A. I have heard so.

16 Q.

Was it not at that time a very unpopular law? A. I believe it might, though I can say little about it, as I lived at a distance from that province.

11 Q. Was not the scarcity of gold and silver an argument used against abolishing the paper?

A. I suppose it was.*

18 Q. What is the present opinion there of that law? Is it as unpopular as it was at first?

A. I think it is not.

Q. Have not instructions from hence been sometimes sent over to governors, highly oppressive and unpolitical?

A. Yes.

Q. Have not some governors dispensed with them for that reason?

A. Yes, I have heard so.

Q. Did the Americans ever dispute the controlling power of Parliament to regulate the commerce? A. No.

Q. Can any thing less than a military force carry the Stamp Act into execution?

A. I do not see how a military force can be applied to that purpose.

Q. Why may it not?

A. Suppose a military force sent into America, they will find nobody in arms; what are they then to do? They cannot force a man to take stamps who chooses to do without them. They will not find a rebellion; they may indeed make one.

Q. If the act is not repealed, what do you think will be the consequences?

A. A total loss of the respect and affection the

* See Remarks and Facts relative to American Paper Money. Vol. II. p. 340.

people of America bear to this country, and of all the commerce that depends on that respect and affection. 85Q. How can the commerce be affected?

A. You will find, that if the act is not repealed, they will take a very little of your manufactures in a short time.

Q. Is it in their power to do without them?

A. I think they may very well do without them. 87 Q. Is it their interest not to take them?

A. The goods they take from Britain are either necessaries, mere conveniences, or superfluities. The first, as cloth, &c., with a little industry they can make at home; the second they can do without, till they are able to provide them among themselves; and the last, which are much the greatest part, they will strike off immediately. They are mere articles of fashion, purchased and consumed because the fashion in a respected country; but will now be detested and rejected. The people have already struck off, by general agreement, the use of all goods fashionable in mournings, and many thousand pounds' worth are sent back as unsalable.

Q. Is it their interest to make cloth at home?

A. I think they may at present get it cheaper from Britain; I mean, of the same fineness and workmanship; but, when one considers other circumstances, the restraints on their trade, and the difficulty of making remittances, it is their interest to make every thing.

Q. Suppose an act of internal regulations connected with a tax; how would they receive it? A. I think it would be objected to.

Q. Then no regulation with a tax would be submitted to?

A. Their opinion is, that, when aids to the crown are wanted, they are to be asked of the several assem

blies, according to the old established usage; who will, as they always have done, grant them freely. And that their money ought not to be given away, without their consent, by persons at a distance, unacquainted with their circumstances and abilities. The granting aids to the crown is the only means they have of recommending themselves to their sovereign; and they think it extremely hard and unjust, that a body of men, in which they have no representatives, should make a merit to itself of giving and granting what is not its own, but theirs; and deprive them of a right they esteem of the utmost value and importance, as it is the security of all their other rights.

q Q. But is not the post-office, which they have long received, a tax as well as a regulation?

A. No; the money paid for the postage of a letter is not of the nature of a tax; it is merely a quantum meruit for a service done; no person is compellable to pay the money if he does not choose to receive the service. A man may still, as before the act, send his letter by a servant, a special messenger, or a friend, if he thinks it cheaper and safer.

92 Q. But do they not consider the regulations of the post-office, by the act of last year, as a tax?

A. By the regulations of last year the rate of postage was generally abated near thirty per cent through all America; they certainly cannot consider such abatement as a tax.

13 Q. If an excise was laid by Parliament, which they might likewise avoid paying, by not consuming the articles excised, would they then not object to it?

A. They would certainly object to it, as an excise is unconnected with any service done, and is merely an aid, which they think ought to be asked of them, and granted by them, if they are to pay it; and can be

granted for them by no others whatsoever, whom they have not empowered for that purpose.

94 Q. You say they do not object to the right of Parliament, in laying duties on goods to be paid on their importation; now, is there any kind of difference between a duty on the importation of goods, and an excise on their consumption?

A. Yes, a very material one; an excise, for the reasons I have just mentioned, they think you can have no right to lay within their country. But the sea is yours; you maintain, by your fleets, the safety of navigation in it, and keep it clear of pirates; you may have, therefore, a natural and equitable right to some toll or duty on merchandises carried through that part of your dominions, towards defraying the expense you are at in ships to maintain the safety of that carriage.

Q. Does this reasoning hold in the case of a duty laid on the produce of their lands exported? And would they not then object to such a duty?

A. If it tended to make the produce so much dearer abroad, as to lessen the demand for it, to be sure they would object to such a duty; not to your right of laying it, but they would complain of it as a burden, and petition you to lighten it.

? Q. Is not the duty paid on the tobacco exported, a duty of that kind?

A. That, I think, is only on tobacco carried coastwise, from one colony to another, and appropriated as a fund for supporting the college at Williamsburg in Virginia.

Q. Have not the assemblies in the West Indies the same natural rights with those in North America?

A. Undoubtedly.

98 Q. And is there not a tax laid there on their sugars exported?

A. I am not much acquainted with the West Indies; but the duty of four and a half per cent on sugars exported was, I believe, granted by their own assemblies. 99 Q. How much is the poll-tax in your province laid on unmarried men?

A. It is, I think, fifteen shillings, to be paid by every single freeman, upwards of twenty-one years old.

Q. What is the annual amount of all the taxes in Pennsylvania?

A. I suppose about twenty thousand pounds sterling. 10 Q. Supposing the Stamp Act continued and enforced, do you imagine that ill humor will induce the Americans to give as much for worse manufactures of their own, and use them, preferable to better of ours?

A. Yes, I think so. People will pay as freely to gratify one passion as another, their resentment as their pride.

Q. Would the people at Boston discontinue their trade?

A. The merchants are a very small number compared with the body of the people, and must discontinue their trade, if nobody will buy their goods.

Q. What are the body of the people in the colonies? A. They are farmers, husbandmen, or planters. Q. Would they suffer the produce of their lands to rot?

A. No; but they would not raise so much. They would manufacture more, and plough less.

Q. Would they live without the administration of justice in civil matters, and suffer all the inconveniences of such a situation for any considerable time, rather than take the stamps, supposing the stamps were protected by a sufficient foree, where every one might have them?

A. I think the supposition impracticable, that the stamps should be so protected as that every one might