Thomas Paine – Author of Common Sense – 1776

Amerikanischer Patriotismus Erfolg in Amerika Logo
American Pride LogoGeorge Washington Crossing DelawareFreedom Vets Day Veterans Day November 2009The Alamo San Antonio TexasRough Riders San Juan Hill RooseveltReagan Bush Gorbachev Statue of Liberty
  • Yahoo Answers Logo
  • Facebook Logo
  • Twitter Logo
  • Youtube Logo
StoriesofUSA@gmail.com

"Wir loben Sie für Ihre Bemühungen um die Entwicklung und Verbesserung des Zugangs zu qualitativ hochwertigen Bildungsressourcen Geschichte, dass Will
enhance the teaching and learning of history in schools across this nation"
- US Department of Education

  • American Patriotism Stories of USA Home Icon
  • Abraham Lincoln Icon
  • Liberty Bell Icon
  • US Flag American Patriotism Icon
  • Dream 2 Achieve Children Success
  • Success in America
  • Behind the Red, White and Blue Icon
LEBENS
AMERICA'S HERITAGE
Spenden Sie jetzt Knopf


RANDY E KING BIO
BEST-SELLING AUTHOR


Jetzt buchen Best Redner Randy E King "Die Geschichte kann uns, wo wir tun oder nicht gehen zu zeigen."


Doppelzüngig
August 2014 verfügbar


Duplicitous Book Cover
"Unsere wahre Feind ist die Unwissenheit und Apathie."


Hört irgendjemand zu?
Echt Teens - Wahre Geschichten


Is Anybody Listening Book Cover "Raising teenagers is like trying to nail Jell-O to a tree."




Links Mitte Rechts was das Beste für Amerika Bucheinband "Wer nichts weiß ist näher an der Wahrheit, als er dessen Geist mit Unwahrheiten und Fehler gefüllt."


BUY AMERICAN PRIDE CD
American Pride CD mp3 Digitaler Download
HOME | US HISTORY | HISTORY ICONS | PATRIOTIC | DREAM2ACHIEVE | SUCCESS | MISC

Thomas Paine – Author of Common Sense – 1776

Thomas Paine – Author of Common Sense – 1776

Alternative Thomas Paine - Autor von Common Sense - 1776 Video

Gesunder Menschenverstand
Von Thomas Paine

Einführung

Common Sense Thomas Paine 1776 Vielleicht sind die in den nachfolgenden Seiten enthaltenen Gefühle sind noch nicht ausreichend, um sie zu beschaffen modische allgemeinen Gunsten; eine lange Gewohnheit, nicht an eine Sache falsch, gibt es einen oberflächlichen Anschein von Recht und hebt zunächst eine gewaltige Empörung in der Verteidigung der Brauch. Aber Tumult bald nachlässt. Zeit macht mehr Konvertiten als Grund.

Wie ein langer und gewalttätigen Machtmissbrauch ist in der Regel die Mittel für den Aufruf des rechts von ihr in Frage (und in Verfahren betreffend die zu noch nie gedacht könnte, hätte nicht die Betroffenen in die Untersuchung wurden verschärft,) und als der König der England hat in seinem eigenen Recht verpflichtet, dem Parlament, was er ihnen ruft zu unterstützen, und die guten Menschen in diesem Land sind schmerzlich durch die Kombination Unterdrückten, eine unzweifelhafte Privileg, in die Ansprüche der beiden erkundigen sie haben, und ebenso abzulehnen die Anmaßungen von beiden.

In den folgenden Blätter, hat der Autor vermied jede Sache, die unter uns persönlich ist. Komplimente sowie Kritik an Einzelpersonen machen keinen Teil davon. Der Weise und der würdige muss nicht der Triumph einer Broschüre; und diejenigen, deren Gefühle sind unüberlegte oder unfreundlich, die von sich nicht mehr, es sei denn zu viel Mühe ist, auf ihre Umwandlung verliehen.

Die Ursache für Amerika ist, in einem großen Maß, die Ursache der ganzen Menschheit. Viele Umstände haben und werden entstehen, die nicht lokal, sondern universell, und durch die die Prinzipien der alle Liebhaber der Menschheit betroffen sind, und in dem Fall, von denen interessiert sind, ihre Zuneigung. Die Verlegung eines Landes verwüstet mit Feuer und Schwert, erklärte Krieg gegen die natürlichen Rechte aller Menschen, und auszurotten die Verteidiger davon aus dem Gesicht der Erde, ist das Anliegen eines jeden Menschen, denen die Natur gegeben hat, die Macht der Gefühle; wobei die Klasse, unabhängig von Partei Tadel, ist

Der Autor.
Philadelphia, 14. Februar 1776

DER HERKUNFT UND DESIGN VON Regierung im Allgemeinen. MIT KOMPAKT ANMERKUNGEN der englischen Verfassung

Einige Schriftsteller haben so verdammte Gesellschaft mit der Regierung, wie wenig oder keinen Unterschied zwischen ihnen zu verlassen; Diese Maßnahmen sind nicht nur unterschiedliche, sondern hat verschiedene Ursachen. Gesellschaft wird durch unsere Wünsche durch unsere Schlechtigkeit produziert und Regierung; der ehemalige fördert unser Glück positiv durch die Vereinigung unserer Neigungen, letztere negativ durch Zurückhalten unsere Laster. Der eine fordert Verkehr, der andere schafft Unterschiede. Das erste ist ein Patron, der letzte ein Punisher.

Gesellschaft, in jedem Staat ist ein Segen, aber auch in seiner Regierung besten Zustand ist, sondern ein notwendiges Übel in seiner schlimmsten Zustand eine unerträgliche ein; denn wenn wir leiden, oder an die gleichen Nöte von einer Regierung, die wir in einem Land ohne Regierung erwarten könnte, ausgesetzt wird, wird unsere Katastrophen durch Reflexion, dass wir liefern die Mittel, mit denen wir leiden, erhöht! Regierung, wie Kleidung, ist das Abzeichen der verlorenen Unschuld; die Paläste der Könige sind auf den Ruinen der Lauben Paradies gebaut. Für waren die Impulse des Gewissens klare, einheitliche und unwiderstehlich gehorchte, würde der Mensch keine andere Gesetzgeber müssen; aber das nicht der Fall ist, findet er es für nötig, sich zu ergeben einen Teil seines Eigentums, Mittel für den Schutz der den Rest liefern; und das er induziert wird, die von der gleichen Umsicht, die in jedem anderen Fall rät ihm von zwei Übeln wählen, um es gelinde zu tun. Darum, Sicherheit der wahre Design und Ende der Regierung, es unwiderleglich folgt, dass, was auch immer Form davon scheint wahrscheinlich, es zu uns zu gewährleisten, mit dem geringsten Aufwand und größten Nutzen, ist vorzuziehen, alle anderen.

Um eine klare und gerechte Idee des Designs und Ende der Regierung zu gewinnen, nehmen wir an, eine kleine Anzahl von Personen in irgendeiner abgesonderten Teil der Erde angesiedelt, die nicht mit der Ruhe, sie werden dann stellen die erste Besiedlung eines Landes, oder der Welt. In diesem Zustand der natürlichen Freiheit, wird die Gesellschaft ihr erster Gedanke sein. Tausend Motive werden sie dazu anzuregen, ist die Stärke eines Menschen so ungleich, um seine Wünsche, und sein Geist so ungeeignet für die ewige Einsamkeit, dass er bald verpflichtet, Hilfe und Unterstützung von anderen, der seinerseits erfordert die gleiche suchen. Vier oder fünf vereint der Lage wäre, eine tolerierbare Wohnung mitten in der Wildnis zu erhöhen, aber ein Mann könnte der gemeinsamen Arbeitslebenszeit ohne Durchführung jeglicher Sache, als er seine Holz gefällt hatte, konnte er es nicht entfernen, noch zu errichten, nachdem es entfernt wurde; Hunger in der Zwischenzeit würde ihn von seiner Arbeit zu drängen, und jedes andere wollen nennen ihn einen anderen Weg. Krankheit, ja sogar Unglück wäre der Tod sein, wenn vielleicht auch nicht sterblich sein, aber entweder würde ihn von Wohn deaktivieren und ihn in einen Zustand, in dem er vielleicht eher gesagt, zugrunde zu gehen, als zu sterben verringern.

So Notwendigkeit, wie ein gravitierende Macht, bald bilden unsere neu angekommenen Einwanderer in die Gesellschaft, die gegenseitigen Segen von denen, ersetzen würde, und machen die Verpflichtungen des Rechts und der Regierung unnötig, während sie blieb vollkommen, nur um einander; aber als nichts, aber der Himmel ist uneinnehmbar umge, wird es zwangsläufig vorkommen, dass in dem Maße, wie sie die ersten Schwierigkeiten der Emigration, die sie in einer gemeinsamen Sache zusammengebunden zu überwinden, werden sie anfangen, ihre Pflicht und Bindung zueinander zu entspannen; und diese Nachlässigkeit, wird auf die Notwendigkeit, der Einrichtung eine Form der Regierung, den Mangel der moralischen Tugend zu versorgen.

Einige praktische Baum wird sie unter den Zweigen, von denen die ganze Kolonie kann versammeln, um auf die öffentlichen Angelegenheiten zu beraten leisten einen Staat-Haus. Es ist mehr als wahrscheinlich, dass die ersten Gesetze wird der Titel nur der Verordnungen haben, und von keinem anderen Strafe als öffentliche disesteem durchgesetzt werden. In dieser ersten Parlaments jeder Mann, von Naturrecht einen Sitz haben.

Aber als die Kolonie steigt, werden die Bedenken der Öffentlichkeit ebenfalls zu erhöhen, und die Entfernung, in der die Mitglieder getrennt werden können, wird es zu unbequem für alle von ihnen bei jeder Gelegenheit, wie auf den ersten, wenn ihre Zahl war klein, ihre Wohnungen zu erfüllen machen in der Nähe, und die Bedenken der Öffentlichkeit nur wenige und unbedeutende. Dieser wird Sie auf die Bequemlichkeit ihrer Zustimmung zur Gesetzesteil zu verlassen, um von einer ausgewählten Zahl, die aus der ganzen Körper, die angeblich die gleichen Anliegen auf dem Spiel, die diejenigen haben, die sie ernannt hat, und die in dem Gesetz müssen verwaltet werden gleiche Weise wie im ganzen Körper wirken würde sie waren zu präsentieren. Wenn die Kolonie weiter zu erhöhen, wird es notwendig, die Anzahl der Vertreter ergänzen, und dass das Interesse der jeder Teil der Kolonie kann besucht werden, wird es am besten gefunden werden, um das Ganze in bequemer teilen, und jeder Teil schickt seine richtige Anzahl; und dass die gewählte vielleicht nie zu bilden, um sich selbst ein Interesse getrennt von den Kurfürsten, wird Umsicht darauf hin, den Anstand, die Wahlen oft; weil, wie der gewählte Macht durch das bedeutet, zurückzukehren und wieder mischen sich mit der allgemeinen Körper der Wähler in ein paar Monaten wird die Treue der Öffentlichkeit durch die umsichtige Reflexion nicht einen Stab für sich selbst zu sichern. Und da dies häufige Austausch wird ein gemeinsames Interesse mit jedem Teil der Community zu etablieren, werden sie sich gegenseitig und natürlich unterstützen sich gegenseitig, und auf diese (nicht auf dem nichtssagenden Namen des Königs) hängt die Stärke der Regierung, und das Glück der Regierten .

Hier ist dann der Ursprung und Aufstieg der Regierung; nämlich ein Modus notwendig gemacht durch die Unfähigkeit der moralische Tugend, die Welt zu regieren; Auch hier ist das Design und das Ende der Regierung, dh., Freiheit und Sicherheit. Und wie unsere Augen mit Schnee, oder unsere Ohren durch Schall getäuscht geblendet werden; Vorurteile können jedoch unseren Willen verbiegen oder Interesse verdunkeln unser Verständnis, das einfache Stimme der Natur und der Vernunft werden sagen, ist es richtig.

Ich zeichne meine Vorstellung von der Form der Regierung aus einem Prinzip in der Natur, die keine Kunst stürzen können, nämlich, dass die mehr einfach irgend etwas ist, desto weniger haftet sie ungeordnet zu sein, und desto leichter repariert, wenn ungeordnet. und mit dieser Maxime in der Ansicht, biete ich ein paar Bemerkungen über die so viel prahlte Verfassung von England. Dass es für die edlen dunklen und sklavische Zeiten, in denen es errichtet wurde gewährt. Wenn die Welt mit Tyrannei überrannt zuletzt daraus war eine herrliche Rettung. Aber dass es unvollkommen, unterliegen Krämpfe, und unfähig, was es scheint zu versprechen, wird sich leicht zeigen.

Absolute Regierungen (obwohl die Schande der menschlichen Natur) haben diesen Vorteil mit sich, dass sie einfach sind; wenn die Menschen leiden, sie kennen den Kopf, von dem ihr Leiden Quellen, wissen ebenfalls das Heilmittel, und werden nicht durch eine Vielzahl von Ursachen und Heilung verwirrt. Aber die Verfassung von England ist so überaus komplex, dass die Nation kann über Jahre zusammen, ohne in der Lage zu, in welchem ​​Teil der Fehler liegt entdecken leiden, werden einige in ein und einige in einem anderen zu sagen, und jede politische Arzt ein anderes Arzneimittel zu beraten.

Ich weiß, es ist schwierig, über lokale oder langjährige Vorurteile zu bekommen, aber wenn wir uns leiden, um die Einzelteile der englischen Verfassung zu untersuchen, so finden wir sie, um die Basis sein, Reste von zwei alten Tyranneien, mit einigen neuen republikanischen Materialien zusammengesetzt .

First.- Die Überreste der monarchischen Tyrannei in der Person des Königs. Secondly.- Die Überreste aristokratischen Tyrannei in den Personen der Altersgenossen. Thirdly.- Die neue republikanische Materialien, in den Personen der Allmende, auf dessen Grund hängt die Freiheit von England.

Die beiden ersten, indem sie erblich, sind unabhängig von den Menschen; weshalb in einem verfassungsrechtlichen Sinne sie nichts gegen die Freiheit des Staates beitragen.

Zu sagen, dass die Verfassung von England ist ein Zusammenschluss von drei Mächte sich wechselseitig die Kontrolle ist eine Farce, entweder die Worte haben keine Bedeutung, oder sie sind flach Widersprüche.

Zu sagen, dass die commons ist eine Prüfung über den König, setzt zwei Dinge.

First.-, dass der König nicht ohne betreut vertraut werden, oder in anderen Worten, dass ein Durst nach absoluter Macht ist die natürliche Erkrankung der Monarchie. Secondly.- Dass die Lager, indem sie zu diesem Zweck benannte, sind entweder klüger oder mehr verdient Vertrauen als die Krone.

Aber als die gleiche Verfassung, die der Allmende gibt eine Macht, den König durch das Zurückhalten der Lieferungen zu überprüfen, gibt danach dem König eine Macht, die Allmende zu überprüfen, durch die Stärkung ihn zu ihren anderen Rechnungen zurückzuweisen; wieder voraus, dass der König ist weiser als die, die sie bereits angenommen weiser als ihn zu sein. Eine bloße Absurdität!

Es ist etwas in der Zusammensetzung der Monarchie überaus lächerlich; es zuerst schließt ein Mann aus dem Mittel der Information, noch befähigt ihn, in Fällen tätig werden, wo die höchste Beurteilung erforderlich. Der Zustand eines Königs schließt ihn von der Welt, aber das Geschäft von einem König verlangt von ihm, um es gründlich zu kennen; weshalb die verschiedenen Teile, unnatürlich und einander entgegengesetzte Zerstörung, beweisen die ganzen Charakter absurd und nutzlos.

Einige Autoren haben die englische Verfassung so zu erklären; der König, sagen sie, ist eine, die Menschen zueinander; die Peers sind ein Haus im Namen des Königs; die Gemeinen in Namen des Volkes; aber das hat alle Unterscheidungen eines Hauses mit sich selbst uneins; und angenehm angeordnet obwohl die Ausdrücke sein, aber wenn sie im Leerlauf untersucht und mehrdeutig erscheinen; und es wird immer der Fall, dass die schönsten Konstruktion, die Worte in der Lage sind, wenn sie auf die Beschreibung von etwas aufgebracht, die entweder nicht vorhanden oder zu unverständlich im Kompass Beschreibung ersichtlich, wird also der Ton nur sein, und obwohl sie kann das Ohr unterhalten, sie den Geist nicht informieren können, für diese Erklärung enthält eine vorherige Frage, nämlich. Wie kam der König von einer Macht, die die Menschen haben Angst, zu vertrauen und immer verpflichtet zu prüfen? Eine solche Leistung nicht das Geschenk eines weisen Menschen sein, noch kann jeder Macht, die Kontrolle muss von Gott sein; noch die Bestimmung, die die Verfassung macht, setzt eine solche Macht zu existieren.

Aber der Vorschrift ist ungleich der Aufgabe; das Mittel entweder nicht oder wird nicht das Ende zu erreichen, und die ganze Sache ist ein felo de se; für die mehr Gewicht tragen stets up weniger, und da alle Räder einer Maschine in Bewegung von einem gesagt, es bleibt nur noch zu wissen, welche Macht in der Verfassung das meiste Gewicht hat, denn das wird zu regieren; und obwohl die anderen, oder ein Teil von ihnen, kann verstopfen, oder, wie die Phrase ist, überprüfen Sie die Schnelligkeit seiner Bewegung, noch so lange, wie sie können es nicht stoppen, werden ihre Bemühungen wirkungslos sein; der erste bewegende Kraft wird endlich haben ihren Weg, und was sie will in der Geschwindigkeit wird durch Zeit geliefert.

Dass die Krone ist dies anmaßend Teil in der englischen Verfassung muss nicht erwähnt werden, und dass es seine ganze Folge leitet lediglich davon, dass der Geber der Orte Renten ist selbstverständlich, weshalb, obwohl wir haben, und klug genug, um geschlossen und verriegeln eine Tür gegen absolute Monarchie, haben wir gleichzeitig dumm genug gewesen, um die Krone in Besitz des Schlüssels setzen.

Das Vorurteil der Engländer, zugunsten ihrer eigenen Regierung durch König, Lords und Commons, stellt sich so viel oder mehr von Nationalstolz als die Vernunft. Personen sind in England zweifellos sicherer als in einigen anderen Ländern, sondern den Willen des Königs ist wie viel das Gesetz des Landes in Großbritannien wie in Frankreich, mit dem Unterschied, dass anstelle der ausgehend direkt aus seinem Mund, Händen, um die ist es Menschen unter dem furchtbarsten Form einer Handlung des Parlaments. Für das Schicksal der Karl I., der hat nur gemacht Könige subtiler nicht- mehr gerecht.

Darum, beiseite legen alle nationalen Stolz und Vorurteil zugunsten der Arten und Formen, ist die reine Wahrheit, dass es ganz durch die Verfassung der Menschen, und nicht auf die Verfassung der Regierung, dass die Krone nicht so bedrückend in England wie in der Türkei.

Eine Untersuchung der verfassungsrechtlichen Fehler in der englischen Form der Regierung ist in dieser Zeit sehr notwendig; für so sind wir noch nie in einem ordnungsgemäßen Zustand gerecht zu anderen, während wir unter dem Einfluss von einigen führenden Parteilichkeit weiter, so dass weder sind wir in der Lage, es zu tun, um uns, während wir weiterhin von einem hartnäckigen Vorurteil gefesselt. Und als ein Mann, der zu einer Prostituierten angebracht ist, ist ungeeignet zu wählen oder Richter einer Frau, so dass jede Voreingenommenheit zugunsten eines faulen Verfassung der Regierung wird uns von anspruchsvollen einen guten deaktivieren.

DER Monarchie und Erbfolge

MENSCHHEIT Befinden ursprünglich gleich in der Schöpfungsordnung, die Gleichberechtigung nur durch einem späteren Umstand zerstört werden; die Unterschiede von reich und arm, kann in einem großen Maß berücksichtigt werden, und das ohne Rückgriff auf den harten, schlecht klingenden Namen der Unterdrückung und Habgier. Unterdrückung ist oft die Folge, aber selten oder nie die Mittel des Reichtums; und obwohl Geiz wird ein Mann davon, dass necessitously Armen erhalten, in der Regel macht es ihm zu ängstlich, um wohlhabend zu sein. Aber es ist eine andere und stärkere Unterscheidung, für die keine wirklich natürliche oder religiösen Grund zugeordnet werden können, und das ist die Unterscheidung der Menschen in Könige und Untertanen. Männliche und weibliche sind die Unterschiede der Natur, gute und schlechte Unterscheidungen des Himmels; aber wie ein Rennen der Männer in die Welt gekommen, so erhaben über dem Rest, und zeichnete, wie einige neue Arten, die es wert fragend in, und ob sie die Mittel des Glücks oder des Elends an die Menschheit.

In den frühen Zeitaltern der Welt, nach der Schrift Chronologie, gab es keine Könige; Die Folge davon war, gab es keine Kriege; Es ist der Stolz der Könige, die die Menschheit in Verwirrung zu stürzen. Holland ohne König hat genossen mehr Frieden für diese letzten Jahrhunderts als eine der monarchischen Regierungen in Europa. Antike begünstigt die gleiche Bemerkung; für die ruhigen und ländlichen Leben der ersten Patriarchen hat ein glückliches etwas in ihnen, die weg verschwindet, wenn wir in die Geschichte der jüdischen Lizenz kommen.

Regierung von Königen wurde zuerst von den Heiden, von denen die Kinder Israel kopiert die benutzerdefinierte in die Welt eingeführt. Es war der wohlhabendsten Erfindung der Teufel immer zu Fuß zur Förderung des Götzendienstes eingestellt. Die Heiden bezahlt göttliche Ehren ihrer verstorbenen Könige und die christliche Welt hat auf den Plan, indem Sie die gleichen, ihre Lebens diejenigen verbessert. Wie pietätlos ist der Titel der heiligen Majestät zu einem Wurm, der in der Mitte seiner Pracht zu Staub zerfall angewendet wird!

Da die Verherrlichung eines Mannes so sehr über den Rest kann nicht auf die Gleichberechtigung der Natur gerechtfertigt werden, so kann auch nicht auf die Autorität der Schrift verteidigt werden; für den Willen des Allmächtigen, wie Gideon und der Prophet Samuel erklärte, missbilligt ausdrücklich der Regierung durch Könige. Alle anti-monarchische Teile der Schrift wurden sehr sanft über in monarchischen Regierungen beschönigt, aber sie zweifellos verdient die Aufmerksamkeit der Länder, die ihre Regierungen noch nicht zu bilden. Gebt dem Kaiser, was des Kaisers ist die biblische Lehre von der Plätze sind, aber es ist keine Unterstützung der monarchischen Regierung, für die Juden zu dieser Zeit waren ohne König, und in einem Zustand der Knechtschaft der Römer.

In der Nähe von 3000 Jahre im Rahmen eines nationalen Wahn von der Mosaik-Konto der Schöpfung, bis die Juden bestanden bat um einen König. Bis dahin ihre Form der Regierung (außer in außergewöhnlichen Fällen, in denen der Allmächtige zwischen) war eine Art von Republik von einem Richter verabreicht und die Ältesten der Stämme. Könige hatten sie keine, und es sündhaft gehalten wurde, um jede Befinden unter diesem Titel, aber die Herren von Hosts zu bestätigen. Und wenn ein Mann ernsthaft reflektiert über die götzendienerische Hommage, die den Personen der Könige er sich nicht wundern muss bezahlt wird, dass der Allmächtige, immer eifersüchtig auf seine Ehre, sollte eine Regierungsform, die so gottlos dringt in das Vorrecht des Himmels missbilligen.

Monarchie ist in der Schrift als eine der Sünden der Juden, für die ein Fluch in der Reserve gegen sie denunziert rangiert. Die Geschichte dieser Transaktion ist einen Besuch wert, um.

Die Kinder Israel durch die Midianiter Unterdrückten, marschierten Gideon gegen sie mit einer kleinen Armee, und der Sieg, durch die göttliche Zwischen entschied zu seinen Gunsten. Die Juden begeistern mit Erfolg, zuweisen und auf die Feldherrn von Gideon, schlug vor, ihm einen König und sprach:, Regel du über uns, du und dein Sohn und deines Sohnes Sohn. Hier war die Versuchung in vollem Umfang; nicht nur ein Reich, sondern eine erblich, aber Gideon in der Frömmigkeit seiner Seele antwortete: Ich will nicht über euch herrschen, auch mein Sohn soll nicht Herr über euch, der Herr die Herrschaft über SIE. Worte braucht nicht mehr explizit sein; Gideon tut nicht die Ehre zurückgehen, aber leugnet ihr Recht, es zu geben; auch will sie mit erfunden Erklärungen seinen Dank Kompliment, aber im positiven stile eines Propheten lädt sie mit Unzufriedenheit an ihren richtigen Souverän, den König des Himmels.

Über 130 Jahre nach, fielen sie wieder in die gleichen Fehler. Die Sehnsucht, die die Juden für die götzendienerischen Bräuche der Heiden hatte, ist etwas außerordentlich unverantwortlich; aber so war es, dass über halten, das Fehlverhalten von Samuel die beiden Söhne, die mit einigen weltlichen Sorgen anvertraut waren, kamen sie zu einem abrupten und lärmenden Art und Weise zu Samuel und sprach: Siehe, du bist alt und deine Söhne wandeln nicht in deinen Wegen, Jetzt machen uns zu einem König, der uns wie alle anderen Nationen richten. Und hier können wir nicht, aber beobachten, dass ihre Motive waren schlecht, dh., Dass sie vielleicht wie zu anderen Nationen, dh, den Heiden, während ihre wahre Herrlichkeit im Sein, so viel wie möglich im Gegensatz zu ihnen gelegt sein. Das gefiel Samuel, als sie sagten, geben Sie uns einen König, der uns richte; und Samuel betete zum Herrn, und der Herr sprach zu Samuel: Gehorche der Stimme des Volkes in allem, was sie sagen, zu dir, denn sie haben nicht dich, sondern mich verworfen haben, dann sollte ich nicht über sie herrschen.

Nach all den Arbeiten, die seit dem Tag getan haben; womit sie brachte sie aus Ägypten, bis auf diesen Tag; wherewith they have forsaken me and served other Gods; so do they also unto thee. Now therefore hearken unto their voice, howbeit, protest solemnly unto them and show them the manner of the king that shall reign over them, ie, not of any particular king, but the general manner of the kings of the earth, whom Israel was so eagerly copying after. And notwithstanding the great distance of time and difference of manners, the character is still in fashion. And Samuel told all the words of the Lord unto the people, that asked of him a king. And he said, This shall be the manner of the king that shall reign over you; he will take your sons and appoint them for himself for his chariots, and to be his horsemen, and some shall run before his chariots (this description agrees with the present mode of impressing men) and he will appoint him captains over thousands and captains over fifties, and will set them to ear his ground and to read his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots; and he will take your daughters to be confectionaries and to be cooks and to be bakers (this describes the expense and luxury as well as the oppression of kings) and he will take your fields and your olive yards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants; and he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give them to his officers and to his servants (by which we see that bribery, corruption, and favoritism are the standing vices of kings) and he will take the tenth of your men servants, and your maid servants, and your goodliest young men and your asses, and put them to his work; and he will take the tenth of your sheep, and ye shall be his servants, and ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen, AND THE LORD WILL NOT HEAR YOU IN THAT DAY. This accounts for the continuation of monarchy; neither do the characters of the few good kings which have lived since, either sanctify the title, or blot out the sinfulness of the origin; the high encomium given of David takes no notice of him officially as a king, but only as a man after God's own heart. Nevertheless the People refused to obey the voice of Samuel, and they said, Nay, but we will have a king over us, that we may be like all the nations, and that our king may judge us, and go out before us and fight our battles. Samuel continued to reason with them, but to no purpose; he set before them their ingratitude, but all would not avail; and seeing them fully bent on their folly, he cried out, I will call unto the Lord, and he shall sent thunder and rain (which then was a punishment, being the time of wheat harvest) that ye may perceive and see that your wickedness is great which ye have done in the sight of the Lord, IN ASKING YOU A KING. So Samuel called unto the Lord, and the Lord sent thunder and rain that day, and all the people greatly feared the Lord and Samuel And all the people said unto Samuel, Pray for thy servants unto the Lord thy God that we die not, for WE HAVE ADDED UNTO OUR SINS THIS EVIL, TO ASK A KING. These portions of scripture are direct and positive. They admit of no equivocal construction. That the Almighty hath here entered his protest against monarchial government is true, or the scripture is false. And a man hath good reason to believe that there is as much of kingcraft, as priestcraft in withholding the scripture from the public in Popish countries. For monarchy in every instance is the Popery of government.

To the evil of monarchy we have added that of hereditary succession; and as the first is a degradation and lessening of ourselves, so the second, claimed as a matter of right, is an insult and an imposition on posterity. For all men being originally equals, no one by birth could have a right to set up his own family in perpetual preference to all others for ever, and though himself might deserve some decent degree of honors of his contemporaries, yet his descendants might be far too unworthy to inherit them. One of the strongest natural proofs of the folly of hereditary right in kings, is, that nature disapproves it, otherwise she would not so frequently turn it into ridicule by giving mankind an ass for a lion.

Zweitens, da kein Mann an konnte zunächst alle anderen öffentlichen Ehrungen als wurden ihm verliehen haben, so dass die Geber dieser Auszeichnung keine Macht, das Recht der Nachwelt zu verschenken haben, und obwohl sie vielleicht sagen: "Wir wählen Sie für unser Kopf "Sie konnte nicht, ohne manifeste Ungerechtigkeit, um ihre Kinder, sagen wir,", dass Ihre Kinder und Ihre Kindeskinder über unseren für immer regieren. "Weil eine solche unklug, ungerecht, unnatürlichen Kompakt Macht (vielleicht) in der nächsten Folge legte sie unter der Regierung von einem Schurken oder ein Narr. Die meisten weisen Männer, in ihrem privaten Gefühle, je Erbrecht mit Verachtung behandelt; aber es ist eine jener Übel, die, wenn einmal etabliert ist, nicht leicht entfernt; viele einreichen von Angst, andere aus Aberglauben und die mächtigeren Teil Aktien mit dem König die Plünderung der Ruhe.

Dies wird angenommen, das die vorliegende Rennen der Könige in der Welt einen ehrenvollen Ursprung gehabt haben; Es ist mehr als wahrscheinlich, dass wir nehmen Sie den dunklen Abdeckung der Antike, und sie verfolgen ihre ersten Anstieg, dass wir die erste von ihnen finde nichts besser als die Hauptraufbold von rund unruhig Bande, deren wilden Sitten der Vorrang in Subtilität erhalten ihm den Titel des Chef unter Plünderer; und die von einer zunehmenden Macht, und sich seine Raubzüge, die ruhige eingeschüchtert und wehrlos, ihre Sicherheit durch häufige Beiträge zu erwerben. Doch seine Wähler konnten keine Idee, erbliche Recht, seine Nachkommen, weil eine solche unbefristete Ausschluss von sich selbst mit der freien und ungebremst Prinzipien, die sie Profess zu leben unvereinbar sind. Darum, Erbfolge in den frühen Zeiten der Monarchie nicht statt als eine Frage der Anspruch zu nehmen, sondern als etwas lässig oder Ergänzung; aber so wenig oder keine Aufzeichnungen waren in jenen Tagen noch vorhanden, und überlieferten Geschichte mit Fabeln gefüllt, war es sehr einfach, nach dem Ablauf von ein paar Generationen, bis Trumpf einige abergläubische Märchen, bequem zeitgesteuert, wie Mohammed, den erblichen bis hin zu stopfen die Kehlen der vulgär. Vielleicht sind die Erkrankungen, die bedroht ist, oder schien auf dem Tod eines Führers und der Wahl eines neuen (für die Wahlen unter Raufbolde nicht sehr ordentlich sein) induziert viele auf den ersten erbliche Ansprüche begünstigen bedrohen; wodurch es passiert ist, wie es da hat passiert ist, dass das, was auf den ersten haben wir als Service eingereicht, wurde später als ein Recht beansprucht.

England, since the conquest, hath known some few good monarchs, but groaned beneath a much larger number of bad ones, yet no man in his senses can say that their claim under William the Conqueror is a very honorable one. A French bastard landing with an armed banditti, and establishing himself king of England against the consent of the natives, is in plain terms a very paltry rascally original. It certainly hath no divinity in it. However, it is needless to spend much time in exposing the folly of hereditary right, if there are any so weak as to believe it, let them promiscuously worship the ass and lion, and welcome. I shall neither copy their humility, nor disturb their devotion.

Doch ich sollte froh sein, zu fragen, wie sie meinen, Könige kam zuerst? Die Frage, gibt zu, aber von drei Antworten, dh., Entweder durch das Los, durch Wahl oder durch Usurpation. Wenn der erste König wurde durch das Los getroffen, stellt es einen Präzedenzfall für die nächste, die Erbfolge ausschließt. Saul war durch das Los, doch die Nachfolge war nicht erblich, es ist auch nicht von dieser Transaktion erscheint es irgendeine Absicht es jemals sollte. Wenn der erste König eines Landes war durch Wahl, die ebenfalls schafft einen Präzedenzfall für die nächste; für zu sagen, dass das Recht aller zukünftigen Generationen wird entfernt, durch den Akt der ersten Kurfürsten von einer Familie der Könige für immer genommen, in ihrer Wahl nicht nur ein König, sondern hat, der hat keine Parallele in oder aus der Schrift, sondern die Lehre von der Erbsünde, die den freien Willen aller Menschen in Adam verloren annimmt; und von solchen Vergleich, und es wird von keinem anderen, Erbfolge zugeben kann keinen Ruhm abzuleiten. Denn wie in Adam alle gesündigt haben, und wie in den ersten Wähler alle Männer gehorchten; wie in der einen die ganze Menschheit zu Satan unterzogen, und in der anderen die Souveränität; wie unsere Unschuld wurde in der ersten, und unsere Autorität in der letzten verloren; und da beide deaktivieren uns von reassuming einige ehemalige Staats und ein Privileg, es unwiderleglich folgt, dass die Erbsünde und Erbfolge gibt Parallelen. Unehrenhaft Rang! Inglorious Verbindung! Doch die subtilsten Sophist kann nicht zu einer gerechteren Gleichnis.

Was Usurpation, wird kein Mann so winterhart, um sie zu verteidigen; und dass Wilhelm der Eroberer war ein Usurpator ist eine Tatsache, nicht widersprochen werden. Die einfache Wahrheit ist, dass das Alter der englischen Monarchie nicht in der Suche zu tragen.

Aber es ist nicht so sehr die Absurdität, wie dem Übel der Erbfolge, die die Menschheit betrifft. Hat es eine Rasse von guter und weiser Männer zu gewährleisten wäre es das Siegel der göttlichen Autorität zu haben, aber da es eine Tür zum dumm, die Bösen öffnet; und die unsachgemäße hat, der hat es in ihr die Natur der Unterdrückung. Männer, die auf sich selbst geboren zu herrschen sehen, und andere, zu gehorchen, bald wachsen unverschämt; ausgewählt aus der Rest der Menschheit ihr Verstand früh von Bedeutung vergiftet; und die Welt, die sie in so handeln unterscheidet sich erheblich von der Welt insgesamt, dass sie nur wenig Gelegenheit, zu wissen, seine wahren Interessen, und wenn sie an die Regierung erfolgreich sind oft die unwissend und unfähig irgend in den Herrschaften.

Ein weiteres Übel, das Erbfolge besucht ist, dass der Thron unterliegt durch einen Minderjährigen in jedem Alter besessen zu sein; Alle welcher Zeit der Regentschaft, unter dem Deckmantel eines Königs handelt, haben alle Möglichkeiten und Anreize, um ihr Vertrauen zu verraten. Das gleiche nationales Unglück geschieht, wenn ein König mit Alter und Gebrechen getragen, in die letzte Stufe der menschlichen Schwäche. In diesen beiden Fällen die Öffentlichkeit wird eine Beute zu jeder Bösewicht, der erfolgreich mit den Torheiten entweder alt oder Kinderschuhen manipulieren kann.

Die plausibelste Klagegrund, der immer zugunsten der Erbfolge angeboten hat, ist, dass es eine Nation von Bürgerkriegen bewahrt; und waren dies zutrifft, wäre es schwer; wohingegen, ist es das unverschämte Falschheit jemals auf die Menschheit auferlegt. Die ganze Geschichte von England verleugnet die Tatsache. Dreißig Könige und zwei Minderjährige in dieser abgelenkt Reich seit der Eroberung, in der die Zeit hat es (einschließlich der Revolution) nicht weniger als acht Bürgerkriege und Aufstände neunzehn regierte. Darum anstatt für Frieden, macht es dagegen, und zerstört die Grundlagen scheint es zu stehen.

Der Wettbewerb für Monarchie und Nachfolge, zwischen den Häusern York und Lancaster, England legte in einer Szene von Blut für viele Jahre. Zwölf Schlachten, Gefechte und Belagerungen neben, wurden zwischen Henry und Edward gekämpft. Zweimal war Henry Edward Gefangenen, der in seiner Reihe war Gefangener nach Henry. Und so ungewiss ist das Schicksal des Krieges und die Stimmung einer Nation, wenn nichts als persönliche Angelegenheiten sind der Grund einen Streit, dass Henry wurde im Triumph aus einem Gefängnis zu einem Palast genommen, und Edward verpflichtet, aus einem Palast, eine Fliege fremden Land; doch, wie plötzliche Übergänge von Temperament sind selten nachhaltig, Henry seinerseits wurde vom Thron vertrieben und Edward erinnert zu seinem Nachfolger. Das Parlament immer der stärkste Seite.

Dieser Wettbewerb begann in der Regierungszeit von Heinrich dem Sechsten, und wurde nicht ganz bis Heinrich VII, in denen die Familien vereinigt wurden ausgelöscht. Einschließlich eines Zeitraums von 67 Jahren, dh., 1422-1489.

Kurz gesagt, Monarchie und Nachfolge gelegt haben (nicht dieses oder jenes Reich nur), sondern die Welt in Blut und Asche. 'Tis eine Form der Regierung, die das Wort Gottes Zeugnis gegen, und Blut wird es zu besuchen.

Wenn wir in das Geschäft eines Königs zu erkundigen, sind wir, dass (in einigen Ländern sind sie keine haben) zu finden und nach schlendern weg ihr Leben, ohne Freude, sich selbst oder Vorteil für die Nation, aus der Szene zurückziehen, und lassen Sie ihre Nachfolger, die Lauffläche gleiche Leerlauf rund. In absoluten Monarchien das ganze Gewicht von Geschäfts zivilen und militärischen, liegt auf der König; die Kinder Israel in ihrem Antrag für einen König, forderte dieses Plädoyer, "dass er uns richte und vor uns und unsere Kriege." Aber in Ländern, wo er ist weder ein Richter noch ein General, wie in England, eine Mann wäre verwirrt zu wissen, was sein Geschäft.

Je näher eine Regierung Ansätze zu einer Republik, die weniger Geschäft gibt es für einen König. Es ist etwas schwierig, einen passenden Namen für die Regierung von England zu finden. Sir William Meredith nennt es eine Republik; aber in seinem gegenwärtigen Zustand ist es unwürdig des Namens, weil die korrupten Einfluß Wenn die Krone, indem er all die Orte in ihrer Verfügung, der hat so wirksam den Strom Verschlucken und die Tugend des House of Commons gegessen (die republikanische Teil in der Verfassung), die die Regierung von England ist fast so wie die der monarchischen Frankreich oder Spanien. Männer fallen aus mit Namen, ohne sie zu verstehen. Denn die republikanische und nicht das monarchische Teil der Verfassung von England, die Engländer rühmen, nämlich. Ist, um die Freiheit der Wahl eines House of Commons von aus der eigenen Körper-und es ist leicht zu sehen, dass, wenn die republikanische Tugend nicht , kommt es Sklaverei. Mein ist die Verfassung von England kränklich, sondern weil Monarchie hat vergiftet die Republik, hat die Krone vertieft die commons?

In England hat ein König wenig mehr zu tun, als den Krieg zu machen und verschenken Plätze; , die in einfachen Worten, ist, um die Nation zu verarmen und legen Sie es zusammen mit den Ohren. Ein schönes Geschäft in der Tat für einen Mann zu dürfen achthunderttausend Pfund im Jahr für und in den Kauf verehrt! Der mehr wert ist eines ehrlichen Mann für die Gesellschaft, und in den Augen Gottes, als alle gekrönten Raufbolde, die je gelebt hat.

GEDANKEN DER VORLIEGENDEN Zustand der amerikanischen AFFAIRS

Auf den folgenden Seiten biete ich nichts weiter als einfache Tatsachen, schlicht Argumente und gesunden Menschenverstand; und keine anderen Vorbereitungen, um mit dem Leser zu regeln, als dass er sich von Vorurteilen und Voreingenommenheit zu veräußern, und leiden seine Vernunft und seine Gefühle für sich selbst zu bestimmen; dass er anziehen, oder besser gesagt, dass er nicht abschrecken, den wahren Charakter eines Menschen, und großzügig erweitern seine Ansichten über den Tag hinaus.

Bände über das Thema des Kampfes zwischen England und Amerika geschrieben worden. Männer aller Ränge wurden in der Kontroverse begann, aus verschiedenen Motiven und mit verschiedenen Designs; aber alle waren wirkungslos, und die Periode der Aussprache ist geschlossen. Arme, als der letzte Ressource, entscheiden den Wettbewerb; die Beschwerde war die Wahl des Königs, und der Kontinent hat die Herausforderung angenommen.

Es hat des verstorbenen Herrn Pelham berichtet (die Tho 'ein fähiger Minister war nicht ohne seine Fehler), dass auf seinem in der House of Commons angegriffen, auf der Partitur, dass seine Maßnahmen waren nur vorübergehender Art, antwortete "Sie wird meine Zeit zu fasten." Sollte ein Gedanke so fatal und unmännlich besitzen die Kolonien in der vorliegenden Wettbewerb, wird der Name des Vorfahren von künftigen Generationen mit Abscheu in Erinnerung bleiben.

Die Sonne glänzte auf nie eine Ursache von mehr wert. 'Tis nicht die Angelegenheit einer Stadt, eines Landes, einer Provinz oder eines Königreiches, aber eines continent- von mindestens einem Achtel der bewohnbaren Welt. 'Tis nicht die Sorge, eines Tages, eines Jahres oder ein Alter; Nachwelt werden praktisch in den Wettbewerb beteiligt, und wird mehr oder weniger betroffenen jetzt sein, auch bis zum Ende der Zeit, von dem Verfahren. Jetzt ist die Saat der kontinentalen Union, Glauben und Ehre. Jetzt am wenigsten Bruch wird wie ein Name mit der Spitze auf dem Tender Rinde einer jungen Eiche einen Stift graviert sein; Die Wunde wird mit dem Baum zu vergrößern, und die Nachwelt las es in ausgewachsenen Zeichen.

By referring the matter from argument to arms, a new area for politics is struck; a new method of thinking hath arisen. All plans, proposals, &c. prior to the nineteenth of April, ie, to the commencement of hostilities, are like the almanacs of the last year; which, though proper then, are superseded and useless now. Whatever was advanced by the advocates on either side of the question then, terminated in one and the same point, viz., a union with Great Britain; the only difference between the parties was the method of effecting it; the one proposing force, the other friendship; but it hath so far happened that the first hath failed, and the second hath withdrawn her influence.

As much hath been said of the advantages of reconciliation, which, like an agreeable dream, hath passed away and left us as we were, it is but right, that we should examine the contrary side of the argument, and inquire into some of the many material injuries which these colonies sustain, and always will sustain, by being connected with, and dependant on Great Britain. To examine that connection and dependance, on the principles of nature and common sense, to see what we have to trust to, if separated, and what we are to expect, if dependant.

I have heard it asserted by some, that as America hath flourished under her former connection with Great Britain, that the same connection is necessary towards her future happiness, and will always have the same effect. Nothing can be more fallacious than this kind of argument. We may as well assert, that because a child has thrived upon milk, that it is never to have meat; or that the first twenty years of our lives is to become a precedent for the next twenty. But even this is admitting more than is true, for I answer roundly, that America would have flourished as much, and probably much more, had no European power had any thing to do with her. The commerce by which she hath enriched herself are the necessaries of life, and will always have a market while eating is the custom of Europe.

But she has protected us, say some. That she hath engrossed us is true, and defended the continent at our expense as well as her own is admitted, and she would have defended Turkey from the same motive, viz., the sake of trade and dominion.

Leider! we have been long led away by ancient prejudices and made large sacrifices to superstition. We have boasted the protection of Great Britain, without considering, that her motive was interest not attachment; that she did not protect us from our enemies on our account, but from her enemies on her own account, from those who had no quarrel with us on any other account, and who will always be our enemies on the same account. Let Britain wave her pretensions to the continent, or the continent throw off the dependance, and we should be at peace with France and Spain were they at war with Britain. The miseries of Hanover last war, ought to warn us against connections.

It hath lately been asserted in parliament, that the colonies have no relation to each other but through the parent country, ie, that Pennsylvania and the Jerseys, and so on for the rest, are sister colonies by the way of England; this is certainly a very roundabout way of proving relation ship, but it is the nearest and only true way of proving enemyship, if I may so call it. France and Spain never were, nor perhaps ever will be our enemies as Americans, but as our being the subjects of Great Britain.

But Britain is the parent country, say some. Then the more shame upon her conduct. Even brutes do not devour their young; nor savages make war upon their families; wherefore the assertion, if true, turns to her reproach; but it happens not to be true, or only partly so, and the phrase parent or mother country hath been jesuitically adopted by the king and his parasites, with a low papistical design of gaining an unfair bias on the credulous weakness of our minds. Europe, and not England, is the parent country of America. This new world hath been the asylum for the persecuted lovers off civil and religious liberty from every Part of Europe. Hither have they fled, not from the tender embraces of the mother, but from the cruelty of the monster; and it is so far true of England, that the same tyranny which drove the first emigrants from home pursues their descendants still.

In this extensive quarter of the globe, we forget the narrow limits of three hundred and sixty miles (the extent of England) and carry our friendship on a larger scale; we claim brotherhood with every European Christian, and triumph in the generosity of the sentiment.

It is pleasant to observe by what regular gradations we surmount the force of local prejudice, as we enlarge our acquaintance with the world. A man born in any town in England divided into parishes, will naturally associate most with his fellow parishioners (because their interests in many cases will be common) and distinguish him by the name of neighbor; if he meet him but a few miles from home, he drops the narrow idea of a street, and salutes him by the name of townsman; if he travels out of the county, and meet him in any other, he forgets the minor divisions of street and town, and calls him countryman; ie, countyman; but if in their foreign excursions they should associate in France or any other part of Europe, their local remembrance would be enlarged into that of Englishmen. And by a just parity of reasoning, all Europeans meeting in America, or any other quarter of the globe, are countrymen; for England, Holland, Germany, or Sweden, when compared with the whole, stand in the same places on the larger scale, which the divisions of street, town, and county do on the smaller ones; distinctions too limited for continental minds. Not one third of the inhabitants, even of this province, are of English descent. Wherefore, I reprobate the phrase of parent or mother country applied to England only, as being false, selfish, narrow and ungenerous.

But admitting that we were all of English descent, what does it amount to? Nichts. Britain, being now an open enemy, extinguishes every other name and title: And to say that reconciliation is our duty, is truly farcical. The first king of England, of the present line (William the Conqueror) was a Frenchman, and half the peers of England are descendants from the same country; wherefore by the same method of reasoning, England ought to be governed by France.

Much hath been said of the united strength of Britain and the colonies, that in conjunction they might bid defiance to the world. But this is mere presumption; the fate of war is uncertain, neither do the expressions mean anything; for this continent would never suffer itself to be drained of inhabitants to support the British arms in either Asia, Africa, or Europe.

Besides, what have we to do with setting the world at defiance? Our plan is commerce, and that, well attended to,will secure us the peace and friendship of all Europe; because it is the interest of all Europe to have America a free port. Her trade will always be a protection, and her barrenness of gold and silver secure her from invaders.

I challenge the warmest advocate for reconciliation, to show, a single advantage that this continent can reap, by being connected with Great Britain. I repeat the challenge, not a single advantage is derived. Our corn will fetch its price in any market in Europe, and our imported goods must be paid for buy them where we will.

But the injuries and disadvantages we sustain by that connection, are without number; and our duty to mankind I at large, as well as to ourselves, instruct us to renounce the alliance: Because, any submission to, or dependance on Great Britain, tends directly to involve this continent in European wars and quarrels; and sets us at variance with nations, who would otherwise seek our friendship, and against whom, we have neither anger nor complaint. As Europe is our market for trade, we ought to form no partial connection with any part of it. It is the true interest of America to steer clear of European contentions, which she never can do, while by her dependance on Britain, she is made the make-weight in the scale of British politics.

Europe is too thickly planted with kingdoms to be long at peace, and whenever a war breaks out between England and any foreign power, the trade of America goes to ruin, because of her connection with Britain. The next war may not turn out like the Past, and should it not, the advocates for reconciliation now will be wishing for separation then, because, neutrality in that case, would be a safer convoy than a man of war. Every thing that is right or natural pleads for separation. The blood of the slain, the weeping voice of nature cries, 'tis time to part. Even the distance at which the Almighty hath placed England and America, is a strong and natural proof, that the authority of the one, over the other, was never the design of Heaven. The time likewise at which the continent was discovered, adds weight to the argument, and the manner in which it was peopled increases the force of it. The reformation was preceded by the discovery of America, as if the Almighty graciously meant to open a sanctuary to the persecuted in future years, when home should afford neither friendship nor safety.

The authority of Great Britain over this continent, is a form of government, which sooner or later must have an end: And a serious mind can draw no true pleasure by looking forward, under the painful and positive conviction, that what he calls “the present constitution” is merely temporary. As parents, we can have no joy, knowing that this government is not sufficiently lasting to ensure any thing which we may bequeath to posterity: And by a plain method of argument, as we are running the next generation into debt, we ought to do the work of it, otherwise we use them meanly and pitifully. In order to discover the line of our duty rightly, we should take our children in our hand, and fix our station a few years farther into life; that eminence will present a prospect, which a few present fears and prejudices conceal from our sight.

Though I would carefully avoid giving unnecessary offence, yet I am inclined to believe, that all those who espouse the doctrine of reconciliation, may be included within the following descriptions:

Interested men, who are not to be trusted; weak men who cannot see; prejudiced men who will not see; and a certain set of moderate men, who think better of the European world than it deserves; and this last class by an ill-judged deliberation, will be the cause of more calamities to this continent than all the other three.

It is the good fortune of many to live distant from the scene of sorrow; the evil is not sufficiently brought to their doors to make them feel the precariousness with which all American property is possessed. But let our imaginations transport us for a few moments to Boston, that seat of wretchedness will teach us wisdom, and instruct us for ever to renounce a power in whom we can have no trust. The inhabitants of that unfortunate city, who but a few months ago were in ease and affluence, have now no other alternative than to stay and starve, or turn out to beg. Endangered by the fire of their friends if they continue within the city, and plundered by the soldiery if they leave it. In their present condition they are prisoners without the hope of redemption, and in a general attack for their relief, they would be exposed to the fury of both armies.

Men of passive tempers look somewhat lightly over the offenses of Britain, and, still hoping for the best, are apt to call out, Come we shall be friends again for all this. But examine the passions and feelings of mankind. Bring the doctrine of reconciliation to the touchstone of nature, and then tell me, whether you can hereafter love, honor, and faithfully serve the power that hath carried fire and sword into your land? If you cannot do all these, then are you only deceiving yourselves, and by your delay bringing ruin upon posterity. Your future connection with Britain, whom you can neither love nor honor, will be forced and unnatural, and being formed only on the plan of present convenience, will in a little time fall into a relapse more wretched than the first. But if you say, you can still pass the violations over, then I ask, Hath your house been burnt? Hath you property been destroyed before your face? Are your wife and children destitute of a bed to lie on, or bread to live on? Have you lost a parent or a child by their hands, and yourself the ruined and wretched survivor? If you have not, then are you not a judge of those who have. But if you have, and can still shake hands with the murderers, then are you unworthy the name of husband, father, friend, or lover, and whatever may be your rank or title in life, you have the heart of a coward, and the spirit of a sycophant.

This is not inflaming or exaggerating matters, but trying them by those feelings and affections which nature justifies, and without which, we should be incapable of discharging the social duties of life, or enjoying the felicities of it. I mean not to exhibit horror for the purpose of provoking revenge, but to awaken us from fatal and unmanly slumbers, that we may pursue determinately some fixed object. It is not in the power of Britain or of Europe to conquer America, if she do not conquer herself by delay and timidity. The present winter is worth an age if rightly employed, but if lost or neglected, the whole continent will partake of the misfortune; and there is no punishment which that man will not deserve, be he who, or what, or where he will, that may be the means of sacrificing a season so precious and useful.

It is repugnant to reason, to the universal order of things, to all examples from the former ages, to suppose, that this continent can longer remain subject to any external power. The most sanguine in Britain does not think so. The utmost stretch of human wisdom cannot, at this time compass a plan short of separation, which can promise the continent even a year's security. Reconciliation is was a fallacious dream. Nature hath deserted the connection, and Art cannot supply her place. For, as Milton wisely expresses, “never can true reconcilement grow where wounds of deadly hate have pierced so deep.”

Every quiet method for peace hath been ineffectual. Our prayers have been rejected with disdain; and only tended to convince us, that nothing flatters vanity, or confirms obstinacy in kings more than repeated petitioning- and nothing hath contributed more than that very measure to make the kings of Europe absolute: Witness Denmark and Sweden. Wherefore since nothing but blows will do, for God's sake, let us come to a final separation, and not leave the next generation to be cutting throats, under the violated unmeaning names of parent and child.

To say, they will never attempt it again is idle and visionary, we thought so at the repeal of the stamp act, yet a year or two undeceived us; as well me we may suppose that nations, which have been once defeated, will never renew the quarrel.

As to government matters, it is not in the powers of Britain to do this continent justice: The business of it will soon be too weighty, and intricate, to be managed with any tolerable degree of convenience, by a power, so distant from us, and so very ignorant of us; for if they cannot conquer us, they cannot govern us. To be always running three or four thousand miles with a tale or a petition, waiting four or five months for an answer, which when obtained requires five or six more to explain it in, will in a few years be looked upon as folly and childishness- there was a time when it was proper, and there is a proper time for it to cease.

Small islands not capable of protecting themselves, are the proper objects for kingdoms to take under their care; but there is something very absurd, in supposing a continent to be perpetually governed by an island. In no instance hath nature made the satellite larger than its primary planet, and as England and America, with respect to each Other, reverses the common order of nature, it is evident they belong to different systems: England to Europe- America to itself.

I am not induced by motives of pride, party, or resentment to espouse the doctrine of separation and independence; I am clearly, positively, and conscientiously persuaded that it is the true interest of this continent to be so; that every thing short of that is mere patchwork, that it can afford no lasting felicity,- that it is leaving the sword to our children, and shrinking back at a time, when, a little more, a little farther, would have rendered this continent the glory of the earth.

As Britain hath not manifested the least inclination towards a compromise, we may be assured that no terms can be obtained worthy the acceptance of the continent, or any ways equal to the expense of blood and treasure we have been already put to.

The object contended for, ought always to bear some just proportion to the expense. The removal of the North, or the whole detestable junto, is a matter unworthy the millions we have expended. A temporary stoppage of trade, was an inconvenience, which would have sufficiently balanced the repeal of all the acts complained of, had such repeals been obtained; but if the whole continent must take up arms, if every man must be a soldier, it is scarcely worth our while to fight against a contemptible ministry only. Dearly, dearly, do we pay for the repeal of the acts, if that is all we fight for; for in a just estimation, it is as great a folly to pay a Bunker Hill price for law, as for land. As I have always considered the independency of this continent, as an event, which sooner or later must arrive, so from the late rapid progress of the continent to maturity, the event could not be far off. Wherefore, on the breaking out of hostilities, it was not worth the while to have disputed a matter, which time would have finally redressed, unless we meant to be in earnest; otherwise, it is like wasting an estate of a suit at law, to regulate the trespasses of a tenant, whose lease is just expiring. No man was a warmer wisher for reconciliation than myself, before the fatal nineteenth of April, 1775 (Massacre at Lexington), but the moment the event of that day was made known, I rejected the hardened, sullen tempered Pharaoh of England for ever; and disdain the wretch, that with the pretended title of Father of his people, can unfeelingly hear of their slaughter, and composedly sleep with their blood upon his soul.

But admitting that matters were now made up, what would be the event? I answer, the ruin of the continent. And that for several reasons:

Zuerst. The powers of governing still remaining in the hands of the king, he will have a negative over the whole legislation of this continent. And as he hath shown himself such an inveterate enemy to liberty, and discovered such a thirst for arbitrary power, is he, or is he not, a proper man to say to these colonies, “You shall make no laws but what I please?” And is there any inhabitants in America so ignorant, as not to know, that according to what is called the present constitution, that this continent can make no laws but what the king gives leave to? and is there any man so unwise, as not to see, that (considering what has happened) he will suffer no Law to be made here, but such as suit his purpose? We may be as effectually enslaved by the want of laws in America, as by submitting to laws made for us in England. After matters are make up (as it is called) can there be any doubt but the whole power of the crown will be exerted, to keep this continent as low and humble as possible? Instead of going forward we shall go backward, or be perpetually quarrelling or ridiculously petitioning. We are already greater than the king wishes us to be, and will he not hereafter endeavor to make us less? To bring the matter to one point. Is the power who is jealous of our prosperity, a proper power to govern us? Whoever says No to this question is an independent, for independency means no more, than, whether we shall make our own laws, or whether the king, the greatest enemy this continent hath, or can have, shall tell us, “there shall be now laws but such as I like.”

But the king you will say has a negative in England; the people there can make no laws without his consent. in point of right and good order, there is something very ridiculous, that a youth of twenty-one (which hath often happened) shall say to several millions of people, older and wiser than himself, I forbid this or that act of yours to be law. But in this place I decline this sort of reply, though I will never cease to expose the absurdity of it, and only answer, that England being the king's residence, and America not so, make quite another case. The king's negative here is ten times more dangerous and fatal than it can be in England, for there he will scarcely refuse his consent to a bill for putting England into as strong a state of defence as possible, and in America he would never suffer such a bill to be passed.

America is only a secondary object in the system of British politics- England consults the good of this country, no farther than it answers her own purpose. Wherefore, her own interest leads her to suppress the growth of ours in every case which doth not promote her advantage, or in the least interfere with it. A pretty state we should soon be in under such a second-hand government, considering what has happened! Men do not change from enemies to friends by the alteration of a name; and in order to show that reconciliation now is a dangerous doctrine, I affirm, that it would be policy in the kingdom at this time, to repeal the acts for the sake of reinstating himself in the government of the provinces; in order, that he may accomplish by craft and subtlety, in the long run, wha he cannot do by force ans violence in the short one. Reconciliation and ruin are nearly related.

Secondly. That as even the best terms, which we can expect to obtain, can amount to no more than a temporary expedient, or a kind of government by guardianship, which can last no longer than till the colonies come of age, so the general face and state of things, in the interim, will be unsettled and unpromising. Emigrants of property will not choose to come to a country whose form of government hangs but by a thread, and who is every day tottering on the brink of commotion and disturbance; and numbers of the present inhabitant would lay hold of the interval, to dispose of their effects, and quit the continent.

But the most powerful of all arguments, is, that nothing but independence, ie, a continental form of government, can keep the peace of the continent and preserve it inviolate from civil wars. I dread the event of a reconciliation with Britain now, as it is more than probable, that it will be followed by a revolt somewhere or other, the consequences of which may be far more fatal than all the malice of Britain.

Thousands are already ruined by British barbarity; (thousands more will probably suffer the same fate.) Those men have other feelings than us who have nothing suffered. All they now possess is liberty, what they before enjoyed is sacrificed to its service, and having nothing more to lose, they disdain submission. Besides, the general temper of the colonies, towards a British government, will be like that of a youth, who is nearly out of his time, they will care very little about her. And a government which cannot preserve the peace, is no government at all, and in that case we pay our money for nothing; and pray what is it that Britain can do, whose power will be wholly on paper, should a civil tumult break out the very day after reconciliation? I have heard some men say, many of whom I believe spoke without thinking, that they dreaded independence, fearing that it would produce civil wars. It is but seldom that our first thoughts are truly correct, and that is the case here; for there are ten times more to dread from a patched up connection than from independence. I make the sufferers case my own, and I protest, that were I driven from house and home, my property destroyed, and my circumstances ruined, that as man, sensible of injuries, I could never relish the doctrine of reconciliation, or consider myself bound thereby.

The colonies have manifested such a spirit of good order and obedience to continental government, as is sufficient to make every reasonable person easy and happy on that head. No man can assign the least pretence for his fears, on any other grounds, that such as are truly childish and ridiculous, viz., that one colony will be striving for superiority over another.

Where there are no distinctions there can be no superiority, perfect equality affords no temptation. The republics of Europe are all (and we may say always) in peace. Holland and Switzerland are without wars, foreign or domestic; monarchical governments, it is true, are never long at rest: the crown itself is a temptation to enterprising ruffians at home; and that degree of pride and insolence ever attendant on regal authority swells into a rupture with foreign powers, in instances where a republican government, by being formed on more natural principles, would negotiate the mistake.

If there is any true cause of fear respecting independence it is because no plan is yet laid down. Men do not see their way out; wherefore, as an opening into that business I offer the following hints; at the same time modestly affirming, that I have no other opinion of them myself, than that they may be the means of giving rise to something better. Could the straggling thoughts of individuals be collected, they would frequently form materials for wise and able men to improve to useful matter.

Let the assemblies be annual, with a President only. The representation more equal. Their business wholly domestic, and subject to the authority of a continental congress.

Let each colony be divided into six, eight, or ten, convenient districts, each district to send a proper number of delegates to congress, so that each colony send at least thirty. The whole number in congress will be at least three hundred ninety. Each congress to sit….. and to choose a president by the following method. When the delegates are met, let a colony be taken from the whole thirteen colonies by lot, after which let the whole congress choose (by ballot) a president from out of the delegates of that province. I the next Congress, let a colony be taken by lot from twelve only, omitting that colony from which the president was taken in the former congress, and so proceeding on till the whole thirteen shall have had their proper rotation. And in order that nothing may pass into a law but what is satisfactorily just, not less than three fifths of the congress to be called a majority. He that will promote discord, under a government so equally formed as this, would join Lucifer in his revolt.

But as there is a peculiar delicacy, from whom, or in what manner, this business must first arise, and as it seems most agreeable and consistent, that it should come from some intermediate body between the governed and the governors, that is between the Congress and the people, let a Continental Conference be held, in the following manner, and for the following purpose:

A committee of twenty-six members of Congress, viz., two for each colony. Two members for each house of assembly, or provincial convention; and five representatives of the people at large, to be chosen in the capital city or town of each province, for, and in behalf of the whole province, by as many qualified voters as shall think proper to attend from all parts of the province for that purpose; or, if more convenient, the representatives may be chosen in two or three of the most populous parts thereof. In this conference, thus assembled, will be united, the two grand principles of business, knowledge and power. The members of Congress, Assemblies, or Conventions, by having had experience in national concerns, will be able and useful counsellors, and the whole, being empowered by the people will have a truly legal authority.

The conferring members being met, let their business be to frame a Continental Charter, or Charter of the United Colonies; (answering to what is called the Magna Charta of England) fixing the number and manner of choosing members of Congress, members of Assembly, with their date of sitting, and drawing the line of business and jurisdiction between them: always remembering, that our strength is continental, not provincial: Securing freedom and property to all men, and above all things the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; with such other matter as is necessary for a charter to contain. Immediately after which, the said conference to dissolve, and the bodies which shall be chosen conformable to the said charter, to be the legislators and governors of this continent for the time being: Whose peace and happiness, may God preserve, Amen.

Should any body of men be hereafter delegated for this or some similar purpose, I offer them the following extracts from that wise observer on governments Dragonetti. “The science” says he, “of the politician consists in fixing the true point of happiness and freedom. Those men would deserve the gratitude of ages, who should discover a mode of government that contained the greatest sum of individual happiness, with the least national expense.”- Dragonetti on Virtue and Rewards.

But where says some is the king of America? I'll tell you Friend, he reigns above, and doth not make havoc of mankind like the Royal of Britain. Yet that we may not appear to be defective even in earthly honors, let a day be solemnly set apart for proclaiming the charter; let it be brought forth placed on the divine law, the word of God; let a crown be placed thereon, by which the world may know, that so far as we approve of monarchy, that in America the law is king. For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other. But lest any ill use should afterwards arise, let the crown at the conclusion of the ceremony be demolished, and scattered among the people whose right it is.

A government of our own is our natural right: And when a man seriously reflects on the precariousness of human affairs, he will become convinced, that it is in finitely wiser and safer, to form a constitution of our own in a cool deliberate manner, while we have it in our power, than to trust such an interesting event to time and chance. If we omit it now, some Massenello* may hereafter arise, who laying hold of popular disquietudes, may collect together the desperate and the discontented, and by assuming to themselves the powers of government, may sweep away the liberties of the continent like a deluge. Should the government of America return again into the hands of Britain, the tottering situation of things, will be a temptation for some desperate adventurer to try his fortune; and in such a case, what relief can Britain give? Ere she could hear the news the fatal business might be done, and ourselves suffering like the wretched Britons under the oppression of the Conqueror. Ye that oppose independence now, ye know not what ye do; ye are opening a door to eternal tyranny, by keeping vacant the seat of government.

(*Thomas Anello, otherwise Massenello, a fisherman of Naples, who after spiriting up his countrymen in the public market place, against the oppression of the Spaniards, to whom the place was then subject, prompted them to revolt, and in the space of a day became king.)

There are thousands and tens of thousands; who would think it glorious to expel from the continent, that barbarous and hellish power, which hath stirred up the Indians and Negroes to destroy us; the cruelty hath a double guilt, it is dealing brutally by us, and treacherously by them. To talk of friendship with those in whom our reason forbids us to have faith, and our affections, (wounded through a thousand pores) instruct us to detest, is madness and folly. Every day wears out the little remains of kindred between us and them, and can there be any reason to hope, that as the relationship expires, the affection will increase, or that we shall agree better, when we have ten times more and greater concerns to quarrel over than ever?

Ye that tell us of harmony and reconciliation, can ye restore to us the time that is past? Can ye give to prostitution its former innocence? Neither can ye reconcile Britain and America. The last cord now is broken, the people of England are presenting addresses against us. There are injuries which nature cannot forgive; she would cease to be nature if she did. As well can the lover forgive the ravisher of his mistress, as the continent forgive the murders of Britain. The Almighty hath implanted in us these inextinguishable feelings for good and wise purposes. They are the guardians of his image in our hearts. They distinguish us from the herd of common animals. The social compact would dissolve, and justice be extirpated the earth, of have only a casual existence were we callous to the touches of affection. The robber and the murderer, would often escape unpunished, did not the injuries which our tempers sustain, provoke us into justice.

O ye that love mankind! Ye that dare oppose, not only the tyranny, but the tyrant, stand forth! Every spot of the old world is overrun with oppression. Freedom hath been hunted round the globe. Asia, and Africa, have long expelled her. Europe regards her like a stranger, and England hath given her warning to depart. O! receive the fugitive, and prepare in time an asylum for mankind.

OF THE PRESENT ABILITY OF AMERICA, WITH SOME MISCELLANEOUS REFLECTIONS

I HAVE never met with a man, either in England or America, who hath not confessed his opinion, that a separation between the countries, would take place one time or other. And there is no instance in which we have shown less judgment, than in endeavoring to describe, what we call, the ripeness or fitness of the Continent for independence.

As all men allow the measure, and vary only in their opinion of the time, let us, in order to remove mistakes, take a general survey of things and endeavor if possible, to find out the very time. But we need not go far, the inquiry ceases at once, for the time hath found us. The general concurrence, the glorious union of all things prove the fact.

It is not in numbers but in unity, that our great strength lies; yet our present numbers are sufficient to repel the force of all the world. The Continent hath, at this time, the largest body of armed and disciplined men of any power under Heaven; and is just arrived at that pitch of strength, in which no single colony is able to support itself, and the whole, who united can accomplish the matter, and either more, or, less than this, might be fatal in its effects. Our land force is already sufficient, and as to naval affairs, we cannot be insensible, that Britain would never suffer an American man of war to be built while the continent remained in her hands. Wherefore we should be no forwarder an hundred years hence in that branch, than we are now; but the truth is, we should be less so, because the timber of the country is every day diminishing, and that which will remain at last, will be far off and difficult to procure.

Were the continent crowded with inhabitants, her sufferings under the present circumstances would be intolerable. The more sea port towns we had, the more should we have both to defend and to loose. Our present numbers are so happily proportioned to our wants, that no man need be idle. The diminution of trade affords an army, and the necessities of an army create a new trade. Debts we have none; and whatever we may contract on this account will serve as a glorious memento of our virtue. Can we but leave posterity with a settled form of government, an independent constitution of its own, the purchase at any price will be cheap. But to expend millions for the sake of getting a few we acts repealed, and routing the present ministry only, is unworthy the charge, and is using posterity with the utmost cruelty; because it is leaving them the great work to do, and a debt upon their backs, from which they derive no advantage. Such a thought is unworthy a man of honor, and is the true characteristic of a narrow heart and a peddling politician.

The debt we may contract doth not deserve our regard if the work be but accomplished. No nation ought to be without a debt. A national debt is a national bond; and when it bears no interest, is in no case a grievance. Britain is oppressed with a debt of upwards of one hundred and forty millions sterling, for which she pays upwards of four millions interest. And as a compensation for her debt, she has a large navy; America is without a debt, and without a navy; yet for the twentieth part of the English national debt, could have a navy as large again. The navy of England is not worth, at this time, more than three millions and a half sterling.

The first and second editions of this pamphlet were published without the following calculations, which are now given as a proof that the above estimation of the navy is a just one. (See Entick's naval history, intro. page 56.)

The charge of building a ship of each rate, and furnishing her with masts, yards, sails and rigging, together with a proportion of eight months boatswain's and carpenter's sea-stores, as calculated by Mr. Burchett, Secretary to the navy, is as follows:
For a ship of 100 guns £35,553
90 £29,886
80 £23,638
70 £17,785
60 £14,197
50 £10,606
40 £7,558
30 £5,846
20 £3,710

And from hence it is easy to sum up the value, or cost rather, of the whole British navy, which in the year 1757, when it was as its greatest glory consisted of the following ships and guns:
Ships Guns Cost of one Cost of all
6 100 £35,533 £213,318
12 90 £29,886 £358,632
12 80 £23,638 £283,656
43 70 £17,785 £746,755
35 60 £14,197 £496,895
40 50 £10,606 £424,240
45 40 £7,758 £344,110
58 20 £3,710 £215,180
85 Sloops, bombs,
and fireships, one another £2,000 £170,000

Kosten £ 3.266.786
Remains for guns £229,214
Total £3,500,000

No country on the globe is so happily situated, so internally capable of raising a fleet as America. Tar, timber, iron, and cordage are her natural produce. We need go abroad for nothing. Whereas the Dutch, who make large profits by hiring out their ships of war to the Spaniards and Portuguese, are obliged to import most of the materials they use. We ought to view the building a fleet as an article of commerce, it being the natural manufactory of this country. It is the best money we can lay out. A navy when finished is worth more than it cost. And is that nice point in national policy, in which commerce and protection are united. Let us build; if we want them not, we can sell; and by that means replace our paper currency with ready gold and silver.

In point of manning a fleet, people in general run into great errors; it is not necessary that one-fourth part should be sailors. The privateer Terrible, Captain Death, stood the hottest engagement of any ship last war, yet had not twenty sailors on board, though her complement of men was upwards of two hundred. A few able and social sailors will soon instruct a sufficient number of active landsmen in the common work of a ship. Wherefore, we never can be more capable to begin on maritime matters than now, while our timber is standing, our fisheries blocked up, and our sailors and shipwrights out of employ. Men of war of seventy and eighty guns were built forty years ago in New England, and why not the same now? Ship building is America's greatest pride, and in which, she will in time excel the whole world. The great empires of the east are mostly inland, and consequently excluded from the possibility of rivalling her. Africa is in a state of barbarism; and no power in Europe, hath either such an extent or coast, or such an internal supply of materials. Where nature hath given the one, she has withheld the other; to America only hath she been liberal of both. The vast empire of Russia is almost shut out from the sea; wherefore, her boundless forests, her tar, iron, and cordage are only articles of commerce.

In point of safety, ought we to be without a fleet? We are not the little people now, which we were sixty years ago; at that time we might have trusted our property in the streets, or fields rather; and slept securely without locks or bolts to our doors or windows. The case now is altered, and our methods of defence ought to improve with our increase of property. A common pirate, twelve months ago, might have come up the Delaware, and laid the city of Philadelphia under instant contribution, for what sum he pleased; and the same might have happened to other places. Nay, any daring fellow, in a brig of fourteen or sixteen guns, might have robbed the whole Continent, and carried off half a million of money. These are circumstances which demand our attention, and point out the necessity of naval protection.

Some, perhaps, will say, that after we have made it up with Britain, she will protect us. Can we be so unwise as to mean, that she shall keep a navy in our harbors for that purpose? Common sense will tell us, that the power which hath endeavored to subdue us, is of all others the most improper to defend us. Conquest may be effected under the pretence of friendship; and ourselves, after a long and brave resistance, be at last cheated into slavery. And if her ships are not to be admitted into our harbors, I would ask, how is she to protect us? A navy three or four thousand miles off can be of little use, and on sudden emergencies, none at all. Wherefore, if we must hereafter protect ourselves, why not do it for ourselves? Why do it for another.

The English list of ships of war is long and formidable, but not a tenth part of them are at any one time fit for service, numbers of them not in being; yet their names are pompously continued in the list, if only a plank be left of the ship: and not a fifth part, of such as are fit for service, can be spared on any one station at one time. The East, and West Indies, Mediterranean, Africa, and other parts over which Britain extends her claim, make large demands upon her navy. From a mixture of prejudice and inattention, we have contracted a false notion respecting the navy of England, and have talked as if we should have the whole of it to encounter at once, and for that reason, supposed that we must have one as large; which not being instantly practicable, have been made use of by a set of disguised tories to discourage our beginning thereon. Nothing can be farther from truth than this; for if America had only a twentieth part of the naval force of Britain, she would be by far an over match for her; because, as we neither have, nor claim any foreign dominion, our whole force would be employed on our own coast, where we should, in the long run, have two to one the advantage of those who had three or four thousand miles to sail over, before they could attack us, and the same distance to return in order to refit and recruit. And although Britain by her fleet, hath a check over our trade to Europe, we have as large a one over her trade to the West Indies, which, by laying in the neighborhood of the Continent, is entirely at its mercy.

Some method might be fallen on to keep up a naval force in time of peace, if we should not judge it necessary to support a constant navy. If premiums were to be given to merchants, to build and employ in their service, ships mounted with twenty, thirty, forty, or fifty guns, (the premiums to be in proportion to the loss of bulk to the merchants) fifty or sixty of those ships, with a few guard ships on constant duty, would keep up a sufficient navy, and that without burdening ourselves with the evil so loudly complained of in England, of suffering their fleet, in time of peace to lie rotting in the docks. To unite the sinews of commerce and defence is sound policy; for when our strength and our riches, play into each other's hand, we need fear no external enemy.

In almost every article of defence we abound. Hemp flourishes even to rankness, so that we need not want cordage. Our iron is superior to that of other countries. Our small arms equal to any in the world. Cannon we can cast at pleasure. Saltpetre and gunpowder we are every day producing. Our knowledge is hourly improving. Resolution is our inherent character, and courage hath never yet forsaken us. Wherefore, what is it that we want? Why is it that we hesitate? From Britain we can expect nothing but ruin. If she is once admitted to the government of America again, this Continent will not be worth living in. Jealousies will be always arising; insurrections will be constantly happening; and who will go forth to quell them? Who will venture his life to reduce his own countrymen to a foreign obedience? The difference between Pennsylvania and Connecticut, respecting some unlocated lands, shows the insignificance of a British government, and fully proves, that nothing but Continental authority can regulate Continental matters.

Another reason why the present time is preferable to all others, is, that the fewer our numbers are, the more land there is yet unoccupied, which instead of being lavished by the king on his worthless dependents, may be hereafter applied, not only to the discharge of the present debt, but to the constant support of government. No nation under heaven hath such an advantage as this.

Earlier in this work, I threw out a few thoughts on the propriety of a Continental Charter, (for I only presume to offer hints, not plans) and in this place, I take the liberty of rementioning the subject, by observing, that a charter is to be understood as a bond of solemn obligation, which the whole enters into, to support the right of every separate part, whether of religion, personal freedom, or property, A firm bargain and a right reckoning make long friends.

In a former page I likewise mentioned the necessity of a large and equal representation; and there is no political matter which more deserves our attention. A small number of electors, or a small number of representatives, are equally dangerous. But if the number of the representatives be not only small, but unequal, the danger is increased. As an instance of this, I mention the following; when the Associators petition was before the House of Assembly of Pennsylvania; twenty-eight members only were present, all the Bucks County members, being eight, voted against it, and had seven of the Chester members done the same, this whole province had been governed by two counties only, and this danger it is always exposed to. The unwarrantable stretch likewise, which that house made in their last sitting, to gain an undue authority over the delegates of that province, ought to warn the people at large, how they trust power out of their own hands. A set of instructions for the Delegates were put together, which in point of sense and business would have dishonored a school-boy, and after being approved by a few, a very few without doors, were carried into the house, and there passed in behalf of the whole colony; whereas, did the whole colony know, with what ill-will that House hath entered on some necessary public measures, they would not hesitate a moment to think them unworthy of such a trust.

Immediate necessity makes many things convenient, which if continued would grow into oppressions. Expedience and right are different things. When the calamities of America required a consultation, there was no method so ready, or at that time so proper, as to appoint persons from the several Houses of Assembly for that purpose and the wisdom with which they have proceeded hath preserved this continent from ruin. But as it is more than probable that we shall never be without a Congress, every well-wisher to good order, must own, that the mode for choosing members of that body, deserves consideration. And I put it as a question to those, who make a study of mankind, whether representation and election is not too great a power for one and the same body of men to possess? When we are planning for posterity, we ought to remember that virtue is not hereditary.

It is from our enemies that we often gain excellent maxims, and are frequently surprised into reason by their mistakes. Mr. Cornwall (one of the Lords of the Treasury) treated the petition of the New York Assembly with contempt, because that House, he said, consisted but of twenty-six members, which trifling number, he argued, could not with decency be put for the whole. We thank him for his involuntary honesty.*

*Those who would fully understand of what great consequence a large and equal representation is to a state, should read Burgh's political Disquisitions.

To conclude: However strange it may appear to some, or however unwilling they may be to think so, matters not, but many strong and striking reasons may be given, to show, that nothing can settle our affairs so expeditiously as an open and determined declaration for independence. Some of which are:

Zuerst. It is the custom of nations, when any two are at war, for some other powers, not engaged in the quarrel, to step in as mediators, and bring about the preliminaries of a peace: but while America calls herself the subject of Great Britain, no power, however well disposed she may be, can offer her mediation. Wherefore, in our present state we may quarrel on for ever.

Zweitens. It is unreasonable to suppose, that France or Spain will give us any kind of assistance, if we mean only to make use of that assistance for the purpose of repairing the breach, and strengthening the connection between Britain and America; because, those powers would be sufferers by the consequences.

Thirdly. While we profess ourselves the subjects of Britain, we must, in the eye of foreign nations, be considered as rebels. The precedent is somewhat dangerous to their peace, for men to be in arms under the name of subjects; we on the spot, can solve the paradox: but to unite resistance and subjection, requires an idea much too refined for common understanding.

Fourthly. Were a manifesto to be published, and despatched to foreign courts, setting forth the miseries we have endured, and the peaceable methods we have ineffectually used for redress; declaring, at the same time, that not being able, any longer to live happily or safely under the cruel disposition of the British court, we had been driven to the necessity of breaking off all connection with her; at the same time assuring all such courts of our peaceable disposition towards them, and of our desire of entering into trade with them. Such a memorial would produce more good effects to this Continent, than if a ship were freighted with petitions to Britain.

Under our present denomination of British subjects we can neither be received nor heard abroad: The custom of all courts is against us, and will be so, until, by an independence, we take rank with other nations.

These proceedings may at first appear strange and difficult; but, like all other steps which we have already passed over, will in a little time become familiar and agreeable; and, until an independence is declared, the continent will feel itself like a man who continues putting off some unpleasant business from day to day, yet knows it must be done, hates to set about it, wishes it over, and is continually haunted with the thoughts of its necessity.

APPENDIX

SINCE the publication of the first edition of this pamphlet, or rather, on the same day on which it came out, the king's speech made its appearance in this city. Had the spirit of prophecy directed the birth of this production, it could not have brought it forth, at a more seasonable juncture, or a more necessary time. The bloody-mindedness of the one, show the necessity of pursuing the doctrine of the other. Men read by way of revenge. And the speech instead of terrifying, prepared a way for the manly principles of independence.

Ceremony, and even, silence, from whatever motive they may arise, have a hurtful tendency, when they give the least degree of countenance to base and wicked performances; wherefore, if this maxim be admitted, it naturally follows, that the king's speech, as being a piece of finished villainy, deserved, and still deserves, a general execration both by the congress and the people. Yet as the domestic tranquility of a nation, depends greatly on the chastity of what may properly be called national manners, it is often better, to pass some things over in silent disdain, than to make use of such new methods of dislike, as might introduce the least innovation, on that guardian of our peace and safety. And perhaps, it is chiefly owing to this prudent delicacy, that the king's speech, hath not before now, suffered a public execution. The speech if it may be called one, is nothing better than a wilful audacious libel against the truth, the common good, and the existence of mankind; and is a formal and pompous method of offering up human sacrifices to the pride of tyrants. But this general massacre of mankind, is one of the privileges, and the certain consequences of kings; for as nature knows them not, they know not her, and although they are beings of our own creating, they know not us, and are become the gods of their creators. The speech hath one good quality, which is, that it is not calculated to deceive, neither can we, even if we would, be deceived by it. Brutality and tyranny appear on the face of it. It leaves us at no loss: And every line convinces, even in the moment of reading, that He, who hunts the woods for prey, the naked and untutored Indian, is less a savage than the king of Britain.

Sir John Dalrymple, the putative father of a whining jesuitical piece, fallaciously called, The address of the people of ENGLAND to the inhabitants of America, hath, perhaps from a vain supposition, that the people here were to be frightened at the pomp and description of a king, given, (though very unwisely on his part) the real character of the present one: “But,” says this writer, “if you are inclined to pay compliments to an administration, which we do not complain of,” (meaning the Marquis of Rockingham's at the repeal of the Stamp Act) “it is very unfair in you to withhold them from that prince, by whose NOD ALONE they were permitted to do anything.” This is toryism with a witness! Here is idolatry even without a mask: And he who can calmly hear, and digest such doctrine, hath forfeited his claim to rationality an apostate from the order of manhood; and ought to be considered- as one, who hath, not only given up the proper dignity of a man, but sunk himself beneath the rank of animals, and contemptibly crawl through the world like a worm.

However, it matters very little now, what the king of England either says or does; he hath wickedly broken through every moral and human obligation, trampled nature and conscience beneath his feet; and by a steady and constitutional spirit of insolence and cruelty, procured for himself an universal hatred. It is now the interest of America to provide for herself. She hath already a large and young family, whom it is more her duty to take care of, than to be granting away her property, to support a power who is become a reproach to the names of men and Christians. Ye, whose office it is to watch over the morals of a nation, of whatsoever sect or denomination ye are of, as well as ye, who are more immediately the guardians of the public liberty, if ye wish to preserve your native country uncontaminated by European corruption, ye must in secret wish a separation But leaving the moral part to private reflection, I shall chiefly confine my farther remarks to the following heads:

Zuerst. That it is the interest of America to be separated from Britain. Secondly. Which is the easiest and most practicable plan, reconciliation or independence? with some occasional remarks.

In support of the first, I could, if I judged it proper, produce the opinion of some of the ablest and most experienced men on this continent; and whose sentiments, on that head, are not yet publicly known. It is in reality a self-evident position: For no nation in a state of foreign dependance, limited in its commerce, and cramped and fettered in its legislative powers, can ever arrive at any material eminence. America doth not yet know what opulence is; and although the progress which she hath made stands unparalleled in the history of other nations, it is but childhood, compared with what she would be capable of arriving at, had she, as she ought to have, the legislative powers in her own hands. England is, at this time, proudly coveting what would do her no good, were she to accomplish it; and the Continent hesitating on a matter, which will be her final ruin if neglected. It is the commerce and not the conquest of America, by which England is to be benefited, and that would in a great measure continue, were the countries as independent of each other as France and Spain; because in many articles, neither can go to a better market. But it is the independence of this country on Britain or any other which is now the main and only object worthy of contention, and which, like all other truths discovered by necessity, will appear clearer and stronger every day.

Zuerst. Because it will come to that one time or other. Secondly. Because the longer it is delayed the harder it will be to accomplish.

I have frequently amused myself both in public and private companies, with silently remarking the spacious errors of those who speak without reflecting. And among the many which I have heard, the following seems the most general, viz., that had this rupture happened forty or fifty years hence, instead of now, the Continent would have been more able to have shaken off the dependance. To which I reply, that our military ability at this time, arises from the experience gained in the last war, and which in forty or fifty years time, would have been totally extinct. The Continent, would not, by that time, have had a General, or even a military officer left; and we, or those who may succeed us, would have been as ignorant of martial matters as the ancient Indians: And this single position, closely attended to, will unanswerably prove, that the present time is preferable to all others: The argument turns thus- at the conclusion of the last war, we had experience, but wanted numbers; and forty or fifty years hence, we should have numbers, without experience; wherefore, the proper point of time, must be some particular point between the two extremes, in which a sufficiency of the former remains, and a proper increase of the latter is obtained: And that point of time is the present time.

The reader will pardon this digression, as it does not properly come under the head I first set out with, and to which I again return by the following position, viz.:

Should affairs be patched up with Britain, and she to remain the governing and sovereign power of America, (which as matters are now circumstanced, is giving up the point entirely) we shall deprive ourselves of the very means of sinking the debt we have or may contract. The value of the back lands which some of the provinces are clandestinely deprived of, by the unjust extension of the limits of Canada, valued only at five pounds sterling per hundred acres, amount to upwards of twenty-five millions, Pennsylvania currency; and the quit-rents at one penny sterling per acre, to two millions yearly.

It is by the sale of those lands that the debt may be sunk, without burden to any, and the quit-rent reserved thereon, will always lessen, and in time, will wholly support the yearly expense of government. It matters not how long the debt is in paying, so that the lands when sold be applied to the discharge of it, and for the execution of which, the Congress for the time being, will be the continental trustees.

I proceed now to the second head, viz. Which is the earliest and most practicable plan, reconciliation or independence? with some occasional remarks.

He who takes nature for his guide is not easily beaten out of his argument, and on that ground, I answer generally- That INDEPENDENCE being a SINGLE SIMPLE LINE, contained within ourselves; and reconciliation, a matter exceedingly perplexed and complicated, and in which, a treacherous capricious court is to interfere, gives the answer without a doubt.

We fight neither for revenge nor conquest; neither from pride nor passion; we are not insulting the world with our fleets and armies, nor ravaging the globe for plunder. Beneath the shade of our own vines are we attacked; in our own houses, and on our own lands, is the violence committed against us. We view our enemies in the characters of highwaymen and housebreakers, and having no defence for ourselves in the civil law; are obliged to punish them by the military one, and apply the sword, in the very case, where you have before now, applied the halter. Perhaps we feel for the ruined and insulted sufferers in all and every part of the continent, and with a degree of tenderness which hath not yet made its way into some of your bosoms. But be ye sure that ye mistake not the cause and ground of your Testimony. Call not coldness of soul, religion; nor put the bigot in the place of the Christian.

O ye partial ministers of your own acknowledged principles! If the bearing arms be sinful, the first going to war must be more so, by all the difference between wilful attack and unavoidable defence.

Wherefore, if ye really preach from conscience, and mean not to make a political hobby-horse of your religion, convince the world thereof, by proclaiming your doctrine to our enemies, for they likewise bear ARMS. Give us proof of your sincerity by publishing it at St. James's, to the commanders in chief at Boston, to the admirals and captains who are practically ravaging our coasts, and to all the murdering miscreants who are acting in authority under HIM whom ye profess to serve. Had ye the honest soul of Barclay* ye would preach repentance to your king; Ye would tell the royal tyrant of his sins, and warn him of eternal ruin. Ye would not spend your partial invectives against the injured and the insulted only, but like faithful ministers, would cry aloud and spare none. Say not that ye are persecuted, neither endeavor to make us the authors of that reproach, which, ye are bringing upon yourselves; for we testify unto all men, that we do not complain against you because ye are Quakers, but because ye pretend to be and are NOT Quakers.

*”Thou hast tasted of prosperity and adversity; thou knowest what it is to be banished thy native country, to be overruled as well as to rule, and set upon the throne; and being oppressed thou hast reason to know now hateful the oppressor is both to God and man. If after all these warnings and advertisements, thou dost not turn unto the Lord with all thy heart, but forget him who remembered thee in thy distress, and give up thyself to follow lust and vanity, surely great will be thy condemnation. Against which snare, as well as the temptation of those who may or do feed thee, and prompt thee to evil, the most excellent and prevalent remedy will be, to apply thyself to that light of Christ which shineth in thy conscience and which neither can, nor will flatter thee, nor suffer thee to be at ease in thy sins.”- Barclay's Address to Charles II.

Leider! it seems by the particular tendency of some part of your Testimony, and other parts of your conduct, as if all sin was reduced to, and comprehended in the act of bearing arms, and that by the people only. Ye appear to us, to have mistaken party for conscience, because the general tenor of your actions wants uniformity: And it is exceedingly difficult to us to give credit to many of your pretended scruples; because we see them made by the same men, who, in the very instant that they are exclaiming against the mammon of this world, are nevertheless, hunting after it with a step as steady as Time, and an appetite as keen as Death.

The quotation which ye have made from Proverbs, in the third page of your testimony, that, “when a man's ways please the Lord, he maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him;” is very unwisely chosen on your part; because it amounts to a proof, that the king's ways (whom ye are so desirous of supporting) do not please the Lord, otherwise, his reign would be in peace.

I now proceed to the latter part of your testimony, and that, for which all the foregoing seems only an introduction, viz:

“It hath ever been our judgment and principle, since we were called to profess the light of Christ Jesus, manifested in our consciences unto this day, that the setting up and putting down kings and governments, is God's peculiar prerogative; for causes best known to himself: And that it is not our business to have any hand or contrivance therein; nor to be busy-bodies above our station, much less to plot and contrive the ruin, or overturn any of them, but to pray for the king, and safety of our nation, and good of all men: that we may live a peaceable and quiet life, in all goodliness and honesty; under the government which God is pleased to set over us.” If these are really your principles why do ye not abide by them? Why do ye not leave that, which ye call God's work, to be managed by himself? These very principles instruct you to wait with patience and humility, for the event of all public measures, and to receive that event as the divine will towards you. Wherefore, what occasion is there for your political Testimony if you fully believe what it contains? And the very publishing it proves, that either, ye do not believe what ye profess, or have not virtue enough to practice what ye believe.

The principles of Quakerism have a direct tendency to make a man the quiet and inoffensive subject of any, and every government which is set over him. And if the setting up and putting down of kings and governments is God's peculiar prerogative, he most certainly will not be robbed thereof by us; wherefore, the principle itself leads you to approve of every thing, which ever happened, or may happen to kings as being his work. Oliver Cromwell thanks you. Charles, then, died not by the hands of man; and should the present proud imitator of him, come to the same untimely end, the writers and publishers of the Testimony, are bound by the doctrine it contains, to applaud the fact. Kings are not taken away by miracles, neither are changes in governments brought about by any other means than such as are common and human; and such as we are now using. Even the dispersing of the Jews, though foretold by our Savior, was effected by arms. Wherefore, as ye refuse to be the means on one side, ye ought not to be meddlers on the other; but to wait the issue in silence; and unless you can produce divine authority, to prove, that the Almighty who hath created and placed this new world, at the greatest distance it could possibly stand, east and west, from every part of the old, doth, nevertheless, disapprove of its being independent of the corrupt and abandoned court of Britain; unless I say, ye can show this, how can ye, on the ground of your principles, justify the exciting and stirring up of the people “firmly to unite in the abhorrence of all such writings, and measures, as evidence a desire and design to break off the happy connection we have hitherto enjoyed, with the kingdom of Great Britain, and our just and necessary subordination to the king, and those who are lawfully placed in authority under him.” What a slap in the face is here! the men, who, in the very paragraph before, have quietly and passively resigned up the ordering, altering, and disposal of kings and governments, into the hands of God, are now recalling their principles, and putting in for a share of the business. Is it possible, that the conclusion, which is here justly quoted, can any ways follow from the doctrine laid down? The inconsistency is too glaring not to be seen; the absurdity too great not to be laughed at; and such as could only have been made by those, whose understandings were darkened by the narrow and crabby spirit of a despairing political party; for ye are not to be considered as the whole body of the Quakers but only as a factional and fractional part thereof.

Here ends the examination of your testimony; (which I call upon no man to abhor, as ye have done, but only to read and judge of fairly;) to which I subjoin the following remark; “That the setting up and putting down of kings,” most certainly mean, the making him a king, who is yet not so, and the making him no king who is already one. And pray what hath this to do in the present case? We neither mean to set up nor to put down, neither to make nor to unmake, but to have nothing to do with them. Wherefore your testimony in whatever light it is viewed serves only to dishonor your judgment, and for many other reasons had better have been let alone than published.

Zuerst. Because it tends to the decrease and reproach of religion whatever, and is of the utmost danger to society, to make it a party in political disputes. Secondly. Because it exhibits a body of men, numbers of whom disavow the publishing political testimonies, as being concerned therein and approvers thereof. Thirdly. Because it hath a tendency to undo that continental harmony and friendship which yourselves by your late liberal and charitable donations hath lent a hand to establish; and the preservation of which, is of the utmost consequence to us all.

And here, without anger or resentment I bid you farewell. Sincerely wishing, that as men and Christians, ye may always fully and uninterruptedly enjoy every civil and religious right; and be, in your turn, the means of securing it to others; but that the example which ye have unwisely set, of mingling religion with politics, may be disavowed and reprobated by every inhabitant of America.

-THE END-

Source: Common Sense, by Thomas Paine, printed by W. and T. Bradford, Philadelphia, 1791.

English flagKorean flagChinese (Simplified) flagPortuguese flagGerman flagFrench flagSpanish flagJapanese flagArabic flagRussian flagGreek flagHindi flagTagalog flagFarsi flag
Wie gesehen / gehört am:
Fox News LogoCBS News LogoDie Huffington Post Logo
Blog-Kommentare
  • Dragon City HACK : Great Video !! Liebte es! Ich subbed! BTW what do you use to record? Ich habe einen Mac, so würde dieses Tutorial nicht wirklich ...
  • Nickie : Can you tell me exactly HOW Pres Geo W Bush is related to Pocahontas? Mein Mann ist mit Pres Bush, hörte ich ihn sagen zu verwandten ...
  • Jerome Delaney : Würde gerne die Verfassung zu überprüfen. Mein letzter Kontakt mit ihm war vor vielen Jahren, als ich ein Grundschüler ...
American Pride, USA Autoren Persönliche Study Guide, Amerika Jugend, amerikanischen Patriotismus, patriotischen Amerika, wie man in der USA, Erfolgsgeschichten in Amerika erfolgreich sein, American Patriotic Buch, was das Beste für Amerika ?, Is Anybody Listening ?, Duplicitous, Randy E King

Hurricane Storm Shutters Fort Lauderdale Florida Garage Door Installation Key Largo FL Blinds, Shutters, Shades, Window Treatments Fort Lauderdale