The Diplomatic Correspondence of the American Revolution, Vol. 05
History
The Diplomatic Correspondence of the American Revolution, Vol. 05
United States -- Foreign relations -- 1775-1783; United States -- History -- Revolution, 1775-1783 -- Sources
A general repugnance to the alliance with France, is mentioned. A
greater mistake was never made. On the contrary, every step of
Congress, every proceeding of every Assembly upon the continent, every
prayer that is made in the pulpit, and every speculation in the
newspapers, demonstrates the high sense they have of the importance of
this alliance. It is said, that this alliance has been of little
utility. Has it not employed the British army? has it not cut out work
enough for the British navy? has it not wasted for England her annual
twenty millions? has it not prevented these from being employed
against America? has it not given scope to American privateers? has it
not protected the American trade? has it not hurt that of Great
Britain? has it not engaged Russia, Holland, Sweden, Denmark, and
Portugal, at least to a neutrality? at least has it not contributed
much to these vast advantages to America? has it not taken away from
Great Britain the dominion of the sea, so far as to allow liberty of
navigation to others? It is true, the alliance might have been of more
utility to all the allies with the same expense, if France and Spain
had sooner adopted the policy of sending more of their forces to
America. But they are now so well convinced of it, that unless
miracles are wrought to prevent it, America and England too will soon
see more of the effects of this alliance. Let Britain tremble at the
consequences of her own folly and her own crime.
His Lordship says, that the people would return to their allegiance,
if they were not restrained by the tyranny of those who have got the
powers of government. These are the Assemblies, Senates, Governors,
and Congress. Now what power have any of these, but what the people
please to allow them? By what engine is this tyranny exercised? Is it
by the militia? In order to judge of this, let us consider the
constitution of the militia. The militia, is in fact the whole people,
for by the laws of every State, every man from sixteen to sixty years
of age, belongs to the militia, is obliged to be armed, to train and
march upon occasion, or find a substitute. The officers are chosen by
the men, except the General officers, who are appointed by the
Assemblies. It is this very militia which forms the body of voters,
who annually choose the members of the Assembly, and the senators, and
governors. Is it possible these men should tyrannise over men upon
whom they are so entirely dependent? As well might it be reproached to
his Lordship and his colleagues in administration, that they
tyrannised over their royal master, who can displace them at his
pleasure. The Assemblies thus annually chosen by the people, or
militia, annually choose the delegates in Congress, and have power to
recall them at pleasure. Will the militia then obey either Assemblies
or Congress in the execution of tyrannical orders, or any orders that
are not generally agreeable to them? The thing speaks for itself. Is
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account