cifely the fame oppreffion as to us it would be to have taxes laid on us by an edict from the throne, has by very high authority, been pronounced fedition and rebellion: but with all due fubmiffion to authority (-truth and juftice are above all authority) when the illuftrious Hampden refifted the lawful fovereign's unlawful demand of only three fhillings and fourpence, because he had no voice in confenting to the laying on the fhip-tax, was he, too, guilty of fedition and rebellion? If he was, we are all rebels, but the jacobites; and our gracious king Geo. III. (whom God preferve) is an ufurper; for the revolution was brought about with the direct defign of preventing any man's property being feized without his confent, given either in perfon or by reprefentative, which makes it the fame to our colonists to be taxed by the parliament of Britain as by that of Paris --Magna Charta and the Bill of Rights prohibit the taxing of the mother country by prerogative, and without confent of those who are to be taxed. If the people of Britain are not to be taxed, but by parliament; because otherwise they might be taxed without their own confent; does it not directly follow, that the colonists cannot, according to Magna Charta, and the Bill of Rights, be taxed by parliament fo long as they continue unreprefented; because otherwife they may be taxed without their own confent?--It was very fairly made out that the colonifts were not, generally fpeaking, in circumftances to pay the ftamp duty. And to raise the price of justice fo high, that the people fhall not be able to obtain it, is much the fame as flatly denying them juftice; while Magna Charta fays, Nulli negabimus, nulli vendemus juftitiam, &c.Even Governor Bernard (no friend to the colonifts) owns their inability to bear taxes. "I can, fays he, readily recommend ⚫ that part of the petition, which prays relief against those acts which are made for the purpose of drawing a revenue from the colonies. For they are fo little able to bear drawing money from them, that they are unable at prefent to pay the charges of their support and protection +." Before the taxing of the unreprefented colonies was thought of, the miniftry ought to have reduced exorbitant salaries, abated, or abolished exceffive perquifites, annihilated useless places, ftopped iniquitous penfions, withheld electioneering expences, and bribes for votes in the house, reduced an odious and devouring army, and taxed vice, luxury, gaming, and public diverfions. This would have brought into the treasury ten times more than Grenville could ever expect from taxing, by force and authority, the unreprefented colonies.-Even a conquered city has time given it to raife the contribution laid upon it; and may raise it in its own + Governor Bernard to Lord Hillsborough, July 16, 1768.

way. We have treated our colonies worse than conquered countries. Neither Wales nor Ireland are taxed unheard and unrepresented in the British parliament, as the colonies. Wales fends members to parliament, and Ireland has done fo. And as Ireland is not now reprefented in the British parliament, neither is it taxed in the British parliament.But are then the colonifts, it will be faid, to be complimented with immunity from all fhare of the public burden, while they enjoy their fhare of the public protection?-The question was not, Whether the colonifts fhould contribute to the public expence. The Grenvillians knew, that when the requifitions had been made by government, the colonifts had anfwered their demands; particularly in the years 1756, 7, 8, 9, 1760, 61, and 62; they knew that the town of Bofton contributed for feveral years together twelve fhillings in the pound. Our government, therefore, thought it but just to reimburse the colonies a part of their exceffive expences. But their fucceffors, contrary to the sense of all mankind, thought it better to obtain by force, than with a good will. Accordingly we find fo early as A. D. 1765, immediately after the first of the colonifts thewed a little courage in refufing to fubmit to taxation without reprefentation, orders were given to Governor Bernard to employ the militia under General Gage in fuppreffing the fpirit of liberty.Where would have been the harm of making a fair and moderate propofal to the colonies? If they raifed the money in obedience to our requifition, as formerly, all was well. But furely it was foon enough to propofe levying money on them by parliamentary taxation, when they refused to give upon re quifition.'

This is a fpecimen of our Author's manner of treating the fubject of colony-taxation. Thofe readers who may not agree with him in the whole, will yet allow that he poffefles no fmall ftrength of argument. A commendable zeal for liberty and public welfare may be thought fometimes to excite in him too much warmth, but his caufe is noble, and his fentiments are liberal. If he means, as the reader may perhaps be led to conclude from fome part of the work, that all the restraints and limitations, under which the colonies are laid by the mother country, by whom they are fecured and affifted, are unreafonable, few we fuppofe will agree with him. It is wifdom in a writer to be cautious of faying too much, even where he reafons well, fince the overloaded "carriage is likely to break down or be overturned.

We have taken so much notice of the former books, that we have left but little room for our Author's account of the army, a ftanding army, which a finall degree of penetration will eafily perceive to be a very dangerous inftitution. "An

"An army in a free country, fays Judge Blackstone, ought only to be enlisted for a fhort and limited time. The foldiers fhould live intermixed with the people. No feparate camp, no barracks, no inland fortreffes fhould be allowed.-In a land of liberty it is extremely dangerous to make a distinct order of the profeffion of arms. In abfolute monarchies, this is neceffary for the fafety of the prince, and arifes from the main principle of their conftitution, which is that of governing by fear; but in free ftates, the profeffion of a foldier, taken fingly and merely as a profeffion, is justly an object of jealoufy. The laws therefore and conftitution of these kingdoms know no fuch state as that of a perpetual ftanding foldier, bred up to no other profeffion, than that of war.".

When a country is to be enslaved, the army, fays our pa triotic Difquifitor, is the inftrument to be used. No nation ever was enflaved but by an army. No nation ever kept up an army in times of peace, which did not lofe its liberties.-Mr. Hume calls the army a mortal diftemper in the British government, of which it muft at laft inevitably perifh.-It was Walpole's custom, if a borough did not elect his man for their member, to send them a messenger of Satan to buffet them, a company of foldiers to live on them. In this way a ftanding army may be used as an inftrument in the hand of a wicked minifter for crushing liberty. There is much ftrefs laid, by thofe, who would lull us afleep, that we may not see our danger from the army, on the behaviour of that of James II. who on being put to the trial on Hounslowheath, whether they would ftand by the tyrant, all laid down their arms. But we must be weak indeed, if we suffer our felves to be mifled by a precedent, fo little in point as this. The army were all brought up Proteftants, and James wanted to make use of them to establish Popery, of the cruelties of which he had given them a pretty fpecimen. Does it follow, that because a Proteftant army would not be the inftruments of a tyrant in overthrowing the religion they were brought up in (even the foldiers had fome zeal for religion in those days, though not a zeal according to knowledge) and establishing one they were from their infancy taught to dread above all earthly evils-does it follow, I fay, that becaufe an army would not do what must be fo difagreeable to themfelves, they would not do what may be fuppofed agreeable to themselves, that is, would not promote a military government? All history confutes this reafoning. For all history fhews, that the foldiery have ever been ready to enflave their fellow fubjects, and almoft all nations have actually been enslaved by armies.-Under fuch kings as the prefent, we should have little to fear with an army as numerous as that of France. But a tyrannical prince or daring minister might bring this kingdom into dreadful confufion by

having

;

having on his fide an army of only 10,000 regulars, and we feem now to plead prescription for keeping up a force of above four times that number.-Our courtiers affect to call the British land establishment a parliamentary army, and would deceive us into the notion of a difference between a ftanding army and a parliamentary. The British land forces, fay they, are appointed from year to year, not only as to their number but as to their fubfiftence; fo that the parliament's neglecting to provide for their fubfiftence would be annihilating the army at once. But is the army lefs a grievance for being on this foot, than if it were on the fame with those of France or Spain. "Queen Elizabeth's whole reign may be almoft called a ftate of offenfive and defenfive war; in England as well as Ireland in the Indies as well as in Europe; the ventured to go through this ftate, if it was a venture, without the help of a ftanding army. Whenever he wanted troops, her fubjects flocked to her ftandard; and her reign affords moft illuftrious proofs, that all the ends of fecurity and of glory too may be answered in this ifland without the charge and danger of the expedient juft mentioned *." The confidence which a ftanding army gives a minifter, puts him on carrying things with a higher hand, than he would attempt to do, if the people were armed, and the court unarmed, that is, if there were no land-force in the nation, but a militia. Had we at this time no ftanding army, we fhould not think of forcing money out of the pockets of three millions of our fubjects. We fhould not think of punishing with military execution, unconvicted and unheard, our brave American children, our fureft friends and best customers. We should not infift on bringing them over to be tried here, on pretence of no juftice to be had in America, in direct violation of the conftitution.-We fhould not think of putting them in a state of subjection to an army rendered independent on the civil magiftrate, and fecured from punishment, even of the most atrocious offence, by their being to be fent, across an ocean, 3000 miles, to their mock trial. We should not think of putting a part of our Western dominions, as large as all Europe, under French law, which knows nothing of our inestimable privilege of trial by jury, whilft the kings at the coronation folemnly fwear to govern all the fubjects by the English law. We fhould not think of giving our kings power to make not only laws, but legiflators, for a vaft multitude of the subjects, without concurrence of lords and commons. We fhould not propofe to give the fanction of parliament to Popery, in direct oppofition to Revolution principles. We fhould not think of giving Papists the power of making laws obligatory on Proteftants, with

Bolingbr. Rem. Hift. Engl. 159.

fevere

fevere penalties and fanctions. We should not think of resuming unforfeited charters. We fhould not think of making governors, the needy, and often worthless dependents of our corrupt court, lords paramount over our brave colonies, by giving them the power of appointing and removing judges at their pleasure, while the governors themselves, however tyrannical, are liable to no impeachment by the people. We should notbut there is no end to obfervations on the difference between the measures likely to be purfued by a minifter backed by a ftanding army, and thofe of a court awed by the fear of an armed people.'

Let the Reader attend to these remarks and make his own reflections.

-This honeft Writer concludes with the following paragraph, immediately connected with the foregoing: Fearing left I fhould tire the Reader, I have fuppreffed many speeches and quotations on the army, as well as moft of the other heads I have treated of. What I have published will shew plainly, that the ablest men, and beft citizens of this realm, have looked on a mercenary army in times of peace, whether allowed from year to year, or eftablished for perpetuity, as a dangerous and alarming abuse in a free country. They oppofed it ftrenuously in treatifes, pamphlets, and fpeeches. And we let it pass annually without queftion or difpute. Whether the fears of our ancestors, or our indifference, are most reasonable, time will fhew. By the afpect of the present times, it is not improbable, that the point may very foon be decided.'

We perfuade ourselves that the above paffages will be acceptable to our Readers, who will now be enabled to judge what is to be expected from this part of the work. Confidered merely as a matter of curiofity and entertainment, the book is really valuable, at the fame time that it is replete with knowledge and instruction, drawn from the best fources. The worthy Compiler merits the refpect and efteem of the Public for the great zeal and labour which he has employed; and we heartily with that his earnest endeavours may be followed by fome anfwerable fuccefs, for the advantage and honour of these kingdoms!

Hi.

6s.

ART. V. Sermons, chiefly upon religious Hypocrify. By the Author of the Eays on Public Worship*, &c. 12mo. 2 Vols. bound. Payne, &c. 1774.

HESE very fingular difcourfes will be read with pleasure, THES or difapprobation, according to the different prejudices and pre-established opinions of their several readers. They are not

See Reviews for March 1773, and July 1774, p. 63.

compofed