Common Sense Thomas Paine 11909 downloads.pdf

The Project Gutenberg eBook of Common Sense
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of
the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will
have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using
this eBook.

Title: Common Sense

Author: Thomas Paine

Release date: July 1, 1994 [eBook #147]
Most recently updated: October 29, 2024

Language: English

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/147

Credits: John Campbell. HTML version by Al Haines. Modified by Robert
Homa.

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK COMMON
SENSE ***

COMMON SENSE;
addressed to the

INHABITANTS
of

AMERICA,
On the following interesting

SUBJECTS

I. Of the Origin and Design of Government in general,
with concise Remarks on the English Constitution.
II. Of Monarchy and Hereditary Succession
III. Thoughts on the present State of American Affairs
IV. Of the present Ability of America, with some
miscellaneous Reflections

A new edition, with several additions in the body of the work. To which
is added an appendix; together with an address to the people called Quakers.

Man knows no Master save creating Heaven
Or those whom choice and common good ordain.

Thomson.

PHILADELPHIA

Printed and sold by W. & T. Bradford, February 14, 1776.

MDCCLXXVI

Common Sense

By Thomas Paine

INTRODUCTION.

Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not yet
sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favor; a long habit of not
thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and
raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon
subsides. Time makes more converts than reason.

As a long and violent abuse of power, is generally the Means of calling
the right of it in question (and in Matters too which might never have been
thought of, had not the Sufferers been aggravated into the inquiry) and as
the King of England hath undertaken in his own Right, to support the
Parliament in what he calls Theirs, and as the good people of this country
are grievously oppressed by the combination, they have an undoubted
privilege to inquire into the pretensions of both, and equally to reject the
usurpation of either.

In the following sheets, the author hath studiously avoided every thing
which is personal among ourselves. Compliments as well as censure to
individuals make no part thereof. The wise, and the worthy, need not the
triumph of a pamphlet; and those whose sentiments are injudicious, or
unfriendly, will cease of themselves unless too much pains are bestowed
upon their conversion.

The cause of America is in a great measure the cause of all mankind.
Many circumstances hath, and will arise, which are not local, but universal,
and through which the principles of all Lovers of Mankind are affected, and
in the Event of which, their Affections are interested. The laying a Country
desolate with Fire and Sword, declaring War against the natural rights of all
Mankind, and extirpating the Defenders thereof from the Face of the Earth,
is the Concern of every Man to whom Nature hath given the Power of
feeling; of which Class, regardless of Party Censure, is the

AUTHOR

P.S. The Publication of this new Edition hath been delayed, with a View
of taking notice (had it been necessary) of any Attempt to refute the
Doctrine of Independance: As no Answer hath yet appeared, it is now
presumed that none will, the Time needful for getting such a Performance
ready for the Public being considerably past.

Who the Author of this Production is, is wholly unnecessary to the
Public, as the Object for Attention is the Doctrine itself, not the Man. Yet it
may not be unnecessary to say, That he is unconnected with any Party, and
under no sort of Influence public or private, but the influence of reason and
principle.

Philadelphia, February 14, 1776

OF THE ORIGIN AND DESIGN OF GOVERNMENT IN GENERAL,
WITH CONCISE REMARKS ON THE ENGLISH CONSTITUTION.

Some writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave
little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different,
but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and
government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness
positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our
vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The
first a patron, the last a punisher.

Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state
is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one; for when we
suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries by a government, which we
might expect in a country without government, our calamity is heightened
by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer. Government,
like dress, is the badge of lost innocence; the palaces of kings are built on
the ruins of the bowers of paradise. For were the impulses of conscience
clear, uniform, and irresistibly obeyed, man would need no other lawgiver;
but that not being the case, he finds it necessary to surrender up a part of his
property to furnish means for the protection of the rest; and this he is
induced to do by the same prudence which in every other case advises him
out of two evils to choose the least. Wherefore, security being the true
design and end of government, it unanswerably follows that whatever form
thereof appears most likely to ensure it to us, with the least expence and
greatest benefit, is preferable to all others.

In order to gain a clear and just idea of the design and end of
government, let us suppose a small number of persons settled in some
sequestered part of the earth, unconnected with the rest, they will then
represent the first peopling of any country, or of the world. In this state of
natural liberty, society will be their first thought. A thousand motives will
excite them thereto, the strength of one man is so unequal to his wants, and
his mind so unfitted for perpetual solitude, that he is soon obliged to seek
assistance and relief of another, who in his turn requires the same. Four or
five united would be able to raise a tolerable dwelling in the midst of a

wilderness, but one man might labour out of the common period of life
without accomplishing any thing; when he had felled his timber he could
not remove it, nor erect it after it was removed; hunger in the mean time
would urge him from his work, and every different want call him a different
way. Disease, nay even misfortune would be death, for though neither
might be mortal, yet either would disable him from living, and reduce him
to a state in which he might rather be said to perish than to die.

Thus necessity, like a gravitating power, would soon form our newly
arrived emigrants into society, the reciprocal blessings of which, would
supersede, and render the obligations of law and government unnecessary
while they remained perfectly just to each other; but as nothing but heaven
is impregnable to vice, it will unavoidably happen, that in proportion as
they surmount the first difficulties of emigration, which bound them
together in a common cause, they will begin to relax in their duty and
attachment to each other; and this remissness, will point out the necessity,
of establishing some form of government to supply the defect of moral
virtue.

Some convenient tree will afford them a State-House, under the branches
of which, the whole colony may assemble to deliberate on public matters. It
is more than probable that their first laws will have the title only of
Regulations, and be enforced by no other penalty than public disesteem. In
this first parliament every man, by natural right, will have a seat.

But as the colony increases, the public concerns will increase likewise,
and the distance at which the members may be separated, will render it too
inconvenient for all of them to meet on every occasion as at first, when their
number was small, their habitations near, and the public concerns few and
trifling. This will point out the convenience of their consenting to leave the
legislative part to be managed by a select number chosen from the whole
body, who are supposed to have the same concerns at stake which those
who appointed them, and who will act in the same manner as the whole
body would act were they present. If the colony continue increasing, it will
become necessary to augment the number of the representatives, and that
the interest of every part of the colony may be attended to, it will be found
best to divide the whole into convenient parts, each part sending its proper

number; and that the elected might never form to themselves an interest
separate from the electors, prudence will point out the propriety of having
elections often; because as the elected might by that means return and mix
again with the general body of the electors in a few months, their fidelity to
the public will be secured by the prudent reflexion of not making a rod for
themselves. And as this frequent interchange will establish a common
interest with every part of the community, they will mutually and naturally
support each other, and on this (not on the unmeaning name of king)
depends the strength of government, and the happiness of the governed.

Here then is the origin and rise of government; namely, a mode rendered
necessary by the inability of moral virtue to govern the world; here too is
the design and end of government, viz. freedom and security. And however
our eyes may be dazzled with show, or our ears deceived by sound;
however prejudice may warp our wills, or interest darken our
understanding, the simple voice of nature and of reason will say, it is right.

I draw my idea of the form of government from a principle in nature,
which no art can overturn, viz. that the more simple any thing is, the less
liable it is to be disordered; and the easier repaired when disordered; and
with this maxim in view, I offer a few remarks on the so much boasted
constitution of England. That it was noble for the dark and slavish times in
which it was erected, is granted. When the world was over run with tyranny
the least remove therefrom was a glorious rescue. But that it is imperfect,
subject to convulsions, and incapable of producing what it seems to
promise, is easily demonstrated.

Absolute governments (tho’ the disgrace of human nature) have this
advantage with them, that they are simple; if the people suffer, they know
the head from which their suffering springs, know likewise the remedy, and
are not bewildered by a variety of causes and cures. But the constitution of
England is so exceedingly complex, that the nation may suffer for years
together without being able to discover in which part the fault lies, some
will say in one and some in another, and every political physician will
advise a different medicine.

I know it is difficult to get over local or long standing prejudices, yet if
we will suffer ourselves to examine the component parts of the English

constitution, we shall find them to be the base remains of two ancient
tyrannies, compounded with some new republican materials.

First.—The remains of monarchical tyranny in the person of the king.

Secondly.—The remains of aristocratical tyranny in the persons of the
peers.

Thirdly.—The new republican materials, in the persons of the commons,
on whose virtue depends the freedom of England.

The two first, by being hereditary, are independent of the people;
wherefore in a constitutional sense they contribute nothing towards the
freedom of the state.

To say that the constitution of England is a union of three powers
reciprocally checking each other, is farcical, either the words have no
meaning, or they are flat contradictions.

To say that the commons is a check upon the king, presupposes two
things:

First.—That the king is not to be trusted without being looked after, or
in other words, that a thirst for absolute power is the natural disease of
monarchy.

Secondly.—That the commons, by being appointed for that purpose, are
either wiser or more worthy of confidence than the crown.

But as the same constitution which gives the commons a power to check
the king by withholding the supplies, gives afterwards the king a power to
check the commons, by empowering him to reject their other bills; it again
supposes that the king is wiser than those whom it has already supposed to
be wiser than him. A mere absurdity!

There is something exceedingly ridiculous in the composition of
monarchy; it first excludes a man from the means of information, yet
empowers him to act in cases where the highest judgment is required. The

state of a king shuts him from the world, yet the business of a king requires
him to know it thoroughly; wherefore the different parts, by unnaturally
opposing and destroying each other, prove the whole character to be absurd
and useless.

Some writers have explained the English constitution thus; the king, say
they, is one, the people another; the peers are an house in behalf of the king;
the commons in behalf of the people; but this hath all the distinctions of a
house divided against itself; and though the expressions be pleasantly
arranged, yet when examined they appear idle and ambiguous; and it will
always happen, that the nicest construction that words are capable of, when
applied to the description of some thing which either cannot exist, or is too
incomprehensible to be within the compass of description, will be words of
sound only, and though they may amuse the ear, they cannot inform the
mind, for this explanation includes a previous question, viz. How came the
king by a power which the people are afraid to trust, and always obliged to
check? Such a power could not be the gift of a wise people, neither can any
power, which needs checking, be from God; yet the provision, which the
constitution makes, supposes such a power to exist.

But the provision is unequal to the task; the means either cannot or will
not accomplish the end, and the whole affair is a felo de se; for as the
greater weight will always carry up the less, and as all the wheels of a
machine are put in motion by one, it only remains to know which power in
the constitution has the most weight, for that will govern; and though the
others, or a part of them, may clog, or, as the phrase is, check the rapidity of
its motion, yet so long as they cannot stop it, their endeavors will be
ineffectual; the first moving power will at last have its way, and what it
wants in speed is supplied by time.

That the crown is this overbearing part in the English constitution needs
not be mentioned, and that it derives its whole consequence merely from
being the giver of places and pensions is self-evident, wherefore, though we
have been wise enough to shut and lock a door against absolute monarchy,
we at the same time have been foolish enough to put the crown in
possession of the key.

The prejudice of Englishmen, in favour of their own government by
king, lords and commons, arises as much or more from national pride than
reason. Individuals are undoubtedly safer in England than in some other
countries, but the will of the king is as much the law of the land in Britain
as in France, with this difference, that instead of proceeding directly from
his mouth, it is handed to the people under the more formidable shape of an
act of parliament. For the fate of Charles the first, hath only made kings
more subtle—not more just.

Wherefore, laying aside all national pride and prejudice in favour of
modes and forms, the plain truth is, that it is wholly owing to the
constitution of the people, and not to the constitution of the government that
the crown is not as oppressive in England as in Turkey.

An inquiry into the constitutional errors in the English form of
government is at this time highly necessary, for as we are never in a proper
condition of doing justice to others, while we continue under the influence
of some leading partiality, so neither are we capable of doing it to ourselves
while we remain fettered by any obstinate prejudice. And as a man, who is
attached to a prostitute, is unfitted to choose or judge of a wife, so any
prepossession in favour of a rotten constitution of government will disable
us from discerning a good one.

OF MONARCHY AND HEREDITARY SUCCESSION.

Mankind being originally equals in the order of creation, the equality
could only be destroyed by some subsequent circumstance; the distinctions
of rich, and poor, may in a great measure be accounted for, and that without
having recourse to the harsh ill sounding names of oppression and avarice.
Oppression is often the consequence, but seldom or never the means of
riches; and though avarice will preserve a man from being necessitously
poor, it generally makes him too timorous to be wealthy.

But there is another and greater distinction for which no truly natural or
religious reason can be assigned, and that is, the distinction of men into
kings and subjects. Male and female are the distinctions of nature, good and
bad the distinctions of heaven; but how a race of men came into the world
so exalted above the rest, and distinguished like some new species, is worth
enquiring into, and whether they are the means of happiness or of misery to
mankind.

In the early ages of the world, according to the scripture chronology,
there were no kings; the consequence of which was there were no wars; it is
the pride of kings which throw mankind into confusion. Holland without a
king hath enjoyed more peace for this last century than any of the
monarchial governments in Europe. Antiquity favors the same remark; for
the quiet and rural lives of the first patriarchs hath a happy something in
them, which vanishes away when we come to the history of Jewish royalty.

Government by kings was first introduced into the world by the
Heathens, from whom the children of Israel copied the custom. It was the
most prosperous invention the Devil ever set on foot for the promotion of
idolatry. The Heathens paid divine honors to their deceased kings, and the
christian world hath improved on the plan by doing the same to their living
ones. How impious is the title of sacred majesty applied to a worm, who in
the midst of his splendor is crumbling into dust!

As the exalting one man so greatly above the rest cannot be justified on
the equal rights of nature, so neither can it be defended on the authority of

scripture; for the will of the Almighty, as declared by Gideon and the
prophet Samuel, expressly disapproves of government by kings. All anti-
monarchical parts of scripture have been very smoothly glossed over in
monarchical governments, but they undoubtedly merit the attention of
countries which have their governments yet to form. “Render unto Cæsar
the things which are Cæsar’s” is the scripture doctrine of courts, yet it is no
support of monarchical government, for the Jews at that time were without
a king, and in a state of vassalage to the Romans.

Near three thousand years passed away from the Mosaic account of the
creation, till the Jews under a national delusion requested a king. Till then
their form of government (except in extraordinary cases, where the
Almighty interposed) was a kind of republic administred by a judge and the
elders of the tribes. Kings they had none, and it was held sinful to
acknowledge any being under that title but the Lord of Hosts. And when a
man seriously reflects on the idolatrous homage which is paid to the
persons of Kings, he need not wonder, that the Almighty ever jealous of his
honor, should disapprove of a form of government which so impiously
invades the prerogative of heaven.

Monarchy is ranked in scripture as one of the sins of the Jews, for which
a curse in reserve is denounced against them. The history of that transaction
is worth attending to.

The children of Israel being oppressed by the Midianites, Gideon
marched against them with a small army, and victory, thro’ the divine
interposition, decided in his favour. The Jews elate with success, and
attributing it to the generalship of Gideon, proposed making him a king,
saying, Rule thou over us, thou and thy son and thy son’s son. Here was
temptation in its fullest extent; not a kingdom only, but an hereditary one,
but Gideon in the piety of his soul replied, I will not rule over you, neither
shall my son rule over you. The Lord shall rule over you. Words need not
be more explicit; Gideon doth not decline the honor, but denieth their right
to give it; neither doth he compliment them with invented declarations of
his thanks, but in the positive stile of a prophet charges them with
disaffection to their proper Sovereign, the King of heaven.

About one hundred and thirty years after this, they fell again into the
same error. The hankering which the Jews had for the idolatrous customs of
the Heathens, is something exceedingly unaccountable; but so it was, that
laying hold of the misconduct of Samuel’s two sons, who were entrusted
with some secular concerns, they came in an abrupt and clamorous manner
to Samuel, saying, Behold thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways,
now make us a king to judge us like all other nations. And here we cannot
but observe that their motives were bad, viz. that they might be like unto
other nations, i.e. the Heathens, whereas their true glory laid in being as
much unlike them as possible. But the thing displeased Samuel when they
said, Give us a king to judge us; and Samuel prayed unto the Lord, and the
Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they
say unto thee, for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me,
THAT I SHOULD NOT REIGN OVER THEM. According to all the works
which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt,
even unto this day; wherewith they have forsaken me and served other
Gods; so do they also unto thee. Now therefore hearken unto their voice,
howbeit, protest solemnly unto them and shew them the manner of the king
that shall reign over them, i.e. not of any particular king, but the general
manner of the kings of the earth, whom Israel was so eagerly copying after.
And notwithstanding the great distance of time and difference of manners,
the character is still in fashion. And Samuel told all the words of the Lord
unto the people, that asked of him a king. And he said, This shall be the
manner of the king that shall reign over you; he will take your sons and
appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen, and some
shall run before his chariots (this description agrees with the present mode
of impressing men) and he will appoint him captains over thousands and
captains over fifties, and will set them to ear his ground and to reap his
harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his
chariots; and he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be
cooks and to be bakers (this describes the expence and luxury as well as the
oppression of kings) and he will take your fields and your olive yards, even
the best of them, and give them to his servants; and he will take the tenth of
your feed, and of your vineyards, and give them to his officers and to his
servants (by which we see that bribery, corruption and favoritism are the
standing vices of kings) and he will take the tenth of your men servants, and
your maid servants, and your goodliest young men and your asses, and put

them to his work; and he will take the tenth of your sheep, and ye shall be
his servants, and ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye
shall have chosen, and the Lord will not hear you in that day. This
accounts for the continuation of monarchy; neither do the characters of the
few good kings which have lived since, either sanctify the title, or blot out
the sinfulness of the origin; the high encomium given of David takes no
notice of him officially as a king, but only as a man after God’s own heart.
Nevertheless the People refused to obey the voice of Samuel, and they said,
Nay, but we will have a king over us, that we may be like all the nations,
and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles.
Samuel continued to reason with them, but to no purpose; he set before
them their ingratitude, but all would not avail; and seeing them fully bent
on their folly, he cried out, I will call unto the Lord, and he shall send
thunder and rain (which then was a punishment, being in the time of wheat
harvest) that ye may perceive and see that your wickedness is great which
ye have done in the sight of the Lord, in asking you a king. So Samuel
called unto the Lord, and the Lord sent thunder and rain that day, and all
the people greatly feared the Lord and Samuel. And all the people said unto
Samuel, Pray for thy servants unto the Lord thy God that we die not, for we
have added unto our sins this evil, to ask a king. These portions of
scripture are direct and positive. They admit of no equivocal construction.
That the Almighty hath here entered his protest against monarchical
government is true, or the scripture is false. And a man hath good reason to
believe that there is as much of king-craft, as priest-craft, in withholding the
scripture from the public in Popish countries. For monarchy in every
instance is the Popery of government.

To the evil of monarchy we have added that of hereditary succession;
and as the first is a degradation and lessening of ourselves, so the second,
claimed as a matter of right, is an insult and an imposition on posterity. For
all men being originally equals, no one by birth could have a right to set up
his own family in perpetual preference to all others for ever, and though
himself might deserve some decent degree of honors of his cotemporaries,
yet his descendants might be far too unworthy to inherit them. One of the
strongest natural proofs of the folly of hereditary right in kings, is, that
nature disapproves it, otherwise she would not so frequently turn it into
ridicule by giving mankind an ass for a lion.

Secondly, as no man at first could possess any other public honors than
were bestowed upon him, so the givers of those honors could have no
power to give away the right of posterity, and though they might say “We
choose you for our head,” they could not, without manifest injustice to their
children, say “that your children and your children’s children shall reign
over ours for ever.” Because such an unwise, unjust, unnatural compact
might (perhaps) in the next succession put them under the government of a
rogue or a fool. Most wise men, in their private sentiments, have ever
treated hereditary right with contempt; yet it is one of those evils, which
when once established is not easily removed; many submit from fear, others
from superstition, and the more powerful part shares with the king the
plunder of the rest.

This is supposing the present race of kings in the world to have had an
honorable origin; whereas it is more than probable, that could we take off
the dark covering of antiquity, and trace them to their first rise, that we
should find the first of them nothing better than the principal ruffian of
some restless gang, whose savage manners or pre-eminence in subtility
obtained him the title of chief among plunderers; and who by increasing in
power, and extending his depredations, over-awed the quiet and defenceless
to purchase their safety by frequent contributions. Yet his electors could
have no idea of giving hereditary right to his descendants, because such a
perpetual exclusion of themselves was incompatible with the free and
unrestrained principles they professed to live by. Wherefore, hereditary
succession in the early ages of monarchy could not take place as a matter of
claim, but as something casual or complimental; but as few or no records
were extant in those days, and traditional history stuffed with fables, it was
very easy, after the lapse of a few generations, to trump up some
superstitious tale, conveniently timed, Mahomet like, to cram hereditary
right down the throats of the vulgar. Perhaps the disorders which threatened,
or seemed to threaten, on the decease of a leader and the choice of a new
one (for elections among ruffians could not be very orderly) induced many
at first to favor hereditary pretensions; by which means it happened, as it
hath happened since, that what at first was submitted to as a convenience,
was afterwards claimed as a right.

England, since the conquest, hath known some few good monarchs, but
groaned beneath a much larger number of bad ones; yet no man in his
senses can say that their claim under William the Conqueror is a very
honorable one. A French bastard landing with an armed banditti, and
establishing himself king of England against the consent of the natives, is in
plain terms a very paltry rascally original.—It certainly hath no divinity in
it. However, it is needless to spend much time in exposing the folly of
hereditary right; if there are any so weak as to believe it, let them
promiscuously worship the ass and lion, and welcome. I shall neither copy
their humility, nor disturb their devotion.

Yet I should be glad to ask how they suppose kings came at first? The
question admits but of three answers, viz. either by lot, by election, or by
usurpation. If the first king was taken by lot, it establishes a precedent for
the next, which excludes hereditary succession. Saul was by lot, yet the
succession was not hereditary, neither does it appear from that transaction
there was any intention it ever should. If the first king of any country was
by election, that likewise establishes a precedent for the next; for to say, that
the right of all future generations is taken away, by the act of the first
electors, in their choice not only of a king, but of a family of kings for ever,
hath no parrallel in or out of scripture but the doctrine of original sin, which
supposes the free will of all men lost in Adam; and from such comparison,
and it will admit of no other, hereditary succession can derive no glory. For
as in Adam all sinned, and as in the first electors all men obeyed; as in the
one all mankind were subjected to Satan, and in the other to Sovereignty; as
our innocence was lost in the first, and our authority in the last; and as both
disable us from reassuming some former state and privilege, it
unanswerably follows that original sin and hereditary succession are
parellels. Dishonorable rank! Inglorious connexion! Yet the most subtile
sophist cannot produce a juster simile.

As to usurpation, no man will be so hardy as to defend it; and that
William the Conqueror was an usurper is a fact not to be contradicted. The
plain truth is, that the antiquity of English monarchy will not bear looking
into.

But it is not so much the absurdity as the evil of hereditary succession
which concerns mankind. Did it ensure a race of good and wise men it
would have the seal of divine authority, but as it opens a door to the foolish,
the wicked, and the improper, it hath in it the nature of oppression. Men
who look upon themselves born to reign, and others to obey, soon grow
insolent; selected from the rest of mankind their minds are early poisoned
by importance; and the world they act in differs so materially from the
world at large, that they have but little opportunity of knowing its true
interests, and when they succeed to the government are frequently the most
ignorant and unfit of any throughout the dominions.

Another evil which attends hereditary succession is, that the throne is
subject to be possessed by a minor at any age; all which time the regency,
acting under the cover of a king, have every opportunity and inducement to
betray their trust. The same national misfortune happens, when a king worn
out with age and infirmity, enters the last stage of human weakness. In both
these cases the public becomes a prey to every miscreant, who can tamper
successfully with the follies either of age or infancy.

The most plausible plea, which hath ever been offered in favour of
hereditary succession, is, that it preserves a nation from civil wars; and
were this true, it would be weighty; whereas, it is the most barefaced falsity
ever imposed upon mankind. The whole history of England disowns the
fact. Thirty kings and two minors have reigned in that distracted kingdom
since the conquest, in which time there have been (including the
Revolution) no less than eight civil wars and nineteen rebellions. Wherefore
instead of making for peace, it makes against it, and destroys the very
foundation it seems to stand on.

The contest for monarchy and succession, between the houses of York
and Lancaster, laid England in a scene of blood for many years. Twelve
pitched battles, besides skirmishes and sieges, were fought between Henry
and Edward. Twice was Henry prisoner to Edward, who in his turn was
prisoner to Henry. And so uncertain is the fate of war and the temper of a
nation, when nothing but personal matters are the ground of a quarrel, that
Henry was taken in triumph from a prison to a palace, and Edward obliged
to fly from a palace to a foreign land; yet, as sudden transitions of temper

are seldom lasting, Henry in his turn was driven from the throne, and
Edward recalled to succeed him. The parliament always following the
strongest side.

This contest began in the reign of Henry the Sixth, and was not entirely
extinguished till Henry the Seventh, in whom the families were united.
Including a period of 67 years, viz. from 1422 to 1489.

In short, monarchy and succession have laid (not this or that kingdom
only) but the world in blood and ashes. ’Tis a form of government which
the word of God bears testimony against, and blood will attend it.

If we inquire into the business of a king, we shall find that in some
countries they have none; and after sauntering away their lives without
pleasure to themselves or advantage to the nation, withdraw from the scene,
and leave their successors to tread the same idle round. In absolute
monarchies the whole weight of business, civil and military, lies on the
king; the children of Israel in their request for a king, urged this plea “that
he may judge us, and go out before us and fight our battles.” But in
countries where he is neither a judge nor a general, as in England, a man
would be puzzled to know what is his business.

The nearer any government approaches to a republic the less business
there is for a king. It is somewhat difficult to find a proper name for the
government of England. Sir William Meredith calls it a republic; but in its
present state it is unworthy of the name, because the corrupt influence of
the crown, by having all the places in its disposal, hath so effectually
swallowed up the power, and eaten out the virtue of the house of commons
(the republican part in the constitution) that the government of England is
nearly as monarchical as that of France or Spain. Men fall out with names
without understanding them. For it is the republican and not the
monarchical part of the constitution of England which Englishmen glory in,
viz. the liberty of choosing a house of commons from out of their own body
—and it is easy to see that when republican virtue fails, slavery ensues.
Why is the constitution of England sickly, but because monarchy hath
poisoned the republic, the crown hath engrossed the commons?

In England a king hath little more to do than to make war and give away
places; which in plain terms, is to impoverish the nation and set it together
by the ears. A pretty business indeed for a man to be allowed eight hundred
thousand sterling a year for, and worshipped into the bargain! Of more
worth is one honest man to society and in the sight of God, than all the
crowned ruffians that ever lived.

THOUGHTS ON THE PRESENT STATE OF AMERICAN AFFAIRS.

In the following pages I offer nothing more than simple facts, plain
arguments, and common sense; and have no other preliminaries to settle
with the reader, than that he will divest himself of prejudice and
prepossession, and suffer his reason and his feelings to determine for
themselves; that he will put on, or rather that he will not put off, the true
character of a man, and generously enlarge his views beyond the present
day.

Volumes have been written on the subject of the struggle between
England and America. Men of all ranks have embarked in the controversy,
from different motives, and with various designs; but all have been
ineffectual, and the period of debate is closed. Arms, as the last resource,
decide the contest; the appeal was the choice of the king, and the continent
hath accepted the challenge.

It hath been reported of the late Mr. Pelham (who tho’ an able minister
was not without his faults) that on his being attacked in the house of
commons, on the score, that his measures were only of a temporary kind,
replied “they will last my time.” Should a thought so fatal and unmanly
possess the colonies in the present contest, the name of ancestors will be
remembered by future generations with detestation.

The sun never shined on a cause of greater worth. ’Tis not the affair of a
city, a country, a province, or a kingdom, but of a continent—of at least one
eighth part of the habitable globe. ’Tis not the concern of a day, a year, or
an age; posterity are virtually involved in the contest, and will be more or
less affected, even to the end of time, by the proceedings now. Now is the
seed time of continental union, faith and honor. The least fracture now will
be like a name engraved with the point of a pin on the tender rind of a
young oak; the wound will enlarge with the tree, and posterity read it in full
grown characters.

By referring the matter from argument to arms, a new æra for politics is
struck; a new method of thinking hath arisen. All plans, proposals, &c. prior

to the nineteenth of April, i.e. to the commencement of hostilities, are like
the almanacks of the last year; which, though proper then, are superseded
and useless now. Whatever was advanced by the advocates on either side of
the question then, terminated in one and the same point, viz. a union with
Great-Britain; the only difference between the parties was the method of
effecting it; the one proposing force, the other friendship; but it hath so far
happened that the first hath failed, and the second hath withdrawn her
influence.

As much hath been said of the advantages of reconciliation, which, like
an agreeable dream, hath passed away and left us as we were, it is but right,
that we should examine the contrary side of the argument, and inquire into
some of the many material injuries which these colonies sustain, and always
will sustain, by being connected with, and dependant on Great-Britain. To
examine that connexion and dependance, on the principles of nature and
common sense, to see what we have to trust to, if separated, and what we
are to expect, if dependant.

I have heard it asserted by some, that as America hath flourished under
her former connexion with Great-Britain, that the same connexion is
necessary towards her future happiness, and will always have the same
effect. Nothing can be more fallacious than this kind of argument. We may
as well assert that because a child has thrived upon milk, that it is never to
have meat, or that the first twenty years of our lives is to become a
precedent for the next twenty. But even this is admitting more than is true,
for I answer roundly, that America would have flourished as much, and
probably much more, had no European power had any thing to do with her.
The commerce, by which she hath enriched herself are the necessaries of
life, and will always have a market while eating is the custom of Europe.

But she has protected us, say some. That she has engrossed us is true,
and defended the continent at our expence as well as her own is admitted,
and she would have defended Turkey from the same motive, viz. the sake of
trade and dominion.

Alas, we have been long led away by ancient prejudices, and made large
sacrifices to superstition. We have boasted the protection of Great-Britain,
without considering, that her motive was interest not attachment; that she

did not protect us from our enemies on our account, but from her enemies
on her own account, from those who had no quarrel with us on any other
account, and who will always be our enemies on the same account. Let
Britain wave her pretensions to the continent, or the continent throw off the
dependance, and we should be at peace with France and Spain were they at
war with Britain. The miseries of Hanover last war ought to warn us against
connexions.

It has lately been asserted in parliament, that the colonies have no
relation to each other but through the parent country, i.e. that Pennsylvania
and the Jerseys, and so on for the rest, are sister colonies by the way of
England; this is certainly a very round-about way of proving relationship,
but it is the nearest and only true way of proving enemyship, if I may so call
it. France and Spain never were, nor perhaps ever will be our enemies as
Americans, but as our being the subjects of Great-Britain.

But Britain is the parent country, say some. Then the more shame upon
her conduct. Even brutes do not devour their young, nor savages make war
upon their families; wherefore the assertion, if true, turns to her reproach;
but it happens not to be true, or only partly so, and the phrase parent or
mother country hath been jesuitically adopted by the king and his parasites,
with a low papistical design of gaining an unfair bias on the credulous
weakness of our minds. Europe, and not England, is the parent country of
America. This new world hath been the asylum for the persecuted lovers of
civil and religious liberty from every part of Europe. Hither have they fled,
not from the tender embraces of the mother, but from the cruelty of the
monster; and it is so far true of England, that the same tyranny which drove
the first emigrants from home, pursues their descendants still.

In this extensive quarter of the globe, we forget the narrow limits of
three hundred and sixty miles (the extent of England) and carry our
friendship on a larger scale; we claim brotherhood with every European
christian, and triumph in the generosity of the sentiment.

It is pleasant to observe by what regular gradations we surmount the
force of local prejudice, as we enlarge our acquaintance with the world. A
man born in any town in England divided into parishes, will naturally
associate most with his fellow parishioners (because their interests in many

cases will be common) and distinguish him by the name of neighbour; if he
meet him but a few miles from home, he drops the narrow idea of a street,
and salutes him by the name of townsman; if he travel out of the county,
and meet him in any other, he forgets the minor divisions of street and
town, and calls him countryman, i.e. county-man; but if in their foreign
excursions they should associate in France or any other part of Europe, their
local remembrance would be enlarged into that of Englishmen. And by a
just parity of reasoning, all Europeans meeting in America, or any other
quarter of the globe, are countrymen; for England, Holland, Germany, or
Sweden, when compared with the whole, stand in the same places on the
larger scale, which the divisions of street, town, and county do on the
smaller ones; distinctions too limited for continental minds. Not one third of
the inhabitants, even of this province, are of English descent. Wherefore I
reprobate the phrase of parent or mother country applied to England only, as
being false, selfish, narrow and ungenerous.

But admitting, that we were all of English descent, what does it amount
to? Nothing. Britain, being now an open enemy, extinguishes every other
name and title: And to say that reconciliation is our duty, is truly farcical.
The first king of England, of the present line (William the Conqueror) was a
Frenchman, and half the Peers of England are descendants from the same
country; therefore, by the same method of reasoning, England ought to be
governed by France.

Much hath been said of the united strength of Britain and the colonies,
that in conjunction they might bid defiance to the world. But this is mere
presumption; the fate of war is uncertain, neither do the expressions mean
any thing; for this continent would never suffer itself to be drained of
inhabitants, to support the British arms in either Asia, Africa, or Europe.

Besides what have we to do with setting the world at defiance? Our plan
is commerce, and that, well attended to, will secure us the peace and
friendship of all Europe; because, it is the interest of all Europe to have
America a free port. Her trade will always be a protection, and her
barrenness of gold and silver secure her from invaders.

I challenge the warmest advocate for reconciliation, to shew, a single
advantage that this continent can reap, by being connected with Great

Britain. I repeat the challenge, not a single advantage is derived. Our corn
will fetch its price in any market in Europe, and our imported goods must
be paid for buy them where we will.

But the injuries and disadvantages we sustain by that connection, are
without number; and our duty to mankind at large, as well as to ourselves,
instruct us to renounce the alliance: Because, any submission to, or
dependance on Great-Britain, tends directly to involve this continent in
European wars and quarrels; and sets us at variance with nations, who
would otherwise seek our friendship, and against whom, we have neither
anger nor complaint. As Europe is our market for trade, we ought to form
no partial connection with any part of it. It is the true interest of America to
steer clear of European contentions, which she never can do, while by her
dependence on Britain, she is made the make-weight in the scale of British
politics.

Europe is too thickly planted with kingdoms to be long at peace, and
whenever a war breaks out between England and any foreign power, the
trade of America goes to ruin, because of her connection with Britain. The
next war may not turn out like the last, and should it not, the advocates for
reconciliation now will be wishing for separation then, because, neutrality
in that case, would be a safer convoy than a man of war. Every thing that is
right or natural pleads for separation. The blood of the slain, the weeping
voice of nature cries, ’Tis time to part. Even the distance at which the
Almighty hath placed England and America, is a strong and natural proof,
that the authority of the one, over the other, was never the design of
Heaven. The time likewise at which the continent was discovered, adds
weight to the argument, and the manner in which it was peopled encreases
the force of it. The reformation was preceded by the discovery of America,
as if the Almighty graciously meant to open a sanctuary to the persecuted in
future years, when home should afford neither friendship nor safety.

The authority of Great-Britain over this continent, is a form of
government, which sooner or later must have an end: And a serious mind
can draw no true pleasure by looking forward, under the painful and
positive conviction, that what he calls “the present constitution” is merely
temporary. As parents, we can have no joy, knowing that this government is

not sufficiently lasting to ensure any thing which we may bequeath to
posterity: And by a plain method of argument, as we are running the next
generation into debt, we ought to do the work of it, otherwise we use them
meanly and pitifully. In order to discover the line of our duty rightly, we
should take our children in our hand, and fix our station a few years farther
into life; that eminence will present a prospect, which a few present fears
and prejudices conceal from our sight.

Though I would carefully avoid giving unnecessary offence, yet I am
inclined to believe, that all those who espouse the doctrine of reconciliation,
may be included within the following descriptions. Interested men, who are
not to be trusted; weak men, who cannot see; prejudiced men, who will not
see; and a certain set of moderate men, who think better of the European
world than it deserves; and this last class, by an ill-judged deliberation, will
be the cause of more calamities to this continent, than all the other three.

It is the good fortune of many to live distant from the scene of sorrow;
the evil is not sufficient brought to their doors to make them feel the
precariousness with which all American property is possessed. But let our
imaginations transport us for a few moments to Boston, that seat of
wretchedness will teach us wisdom, and instruct us for ever to renounce a
power in whom we can have no trust. The inhabitants of that unfortunate
city, who but a few months ago were in ease and affluence, have now, no
other alternative than to stay and starve, or turn out to beg. Endangered by
the fire of their friends if they continue within the city, and plundered by the
soldiery if they leave it. In their present condition they are prisoners without
the hope of redemption, and in a general attack for their relief, they would
be exposed to the fury of both armies.

Men of passive tempers look somewhat lightly over the offences of
Britain, and, still hoping for the best, are apt to call out, “Come, come, we
shall be friends again, for all this.” But examine the passions and feelings
of mankind, Bring the doctrine of reconciliation to the touchstone of nature,
and then tell me, whether you can hereafter love, honour, and faithfully
serve the power that hath carried fire and sword into your land? If you
cannot do all these, then are you only deceiving yourselves, and by your
delay bringing ruin upon posterity. Your future connection with Britain,

whom you can neither love nor honour, will be forced and unnatural, and
being formed only on the plan of present convenience, will in a little time
fall into a relapse more wretched than the first. But if you say, you can still
pass the violations over, then I ask, Hath your house been burnt? Hath your
property been destroyed before your face? Are your wife and children
destitute of a bed to lie on, or bread to live on? Have you lost a parent or a
child by their hands, and yourself the ruined and wretched survivor? If you
have not, then are you not a judge of those who have. But if you have, and
still can shake hands with the murderers, then are you unworthy of the
name of husband, father, friend, or lover, and whatever may be your rank or
title in life, you have the heart of a coward, and the spirit of a sycophant.

This is not inflaming or exaggerating matters, but trying them by those
feelings and affections which nature justifies, and without which, we should
be incapable of discharging the social duties of life, or enjoying the
felicities of it. I mean not to exhibit horror for the purpose of provoking
revenge, but to awaken us from fatal and unmanly slumbers, that we may
pursue determinately some fixed object. It is not in the power of Britain or
of Europe to conquer America, if she do not conquer herself by delay and
timidity. The present winter is worth an age if rightly employed, but if lost
or neglected, the whole continent will partake of the misfortune; and there
is no punishment which that man will not deserve, be he who, or what, or
where he will, that may be the means of sacrificing a season so precious and
useful.

It is repugnant to reason, to the universal order of things to all examples
from former ages, to suppose, that this continent can longer remain subject
to any external power. The most sanguine in Britain does not think so. The
utmost stretch of human wisdom cannot, at this time, compass a plan short
of separation, which can promise the continent even a year’s security.
Reconciliation is now a fallacious dream. Nature hath deserted the
connexion, and Art cannot supply her place. For, as Milton wisely
expresses, “never can true reconcilement grow where wounds of deadly
hate have pierced so deep.”

Every quiet method for peace hath been ineffectual. Our prayers have
been rejected with disdain; and only tended to convince us, that nothing

flatters vanity, or confirms obstinacy in Kings more than repeated
petitioning—and nothing hath contributed more than that very measure to
make the Kings of Europe absolute: Witness Denmark and Sweden.
Wherefore, since nothing but blows will do, for God’s sake, let us come to a
final separation, and not leave the next generation to be cutting throats,
under the violated unmeaning names of parent and child.

To say, they will never attempt it again is idle and visionary, we thought
so at the repeal of the stamp-act, yet a year or two undeceived us; as well
may we suppose that nations, which have been once defeated, will never
renew the quarrel.

As to government matters, it is not in the power of Britain to do this
continent justice: The business of it will soon be too weighty, and intricate,
to be managed with any tolerable degree of convenience, by a power, so
distant from us, and so very ignorant of us; for if they cannot conquer us,
they cannot govern us. To be always running three or four thousand miles
with a tale or a petition, waiting four or five months for an answer, which
when obtained requires five or six more to explain it in, will in a few years
be looked upon as folly and childishness—There was a time when it was
proper, and there is a proper time for it to cease.

Small islands not capable of protecting themselves, are the proper
objects for kingdoms to take under their care; but there is something very
absurd, in supposing a continent to be perpetually governed by an island. In
no instance hath nature made the satellite larger than its primary planet, and
as England and America, with respect to each other, reverses the common
order of nature, it is evident they belong to different systems: England to
Europe, America to itself.

I am not induced by motives of pride, party, or resentment to espouse the
doctrine of separation and independance; I am clearly, positively, and
conscientiously persuaded that it is the true interest of this continent to be
so; that every thing short of that is mere patchwork, that it can afford no
lasting felicity,—that it is leaving the sword to our children, and shrinking
back at a time, when, a little more, a little farther, would have rendered this
continent the glory of the earth.

As Britain hath not manifested the least inclination towards a
compromise, we may be assured that no terms can be obtained worthy the
acceptance of the continent, or any ways equal to the expence of blood and
treasure we have been already put to.

The object, contended for, ought always to bear some just proportion to
the expence. The removal of North, or the whole detestable junto, is a
matter unworthy the millions we have expended. A temporary stoppage of
trade, was an inconvenience, which would have sufficiently ballanced the
repeal of all the acts complained of, had such repeals been obtained; but if
the whole continent must take up arms, if every man must be a soldier, it is
scarcely worth our while to fight against a contemptible ministry only.
Dearly, dearly, do we pay for the repeal of the acts, if that is all we fight for;
for in a just estimation, it is as great a folly to pay a Bunker-hill price for
law, as for land. As I have always considered the independancy of this
continent, as an event, which sooner or later must arrive, so from the late
rapid progress of the continent to maturity, the event could not be far off.
Wherefore, on the breaking out of hostilities, it was not worth the while to
have disputed a matter, which time would have finally redressed, unless we
meant to be in earnest; otherwise, it is like wasting an estate on a suit at law,
to regulate the trespasses of a tenant, whose lease is just expiring. No man
was a warmer wisher for reconciliation than myself, before the fatal
nineteenth of April 1775, but the moment the event of that day was made
known, I rejected the hardened, sullen tempered Pharaoh of England for
ever; and disdain the wretch, that with the pretended title of father of his
people can unfeelingly hear of their slaughter, and composedly sleep with
their blood upon his soul.

But admitting that matters were now made up, what would be the event?
I answer, the ruin of the continent. And that for several reasons.

First. The powers of governing still remaining in the hands of the king,
he will have a negative over the whole legislation of this continent. And as
he hath shewn himself such an inveterate enemy to liberty, and discovered
such a thirst for arbitrary power; is he, or is he not, a proper man to say to
these colonies, “You shall make no laws but what I please.” And is there any
inhabitant in America so ignorant, as not to know, that according to what is

called the present constitution, that this continent can make no laws but
what the king gives leave to; and is there any man so unwise, as not to see,
that (considering what has happened) he will suffer no law to be made here,
but such as suit his purpose. We may be as effectually enslaved by the want
of laws in America, as by submitting to laws made for us in England. After
matters are made up (as it is called) can there be any doubt, but the whole
power of the crown will be exerted, to keep this continent as low and
humble as possible? Instead of going forward we shall go backward, or be
perpetually quarrelling or ridiculously petitioning.—We are already greater
than the king wishes us to be, and will he not hereafter endeavour to make
us less? To bring the matter to one point. Is the power who is jealous of our
prosperity, a proper power to govern us? Whoever says No to this question
is an independant, for independancy means no more, than, whether we shall
make our own laws, or whether the king, the greatest enemy this continent
hath, or can have, shall tell us “there shall be no laws but such as I like.”

But the king you will say has a negative in England; the people there can
make no laws without his consent. In point of right and good order, there is
something very ridiculous, that a youth of twenty-one (which hath often
happened) shall say to several millions of people, older and wiser than
himself, I forbid this or that act of yours to be law. But in this place I
decline this sort of reply, though I will never cease to expose the absurdity
of it, and only answer, that England being the King’s residence, and
America not so, makes quite another case. The king’s negative here is ten
times more dangerous and fatal than it can be in England, for there he will
scarcely refuse his consent to a bill for putting England into as strong a state
of defence as possible, and in America he would never suffer such a bill to
be passed.

America is only a secondary object in the system of British politics,
England consults the good of this country, no farther than it answers her
own purpose. Wherefore, her own interest leads her to suppress the growth
of ours in every case which doth not promote her advantage, or in the least
interferes with it. A pretty state we should soon be in under such a second-
hand government, considering what has happened! Men do not change from
enemies to friends by the alteration of a name: And in order to shew that
reconciliation now is a dangerous doctrine, I affirm, that it would be policy

in the king at this time, to repeal the acts for the sake of reinstating himself
in the government of the provinces; in order, that he may accomplish by
craft and subtilty, in the long run, what he cannot do by force and
violence in the short one. Reconciliation and ruin are nearly related.

Secondly. That as even the best terms, which we can expect to obtain,
can amount to no more than a temporary expedient, or a kind of
government by guardianship, which can last no longer than till the colonies
come of age, so the general face and state of things, in the interim, will be
unsettled and unpromising. Emigrants of property will not choose to come
to a country whose form of government hangs but by a thread, and who is
every day tottering on the brink of commotion and disturbance; and
numbers of the present inhabitants would lay hold of the interval, to
dispense of their effects, and quit the continent.

But the most powerful of all arguments, is, that nothing but
independance, i.e. a continental form of government, can keep the peace of
the continent and preserve it inviolate from civil wars. I dread the event of a
reconciliation with Britain now, as it is more than probable, that it will be
followed by a revolt somewhere or other, the consequences of which may
be far more fatal than all the malice of Britain.

Thousands are already ruined by British barbarity; (thousands more will
probably suffer the same fate) Those men have other feelings than us who
have nothing suffered. All they now possess is liberty, what they before
enjoyed is sacrificed to its service, and having nothing more to lose, they
disdain submission. Besides, the general temper of the colonies, towards a
British government, will be like that of a youth, who is nearly out of his
time; they will care very little about her. And a government which cannot
preserve the peace, is no government at all, and in that case we pay our
money for nothing; and pray what is it that Britain can do, whose power
will be wholly on paper, should a civil tumult break out the very day after
reconciliation? I have heard some men say, many of whom I believe spoke
without thinking, that they dreaded an independance, fearing that it would
produce civil wars. It is but seldom that our first thoughts are truly correct,
and that is the case here; for there are ten times more to dread from a
patched up connexion than from independance. I make the sufferers case

my own, and I protest, that were I driven from house and home, my
property destroyed, and my circumstances ruined, that as man, sensible of
injuries, I could never relish the doctrine of reconciliation, or consider
myself bound thereby.

The colonies have manifested such a spirit of good order and obedience
to continental government, as is sufficient to make every reasonable person
easy and happy on that head. No man can assign the least pretence for his
fears, on any other grounds, than such as are truly childish and ridiculous,
viz. that one colony will be striving for superiority over another.

Where there are no distinctions there can be no superiority, perfect
equality affords no temptation. The republics of Europe are all (and we may
say always) in peace. Holland and Swisserland are without wars, foreign or
domestic: Monarchical governments, it is true, are never long at rest; the
crown itself is a temptation to enterprizing ruffians at home; and that degree
of pride and insolence ever attendant on regal authority, swells into a
rupture with foreign powers, in instances, where a republican government,
by being formed on more natural principles, would negociate the mistake.

If there is any true cause of fear respecting independance, it is because
no plan is yet laid down. Men do not see their way out—Wherefore, as an
opening into that business, I offer the following hints; at the same time
modestly affirming, that I have no other opinion of them myself, than that
they may be the means of giving rise to something better. Could the
straggling thoughts of individuals be collected, they would frequently form
materials for wise and able men to improve into useful matter.

Let the assemblies be annual, with a President only. The representation
more equal. Their business wholly domestic, and subject to the authority of
a Continental Congress.

Let each colony be divided into six, eight, or ten, convenient districts,
each district to send a proper number of delegates to Congress, so that each
colony send at least thirty. The whole number in Congress will be at least
390. Each Congress to sit and to choose a president by the following
method. When the delegates are met, let a colony be taken from the whole

thirteen colonies by lot, after which, let the whole Congress choose (by
ballot) a president from out of the delegates of that province. In the next
Congress, let a colony be taken by lot from twelve only, omitting that
colony from which the president was taken in the former Congress, and so
proceeding on till the whole thirteen shall have had their proper rotation.
And in order that nothing may pass into a law but what is satisfactorily just,
not less than three fifths of the Congress to be called a majority.—He that
will promote discord, under a government so equally formed as this, would
have joined Lucifer in his revolt.

But as there is a peculiar delicacy, from whom, or in what manner, this
business must first arise, and as it seems most agreeable and consistent that
it should come from some intermediate body between the governed and the
governors, that is, between the Congress and the people, let a Continental
Conference be held, in the following manner, and for the following
purpose.

A committee of twenty-six members of Congress, viz. two for each
colony. Two members from each House of Assembly, or Provincial
Convention; and five representatives of the people at large, to be chosen in
the capital city or town of each province, for, and in behalf of the whole
province, by as many qualified voters as shall think proper to attend from
all parts of the province for that purpose; or, if more convenient, the
representatives may be chosen in two or three of the most populous parts
thereof. In this conference, thus assembled, will be united, the two grand
principles of business, knowledge and power. The members of Congress,
Assemblies, or Conventions, by having had experience in national
concerns, will be able and useful counsellors, and the whole, being
impowered by the people, will have a truly legal authority.

The conferring members being met, let their business be to frame a
Continental Charter, or Charter of the United Colonies; (answering to
what is called the Magna Charta of England) fixing the number and manner
of choosing members of Congress, members of Assembly, with their date of
sitting, and drawing the line of business and jurisdiction between them:
(Always remembering, that our strength is continental, not provincial:)
Securing freedom and property to all men, and above all things, the free

exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; with such other
matter as is necessary for a charter to contain. Immediately after which, the
said Conference to dissolve, and the bodies which shall be chosen
comformable to the said charter, to be the legislators and governors of this
continent for the time being: Whose peace and happiness, may God
preserve, Amen.

Should any body of men be hereafter delegated for this or some similar
purpose, I offer them the following extracts from that wise observer on
governments Dragonetti. “The science” says he “of the politician consists
in fixing the true point of happiness and freedom. Those men would deserve
the gratitude of ages, who should discover a mode of government that
contained the greatest sum of individual happiness, with the least national
expense.

Dragonetti on virtue and rewards.”

But where says some is the King of America? I’ll tell you Friend, he
reigns above, and doth not make havoc of mankind like the Royal Brute of
Britain. Yet that we may not appear to be defective even in earthly honors,
let a day be solemnly set apart for proclaiming the charter; let it be brought
forth placed on the divine law, the word of God; let a crown be placed
thereon, by which the world may know, that so far as we approve of
monarchy, that in America the law is king. For as in absolute governments
the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be King; and there
ought to be no other. But lest any ill use should afterwards arise, let the
crown at the conclusion of the ceremony be demolished, and scattered
among the people whose right it is.

A government of our own is our natural right: And when a man seriously
reflects on the precariousness of human affairs, he will become convinced,
that it is infinitely wiser and safer, to form a constitution of our own in a
cool deliberate manner, while we have it in our power, than to trust such an
interesting event to time and chance. If we omit it now, some Massanello ¹
may hereafter arise, who laying hold of popular disquietudes, may collect
together the desperate and the discontented, and by assuming to themselves
the powers of government, may sweep away the liberties of the continent
like a deluge. Should the government of America return again into the

hands of Britain, the tottering situation of things, will be a temptation for
some desperate adventurer to try his fortune; and in such a case, what relief
can Britain give? Ere she could hear the news, the fatal business might be
done; and ourselves suffering like the wretched Britons under the
oppression of the Conqueror. Ye that oppose independance now, ye know
not what ye do; ye are opening a door to eternal tyranny, by keeping vacant
the seat of government. There are thousands, and tens of thousands, who
would think it glorious to expel from the continent, that barbarous and
hellish power, which hath stirred up the Indians and Negroes to destroy us,
the cruelty hath a double guilt, it is dealing brutally by us, and treacherously
by them.
¹ Thomas Anello, otherwise Massanello, a fisherman of Naples, who after
spiriting up his countrymen in the public market place, against the oppressions of
the Spaniards, to whom the place was then subject, prompted them to revolt, and
in the space of a day became king.

To talk of friendship with those in whom our reason forbids us to have
faith, and our affections wounded through a thousand pores instruct us to
detest, is madness and folly. Every day wears out the little remains of
kindred between us and them, and can there be any reason to hope, that as
the relationship expires, the affection will increase, or that we shall agree
better, when we have ten times more and greater concerns to quarrel over
than ever?

Ye that tell us of harmony and reconciliation, can ye restore to us the
time that is past? Can ye give to prostitution its former innocence? Neither
can ye reconcile Britain and America. The last cord now is broken, the
people of England are presenting addresses against us. There are injuries
which nature cannot forgive; she would cease to be nature if she did. As
well can the lover forgive the ravisher of his mistress, as the continent
forgive the murders of Britain. The Almighty hath implanted in us these
unextinguishable feelings for good and wise purposes. They are the
guardians of his image in our hearts. They distinguish us from the herd of
common animals. The social compact would dissolve, and justice be
extirpated the earth, or have only a casual existence were we callous to the
touches of affection. The robber, and the murderer, would often escape
unpunished, did not the injuries which our tempers sustain, provoke us into
justice.

O ye that love mankind! Ye that dare oppose, not only the tyranny, but
the tyrant, stand forth! Every spot of the old world is overrun with
oppression. Freedom hath been hunted round the globe. Asia, and Africa,
have long expelled her—Europe regards her like a stranger, and England
hath given her warning to depart. O! receive the fugitive, and prepare in
time an asylum for mankind.

OF THE PRESENT ABILITY OF AMERICA,
WITH SOME MISCELLANEOUS REFLEXIONS.

I have never met with a man, either in England or America, who hath not
confessed his opinion, that a separation between the countries, would take
place one time or other: And there is no instance, in which we have shewn
less judgment, than in endeavouring to describe, what we call, the ripeness
or fitness of the Continent for independance.

As all men allow the measure, and vary only in their opinion of the time,
let us, in order to remove mistakes, take a general survey of things, and
endeavour, if possible, to find out the very time. But we need not go far, the
inquiry ceases at once, for, the time hath found us. The general concurrence,
the glorious union of all things prove the fact.

It is not in numbers, but in unity, that our great strength lies; yet our
present numbers are sufficient to repel the force of all the world. The
Continent hath, at this time, the largest body of armed and disciplined men
of any power under Heaven; and is just arrived at that pitch of strength, in
which no single colony is able to support itself, and the whole, when united,
can accomplish the matter, and either more, or, less than this, might be fatal
in its effects. Our land force is already sufficient, and as to naval affairs, we
cannot be insensible, that Britain would never suffer an American man of
war to be built, while the continent remained in her hands. Wherefore, we
should be no forwarder an hundred years hence in that branch, than we are
now; but the truth is, we should be less so, because the timber of the
country is every day diminishing, and that, which will remain at last, will be
far off and difficult to procure.

Were the continent crowded with inhabitants, her sufferings under the
present circumstances would be intolerable. The more sea port towns we
had, the more should we have both to defend and to lose. Our present
numbers are so happily proportioned to our wants, that no man need be idle.
The diminution of trade affords an army, and the necessities of an army
create a new trade.

Debts we have none; and whatever we may contract on this account will
serve as a glorious memento of our virtue. Can we but leave posterity with a
settled form of government, an independant constitution of its own, the
purchase at any price will be cheap. But to expend millions for the sake of
getting a few vile acts repealed, and routing the present ministry only, is
unworthy the charge, and is using posterity with the utmost cruelty; because
it is leaving them the great work to do, and a debt upon their backs, from
which they derive no advantage. Such a thought is unworthy a man of
honor, and is the true characteristic of a narrow heart and a pedling
politician.

The debt we may contract doth not deserve our regard if the work be but
accomplished. No nation ought to be without a debt. A national debt is a
national bond; and when it bears no interest, is in no case a grievance.
Britain is oppressed with a debt of upwards of one hundred and forty
millions sterling, for which she pays upwards of four millions interest. And
as a compensation for her debt, she has a large navy; America is without a
debt, and without a navy; yet for the twentieth part of the English national
debt, could have a navy as large again. The navy of England is not worth, at
this time, more than three millions and an half sterling.

The first and second editions of this pamphlet were published without
the following calculations, which are now given as a proof that the above
estimation of the navy is just. See Entic’s naval history, intro. page 56.

The charge of building a ship of each rate, and furnishing her with masts,
yards, sails and rigging, together with a proportion of eight months
boatswain’s and carpenter’s sea-stores, as calculated by Mr. Burchett,
Secretary to the navy.

£
[pounds
sterling]

For a ship of 100 guns = 35,553
90 = 29,886
80 = 23,638
70 = 17,785

60 = 14,197
50 = 10,606
40 = 7,558
30 = 5,846
20 = 3,710

And from hence it is easy to sum up the value, or cost rather, of the
whole British navy, which in the year 1757, when it was at its greatest glory
consisted of the following ships and guns:

Ships. Guns. Cost of one. Cost of all.
Cost in £ [pounds sterling]

6 100 35,553 213,318
12 90 29,886 358,632
12 80 23,638 283,656
43 70 17,785 764,755
35 60 14,197 496,895
40 50 10,606 424,240
45 40 7,558 340,110
58 20 3,710 215,180
Sloops, bombs
85 and fireships, one
with another, at } 2,000 170,000
------------
Cost 3,266,786
Remains for Guns 233,214
------------
3,500,000

No country on the globe is so happily situated, or so internally capable
of raising a fleet as America. Tar, timber, iron, and cordage are her natural
produce. We need go abroad for nothing. Whereas the Dutch, who make
large profits by hiring out their ships of war to the Spaniards and
Portuguese, are obliged to import most of the materials they use. We ought
to view the building a fleet as an article of commerce, it being the natural
manufactory of this country. It is the best money we can lay out. A navy

when finished is worth more than it cost. And is that nice point in national
policy, in which commerce and protection are united. Let us build; if we
want them not, we can sell; and by that means replace our paper currency
with ready gold and silver.

In point of manning a fleet, people in general run into great errors; it is
not necessary that one fourth part should be sailors. The Terrible privateer,
Captain Death, stood the hottest engagement of any ship last war, yet had
not twenty sailors on board, though her complement of men was upwards of
two hundred. A few able and social sailors will soon instruct a sufficient
number of active landmen in the common work of a ship. Wherefore, we
never can be more capable to begin on maritime matters than now, while
our timber is standing, our fisheries blocked up, and our sailors and
shipwrights out of employ. Men of war, of seventy and eighty guns were
built forty years ago in New-England, and why not the same now? Ship-
building is America’s greatest pride, and in which, she will in time excel the
whole world. The great empires of the east are mostly inland, and
consequently excluded from the possibility of rivalling her. Africa is in a
state of barbarism; and no power in Europe, hath either such an extent of
coast, or such an internal supply of materials. Where nature hath given the
one, she has withheld the other; to America only hath she been liberal of
both. The vast empire of Russia is almost shut out from the sea; wherefore,
her boundless forests, her tar, iron, and cordage are only articles of
commerce.

In point of safety, ought we to be without a fleet? We are not the little
people now, which we were sixty years ago; at that time we might have
trusted our property in the streets, or fields rather; and slept securely
without locks or bolts to our doors or windows. The case now is altered, and
our methods of defence, ought to improve with our increase of property. A
common pirate, twelve months ago, might have come up the Delaware, and
laid the city of Philadelphia under instant contribution, for what sum he
pleased; and the same might have happened to other places. Nay, any daring
fellow, in a brig of fourteen or sixteen guns, might have robbed the whole
Continent, and carried off half a million of money. These are circumstances
which demand our attention, and point out the necessity of naval protection.

Some, perhaps, will say, that after we have made it up with Britain, she
will protect us. Can we be so unwise as to mean, that she shall keep a navy
in our harbours for that purpose? Common sense will tell us, that the power
which hath endeavoured to subdue us, is of all others, the most improper to
defend us. Conquest may be effected under the pretence of friendship; and
ourselves, after a long and brave resistance, be at last cheated into slavery.
And if her ships are not to be admitted into our harbours, I would ask, how
is she to protect us? A navy three or four thousand miles off can be of little
use, and on sudden emergencies, none at all. Wherefore, if we must
hereafter protect ourselves, why not do it for ourselves? Why do it for
another?

The English list of ships of war, is long and formidable, but not a tenth
part of them are at any one time fit for service, numbers of them not in
being; yet their names are pompously continued in the list, if only a plank
be left of the ship: and not a fifth part, of such as are fit for service, can be
spared on any one station at one time. The East and West Indies,
Mediterranean, Africa, and other parts over which Britain extends her
claim, make large demands upon her navy. From a mixture of prejudice and
inattention, we have contracted a false notion respecting the navy of
England, and have talked as if we should have the whole of it to encounter
at once, and for that reason, supposed, that we must have one as large;
which not being instantly practicable, have been made use of by a set of
disguised Tories to discourage our beginning thereon. Nothing can be
farther from truth than this; for if America had only a twentieth part of the
naval force of Britain, she would be by far an over match for her; because,
as we neither have, nor claim any foreign dominion, our whole force would
be employed on our own coast, where we should, in the long run, have two
to one the advantage of those who had three or four thousand miles to sail
over, before they could attack us, and the same distance to return in order to
refit and recruit. And although Britain by her fleet, hath a check over our
trade to Europe, we have as large a one over her trade to the West-Indies,
which, by laying in the neighbourhood of the Continent, is entirely at its
mercy.

Some method might be fallen on to keep up a naval force in time of
peace, if we should not judge it necessary to support a constant navy. If

premiums were to be given to merchants, to build and employ in their
service ships mounted with twenty, thirty, forty or fifty guns, (the premiums
to be in proportion to the loss of bulk to the merchants) fifty or sixty of
those ships, with a few guardships on constant duty, would keep up a
sufficient navy, and that without burdening ourselves with the evil so loudly
complained of in England, of suffering their fleet, in time of peace to lie
rotting in the docks. To unite the sinews of commerce and defense is sound
policy; for when our strength and our riches play into each other’s hand, we
need fear no external enemy.

In almost every article of defense we abound. Hemp flourishes even to
rankness, so that we need not want cordage. Our iron is superior to that of
other countries. Our small arms equal to any in the world. Cannon we can
cast at pleasure. Saltpetre and gunpowder we are every day producing. Our
knowledge is hourly improving. Resolution is our inherent character, and
courage hath never yet forsaken us. Wherefore, what is it that we want?
Why is it that we hesitate? From Britain we can expect nothing but ruin. If
she is once admitted to the government of America again, this Continent
will not be worth living in. Jealousies will be always arising; insurrections
will be constantly happening; and who will go forth to quell them? Who
will venture his life to reduce his own countrymen to a foreign obedience?
The difference between Pennsylvania and Connecticut, respecting some
unlocated lands, shews the insignificance of a British government, and fully
proves, that nothing but Continental authority can regulate Continental
matters.

Another reason why the present time is preferable to all others, is, that
the fewer our numbers are, the more land there is yet unoccupied, which
instead of being lavished by the king on his worthless dependants, may be
hereafter applied, not only to the discharge of the present debt, but to the
constant support of government. No nation under heaven hath such an
advantage as this.

The infant state of the Colonies, as it is called, so far from being against,
is an argument in favour of independance. We are sufficiently numerous,
and were we more so, we might be less united. It is a matter worthy of
observation, that the more a country is peopled, the smaller their armies are.

In military numbers, the ancients far exceeded the moderns: and the reason
is evident. For trade being the consequence of population, men become too
much absorbed thereby to attend to anything else. Commerce diminishes
the spirit, both of patriotism and military defence. And history sufficiently
informs us, that the bravest achievements were always accomplished in the
non-age of a nation. With the increase of commerce, England hath lost its
spirit. The city of London, notwithstanding its numbers, submits to
continued insults with the patience of a coward. The more men have to lose,
the less willing are they to venture. The rich are in general slaves to fear,
and submit to courtly power with the trembling duplicity of a Spaniel.

Youth is the seed time of good habits, as well in nations as in
individuals. It might be difficult, if not impossible, to form the Continent
into one government half a century hence. The vast variety of interests,
occasioned by an increase of trade and population, would create confusion.
Colony would be against colony. Each being able might scorn each other’s
assistance: and while the proud and foolish gloried in their little
distinctions, the wise would lament, that the union had not been formed
before. Wherefore, the present time is the true time for establishing it. The
intimacy which is contracted in infancy, and the friendship which is formed
in misfortune, are, of all others, the most lasting and unalterable. Our
present union is marked with both these characters: we are young and we
have been distressed; but our concord hath withstood our troubles, and fixes
a memorable area for posterity to glory in.

The present time, likewise, is that peculiar time, which never happens to
a nation but once, viz. the time of forming itself into a government. Most
nations have let slip the opportunity, and by that means have been
compelled to receive laws from their conquerors, instead of making laws
for themselves. First, they had a king, and then a form of government;
whereas, the articles or charter of government, should be formed first, and
men delegated to execute them afterward: but from the errors of other
nations, let us learn wisdom, and lay hold of the present opportunity—To
begin government at the right end.

When William the Conqueror subdued England, he gave them law at the
point of the sword; and until we consent, that the seat of government, in

America, be legally and authoritatively occupied, we shall be in danger of
having it filled by some fortunate ruffian, who may treat us in the same
manner, and then, where will be our freedom? where our property?

As to religion, I hold it to be the indispensable duty of all government, to
protect all conscientious professors thereof, and I know of no other business
which government hath to do therewith. Let a man throw aside that
narrowness of soul, that selfishness of principle, which the niggards of all
professions are so unwilling to part with, and he will be at once delivered of
his fears on that head. Suspicion is the companion of mean souls, and the
bane of all good society. For myself, I fully and conscientiously believe,
that it is the will of the Almighty, that there should be diversity of religious
opinions among us: It affords a larger field for our Christian kindness. Were
we all of one way of thinking, our religious dispositions would want matter
for probation; and on this liberal principle, I look on the various
denominations among us, to be like children of the same family, differing
only, in what is called, their Christian names.

In page forty, I threw out a few thoughts on the propriety of a
Continental Charter, (for I only presume to offer hints, not plans) and in this
place, I take the liberty of re-mentioning the subject, by observing, that a
charter is to be understood as a bond of solemn obligation, which the whole
enters into, to support the right of every separate part, whether of religion,
personal freedom, or property. A firm bargain and a right reckoning make
long friends.

In a former page I likewise mentioned the necessity of a large and equal
representation; and there is no political matter which more deserves our
attention. A small number of electors, or a small number of representatives,
are equally dangerous. But if the number of the representatives be not only
small, but unequal, the danger is increased. As an instance of this, I mention
the following; when the Associators petition was before the House of
Assembly of Pennsylvania; twenty-eight members only were present, all the
Bucks county members, being eight, voted against it, and had seven of the
Chester members done the same, this whole province had been governed by
two counties only, and this danger it is always exposed to. The
unwarrantable stretch likewise, which that house made in their last sitting,

to gain an undue authority over the delegates of that province, ought to
warn the people at large, how they trust power out of their own hands. A set
of instructions for the Delegates were put together, which in point of sense
and business would have dishonoured a schoolboy, and after being
approved by a few, a very few without doors, were carried into the House,
and there passed in behalf of the whole colony; whereas, did the whole
colony know, with what ill-will that House hath entered on some necessary
public measures, they would not hesitate a moment to think them unworthy
of such a trust.

Immediate necessity makes many things convenient, which if continued
would grow into oppressions. Expedience and right are different things.
When the calamities of America required a consultation, there was no
method so ready, or at that time so proper, as to appoint persons from the
several Houses of Assembly for that purpose; and the wisdom with which
they have proceeded hath preserved this continent from ruin. But as it is
more than probable that we shall never be without a Congress, every well
wisher to good order, must own, that the mode for choosing members of
that body, deserves consideration. And I put it as a question to those, who
make a study of mankind, whether representation and election is not too
great a power for one and the same body of men to possess? When we are
planning for posterity, we ought to remember, that virtue is not hereditary.

It is from our enemies that we often gain excellent maxims, and are
frequently surprised into reason by their mistakes. Mr. Cornwall (one of the
Lords of the Treasury) treated the petition of the New-York Assembly with
contempt, because that House, he said, consisted but of twenty-six
members, which trifling number, he argued, could not with decency be put
for the whole. We thank him for his involuntary honesty. ¹
¹ Those who would fully understand of what great consequence a large and equal
representation is to a state, should read Burgh’s political disquisitions.

To Conclude, however strange it may appear to some, or however
unwilling they may be to think so, matters not, but many strong and striking
reasons may be given, to shew, that nothing can settle our affairs so
expeditiously as an open and determined declaration for independance.
Some of which are,

First.—It is the custom of nations, when any two are at war, for some
other powers, not engaged in the quarrel, to step in as mediators, and bring
about the preliminaries of a peace: but while America calls herself the
Subject of Great-Britain, no power, however well disposed she may be, can
offer her mediation. Wherefore, in our present state we may quarrel on for
ever.

Secondly.—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 assistance
for the purpose of repairing the breach, and strengthening the connection
between Britain and America; because, those powers would be sufferers by
the consequences.

Thirdly.—While we profess ourselves the subjects of Britain, we must,
in the eye of foreign nations, be considered as rebels. The precedent is
somewhat dangerous to their peace, for men to be in arms under the name
of subjects; we, on the spot, can solve the paradox: but to unite resistance
and subjection, requires an idea much too refined for common
understanding.

Fourthly.—Were a manifesto to be published, and despatched to foreign
courts, setting forth the miseries we have endured, and the peaceable
methods we have ineffectually used for redress; declaring, at the same time,
that not being able, any longer, to live happily or safely under the cruel
disposition of the British court, we had been driven to the necessity of
breaking off all connections with her; at the same time, assuring all such
courts of our peaceable disposition towards them, and of our desire of
entering into trade with them: Such a memorial would produce more good
effects to this Continent, than if a ship were freighted with petitions to
Britain.

Under our present denomination of British subjects, we can neither be
received nor heard abroad: The custom of all courts is against us, and will
be so, until, by an independance, we take rank with other nations.

These proceedings may at first appear strange and difficult; but, like all
other steps which we have already passed over, will in a little time become
familiar and agreeable; and, until an independance is declared, the

Continent will feel itself like a man who continues putting off some
unpleasant business from day to day, yet knows it must be done, hates to set
about it, wishes it over, and is continually haunted with the thoughts of its
necessity.

APPENDIX.

Since the publication of the first edition of this pamphlet, or rather, on
the same day on which it came out, the King’s Speech made its appearance
in this city. Had the spirit of prophecy directed the birth of this production,
it could not have brought it forth, at a more seasonable juncture, or a more
necessary time. The bloody mindedness of the one, shew the necessity of
pursuing the doctrine of the other. Men read by way of revenge. And the
Speech, instead of terrifying, prepared a way for the manly principles of
Independance.

Ceremony, and even, silence, from whatever motive they may arise, have
a hurtful tendency, when they give the least degree of countenance to base
and wicked performances; wherefore, if this maxim be admitted, it naturally
follows, that the King’s Speech, as being a piece of finished villainy,
deserved, and still deserves, a general execration both by the Congress and
the people. Yet, as the domestic tranquillity of a nation, depends greatly, on
the chastity of what may properly be called national manners, it is often
better, to pass some things over in silent disdain, than to make use of such
new methods of dislike, as might introduce the least innovation, on that
guardian of our peace and safety. And, perhaps, it is chiefly owing to this
prudent delicacy, that the King’s Speech, hath not, before now, suffered a
public execution. The Speech if it may be called one, is nothing better than
a wilful audacious libel against the truth, the common good, and the
existence of mankind; and is a formal and pompous method of offering up
human sacrifices to the pride of tyrants. But this general massacre of
mankind, is one of the privileges, and the certain consequence of Kings; for
as nature knows them not, they know not her, and although they are beings
of our own creating, they know not us, and are become the gods of their
creators. The Speech hath one good quality, which is, that it is not
calculated to deceive, neither can we, even if we would, be deceived by it.
Brutality and tyranny appear on the face of it. It leaves us at no loss: And
every line convinces, even in the moment of reading, that He, who hunts the
woods for prey, the naked and untutored Indian, is less a Savage than the
King of Britain.

Sir John Dalrymple, the putative father of a whining jesuitical piece,
fallaciously called, “The Address of the people of England to the
inhabitants of America,” hath, perhaps, from a vain supposition, that the
people here were to be frightened at the pomp and description of a king,
given, (though very unwisely on his part) the real character of the present
one: “But” says this writer, “if you are inclined to pay compliments to an
administration, which we do not complain of,” (meaning the Marquis of
Rockingham’s at the repeal of the Stamp Act) “it is very unfair in you to
withhold them from that prince, by whose nod alone they were permitted to
do any thing.” This is toryism with a witness! Here is idolatry even without
a mask: And he who can calmly hear, and digest such doctrine, hath
forfeited his claim to rationality—an apostate from the order of manhood;
and ought to be considered—as one, who hath not only given up the proper
dignity of man, but sunk himself beneath the rank of animals, and
contemptibly crawls through the world like a worm.

However, it matters very little now, what the king of England either says
or does; he hath wickedly broken through every moral and human
obligation, trampled nature and conscience beneath his feet; and by a steady
and constitutional spirit of insolence and cruelty, procured for himself an
universal hatred. It is now the interest of America to provide for herself. She
hath already a large and young family, whom it is more her duty to take care
of, than to be granting away her property, to support a power who is
become a reproach to the names of men and christians—Ye, whose office it
is to watch over the morals of a nation, of whatsoever sect or denomination
ye are of, as well as ye, who are more immediately the guardians of the
public liberty, if ye wish to preserve your native country uncontaminated by
European corruption, ye must in secret wish a separation—But leaving the
moral part to private reflection, I shall chiefly confine my farther remarks to
the following heads.

First. That it is the interest of America to be separated from Britain.

Secondly. Which is the easiest and most practicable plan, reconciliation
or independance? with some occasional remarks.

In support of the first, I could, if I judged it proper, produce the opinion
of some of the ablest and most experienced men on this continent; and

whose sentiments, on that head, are not yet publicly known. It is in reality a
self-evident position: For no nation in a state of foreign dependance, limited
in its commerce, and cramped and fettered in its legislative powers, can
ever arrive at any material eminence. America doth not yet know what
opulence is; and although the progress which she hath made stands
unparalleled in the history of other nations, it is but childhood, compared
with what she would be capable of arriving at, had she, as she ought to
have, the legislative powers in her own hands. England is, at this time,
proudly coveting what would do her no good, were she to accomplish it;
and the Continent hesitating on a matter, which will be her final ruin if
neglected. It is the commerce and not the conquest of America, by which
England is to be benefited, and that would in a great measure continue,
were the countries as independant of each other as France and Spain;
because in many articles, neither can go to a better market. But it is the
independance of this country of Britain or any other, which is now the main
and only object worthy of contention, and which, like all other truths
discovered by necessity, will appear clearer and stronger every day.

First. Because it will come to that one time or other.

Secondly. Because, the longer it is delayed the harder it will be to
accomplish.

I have frequently amused myself both in public and private companies,
with silently remarking, the specious errors of those who speak without
reflecting. And among the many which I have heard, the following seems
the most general, viz. that had this rupture happened forty or fifty years
hence, instead of now, the Continent would have been more able to have
shaken off the dependance. To which I reply, that our military ability, at this
time, arises from the experience gained in the last war, and which in forty or
fifty years time, would have been totally extinct. The Continent, would not,
by that time, have had a General, or even a military officer left; and we, or
those who may succeed us, would have been as ignorant of martial matters
as the ancient Indians: And this single position, closely attended to, will
unanswerably prove, that the present time is preferable to all others. The
argument turns thus—at the conclusion of the last war, we had experience,
but wanted numbers; and forty or fifty years hence, we should have

numbers, without experience; wherefore, the proper point of time, must be
some particular point between the two extremes, in which a sufficiency of
the former remains, and a proper increase of the latter is obtained: And that
point of time is the present time.

The reader will pardon this digression, as it does not properly come
under the head I first set out with, and to which I again return by the
following position, viz.

Should affairs be patched up with Britain, and she to remain the
governing and sovereign power of America, (which, as matters are now
circumstanced, is giving up the point intirely) we shall deprive ourselves of
the very means of sinking the debt we have, or may contract. The value of
the back lands which some of the provinces are clandestinely deprived of,
by the unjust extention of the limits of Canada, valued only at five pounds
sterling per hundred acres, amount to upwards of twenty-five millions,
Pennsylvania currency; and the quit-rents at one penny sterling per acre, to
two millions yearly.

It is by the sale of those lands that the debt may be sunk, without burthen
to any, and the quit-rent reserved thereon, will always lessen, and in time,
will wholly support the yearly expence of government. It matters not how
long the debt is in paying, so that the lands when sold be applied to the
discharge of it, and for the execution of which, the Congress for the time
being, will be the continental trustees.

I proceed now to the second head, viz. Which is the easiest and most
practicable plan, reconciliation or independance; with some occasional
remarks.

He who takes nature for his guide is not easily beaten out of his
argument, and on that ground, I answer generally—That independance
being a single simple line, contained within ourselves; and reconciliation, a
matter exceedingly perplexed and complicated, and in which, a treacherous
capricious court is to interfere, gives the answer without a doubt.

The present state of America is truly alarming to every man who is
capable of reflexion. Without law, without government, without any other

mode of power than what is founded on, and granted by courtesy. Held
together by an unexampled concurrence of sentiment, which, is nevertheless
subject to change, and which every secret enemy is endeavouring to
dissolve. Our present condition, is, Legislation without law; wisdom
without a plan; constitution without a name; and, what is strangely
astonishing, perfect Independance contending for dependance. The instance
is without a precedent; the case never existed before; and who can tell what
may be the event? The property of no man is secure in the present unbraced
system of things. The mind of the multitude is left at random, and seeing no
fixed object before them, they pursue such as fancy or opinion starts.
Nothing is criminal; there is no such thing as treason; wherefore, every one
thinks himself at liberty to act as he pleases. The Tories dared not have
assembled offensively, had they known that their lives, by that act, were
forfeited to the laws of the state. A line of distinction should be drawn,
between, English soldiers taken in battle, and inhabitants of America taken
in arms. The first are prisoners, but the latter traitors. The one forfeits his
liberty, the other his head.

Notwithstanding our wisdom, there is a visible feebleness in some of our
proceedings which gives encouragement to dissensions. The Continental
Belt is too loosely buckled. And if something is not done in time, it will be
too late to do any thing, and we shall fall into a state, in which, neither
Reconciliation nor Independance will be practicable. The king and his
worthless adherents are got at their old game of dividing the Continent, and
there are not wanting among us, Printers, who will be busy in spreading
specious falsehoods. The artful and hypocritical letter which appeared a few
months ago in two of the New-York papers, and likewise in two others, is
an evidence that there are men who want either judgment or honesty.

It is easy getting into holes and corners and talking of reconciliation: But
do such men seriously consider, how difficult the task is, and how
dangerous it may prove, should the Continent divide thereon. Do they take
within their view, all the various orders of men whose situation and
circumstances, as well as their own, are to be considered therein. Do they
put themselves in the place of the sufferer whose all is already gone, and of
the soldier, who hath quitted all for the defence of his country. If their ill
judged moderation be suited to their own private situations only, regardless

of others, the event will convince them, that “they are reckoning without
their Host.”

Put us, say some, on the footing we were on in sixty-three: To which I
answer, the request is not now in the power of Britain to comply with,
neither will she propose it; but if it were, and even should be granted, I ask,
as a reasonable question, By what means is such a corrupt and faithless
court to be kept to its engagements? Another parliament, nay, even the
present, may hereafter repeal the obligation, on the pretence, of its being
violently obtained, or unwisely granted; and in that case, Where is our
redress?—No going to law with nations; cannon are the barristers of
Crowns; and the sword, not of justice, but of war, decides the suit. To be on
the footing of sixty-three, it is not sufficient, that the laws only be put on the
same state, but, that our circumstances, likewise, be put on the same state;
Our burnt and destroyed towns repaired or built up, our private losses made
good, our public debts (contracted for defence) discharged; otherwise, we
shall be millions worse than we were at that enviable period. Such a
request, had it been complied with a year ago, would have won the heart
and soul of the Continent—but now it is too late, “The Rubicon is passed.”

Besides, the taking up arms, merely to enforce the repeal of a pecuniary
law, seems as unwarrantable by the divine law, and as repugnant to human
feelings, as the taking up arms to enforce obedience thereto. The object, on
either side, doth not justify the means; for the lives of men are too valuable
to be cast away on such trifles. It is the violence which is done and
threatened to our persons; the destruction of our property by an armed
force; the invasion of our country by fire and sword, which conscientiously
qualifies the use of arms: And the instant, in which such a mode of defence
became necessary, all subjection to Britain ought to have ceased; and the
independancy of America, should have been considered, as dating its æra
from, and published by, the first musket that was fired against her. This line
is a line of consistency; neither drawn by caprice, nor extended by
ambition; but produced by a chain of events, of which the colonies were not
the authors.

I shall conclude these remarks, with the following timely and well
intended hints. We ought to reflect, that there are three different ways, by

which an independancy may hereafter be effected; and that one of those
three, will one day or other, be the fate of America, viz. By the legal voice
of the people in Congress; by a military power; or by a mob: It may not
always happen that our soldiers are citizens, and the multitude a body of
reasonable men; virtue, as I have already remarked, is not hereditary,
neither is it perpetual. Should an independancy be brought about by the first
of those means, we have every opportunity and every encouragement before
us, to form the noblest purest constitution on the face of the earth. We have
it in our power to begin the world over again. A situation, similar to the
present, hath not happened since the days of Noah until now. The birthday
of a new world is at hand, and a race of men, perhaps as numerous as all
Europe contains, are to receive their portion of freedom from the event of a
few months. The Reflexion is awful—and in this point of view, How
trifling, how ridiculous, do the little, paltry cavellings, of a few weak or
interested men appear, when weighed against the business of a world.

Should we neglect the present favorable and inviting period, and an
Independance be hereafter effected by any other means, we must charge the
consequence to ourselves, or to those rather, whose narrow and prejudiced
souls, are habitually opposing the measure, without either inquiring or
reflecting. There are reasons to be given in support of Independance, which
men should rather privately think of, than be publicly told of. We ought not
now to be debating whether we shall be independant or not, but, anxious to
accomplish it on a firm, secure, and honorable basis, and uneasy rather that
it is not yet began upon. Every day convinces us of its necessity. Even the
Tories (if such beings yet remain among us) should, of all men, be the most
solicitous to promote it; for, as the appointment of committees at first,
protected them from popular rage, so, a wise and well established form of
government, will be the only certain means of continuing it securely to
them. Wherefore, if they have not virtue enough to be Whigs, they ought to
have prudence enough to wish for Independance.

In short, Independance is the only Bond that can tye and keep us
together. We shall then see our object, and our ears will be legally shut
against the schemes of an intriguing, as well, as a cruel enemy. We shall
then too, be on a proper footing, to treat with Britain; for there is reason to
conclude, that the pride of that court, will be less hurt by treating with the

American states for terms of peace, than with those, whom she
denominates, “rebellious subjects,” for terms of accommodation. It is our
delaying it that encourages her to hope for conquest, and our backwardness
tends only to prolong the war. As we have, without any good effect
therefrom, withheld our trade to obtain a redress of our grievances, let us
now try the alternative, by independantly redressing them ourselves, and
then offering to open the trade. The mercantile and reasonable part in
England, will be still with us; because, peace with trade, is preferable to war
without it. And if this offer be not accepted, other courts may be applied to.

On these grounds I rest the matter. And as no offer hath yet been made to
refute the doctrine contained in the former editions of this pamphlet, it is a
negative proof, that either the doctrine cannot be refuted, or, that the party
in favour of it are too numerous to be opposed. Wherefore, instead of
gazing at each other with suspicious or doubtful curiosity; let each of us,
hold out to his neighbour the hearty hand of friendship, and unite in
drawing a line, which, like an act of oblivion shall bury in forgetfulness
every former dissension. Let the names of Whig and Tory be extinct; and let
none other be heard among us, than those of a good citizen, an open and
resolute friend, and a virtuous supporter of the rights of mankind and of the
FREE AND INDEPENDANT STATES OF AMERICA.

To the Representatives of the Religious Society of the People called
Quakers, or to so many of them as were concerned in publishing the
late piece, entitled “The Ancient Testimony and Principles of the
People called Quakers renewed, with Respect to the King and
Government, and touching the Commotions now prevailing in these
and other parts of America addressed to the People in General.”

The Writer of this, is one of those few, who never dishonours religion
either by ridiculing, or cavilling at any denomination whatsoever. To God,
and not to man, are all men accountable on the score of religion. Wherefore,
this epistle is not so properly addressed to you as a religious, but as a
political body, dabbling in matters, which the professed Quietude of your
Principles instruct you not to meddle with.

As you have, without a proper authority for so doing, put yourselves in
the place of the whole body of the Quakers, so, the writer of this, in order to
be on an equal rank with yourselves, is under the necessity, of putting
himself in the place of all those, who, approve the very writings and
principles, against which your testimony is directed: And he hath chosen
this singular situation, in order, that you might discover in him that
presumption of character which you cannot see in yourselves. For neither
he nor you can have any claim or title to Political Representation.

When men have departed from the right way, it is no wonder that they
stumble and fall. And it is evident from the manner in which ye have
managed your testimony, that politics, (as a religious body of men) is not
your proper Walk; for however well adapted it might appear to you, it is,
nevertheless, a jumble of good and bad put unwisely together, and the
conclusion drawn therefrom, both unnatural and unjust.

The two first pages, (and the whole doth not make four) we give you
credit for, and expect the same civility from you, because the love and
desire of peace is not confined to Quakerism, it is the natural, as well the
religious wish of all denominations of men. And on this ground, as men
labouring to establish an Independant Constitution of our own, do we
exceed all others in our hope, end, and aim. Our plan is peace for ever. We
are tired of contention with Britain, and can see no real end to it but in a
final separation. We act consistently, because for the sake of introducing an
endless and uninterrupted peace, do we bear the evils and burthens of the
present day. We are endeavoring, and will steadily continue to endeavour, to
separate and dissolve a connexion which hath already filled our land with
blood; and which, while the name of it remains, will be the fatal cause of
future mischiefs to both countries.

We fight neither for revenge nor conquest; neither from pride nor
passion; we are not insulting the world with our fleets and armies, nor
ravaging the globe for plunder. Beneath the shade of our own vines are we
attacked; in our own houses, and on our own lands, is the violence
committed against us. We view our enemies in the character of
Highwaymen and Housebreakers, and having no defence for ourselves in
the civil law, are obliged to punish them by the military one, and apply the

sword, in the very case, where you have before now, applied the halter—
Perhaps we feel for the ruined and insulted sufferers in all and every part of
the continent, with a degree of tenderness which hath not yet made its way
into some of your bosoms. But be ye sure that ye mistake not the cause and
ground of your Testimony. Call not coldness of soul, religion; nor put the
Bigot in the place of the Christian.

O ye partial ministers of your own acknowledged principles. If the
bearing arms be sinful, the first going to war must be more so, by all the
difference between wilful attack and unavoidable defence. Wherefore, if ye
really preach from conscience, and mean not to make a political hobby-
horse of your religion, convince the world thereof, by proclaiming your
doctrine to our enemies, for they likewise bear arms. Give us proof of your
sincerity by publishing it at St. James’s, to the commanders in chief at
Boston, to the Admirals and Captains who are piratically ravaging our
coasts, and to all the murdering miscreants who are acting in authority
under him whom ye profess to serve. Had ye the honest soul of Barclay ¹ ye
would preach repentance to your king; Ye would tell the Royal Wretch his
sins, and warn him of eternal ruin. Ye would not spend your partial
invectives against the injured and the insulted only, but, like faithful
ministers, would cry aloud and spare none. Say not that ye are persecuted,
neither endeavour to make us the authors of that reproach, which, ye are
bringing upon yourselves; for we testify unto all men, that we do not
complain against you because ye are Quakers, but because ye pretend to be
and are not Quakers.

¹“Thou hast tasted of prosperity and adversity; thou knowest what it is to be
banished thy native country, to be over-ruled as well as to rule, and set upon
the throne; and being oppressed thou hast reason to know how hateful the
oppressor is both to God and man: If after all these warnings and
advertisements, thou dost not turn unto the Lord with all thy heart, but
forget him who remembered thee in thy distress, and give up thyself to
follow lust and vanity, surely great will be thy condemnation.—Against
which snare, as well as the temptation of those who may or do feed thee,
and prompt thee to evil, the most excellent and prevalent remedy will be, to
apply thyself to that light of Christ which shineth in thy conscience, and
which neither can, nor will flatter thee, nor suffer thee to be at ease in thy
sins.”

—Barclay’s address to Charles II.

Alas! it seems by the particular tendency of some part of your testimony,
and other parts of your conduct, as if, all sin was reduced to, and
comprehended in, the act of bearing arms, and that by the people only. Ye
appear to us, to have mistaken party for conscience; because, the general
tenor of your actions wants uniformity: And it is exceedingly difficult to us
to give credit to many of your pretended scruples; because, we see them
made by the same men, who, in the very instant that they are exclaiming
against the mammon of this world, are nevertheless, hunting after it with a
step as steady as Time, and an appetite as keen as Death.

The quotation which ye have made from Proverbs, in the third page of
your testimony, that, “when a man’s ways please the Lord, he maketh even
his enemies to be at peace with him”; is very unwisely chosen on your part;
because, it amounts to a proof, that the king’s ways (whom ye are desirous
of supporting) do not please the Lord, otherwise, his reign would be in
peace.

I now proceed to the latter part of your testimony, and that, for which all
the foregoing seems only an introduction, viz.

“It hath ever been our judgment and principle, since we were called to
profess the light of Christ Jesus, manifested in our consciences unto this
day, that the setting up and putting down kings and governments, is God’s
peculiar prerogative; for causes best known to himself: And that it is not our
business to have any hand or contrivance therein; nor to be busy bodies
above our station, much less to plot and contrive the ruin, or overturn of any

of them, but to pray for the king, and safety of our nation, and good of all
men: That we may live a peaceable and quiet life, in all godliness and
honesty; under the government which God is pleased to set over us.”—If
these are really your principles why do ye not abide by them? Why do ye
not leave that, which ye call God’s Work, to be managed by himself? These
very principles instruct you to wait with patience and humility, for the event
of all public measures, and to receive that event as the divine will towards
you. Wherefore, what occasion is there for your political testimony if you
fully believe what it contains: And the very publishing it proves, that either,
ye do not believe what ye profess, or have not virtue enough to practise
what ye believe.

The principles of Quakerism have a direct tendency to make a man the
quiet and inoffensive subject of any, and every government which is set
over him. And if the setting up and putting down of kings and governments
is God’s peculiar prerogative, he most certainly will not be robbed thereof
by us; wherefore, the principle itself leads you to approve of every thing,
which ever happened, or may happen to kings as being his work. Oliver
Cromwell thanks you. Charles, then, died not by the hands of man; and
should the present Proud Imitator of him, come to the same untimely end,
the writers and publishers of the Testimony, are bound, by the doctrine it
contains, to applaud the fact. Kings are not taken away by miracles, neither
are changes in governments brought about by any other means than such as
are common and human; and such as we are now using. Even the dispersion
of the Jews, though foretold by our Saviour, was effected by arms.
Wherefore, as ye refuse to be the means on one side, ye ought not to be
meddlers on the other; but to wait the issue in silence; and unless ye can
produce divine authority, to prove, that the Almighty who hath created and
placed this new world, at the greatest distance it could possibly stand, east
and west, from every part of the old, doth, nevertheless, disapprove of its
being independant of the corrupt and abandoned court of Britain, unless I
say, ye can shew this, how can ye on the ground of your principles, justify
the exciting and stirring up the people “firmly to unite in the abhorrence of
all such writings, and measures, as evidence a desire and design to break off
the happy connexion we have hitherto enjoyed, with the kingdom of Great-
Britain, and our just and necessary subordination to the king, and those who
are lawfully placed in authority under him.” What a slap of the face is here!

the men, who in the very paragraph before, have quietly and passively
resigned up the ordering, altering, and disposal of kings and governments,
into the hands of God, are now, recalling their principles, and putting in for
a share of the business. Is it possible, that the conclusion, which is here
justly quoted, can any ways follow from the doctrine laid down? The
inconsistency is too glaring not to be seen; the absurdity too great not to be
laughed at; and such as could only have been made by those, whose
understandings were darkened by the narrow and crabby spirit of a
despairing political party; for ye are not to be considered as the whole body
of the Quakers but only as a factional and fractional part thereof.

Here ends the examination of your testimony; (which I call upon no man
to abhor, as ye have done, but only to read and judge of fairly;) to which I
subjoin the following remark; “That the setting up and putting down of
kings,” most certainly mean, the making him a king, who is yet not so, and
the making him no king who is already one. And pray what hath this to do
in the present case? We neither mean to set up nor to put down, neither to
make nor to unmake, but to have nothing to do with them. Wherefore, your
testimony in whatever light it is viewed serves only to dishonor your
judgement, and for many other reasons had better have been let alone than
published.

First, Because it tends to the decrease and reproach of all religion
whatever, and is of the utmost danger to society, to make it a party in
political disputes.

Secondly, Because it exhibits a body of men, numbers of whom disavow
the publishing political testimonies, as being concerned therein and
approvers thereof.

Thirdly, Because it hath a tendency to undo that continental harmony
and friendship which yourselves by your late liberal and charitable
donations hath lent a hand to establish; and the preservation of which, is of
the utmost consequence to us all.

And here without anger or resentment I bid you farewell. Sincerely
wishing, that as men and christians, ye may always fully and
uninterruptedly enjoy every civil and religious right; and be, in your turn,

the means of securing it to others; but that the example which ye have
unwisely set, of mingling religion with politics, may be disavowed and
reprobated by every inhabitant of America.

F I N I S.

On Common Sense

“No writer has exceeded Paine in ease and familiarity of style, in
perspicuity of expression, happiness of elucidation, and in simple
and unassuming language.”

Thomas Jefferson

“A pamphlet called ‘Commonsense’ makes a great noise. One of the
vilest things that ever was published to the world. Full of false
representations, lies, calumny, and treason, whose principles are to
subvert all Kingly Governments and erect an Independent
Republic.”

Nicholas Cresswell

“I dreaded the effect so popular a pamphlet might have among the
people, and determined to do all in my Power to counteract the
effect of it.”

John Adams

“Its effects were sudden and extensive upon the American mind. It
was read by public men.”

Dr. Benjamin Rush

“Have you read the pamphlet Common Sense? I never saw such a
masterful performance.… In short, I own myself convinced, by the
arguments, of the necessity of separation.”

General Charles Lee

Transcriber's Notes

This production of the Bradford edition of Common Sense retains the
original characteristics of the document—the author's use of capitalization
(large and small), spelling, and italics.

The page numbers of this version of the book were my invention, for
ease in reading the HTML document. The page numbers can more
accurately be called paragraph numbers. They match the paragraph numbers
in the edited text of ‘Common Sense’ from the National Humanities Center.

In one case, the text refers to page forty (see our Page 130). We provided
a link to the appropriate part of our document but retained the page number
specified by Paine. Our page numbers are not carried over to the Kindle, E-
PUB, and text documents produced by Project Gutenberg.

The section "On Common Sense," containing quotes about Common
Sense, have been added by this transcriber.

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK COMMON SENSE
***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be
renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law
means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the
Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States
without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules,
set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying
and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the
PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a
registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook,
except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying
royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge
anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg
eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do
practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by
U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license,
especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any
other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you
agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg License
available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing
Project Gutenberg electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg electronic work,
you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the
terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright)
agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement,
you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg
electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy
of or access to a Project Gutenberg electronic work and you do not agree to
be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on
or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can
do with most Project Gutenberg electronic works even without complying
with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a
lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg electronic works if you
follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to
Project Gutenberg electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation”
or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
Gutenberg electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual
work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are

located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are
removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing
Project Gutenberg works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for
keeping the Project Gutenberg name associated with the work. You can
easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg License when you
share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a
constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the
laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before
downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating
derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg work.
The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status
of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg work (any work on which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied
or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License
included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is derived from
texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice
indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the
work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without
paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a
work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on
the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs
1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
Project Gutenberg trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is posted with the
permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply
with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed
by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project
Gutenberg License for all works posted with the permission of the
copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg License
terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any
other work associated with Project Gutenberg.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently
displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or
immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg work in a format other than “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the
official Project Gutenberg website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no
additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of
exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work
in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format
must include the full Project Gutenberg License as specified in paragraph
1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing,
copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg works unless you comply
with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to
or distributing Project Gutenberg electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the
use of Project Gutenberg works calculated using the method you
already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the
owner of the Project Gutenberg trademark, but he has agreed to donate
royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days
following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to
prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly
marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about
donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does
not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You
must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works
possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all
access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in
this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project

Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3
below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works
not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™
collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and
the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as,
but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription
errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that
damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except
for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to
you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE
THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT
EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE
THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you
discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you
can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund.
If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to

you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work
electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you
may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR
FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or
the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or
limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable
to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum
disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity
or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance
with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works,
harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause
to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg work, (b)
alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg
work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project
Gutenberg

Project Gutenberg is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic
works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including
obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the

efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of
life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance
they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg’s goals and ensuring
that the Project Gutenberg collection will remain freely available for
generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for
Project Gutenberg and future generations. To learn more about the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations
can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)
(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of
Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service.
The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541.
Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s
laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 41 Watchung Plaza #516,
Montclair NJ 07042, USA, +1 (862) 621-9288. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and
official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the
number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed
in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment

including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are
particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States.
Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort,
much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these
requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not
received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have
not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against
accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us
with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any
statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the
United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods
and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including
checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg
electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with
anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg
eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed editions,
all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a

copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in
compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility:
www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg, including how
to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation,
how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email
newsletter to hear about new eBooks.