"
This is a plain matter of fact, necessary to be laid down, and, excepting the
description, it is laid down in the language of the Constitution; it is taken
nearly verbatim from Acts of Parliament.
The second is like unto the first--
"That the said Colonies and Plantations have been liable to, and bounden by,
several subsidies, payments, rates, and taxes given and granted by Parliament,
though the said Colonies and Plantations have not their Knights and Burgesses in
the said High Court of Parliament, of their own election, to represent the
condition of their country; by lack whereof they have been oftentimes touched
and grieved by subsidies given, granted, and assented to, in the said Court, in
a manner prejudicial to the commonwealth, quietness, rest, and peace of the
subjects inhabiting within the same."
Is this description too hot, or too cold; too strong, or too weak? Does it
arrogate too much to the supreme legislature? Does it lean too much to the
claims of the people? If it runs into any of these errors, the fault is not
mine. It is the language of your own ancient Acts of Parliament.
Pages:
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123