[forced] submission as this, is all the submission our Lord's example can be supposed in the least to coun

If you could prove this assertion, Sir, the brightness of our Lord's moral character would suffer a total eclipse. For, if "what a man has is absolutely his own," and if the Roman Emperor had not, as protector of the Jews, a reasonable claim to their tribute-money, did not our Lord prevaricate, and was not an untruth found in his mouth, when he said to the Jews, who shewed him the tribute money, "Render, therefore, to Casar, the things which are Cæsar's ?" In what sense could he say, that this money was Caesar's, if Caesar had no more right to it than an highwayman? And with what moral propriety could he bid the Jews to render such money to Cæsar, as a part of Cæsar's property ?

This is not all: The manner in which our Lord enforced paying taxes to Tiberius, shows that he rested this branch of our duty to our neighbour upon the very same authority on which he rested our obedience to God himself. To be convinced of it, we need only consider his evangelical charge, Render, therefore, to Cesar, the things which are Caesar's ; and to God, the things which are God's.' The manner in which the two parts of this injunction are connected, demonstrates, that we must pay taxes to the Civil Power by which we are protected, as conscientiously as we pay adoration to the Divine Power by which we exist. But, according to your patriotic doctrine, our Lord's solemn precept degenerates into a charge as absurd and profane as the following: "Your money is absolutely your own; render it therefore to Cæsar, or to an highwayman, for it is his if he demands it; nor forget, in like manner, to render your all to God; for it is his, as your money is an highwayman's." What monstrous doctrines does your patriotism couple together! Geminantur tigribus agni! And how hard is it to do justice to Scripture, when we directly or indirectly part these inseparable precepts,

tive power: Honour him with a reasonable part of th substance, as well as by thy respectful behaviour.'

Let us see if you are more successful in your attemp to overthrow what you call my "grand plea from Scrip ture," taken from Rom. xiii. St. Paul there proves by various reasons, that taxes are due to the higher power: that protect us. Such powers are ordained of God:Resisting them, when they lay reasonable taxes upon us, is resisting the ordinance of God:'—Those who resist, in such a case, shall receive to themselves damnation: They are God's ministers to us for good:' Their grand business being to protect us in the way of virtue, and to curb or punish us in the way of vice: And they attend continually to do this very thing, that is, to our protection when we do well, and to our punishment when we break the laws. Render therefore to all their dues, tribute to whom tribute is due,' &c.

6

To set aside the force of this nervous comment of St. Paul upon the words of our Lord, Render unto Cæsar,' &c., you tell us, p. 63, that "the Apostle does not take upon him in the least, to determine to whom tribute was due." But are you not mistaken, Sir? Does he not explicitly say to whom, when he mentions the higher powers that protect us? Now if the King and the British Parliament be the higher powers that have hitherto protected the Colonies, does not the Apostle decide our controversy as much as if he said, Let the American Colonies pay taxes to the King and Parlia ment, who are the higher powers that have continually attended to the protection of the Colonists when they did well, and now attend to the punishing of them because they do ill?

But you add also, "The Apostle does not take upon him to determine what quantum of tribute might be due." True: For he did not attend continually to the dangers of the State, and to the best means of averting them. He minded his own business, instead of reflecting upon the higher powers in the execution of theirs. He knew no more than you and I, what expence those Powers might be at, to protect him and all his fellow.

2

subjects; though he could easily conceive that such expence was prodigious, since the chief captain Lysias' employed once an army to rescue him from the charge of mobbing religionists; and protected him on another occasion, by granting him ' a guard of 200 soldiers, 70 horsemen, and 200 spearmen.' (Acts xxiii. 23, 27.) Now as Paul did not know but myriads of his fellow-subjects stood in need of such a guard as well as himself, and as he did not claim a place in the Legislature jure divino, he did not pretend to determine the quantum of tribute necessary to maintain a sufficient, protecting force, all over the Roman empire. But what has this to do with the question? Could not Paul make Christians understand, that they must pay rent to their landlords, and taxes to the higher powers, without "determining the quantum" of such rents and taxes? - Must not a Divine, who makes so frivolous an objection, be at a strange loss for arguments?

But you go on: P. 63, “The Apostle only enjoins the conscientious payment of what was due, according to the nature of the government under which they lived." True, Sir, if by "the nature of the government under which we live," you mean the reasonable demands of the legislative power which protects us. But if you mean by this phrase, as your scheme requires, that we are to pay taxes only according to the nice speculations of men, who cry up the Constitution one hour, and decry it the next, if it does not suit their chimerical notions of equal representation, and their injudicious ideas of liberty; your doctrine is subversive of the Apostle's loyal precept, opens the door to all manner of sedition, and leaves Christians at an utter uncertainty with respect to a capital branch of morality, the payment of taxes: And I prove my assertion by the following obser

vations:

1. The Jews were divided among themselves, with respect to the nature of the government they were under. While some of them said, We are under the Roman government, We will have no king but Cæsar;' the' patriots said, "We were never in bondage to any man :

We are freemen, we are under the Mosaic Constitution; we owe no taxes to Cæsar. To pay taxes to an Heathen prince, is to give up the excellent Constitution which our ancestors have transmitted to us." Now, in full opposition to these plausible notions, our Lord bid the Jews pay taxes to Cæsar, according to the Roman government; another government this, than that which the patriots said they were under.

2. When Joseph and the virgin Mary went to Bethlehem, to be taxed according to the decree of Cæsar Augustus, the ablest politicians were at a loss to say what was precisely the nature of the Roman government, which the Jews and most other nations were then under ; so many were the changes which it had undergone. At first it was a Monarchy, by and by a Republic, headed by Consuls, and by and by a Republic headed by a Dictator. One time the supreme power had centered in a Decemvirate; at another time a Triumvirate had held the reins of administration. At that juncture the government wore the form of a Monarchy again; but there was yet a considerable minority, who held the high republican principles of Cato, Brutus, and Cassius, the three great patriots of the day. This minority considered Cæsar Augustus as a tyrant, and a robber, to whom no taxes were due; asserting that the government which the Romans were under, was entirely republican. Now what must subjects do in such a case? Must they refuse to pay taxes to the power that actually protects them, till the minority and the majority be perfectly agreed concerning "the nature of the government under which they live?" Or must they lose their time in trying to decide nice, political questions, which puzzle the men who have studied civil law all their lives?

3. As it was next to impossible, to determine, with exactness, what was the nature of the Roman government: So it requires more wisdom than millions of people in the British empire are masters of, precisely to determine the nature of the British government. The strong Whigs are for the republican government, which

obtained in the days of Cromwell and the Rump. The strong Tories contend for the high monarchical government which prevailed in the days of King James II. You and I, Sir, are for the government which has obtained since the Revolution. Nor are you satisfied even with this, for you speak of an avowed defect in the present Constitution.-You are for an equal representation of the people, that is, for an utter impossibility: And, p. 98, you inform us, "That till the eighth year of Henry the VI. all the residents in a county were permitted to elect representatives, without exception;" insinuating, that now "the representation here in England is imperfect," because that practice is disused. Now, Sir, if this kind of representation be essential to the nature of the government we live under; and if we be not bound to pay taxes, which are not laid according to the ancient form of the Constitution; it is clear, that no man in Great Britain is bound to pay any tax at all; for no tax is laid according to your levelling scheme of representation, and according to the nature of government, which obtained before Henry VI. Hence it appears, that, as the Pope's bulls formerly loosed Britons from the oaths of fidelity, which they had taken to their Sovereign, and by this mean raised and fomented rebellions ; so your political refinements loose not only the Colonies, but Great Britain also, from the obligation of paying taxes to the king and parliament. So true it is, that overdoing is the way of undoing; and that your politics tend to kindle the flame of rebellion in England, and to keep it up in America. I say your politics, because candour obliges me to do justice to your good meaning, and to make a friendly distinction between your person and your opinions.

4. Should you say, that, though it cannot be expected that every subject should study the nature of all the wheels and springs, which compose that piece of political mechanism, we call the Constitution; yet every subject may choose his own representative, whose business it is to decide what taxes must be paid according to the Con