FOOTNOTES:

[59] As I am very much unacquainted with the history and principles of these provincial politics, I shall confine myself to some imperfect anecdotes concerning the parties, &c. A speech, which Mr. Dickinson had delivered in the Pensylvania assembly against the abolition of the proprietary government, having been published, and a preface having been written to it, as I think by a Dr. Smith, Mr. Galloway's speech was held forth as a proper answer to that speech, while the preface to it appeared balanced by the above preface from Dr. Franklin. Mr. Galloway's speech, or probably the advertisement that attended it, urged, I believe, Mr. Dickinson first to a challenge, and then to a printed reply.—The controversy was quickly republished in England, or at least the principal parts of it; and it is from the English edition of Mr. Galloway's speech (printed in London by Nichols in 1765) that I have copied the above.

These several gentlemen however seem, for a time, to have better agreed in their subsequent opinions concerning American taxation by Great Britain; Mr. Dickinson, in particular, having taken a very spirited line in the Farmer's Letters and other pieces, which procured him considerable reputation. The congress declaration, nevertheless, for independence, was reported not to have given perfect satisfaction at first, either to himself or to Mr. Galloway. And in the event, Mr. Galloway thought proper to come over to General Howe, and afterwards to embark for England. B. V.

[60] This act is intitled, An Act for granting to his Majesty the Sum of One Hundred Thousand Pounds: striking the same in Bills of Credit, and sinking the Bills by a Tax on all Estates real and personal.

[61] i. e. In England, I suppose, when the laws were brought home to receive the king's assent. B. V.

[62] Possibly this word where, means wherever. B. V.

[63] This would have been done, and the money all sunk in the hands of the people, if the agents, Benjamin Franklin, and Robert Charles, had not interposed, and voluntarily, without authority from the assembly so to do, but at their own risque, undertaken, that these amendments should be made, or that they themselves would indemnify the proprietaries from any damages they might sustain for want thereof. An action which, as the prefacer says in another case, "posterity perhaps may find a name for."

[64] It is not easy to guess from what source our proprietaries have drawn their principles. Those who study law and justice as a science have established it a maxim in equity, "Qui sentit commodum, sentire debet et onus." And so consistent is this with the common sense of mankind, that even our lowest untaught coblers and porters feel the force of it in their own maxim (which they are honest enough never to dispute) "Touch pot, touch penny."

[65] For a fuller account of this dispute the reader is referred to the newspapers and votes of assembly.

[66] These words, "by completing the agreement," &c. are omitted by the honest prefacer, in his account of the resolve, that they might not interfere with his insinuation of the measure's being impracticable, "have the proprietors, by any act of theirs, forfeited the least tittle of what was granted them by his Majesty's royal ancestors? Or can they be deprived of their charter rights without their consent?" &c. Sensible that these questions are impertinent, if those rights are already sold.

[67] The prefacer, with great art, endeavours to represent this number as insignificant. He says the petitioners were but 3500, and that the province contains near three hundred thousand souls! His reader is to imagine, that two hundred and ninety six thousand five hundred of them were applied to, and refused to sign it. The truth is, that his number of souls is vastly exaggerated. The dwelling-houses in the province in 1752 did not exceed 20,000. Political arithmeticians reckon generally but five souls to a house, one house with another; and therefore, allowing for houses since built, there are not probably more than an hundred and ten thousand souls in the province; that of these, scarce twenty two thousand could with any propriety be petitioners. And considering the scattered settlement of the province; the general inattention of mankind, especially in new countries, to public affairs; and the indefatigable pains taken by the proprietaries' new allies the presbyterian clergy of Philadelphia, (who wrote circular letters to every congregation in the county, to deter them from petitioning, by dutiful intimations, that if we were reduced to a royal government, it would be the "ruin of the province;") it is a wonder the number (near a sixth part) was so great as it was. But if there had been no such petitions, it would not have been material to the point. The assembly went upon another foundation. They had adjourned to consult their constituents; they returned satisfied that the measure was agreeable to them, and nothing appeared to the contrary.

[68] The assembly being called upon by the governor for their advice on that occasion did, in a message, advise his sending for and examining the magistrates of Lancaster county and borough, where the murders were committed, in order to discover the actors; but neither that nor any of the other measures recommended were ever taken. Proclamations indeed were published, but soon discontinued.

[69] Mr. Galloway's speech is of course omitted here. Editor.