Browsing named entities in George Bancroft, History of the United States from the Discovery of the American Continent, Vol. 5, 13th edition.. You can also browse the collection for Manchester (United Kingdom) or search for Manchester (United Kingdom) in all documents.

Your search returned 6 results in 6 document sections:

of a town, and scarce so much housing as a sheep-cot, or more inhabitants than a shepherd, sent as many representatives to the grand assembly of law-makers as the whole county of Yorkshire, so numerous in people and powerful in riches. The illustration is in substance, and almost in words, from Locke. The lord of the borough of Newport, in the Isle of Wight, in like manner chap. III.} 1763. named two members, while Bristol elected no more; the populous capital of Scotland but one; and Manchester none. Two hundred and fifty-four members had such small constituencies, that about five thousand seven hundred and twenty-three votes sufficed to choose them. Fifty-six were elected by so few that, had the districts been equally divided, six and a half votes would have sufficed for each member. In an island counting more than seven and a half millions of people, and at least a million and a half of mature men, no one could pretend that it required more than ten thousand voters to elect
ent, the elephant at the head of this nabob's army, is this: that no Englishman is or can be taxed but by his own consent, or the persons whom he has chosen to represent him. But this is the very reverse of truth; for no man that I know of is taxed by his own consent, least of all an Englishman. The unfortunate counties which produce cider were taxed without the consent of their repre sentatives; and while every Englishman is taxed, not one in twenty is represented. Are not the people of Manchester and Birmingham Englishmen? And are they not taxed? If every Englishman is represented in parliament, why does not this imaginary representation extend to America? If it can travel three hundred miles, why not three thousand? If it can jump over rivers and mountains, why cannot it sail over the ocean? If Manchester and Birmingham are there represented, why not Albany and Boston? Are they not Englishmen? But it is urged, if the privilege of being taxed by the legislative power wit
nstitutional manner of imposing it, that is the great subject of uneasiness to the colonies. The minister admitted in parliament, that they had in the fullest sense the right to be taxed only by their own consent, given by their representatives; and grounds his pretence of the right to tax them entirely upon this, that they are chap. XIII.} 1765. May. virtually represented in parliament. It is said that they are in the same situation as the inhabitants of Leeds, Halifax, Birmingham, Manchester, and several other corporate towns; and that the right of electing does not comprehend above one-tenth part of the people of England. And in this land of liberty, for so it was our glory to call it, are there really men so insensible to shame, as before the awful tribunal of reason, to mention the hardships which, through their practices, some places in England are obliged to bear without redress, as precedents for imposing still greater hardships and wrongs upon America? It has long
tes to the Calvinist ministers of New England. Are persons chosen for the representatives of London and Bristol, in like manner chosen to be the representatives of Philadelphia or Boston? Have two men chosen to represent a poor borough in England, that has sold its votes to the highest bidder, any pretence to say that they represent Virginia or Pennsylvania? And have four hundred such fellows a right to take our liberties? F. Alison to E. Stiles. But it was argued again and again: Manchester, Birmingham, and Sheffield, like America, return no members. Why, rejoined Otis, and his answer won immediate applause in England, Monthly Review. why ring everlasting changes to the colonists on them? If they are not represented, they ought to be. Every man of a sound mind, he continued, should have his vote. Ah, but, replied the royalists, holding Otis to his repeated concessions, you own that par- chap. XIV.} 1765. June. liament is the supreme legislature; will you question it
h and Dutch, rather than of their fellow subjects. They do not condescend to enter into explanations upon the Stamp Act, but object to its principle, and the power of making it; yet the law was passed very deliberately, with no opposition in this house, and very little in the other. The tax, moreover, is light, and is paid only by the rich, in proportion to their dealings. The objections for want of representation are absurd. Who are affected by the duties on hardware but the people of Manchester, Birmingham and Leeds? And how are they represented? But suppose the act liable to exceptions, is this a time to discuss them? When the Pretender was at Derby, did you then enter upon a tame consideration of grievances? What occasion is there for papers? The present rebellion is more unnatural, and not less notorious, than that of 1745. The king's governors chap. XX.} 1765. Dec. have been hanged in effigy, his forts and generals besieged, and the civil power annulled or suspended
he; when in my place, I feel I am tolerably able to remain through the debate, and cry aye to the repeal with no sickly voice; and he hobbled into the house on crutches, swathed in flannels; huzzaed as he passed through the lobby, by almost all chap XXIII.} 1766. Feb. the persons there. Conway moved for leave to bring in a bill for the repeal of the American Stamp Act. It had interrupted British commerce; jeoparded debts to British merchants; stopped one-third of the manufactures of Manchester; increased the rates on land, by throwing thousands of poor out of employment. The act too breathed oppression. It annihilated juries; and gave vast power to the admiralty courts. The lawyers might decide in favor of the right to tax; but the conflict would ruin both countries. In three thousand miles of territory, the English had but five thousand troops, the Americans one hundred and fifty thousand fighting men. If they did not repeal the act, France and Spain would declare war, and