kind, or is it to prevent them from becoming too populous? If the latter, would not the fertile plains of the Western World receive the redundancy of the Old?

1786.

RESORT TO ARMS, IN DEFENCE OF FREEDOM.

At a time, when our lordly masters in Great Britain will be satisfied with nothing less than the deprivation of American freedom, it seems highly necessary, that something should be done to avert the stroke, and maintain the liberty which we have derived from our ancestors. But the manner of doing it, to answer the purpose effectually, is the point in question.

That no man should scruple, or hesitate a moment, to use arms, in defence of so valuable a blessing, is clearly my opinion.

Arms should be the last resource, the dernier resort.

We have already, it is said, proved the inefficacy of addresses to the Throne, and remonstrances to Parliament. How far, then, their attention to our rights and privileges is to be awakened or alarmed, by starving their trade and manufactures, remains to be tried.

NON-IMPORTATION AND DISUSE OF BRITISH COM

MODITIES.

The Northern colonies are endeavoring to adopt this scheme. In my opinion, it is a good one, and must be attended with salutary effects, provided it can be carried pretty generally into execution. But, to what extent it is practicable to do so, I will not take upon me to determine. That there will be a difficulty attending the execution of it every where, from clashing interests, and selfish, designing men, ever attentive to their own gains, and watchful of every turn that can assist their lucrative views, cannot be denied. In the tobacco colonies, where the trade is so diffused, and in a manner wholly conducted by factors for their principals at home, these difficulties are certainly enhanced, but, I think, not insurmountably increased, if the gentlemen, in their several counties, will be at some pains to explain matters to the people, and stimulate them to cordial agreements, to purchase none but certain enumerated articles, out of any of the stores, after a definite period, and neither import nor purchase any themselves.

This, if it should not effectually withdraw the factors from their importations, would at least make them extremely cautious in doing it, as the prohibited goods could be vended to none but the non-associators, or those who would pay no regard to their asso

ciation; both of whom ought to be stigmatized, and made the objects of public reproach.

The more I consider a scheme of this sort, the more ardently I wish success to it, because I think there are private as well as public advantages to result from it, the former certain, however precarious the latter may prove.

I have always thought, that, by virtue of the same power which assumes the right of taxation, the Parliament may attempt at least to restrain our manufacturers, especially those of a public nature, the same equity and justice prevailing in the one case as the other, it being no greater hardship to forbid my manufacturing, than it is to order me to buy goods loaded with duties, for the express purpose of raising a revenue. But as a measure of this sort would be an additional exertion of arbitrary power, we cannot be placed in a worse condition, I think, by putting it to the test.

That the colonies are considerably indebted to Great Britain, is a truth universally acknowledged. That many families are reduced, almost, if not quite, to penury, and want, by the low ebb of their fortunes, and that estates are daily selling for the discharge of debts, the public prints furnish too many melancholy proofs.

That a scheme of this sort will contribute more

effectually than any other that can be devised, to extricate the country from the distress it at present labors under, I most firmly believe, if it can be generally adopted.

I can see but one class of people, the merchants excepted, who will not, or ought not, to wish well to the scheme; namely, they who live genteelly and hospitably on clear estates. Such as these, were they not to consider the valuable object in view, and the good of others, might think it hard, to be curtailed in their living and enjoyments.

As to the penurious man, he would thereby save his money and his credit, having the best plea for doing that, which before, perhaps, he had the most violent struggles to refrain from doing.

The extravagant and expensive man has the same good plea, to retrench his expenses. He would be furnished with a pretext to live within bounds, and embrace it. Prudence dictated economy before, but his resolution was too weak to put it in practice "How can I," says he, "who have lived in such and such a manner, change my method? I am ashamed to do it; and, besides, such an alteration in the system of my living, will create suspicions of the decay of my fortune; and such a thought the world must not harbor." He continues his course, till at last his estate comes to an end, a sale of it being the consequence of his perseverance in error. This, I am satis

fied, is the way, that many, who have set out in the

wrong track, have reasoned, till ruin has stared them in the face.

And in respect to the needy man, he is only left in the same situation that he was found in; better, I may say, because, as he judges from comparison, his condition is amended, in proportion as it approaches nearer to those above him.

I think the scheme a good one.

1. WAR.

If the title of GREAT MAN ought to be reserved for him who cannot be charged with an indiscretion or a vice, who spent his life in establishing the independence, the glory, and durable prosperity of his country; who succeeded in all that he undertook, and whose successes were never won at the expense of honor, justice, integrity, or by the sacrifice of a single principle, this title will not be denied to Washington. JARED SPARKS.

THE PATRIOT'S ALTERNATIVE.

Unhappy it is, to reflect, that a brother's sword has been sheathed in a brother's breast, and that the once happy and peaceful plains of America are either to be drenched with blood, or inhabited by slaves.

. Sad alternative ! But can a virtuous man hesitate in his choice?

1775.