not annually laid out for the maintainance of Bishops among them. Is this reasonable? Would Church-men themselves think it so in regard of other denominations of christians besides themselves? Should any of these denominations, in like circumstances, make the like complaints, insisting that they were not suffered "fully to enjoy their religion," none, it may be, would treat their complaints with more contempt, than those who are themselves so loud in making them. And yet, I know not, in regard of real merit, but other denominations would have as good a right to complain, as those who profess themselves members of the Church of England. For they are the descendants from ancestors, who subdued & cultivated this rude wilderness, amidst a thousand difficulties & hazards, so as to make it the pleasant fruitful land we now behold it; hereby adding to the extent, strength and glory of the British Crown: Nor has that sacred Majesty who wears it more loyal subjects, even in England itself: And as they are far more numerous than the Episcoparians, they are in proportion more able, and I am sure they would be as willing, to exert themselves, if called to it, at the peril of their lives, in defence of his Person and Dominions.

Charles Chauncy, A Letter to a Friend, containing Remarks on certain Passages in a Sermon preached by . . . John Lord Bishop of Landaff (Boston, 1767), 44-50 passim

148. Troops and Sons of Liberty in Boston (1768)

BY CHIEF JUSTICE THOMAS HUTCHINSON

These private letters, written by Hutchinson (later governor of Massachusetts) to a friend in England, fell into Franklin's hands and were by him in 1773 sent to leaders of the patriot party in Boston, by whom they were published as evidence of an attempt by a royal official to undermine their liberties. Bibliography: Frothingham, Rise of the Republic, 183-184; Winsor, Narrative and Critical History, VI, 72, and Memorial History of Boston, III, 11-26; Channing and Hart, Guide, § 135.

IT

Boston, 4th October 1768.

T is not strange that measures should be immediately taken to reduce the colonies to their former state of government and order, but that the national funds should be effected by it is to me a little mysterious and surprizing. Principles of government absurd enough,

spread thro' all the colonies; but I cannot think that in any colony, people of any consideration have ever been so mad as to think of a revolt. Many of the common people have been in a frenzy, and talk'd of dying in defence of their liberties, and have spoke and printed what is highly criminal, and too many of rank above the vulgar, and some in public posts have countenanced and encouraged them until they increased so much in their numbers and in their opinion of their importance as to submit to government no further than they thought proper. The legislative powers have been influenced by them, and the executive powers intirely lost their force. There has been continual danger of mobs and insurrections, but they would have spent all their force within ourselves, the officers of the Crown and some of the few friends who dared to stand by them possibly might have been knock'd in the head, and some such fatal event would probably have brought the people to their

senses.

Whilst we were in this state, news came of two regiments being ordered from Halifax, and soon after two more from Ireland. The minds of people were more and more agitated, broad hints were given that the troops should never land, a barrel of tar was placed upon the beacon, in the night to be fired to bring in the country when the troops appeared, and all the authority of the government was not strong enough to remove it. The town of Boston met and passed a number of weak but very criminal votes; and as the governor declined calling an assembly they sent circular letters to all the towns and districts to send a person each that there might be a general consultation at so extraordinary a crisis. They met and spent a week, made themselves ridiculous, and then dissolv'd themselves, after a message or two to the governor which he refused to receive; a petition to the King which I dare say their agent will never be allow'd to present, and a result which they have published ill-natured and impotent.

In this confusion the troops from Halifax arrived. I never was much afraid of the people's taking arms, but I was apprehensive of violence from the mob, it being their last chance before the troops could land. As the prospect of revenge became more certain their courage abated in proportion. Two regiments are landed, but a new grievance is now rais'd. The troops are by act of parliament to be quartered no where else but in the barracks until they are full. There are barracks enough at the castle to hold both regiments. It is therefore against the act to bring any of them into town.. I hear the commander in chief has

provided barracks or quarters, but a doubt still remains with some of the council, whether they are to furnish the articles required, unless the men are in the province barracks, and they are to determine upon it to day.

The government has been so long in the hands of the populace that it must come out of them by degrees, at least it will be a work of time to bring the people back to just notions of the nature of government. . . . Boston, 20th January 1769.

What marks of resentment the parliament will show, whether they will be upon the province in general or particular persons, is extremely uncertain, but that they will be placed somewhere is most certain, and I add, because I think it ought to be so, that those who have been most steady in preserving the constitution and opposing the licenciousness of such as call themselves sons of liberty will certainly meet with favor and encouragement.

This is most certainly a crisis. I really wish that there may not have been the least degree of severity beyond what is absolutely necessary to maintain, I think I may say to you the dependance which a colony ought to have upon the parent state; but if no measures shall have been taken to secure this dependance, or nothing more than some declaratory acts or resolves, it is all over with us. The friends of government will be utterly disheartned, and the friends of anarchy will be afraid of nothing, be it ever so extravagant.

. . . I never think of the measures necessary for the peace and good order of the colonies without pain. There must be an abridgment of what are called English liberties. I relieve myself by considering that in a remove from the state of nature to the most perfect state of government there must be a great restraint of natural liberty. I doubt whether it is possible to project a system of government in which a colony 3000 miles distant from the parent state shall enjoy all the liberty of the parent state. I am certain I have never yet seen the projection. I wish the good of the colony when I wish to see some further restraint of liberty rather than the connexion with the parent state should be broken; for I am sure such a breach must prove the ruin of the colony. Pardon me this excursion, it really proceeds from the state of mind into which our perplexed affairs often throws me.

Boston, 20th October, 1769.

So much has been said upon the repeal of the duties laid by the last act, that it will render it very difficult to keep people's minds quiet if that should be refused them. They deserve punishment you will say,

but laying or continuing taxes upon all cannot be thought equal, seeing many will be punished who are not offenders. Penalties of another kind seem better adapted. . . .

I must beg the favor of you to keep secret every thing I write, until we are in a more settled state, for the party here either by their agent or by some of their emissaries in London, have sent them every report or rumor of the contents of letters wrote from hence. I hope we shall see better times both here and in England.

Copy of Letters sent to Great-Britain, by his Excellency Thomas Hutchinson, etc. (Boston, 1773), 9–18 passim.

149. The Pennsylvania Farmer's Remedy (1768)

BY JOHN DICKINSON

Dickinson was a Pennsylvania lawyer. His pamphlets published previous to the outbreak of the Revolution exercised remarkable influence; but he was opposed to independence, and took no part in the Revolution after 1776.- Bibliography: Tyler, Literary History of the Revolution, I, 235-240, II, 21-34; Winsor, Narrative and Critical History, VI, 82-83; Channing and Hart, Guide, § 134.

I

HOPE, my dear countrymen, that you will in every colony be upon your guard against those who may at any time endeavour to stir you up, under pretences of patriotism, to any measures disrespectful to our sovereign and our mother country. Hot, rash, disorderly proceedings, injure the reputation of a people as to wisdom, valour and virtue, without procuring them the least benefit. I pray God, that he may be pleased to inspire you and your posterity to the latest ages with that spirit, of which I have an idea, but find a difficulty to express; to express in the best manner I can, I mean a spirit that shall so guide you, that it will be impossible to determine, whether an American's character is most distinguishable for his loyalty to his sovereign, his duty to his mother country, his love of freedom, or his affection for his native soil.

Every government, at some time or other, falls into wrong measures; these may proceed from mistake or passion. But every such measure does not dissolve the obligation between the governors and the governed; the mistake may be corrected; the passion may pass over.

It is the duty of the governed, to endeavour to rectify the mistake, and appease the passion. They have not at first any other right, than