THE political creed of America (for I make no esti­mate of two parties, who taken together are a Mi­nority of the continent) may be comprised in the twelve following articles.

I. Every nation has authority to frame such a govern­ment for itself, as will, without injury to others, be most conducive to its own felicity.

II. The national sovereignty under every form of go­vernment whether in the hands of one, or of many per­sons, or however modelled, is absolute; for no State can exist, if any of its members may by force or fraud attempt its subversion with impunity: And therefore, every na­tion punishes treason, or an attempt tending to overturn the constitution, as the highest crime of which a subject can be guilty.

III. No man can be innocent, even F [...]ro Conscienti [...], in an endeavour to change the government of his country, if the meditated revolution will light up a civil war, and the miseries in prospect are likely to exceed those, which the community have been accustomed to endure.

IV. The establishments made in America by English emigrants and their associates, might in the early day of the colonies, if the parent country had been so determined, have been prevented or broken up.

V. The Lords and Commons of England, being con­n [...]sant of the grants and charters of their Kings and Queens, for the encouragement of the colonies, and of the transactions under them; and afterwards co-operating [Page 4]for regulating the plantations, rendering them secure a­gainst foreign invasions and useful to Great-Britain, they cannot therefore be considered as merely Royal, but Parli­amentary, or national establishments.

VI. The grants and charters to the colonies, and the posterior settlements, regulations and usages by the per­mission, and with the knowledge or privity, and without the interdiction of Parliament, are incontestible proofs of a great national covenant between the Mother Country and the colonies, for her favours (which undeniably have been many and great) by inspiring the Colonists with confidence, and exposing them to hazardous and ex­pensive undertakings, created rights; and gratitude never obliges to returns and surrenders, incompatible with those rights which are essential to the felicity of the receiver of the benefits.

VII. Before the year 1764, the King, Lords and Com­mons, were universally acknowledged to be the supreme law-givers of the whole empire; of which the colonies were members.

VIII. The national c [...]enant bound the parent country to protect and promote the colonies, according to the good faith implied in the grants and charters, and other royal and national acts in their favour, as far as was consitient with the general weal of all the dispersions of the nation; and it obliged the plantations to submit to her authority, in all cases not repugnant to their grants, charters and establishments; and to such acts aad contributions, as were necessary for the common defence and felicity of the empire.

IX. Neither of the contracting parties may dissolve this compact, as lo [...] as their joint aim in the union, to wit, their mutual prosperity, can be attained by it.

X. As no provision was made for constituting an impar­tial Judge between them, to bridle or correct the partiality or infidelity of either party, therefore their controversies [Page 5]are to be decided by negotiation and treaty, or on appeal by battle to the Lord of Hosts; for neither is obliged to surrender its essential rights at the will of the other, and each is justifiable in exerting its own self-preserving powers.

XI. When one of them wants either will or ability to fulfil its engagements, the other, if not instrumental to this disaffection or impotence, will be discharged from the original obligation. But,

XII. Since amongst imperfect beings offences are inevi­table, the contractors are by the laws of a judge who can­not be deceived, reciprocally bound, upon exceptions ta­ken, to pursue every measure of a re-conciliatory nature, consistent with the end of the union; and to such mutual condescensions, as tend to the re-establishment of the ge­neral felicity, peace and harmony: And this is the more eminently their duty, since the empire consists of other branches, which have offended neither of the parties at strife, and will nevertheless be ruined if the controversy ends in a separation,

In the application of these principles to the present quar­rel, perhaps neither Great-Britain nor America will ap­pear to be without blame.

What a new and awful idea of the constitution did the Parent Country hold up to her Colonies, at the passing of the stamp act! Her language was this:

"You Americans are absolutely ours. We may dis­pose of your persons, your commerce, your lands and ac­quisitions as we please. You have no rights. The grants of our Kings to your ancestors do not bind this nation. The privileges and securities of Englishmen cannot be yours unless you return to the old realm. Our ancient indulgences were temporary permissions, from which you can deduce no title to permanent enjoyments. Your plea that our Commons are not of your electing, and that we and they are interested in the increase of your burdens, [Page 6]can come with propriety only from the mouth of a British inhabitant —All America is subject to our taxations; nor will we hear your complaints, until you first own our authority to deal with you as we please, and acknowledge that such benefits as you request, are to be expected not as of right, but of grace."

Had England such principles at the first emigrations, she was bound to declare them to the adventurers, before they gave themselves to the winds and the seas, to gain her a share of the wealth and commerce of the new world, by which her island has been converted into a Nation of Princes.

But thus she never did speak till this memorable aera; and therefore the Colonies were in consternation at the haughty tone, uttering this novel explanation of the nature of the union. They remonstrated—they resisted —and the instant Great-Britain took off the new burden, America re­garded her deeds more than her words, submitting without cavalling, to that rational sovereignty she had formerly ex­ercised, to the common advantage of the empire.

The grand desideratum of the moment in which the stamp-act was repealed (1766) was some plan for obtain­ing in future the reasonable contributions of the Colonies for the common defence, consistent with the supremacy of Parliament and the freedom of America, either in the old or in some new and unexceptionable mode. If assemblies were no longer to be trusted, for grants on seperate requisi­tions from the Crown (though the Colonies had in this way the credit of having overacted their parts) an Ameri­can Parliament might have been constituted to insure and quicken the supplies; or permanent funds might have been set a part in every plantation for their quotas to the nati­onal charge, rising and falling with the commerce of a co­lony, perfectly consistent with their safety and the national supremacy, and requisite for the union and direction of their [Page 7]force: But to the astonishment of common sense, Great-Britain, blind to futurity, and anxious only for present peace, contented herself with an empty declaration of her authority to bind the colonies in all cases whatsoever; and as if this would have prevented America from indulging jealousies, or have induced her to slide into security and confidence, she absurdly enrolled it among her laws. Easy themselves, the ministers of the day, devised nothing to counteract the poison administered by their predecessors, and seemed to be regardless of the durable interests of the Monarch they served, and the nation who resigned to their counsels. But to proceed, we remark,

1. That the present animosities are imputable to the pride and avarice of Great-Britain, in assuming an au­thority, inconsistent with the compact by which the em­pire had been long prosperously united. The colonies had the merit of returning to their submission, as soon as they were disburdened of the stamp-duties, the irritating asser­tion of a right to despotic sovereignty over them notwith­standing. They remained quiet till Mr. Townshend re­vived the old claim in a new form, by imposing duties upon paper, paint, &c. for raising a revenue, subversive of the Colony Legislatures and the ancient customs of he empire.

2. That the Colonies were justifiable in censuring the new law devised to execute the tea duty act; for that aim­ing to enforce the claim of absolute sovereignty obliged to some conduct or declaration against an unconditional sub­mission— Perhaps it justified the open violation to which they resorted.—Representations and petitions having been tried without effect, what could be expected from the mere influence of dissuasions against the purchase of the dutied article? Had not the patriot dissuader to apprehend pro­secution and ruin, unless when imprisoned, his country­men would rise up against the government for his redemp­tion? [Page 8]And which measure was least exceptionable, the de­struction of the commodity, or the rupture of gaols, for a deliverance of the prisoners in the confederacy, and the sudden overturning of the Colony Government for defeat­ing the regular course of the law?

That the resentment of Great-Britain, on the destruc­tion and expulsion of the tea cargoes, manifested in the co­ercive measures of 1774, by altering the charter of the Massachusetts Bay, extinguishing the commerce of Boston, collecting an army there, rendering the soldiery dispunish­able for the shedding of blood, modelling the province of Quebec favourable to the designs of compulsion and vio­lence, was utterly unjustifiable, and an infraction of the league, which obliged Great-Britain to protect the colo­nies; and these severities were the more inexcusable, since to that moment her sovereignty in all cases (the matter of taxation excepted) had not been denied by the Colonies; but was by all their courts, and in all their proceedings, confessed or implied, adjudged, and supported.

4. That the provinces were not blameable in forming a Congress, to unite their counsels and ward off danger, as they did in September 1774.

5. That it was the duty of the American Assemblies, and of the Congress acting for the whole continent, at that time to tender a plan to the Mother Country, for restoring peace, consistent with the compact, by which the Parlia­ment of Great-Britain was to enjoy a supremacy for the common felicity of the empire; and consequently, that the declaration they then made, of the right of the colonies to an exclusive legislation, not only in cases of taxation but of internal polity, subject only to the negative of their so­vereign, was a departure in terms from the original league; since it left no authority to the Parliament of Great-Britain over the Plantations, except for the regulation of the ex­ternal commerce of the empire; and gave vigour to the [Page 9]jealousy before excited, by the misrepresentations of their enemies, of a design to maintain an inauspicious union and confederacy with the Monarchs, and not with the Le­gislature and People of Great-Britain; and that the intima­tion of the same Congress, of the willingness of the colo­nies, to acquiesce in their condition, prior to 1763, gave Great-Britain no sufficient ground to expect their submis­sion, to the ancient acknowledged claims of her Parlia­ment; since the repeal of the offensive statutes, without a retraction of the denial of her legislative authority, would, by a violent implication, establish the Congress's declara­tion, and amount to a consent, that America was thence­forth to be the Ally of Great-Britain, and not what the Congress, at that very time, averred her to be, a Member of the Empire. ^*

[Page 10] 6. That it would not have been inconsistent with the dignity of Great-Britain, if instead of declaring war against her Colonies, as in the joint address of the Lords and Com­mons to the King in January, 1775, she had animadvert­ed upon the denial of her authority in all cases respecting internal polity, as an error; and have specified in what particulars the Americans should be restored to a uti posi­detis relative to their charters, patents, assemblies, elec­tions, and modes of government, &c. on condition of their contributing to the necessities of the Empire. And that the parliamentary vote of the 20th of February, 1775, would have more naturally effected a treaty of reconcilia­tion, had it explicitly asserted, that the right reserved to Parliament, of approving the quantum of the Colony con­tributions towards the common defence, was not claimed [Page 11]upon the supposition, that Parliament authoritatively com­mand levies, but only on her right to judge of the exercise or defect of a due sympathy in any branch of the empire, to the general necessities of the whole body; and especially if Great-Britain had at the same time intimated a readiness to consent to such checks, limitations and restraints, as might be necessary to insure the application of them, to [Page 12]the end for which they were given; and had with these, promised a restitution of rights and act of oblivion. ^*

[Page 13] 7. That it was a fault to issue that proposal, in terms capable of being construed, into an attachment to the prin­ciple of unlimited submission, and accompanying it with acts for augmenting her force at Boston, and restraining the fishery and commerce of her Colonies, and for neg­lecting to command a cessation of arms, until the Colonies had an opportunity to deliberate, with composure of mind, upon that proposal—more especially for her irritating sally to Concord and [...]exington, on the 19th of April 1775, when no Governor but Mr. Gage had received the Parlia­ment's conciliatory resolve.

8. That as this vote, under these circumstances, and the partial direction of her wrath against the New-England Colonies, favoured the opinion of its being contrived, to deceive and divide the Provinces, the Congress of 1775, had some pretext for flying to arms, to repel further in­cursions of the British troops, till Government gave them an opportunity, in a condition less alarming, to explain the declaration of 1774 into a consistency with the ancient supremacy of Parliament, and to state the limitations re­quisite for their safety, in answer to the February resolu­tion or proposal.

9. That the total rejection of it in August 1775, and the neglect of the Congress to recall or explain the decla­ration [Page 14]of 1774, had natural tendency to exasperate the nation; and as the Continental successes in Canada, a [...] the impotent state of the British army at Boston, did leave America in a condition for a more cool and deliberate con­sideration of the controversy, than could have been expect­ed immediately after the irritations at Lexington, Concord, and Cha [...]lestown, her Congress deserves the charge of abandoning to passion, if not to motives less excusable; it being then the palpable duty of both countries, by pro­per agents in a confidential way, to state and explain their respective claims and desires.

10. That the neglect of Great-Britain to supersede the orders to the navy, for sacrificing every town on the Ame­rican coast, which should prepare for defence; and [...] her continuance of hostilities after the petition to the King, preferred by Mr. Richard Pean in August 1775, submit­ting it to his wisdom to point to some plan for the restora­tion of harmony, confirmed the cha [...]e of her commencing a war to maintain an illiberal dominion.

11. That the Congress would have had merit with their countrymen, if instead of [...] it to the King to direct ‘to a m [...]de, by which the united applications of his faithful Colonists to the throne, in pursuance of their common councils, may be [...] into a happy and permanent reconciliation;’ they had at the same time expressly assured his Majesty, that they meant not by their declaration of rights in 1774, to exclude Parliament from participating in the regulations respecting the internal po­lity of the Colonies: And that an [...]ission so naturally confirming the suspicion of a design to involve the Empire in blood, by a struggle for [...] it, discovers, at least great imperfection in the counsels of that Congress; as it was reasonable to suppose, that the petition would be compared with the principles and temper manifested in the preparations for an offensive war into Canada, and the [Page 15]disdainful rejection of the Parliament's proposal, of the month of February preceding.

12. That every partial view, whether of Great Britain, to aggrandize herself by extortionate exactions from the Plantations, regardless of their felicity; or of America, to figure as an independent power, on the ruins of Great-Britain, Ireland, and the other Colonies, Factories and Settlements, is unrighteous in the sight of God; and upon the belief of the manifestation of his justice in the govern­ment of nations, must expose to the correction of his irre­sistible and unerring hand.

13. Both countries being chargeable with inattention to the obligations they were under to pursue the measures requisite to a reconciliation, neither of them could reject terms consistent with the original compact, though no re­imbursements were offered for the losses they had sustain­ed. Add to this, that the controversy arose from—neglect in our early days, to concert such specifick stipulations as were necessary to prevent doubts and strife, and reconcile the safety of the Colonies with the general supremacy of Parliament; and that a definitive treaty restoring each country to a situation preferable to her primitive condition, afforded a reasonable security for her future felicity; Great-Britain's best hopes being founded on the dependence and union of America; and the Colonies being arrived at such a maturity of strength, as to command upon the principles of utility, a system of liberality, in the future management of their affairs.

14. That Great Britain even in passing the prohibitory act of December 1775, opened a door to pacification, as it repealed the Boston port act. and the two other coercive statutes for restraining the fishery and the commerce of the Colonies; and enabling the Crown to appoint Commis­sioners, to render the prohibiting act itself useless, upon a treaty to be made with the Colonies, or with any port or [Page 16]place within either of them; and more especially as the King's Ministers had so early as September (soon after the Congress's petition to the King) dispatched messengers, who in January 1776, had interviews with certain of the Delegates at Philadelphia, and made such intimations, as gave just ground to hope for an immediate termination of all differences had the Congress sent others on their part, to confess their willingness to negotiate upon the overtures, which Administration (then supposed by the Colonies or their Congress to have the lead of Parliament) stood ready to recommend to the national approbation. ^*

[Page 17] 15. That the concealment of these pre-intimations, so explanatory of the true intent of the armanents expected in June and July, 1776, and of the nature of the commission and instructions given to Lord and General Howe, added to the guilt of the Congress, and favored the perilous design of drawing the people into the precipitate renunci­ation of the dependency of the Colonies, the 4th of July, 1776, and of plunging their countrymen into a tedious and desolating war. ^*

[Page 18] 16. That there is reason to suspect, that the views which [Page 19]prompted to that awful resolution, will lead the Delegates [Page 20]to practise every artifice, to hide its horrible tendency from [Page 21]the eye of the publick; and if possible, to turn the quar­rel [Page 22]to their own emolument, at the expence of the blood and treasure of their country. ^*

[Page 23] 17. That the appeal being made by the sword to the Omniscient Judge who will decide upon it with infallible rectitude, and the war wasting the empire, and tending to a separation ruinous to millions, who have taken no part in the controversy, it concerns those who began, as well as those who support and protract it, under the loud calls of justice, humanity, benevolence, honour, religion and the general interest, to cultivate concord, and a return to their ancient union, according to that compact which eminently advanced the common prosperity, antecedent to the year [Page 24]1764; for no end however laudable and desirable, will justify a perfidious and ambitious violation of that cove­nant, under which the two countries were placed by the Providence of God, be the prospect never so flattering to our zeal for the civil or religious interests of mankind; it being the indispensable duty of Christians, to seek for tem­poral as well as eternal felicity in the way of well-doing; trusting it to the Supreme Ruler, to accomplish his bene­volent design [...], relating both to Church and State, accor­ding to his own infinite wisdom and uncontroulable sove­reignty.

[Page 25] 18. If it was the duty of the Congress by withholding at first or afterwards re [...]ctng the declaration of 1774, which renounces the whole authority of Parliament in the concerns of civil polity, to have prevented an open war; or to have terminated it by messages in answer to the over­tures of January 1776, when but few of the Colonies had thought of even temporary establishments for common order, nor any of them had authorized their Delegates to vote for a disunion, or to have checked the military operations, by calling for the terms brought out by Lord Howe, and sub­mitting them, under a cessation of arms, to the considera­tion of their constituents in autumn 1776, no subsequent transaction of the Congress, to give success to the unwar­rantable project for dismembering the Empire, then con­cealed from the multitude, can bind the rest of their coun­trymen, in honour or conscience, to support a weak and wicked faction, in an obstinate prosecution of the war.

19. Who then are the real enemies of America, if not they who have perverted the virtuous aims of the main body [Page 26]of the people for the defence of their rights and privileges, into a war for dominion? And seduced some, terrified many, and driven more, to assist in this extravagant enter­prize—who, under the disguise of patriot zeal, did, unau­thorized, dispatch an emissary in the winter 1776, ^† to draw the ancient enmity of France into a contenton purely do­mestick; and have since by various arts and assiduous la­bours, in and out of Congress, opposed all peaceful nego­tiations, and effected a league with the common see, to gratify the corrupt aims of private ambition and interest; and together with others, in divers posts, offices and em­ployments, are feeding and thriving upon the miseries of their countrymen, and by force and fraud preventing their return to the blessings of peace, liberty and safety, under a most generous plan tendered by Great-Britain, with pro­posals of a solemn covention, for advancing and perpe­tuating the prosperity of the whole Empire? ^*

[Page 27] 20. It being manifest that nothing will satisfy the di­rectors of the American Councils (by whom several of the Colonies suffer themselves to be ruled) but measures in­compatible with the safety of the many millions of the same natural stock with themselves in Europe, Asia and Africa, and in the contended dispersions in the Islands, as well as on the continent of America, Great-Britain will be justifi­able in exerting the powers she enjoys for her preservation, to render the rebelled Plantations as impotent as they ap­pear to be unfriendly, to the welfare of that vast commu­nity, with whom they may be, as they once were, happily united; and from whom they are not sullenly severed, upon principles of partiality, reprobated by great multi­tudes of their own countrymen, who have suffered insults, imprisonments, fines, sequestrations, and many of them death itself.

21. But since men's passions became inflamed, under errone­ous views of the measures requisite to promote and secure the common interests of both countries, and it is scares possible for the ordinary [...] of justice, biassed as they may be by pre­judices, exactly to discern the line of separation, between that conduct, which from the motives and ends of the agent, may not deserve blame, and a behaviour in the eye of the law crimi­nal and treasonable, it was wise and just as well as merciful in [Page 28]Great-Britain, to issue as she did, in October 1778, general and undistinguishing pardons; that punishment might be inflicted only for guilt to be contracted in future, by persevering in a conflict, undoubtedly degenerated from a struggle for liberty, into an UNNATURAL REBELLION.

22. That the sufferings of the loyalists in all parts of the con­tinent, from the hands of fellow subjects, who while violating the rights of private judgment, are nevertheless appealing in their fasts, prayers and thanksgivings, so the God of love and mercy, for their innocence, will eternally demonstrate the hypocrisy, avarice and profligacy of some, and the fanaticism of the rest of their oppressors; as the forbearance of Great-Britain, in not having yet executed a single rebel in her power, and in restrain­ing from the devastations and complicated calamities, she might [...] brought upon the avowed ally of her inveterate enemy, is of her lenity and ge [...]erosity: And that it will become her in future, to have tender regard, not only to her friends in Ame­rica, but to discriminate the ignorant, the timid, the helpless, the uninformed and the seduced, by proportionable indulgen­cies; and to remember at the final termination of the war in a reunion, the fidelity and affection she found here, and to strike hands with the Colonies, in a free and generous establishment of their privileges, bought by the blood of the American, as well as the European loyalist.

Lastly, That Great-Britain independent of her own interest in the controversy, i [...], all circumstances considered, bound by justice and honour to prevent the ruin of her American friends, at every risk short of certain destruction to herself: And that it will be her duty, if compelled by adversity to conclude a disad­vantageous peace, and to part with one or more of her Colonies to France, Spain or any other foreign nation, to stipulate in clear and strong terms, in behalf of the loyalists who may be found there, for every advantage of disposing of their estates, and free liberty to remove to such of the Colonies or Dominions as may not be unfortunately surrendered at the end of the war, to a popish or arbitrary power.