of American rights.
He was an enthusiast in
his love for England
, and accepted the undefined relations of the Parliament to the Colonies as a perpetual compromise, which neither party was to disturb by pursuing an abstract theory to its ultimate conclusions.
His words carried the more weight, because he argued against the new Port Duties, only as a conservative.
‘If once we are separated from the mother country,’ he asked in the sincerity of sorrow, ‘what new form of government shall we adopt?
or where shall we find another Britain to supply our loss?
Torn from the body to which we were united by religion, liberty, laws, affections, relation, language, and commerce, we must bleed at every vein.’1
He admitted that Parliament possessed a legal authority to regulate the trade of every part of the empire.
Examining all the statutes relating to America
from its first settlement, he found every one of them based on that principle till the administration of Grenville
Never before did the British Commons
think of imposing duties in the Colonies for the purpose of raising a revenue.
first asserted in the Preamble of one Act, that it was ‘just and necessary’ for them to give and grant such duties; and in the Preamble of another, that it was ‘just and necessary’ to raise a further revenue in the same way; while the Preamble of the last Act granting duties upon paper, glass, colors, and tea, disregarding ancient precedents under cover of these modern ones, declared that it was moreover ‘expedient,’ that a revenue should be so raised.
‘This,’ said the Farmer
is an Innovation and a