The Pennsylvania ledger, or, The Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, & New-Jersey weekly advertiser — Philadelphia, Pa., 1776-03-30 00:00:00, page 2

IN my fourth letter, some notice was taken of
the dangerous proposition held up to us by the
author or Common Sense, for having recourse to fo
reign abidance, and mixing the virtuous cause of
the<e Colonies with the ambitious views of France
and Spain, even allowing that they are either able,
or that we could make it their interest, to enter in
to a war with Great-Britain and her allies, on our
account. Hillary will scarce give us an example of
any people that ever recurred to an expedient of
this kind, without having their allies at last for
their Masters. The fatal consequences of hasty
resolution's, in great questions, might be well illus
trated by the conduct of the foolilh Danes; who, to
avenge themselves of their nobility, in one dreadful
moment, made an irretrievable surrender of their
own Liberty, -and that of their poftevity, into the
hands of a Tyrant. And had 1 been disposed to
Work upon the paflions, rather than address the
reason of my readers, the mention which was made
in my last, of the arbitrary governments of France
and Spain, their bloody massacres and unrelenting
persecutions, gave me an opportunity of entering
into descriptions, which would have ' harrow'd up
the very fouls" of Protefants and Freemen !
Theadminiftration of Great Britain itielf, daring
as they seem to be, have not yet dared to recur to
the desperate measure bl- calling in foreign aid. But
some of our bell friends intimate that an example of
this kind, on either fide, would juftify the like con
duct on the other. A great Majority of the patri
otic freeholders of the county of Berks in England,
nobly supporting our cause before the throne, com
pliment us upon this—that we have not thrown
burfelves into the arms of other powers, and that
" our Petitions have yet appeared before no throne
" but that of Britain. Let not England (fay they)
“ let an example, which is but too easily copied, by
“ drawing into a free coutry, the insidious and
“ mercenary aid of foreign forces, trained to the
'• support of barbarous Despotism. The moment
" that a great army ot such, or of any foreigners,
" thill enter your territories, the liberties of your
“ people are at an end—Strenuous as we are for
“ the honor of our country, we cannot be forget
“ ful of its pe ice and concord. It is therefore we
“ abhor the idea of encouraging foreigners to make
“ a'prey of this nation, and its dependencies, under
“ the miferabl A and uncovered pretext of difeoun
“ tenancing fa&ion and sedition among ourselves."
It it but too reasonable, then, to conclude, —that
^whichsoever fide. Great Britain or America, shall
firtt call in foreign afliftance, will but force the
other into the fame desperate measure. In either
case this devoted land would become one field of
blood and carnage for a length of years; which,
ar fad, it is to be apprehended, would only be
dreadfully closed in our perpetual fubjedion & Slave
ry to the victorious fide, whether allies or foes! It
is, indeed, impollible 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
son, and the daughter of his affedion, are not fate
from the unholy violence of mercenary soldiery, ri
oting througli every corner of a Jand not their own,
insolent in victory, and barbarous in defeat.
Altho' we now sadly bleed under the cruel hand
o' an unjust adminitfraiion, who hive kindled up a
mod unnatural war among brethren in their own
End; yet (God be thank'd) that war hath not
re ched, and I trull will never be able to reach,
m ich further than our tea-chores. A nation can
not long continue totally blind to all its mod effen
tiJ interests. Our own vigor and vrtue have al
ready gone a great way to convince our oppressors
ofthe inanity, as well as the impradicabitliy, of their
fthemes to govern a great and dittant country by
force. Perseverance, on our fide, will Ipeedily ac
complish the rest. Our friends in Britain, unbought
by us and uncorrupted by our foes, are yec of more
wortli to uschan wholenations of foreigners, drawn
in to our aflidance by mercenary or interested views.
If, by no precipitate or unnecessary measures, we
forfeit the esteem of the former, and make them al
so enemies, we sh ill prevail by our united Strength.
The devices of thole, who, for ambitious purposes,
strive to divide a house againditfelf, will be finally
confound'd, and the whole family of Britons, on
both sides of the Atl mtic, may yet be bound toge
ther, by frelh ties of mutual love and intereft—for
many generations!
But, I repeat it once more—by the former mea
sure of calling in foreigners to decide our quarrels,
we shall bleed, not in a few parts only, but at every
pore, and the present generation will not probably
Lethe end of the conted Would to Heaven, that
they who press such a measure, as preferable to re
conciliation with our ancient friends, upon whate
ver terms, could but behold the face of Poland,
an 1 visit the feenes of hivoc and desolation which
mirk rhe late footfteps of contending foreign pow
ers in that country; or read the accounts of the
like feenes in many parts of Germany ! They would
To the PEOPLE of Pennsylvania.
L ETTER V.
not then continue to urge such a measure, till they
could clearly prove that the laft.neceffity was come.
Let it not be said that I am here drawing a hor
rible picture to frighten this country into an abfo
lute fubmiflion 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 of the colonies shall deem fate and honour
able. But upon the other plan, it is much to be
feared, that fubmiflion as well as ruin might be our
lot, -and were I disposed to give bad names to any
perlons, who may perhaps be honestly enquiring
after our true interest in this contest, they whoadvife
such a plan, and not Cato, might be called inimi
cal to thele colonies. Nor let it be said, that the
wished for assistance, is not that of armies, but of
fleets for trade, and commercial protection. Even
fuppofmg that to be the case, will the fleets of any
power, who can look those of Britain in the face,
be content just 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 answering) makes
no such diftinCtion; and speaks of the "assistance
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 assistance, if we
" mean only to make use of that affillance for the
" purpole of repairing the breach, and drengthen
“ ing the connection, between Britain and Ameri
" ca." —That the assistance here meant, is not con
fined to mere naval assistance in the idea of some,
who are great advocates for this author's pamphlet,
might have been easily gathered from their expres
sions, when we received the late accounts of the ar
rival of unusual numbers of troops in the neigh
bouring French Weft-Indies.—-
But this only alarmed others the more ; and lam
well persuaded that this writer's idea is not yet a
dopted by many perlons of much consideration in
this country, much less by any Public Bodies. I
confider it only as thrown out to colled the senti
ments of America upon it, although I cannot but
think it a dangerous as well as unseasonable 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 quedion, it ought now to
be fairly difeuffed, for whatever we have left, wor
thy of our attention as freemen, is all involved in
this flake; and when important quellions are put
upon the footing, that if they are not answered,
they are to be taken for granted, it becomes abso
lutely necessary to examine them.
For my part, the more I confider the matter (and
I have long considered it impartially) the more I
am persuaded that our political salvation can only
be worked out by our own united virtue, and upon
our own foundation. When it shall clearly appear
that we can nolonger hand upon this ground ; when
we shall be generally convinced, by better arguments
th^n declamation, and the abuse of things venerable
and ancient, that future connexion with Great-
Britain, is neither possible nor fafe; then we shall
be fully united and prepared, at every rilk, to pur
sue whatever measures the sense of the community,
fairly collected, shall think necessary to adopt., But
even then, before we launch forth, many domeflic
concerns are to be adjusted.
Under what form of government are we to confe
drate? How much oi our ancient conditutions is to be
preserved? Who is to fettle our clashing territorial
claims? In what cases are the jurisdiction and ex
pences of these colonies to bejoint or separate? On
what terms are we to engage foreign alliances, and
yet to secure our Liberties in connexion with them?
Are the Colonies to vote equally in determining
these grand concerns; or is a representation to be
formed, in proportion to numbers and consequence?
I might propose more questions of this kind; and
when the necessity comes, they will rife thickenough
upon us, and we mull then encounter them all, tor
the fake of American Liberty; which I would
never desert, but with my life. But I am sure that
the authorof Common Sense, who labours to prove
that the necessity is already come, offers nothing on
this head, that can give much fatisfa&ion to the
public in general. Trusting, however, that in the
preceding part of his work, he has levelled the En
glish constitution in the dust, together with all our
American constitutions, which are formed on simi
lar models, and that he has thereby led us pas the
Rubicon, he may flatter himfelf that we will the
more readily, follow his future direction, and adopt
what plans he may offer. But I chufe to examine
for myfelf, and having dispatched his main argu
ment for Independence, which he founds on the ne
cessity of foreign assistance, I proceed to confider
some other parts of his work.
His firft feCtions on the origin of government and
monarchy, appear to be the strangest medley of in
consistencies and contradictions, which were per
hads ever offered to the Common Sense of any peo
ple, and calculated only to mislead those fuperfici
al readers, who are content to believe as they go,
without comparing one part of a writer's doctrine
with another.
If the author meant only by this to tell us, that
if all men were perfedly virtuous, and followed the
pure dictates of right reason, human governments
would have been unnecessary; then I could sub
scribe to his doctrine, and might have paid him a
compliment for eloathing an old trutli in a spruce
metaphor. But if he meant to prove that monar^
chies were any more founded on the ruins of para
dise than Republics, he ought in confillency with
himfelf, to have shewn us—that, after Adam was
expelled from Paradise, he and his defcendents, as
soon as they were "four or five" strong, and
“ able to raise a tolerable dwelling in the wilder
ness" —were found ereCting some fort of palace for
him as their king; and that, after this example, all
future governments were kingly, in the firft ages.
But our author ihews us no such thing. On the
contrary, when he speaks of the manner of "peo
pling the world," and frames a government out of
the state of nature, the firft idea he presents us with
is that of a pure Republic,—•
“ Some convenient tree, fays he, affords a State
" House, under the branches of which the whole
“ colony may assemble to deliberate on public
" matters."—They proceed as their numbers in
crease, to improve this constitution, and devise
checks, that, 66 the elected may not form to them
" selves an interest feperate from the electors"
On these checks, (" not on the unmeaning name of
" King) depends the frength of government and
" happiness of the governed."
How can this be reconciled to what follows?
The author has told us that all government, " be
ing at bell but a necessary evil, promotes happiness
only negatively, by refraining (viz. checking) our
vices ;" and in ereding his early Republic, he con
trives his checks accordingly; but ( rifum teneatis ! )
directly forgets himfelf, and fays that no " power,
^hich needs checking can be from God." Thus, by
his own argument, God has as little to do with the
powers of government in the Republican as mi x t
forms. But further, least his readers Ihould alio
forget themselves, and be carried away by his firft
affection—that "the palaces of Kings were built on
the ruins of Paradise;" he takes care to tell us,
and backs it with tlie authority of '' scripture.
Chronology ; that in the early ages of the world
there were no Kings;" that the Devil himfelf,
in thole ancient times, was but a dull fellow;
and that, although " government by Kings was
his most prosperous invention for the promotion of
idolatry, he was a long while in hammering it out;
which is but a poor compliment to Satan's cunning!
For being a King himfelf from the beginning, he
might have hit upon it foontr. But I leave our
author to make his own apology to his infernal
Majesty, if he be of his councils; for I have no bu
siness to interefere between them.
“ Society, fays he, is produced by our wants,
" and government by our wickedness; the fornfiT
" promotes our happiness poftively, by uniting our
" affections; the later negatively, by refraining owe
« vices—Government, like dress, is the badge of
" loft innocence; the palaces of Kings are built on
" the ruins of the bowers of Paradise."
It is fufficient to shew what use he makes of his
Common Sense, at the very outlet, in refuting his
own firft doCtrine, and proving to demonstration
that, instead of Palaces for Kings, State Houses for
whole Colonies were built out of the ruins of
Paradise; nay more, that these ruins, in the case
of the Jews, were near three thousand years tossed
up and down into various forms, before they were
converted into Royal Edifices! That I have not
milreprefented our author in this argument, his
own words will shew. " Near three thousand
years passed away, from the Mosaic account of
the creation, till the Jews, under a national delusi
on, requeued a King. Till then, their form of
government (except in extraordinary cases, where the
Almighty interpoled) was a kind of Republic, &c."
He proceeds, in the next place, to persuade us
that he is as well acquainted with the secrets of
Heaven as the devices of Hell, concerning the ori
gin of Kingly government; and that the Almighty
consented at last to this " moll 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 inflicted upon them
by any other human form of government. There
never was a greater perversion of Scripture than
our author has been guilty of, in his endeavours to
eftablilh this part of his argument, as every man of
common understanding, who has his bible in his
hand, may easily perceive.
The bounds prescribed for this letter will not
fufler me, at present to point out his misrepresent
ations, and to shew how he sets himfelf up, not
only against the plain letter of scripture, but the
universal 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 part, as the author has set
me the example of examining scripture on this head.