when oppressed. And to prevent their doing this, is, we conceive, another main view of this instruction.

In short, it does not appear to your committee that this extraordinary instance of the proprietary's care of the people's money, to prevent its being wasted by their own representatives, was for the people at all necessary. Those representatives themselves are a part of the people, and must bear a share of their burdens. For their own sakes, therefore, as well as to recommend themselves to the esteem and regard of their constituents, it is highly probable they will execute that trust, as they always have done, with justice, prudence, and frugality; with freedom to the king's service, and grateful generosity to governors that sincerely seek their welfare, and do not join with the proprietaries to oppress them. But this instruction might perhaps be necessary to extort those grants to governors which they had been pleased to style salary, and render that certain, which before depended on the good will of the people; for how else can the proprietaries be sure of that share of those grants, which, by their private contracts sometimes made with their governors, is (if report says true) to be paid to themselves?

The proprietaries are however willing to permit the renewal of the eighty thousand pounds, which is now to sink in a few years, and even the adding forty thousand pounds more, the whole to be emitted on loan, provided, that the eleventh instruction be complied with, and half the power of applying the interest reserved to them; and provided, that all rents and quit-rents due, or to be due or payable to them, be always paid according to the rate of exchange at the times of payment between Philadelphia and London, or some other sufficient provision enacted in lieu thereof, as was done by a former act.' Your committee cannot help observing here, that the proprietaries tenderness for their own interest appears in this instruction much stronger than their care for that of the people. Very great emoluments arise to them by emissions of paper money on loan, and the interest money is a tax they are clear of. They are therefore willing the quantity should be encreased; but whatever advantages they receive from it, they are resolved to suffer no disadvantage from any occasional depreciation; for they will always be paid their rents and quit-rents, according to the rate of exchange between Philadelphia and London. By the original agreements, those rents and quit-rents were to be paid in sterling money (or the value in coin current) to the proprietary receivers in the province. A bill of exchange besides the sterling sum conveyed, includes all the freight, risk and expence of conveying that sum in specie to London. Now we conceive the people are not, nor can in justice or reason be, obliged to transmit their rents to London, and pay them there to the proprietaries. If the proprietaries should think fit, to remove to China, they might as justly add to their demand the rate of exchange between London and Canton; this therefore is extortion, and ought never to be allowed in any future act, nor any equivalent made for it. For had that equivalent been really given as a matter of justice, and not extorted as purchase money for the law, it would have been extended to the rents of private landlords, as well as those of

the proprietaries. Besides, the great sums to be yearly remitted to them in London, for which no returns come back to the country, naturally tend to raise the exchange; and even put it in the power of their agents to raise it occasionally, just before the periodical times of payment (to the great injury of the people) and to lower it again at their pleasure; a dangerous power this, if no inconvenience can arise to themselves by the rise of exchange! the depreciation of money in every country where it happens, is a common calamity. The proprietary estate ought not to be exempt from it, at the expence of all other estates. There are many fixed ground rents, and other rents arising in the province belonging to the people, and due to private estates. These rents have as much right to be considered, and their deficiency, in case of depreciation, provided for out of the public funds, as those of the proprietaries. But of these they take no care, so their own are secured. It appears however to your committee, that all rents in the country ought to be on the same footing, with regard to any loss by the depreciation of its currency, since that is less likely ever to happen which it is the interest of all to prevent.

Your committee now come to the twenty-first instruction, by the preamble of which it is insinuated, as if acts for provincial taxes had been common in this province, and that the proprietary's estate had been always exempted in such acts; whereas the truth is that there never were but two or three, and those in the early times of the province, when the proprietary's circumstances were low, his affairs encumbered, and the quit-rents so small, as to be insufficient for his support, and therefore they were not only exempted from any part of such tax, but duties and licence fees were granted to help them out. For more than forty years, as the excise and interest money have been sufficient for support of government, no provincial taxes have been levied (in this very instruction, a little lower, they themselves acknowlege none have been raised in their time) and the proprietary estate has vastly encreased; those licence fees are also vastly increased, and yet they still received them But that their estate should now be exempt from provincial taxes, raised for the defence of that very estate, appears to us extremely unreasonable. During the distress of the family, there was likewise a voluntary subscription among the people to pay the proprietary's passage to England; they may from thence as justly claim a right of having their expences borne by the public whenever they cross the But when those aids were granted to the old proprietary, he had a much better claim to them than his sons; for he undertook to act as an agent and advocate for his people, in England; to defend and secure their rights and privileges; not like his successors, to abolish and destroy them.*

seas.

This he executed in several instances, and particularly in his answer to the lords of trade's objections to the act of privileges to a freeman, in the year 1705; in which he informed their lordships, that the act was agreeable to the great charter which all Englishmen were entitled to; and that we went not so far (i. e. from England to America) to lose a tittle of it.'

The instruction farther says, that since the expiration of those former laws, no aid hath ever been granted by the assembly to them as proprietaries. As proprietaries, what right, have they to aids? are they not hereditary governors of the province? and while they have indulged themselves with an almost constant residence in England, remote from their country, and greatly to its inconvenience and prejudice, have not the assemblies constantly supported their deputy, sent by the proprietaries to do what they ought themselves to have done in person; though he was often an imperfect deputy, restrained in those powers which should always subsist and be present in every government for the common welfare? but they are pleased to say, 'they have voluntarily and cheerfully expended several considerable sums of their own money for the advancement of the province." This they said likewise to a former assembly, and the answer was, 'We are unacquainted with these expences; let the accounts be laid before us, and whatever expence appears to have been made for the service of the province shall be allowed, and repaid with thanks.' Those accounts have never yet appeared; and till they do, we think they ought not to be made the foundation of any claim whatever.

They say farther, that they had no reason to suspect that the assembly would deviate so much from the former usage, as to pretend, by any act of theirs, to charge the proprietary estate in the province with the burden of any taxes.' Amazing! if the assembly deviated from the former usage, by taxing their own estates, and those of their constituents (their usual funds failing) why should they not deviate in the same manner in taxing the proprietary estate? and what are the particular merits of this family, that when the whole British nation, when every estate in the kingdom, as well as in this province, is taxed, towards the recovery and defence of their estate in Pennsylvania, that very estate alone should be exempted, and they so confident of its right to an exemption, as to have no reason to suspect the assembly would attempt to tax it?

But it seems the assembly have represented them in an untrue light, as if unwilling to assist the public, by contributing towards the defence of the country, though no application had ever once been made to them for that purpose.' How far they are placed in an untrue light on this account, will, we presume, appear before we finish this report. It appears too, by a report of a former committee. They likewise say, 'no application was ever once made to them for their assistance towards the defence of the country.' Heretofore it was thought that the country was best defended by maintaining peace and a good understanding with the Indians. This was done from year to year by expensive and repeated presents. The proprietary reaped great advantages from this good understanding and these presents, in his bargains with the Indians for lands. The expences grew yearly more and more heavy, and repeated humble applications were made to the proprietaries, that they would be pleased to bear a part, but without success. They vouchsafe indeed an answer to the last application, but it was to reject it with the utmost pride and scorn, claiming an inherent right of ex

emption of their estate from all public charges whatsoever, in virtue of their being governors as well as proprietaries. And the sixty thousand pounds bill is called an attempt of the assembly by an act of theirs,' to charge the proprietary estate, as if they had presumed to do it alone by their own authority. The assembly could not possibly think of taxing the proprietary estate, without the consent of the proprietaries by their deputy; the bill was therefore another humble application to the proprietaries for their consent to a thing so reasonable; and the very style of it was, ' we pray that it may be enacted.' But that prayer could not be granted, though the province was on the brink of ruin. And yet it seems the proprietaries were not unwilling;' though their deputy declared they had expressly restrained him even by the words of his commission! the bill however is stigmatized with the characters of most unjust and extraordinary.' Thus it is, when men judge in their own cases. These gentlemen think it unjust to tax their estates, though all the world thinks otherwise. As provincial taxes had not been usual, it might be so far extraordinary, but the mode of taxation was by no means extraordinary, being the same with that of raising our county rates and levies, long used and approved by the province. And the taxing of proprietary lands is used both in New Jersey and Maryland; and located unimproved lands have formerly been taxed in this province. Had such been taxed every where from the first settlement of America, we conceive it would have tended to the increase of the inhabitants, and the greater strength of the colonies; for then such immense quantities of land would not have been monopolized and lain dormant, but people would more easily have obtained settlements, and been seated closer together.

But the proprietaries would have it understood, that it is not for their own sake only, that they object to the fifty thousand pounds bill which was refused, or the sixty thousand pounds act that passed. They are tenderly concerned for the estates of others. No part of the lands of a delinquent, who refuses or neglects to pay his tax, ought in their opinion, to be sold for payment; though lands in America are by act of parliament made liable to be sold for discharge of debts, and were almost always so here by the laws of this province. If lands, or parts of land may be sold to satisfy private, why not public debts? and though it be unusual in England, it has long been the practice, as we are informed, in several of the colonies, particularly in New England. But they say, a tax of one shilling in the pound, on the whole value, is what never was laid, nor can possibly be paid, in any country.' Strange! may not a country in imminent danger give a twentieth part of their estates to save the other nineteen? is it impossible even to give a half, or three-fourths, to save the other half or quarter? may they not even give nineteen parts to save the twentieth? the proprietary's gift of five thousand pounds, they afterwards say, is twenty times more than their tax, if fairly and equally assessed, could by that bill have amounted to. If so, it is possible to give the whole twenty parts; but it has always been understood, that estates are not to be taxed to the full value

they might singly sell for. In the same bill it was provided, that located unimproved lands should not be valued in the rates at more than fifteen pounds per hundred acres; when it is well known, that the proprietary's lowest price for wild lands on the frontiers is fifteen pounds ten shillings per hundred; and that the located unimproved lands in their manors, are, some of them,valued at three or four hundred pounds per hundred; they may therefore well say, that if that tax had been fully assessed, it must have amounted to many times the sum;' but then their next assertion is somewhat inconsistent, viz. that the bill laying this tax was 'most unjustly calculated for the purpose of putting it in the power of the assessors to tax the proprietary estates up to the full value, and to ease other persons, by taxing them so lightly as only to make up the residue of the fifty thousand pounds, in which case, much the greatest part of the burden might have been laid on the proprietary estates alone.' The value of the proprietary estate has long, for prudential reasons, been kept a profound secret; and the proprietaries have lately given five thousand pounds rather than submit it to the enquiry of the assessors. But your committee conceive some light may be obtained on that head, from this part of the instruction compared with the fifty thousand pounds bill. By that bill their wild unsurveyed, or unlocated lands, which are many millions of acres, were not to be taxed at all, though they never sell any of them for less than fifteen pounds ten shillings, per hundred acres. Their taxable estate consists chiefly in located (though uncultivated) tracts and manors, and in the reserved quit-rents arising from the lands they have sold. These manors and tracts are generally choice, being of the best lands, picked out of every new purchase from the Indians by their surveyors, before the office is opened, and laid by for a market, not to be disposed of till all the surrounding lands are sold and settled. This has increased their value prodigiously, so that they are now, one with another, valued at more than three hundred pounds. per hundred; yet by the bill, they were not to be taxed as worth more than fifteen pounds per hundred. And they own, that by the same bill, their quit-rents were to be taxed in the same manner as other estates,' consequently as great an abatement to be made in the valuation. And yet by this same bill, under this very moderate valuation of their estate, they say, it would have been in the power of the assessors to have laid much the greatest part of the burden on their estates alone. Now, much the greatest part of fifty thousand pounds may be forty thousand pounds, but we will say (for moderation's sake) it is only thirty thousand pounds, and that sum might have been raised by that bill, on the proprietary estates, in two years by a tax of one shilling in the pound, i. e. fifteen thousand pounds per anThe shillings in fifteen thousand pounds are three hundred thousand, consequently their estates at that low valuation are worth three hundred thousand pounds. But if you multiply that valuation by 20, to bring it nearer the truth, those estates must amount to six millions, exclusive of their wild lands as aforesaid. If this computation be too high, they may be able hereafter to shew its mistakes. At present we conceive the consequences

Bum.

<