confiscations; the courts to decide upon the lawfulness of seizures, were to be composed of a single judge, without a jury, whose emoluments were to be derived from his own condemnations; the Governors of the colonies and the military officers were to be rewarded for their activity by swearing also, either in the property condemned, or in the penalties annexed to the interdicted trade.” And was not the Crown correct in enforcing laws intended for the public weal? Had hostile fleets approached Boston harbour to invade, instead of smuggling crafts, freighted with luxuries, would not the colonist have called loudly for Imperial help to protect? But if the Government had the best of rights to enforce the laws, it certainly displayed much want of judgment in the mode adopted to carry out its demands. The foregoing, from Sabine, recalls to us at once the cause why resistance was strenuously made. The mode of paying their Crown officers was well calculated to kindle feelings of the most determined opposition on the part of the illicit traders, such as John Hancock, John Langdon, Samuel Adams, William Whipple, George Clymer, Stephen Hopkins, Francis Louis, Philip Livingston, Eldridge Gerry, Joseph Hewes, George Taylor, Roger Sherman, Button Gurnett, and Robert Morris, all signers of the declaration of independence,—all smugglers! And thus it came about. The Crown was determined to exact taxes, and ignorant of the feelings of the colonists; and the colonists, grown rich by unrestricted trade—by smuggling, entered into a contract, which was only to end in dismemberment of the British Empire. Side issues were raised, cries of oppression shouted, the love of liberty invoked and epithets bandied; but they were only for effect, to inflame the public mind, of which there was much wavering. Of course, there were other things which assisted to ripen rebellion, at least were so represented, that they added to the growing discontent. Colonies, when they have become developed by age, and powerful by local circumstances, will naturally lose the interest which animates the subject at home. It is in the nature of things that the love of country should gradually change from the old home to the new. The inhabitants of the colonies were in many cases but descendants of European nations, who could not be expected to retain the warmest attachment to the parent country. The tide of war had changed the allegiance of many a one. The heterogeneous whole could not be called English, and hence it was more easy to cast aside the noble feeling called patriotism. Then there were jealousies of the Crown officers, and everything undertaken by the home government, having the appearance of change, was promptly suspected as being intended to degrade them. The exclusiveness of the regular army and superciliousness to the provincial troops, during the French war, caused many a sting, and the thought of insult to the provincial officer