《常识》(Common Sense)摘抄 美国《企业家》杂志19xx年发刊词

作者：托马斯.潘恩Thomas．Paine

我是不会选择做一个普通人的。

如果我能够做到的话，

我有权利成为一个不寻常的人。

我寻找机会，但我不寻求安稳，

我不希望在国家的照顾下成为一名有保障的国民，

那将被人瞧不起而使我感到痛苦不堪。

我要做有意义的冒险。

我要梦想， 要创造， 我要失败， 我也要成功。

我拒绝用刺激来换取施舍；

我宁愿向生活挑战， 而不愿过有保证的生活；

宁愿要达到目的时的激动，

而不愿要乌托邦式毫无生气的平静。

我不会拿我的自由与慈善作交易。

也不会拿我的尊严去与发给乞丐的食物作交易。

我决不会在任何一位大师面前发抖，

也不会为任何恐吓所屈服。

我的天性是挺胸直立， 骄傲而无所畏惧。

我勇敢地面对这个世界，

自豪地说：“在上帝的帮助下，我已经做到了”。

 

第二篇：常识 潘恩

Common Senseby Thomas PaineCOMMON SENSETable of ContentsINTRODUCTIONI. OF THE ORIGIN AND DESIGN OF GOVERNMENT IN GENERAL,WITH CONCISE REMARKS ON THE ENGLISH CONSTITUTIONII. OF MONARCHY AND HEREDITARY SUCCESSIONIII. THOUGHTS ON THE PRESENT STATE OF AMERICAN AFFAIRSIV. OF THE PRESENT ABILITY OF AMERICA, WITH SOMEMISCELLANEOUS REFLEXIONSINTRODUCTIONPERHAPS the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YETsufficiently fashionable to procure them general favor; a long habit of notthinking a thing WRONG, gives it a superficial appearance of beingRIGHT, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defence of custom. Butthe tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason.As a long and violent abuse of power, is generally the Means of calling theright of it in question (and in Matters too which might never have beenthought of, had not the Sufferers been aggravated into the inquiry) and asthe King of England hath undertaken in his OWN RIGHT, to support theParliament in what he calls THEIRS, and as the good people of this countryare grievously oppressed by the combination, they have an undoubtedprivilege to inquire into the pretensions of both, and equally to reject theusurpations of either.In the following sheets, the author hath studiously avoided every thingwhich is personal among ourselves. Compliments as well as censure toindividuals make no part thereof. The wise, and the worthy, need not thetriumph of a pamphlet; and those whose sentiments are injudicious, orunfriendly, will cease of themselves unless too much pains are bestowedupon their conversion.The cause of America is in a great measure the cause of all mankind. Manycircumstances have, and will arise, which are not local, but universal, andthrough which the principles of all Lovers of Mankind are affected, and inthe Event of which, their Affections are interested. The laying of a Countrydesolate with Fire and Sword, declaring War against the natural rights of allMankind, and extirpating the Defenders thereof from the Face of the Earth,is the Concern of every Man to whom Nature hath given the Power offeeling; of which Class, regardless of Party Censure, is THE AUTHORPOSTSCRIPT TO PREFACE IN THE THIRD EDITIONP. S. The Publication of this new Edition hath been delayed, with a View oftaking notice (had it been necessary) of any Attempt to refute the Doctrineof Independance: As no Answer hath yet appeared, it is now presumed thatnone will, the Time needful for getting such a Performance ready for thePublic being considerably past.Who the Author of this Production is, is wholly unnecessary to the Public,as the Object for Attention is the DOCTRINE ITSELF, not the MAN. Yetit may not be unnecessary to say, That he is unconnected with any Party,and under no sort of Influence public or private, but the influence of reasonand principle.Philadelphia, February 14, 1776.OF THE ORIGIN AND DESIGN O

F GOVERNMENT IN GENERAL,WITH CONCISE REMARKS ON THE ENGLISH CONSTITUTIONSOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leavelittle or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different,but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, andgovernment by wickedness; the former promotes our happinessPOSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY byrestraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other createsdistinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one; for when wesuffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, whichwe might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity isheightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.Government, like dress, is the badge of lost innocence; the palaces of kingsare built on the ruins of the bowers of paradise. For were the impulses ofconscience clear, uniform, and irresistibly obeyed, man would need noother lawgiver; but that not being the case, he finds it necessary tosurrender up a part of his property to furnish means for the protection of therest; and this he is induced to do by the same prudence which in every othercase advises him out of two evils to choose the least. WHEREFORE,security being the true design and end of government, it unanswerablyfollows that whatever FORM thereof appears most likely to ensure it to us,with the least expence and greatest benefit, is preferable to all others.In order to gain a clear and just idea of the design and end of government,let us suppose a small number of persons settled in some sequestered partof the earth, unconnected with the rest, they will then represent the firstpeopling of any country, or of the world. In this state of natural liberty,society will be their first thought. A thousand motives will excite themthereto, the strength of one man is so unequal to his wants, and his mind sounfitted for perpetual solitude, that he is soon obliged to seek assistance andrelief of another, who in his turn requires the same. Four or five unitedwould be able to raise a tolerable dwelling in the midst of a wilderness, butONE man might labour out the common period of life withoutaccomplishing any thing; when he had felled his timber he could notremove it, nor erect it after it was removed; hunger in the mean time wouldurge him from his work, and every different want call him a different way.Disease, nay even misfortune would be death, for though neither might bemortal, yet either would disable him from living, and reduce him to a statein which he might rather be said to perish than to die.This necessity, like a gravitating power, would soon form our newly arrivedemigrants into society, the reciprocal blessing of which, would supersede,and render the

obligations of law and government unnecessary while theyremained perfectly just to each other; but as nothing but heaven isimpregnable to vice, it will unavoidably happen, that in proportion as theysurmount the first difficulties of emigration, which bound them together ina common cause, they will begin to relax in their duty and attachment toeach other; and this remissness, will point out the necessity, of establishingsome form of government to supply the defect of moral virtue.Some convenient tree will afford them a State-House, under the branches ofwhich, the whole colony may assemble to deliberate on public matters. It ismore than probable that their first laws will have the title only ofREGULATIONS, and be enforced by no other penalty than publicdisesteem. In this first parliament every man, by natural right, will have a inconvenient for all of them to meet on every occasion as at first, whentheir number was small, their habitations near, and the public concerns fewand trifling. This will point out the convenience of their consenting to leavethe legislative part to be managed by a select number chosen from thewhole body, who are supposed to have the same concerns at stake whichthose have who appointed them, and who will act in the same manner as thewhole body would act were they present. If the colony continuesincreasing, it will become necessary to augment the number of therepresentatives, and that the interest of every part of the colony may beattended to, it will be found best to divide the whole into convenient parts,each part sending its proper number; and that the ELECTED might neverform to themselves an interest separate from the ELECTORS, prudencewill point out the propriety of having elections often; because as theELECTED might by that means return and mix again with the general bodyof the ELECTORS in a few months, their fidelity to the public will besecured by the prudent reflexion of not making a rod for themselves. Andas this frequent interchange will establish a common interest with every part of the community, they will mutually and naturally support each other,and on this (not on the unmeaning name of king) depends the STRENGTHOF GOVERNMENT, AND THE HAPPINESS OF THE GOVERNED.Here then is the origin and rise of government; namely, a mode renderednecessary by the inability of moral virtue to govern the world; here too isthe design and end of government, viz. freedom and security. And howeverour eyes may be dazzled with snow, or our ears deceived by sound;however prejudice may warp our wills, or interest darken ourunderstanding, the simple voice of nature and of reason will say, it is right.I draw my idea of the form of government from a principle in nature, whichno art can overturn, viz. that the more simple any thing is, the less liable itis to be disordered, and the easier repaired when disordered; and with thismaxim in view, I offer a few remarks o

n the so much boasted constitutionof England. That it was noble for the dark and slavish times in which it waserected, is granted. When the world was over run with tyranny the leastremove therefrom was a glorious rescue. But that it is imperfect, subject toconvulsions, and incapable of producing what it seems to promise, is easily demonstrated.Absolute governments (tho' the disgrace of human nature) have thisadvantage with them, that they are simple; if the people suffer, they knowthe head from which their suffering springs, know likewise the remedy, andare not bewildered by a variety of causes and cures. But the constitution ofEngland is so exceedingly complex, that the nation may suffer for yearstogether without being able to discover in which part the fault lies, somewill say in one and some in another, and every political physician willadvise a different medicine.I know it is difficult to get over local or long standing prejudices, yet if wewill suffer ourselves to examine the component parts of the Englishconstitution, we shall find them to be the base remains of two ancient tyrannies, compounded with some new republican materials.FIRST. The remains of monarchical tyranny in the person of the king.SECONDLY. The remains of aristocratical tyranny in the persons of thepeers.THIRDLY. The new republican materials, in the persons of the commons,on whose virtue depends the freedom of England.The two first, by being hereditary, are independent of the people; whereforein a CONSTITUTIONAL SENSE they contribute nothing towards thefreedom of the state.To say that the constitution of England is a UNION of three powersreciprocally CHECKING each other, is farcical, either the words have nomeaning, or they are flat contradictions.To say that the commons is a check upon the king, presupposes two things.FIRST. That the king is not to be trusted without being looked after, or inother words, that a thirst for absolute power is the natural disease of monarchy.SECONDLY. That the commons, by being appointed for that purpose, areeither wiser or more worthy of confidence than the crown.But as the same constitution which gives the commons a power to checkthe king by withholding the supplies, gives afterwards the king a power tocheck the commons, by empowering him to reject their other bills; it againsupposes that the king is wiser than those whom it has already supposed tobe wiser than him. A mere absurdity!There is something exceedingly ridiculous in the composition of monarchy;it first excludes a man from the means of information, yet empowers him toact in cases where the highest judgment is required. The state of a kingshuts him from the world, yet the business of a king requires him to know itthoroughly; wherefore the different parts, by unnaturally opposing anddestroying each other, prove the whole character to be absurd and useless.Some writers have explained the English constit

ution thus; the king, saythey, is one, the people another; the peers are an house in behalf of theking; the commons in behalf of the people; but this hath all the distinctionsof an house divided against itself; and though the expressions be pleasantlyarranged, yet when examined they appear idle and ambiguous; and it willalways happen, that the nicest construction that words are capable of, when applied to the description of some thing which either cannot exist, or is tooincomprehensible to be within the compass of description, will be words ofsound only, and though they may amuse the ear, they cannot inform themind, for this explanation includes a previous question, viz. HOW CAMETHE KING BY A POWER WHICH THE PEOPLE ARE AFRAID TOTRUST, AND ALWAYS OBLIGED TO CHECK? Such a power could notbe the gift of a wise people, neither can any power, WHICH NEEDSCHECKING, be from God; yet the provision, which the constitutionmakes, supposes such a power to exist.But the provision is unequal to the task; the means either cannot or will notaccomplish the end, and the whole affair is a felo de se; for as the greater weight will always carry up the less, and as all the wheels of a machine areput in motion by one, it only remains to know which power in theconstitution has the most weight, for that will govern; and though theothers, or a part of them, may clog, or, as the phrase is, check the rapidityof its motion, yet so long as they cannot stop it, their endeavors will beineffectual; the first moving power will at last have its way, and what itwants in speed is supplied by time.That the crown is this overbearing part in the English constitution needs notbe mentioned, and that it derives its whole consequence merely from beingthe giver of places and pensions is self-evident; wherefore, though we havebeen wise enough to shut and lock a door against absolute monarchy, we atthe same time have been foolish enough to put the crown in possession ofthe key.The prejudice of Englishmen, in favour of their own government by king,lords and commons, arises as much or more from national pride thanreason. Individuals are undoubtedly safer in England than in some othercountries, but the WILL of the king is as much the LAW of the land inBritain as in France, with this difference, that instead of proceeding directlyfrom his mouth, it is handed to the people under the more formidable shape of an act of parliament. For the fate of Charles the first, hath only madekings more subtle--not more just.Wherefore, laying aside all national pride and prejudice in favour of modesand forms, the plain truth is, that IT IS WHOLLY OWING TO THECONSTITUTION OF THE PEOPLE, AND NOT TO THECONSTITUTION OF THE GOVERNMENT that the crown is not asoppressive in England as in Turkey.An inquiry into the CONSTITUTIONAL ERRORS in the English form ofgovernment is at this time highly necessary; for as we are never in a propercondit

ion of doing justice to others, while we continue under the influenceof some leading partiality, so neither are we capable of doing it to ourselveswhile we remain fettered by any obstinate prejudice. And as a man, who isattached to a prostitute, is unfitted to choose or judge of a wife, so any prepossession in favour of a rotten constitution of government will disableus from discerning a good one.OF MONARCHY AND HEREDITARY SUCCESSIONMANKIND being originally equals in the order of creation, the equalitycould only be destroyed by some subsequent circumstance; the distinctionsof rich, and poor, may in a great measure be accounted for, and that withouthaving recourse to the harsh ill sounding names of oppression and avarice.Oppression is often the CONSEQUENCE, but seldom or never theMEANS of riches; and though avarice will preserve a man from beingnecessitously poor, it generally makes him too timorous to be wealthy.But there is another and greater distinction for which no truly natural orreligious reason can be assigned, and that is, the distinction of men intoKINGS and SUBJECTS. Male and female are the distinctions of nature,good and bad the distinctions of heaven; but how a race of men came intothe world so exalted above the rest, and distinguished like some newspecies, is worth enquiring into, and whether they are the means ofhappiness or of misery to mankind.In the early ages of the world, according to the scripture chronology, there were no kings; the consequence of which was there were no wars; it is thepride of kings which throw mankind into confusion. Holland without a kinghath enjoyed more peace for this last century than any of the monarchicalgovernments in Europe. Antiquity favors the same remark; for the quiet andrural lives of the first patriarchs hath a happy something in them, whichvanishes away when we come to the history of Jewish royalty.Government by kings was first introduced into the world by the Heathens,from whom the children of Israel copied the custom. It was the mostprosperous invention the Devil ever set on foot for the promotion ofidolatry. The Heathens paid divine honors to their deceased kings, and thechristian world hath improved on the plan by doing the same to their livingones. How impious is the title of sacred majesty applied to a worm, who inthe midst of his splendor is crumbling into dust! As the exalting one man so greatly above the rest cannot be justified on theequal rights of nature, so neither can it be defended on the authority ofscripture; for the will of the Almighty, as declared by Gideon and theprophet Samuel, expressly disapproves of government by kings. Allanti-monarchical parts of scripture have been very smoothly glossed over inmonarchical governments, but they undoubtedly merit the attention ofcountries which have their governments yet to form. "RENDER UNTOCAESAR THE THINGS WHICH ARE CAESAR'S" is the scripturedoctrine o

f courts, yet it is no support of monarchical government, for theJews at that time were without a king, and in a state of vassalage to theRomans.Near three thousand years passed away from the Mosaic account of thecreation, till the Jews under a national delusion requested a king. Till thentheir form of government (except in extraordinary cases, where theAlmighty interposed) was a kind of republic administered by a judge andthe elders of the tribes. Kings they had none, and it was held sinful toacknowledge any being under that title but the Lord of Hosts. And when aman seriously reflects on the idolatrous homage which is paid to thepersons of Kings, he need not wonder, that the Almighty ever jealous of hishonor, should disapprove of a form of government which so impiouslyinvades the prerogative of heaven.Monarchy is ranked in scripture as one of the sins of the Jews, for which acurse in reserve is denounced against them. The history of that transactionis worth attending to.The children of Israel being oppressed by the Midianites, Gideon marchedagainst them with a small army, and victory, thro' the divine interposition,decided in his favour. The Jews elate with success, and attributing it to thegeneralship of Gideon, proposed making him a king, saying, RULE THOUOVER US, THOU AND THY SON AND THY SON'S SON. Here wastemptation in its fullest extent; not a kingdom only, but an hereditary one,but Gideon in the piety of his soul replied, I WILL NOT RULE OVERYOU, NEITHER SHALL MY SON RULE OVER YOU. THE LORDSHALL RULE OVER YOU. Words need not be more explicit; Gideon Monarchy is ranked in scripture as one of the sins of the Jews, for which acurse in reserve is denounced against them. The history of that transactionis worth attending to.The children of Israel being oppressed by the Midianites, Gideon marchedagainst them with a small army, and victory, thro' the divine interposition,decided in his favour. The Jews elate with success, and attributing it to thegeneralship of Gideon, proposed making him a king, saying, RULE THOUOVER US, THOU AND THY SON AND THY SON'S SON. Here wastemptation in its fullest extent; not a kingdom only, but an hereditary one,but Gideon in the piety of his soul replied, I WILL NOT RULE OVERYOU, NEITHER SHALL MY SON RULE OVER YOU. THE LORDSHALL RULE OVER YOU. Words need not be more explicit; Gideon doth not DECLINE the honor, but denieth their right to give it; neither dothhe compliment them with invented declarations of his thanks, but in thepositive stile of a prophet charges them with disaffection to their properSovereign, the King of heaven.About one hundred and thirty years after this, they fell again into the sameerror. The hankering which the Jews had for the idolatrous customs of theHeathens, is something exceedingly unaccountable; but so it was, thatlaying hold of the misconduct of Samuel's two sons, who were entrustedwith some secular conc

erns, they came in an abrupt and clamorous mannerto Samuel, saying, BEHOLD THOU ART OLD, AND THY SONS WALKNOT IN THY WAYS, NOW MAKE US A KING TO JUDGE US LIKEALL THE OTHER NATIONS. And here we cannot but observe that theirmotives were bad, viz. that they might be LIKE unto other nations, i. e. theHeathens, whereas their true glory laid in being as much UNLIKE them aspossible. BUT THE THING DISPLEASED SAMUEL WHEN THEYSAID, GIVE US A KING TO JUDGE US; AND SAMUEL PRAYEDUNTO THE LORD, AND THE LORD SAID UNTO SAMUEL, HEARKEN UNTO THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE IN ALL THAT THEYSAY UNTO THEE, FOR THEY HAVE NOT REJECTED THEE, BUTTHEY HAVE REJECTED ME, THAT I SHOULD NOT REIGN OVERTHEM. ACCORDING TO ALL THE WORKS WHICH THEY HAVEDONE SINCE THE DAY THAT I BROUGHT THEM UP OUT OFEGYPT, EVEN UNTO THIS DAY; WHEREWITH THEY HAVEFORSAKEN ME AND SERVED OTHER GODS; SO DO THEY ALSOUNTO THEE. NOW THEREFORE HEARKEN UNTO THEIR VOICE,HOWBEIT, PROTEST SOLEMNLY UNTO THEM AND SHEW THEMTHE MANNER OF THE KING THAT SHALL REIGN OVER THEM, I.E. not of any particular king, but the general manner of the kings of theearth, whom Israel was so eagerly copying after. And notwithstanding thegreat distance of time and difference of manners, the character is still infashion. AND SAMUEL TOLD ALL THE WORDS OF THE LORDUNTO THE PEOPLE, THAT ASKED OF HIM A KING. AND HE SAID,THIS SHALL BE THE MANNER OF THE KING THAT SHALL REIGNOVER YOU; HE WILL TAKE YOUR SONS AND APPOINT THEMFOR HIMSELF, FOR HIS CHARIOTS, AND TO BE HIS HORSEMEN,AND SOME SHALL RUN BEFORE HIS CHARIOTS (this descriptionagrees with the present mode of impressing men) AND HE WILLAPPOINT HIM CAPTAINS OVER THOUSANDS AND CAPTAINSOVER FIFTIES, AND WILL SET THEM TO EAR HIS GROUND ANDTO READ HIS HARVEST, AND TO MAKE HIS INSTRUMENTS OFWAR, AND INSTRUMENTS OF HIS CHARIOTS; AND HE WILLTAKE YOUR DAUGHTERS TO BE CONFECTIONARIES, AND TO BECOOKS AND TO BE BAKERS (this describes the expence and luxury aswell as the oppression of kings) AND HE WILL TAKE YOUR FIELDSAND YOUR OLIVE YARDS, EVEN THE BEST OF THEM, AND GIVETHEM TO HIS SERVANTS; AND HE WILL TAKE THE TENTH OFYOUR FEED, AND OF YOUR VINEYARDS, AND GIVE THEM TOHIS OFFICERS AND TO HIS SERVANTS (by which we see that bribery,corruption, and favoritism are the standing vices of kings) AND HE WILLTAKE THE TENTH OF YOUR MEN SERVANTS, AND YOUR MAIDSERVANTS, AND YOUR GOODLIEST YOUNG MEN AND YOURASSES, AND PUT THEM TO HIS WORK; AND HE WILL TAKE THETENTH OF YOUR SHEEP, AND YE SHALL BE HIS SERVANTS, ANDYE SHALL CRY OUT IN THAT DAY BECAUSE OF YOUR KING WHICH YE SHALL HAVE CHOSEN, AND THE LORD WILL NOTHEAR YOU IN THAT DAY. This accounts for the continuation ofmonarchy; neither do the characters of the few good kings which have livedsince, either sanctify the title, or blot out the sinfulness of the origin; thehigh encomium given of David takes no notice of him OFFICIALLY AS AKING, but only as a MAN after God's own hear

t. NEVERTHELESS THEPEOPLE REFUSED TO OBEY THE VOICE OF SAMUEL, AND THEYSAID, NAY, BUT WE WILL HAVE A KING OVER US, THAT WEMAY BE LIKE ALL THE NATIONS, AND THAT OUR KING MAYJUDGE US, AND GO OUT BEFORE US, AND FIGHT OUR BATTLES.Samuel continued to reason with them, but to no purpose; he set beforethem their ingratitude, but all would not avail; and seeing them fully benton their folly, he cried out, I WILL CALL UNTO THE LORD, AND HESHALL SEND THUNDER AND RAIN (which then was a punishment,being in the time of wheat harvest) THAT YE MAY PERCEIVE ANDSEE THAT YOUR WICKEDNESS IS GREAT WHICH YE HAVEDONE IN THE SIGHT OF THE LORD, IN ASKING YOU A KING. SO SAMUEL CALLED UNTO THE LORD, AND THE LORD SENTTHUNDER AND RAIN THAT DAY, AND ALL THE PEOPLEGREATLY FEARED THE LORD AND SAMUEL. AND ALL THEPEOPLE SAID UNTO SAMUEL, PRAY FOR THY SERVANTS UNTOTHE LORD THY GOD THAT WE DIE NOT, FOR WE HAVE ADDEDUNTO OUR SINS THIS EVIL, TO ASK A KING. These portions ofscripture are direct and positive. They admit of no equivocal construction.That the Almighty hath here entered his protest against monarchicalgovernment is true, or the scripture is false. And a man hath good reason tobelieve that there is as much of king-craft, as priest-craft, in withholdingthe scripture from the public in Popish countries. For monarchy in everyinstance is the Popery of government.To the evil of monarchy we have added that of hereditary succession; andas 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. Forall men being originally equals, no ONE by BIRTH could have a right toset up his own family in perpetual preference to all others for ever, andthough himself might deserve SOME decent degree of honors of hiscotemporaries, yet his descendants might be far too unworthy to inherit them. One of the strongest NATURAL proofs of the folly of hereditaryright in kings, is, that nature disapproves it, otherwise, she would not sofrequently turn it into ridicule by giving mankind an ASS FOR A LION.Secondly, as no man at first could possess any other public honors thanwere bestowed upon him, so the givers of those honors could have nopower to give away the right of posterity, and though they might say "Wechoose you for OUR head," they could not, without manifest injustice totheir children, say "that your children and your children's children shallreign over OURS for ever." Because such an unwise, unjust, unnaturalcompact might (perhaps) in the next succession put them under thegovernment of a rogue or a fool. Most wise men, in their privatesentiments, have ever treated hereditary right with contempt; yet it is one ofthose evils, which when once established is not easily removed; manysubmit from fear, others from superstition, and the more powerful partshares with the king the plunder of the rest.This is supposing the present race

of kings in the world to have had anhonorable origin; whereas it is more than probable, that could we take offthe dark covering of antiquity, and trace them to their first rise, that weshould find the first of them nothing better than the principal ruffian ofsome restless gang, whose savage manners or pre-eminence in subtilityobtained him the title of chief among plunderers; and who by increasing inpower, and extending his depredations, over-awed the quiet and defencelessto purchase their safety by frequent contributions. Yet his electors couldhave no idea of giving hereditary right to his descendants, because such aperpetual exclusion of themselves was incompatible with the free andunrestrained principles they professed to live by. Wherefore, hereditarysuccession in the early ages of monarchy could not take place as a matter ofclaim, but as something casual or complimental; but as few or no recordswere extant in those days, and traditionary history stuffed with fables, itwas very easy, after the lapse of a few generations, to trump up somesuperstitious tale, conveniently timed, Mahomet like, to cram hereditaryright down the throats of the vulgar. Perhaps the disorders whichthreatened, or seemed to threaten, on the decease of a leader and the choiceof a new one (for elections among ruffians could not be very orderly)induced many at first to favor hereditary pretensions; by which means ithappened, as it hath happened since, that what at first was submitted to as a convenience, was afterwards claimed as a right.England, since the conquest, hath known some few good monarchs, butgroaned beneath a much larger number of bad ones; yet no man in hissenses can say that their claim under William the Conqueror is a veryhonorable one. A French bastard landing with an armed banditti, andestablishing himself king of England against the consent of the natives, is inplain 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 ofhereditary right, if there are any so weak as to believe it, let thempromiscuously worship the ass and lion, and welcome. I shall neither copytheir humility, nor disturb their devotion.Yet I should be glad to ask how they suppose kings came at first? Thequestion admits but of three answers, viz. either by lot, by election, or by usurpation. If the first king was taken by lot, it establishes a precedent forthe next, which excludes hereditary succession. Saul was by lot, yet thesuccession was not hereditary, neither does it appear from that transactionthere was any intention it ever should. If the first king of any country wasby election, that likewise establishes a precedent for the next; for to say,that the RIGHT of all future generations is taken away, by the act of thefirst electors, in their choice not only of a king, but of a family of kings forever, hath no parrallel in or

out of scripture but the doctrine of original sin,which supposes the free will of all men lost in Adam; and from suchcomparison, and it will admit of no other, hereditary succession can deriveno glory. For as in Adam all sinned, and as in the first electors all menobeyed; as in the one all mankind were subjected to Satan, and in the otherto Sovereignty; as our innocence was lost in the first, and our authority inthe last; and as both disable us from reassuming some former state andprivilege, it unanswerably follows that original sin and hereditarysuccession are parallels. Dishonorable rank! Inglorious connexion! Yet themost subtile sophist cannot produce a juster simile.As to usurpation, no man will be so hardy as to defend it; and that Williamthe Conqueror was an usurper is a fact not to be contradicted. The plaintruth is, that the antiquity of English monarchy will not bear looking into.But it is not so much the absurdity as the evil of hereditary successionwhich concerns mankind. Did it ensure a race of good and wise men itwould have the seal of divine authority, but as it opens a door to theFOOLISH, the WICKED, and the IMPROPER, it hath in it the nature ofoppression. Men who look upon themselves born to reign, and others toobey, soon grow insolent; selected from the rest of mankind their minds areearly poisoned by importance; and the world they act in differs somaterially from the world at large, that they have but little opportunity ofknowing its true interests, and when they succeed to the government arefrequently the most ignorant and unfit of any throughout the dominions.Another evil which attends hereditary succession is, that the throne issubject to be possessed by a minor at any age; all which time the regency,acting under the cover of a king, have every opportunity and inducement to betray their trust. The same national misfortune happens, when a king wornout with age and infirmity, enters the last stage of human weakness. In boththese cases the public becomes a prey to every miscreant, who can tampersuccessfully with the follies either of age or infancy.The most plausible plea, which hath ever been offered in favour ofhereditary succession, is, that it preserves a nation from civil wars; andwere this true, it would be weighty; whereas, it is the most barefaced falsityever imposed upon mankind. The whole history of England disowns thefact. Thirty kings and two minors have reigned in that distracted kingdomsince the conquest, in which time there have been (including theRevolution) no less than eight civil wars and nineteen rebellions.Wherefore instead of making for peace, it makes against it, and destroys thevery foundation it seems to stand on.The contest for monarchy and succession, between the houses of York andLancaster, laid England in a scene of blood for many years. Twelve pitchedbattles, besides skirmishes and sieges, were fought between Henry and Ed

ward. Twice was Henry prisoner to Edward, who in his turn wasprisoner to Henry. And so uncertain is the fate of war and the temper of anation, when nothing but personal matters are the ground of a quarrel, thatHenry was taken in triumph from a prison to a palace, and Edward obligedto fly from a palace to a foreign land; yet, as sudden transitions of temperare seldom lasting, Henry in his turn was driven from the throne, andEdward recalled to succeed him. The parliament always following thestrongest side.This contest began in the reign of Henry the Sixth, and was not entirelyextinguished till Henry the Seventh, in whom the families were united.Including a period of 67 years, viz. from 1422 to 1489.In short, monarchy and succession have laid (not this or that kingdom only)but the world in blood and ashes. 'Tis a form of government which the wordof God bears testimony against, and blood will attend it.If we inquire into the business of a king, we shall find that in somecountries they have none; and after sauntering away their lives withoutpleasure to themselves or advantage to the nation, withdraw from the scene,and leave their successors to tread the same idle round. In absolutemonarchies the whole weight of business, civil and military, lies on theking; the children of Israel in their request for a king, urged this plea "thathe may judge us, and go out before us and fight our battles." But incountries where he is neither a judge nor a general, as in England, a manwould be puzzled to know what IS his business.The nearer any government approaches to a republic the less business thereis for a king. It is somewhat difficult to find a proper name for thegovernment of England. Sir William Meredith calls it a republic; but in itspresent state it is unworthy of the name, because the corrupt influence ofthe crown, by having all the places in its disposal, hath so effectuallyswallowed up the power, and eaten out the virtue of the house of commons(the republican part in the constitution) that the government of England isnearly as monarchical as that of France or Spain. Men fall out with nameswithout understanding them. For it is the republican and not themonarchical part of the constitution of England which Englishmen glory in,viz. the liberty of choosing an house of commons from out of their ownbody--and it is easy to see that when republican virtue fails, slavery ensues.Why is the constitution of England sickly, but because monarchy hath poisoned the republic, the crown hath engrossed the commons?In England a king hath little more to do than to make war and give awayplaces; which in plain terms, is to impoverish the nation and set it togetherby the ears. A pretty business indeed for a man to be allowed eight hundredthousand sterling a year for, and worshipped into the bargain! Of moreworth is one honest man to society and in the sight of God, than all thecrowned ruffians that

ever lived.THOUGHTS ON THE PRESENT STATE OF AMERICAN AFFAIRSIN the following pages I offer nothing more than simple facts, plainarguments, and common sense; and have no other preliminaries to settle with the reader, than that he will divest himself of prejudice andprepossession, and suffer his reason and his feelings to determine forthemselves; that he will put ON, or rather that he will not put OFF, the truecharacter of a man, and generously enlarge his views beyond the presentday.Volumes have been written on the subject of the struggle between Englandand America. Men of all ranks have embarked in the controversy, fromdifferent motives, and with various designs; but all have been ineffectual,and the period of debate is closed. Arms, as the last resource, decide thecontest; the appeal was the choice of the king, and the continent hathaccepted the challenge.It hath been reported of the late Mr Pelham (who tho' an able minister wasnot without his faults) that on his being attacked in the house of commons,on the score, that his measures were only of a temporary kind, replied,"THEY WILL LAST MY TIME." Should a thought so fatal and unmanlypossess the colonies in the present contest, the name of ancestors will beremembered by future generations with detestation.The sun never shined on a cause of greater worth. 'Tis not the affair of acity, a country, a province, or a kingdom, but of a continent--of at least oneeighth part of the habitable globe. 'Tis not the concern of a day, a year, oran age; posterity are virtually involved in the contest, and will be more or less affected, even to the end of time, by the proceedings now. Now is theseed time of continental union, faith and honor. The least fracture now willbe like a name engraved with the point of a pin on the tender rind of ayoung oak; The wound will enlarge with the tree, and posterity read it infull grown characters.By referring the matter from argument to arms, a new era for politics isstruck; a new method of thinking hath arisen. All plans, proposals, &c.prior to the nineteenth of April, I. E. to the commencement of hostilities,are like the almanacks of the last year; which, though proper then, aresuperceded and useless now. Whatever was advanced by the advocates oneither 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 themethod of effecting it; the one proposing force, the other friendship; but ithath so far happened that the first hath failed, and the second hathwithdrawn her influence.As much hath been said of the advantages of reconciliation, which, like anagreeable 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 intosome of the many material injuries which these colonies sustain, andalways will sustain, by being connected with, and

dependant on GreatBritain. To examine that connexion and dependance, on the principles ofnature and common sense, to see what we have to trust to, if separated, andwhat we are to expect, if dependant.I have heard it asserted by some, that as America hath flourished under herformer connexion with Great Britain, that the same connexion is necessarytowards her future happiness, and will always have the same effect.Nothing can be more fallacious than this kind of argument. We may as wellassert that because a child has thrived upon milk, that it is never to havemeat, 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 answerroundly, that America would have flourished as much, and probably muchmore, 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 willalways have a market while eating is the custom of Europe.But she has protected us, say some. That she hath engrossed us is true, anddefended the continent at our expence as well as her own is admitted, andshe would have defended Turkey from the same motive, viz. the sake oftrade and dominion.Alas, we have been long led away by ancient prejudices, and made largesacrifices 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, butfrom HER ENEMIES on HER OWN ACCOUNT, from those who had no quarrel with us on any OTHER ACCOUNT, and who will always be ourenemies on the SAME ACCOUNT. Let Britain wave her pretensions to thecontinent, or the continent throw off the dependance, and we should be atpeace with France and Spain were they at war with Britain. The miseries ofHanover last war ought to warn us against connexions.It hath lately been asserted in parliament, that the colonies have no relationto each other but through the parent country, I. E. that Pennsylvania and theJerseys, and so on for the rest, are sister colonies by the way of England;this is certainly a very round-about way of proving relationship, but it is thenearest and only true way of proving enemyship, if I may so call it. Franceand Spain never were, nor perhaps ever will be our enemies asAMERICANS, but as our being the SUBJECTS OF GREAT BRITAIN.But Britain is the parent country, say some. Then the more shame upon herconduct. Even brutes do not devour their young, nor savages make warupon 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 orMOTHER COUNTRY hath been jesuitically adopted by the king and hisparasites, with a low papistical design of gaining an unfair bias on thecredulous weakness of our minds. Europe, and not England, is the parent country of America. This n

ew world hath been the asylum for thepersecuted lovers of civil and religious liberty from EVERY PART ofEurope. 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 thesame tyranny which drove the first emigrants from home, pursues theirdescendants still.In this extensive quarter of the globe, we forget the narrow limits of threehundred and sixty miles (the extent of England) and carry our friendship ona larger scale; we claim brotherhood with every European christian, andtriumph in the generosity of the sentiment.It is pleasant to observe by what regular gradations we surmount the forceof 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 willbe common) and distinguish him by the name of NEIGHBOUR; if he meethim but a few miles from home, he drops the narrow idea of a street, andsalutes him by the name of TOWNSMAN; if he travel out of the county,and meet him in any other, he forgets the minor divisions of street andtown, and calls him COUNTRYMAN; i. e. COUNTY-MAN; but if in theirforeign excursions they should associate in France or any other part ofEUROPE, their local remembrance would be enlarged into that ofENGLISHMEN. And by a just parity of reasoning, all Europeans meetingin America, or any other quarter of the globe, are COUNTRYMEN; forEngland, 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 forcontinental minds. Not one third of the inhabitants, even of this province,are of English descent. Wherefore I reprobate the phrase of parent ormother country applied to England only, as being false, selfish, narrow andungenerous.But admitting, that we were all of English descent, what does it amount to?Nothing. Britain, being now an open enemy, extinguishes every other nameand title: And to say that reconciliation is our duty, is truly farcical. Thefirst king of England, of the present line (William the Conqueror) was aFrenchman, and half the Peers of England are descendants from the samecountry; wherefore, by the same method of reasoning, England ought to begoverned by France.Much hath been said of the united strength of Britain and the colonies, thatin conjunction they might bid defiance to the world. But this is merepresumption; the fate of war is uncertain, neither do the expressions meanany thing; for this continent would never suffer itself to be drained ofinhabitants, 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 iscommerce, and that, well attended to, will secure us the pe

ace andfriendship of all Europe; because, it is the interest of all Europe to haveAmerica 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 shew, a singleadvantage that this continent can reap, by being connected with GreatBritain. I repeat the challenge, not a single advantage is derived. Our cornwill fetch its price in any market in Europe, and our imported goods mustbe paid for buy them where we will.But the injuries and disadvantages we sustain by that connection, arewithout number; and our duty to mankind at large, as well as to ourselves,instruct us to renounce the alliance: Because, any submission to, ordependance on Great Britain, tends directly to involve this continent inEuropean wars and quarrels; and sets us at variance with nations, whowould otherwise seek our friendship, and against whom, we have neitheranger nor complaint. As Europe is our market for trade, we ought to formno partial connection with any part of it. It is the true interest of America tosteer clear of European contentions, which she never can do, while by herdependance on Britain, she is made the make-weight in the scale on Britishpolitics.Europe is too thickly planted with kingdoms to be long at peace, andwhenever a war breaks out between England and any foreign power, the trade of America goes to ruin, BECAUSE OF HER CONNECTION WITHBRITAIN. The next war may not turn out like the last, 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 theslain, the weeping voice of nature cries, 'TIS TIME TO PART. Even thedistance at which the Almighty hath placed England and America, is astrong and natural proof, that the authority of the one, over the other, wasnever the design of Heaven. The time likewise at which the continent wasdiscovered, adds weight to the argument, and the manner in which it waspeopled encreases the force of it. The reformation was preceded by thediscovery of America, as if the Almighty graciously meant to open asanctuary to the persecuted in future years, when home should affordneither 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 notrue pleasure by looking forward, under the painful and positive conviction,that what he calls "the present constitution" is merely temporary. Asparents, we can have no joy, knowing that THIS GOVERNMENT is notsufficiently lasting to ensure any thing which we may bequeath to posterity:And by a plain method of argument, as we are running the next generationinto debt, we ought to do the work of it, otherwise we use them meanly

andpitifully. In order to discover the line of our duty rightly, we should takeour 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 andprejudices conceal from our sight.Though I would carefully avoid giving unnecessary offence, yet I aminclined to believe, that all those who espouse the doctrine ofreconciliation, 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 thiscontinent, 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 theprecariousness with which all American property is possessed. But let ourimaginations transport us for a few moments to Boston, that seat ofwretchedness will teach us wisdom, and instruct us for ever to renounce apower in whom we can have no trust. The inhabitants of that unfortunatecity, who but a few months ago were in ease and affluence, have now, noother alternative than to stay and starve, or turn out to beg. Endangered bythe fire of their friends if they continue within the city, and plundered bythe soldiery if they leave it. In their present condition they are prisonerswithout the hope of redemption, and in a general attack for their relief, theywould be exposed to the fury of both armies.Men of passive tempers look somewhat lightly over the offences of Britain,and, still hoping for the best, are apt to call out, "COME, COME, WESHALL BE FRIENDS AGAIN, FOR ALL THIS." But examine thepassions and feelings of mankind, Bring the doctrine of reconciliation tothe touchstone of nature, and then tell me, whether you can hereafter love,honour, and faithfully serve the power that hath carried fire and sword intoyour land? If you cannot do all these, then are you only deceivingyourselves, and by your delay bringing ruin upon posterity. Your futureconnection with Britain, whom you can neither love nor honour, will beforced and unnatural, and being formed only on the plan of presentconvenience, will in a little time fall into a relapse more wretched than thefirst. But if you say, you can still pass the violations over, then I ask, Hathyour house been burnt? Hath your property been destroyed before yourface? Are your wife and children destitute of a bed to lie on, or bread to liveon? Have you lost a parent or a child by their hands, and yourself the ruinedand wretched survivor? If you have not, then are you not a judge of thosewho have. But if you have, and still can shake hands with the murderers,then you are unworthy of the name of husband, father, friend, or lover, an

dwhatever 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 thosefeelings and affections which nature justifies, and without which, weshould 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 provokingrevenge, but to awaken us from fatal and unmanly slumbers, that we maypursue determinately some fixed object. It is not in the power of Britain orof Europe to conquer America, if she do not conquer herself by DELAYand TIMIDITY. The present winter is worth an age if rightly employed, butif lost or neglected, the whole continent will partake of the misfortune; andthere is no punishment which that man will not deserve, be he who, orwhat, or where he will, that may be the means of sacrificing a season soprecious and useful.It is repugnant to reason, to the universal order of things to all examplesfrom former ages, to suppose, that this continent can longer remain subject to any external power. The most sanguine in Britain does not think so. Theutmost stretch of human wisdom cannot, at this time, compass a plan shortof separation, which can promise the continent even a year's security.Reconciliation is NOW a falacious dream. Nature hath deserted theconnexion, and Art cannot supply her place. For, as Milton wiselyexpresses, "never can true reconcilement grow where wounds of deadlyhate have pierced so deep."Every quiet method for peace hath been ineffectual. Our prayers have beenrejected with disdain; and only tended to convince us, that nothing flattersvanity, or confirms obstinacy in Kings more than repeated petitioning--andnoting hath contributed more than that very measure to make the Kings ofEurope absolute: Witness Denmark and Sweden. Wherefore, since nothingbut blows will do, for God's sake, let us come to a final separation, and notleave the next generation to be cutting throats, under the violatedunmeaning names of parent and child.To say, they will never attempt it again is idle and visionary, we thought soat the repeal of the stamp act, yet a year or two undeceived us; as well maywe suppose that nations, which have been once defeated, will never renewthe quarrel.As to government matters, it is not in the power of Britain to do thiscontinent 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 mileswith a tale or a petition, waiting four or five months for an answer, whichwhen obtained requires five or six more to explain it in, will in a few yearsbe looked upon as folly and childishness--There was a time when it wasproper, and there is a proper ti

me for it to cease.Small islands not capable of protecting themselves, are the proper objectsfor kingdoms to take under their care; but there is something very absurd,in supposing a continent to be perpetually governed by an island. In noinstance hath nature made the satellite larger than its primary planet, and as England and America, with respect to each other, reverses the commonorder of nature, it is evident they belong to different systems: England toEurope, America to itself.I am not induced by motives of pride, party, or resentment to espouse thedoctrine of separation and independance; I am clearly, positively, andconscientiously persuaded that it is the true interest of this continent to beso; that every thing short of THAT is mere patchwork, that it can afford nolasting felicity,--that it is leaving the sword to our children, and shrinkingback at a time, when, a little more, a little farther, would have rendered thiscontinent 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 ofthe continent, or any ways equal to the expense of blood and treasure wehave been already put to.The object, contended for, ought always to bear some just proportion to theexpense. The removal of North, or the whole detestable junto, is a matterunworthy the millions we have expended. A temporary stoppage of trade,was an inconvenience, which would have sufficiently ballanced the repealof all the acts complained of, had such repeals been obtained; but if thewhole continent must take up arms, if every man must be a soldier, it isscarcely 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 fightfor; for in a just estimation, it is as great a folly to pay a Bunker-hill pricefor law, as for land. As I have always considered the independancy of thiscontinent, as an event, which sooner or later must arrive, so from the laterapid 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 tohave disputed a matter, which time would have finally redressed, unless wemeant to be in earnest; otherwise, it is like wasting an estate on a suit atlaw, to regulate the trespasses of a tenant, whose lease is just expiring. Noman was a warmer wisher for reconciliation than myself, before the fatalnineteenth of April 1775, but the moment the event of that day was madeknown, I rejected the hardened, sullen tempered Pharaoh of England for ever; and disdain the wretch, that with the pretended title of FATHER OFHIS PEOPLE, can unfeelingly hear of their slaughter, and composedlysleep with their blood upon his soul.But admitting that matters were now made up, what would be the event? Ianswer, the ruin of the continent. And that for sever

al reasons.FIRST. 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 ashe hath shewn himself such an inveterate enemy to liberty, and discoveredsuch a thirst for arbitrary power; is he, or is he not, a proper man to say tothese colonies, "YOU SHALL MAKE NO LAWS BUT WHAT IPLEASE." And is there any inhabitant in America so ignorant, as not toknow, that according to what is called the PRESENT CONSTITUTION,that this continent can make no laws but what the king gives it leave to; andis there any man so unwise, as not to see, that (considering what hashappened) he will suffer no law to be made here, but such as suit HISpurpose. We may be as effectually enslaved by the want of laws inAmerica, as by submitting to laws made for us in England. After mattersare made up (as it is called) can there be any doubt, but the whole power ofthe crown will be exerted, to keep this continent as low and humble as possible? Instead of going forward we shall go backward, or be perpetuallyquarrelling or ridiculously petitioning. We are already greater than the kingwishes us to be, and will he not hereafter endeavour to make us less? Tobring 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 anINDEPENDANT, for independancy means no more, than, whether we shallmake our own laws, or, whether the king, the greatest enemy this continenthath, or can have, shall tell us, "THERE SHALL BE NO LAWS BUTSUCH AS I LIKE."But the king you will say has a negative in England; the people there canmake no laws without his consent. In point of right and good order, there issomething very ridiculous, that a youth of twenty-one (which hath oftenhappened) shall say to several millions of people, older and wiser thanhimself, I forbid this or that act of yours to be law. But in this place Idecline this sort of reply, though I will never cease to expose the absurdityof it, and only answer, that England being the King's residence, andAmerica not so, make quite another case. The king's negative HERE is tentimes more dangerous and fatal than it can be in England, for THERE hewill scarcely refuse his consent to a bill for putting England into as strong astate of defence as possible, and in America he would never suffer such abill 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 herOWN purpose. Wherefore, her own interest leads her to suppress thegrowth of OURS in every case which doth not promote her advantage, or inthe least interferes with it. A pretty state we should soon be in under such asecond-hand government, considering what has happened! Men do notchange from enemies to friends by the alteration of a name: And in order toshew that reconcili

ation NOW is a dangerous doctrine, I affirm, THAT ITWOULD BE POLICY IN THE KING AT THIS TIME, TO REPEAL THE ACTS FOR THE SAKE OF REINSTATING HIMSELF IN THEGOVERNMENT OF THE PROVINCES; in order that HE MAYACCOMPLISH BY CRAFT AND SUBTILITY, IN THE LONG RUN,WHAT HE CANNOT DO BY FORCE AND VIOLENCE IN THESHORT 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 ofgovernment by guardianship, which can last no longer than till the coloniescome of age, so the general face and state of things, in the interim, will beunsettled and unpromising. Emigrants of property will not choose to cometo a country whose form of government hangs but by a thread, and who isevery day tottering on the brink of commotion and disturbance; andnumbers of the present inhabitants would lay hold of the interval, to disposeof their effects, and quit the continent.But the most powerful of all arguments, is, that nothing but independance,i. e. a continental form of government, can keep the peace of the continentand preserve it inviolate from civil wars. I dread the event of a reconciliation with Britain now, as it is more than probable, that it willfollowed by a revolt somewhere or other, the consequences of which maybe far more fatal than all the malice of Britain.Thousands are already ruined by British barbarity; (thousands more willprobably suffer the same fate.) Those men have other feelings than us whohave nothing suffered. All they NOW possess is liberty, what they beforeenjoyed is sacrificed to its service, and having nothing more to lose, theydisdain submission. Besides, the general temper of the colonies, towards aBritish government, will be like that of a youth, who is nearly out of histime; they will care very little about her. And a government which cannotpreserve the peace, is no government at all, and in that case we pay ourmoney for nothing; and pray what is it that Britain can do, whose powerwill be wholly on paper, should a civil tumult break out the very day afterreconciliation? I have heard some men say, many of whom I believe spokewithout thinking, that they dreaded an independance, fearing that it wouldproduce 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 connexion than from independance. I make the sufferers casemy own, and I protest, that were I driven from house and home, myproperty destroyed, and my circumstances ruined, that as a man, sensible ofinjuries, I could never relish the doctrine of reconciliation, or considermyself bound thereby.The colonies have manifested such a spirit of good order and obedience tocontinental government, as is sufficient to make every reasonable personeasy and happy on that head. No man can assign the least pretence for h

isfears, 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 equalityaffords no temptation. The republics of Europe are all (and we may sayalways) in peace. Holland and Swisserland are without wars, foreign ordomestic: Monarchical governments, it is true, are never long at rest; thecrown itself is a temptation to enterprizing ruffians at HOME; and thatdegree of pride and insolence ever attendant on regal authority, swells into a rupture with foreign powers, in instances, where a republicangovernment, by being formed on more natural principles, would negotiatethe mistake.If there is any true cause of fear respecting independance, it is because noplan is yet laid down. Men do not see their way out--Wherefore, as anopening into that business, I offer the following hints; at the same timemodestly affirming, that I have no other opinion of them myself, than thatthey may be the means of giving rise to something better. Could thestraggling thoughts of individuals be collected, they would frequently formmaterials for wise and able men to improve into useful matter.Let the assemblies be annual, with a President only. The representationmore equal. Their business wholly domestic, and subject to the authority ofa Continental Congress.Let each colony be divided into six, eight, or ten, convenient districts, eachdistrict to send a proper number of delegates to Congress, so that eachcolony send at least thirty. The whole number in Congress will be least 390.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 thirteencolonies by lot, after which, let the whole Congress choose (by ballot) apresident from out of the delegates of THAT province. In the nextCongress, let a colony be taken by lot from twelve only, omitting thatcolony from which the president was taken in the former Congress, and soproceeding 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 thatwill promote discord, under a government so equally formed as this, wouldhave joined Lucifer in his revolt.But as there is a peculiar delicacy, from whom, or in what manner, thisbusiness must first arise, and as it seems most agreeable and consistent thatit should come from some intermediate body between the governed and thegovernors, that is, between the Congress and the people, let aCONTINENTAL 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; andfive representatives of the pe

ople at large, to be chosen in the capital city ortown of each province, for, and in behalf of the whole province, by as manyqualified voters as shall think proper to attend from all parts of the provincefor that purpose; or, if more convenient, the representatives may be chosenin two or three of the most populous parts thereof. In this conference, thusassembled, will be united, the two grand principles of business,KNOWLEDGE and POWER. The members of Congress, Assemblies, orConventions, by having had experience in national concerns, will be ableand useful counsellors, and the whole, being impowered by the people, willhave a truly legal authority.The conferring members being met, let their business be to frame aCONTINENTAL CHARTER, or Charter of the United Colonies;(answering to what is called the Magna Charta of England) fixing thenumber and manner of choosing members of Congress, members ofAssembly, with their date of sitting, and drawing the line of business andjurisdiction between them: (Always remembering, that our strength iscontinental, not provincial:) Securing freedom and property to all men, andabove all things, the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates ofconscience; with such other matter as is necessary for a charter to contain.Immediately after which, the said Conference to dissolve, and the bodieswhich shall be chosen comformable to the said charter, to be the legislatorsand governors of this continent for the time being: Whose peace andhappiness, may God preserve, Amen.Should any body of men be hereafter delegated for this or some similarpurpose, I offer them the following extracts from that wise observer ongovernments DRAGONETTI. "The science" says he "of the politicianconsists in fixing the true point of happiness and freedom. Those menwould deserve the gratitude of ages, who should discover a mode ofgovernment that contained the greatest sum of individual happiness, withthe least national expense." "DRAGONETTI ON VIRTUE AND REWARDS."But where says some is the King of America? I'll tell you Friend, he reignsabove, and doth not make havoc of mankind like the Royal Brute ofBritain. 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 broughtforth placed on the divine law, the word of God; let a crown be placedthereon, by which the world may know, that so far as we approve asmonarchy, that in America THE LAW IS KING. For as in absolutegovernments the King is law, so in free countries the law OUGHT to beKing; and there ought to be no other. But lest any ill use should afterwardsarise, let the crown at the conclusion of the ceremony be demolished, andscattered among the people whose right it is.A government of our own is our natural right: And when a man seriouslyreflects on the precariousness of human affairs, he will become convinced,that it is infinitel

y wiser and safer, to form a constitution of our own in acool deliberate manner, while we have it in our power, than to trust such aninteresting event to time and chance. If we omit it now, some, [*1]Massanello may hereafter arise, who laying hold of popular disquietudes,may collect together the desperate and discontented, and by assuming tothemselves the powers of government, may sweep away the liberties of thecontinent like a deluge. Should the government of America return againinto the hands of Britain, the tottering situation of things, will be atemptation 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 fatalbusiness might be done; and ourselves suffering like the wretched Britonsunder the oppression of the Conqueror. Ye that oppose independance now,ye know not what ye do; ye are opening a door to eternal tyranny, bykeeping vacant the seat of government. There are thousands, and tens ofthousands, who would think it glorious to expel from the continent, thatbarbarous and hellish power, which hath stirred up the Indians and Negroesto 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 havefaith, and our affections wounded through a thousand pores instruct us todetest, is madness and folly. Every day wears out the little remains ofkindred between us and them, and can there be any reason to hope, that asthe relationship expires, the affection will increase, or that we shall agreebetter, when we have ten times more and greater concerns to quarrel overthan ever?Ye that tell us of harmony and reconciliation, can ye restore to us the timethat is past? Can ye give to prostitution its former innocence? Neither canye reconcile Britain and America. The last cord now is broken, the peopleof England are presenting addresses against us. There are injuries whichnature cannot forgive; she would cease to be nature if she did. As well canthe lover forgive the ravisher of his mistress, as the continent forgive themurders of Britain. The Almighty hath implanted in us theseunextinguishable feelings for good and wise purposes. They are theguardians of his image in our hearts. They distinguish us from the herd ofcommon animals. The social compact would dissolve, and justice beextirpated from the earth, or have only a casual existence were we callousto the touches of affection. The robber, and the murderer, would oftenescape 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 thetyrant, stand forth! Every spot of the old world is overrun with oppression.Freedom hath been hunted round the globe. Asia, and Africa, have longexpelled her. Europe regards her like a stranger, and England hath given h

erwarning to depart. O! receive the fugitive, and prepare in time an asylumfor mankind.Note 1 Thomas Anello, otherwise Massanello, a fisherman of Naples, whoafter spiriting up his countrymen in the public market place, against theoppression of the Spaniards, to whom the place was then subject, promptedthem to revolt, and in the space of a day became king.MISCELLANEOUS REFLEXIONSI HAVE never met with a man, either in England or America, who hath notconfessed his opinion, that a separation between the countries, would takeplace one time or other: And there is no instance, in which we have shewnless judgment, than in endeavouring to describe, what we call, the ripenessor fitness of the Continent for independance.As all men allow the measure, and vary only in their opinion of the time, letus, in order to remove mistakes, take a general survey of things, andendeavour, 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 generalconcurrence, the glorious union of all things prove the fact.It is not in numbers, but in unity, that our great strength lies; yet our presentnumbers are sufficient to repel the force of all the world. The Continenthath, at this time, the largest body of armed and disciplined men of anypower under Heaven; and is just arrived at that pitch of strength, in which,no single colony is able to support itself, and the whole, when united, canaccomplish the matter, and either more, or, less than this, might be fatal inits effects. Our land force is already sufficient, and as to naval affairs, wecannot be insensible, that Britain would never suffer an American man ofwar to be built, while the continent remained in her hands. Wherefore, weshould be no forwarder an hundred years hence in that branch, than we arenow; but the truth is, we should be less so, because the timber of thecountry 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 thepresent circumstances would be intolerable. The more sea port towns wehad, the more should we have both to defend and to loose. Our presentnumbers are so happily proportioned to our wants, that no man need beidle. The diminution of trade affords an army, and the necessities of anarmy create a new trade.Debts we have none; and whatever we may contract on this account willserve as a glorious memento of our virtue. Can we but leave posterity witha settled form of government, an independant constitution of it's own, thepurchase at any price will be cheap. But to expend millions for the sake ofgetting a few vile acts repealed, and routing the present ministry only, isunworthy 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 adva

ntage. Such a thought is unworthy a man ofhonor, and is the true characteristic of a narrow heart and a pedlingpolitician.The debt we may contract doth not deserve our regard if the work be butaccomplished. 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 fortymillions sterling, for which she pays upwards of four millions interest. Andas a compensation for her debt, she has a large navy; America is without adebt, and without a navy; yet for the twentieth part of the English nationaldebt, could have a navy as large again. The navy of England is not worth, atthis time, more than three millions and an half sterling.The first and second editions of this pamphlet were published without thefollowing calculations, which are now given as a proof that the aboveestimation of the navy is a just one. SEE ENTIC'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 monthsboatswain's and carpenter's sea-stores, as calculated by Mr. Burchett,Secretary to the navy.For a ship of a 100 guns | | 35,553 L.90 | | 29,88680 | | 23,638 70 | | 17,78560 | | 14,19750 | | 10,60640 | | 7,55830 | | 5,84620 | | 3,710And from hence it is easy to sum up the value, or cost rather, of the wholeBritish navy, which in the year 1757, when it was as its greatest gloryconsisted of the following ships and guns.SHIPS. | GUNS. | COST OF ONE. | COST OF ALL.6 | 100 | 35,553 l. | 213,318 l.12 | 90 | 29,886 | 358,63212 | 80 | 23,638 | 283,65643 | 70 | 17,785 | 746,75535 | 60 | 14,197 | 496,89540 | 50 | 10,606 | 424,24045 | 40 | 7,558 | 340,11058 | 20 | 3,710 | 215,18085 | Sloops, bombs, and fireships, one with another, at | 2,000 | 170,000Cost 3,266,786Remains for guns | 233,214Total. 3,500,000No country on the globe is so happily situated, so internally capable ofraising a fleet as America. Tar, timber, iron, and cordage are her naturalproduce. We need go abroad for nothing. Whereas the Dutch, who makelarge profits by hiring out their ships of war to the Spaniards andPortuguese, are obliged to import most of the materials they use. We oughtto view the building a fleet as an article of commerce, it being the naturalmanufactory of this country. It is the best money we can lay out. A navywhen finished is worth more than it cost. And is that nice point in nationalpolicy, in which commerce and protection are united. Let us build; if wewant them not, we can sell; and by that means replace our paper currencywith ready gold and silver.In point of manning a fleet, people in general run into great errors; it is notnecessary that one fourth part should be sailor. The Terrible privateer,Captain Death, stood the hottest engagement of any ship last wa

r, yet hadnot twenty sailors on board, though her complement of men was upwardsof two hundred. A few able and social sailors will soon instruct a sufficientnumber of active landmen in the common work of a ship. Wherefore, wenever can be more capable to begin on maritime matters than now, whileour timber is standing, our fisheries blocked up, and our sailors andshipwrights out of employ. Men of war, of seventy and eighty guns werebuilt 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 timeexcel the whole world. The great empires of the east are mostly inland, andconsequently excluded from the possibility of rivalling her. Africa is in astate of barbarism; and no power in Europe, hath either such an extent ofcoast, or such an internal supply of materials. Where nature hath given theone, she has withheld the other; to America only hath she been liberal ofboth. 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 littlepeople now, which we were sixty years ago; at that time we might havetrusted our property in the streets, or fields rather; and slept securelywithout locks or bolts to our doors or windows. The case now is altered,and our methods of defence, ought to improve with our increase ofproperty. A common pirate, twelve months ago, might have come up theDelaware, and laid the city of Philadelphia under instant contribution, forwhat 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 haverobbed the whole Continent, and carried off half a million of money. Theseare circumstances which demand our attention, and point out the necessityof naval protection.Some, perhaps, will say, that after we have made it up with Britain, she willprotect us. Can we be so unwise as to mean, that she shall keep a navy inour harbours for that purpose? Common sense will tell us, that the powerwhich hath endeavoured to subdue us, is of all others, the most improper todefend us. Conquest may be effected under the pretence of friendship; andourselves, after a long and brave resistance, be at last cheated into slavery.And if her ships are not to be admitted into our harbours, I would ask, howis she to protect us? A navy three or four thousand miles off can be of littleuse, and on sudden emergencies, none at all. Wherefore, if we musthereafter 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 partof them are at any time fit for service, numbers of them not in being; yettheir names are pompously continued in the list, if only a plank be left ofthe ship: and not a fifth part, of such as a

re fit for service, can be spared onany one station at one time. The East, and West Indies, Mediterranean,Africa, and other parts over which Britain extends her claim, make largedemands upon her navy. From a mixture of prejudice and inattention, wehave contracted a false notion respecting the navy of England, and havetalked 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 instantlypracticable, have been made use of by a set of disguised Tories todiscourage our beginning thereon. Nothing can be farther from truth thanthis; 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, norclaim any foreign dominion, our whole force would be employed on ourown coast, where we should, in the long run, have two to one the advantageof those who had three or four thousand miles to sail over, before theycould 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 layingin the neighbourhood 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 premiumswere 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 inproportion 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 ofin England, of suffering their fleet, in time of peace to lie rotting in thedocks. To unite the sinews of commerce and defence is sound policy; forwhen our strength and our riches, play into each other's hand, we need fearno external enemy.In almost every article of defence we abound. Hemp flourishes even torankness, so that we need not want cordage. Our iron is superior to that ofother countries. Our small arms equal to any in the world. Cannons we cancast at pleasure. Saltpetre and gunpowder we are every day producing. Ourknowledge is hourly improving. Resolution is our inherent character, andcourage 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. Ifshe is once admitted to the government of America again, this Continentwill not be worth living in. Jealousies will be always arising; insurrectionswill be constantly happening; and who will go forth to quell them? Whowill venture his life to reduce his own countrymen to a foreign obedience?The difference between Pennsylvania and Connecticut, respecting someunlocated lands, shews the

insignificance of a British government, and fullyproves, that nothing but Continental authority can regulate Continentalmatters.Another reason why the present time is preferable to all others, is, that thefewer our numbers are, the more land there is yet unoccupied, whichinstead of being lavished by the king on his worthless dependents, may behereafter applied, not only to the discharge of the present debt, but to theconstant support of government. No nation under heaven hath such anadvantage as this.The infant state of the Colonies, as it is called, so far from being against, isan argument in favor of independance. We are sufficiently numerous, andwere we more so, we might be less united. It is a matter worthy ofobservation, that the more a country is peopled, the smaller their armies are.In military numbers, the ancients far exceeded the moderns: and the reason is evident, for trade being the consequence of population, men become toomuch absorbed thereby to attend to any thing else. Commerce diminishesthe spirit, both of patriotism and military defence. And history sufficientlyinforms us, that the bravest achievements were always accomplished in thenon age of a nation. With the increase of commerce, England hath lost itsspirit. The city of London, notwithstanding its numbers, submits tocontinued insults with the patience of a coward. The more men have tolose, the less willing are they to venture. The rich are in general slaves tofear, and submit to courtly power with the trembling duplicity of a Spaniel.Youth is the seed time of good habits, as well in nations as in individuals. Itmight be difficult, if not impossible, to form the Continent into onegovernment half a century hence. The vast variety of interests, occasionedby an increase of trade and population, would create confusion. Colonywould be against colony. Each being able might scorn each other'sassistance; and while the proud and foolish gloried in their littledistinctions, the wise would lament, that the union had not been formedbefore. Wherefore, the PRESENT TIME is the TRUE TIME forestablishing it. The intimacy which is contracted in infancy, and the friendship which is formed in misfortune, are, of all others, the most lastingand unalterable. Our present union is marked with both these characters: weare young, and we have been distressed; but our concord hath withstood ourtroubles, and fixes a memorable area for posterity to glory in.The present time, likewise, is that peculiar time, which never happens to anation but once, VIZ. the time of forming itself into a government. Mostnations have let slip the opportunity, and by that means have beencompelled to receive laws from their conquerors, instead of making lawsfor themselves. First, they had a king, and then a form of government;whereas, the articles or charter of government, should be formed first, andmen delegated to execute them afterwards: but fr

om the errors of othernations, let us learn wisdom, and lay hold of the present opportunity--TOBEGIN GOVERNMENT AT THE RIGHT END.When William the Conqueror subdued England, he gave them law at thepoint of the sword; and until we consent, that the seat of government, inAmerica, be legally and authoritatively occupied, we shall be in danger ofhaving it filled by some fortunate ruffian, who may treat us in the samemanner, and then, where will be our freedom? Where our property?As to religion, I hold it to be the indispensible duty of all government, toprotect all conscientious professors thereof, and I know of no other business which government hath to do therewith. Let a man throw asidethat narrowness of soul, that selfishness of principle, which the niggards ofall professions are so unwilling to part with, and he will be at oncedelivered of his fears on that head. Suspicion is the companion of meansouls, and the bane of all good society. For myself, I fully andconscientiously believe, that it is the will of the Almighty, that there shouldbe diversity of religious opinions among us: It affords a larger field for ourChristian kindness. Were we all of one way of thinking, our religiousdispositions would want matter for probation; and on this liberal principle, Ilook on the various denominations among us, to be like children of thesame family, differing only, in what is called, their Christian names.In page [III par 47], I threw out a few thoughts on the propriety of aContinental Charter, (for I only presume to offer hints, not plans) and inthis place, I take the liberty of rementioning the subject, by observing, thata charter is to be understood as a bond of solemn obligation, which thewhole enters into, to support the right of every separate part, whether orreligion, personal freedom, or property. A firm bargain and a rightreckoning make long friends.In a former page I likewise mentioned the necessity of a large and equalrepresentation; and there is no political matter which more deserves ourattention. A small number of electors, or a small number of representatives,are equally dangerous. But if the number of the representatives be not onlysmall, but unequal, the danger is increased. As an instance of this, Imention the following; when the Associators petition was before the Houseof Assembly of Pennsylvania; twenty-eight members only were present, allthe Bucks county members, being eight, voted against it, and had seven ofthe Chester members done the same, this whole province had beengoverned by two counties only, and this danger it is always exposed to. Theunwarrantable stretch likewise, which that house made in their last sitting,to gain an undue authority over the Delegates of that province, ought towarn the people at large, how they trust power out of their own hands. A setof instructions for the Delegates were put together, which in point of senseand business would ha

ve dishonored a schoolboy, and after being approvedby a FEW, a VERY FEW without doors, were carried into the House, andthere passed IN BEHALF OF THE WHOLE COLONY; whereas, did thewhole colony know, with what ill-will that House hath entered on somenecessary public measures, they would not hesitate a moment to think themunworthy of such a trust.Immediate necessity makes many things convenient, which if continuedwould grow into oppressions. Expedience and right are different things.When the calamities of America required a consultation, there was nomethod so ready, or at that time so proper, as to appoint persons from theseveral Houses of Assembly for that purpose; and the wisdom with whichthey have proceeded hath preserved this continent from ruin. But as it ismore than probable that we shall never be without a CONGRESS, every well wisher to good order, must own, that the mode for choosing membersof that body, deserves consideration. And I put it as a question to those,who make a study of mankind, whether REPRESENTATION ANDELECTION is not too great a power for one and the same body of men topossess? When we are planning for posterity, we ought to remember, thatvirtue is not hereditary.It is from our enemies that we often gain excellent maxims, and arefrequently surprised into reason by their mistakes. Mr. Cornwall (one of theLords of the Treasury) treated the petition of the New York Assembly withcontempt, because THAT House, he said, consisted but of twenty-sixmembers, which trifling number, he argued, could not with decency be putfor the whole. We thank him for his involuntary honesty. [*Note 1]TO CONCLUDE, however strange it may appear to some, or howeverunwilling they may be to think so, matters not, but many strong and strikingreasons may be given, to shew, that nothing can settle our affairs soexpeditiously as an open and determined declaration for independance.Some of which are,FIRST--It is the custom of nations, when any two are at war, for some otherpowers, not engaged in the quarrel, to step in as mediators, and bring aboutthe preliminaries of a peace: but while America calls herself the Subject of Great Britain, no power, however well disposed she may be, can offer hermediation. Wherefore, in our present state we may quarrel on for ever.SECONDLY--It is unreasonable to suppose, that France or Spain will giveus any kind of assistance, if we mean only, to make use of that assistancefor the purpose of repairing the breach, and strengthening the connectionbetween Britain and America; because, those powers would be sufferers bythe consequences.THIRDLY--While we profess ourselves the subjects of Britain, we must, inthe eye of foreign nations, be considered as rebels. The precedent issomewhat dangerous to THEIR PEACE, for men to be in arms under thename of subjects; we, on the spot, can solve the paradox: but to unite resistance and subjection, requires an idea mu

ch too refined for thecommon understanding.FOURTHLY--Were a manifesto to be published, and despatched to foreigncourts, setting forth the miseries we have endured, and the peaceablemethods we have ineffectually used for redress; declaring, at the same time,that not being able, any longer, to live happily or safely under the crueldisposition of the British court, we had been driven to the necessity ofbreaking off all connections with her; at the same time, assuring all suchcourts of our peacable disposition towards them, and of our desire ofentering into trade with them: Such a memorial would produce more goodeffects to this Continent, than if a ship were freighted with petitions toBritain.Under our present denomination of British subjects, we can neither bereceived nor heard abroad: The custom of all courts is against us, and willbe so, until, by an independance, we take rank with other nations.These proceedings may at first appear strange and difficult; but, like allother steps which we have already passed over, will in a little time becomefamiliar and agreeable; and, until an independance is declared, theContinent will feel itself like a man who continues putting off someunpleasant business from day to day, yet knows it must be done, hates toset about it, wishes it over, and is continually haunted with the thoughts ofits necessity.Note 1 Those who would fully understand of what great consequence alarge and equal representation is to a state, should read Burgh's politicalDisquisitions.APPENDIXSINCE the publication of the first edition of this pamphlet, or rather, on thesame day on which it came out, the King's Speech made its appearance inthis city. Had the spirit of prophecy directed the birth of this production, itcould not have brought it forth, at a more seasonable juncture, or a more necessary time. The bloody mindedness of the one, shew the necessity ofpursuing the doctrine of the other. Men read by way of revenge. And theSpeech instead of terrifying, prepared a way for the manly principles ofIndependance.Ceremony, and even, silence, from whatever motive they may arise, have ahurtful tendency, when they give the least degree of countenance to baseand wicked performances; wherefore, if this maxim be admitted, itnaturally follows, that the King's Speech, as being a piece of finishedvillany, deserved, and still deserves, a general execration both by theCongress and the people. Yet, as the domestic tranquillity of a nation,depends greatly, on the CHASTITY of what may properly be calledNATIONAL MANNERS, it is often better, to pass some things over insilent disdain, than to make use of such new methods of dislike, as mightintroduce the least innovation, on that guardian of our peace and safety.And, perhaps, it is chiefly owing to this prudent delicacy, that the King'sSpeech, hath not, before now, suffered a public execution. The Speech if itmay be called one,

is nothing better than a wilful audacious libel against thetruth, the common good, and the existence of mankind; and is a formal andpompous 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 consequence of Kings; for as nature knows them NOT, they knowNOT HER, and although they are beings of our OWN creating, they knownot US, and are become the gods of their creators. The Speech hath onegood 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 theface of it. It leaves us at no loss: And every line convinces, even in themoment of reading, that He, who hunts the woods for prey, the naked anduntutored 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 ENGLANDTO THE INHABITANTS OF AMERICA," hath, perhaps, from a vainsupposition, that the people HERE were to be frightened at the pomp anddescription of a king, given, (though very unwisely on his part) the realcharacter 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) "itis very unfair in you to withhold them from that prince, BY WHOSE NODALONE THEY WERE PERMITTED TO DO ANY THING." This istoryism with a witness! Here is idolatry even without a mask: And he whocan so calmly hear, and digest such doctrine, hath forfeited his claim torationality--an apostate from the order of manhood; and ought to beconsidered--as one, who hath, not only given up the proper dignity of aman, but sunk himself beneath the rank of animals, and contemptiblycrawls through the world like a worm.However, it matters very little now, what the king of England either says ordoes; he hath wickedly broken through every moral and human obligation,trampled nature and conscience beneath his feet; and by a steady andconstitutional spirit of insolence and cruelty, procured for himself anuniversal 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 totake care of, than to be granting away her property, to support a power whois become a reproach to the names of men and christians--YE, whose officeit is to watch over the morals of a nation, of whatsoever sect ordenomination ye are of, as well as ye, who, are more immediately theguardians of the public liberty, if ye wish to preserve your native country uncontaminated by European corruption, ye must in secret wish aseparation--But leaving the moral part to private reflection, I shall chieflyconfine my farther remarks to the following heads.First, That it is the interest of America to be sepa

rated from Britain.Secondly, Which is the easiest and most practicable plan,RECONCILIATION or INDEPENDANCE? with some occasionalremarks.In support of the first, I could, if I judged it proper, produce the opinion ofsome of the ablest and most experienced men on this continent; and whosesentiments, on that head, are not yet publicly known. It is in reality aself-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 whatopulence is; and although the progress which she hath made standsunparalleled in the history of other nations, it is but childhood, comparedwith what she would be capable of arriving at, had she, as she ought tohave, 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 ifneglected. It is the commerce and not the conquest of America, by whichEngland is to be benefited, and that would in a great measure continue,were the countries as independant of each other as France and Spain;because in many articles, neither can go to a better market. But it is theindependance of this country of Britain or any other, which is now the mainand only object worthy of contention, and which, like all other truthsdiscovered by necessity, will appear clearer and stronger every day.First, Because it will come to that one time or other.Secondly, Because, the longer it is delayed the harder it will be toaccomplish.I have frequently amused myself both in public and private companies,with silently remarking, the specious errors of those who speak withoutreflecting. And among the many which I have heard, the following seemsmost general, viz. that had this rupture happened forty or fifty years hence,instead of NOW, the Continent would have been more able to have shakenoff the dependance. To which I reply, that our military ability AT THISTIME, arises from the experience gained in the last war, and which in fortyor fifty years time, would have been totally extinct. The Continent, wouldnot, by that time, have had a General, or even a military officer left; andwe, or those who may succeed us, would have been as ignorant of martialmatters 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 hadexperience, but wanted numbers; and forty or fifty years hence, we shouldhave numbers, without experience; wherefore, the proper point of time,obtained: And that point of time is the present time.The reader will pardon this digression, as it does not properly come underthe 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 governingand sovereign power of America, (which, as matters are nowcircumstanced, is giving up the point intirely) we shall deprive ourselves ofthe very means of sinking the debt we have, or may contract. The value ofthe back lands which some of the provinces are clandestinely deprived of,by the unjust extension of the limits of Canada, valued only at five poundssterling per hundred acres, amount to upwards of twenty-five millions,Pennsylvania currency; and the quit-rents at one penny sterling per acre, totwo millions yearly.It is by the sale of those lands that the debt may be sunk, without burthen toany, and the quit-rent reserved thereon, will always lessen, and in time, willwholly support the yearly expence of government. It matters not how longthe debt is in paying, so that the lands when sold be applied to the dischargeof 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 easiest and mostpracticable plan, RECONCILIATION or INDEPENDANCE; with someoccasional remarks.He who takes nature for his guide is not easily beaten out of his argument,and on that ground, I answer GENERALLYUTHAT INDEPENDANCEBEING A SINGLE SIMPLE LINE, CONTAINED WITHINOURSELVES; AND RECONCILIATION, A MATTER EXCEEDINGLYPERPLEXED AND COMPLICATED, AND IN WHICH, ATREACHEROUS CAPRICIOUS COURT IS TO INTERFERE, GIVESTHE ANSWER WITHOUT A DOUBT.The present state of America is truly alarming to every man who is capableof reflexion. Without law, without government, without any other mode ofpower than what is founded on, and granted by courtesy. Held together byan unexampled concurrence of sentiment, which, is nevertheless subject tochange, and which, every secret enemy is endeavouring to dissolve. Ourpresent condition, is, Legislation without law; wisdom without a plan;constitution without a name; and, what is strangely astonishing, perfectIndependance contending for dependance. The instance is without aprecedent; the case never existed before; and who can tell what may be theevent? The property of no man is secure in the present unbraced system ofthings. The mind of the multitude is left at random, and seeing no fixedobject before them, they pursue such as fancy or opinion starts. Nothing iscriminal; there is no such thing as treason; wherefore, every one thinkshimself at liberty to act as he pleases. The Tories dared not have assembledoffensively, had they known that their lives, by that act, were forfeited tothe laws of the state. A line of distinction should be drawn, between,English soldiers taken in battle, and inhabitants of America taken in arms.The first are prisoners, but the latter traitors. The one forfeits his liberty, theother his head.Notwithstanding our wisdom, there is a visible feebleness in some of

ourproceedings which gives encouragement to dissentions. The ContinentalBelt is too loosely buckled. And if something is not done in time, it will betoo late to do any thing, and we shall fall into a state, in which, neither RECONCILIATION nor INDEPENDANCE will be practicable. The kingand his worthless adherents are got at their old game of dividing theContinent, and there are not wanting among us, Printers, who will be busyspreading specious falsehoods. The artful and hypocritical letter whichappeared a few months ago in two of the New York papers, and likewise intwo others, is an evidence that there are men who want either judgment orhonesty.It is easy getting into holes and corners and talking of reconciliation: But dosuch men seriously consider, how difficult the task is, and how dangerous itmay prove, should the Continent divide thereon. Do they take within theirview, all the various orders of men whose situation and circumstances, as well as their own, are to be considered therein. Do they put themselves inthe place of the sufferer whose ALL is ALREADY gone, and of the soldier,who hath quitted ALL for the defence of his country. If their ill judgedmoderation be suited to their own private situations ONLY, regardless ofothers, the event will convince them, that "they are reckoning without theirHost."Put us, say some, on the footing we were on in sixty-three: To which Ianswer, the request is not NOW in the power of Britain to comply with,neither will she propose it; but if it were, and even should be granted, I ask,as a reasonable question, By what means is such a corrupt and faithlesscourt to be kept to its engagements? Another parliament, nay, even thepresent, may hereafter repeal the obligation, on the pretence, of its beingviolently obtained, or unwisely granted; and in that case, Where is ourredress?--No going to law with nations; cannon are the barristers ofCrowns; and the sword, not of justice, but of war, decides the suit. To be onthe footing of sixty-three, it is not sufficient, that the laws only be put onthe same state, but, that our circumstances, likewise, be put on the samestate; Our burnt and destroyed towns repaired or built up, our private lossesmade good, our public debts (contracted for defence) discharged;otherwise, we shall be millions worse than we were at that enviable period.Such a request, had it been complied with a year ago, would have won theheart and soul of the Continent--but now it is too late, "The Rubicon ispassed."Besides, the taking up arms, merely to enforce the repeal of a pecuniarylaw, seems as unwarrantable by the divine law, and as repugnant to humanfeelings, as the taking up arms to enforce obedience thereto. The object, oneither side, doth not justify the means; for the lives of men are too valuableto be cast away on such trifles. It is the violence which is done andthreatened to our persons; the destruction of our prop

erty by an armedforce; the invasion of our country by fire and sword, which conscientiouslyqualifies the use of arms: And the instant, in which such a mode of defencebecame necessary, all subjection to Britain ought to have ceased; and theindependancy of America, should have been considered, as dating its erafrom, and published by, THE FIRST MUSKET THAT WAS FIREDAGAINST HER. This line is a line of consistency; neither drawn bycaprice, nor extended by ambition; but produced by a chain of events, ofwhich the colonies were not the authors.I shall conclude these remarks, with the following timely and well intendedhints. We ought to reflect, that there are three different ways, by which anindependancy may hereafter be effected; and that ONE of those THREE,will one day or other, be the fate of America, viz. By the legal voice of thepeople in Congress; by a military power; or by a mob: It may not alwayshappen that our soldiers are citizens, and the multitude a body of reasonablemen; virtue, as I have already remarked, is not hereditary, neither is itperpetual. Should an independancy be brought about by the first of thosemeans, we have every opportunity and every encouragement before us, to form the noblest purest constitution on the face of the earth. We have it inour power to begin the world over again. A situation, similar to the present,hath not happened since the days of Noah until now. The birthday of a newworld is at hand, and a race of men, perhaps as numerous as all Europecontains, are to receive their portion of freedom from the event of a fewmonths. The Reflexion is awful--and in this point of view, How trifling,how ridiculous, do the little, paltry cavellings, of a few weak or interestedmen appear, when weighed against the business of a world.Should we neglect the present favorable and inviting period, and anIndependance be hereafter effected by any other means, we must charge theconsequence to ourselves, or to those rather, whose narrow and prejudicedsouls, are habitually opposing the measure, without either inquiring orreflecting. There are reasons to be given in support of Independance, whichmen should rather privately think of, than be publicly told of. We ought notnow to be debating whether we shall be independant or not, but, anxious toaccomplish it on a firm, secure, and honorable basis, and uneasy rather thatit is not yet began upon. Every day convinces us of its necessity. Even theTories (if such beings yet remain among us) should, of all men, be the mostsolicitous to promote it; for, as the appointment of committees at first,protected them from popular rage, so, a wise and well established form ofgovernment, will be the only certain means of continuing it securely to them. WHEREFORE, if they have not virtue enough to be WHIGS, theyought to have prudence enough to wish for Independance.In short, Independance is the only BOND that can tye and keep us togethe

r.We shall then see our object, and our ears will be legally shut against theschemes of an intriguing, as well, as a cruel enemy. We shall then too, beon a proper footing, to treat with Britain; for there is reason to conclude,that the pride of that court, will be less hurt by treating with the Americanstates for terms of peace, than with those, whom she denominates,"rebellious subjects," for terms of accommodation. It is our delaying it thatencourages her to hope for conquest, and our backwardness tends only toprolong the war. As we have, without any good effect therefrom, withheldour trade to obtain a redress of our grievances, let us NOW try thealternative, by INDEPENDANTLY redressing them ourselves, and thenoffering to open the trade. The mercantile and reasonable part in England,will be still with us; because, peace WITH trade, is preferable to warWITHOUT it. And if this offer be not accepted, other courts may beapplied to.On these grounds I rest the matter. And as no offer hath yet been made torefute the doctrine contained in the former editions of this pamphlet, it is anegative proof, that either the doctrine cannot be refuted, or, that the partyin favour of it are too numerous to be opposed. WHEREFORE, instead ofgazing at each other with suspicious or doubtful curiosity, let each of us,hold out to his neighbour the hearty hand of friendship, and unite indrawing a line, which, like an act of oblivion, shall bury in forgetfulnessevery former dissention. Let the names of Whig and Tory be extinct; andlet none other be heard among us, than those of A GOOD CITIZEN, ANOPEN AND RESOLUTE FRIEND, AND A VIRTUOUS SUPPORTEROF THE RIGHTS OF MANKIND AND OF THE FREE ANDINDEPENDANT STATES OF AMERICA.---End of COMMON SENSE by Thomas Paine