disapproved by the great mass of the people of Boston, and of the province generally.

Such was the general determination of the people against the execution of the act that the distributors of the stamp paper who did not voluntarily resign were compelled so to do, either by threats or force. On the 1st of November, the day the act was to take effect, neither stamps nor stamp officers were to be found in the colonies. The courts of justice were for a time closed, vessels did not depart from American ports, and business of various kinds was interrupted. This state of things, however, remained for a short period only; business by general consent soon resumed its usual course without the aid of stamp paper.

CHAPTER II

THE SUPREMACY OF PARLIAMENT

[DEBATES IN PARLIAMENT]

Debate on the Right to Tax America between George Grenville and William Pitt. I.-Debate on the Resolution Declaring the Supremacy of Parliament: in favor, Gen. Henry Seymour Conway and the Marquis of Rockingham; opposed, Col. Isaac Barré and William Pitt-Examination of Dr. Benjamin Franklin-Debate on the Repeal of the Stamp Act: in favor, Gen. Conway, Mr. Pitt, and Col. Barré; opposed, Mr. GrenvilleDebate in the House of Lords between Lords Camden and Mansfield on the Supremacy of Parliament-Stamp Act Repealed and Supremacy of Parliament Asserted.

W

HILE this measure of the British Government

was thus agitating the colonies a change took place in the British ministry. The immediate authors of the measure itself were removed from the councils of the King, and others, supposed more favorable to the American interest, came into office.

On the 14th of January, 1766, the American papers relating to the origin, progress, and tendency of the disturbances in the colonies were laid before the House of Commons. These papers the House determined to take into consideration on the 28th of the same month.

Upon the day of the submission of the American papers occurred the great debate between George Grenville and William Pitt on the right of Parliament to tax America.

Pitt's speeches were extemporaneous, and, since verbatim reporting was not practiced in his time, are not preserved in the exact form in which they were delivered. Of all his speeches, that on the Stamp Act, reported by Sir Robert Dean and Lord Charlemont, is said to be closest in verbiage to the actual oration, with

perhaps the exception of his Address to the Throne concerning Affairs in America, reported by Hugh Boyd and corrected by Pitt.

THE RIGHT TO TAX AMERICA

PITT VS. GRENVILLE

Mr. PITT arose from his place in the House and said:

It is a long time, Mr. Speaker, since I have attended in Parliament. When the resolution was taken in this House to tax America I was ill in bed. If I could have endured to be carried in my bed-so great was the agitation of my mind for the consequences-I would have solicited some kind hand to have laid me down on this floor, to have borne my testimony against it! It is now an act that has passed. I would speak with decency of every act of this House; but I must beg the indulgence of the House to speak of it with freedom.

I hope a day may soon be appointed to consider the state of the nation with respect to America. I hope gentlemen will come to this debate with all the temper and impartiality that his Majesty recommends, and the importance of the subject requires; a subject of greater importance than ever engaged the attention of this House, that subject only excepted when, near a century ago, it was the question whether you yourselves were to be bond or free. In the meantime, as I cannot depend upon my health for any future day (such is the nature of my infirmities), I will beg to say a few words at present, leaving the justice, the equity, the policy, the expediency of the act to another time.

I will only speak to one point-a point which seems not to have been generally understood-I mean to the right. Some gentlemen [alluding to Mr. Nugent] seem to have considered it as a point of honor. If gentlemen consider it in that light, they leave all measures of right and wrong, to follow a delusion that may lead to destruction. It is my opinion that this kingdom has no right to lay a tax upon the colonies. At the same time, I assert the authority of this kingdom over the colonies to be sovereign and supreme, in every circumstance of government and legislation whatsoever. They are the subjects of this kingdom; equally entitled with yourselves to all the natural rights of mankind and the peculiar privileges of Englishmen ; equally bound by its laws, and equally participating in the constitution

of this free country. The Americans are the sons, not the bastards of England! Taxation is no part of the governing or legislative power. The taxes are a voluntary gift and grant of the Commons alone. In legislation the three estates of the realm are alike concerned; but the concurrence of the peers and the Crown to a tax is only necessary to clothe it with the form of a law. The gift and grant is of the Commons alone. In ancient days the Crown, the barons, and the clergy possessed the lands. In those days the barons and the clergy gave and granted to the Crown. They gave and granted what was their own! At present, since the discovery of America, and other circumstances permitting, the commons are become the proprietors of the land. The Church (God bless it!) has but a pittance. The property of the lords, compared with that of the commons, is as a drop of water in the ocean; and this House represents those commons, the proprietors of the lands; and those proprietors virtually represent the rest of the inhabitants. When, therefore, in this House, we give and grant, we give and grant what is our own. But in an American tax what do we do? "We, your Majesty's commons for Great Britain, give and grant to your Majesty❞— what? Our own property! No! "We give and grant to your Majesty' the property of your Majesty's commons of America! It is an absurdity in terms.

The distinction between legislation and taxation is essentially necessary to liberty. The Crown and the peers are equally legislative powers with the Commons. If taxation be a part of simple legislation the Crown and the peers have rights in taxation as well as yourselves; rights which they will claim, which they will exercise, whenever the principle can be supported by power.

There is an idea in some that the colonies are virtually represented in the House. I would fain know by whom an American is represented here. Is he represented by any knight of the shire in any county in this kingdom? Would to God that respectable representation was augmented to a greater number! Or will you tell him that he is represented by any representative of a borough? a borough which, perhaps, its own representatives never saw! This is what is called the rotten part of the constitution. It cannot continue a century. If it does not drop it must be amputated. The idea of a virtual representation of America in this House is the most contemptible idea that ever entered into the head of a man. It does not deserve a serious refutation.

The "rotten boroughs" in England were abolished in 1832.

The commons of America, represented in their several assemblies, have ever been in possession of the exercise of this, their constitutional right, of giving and granting their own money. They would have been slaves if they had not enjoyed it! At the same time, this kingdom, as the supreme governing and legislative power, has always bound the colonies by her laws, by her regulations, and restrictions in trade, in navigation, in manufactures, in everything, except that of taking their money out of their pockets without their consent.

Here I would draw the line:

Quam ultra citraque neque consistere rectum.1

At the conclusion of Mr. Pitt's remarks, Mr. Grenville arose in behalf of the government. He began by severely censuring the ministry for not giving Parliament earlier notice of the disturbances in America. "They began," said he, "in July, and now we are in the middle of January; lately they were only occurrences; they are now grown to disturbances, to tumults and riots. I doubt they border on open rebellion; and, if the doctrine I have heard this day be confirmed, I fear they will lose that name to take that of revolution. The government over them being dissolved, a revolution will take place in America."

Then, applying himself to the issue of the debate, namely, the distinction between internal and external taxation, Mr. Grenville continued:

I cannot understand the difference between external and internal taxes. They are the same in effect, and differ only in name. That this kingdom has the sovereign, the supreme legislative power over America is granted; it cannot be denied; and taxation is a part of that sovereign power. It is one branch of the legislation. It is, it has been, exercised over those who are not, who were never, represented. It is exercised over the India Company, the merchants of London, the proprietors of the stocks, and over many great manufacturing towns. It was exercised over the county palatine of Chester, and the bishopric of Durham, before they sent any representatives to Parliament. I appeal for proof to the preambles of the acts which gave them representatives; one in the reign of Henry VIII, the other in that of Charles II. [Mr. Grenville then quoted the acts, and

"Right lies wholly neither with one side nor the other.'