pared to say, that at no future moment I would tax America. There may be times when the necessity of supplying the exigencies of this country may demand that aid; and therefore I would exert our authority now by a practicable claim of right, which I hope will not hereafter be disputed. General Burgoyne. Sir, I look upon America to be our child, which I think we have already spoiled by too much indulgence. We are desired to conciliate measures with the Americans; I look upon this measure to have a totally different effect; I think it a misuse of time to go into a committee, and that even the enquiry, the news of which will soon reach America, will tend to nothing but to raise heats, and not appease, but irritate and disturb the more. It is said, if you remove this duty, you will remove all grievances in America; but I am apprehensive that it is the right of taxation they contend about, and not the tax; it is the independent state of that country upon the legislature of this, which is contended for; but, Sir, I am ready to resist that proposition, and to contend, at any future time, against such independence. I will not enter into the characters of people, nor will I call the great person who planned these measures a cherubim, seraphim, or arch-angel; but, as a man, I believe he has a good head and an honest heart. [The House here seemed very noisy, and did not attend.] He therefore sat down, concluding, that he wished to see America convinced by persuasion rather than the sword. Mr. T. Townshend. Sir, I wish much to go into a committee upon this occasion, because the tea duty, as an object of revenue, is unworthy your consideration; but it is an object which, when once removed from the Americans, will give ease and satisfaction to their minds; and it is preserved by you merely to keep up a continual contest. I will not go back to the ground of arguments which has been so often trod, and which I wish had not been brought forth as the ground of former proceedings, mixing them with the present. I shall look upon this committee, if granted, as the prelude to that peace which you want to restore to America, and shall therefore give my hearty affirmative. Lord Clare. Every man who has spoken on this occasion, has prudently avoided going into any thing that gave rise to the original taxation. I am sorry to find that there is even a negative voice against continuing this tax; but as I find there is dissention upon the occasion, it will give room to the Americans to say that the question was much debated, and far from being unanimous; they will upon that account, hold resistance to the measure to be a good ground for some time or other producing a repeal. I could have wished to have seen the House nearly unanimous against the motion, as I am afraid our differences here will countenance resistance there. What, Sir, would they have us surrender the right of Great Britain? It is impossible, in the nature of things, that he can carry this question; and instead of my hon. friend (Mr. Fuller) wishing to restore peace and quietude, be will find he is whetting his sword that it may cut with a keener edge. Mr. Bulier. Sir, I would treat the Americans as subjects of Great Britain, and think them liable to be taxed as well as any others. I am afraid that all these disturbances have been owing to a change of measures in this country. I think a repeal of this Act will have a bad effect, and you will not know where it will end. Mr. Frederick Montagu. Sir, I feel a strong inclination to trouble the House on this occasion. There must be one supreme right of taxing, I allow, but I think it inexpedient at present to exercise it, and that the only proper way of taxing of America, is through the medium of commerce, and not by hard money. If this motion is rejected, I do not think it will carry the appearance as if we meant to be pacific. Colonel Barré. I have spoken, Sir, fully on this affair, in what I have said at different times before, and it is impossible to tread the same ground, and to make it pleasant to the same hearers. It has been said that millions have been collected from this country for the use of America; but it ought to be considered, that the stroke of war has been given in many of his Majesty's dominions, sometimes necessary in one, sometimes in another, and wherever an injury has been struck, there Great Britain resents it. This tax has been said to be not a fruitful one; I think it a very fruitful one, for it has produced riots and disturbances; it has been resisted, it has done its duty, let us dismiss it. I have been much quoted for requisitions; if you will make them with some address, they will comply. I have been also quoted for the olive branch; I say, you have let slip North presented the Bill," For the impartial administration of justice in the cases of persons questioned for any acts done by them in the execution of the law, or for the suppression of riots and tumults, in the province of Massachuset's Bay, in New England." The Bill was read a first time; upon which, several millions in the East, and now look | Massachuset's Bay.] April 21. Lord Lord North said, he was ashamed to take up the time of the House at that late hour of the night, and the more so, as what he had to say chiefly related to himself. He gave an account of the letter which Mr. Burke had read from lord Hillsborough to the Americans, and stated the matter of its contents in the best light he could. His lordship said, this letter of concession was far from quieting the minds of the Americans; that they were guilty of all riots and disturbances; that the nonimportation agreement was as impudent and futile a measure as ever existed; and he was glad he did not, at that time, propose the repeal of that tax, when all the resolutions of the town-meetings denied the authority of this country. Nothing but wisdom on our side, and prudence on theirs, can bring them to a better temper. The tea tax is not an inconsiderable revenue. Convince your colonies that you are able, and not afraid to controul them, and depend upon it, obedience will be the result of your deliberation; let us conduct ourselves with firmness and resolution throughout the whole of these measures, and there is not the least doubt but peace and quietude will soon be restored. Mr. Sawbridge rose, saying, Sir, I am astonished at the noble lord's proceeding, in bringing in a Bill of the utmost consequence, at a time when there is so thin a House. [There were only forty-one members.] It is an improper time; it is taking us by surprize; it is cowardly. But, Sir, I should think myself highly unworthy a seat in this assembly, were I to suffer so pernicious a Bill to pass in any stage, without giving my hearty negative to it. I will oppose it every time I have an opportunity, although I do not imagine I shall be much attended to. This is a Bill, Sir, of such a ridiculous and cruel nature, that I really am astonished how any person could think of making it. Does the noble lord think that a man who chances to see a person murdered in America, will come over here as an evidence against the aggressor? Does the noble lord think that any American would hazard a trial here, or that he would expect to have justice done him, if he was to come over? Then, Sir, a person would be brought over here to be tried, and you would have evidences only on one side; but I imagine if those evidences should not be sufficient, evidence here, who never saw the transaction, would be procured, and the criminal acquitted. I plainly foresee the dangerous consequences of this Bill; it is meant to enslave America; and the same minister who means to enslave them, would, if he had an opportu Mr. Dowdeswell. I wish the noble lord would consider what will be the result of these measures. I apprehend the conse-nity, enslave England; it is his aim, and quences will be dangerous. We are now in great difficulties; let us resolve to do justice, before it is too late. The House, at twenty minutes past eleven, divided. The Yeas went forth. what he wishes to do; but I sincerely hope the Americans will not admit of the execution of these destructive Bills, but nobly refuse them; if they do not, they are the most abject slaves that ever the earth produced, and nothing that the minister can do is base enough for them. Lord North. Sir, I think myself called upon to vindicate my conduct for bringing in the Bill in so thin a House. Sir, was I to know there would be few members attend? I did as I promised I would do, which was, to bring in the Bill as soon as it was ready; it was but just finished when I brought it, and I little expected to have any debate upon it in this stage: Igerous, that no person will venture to put thought, Sir, the debate would be upon them into execution; he is therefore the second reading; it usually is so; and obliged to have recourse to a third, to inI sincerely hope when this Bill is read a demnify such persons as shall be concerned second time, that we shall have a very full in executing his destructive project. I House, and that every gentleman will give shall oppose this Bill every time I have an his opinion upon it. I wish to have it opportunity, and I trust every lover of his thoroughly discussed, and if it should be country will do the same. He further found to be a bad Bill, in God's name said, that whatever professions of candour throw it out; but if otherwise, you can- were thrown out, he should trust to them not be too unanimous in assenting to it; with great caution; that for his part these the more unanimity there is, the stronger attacks made abroad, seemed to be ineffect it will have. As to its being meant tended to prepare men's minds for meato enslave America, I deny it, I have no sures of a similar nature to be enforced at such intention; it is an unpleasant, but home; and that the conduct and comnecessary step to bring them to a sense of plexion of public measures in general their duty; that assertion has much the wore the appearance of a systematic desame truth in it as what has been before sign of enslaving the people, as well in said, that the Americans had seen their Great Britain as the colonies. error, and were willing to satisfy the East India Company. Sir, there is a ship arrived, I think her name is the Fortune, captain Goreham; she arrived in Boston harbour the latter end of February, or beginning of March 1774, I cannot say which; she was loaded with tea; the inhabitants came immediately and unloaded her, and emptied the contents of her cargo into the sea. Is this, Sir, seeing their error? Is this, Sir, reforming? Is this making restitution to the East India Company? Surely no gentleman will, after this, urge any thing in their defence. The hon. gentleman has said this Bill is a pernicious one; I trust, when gentlemen come to consider it, they will see it quite otherwise. Sir Thomas Frankland rose only to acquaint the House, that he, yesterday afternoon, after the House broke up, was shewn a letter which a friend of his had received from Boston, dated March 1774, which mentioned the tea being destroyed, which was the cargo of captain Goreham, as the noble lord had mentioned. Mr. Byng. Sir, I cannot help rising to oppose this Bill. I agree with my worthy friend, that it is a most pernicious Bill, and, I fear, made with no good intention. I really am surprised at the noble lord, who said, his wish was to make the laws in America as near as possible to our own. Is this Bill any thing like it? No, it is quite the reverse; dragging people from one country to another to give evidence, is such a proposition as I never heard before, nor could have thought of; but, Sir, every person must know, and will allow, that the noble lord finds his other two Bills are so defective and dan Lord Beauchamp. I really am sur prised, Sir, to hear an hon. gentleman say, that every person must know that the two former Bills are defective. Sir, I will venture to say the fact is otherwise; every person must allow they are necessary for the preservation of peace, and restoring the Americans to a sense of their duty. Does the hon. gentleman think the soldiery at Boston will act without they are indemnified? No; they could not. No person would execute the laws half so well, was this Bill not to pass. I think it a necessary Bill; it will make their trials by juries like ours, which are so much approved of; and I shall give my hearty affirmative to it. Mr. Sawbridge. Sir, I rise to explain to the noble lord why I think it a pernicious Bill. I am certain, that however willing I might be to bring an offender to justice, was I to see a murder committed in London, my love of justice might induce me to go to any part of the country to appear as an evidence; but I assure the noble lord I would not go over to America on any account, nor for any mandate that he could issue; and I believe that the noble lord will allow, that not any sum would induce him to go over now; therefore we have the same right to imagine, that people in America will not come over here. I make no doubt but government will take care to bring over evidence in support of their side, but they will not trouble themselves with evidence on the contrary; therefore all your trials will be ex parte, and nothing but a mockery of justice. I do not mention this as an advocate for America, but mention it as an Englishman. The question was then put, and carried, | that the Bill be read a second time on the 25th. sistent with the dignity and justice of this House; I tremble when I am, for fear of the consequences; and I think it a little extraordinary, that Mr. Bollan should be admitted to be heard as an American Further Debates in the Commons on the Bill for regulating the Government of Mas-agent in the House of Lords, when in the sachuset's Bay.] April 22. On the motion for the second reading of this Bill, Mr. Fuller said, he did not rise to make any debate, for he was not enabled as yet to form any opinion whether the Bill before the House was a proper one or not; as copies of the charters which had been ordered before the House were not yet laid, he would venture to say, that no man knew the constitution of that government; it was therefore impossible for him to say, in what manner he would correct and amend it. Sir George Savile said, he had not troubled the House before on the occasion, but he could not help observing, that the measure now before the House was a very doubtful and dangerous one; doubtful as to the matter and propriety of regulation, and dangerous as to its consequence; that charters by government were sacred things, and are only to be taken away by a due course of law, either as a punishment for an offence, or for a breach of the contract, and that can only be by evidence of the facts; nor could he conceive that in either of those cases there could be any such thing as proceeding without a fair hearing of both parties. This measure before us seems to be a most extraordinary exertion of legislative power. Let us suppose a lease granted to a man, wherein was a covenant, the breach of which would subject him to a forfeiture of his lease-would not a court of justice require evidence of the fact? Why, then, will you proceed different from the line which is always observed in courts of justice? You are now going to alter the charter, because it is convenient. In what manner does the House mean to take away this charter, when in fact they refuse to hear the parties, or to go through a legal course of evidence of the facts? Chartered rights have, at all times, when attempted to be altered, or taken away, occasioned much bloodshed and strife; and whatever persons in this House may have advanced, that they do not proceed upon this business but with trembling hands, I do also assure them that I have shewn my fears upon this occasion, for I have run away from every question, except one, to which I gave my negative. I do not like to be present at a business which I think incon House of Commons he was refused. I believe it is true, that the facts set forth in his petition to this House, were different from those which he presented to the House of Lords, in one declaring himself an inhabitant of Boston, and in the other omitting it. I cannot conceive it possible to proceed on this Bill upon the small ground of evidence which you have had. Mr. Welbore Ellis. I must rise, Sir, with great difidence, when I differ from the hon. gentleman who spoke last, whose abilities are so eminently great; but I think, that chartered rights are by no means those sacred things which never can or ought to be altered; they are vested in the crown, as a prerogative, for the good of the people at large; if the supreme legislature find that those charters so granted are both unfit and inconvenient for the public utility, they have a right to make them fit and convenient: wherever private property is concerned, the legislature will not take it away without making a full recompence; but wherever the regulation of public matter is the object, they have a right to correct, controul, or take it away, as may best suit the public welfare. The crown may sometimes grant improper powers with regard to governments that are to be established-will it not be highly proper and necessary that the legislature, seeing in what manner the crown has been ill-advised, should take it into their consideration, and alter it as far as necessary? It is the legislature's duty to correct the errors that have been established in the infancy of that constitution, and regulate them for the public welfare. Is a charter, not consistent with the public good, to be continued? The hon. gentleman says, much bloodshed has been occasioned by taking away or altering of chartered rights; I grant it; but it has always been where encroachments have been made by improper parties, and the attack has been carried on by improper powers. He also says, this form of government in America ought to be altered without hearing the parties; the papers on your table, surely, are sufficient evidence what they have to say in their defence ;-look only into the letter dated the 19th of November, 1773, wherein the governor applied to the 8 these six or seven years last past. We have enacted such a variety of laws, with these new taxes, together with a refusal to repeal the trifling duty on tea; all these things have served no other purpose but to distress and perplex. I think the Americans have done no more than every subject would do in an arbitrary state, where laws are imposed against their will. In my conscience, I think, taxation and legislation are in this case inconsistent. Have you not a legislative right over Ireland? And yet no one will dare to say we have a right to tax. These acts, respecting America, will involve this country and its ministers in misfortunes, and I wish I may not add, in ruin. Lord North. I do not consider this matter of regulation to be taking away their charters in such manner as is represented; it is a regulation of government to assist the crown; it appears to me not to be a mat sity. If it does not stand upon that ground, it stands on nothing. The account which has just now been read to you is an authentic paper, transmitted to government here, shewing that the council refused, in every case, their assistance and advice; and will this country sit still, when they see the colony proceeding against your own subjects, tarring and feathering your servants: denying your laws and au council for advice, and they neglected giving it to him and also wherein a petition was presented to the council by certain persons who applied for protection to their property during these disturbances; the council, without giving any answer, adjourned for ten days, and the governor was not able to do any thing himself without their opinion. Look again, Sir, into the resolution which the council came to when they met again, stating the total insufficiency of their power. This, surely, Sir, is an evidence competent to ground this Bill upon. We have now got no farther than just to alter these two parts, as stated by themselves. Surely, Sir, that form of government which will not protect your property, ought to be altered in such a manner as it may be able to do it. General Conway. What I intend to say will not delay the House long. [The House being rather noisy, the general said, I beg leave once more to say a short word.]ter of political expediency, but of neces I am very sure what I intend to say will little deserve the attention of the House, but the subject is of that importance, that it requires it. The consequence of this Bill will be very important and dangerous. Parliament cannot break into a right without hearing the parties. The question, then, is simply this: have they been heard? What! because the papers say a murder has been committed, does it follow they have proved it? Audi alteram partem' is a maxim Ithority; refusing every direction and advice have long adhered to; but it is something so inconsistent with parliamentary proceedings not to do it, that I am astonished at it. The council are blamed, because they did not give that advice to the governor which he wanted. I think, Sir, the governor might have acted alone, without their assistance. Gentlemen will consider that this is not only the charter of Boston, or of any particular part, but the charter, of all America. Are the Americans not to be heard? Do they not choose to consent and agree about appointing an agent? I think there is no harm, upon this occasion, in stretching a point; and I would rather hear Mr. Bollan as an agent of America (though he is a little irregular in his appointment) sooner than leave it to be said, that this Bill passed without it. The House being vociferous, he said, I am afraid I tire the House with my weak voice; if that is the case, I will not proceed, but I do think, and it is my sincere opinion, that we are the aggressors and innovators, and not the colonies. We have irritated and forced laws upon them for which you send? Are we, Sir, seeing all this, to be silent, and give the governor no support? Gentlemen say, let the colony come to your bar and be heard in their defence; though it is not likely that they will come, when they deny your au thority in every instance. Can we remain in this situation long? We must effectually take some measure to correct and amend the defects of that government. I have heard so many different opinions in regard to our conduct in America, I hardly know how to answer them. The hon. gentleman, who spoke last, formerly blamed the tame and insipid conduct of government; now he condemns this measure as harsh and severe. The Americans have tarred and feathered your subjects, plundered your merchants, burnt your ships, denied all obedience to your laws and authority; yet so clement, and so long forbearing has our conduct been, that it is incumbent on us now to take a different course. Whatever may be the consequence, we must risk something; if we do not, all is over. The measure now pro |