Dunlap's Pennsylvania packet , The general advertiser — Philadelphia, Pa., 1776-04-01 00:00:00, page 2

There is nothing in Cato's firft letter worthy 6f
notice but the following iufffuTmg fabho-d:
" Griev >us a 3 the leaf: rettraint cf the press mull
" always be, to a people entitled to freedom, it
" mutt be theVnore so, when it is not on) unwar
“ ranted by those to whom the) have com fitted the
“care rdtKir liberties, but cannot be warranted
" by them, confident with liberty ithlf."—Th•
rudeand omen>laitical confufion of partons it tha
above paragraph, thought it throws ar, obicirdy
on the meaning, hill leaves it discoverable. Wuo,
Sr, hath laid any restraint on ibe liber y of the
press ? 1 know of no indane ', in warm the press
hath been even the object of notice, in this pro
vince, except oh account of rhe Tory 1 tter from
Kent County whi.'h was published lad fixing in tne
Pennfobvania Ledger, and which it wasahe<lntv of
every good man to detect, be< ame the I:on°fy of the
p cfs :i sgieat HI oj ctto f.c : etr as the /r^ow
or it. I this is the iedraint you comp'ain of we
knoU vouF time character at once ; and that it is so,
appears evident from the .xo^dion whirii immedi
ately follows the above quotation; your words are,
“ Neyrrd eEG, me read:!? fu miitted to it, while
" the lead colourable pretence could be offered
" for requiring such a submission;" Who fob
mitted, Cato ? me Whips or me Tories? Until'
you clear up*this, Sr, you mud content yourfelf
with being ranked among the ranked of the mailing
Tvies; ore are, zo other body of men can have
any presence to complain of want of freedom of the
press. It is not four throwing out; now and then,
a little popular phrdf, rfhich can protect you from
fufyicim ; they are only the gildings under which
the podon is conveyed, and without which you
dared non to renew your attempts on the virtue of
the people.
Cato's Uccnd letter, or the greatest part thereof,
is taken'up ^th the reverence due from us to the
persons and awoorby of the Commffinas, whom
Cato vainly and rhiicidoudy (ths Ambassadors
coming to negotiate a peace. How came Cato not to
be It a I.ttie better into the tectit ? The aft of
Parliament which describes the powers of these men,
hath been in this city upwards of a month, and in
the hands too cf Cato's friends. No, Sir, thev are
not the .4mbafader3 of peace, but the diftinutors
of pardons, mischief anWinfidt. Cato discovers a
grefs ignorance of the British constitution, in sup
posing that thele men can be empowered to a& as
Ambafladors. To prevent his future errors I trill
set him right. The prelent war differs from every
other, in this instance, viz, that it is not carried
bn under the prerogative of the Crown as &ther
wars have always been, but under the authority of
the whole legiiCtwe power united, and as the bar
riers which hand in the l way of a negociation, are
not procla nations but rifts of Parliament, it evident
ly follows, that were even the King of England here
in P-rfon, he Could not ratify the terras or conditi
ons of a reconciliation ; because, in the single cha
r:&er of King he could not stipulate for the repeal
of .ny^Tr of Parliament, neither can the Parlia-'
merit Itipuhue for him. There is ho body of men
more jealous of their privileges than the Commons:
because they f-U them. Mok that; Card.
I have not thelead doubt upon me but that their
bufinels (exclusive of gran ing us pedons) is
downright bribery and corruption. It is the ma
chine by which they erica all their plans. We ou ht
to view them as enemies of a molt dangerous spe
cies, and he who means not to be corrupted by
them will enter bis protest in time. Are they not
the very men who are paid for voting in every mea
sure against us, and ought we not to fufp'& rhe^r
deigns ? Can we view the barbarians as friends?
Would it be prudent to trust the viper in our very
boldms ?Or to fuffer themto ramble at large among
u, while such doubtful characters as Cato have a
being upon the Continent? Yet let their persons
be late lr~m injury and outrage —but trust them
not. Our bufim-fs with them is Jhort a d exo icir,
viz. We are d^firous of peace; Gentlemen ; we are
ready to ratify tne terms, and will virtuouslyfulfil
the conditions thereof; but we fhuld deserve all
and every mifcry whi h tyranny can inffift, were
we, after fuff ring such a repetition of savage bar
barities, to come under your government again.
Cato, by way of dealing i^to credit, fays, that
“ the contest we ate engaged in is founders on the
" melt noble and virtuous principles which cn
“ animate the mind of inn.' We are contending,
" (fays ne) against an arbitrary Minifiry for the
A rights o EngGhmtn." ,N- , Cato, we are nom
conte 1 i % g^gam/t an arbitrary King to get clear of
his tyranny. Wmle the difpnre reitedin .oTs on
ly, it migut he called " contending with the M'-
nidry," cut singe it is broken out into open war, it
is hiph time to have Jone ^ith such filly and watt
gruel definitions. But it suits not Cato to speak the
truffi. It is his inhered to chefs up the fieptered
savage in the jmkhft colours. Cato's patent for a
large trail of I mu is yet unsigned. Alafs poor Cato!
Cato proceeds very importantly to tell us, "that
the eyes cf all Europe are upau us." This dale and
hackneyed phrale, path had a regular decent, from
taany of the King's Speeches down to federal of be
speeches in Parliament; from thence, i took a turn
among the little wits and bucks of St. James's ; till
after Offering all du torture of fehlehh repetition,
and bems reduce to a state of v grancy, was ch
rhaby picked up to e^bellifli the second Ie ter or
Cato. Itis truly of the bug. bear kind, contains no
meaning, and the very tiling it discovers a barren
nefs of invention. It fignifies nothing to tell us
'< that the eyes of all Europe are upon u e ," unless
he has likewise told us what they are looking at us
Jor; which, as he hth not done, I wdl : They
are looking ru, C-to, in hopes of f eing a final
reparation etwen Britain and the Colonies, that
they, tne. lookers on, may partake of a free and 'un
interrupted trad: with the whole Continent of Ame
rica. Cetol thou reafoheft quroftg.
For the prefect, Sir; farewell. 1 have seen thy foli-
Icquy and despise it. Remember, thou haft thrown
me the glove, Cito, and either thee or I mud tire.
I fear not the held of fair debate, but thou haft hep
ped aside hind made it perfcaal —Thou haft taunt
ingly called on me by name ; and if J cease to hunt
thee from every lane arid linking-hole of mifchiet,
and bring ti|ee not a trembling culprit before the
public bar, then brand me yith reproach, by nam
ing me in the hh of your confederates.
The FORESTER.
FbHadefhia, March 28, 1776.
* The miter intended.at fikjl to bane contained bis
remarks in one letter.
To the PEOPLE of PENNSrLHgNIK.
L E T TER. V.
Y N my furth letter, feme notice was taken cf
I the dangerous proportion held up to us by the
author of Common Sense, for having recomfe to f -
reign affiance, andynixirg the virtuous cause cf
these Colonies with the ambitious views of France
aid Spain, even allowing that they are either able,
er that we could make it their intered, to enter in
to a war with Great Britain and her allies, on our
account. Hißory will scarce give us an example of
any people that ever recurred to an expedient of
this kind, without having their allies at Lit for
their Masters. The fatal consequences of hasty
relolu,lions,in greatqneßiuns, might be well illus
trated by the conduct of the foolith Danes; who, to
avenge themselves of their nobility,in one dreadful
moment, made an irretrievable furtender of their
own Liberty, and that cf their poftenty, into the
hods of a Tyrant. And had 1 been di r pofed to
work upon the passions, rather than address the
reason of my readers, the mention which was made
in my laid, of the arbitrary gove.nments of France
and Spain, their bloody massacres and unrelenting
perfected ns, gave me an opportunity o' entering
into d Acriptions, which would have “ harrow'd up
the very fouls" cf Protefant; and Freemen!
Theadrninidration of Great-Brttain itfelf, daring
as they seem to be, have not yet dared to recur to
the desperate meafore of ealling in foreign aid. But
fume ofcur beff friends intimate that an example of
this kind, on cither fide, would juftify the like con
duff on the other. A great majority of the pa^ri^
otic f eeholders of the county of Berks in England,
nobly Rpporting cur cause before the throne, com
pliment us upon this — that we have not thrown
ourselves it to the arms of other powers, and that
" our Petitions have,ef appeared before no throne
“ but that of Britain. Let not England (fay they)
“ set an example, which is but tooeafily co ied, by
“ drawing into a free country, the insidious and
“ mercenary aid of foreign forces, trained to the
“ fopport of barbarous Despotism. The moment
“ that a great army of lueb, or of any foreigners,
" fhab enter your territories, the liber ies of your
“ people are at an end—Strenuous as we are for
'' the honor cf our country, we cannot be forget
“ ful of its peace and concord, ft is therefore we
“ abhor the idea of encouraging f r igners to make
" "a prey of this nation, and its de,enemas, under
“ the miserable add uncovered pretex sci coun :
" tenaocing fa&in and (edition among oorelves."
Itis but too reasonable, then, to conclude, that
whichsoever fide, Great Britain or A erica shall
firft call in foreign affiffarce, will but c ce rite
ot; er into the feme defperrte measure In either
case this devoted land would become ore held of
blood and carnage for a length of years; whieh, at
last, it is to be apprehended, would only be dread
fully closed in our perpetual (objection and (Eve
ry to the victorious fide, whether allies or fees! It
is, indeed, impeffibie to describe the miseries of that
country,which is once made the feat of foreign wars.
Torn in pieces by contending armies, fubjeded to
the alternate ravages and oppressions of rival pow
ers; the Merchant, the Farmer, the Peasant has
nothing to call his own. Even the wife of his bo
som, and the daughter of his affection, are not fafe
from the unholy violence of mercenary soldiery,
rioting thro' every corner of a land not their own,
indolent in victory, and barbarous in defeat.
Altho' we now sadly bleed under the cruel band
of an unjutt adminiftratirn, who have kindled up a
most unnatural war among brethren in their own
land; yet (God be thanked) that war hath not
reached, and I trust will neve r be able to reach,
much further than our sea shores. A nation can
not long continue totally blind to all its most essen
tial interests. Our own vigor and virtue have al
ready gone a great way to convince our oppressors
of the inanity,as well as the impracticability,of their
schemes to govern a great and diftart country by
force. I erfeverance, on cur fide, wil speedily ac
comph'fli the rest. Our friends in Britain, unbought
by us, and uncorrupted by our foes, are yet of more
worth to us than whole nations of foreigner's, drawn
in to our assistance by mercenary or interested views.
If, by no precipitate or unnecessary measures, we
forfeit the edeem of the former, and make them al
so enemies, we shall prevail by our united drength.
The devices cf thole, who, for ambitious purposes,
strive to divide a house againf: itfelf, will be finally
confounded ; and the whole family of Britons, on
both sides of the Atlantic, may yet be bound toge
ther, by frefh tics of mutual love and interefl—
for many generations !
But, I repeat it once more—by the former mea
sure of ca ling in foreigners to decide our quarrels,
we (had bleed, not in a few parts ordy, but at every
pore; and the present generation will not probably
lee the end of the contest. Would to Heaven, that
they who press Inch a measure, as being preferable
to reconciliation with ur ancle: tfriends,upoh What
ever terms, could but behold the face of Poland,
aad v fit the feenes of havoc a-d deflation which
marie the late footfteps of contending foreign pow
ers in that country; or read the accoun s of the
Lke feenes in many parts of Germany! They would
not then continue to urge such a measure, til! thet
could clearly prove that the last necessity was come.
Let it not be laid that I am here drawing a hor
rible picture to frighten this country into an abso
lute submission to Great-Britain. No. I persevere
in my belief, that on our present plan of refinance,'
Britain can never force us either into submission or
reconciliation, but upon such terms as the United
wisdom cf the colonies shall deem fa'e and honor
able. But upon the other plan, 1 is much to be
feared, that fuhmiffion as well as ruin might be our
lot; and were I disposed to give bad names to any
persons, who may perhaps be honestly enquiring
after our true interest in this contest, heywho advise
such a phi, and not Cam, might be called inimj.
cal to these colonies. Nor let it be Gid, that the
wished for assistance, is not that of armies; but of
fleets for trade, and commercial protection. Even
supposing that to be the case, will rhe fleets of any
power, who can look those of Britain in the face,
be content jut to take a peep at our fruitful shores,
give us their protection when called upon, and
then return quietly home? But the author of Com
mon Sense (and 'tis him I am now aifwering) makes
no such difinaion: and foeaks of the " affitance
of France and Spain" generally—and that for the
purposes of a total separation from Great-Britain
—His words are these ^
“ It is unreasonable to suppose that France or
‘ Spain will give us any kind of affiance, if we
“ mean only to make afe of that affofance for the
“ purpose bf repairing the breach, and strengthen
“ ing the connection, between Britain and Ameri
'' ca." That the aTiftance here meant, is not con
fined to mere naval assistance in the Idea of forne,
who are great advocates for this author's pamphlet,
ml,t have been eadlj gathered from their ex,ref
fions, when we received the late accounts of the ar
rival of unusual numbers cf troops in the neigh
bouring French Weft-Indies.—
But this only alarmed others the mpre;and Tarn
wed perfaaded that this writer's idea is not yet a
doped by many perlons of much confidcration in
this country, much leJs by any Public Bodies. I
copfider it only as thrown out to coiled the sen
timents of America upon it, altho' I cannot but
think it a dangerous as well as uGcafonaLe questi
on at this time, and could have been content that
it had not been brought before the public. But
since it hath been made a quefion, it ought now to
be f^iriy dilcuffed, for whatever we have left, wor
thy cf our attention as freemen, is all involved in
this stake; end when important questions are put
upon the footing, that if they are not answered,
they are to be taken for granted, it becomes ab
lolutely necessary to examine them.
For my parr, the more I coofider the matter (and
I have long considered it impartially) the more I
am pertuaded that our political salvation can only
be worked out by durown united virtue, and upon
our own foundation. When it shall clearly appear
that we can no longer hand uponthis ground; when
we shall be generally convinced, by better arguments
than declamation, and the abule of things venera
ble and ancient, that future connexion with Great-
Britain, is neither possible nor fafe; then we shall
be fully united and prepared, at every.rifle, to pur
foe whatever mea ures the sense of the community,
fairly collected, shall think neeeffary to adopt.
But even then, before we launch forth, many do
mellic concerns are to be adjusted.
Under what form of government are we to con
federate ? How much of cur ancient constitutions
is to be preserved ? Who is to fettle cur ciafhing
territorial claims ? In what cases are the jurifdidtion
and expenses of these colonies to be joint or sepa
rate ? On what terms are we to engage foreign al
liances, and yet to Secure ourliberties in connexion
with them ? Arc the colonies to vote equally in
determining these grand concerns; or is a new re
presentation to be formed, in proportion to num
bers and consequence?
I might propole more questions of this kind ;
and when the necessity comes, they will rife thick
enough upon us, and we mull then encounter them
ad, for the fake of American Liberty; which
I would never desert, but with my life. But I
ara sure that the author of Common Sense, who
labours to prove that the necessity is already come,
offers nothing on this head, that can give much
Satisfaction to the public in general. Trusting,
however, that in the preceding part of his work,
he has levelled the English constitution to the daft,
together with all our American constitutions,
which are formed on Similar models, and that be
has thereby led us pafltke Rubicon, he may flatter
himfelf that we will the more readily, follow his
future direction, and adopt what plans he may
offer. But I chafe to examine for myfelf, and
having dispatched his main argument for independ
ence, which he founds on the necessity of foreign
affitance, I proceed to confider some other parts
of his work.
His firft Sections cn the origin of government
and monarchy, appear to be the strangest medley
of i consistencies and contradictions, which were
perhaps ever offered to the Common S € nfe of any
pe # p!e, and calculated only to mislead those Su
perficial readers, who are content to believe as
they go, without comparing one part of a writer's
doctrine with another.
“ Society, fays he, is produced by our wants,
“ and government by our wickedness ; the former
“ promotes our happiness ^f/foefy, by uniting cur
" affections : the latter negatived, by refrain
" ing cur vices—Government, like dress, is the
' ba^ge of loft innocence; the palaces of Kings,
" are built on the ruins of the bowers of Para
" dife."
If the author meant only by this to tell us, that
if all men were perfectly virtuous, and followed the
pure dictates of right reason, human governments
v.ould have been unnecessary ; then I could fub
!cribe to his doctrine, and m ; ght have paid him a
compliment for eloathing an old truth in a fptuce
netaphor But if he meant to prove that monar
chies were any more founded on the ruins of Para
diSethm Republics, he ought in consistency with
him'elf, to have Shewn us—that, after Adam was
expelled from Paradise, he and his defeendents, as'
G n as they were “ four or five" strong, and
66 aide to raise a tolerable dwelling in the wilder
nefs"—were found erecting some fort of palace for
him as their King ;and that, after this example, a 1
future governments were Kingly, is the firft ages,
out our author (hews us no such thing. On the
c notary, when he speaks of the manner of q peo
pling the world," and frames a government out of
the date of nature, the firft idea he prefects us
with is that of a pure republic.—
" Some convenient tree, fays he, affords a
“ State Houje, under the branches of which the
“ WHOLk colony may assemble to deliberate
“ on public matters."—They proceed as their
numbers increase, to improve this constitution,
and device checks, that, “ the eleCed may not
“ form to themselves an interefl separate from
“ the eleßors" —- —On these checks, (" not on
“ the unmeaning name King) depends the Jirengts
" bf government and happinef of the governed."
How can this be reconciled to what ftliovs?
The author has told us that all government, " be
ing at best but a necefiary evil, promotes happiness
only negatively, by refraining (viz. checking) cur
vices;" and in erecting bis early republic, he con
trives his checks accordingly ; but frifum teneatis /)
directly forgets himfelf, and fays that no " power.
which needs checking can be from God." Thus, by
his own argument, God has as little to do with dm
powers of government in the Republican as irirt
forms. But further, lead his readers should aho
forget themselves, and be carried away by his frd
assertion, —that "the palaces of King's were built
on the ruins of Paradise;" lietakes care to tell us,
and backs it with the authority of " fefiorure,
chronology ; that in the early ages cf the world
there were no Kings;" that the Devil himfelf, in
To C Ato, Cassandra, and all the H'riters on the
Indepen lent Controverfj.
Gentlemen*,
r y'HOUGH it might be deemed absolutely ne
-1 ceffary to suppress all publications, which
tend to disunite the colonies, in their prefect spirit
ed opposition to a cruel and unnatural attack from
the people of England; yet, as the question of T
dependenc, has been lately flatted, in a pamphlet
entitled Common Sense, and Supported by a variety
o' subsequent authors, i confess I was much plead
ed on the appearance of a writer on the other die
ot th® question; for as I have nb other view, than
peace and hap\inefs for myfelf and posterity, I was
determined to give an carneft attention to the arr^
ments on both Sides. It is no matter, with m t ,
whether I live under an Emperor, a Pone, a Pa
(haw, a King of England, or a Republic, provi
d d I can be convinced, by irrefutahe arguments,
that such or such a l^te contained the"orcatut
quantity of happiness for the people st farmland
for individuals in particular; for as lam inth c Si
tuation of 99 cut of every 100 in the world, who
have no expectations of ever aicendinn into office
and riding upon the top of the machine, and Ewe
only to expect to contribute my proportion of C
bour to wheel it along, I therefore think it say buffr
ne's, as well as myfellow labourers, to fee that ;tis
so conftruffed, as to move with as little labour as
possible, and the machinery so contrived as to be
the lead liable to get out of order in the vanetv cf
row, and fmocth roads through which we must
inevitably pals.—Now taking it for granted, that
the machine must necessarily be kept in proper mo
tion, I conclude, we are net to consult the ease and
convenience of the riders, but that cf the draughts
* Cassandra quid pleaJe *9 excuse the atpe'la
"'°" of " Gentlemen, for as Phoebus aec.reed.th~t
the Prophetess /WW never be credited, Ia m under
the necefity &freeing that the modem Cassan
dra is a Lady.
those anc-'ent times, rra9 bait a dud fallow ; **d
that, although “ government by Kings was ins
mod prosperous invention for toe ptomorhm of
idolatry," he was a long while in l^mn^ring it
cut; which is but a poor compliment to Saran's
cunning ! For being a King himself from the "be
ginning, he might have bit upon it loaner. Bin
I leave our author to make his own apology i,
his in ernal Majesty, if he be ofhis councils; for
I have he bELeis 10 interfere between them.
It is f u c;ent to ffipw what use be makes of his
Common Scnfe, at the very cutlet, in refuting his
own h it doctrine, and proving 10 derm m'lratin
that indeed of Palacesfor Kings, State-Ho?fo for
whole Colonies were built cn the ruins of
Paradise ; nay more, that these ruins, in th^ case
of the Jews, were near three thousand years tiffed
Up and down into various forms, before they were
converted into Royal Edifices! That I have net
miireprelented our author in this argument, his
own words will shew. “ Near three thousand
years pa/Ted away, from the Mosaic account of
tie creation, till the Jews, under a national delusi
on, requeued a King. Till then, their form of
government (except in extraordinary cases, where
the Almigh.y interposed) was a kind of Repub
lic, Pi.
he proceeds, in the next place, to persuade us
that be is as well acquainted with the secrets of
Heaven as tie devices of Hell, concerning the ori
gin of Kirg'y government ; and that the Almighty
consented at last to this " most prosperous inventi
on of Satan," in mere wrath and vengeance against
the Jews, as a greater punishment for their ingra
titude, than could have been inffided upon them
by any other hu.can form of government. There
never was a greater perversion of scripture than
our author has been guilty of in his endeavours to
eftablilh this pan of his argument, as every man of
common understanding, who has his bible in bis
hand, may easily perceive.
The bounds prescribed for this letter will not
fuffer me, at present to point out his misrepresent
ations, and to shew how he sets himfelf up, not
only againftthe plain letter of scripture, but the
univerfai sense of wife and holy men of every age.
It is not confident with my principles to fay one
word in favour of the divine right of Kings; nor
do I believe a word of what others have said in its
favour. As little do I believe what has been said
concerning the divine right of republics, or any
other human forms of government. But the ques
tion is, whether God hath particularly reprobated
any of them? For my p&rt, as the author has set
me the example ofexamining scripture on this head,
I cannot find any modern Kings particularly re
jeded by heaven, but Mounseir the King of
Branch, ft is in the gyth chapter of Ezekiel;
and I am sure our author, who is so deeply vers
ed in scripture, could not have overlooked it, if
it had not been for the treaty he proposes with
this King. The reader will readily allow that
the application is much more natural than that
which he has made of the Bth chapter of the firft
book of Samuel.
Son of Man, set tly face againf MounTseir
(Heb. Mounseir, or Monsieur ;) and prophet?
againfi it (Heb. Him ;) and fa unto him, thus frith
the Lord God: Beko'd O Mountfeir orMounfier, A
''" "gains thee—because thou haft hod a perpetual
hatred, and haft fed the blood of the children of if
rael [that is the French Protefants] by the force of
the fvord —Therefore, as I live, faith the Lord God,
I will prepare thee unto blood, and blood fhallpurfee
thee-- ith thou haft not haedb ood, even blood foa.l
pursue thee.—Thus quill I make Mountse IR, cr
Monsieur mod deflate —jecaufe thou haft fold
these two nations, and these two countries [fere
Britain and America are clearly pointed ou ffHl
be mine, and me quill pofefs it—whereas the Lord
eves there —as much as to fay, you GUI not have
these two countries Motifeur! the Lord intends
them for his own use—they shall befree Protefant
countries.]
I he reader may peruse and apply the remain
der of the chapter, which he may do as well as
the author of Common Sense; and, some may fay,
perhaps as well as
C A T O.