Britain having assumed to herself the exclusive
right of supplying them with all goods
from Europe, might have forced them (in
the same manner as other countries have done
their colonies) to receive such goods loaded
with all the same duties which they paid in
the mother country. But, on the contrary, till
1763, the same drawbacks were paid upon
the exportation of the greater part of foreign
goods to our colonies, as to any independent
foreign country. In 1763, indeed, by the
4th of Geo. III. c. 15, this indulgence was a
good deal abated, and it was enacted, "That
no part of the duty called the old subsidy
should be drawn back for any goods of the
growth, production, or manufacture of Europe
or the East Indies, which should be
exported from this kingdom to any British
colony or plantation in America; wines,
white calicoes, and muslins, excepted." Before
this law, many different sorts of foreign
goods might have been bought cheaper in the
plantations than in the mother country, and
some may still.
Of the greater part of the regulations concerning
the colony trade, the merchants who
carry it on, it must be observed, have been
the principal advisers. We must not wonder,
therefore, if, in a great part of them, their interest
has been more considered than either
that of the colonies or that of the mother
country. In their exclusive privilege of supplying
the colonies with all the goods which
they wanted from Europe, and of purchasing
all such parts of their surplus produce as
could not interfere with any of the trades
which they themselves carried on at home, the
interest of the colonies was sacrificed to the
interest of those merchants. In allowing the
same drawbacks upon the re-exportation of
the greater part of European and East India
goods to the colonies, as upon their re-exportation
to any independent country, the interest
of the mother country was sacrificed to it,
even according to the mercantile ideas of that
interest. It was for the interest of the merchants
to pay as little as possible for the foreign
goods which they sent to the colonies,
and, consequently, to get back as much as possible
of the duties which they advanced upon
their importation into Great Britain. They
might thereby be enabled to sell in the colonies,
either the some quantity of goods with a
greater profit, or a greater quantity with the
same profit, and, consequently, to gain something
either in the one way or the other.
It was likewise for the interest of the colonies
to get all such goods as cheap, and in as
great abundance as possible. But this might
not always be for the interest of the mother
country. She might frequently suffer, both
in her revenue, by giving back a great part
of the duties which had been paid upon the
importation of such goods; and in her manufactures,
by being undersold in the colony
market in consequence of the easy terms upon
which foreign manufactures could be carried
thither by means of those drawbacks.
The progress of the linen manufacture of
Great Britain, it is commonly said, has been
a good deal retarded by the drawbacks upon
the re-exportation of German linen to the
American colonies.
But though the policy of Great Britain,
with regard to the trade of her colonies, has
been dictated by the same mercantile spirit as
that of other nations, it has, however, upon
the whole, been less illiberal and oppressive
than that of any of them.
In every thing except their foreign trade,
the liberty of the English colonists to manage
their own affairs their own way, is complete.
It is in every respect equal to that of their
fellow-citizens at home, and is secured in the
same manner, by an assembly of the representatives
of the people, who claim the sole
right of imposing taxes for the support of the
colony government. The authority of this
assembly overawes the executive power; and
neither the meanest nor the most obnoxious
colonist, as long as he obeys the law, has any
thing to fear from the resentment, either of
the governor, or of any other civil or military
officer in the province. The colony assemblies,
though, like the house of commons
in England, they are not always a very equal
representation of the people, yet they approach
more nearly to that character; and as the executive
power either has not the means to corrupt
them, or, on account of the support which
it receives from the mother country, is not
under the necessity of doing so, they are, perhaps,
in general more influenced by the inclinations
of their constituents. The councils,
which, in the colony legislatures, correspond
to the house of lords in Great Britain, are
not composed of a hereditary nobility. In
some of the colonies, as in three of the governments
of New England, those councils
are not appointed by the king, but chosen by
the representatives of the people. In none of
the English colonies is there any hereditary
nobility. In all of them, indeed, as in all
other free countries, the descendant of an old
colony family is more respected than an upstart
of equal merit and fortune; but he is
only more respected, and he has no privileges
by which he can be troublesome to his neighbours.
Before the commencement of the present
disturbances, the colony assemblies had
not only the legislative, but a part of the executive
power. In Connecticut and Rhode
Island, they elected the governor. In the
other colonies, they appointed the revenue officers,
who collected the taxes imposed by those
respective assemblies, to whom those officers
were immediately responsible. There is more
equality, therefore, among the English colonists
than among the inhabitants of the mother
country. Their manners are more republican;