Also in
1767, the pamphlet
Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania to the
Inhabitants of the British Colonies,
Letters from a
farmer II
There is another late
act of parliament, which appears to me to be unconstitutional, and as
destructive to the liberty of these colonies, as that mentioned in my
last letter; that is, the act for granting the duties on paper, glass,
&c. [the Townshend Act].
The parliament
unquestionably possesses a legal authority to regulate the trade of
Great-Britain and all her colonies. Such an authority is essential to
the relation between a mother country and her colonies; and necessary
for the common good of all. He, who considers these provinces as
states distinct from the British empire, has very slender notions of
justice, or of their interests. We are but parts of a whole; and
therefore there must exist a power somewhere to preside, and preserve
the connection in due order. This power is lodged in the parliament;
and we are as much dependent on Great-Britain, as a perfectly free
people can be on another.
I have looked over
every statute relating to these colonies, from their first settlement
to this time; and find every one of them founded on this principle,
till the Stamp Act administration. All before, are calculated to
regulate trade, and preserve or promote a mutually beneficial
intercourse between the several constituent parts of the empire; and
though many of them imposed duties on trade, yet those duties were
always imposed with design to restrain the commerce of one part, that
was injurious to another, and thus to promote the general welfare. The
raising a revenue thereby was never intended . . - Never did the
British parliament, till the period above mentioned think of imposing
duties in America, F0R THE PURPOSE OF RAISING A REVENUE. .
Here we may observe an
authority expressly claimed and exerted to impose duties on these
colonies; not for the regulation of trade; not for the preservation or
promotion of a mutually beneficial intercourse between the several
constituent parts of the empire, heretofore the sole objects of
parliamentary institutions; but for the single purpose of levying
money upon us.
This I call an
innovation; and a most dangerous innovation. It may perhaps be
objected, that Great-Britain has a right to lay what duties she
pleases upon her exports, and it makes no difference to us, whether
they are paid here or there.
To this I answer.
These colonies require many things for their use, which the laws of
Great-Britain prohibit them from getting any where but from her. Such
are paper and glass.
That we may be legally
bound to pay any general duties on these commodities relative to the
regulation of trade, is granted; but we being obliged by the laws to
take from Great-Britain, any special duties imposed on their
exportation to us only, with intention to raise a revenue from us
only, are as much taxes, upon us, as those imposed by the Stamp Act
What is the difference
in substance and right whether the same sum is raised upon us by the
rates mentioned in the Stamp Act, on the use of paper, or by these
duties, on the importation of it. It is only the edition of a former
book, shifting a sentence from the end to the beginning....
Some persons perhaps
may say, that this act lays us under no necessity to pay the duties
imposed, because we may ourselves manufacture the articles on which
they are laid; whereas by the Stamp Act no instrument of writing could
be good, unless made on British paper, and that too stamped.
I am told there are
but two or three glass-houses on this continent, and but very few
paper-mills; and suppose more should be erected, a long course of
years must elapse, before they can be brought to perfection. This
continent is a country of planters, farmers, and fishermen; not of
manufacturers. The difficulty of establishing particular manufactures
in such a country, is almost insuperable. .
Great-Britain has
prohibited the manufacturing iron and steel in these colonies, without
any objection being made to her right of doing it. The like right she
must have to prohibit any other manufacture among us. Thus she is
possessed of an undisputed precedent on that point. This authority,
she will say, is founded on the original intention of settling these
colonies; that is, that we should manufacture for them, and that they
should supply her with materials.
Here then, my dear
country men ROUSE yourselves, and behold the ruin hanging over your
heads. If you ONCE admit, that Great-Britain may lay duties upon her
exportations to us, for the purpose of levying money on us only, she
then will have nothing to do, but to lay those duties on the articles
which she prohibits us to manufacture- and the tragedy of American
liberty is finished. . . . If Great-Britain can order us to come to
her for necessaries we want, and can order us to pay what taxes she
pleases before we take them away, or when we land them here, we are as
abject slaves as France and Poland can shew in wooden shoes, and with
uncombed hair.
Letters from a
farmer IV
An objection, I hear, has
been made against my second letter, which I would willingly clear up
before I proceed. "There is," say these objectors, "a
material difference between the Stamp-Act and the late Act for laying
a duty on paper, &c., that justifies the conduct of those who
opposed the former, and yet are willing to submit to the latter. The
duties imposed by the Stamp-Act were internal taxes; but the present
are external, and therefore the parliament may have a right to impose
them."
To this I answer, with
a total denial of the power of parliament to lay upon these colonies
any "tax" whatever.
This point, being so
important to this, and to succeeding generations, I wish to be clearly
understood.
To the word
"tax," I annex that meaning which the constitution and
history of England require to be annexed to it; that is-that it - is
an imposition on the subject, for the sole purpose of levying money. .
.
Whenever we speak of
"taxes" among Englishmen, let us therefore speak of them
with reference to the principles on which, and the intentions with
which they have been established.
In the national,
parliamentary sense insisted on, the word "tax" was
certainly understood by the congress at New-York, whose resolves may
be said to form the American "bill of rights."
The third, fourth,
fifth, and sixth resolves are, thus expressed.
[Here Dickinson quoted
the resolves of the Stamp Act Congress.]
Here is no distinction
made between internal and external taxes. It is evident from the short
reasoning thrown into these resolves, that every imposition "to
grant to his Majesty the property of the colonies," was thought a
"tax"; and that every such imposition, if laid any other
way, than "with their consent, given personally, or by their
representatives," was not only "unreasonable, and
inconsistent with the principles and spirit of the British
constitution," but destructive "to the freedom of a
people.''
Such persons therefore
as speak of internal and external "taxes," I pray may pardon
me, if I object to that expression, as applied to the privileges and
interests of these colonies. There may be internal and external
IMPOSITIONS, founded on different principles, and having different
tendencies, every "tax", being an imposition, tho' every
imposition is not a "tax." But all taxes are founded on the
same principles; and have the same tendency.
External impositions,
for the regulation of our trade, do not "grant to his Majesty the
property of the colonies." They only prevent the colonies
acquiring property, in things not necessary, in a manner judged to be
injurious to the welfare of the whole empire. But the last statute
respecting us, "grants to his Majesty the property of the
colonies," by laying duties on the manufactures of Great-Britain
which they MUST take, and which she settled on them, on purpose that
they SHOULD take.
