Abbildungen der Seite
PDF

vernor himself had represented this bill (to restrain the issues of paper-money) as of mischievous tendencyrthat even the very proprietaries had made a merit of opposing it: that, as in the act of parliament for that purpose which did pass in June 1751, the eastern colonies alone were included, so Pennsylvania was left in full possession of its rights, even by the parliament itself: that, as the date of the governor’s-commission was many years posterior to the date of the instruc— tion, they hoped and presumed, he was at full liberty to pass all their acts upon the terms granted them by the royal and provincial charter, without putting them to the disagreeable

' necessity of examining the validity of such instructions, 8m

And, lastly, as to the issue of their enquiry, concerning the necessity of contending for the present amendments, they not only declared themselves at a loss to find it out, but also called upon the governor to comply with the general voice of the people, and the repeated unanimous applications of their representatives in granting them and the province the seasonable relief provided for in the bill, by‘ giving his assent to

it as it stood.

How the governor was circumstanced may be gathered

lrom his actions: he adhered to his amendments, and' returned the bill as before, with a written message, in which he persevered in holding up the instruction as an insurmountable bar, till revoked, to the assent required of him; urging, that his predecessor had done the same in 1746:

that the assembly admitted the validity of it in ordinary ‘

cases; and, without pretending to dispute, only hoped he would find himself at liberty on a re-consideration to give his assent, notwithstanding, to a currency-bill, when any extraordinary emergency required it: that then, it seemed plain, they did not think an instruction, founded on an address of the commons, was either illegal or temporary, or destructive of their liberties; that if these were then the sentiments of both governor and assembly, there was no room for the insinuation that he had been the first to, press so dangerous an experiment; that if there was no instance befbre of a like clause offered, there, was, perhaps, no instance. of the‘ like

0

[graphic][merged small]

f 88 ~ PENNSYLVANIA, instruction, which otherwise, it was to have been supposed, would have met with the same dutiful obedience ; that a restraining instruction was, perhaps, on no Occasion so neces

sary as in the business of money, over which the king had,

peculiar prerogatives; that if they could make it appear to his ‘majesty’s ministry, that an addition to their currency was at that time necessary, the royal compliance was not to be doubted; that with regard to the former currency-bill by them cited, he was still of the same opinion; but that, surely a very moderate share of penetration was suflicient to distinguish between ah act to enforce all orders and instructions, and an instruction founded on ‘an address of parliament; that they would certainly allow him to judge for himself in a point recommended to his observance on pain of incurring his majesty’s highest displeasure; that he did not by any means blame them for contending for what they apprehended to be their rights and privileges, consequently could have no objection to, their examining the validity of the king’s instructions, provided they proceeded with such temper and moderation, as might give the world no room to repeat the charge brought against the charter-governments by the lords of trade, of apprehending themselves very little dependent on the crown ; and that, upon the whole, he was sincerely of opinion, the royal instruction was of the same force as when the late governor told the assembly, in the year 1746, he‘ could not bring himself to‘such a pitch of boldness as to contravene ‘it.

It is obvious, that the conjuring up the ghost of these departed instructions, was only to strike an awe into the assembly, and thereby prepare them for what farther practice, the new orders which could not but accompany the proprietary’s paper already recited, might enjoin,

The king, the king’s ministers, and the house of commons, were authorities too big for a provincial representative to compete with, and therefore it might be supposed their very names would serve. ‘

But‘they were too wise and too steady to be amused, and the difi‘crence of language made use of by the proprietaries

[graphic]

and their governor, was alone sufiicient to warrant the dif-
ferent conduct they observed; for though the governor talked
only of the sovereign power, the proprietaries talked only of
themselves; ‘If WE shall be induced from the state of your
trade to consent to an increase of your paper-currency.’
Not thinking themselves obliged, therefore, to consider
what additional inducements were necessary to incline those
great men to suffer their deputy to discharge the duty of his

commission, the~assembly chose to lose their bill rather than "

pay more for it than it was worth.

Accordingly, the governor’s amendments being again put to the question, were again rejected unanimously; and a committee was appointed to answer his message, which they did in such a manner as shewed they were more anxious to do justice to their cause than make their court to the governor. , ,

What governor Thomas did in passing the five thousand pounds act, they urged against what he said; the validity of instructions in ordinary cases, said to be admitted by the as

sembly of that time, they explain away, by saying, the dis

tinction was only made use of to furnish the governor with a pretence, or inducement to pass the bill: that this was not the first instruction unlimited in point of time, and remaining as yet unrevoked, which neither was or would, as they hoped, he observed ; since there was one still to be found in the council-books to governor Keith, dated July, 1723, requiring him, for the future, not to pass any private act without a suspending clause, till his majesty’s approbation had been first obtained ; that unfortunate, indeed, would the case of Pennsylvania be, if governors were never to be freed from the obligation of occasional instructions. ‘ If the king,’ said

they, ‘should judge all the purposes of his instruction an- ‘

swcred, upon passing the paper-money bill in parliament in 1751, we must, nevertheless, for ever continue under the

burden of it without redress. And if weshould suppose the ,

governor is restricted by the proprietaries from giving his assent to the emission of any farther sum in bills of credit, as we have very little reason to doubt, if then the proprieta

{QT 531 "ii

\

[graphic]

ries should be pleased to withdraw that restriction, and leave him at liberty to pass all our acts upon the terms granted us by our charters, what will this avail if the governor continues to think he can never be freed from the obligation of his instructions ?’ ‘ , '

lWore materially still, they also subjoined the articles following, viz.

‘We apprehend all royal orders and instructions subject the governors to whom they are directed, and their successors too, as the governor isspleased to inform us, to the royal displeasure, unless such instructions are revoked by his majesty’s authority; and yet we cannot find that governor Keith, to whom it was directed, or governor Gordon his successor, or governor Thomas, or our present wgovernor, have ever thought themselves under any danger of incurring his majesty’s displeasure for a total neglect, and direct disobedience to the additional instruction of the lords justices in 1723, the original of which, we make no doubt, as well as of the instruction of 1740, is in the governor’s possession; and the substance of both we know to be printed with the ininutes of our house. Why then an instruction, allowed to be in force in 1723, and still unrevoked, should be of no effect, vand an additional instruction of the lords justices in 1740, possibly revoked bthe conduct of the succeeding sessions of the same parliament, upon whose address to his majesty that instruction was founded, should be so strictly binding, is what we-cannot apprehend. '

‘But if the liberty the governor contends for can mean,

that we must allow him to I judge for himself, how far he may

or may not obey such royal instructions, at his own risque (as his majesty’s highest displeasure is threatened against him particularly) and at his own pleasure too, then we must own we are at a loss to distinguish any great difference between the mischievous tendency of an act to enforce’all or

' > ders and instructions of the crown whatever, and the necesa

‘sity the governor is pleased to think we are under to allow

'him\ the power of enforcing them whenever he shall think

fit; with this- preference, however, that we would far rather

1

choose to submit ourselves’, and our cause, to the king and the justice of a British parliament, than to the mere will of our governor, whether to enforce or disregard them, however they may have answered their ends, or otherwise abated of their force; and in the present case, we hope the governor, on reflection, will pay some regard to the judgment of the same parliament from which the address to the crown had been preferred to issue this additional instruction, who, although requested in their next session by the board of trade, to address the crown again, that he would be pleased to repeat his instructions to the governors in his American colonies, have not only never complied therewith, that we

know of, but have since passed an act for restraining the is- '

suing bills of credit in those particular colonies, where, after a full enquiry, they found such emissions injurious to the trade of Great Britain, or not calculated to do justice between

man and man, and have left us, as we presume, exonerated‘

from the burden of this additional instruction, and in full power over our laws upon the terms of our charters; and so long as we ask nothing farther than is warranted by these, we hope it neither will nor can interfere with the royal prerogatives.

‘It may be presumed, the representatives of this province, when met in their assemblies, have some valuable privileges yet left, in framing their laws, to do justice between man and man, without the aid of an additional instruction; and we hope it cannot be expected that 'we should very easily part with those rights and depend on royal instructions, over which we are to allow the governor the power he is pleased to contend for; and we have no reason to doubt, all men of understanding and candour will prefer a regular course of laws, occasionally suited to the times, and framed by the representatives of the people, annually chosen, and assented to by their governor, to a series of instructions sent for that purpose from so great a distance. i

‘ For our own part, we are fully satisfied and assured, that so long as we continue in our duty and loyalty to the best of kings, who has been pleased to declare, that nothing in this

« ZurückWeiter »