Are you ready to receive all those tax credits we’ve been hearing about? This year, you have all kinds of options to reduce your tax burden. Qualifying for the various programs is another issue. Depending on your income level, the time you have lived in your house, how many kids you have, if you own a business and its level of success, will dictate how much you can qualify for.

The Asset Protector Group is not offering a credit to help stimulate your budget.

The Asset Protector Group is not offering a “make work pay” tax credit to put an extra $20.00 in your paycheck each week.

The Asset Protector Group is not offering a tax credit of up to $8000.00 for homeowners, which you must claim as income, and PAY BACK like the government is.

Certainly it is refreshing to see the government making an effort. Even the slightest stimulus to our everyday citizens’ cash flow is welcome and needed.

However, The Asset Protector Group has built a program that delivers an immediate stimulus with a bigger and more immediate punch.

What if you could take all the payments that you make each month to your credit card companies, banks, and Credit Unions and keep that money for you and your family? Do you pay $1000, $1500, or even $2000 per month in payments, fees, and interest on your unsecured debts? That equates to 10’s of thousands of dollars each year that would be better used to keep your family afloat in this turbulent economy.

The Asset Protector Group has a rock solid solution to this waste of much needed cash flow.

Our Shielded Circlel program allows you to STOP making those monthly payments and guides you to a foreseeable end to your unsecured debt encumbrances. Our program was written and is supervised by a tax attorney with over 30 years experience.

Our goal is to get those debts settled: PAID OFF!!

Separating the Asset Protector Group from those other so called “debt elimination” companies is that once you become part of our Shielded Circle of Protection, we protect you and your assets, your personal assets, your home, your bank account, and most importantly… your income.

After years of research by our professional staff, we are able to use the banks own tactics and settle your unsecured debt for as little as 10% of the amount owed.

Do yourself and your family a favor and download our free eBook found on our web site, www.apg-llc.us . In that book you will get an education on how the banks have taken full advantage of the consumer and how you can fight back to get these debts settled once and for all.

If you prefer to speak immediately with one of our professionals you can call us toll free at 800-488-2051. We are standing by to stimulate you right now.

Friends and Fellow Citizens: The period for a new election of a
citizen, to administer the executive government of the United
States, being not far distant, and the time actually arrived,
when your thoughts must be employed in designating the person who
is to be clothed with that important trust, it appears to me
proper, especially as it may conduce to a more distinct
expression of the public voice, that I should now apprise you
of the resolution I have formed to decline being considered
among the number of those out of whom a choice is to be made.

I rejoice that the state of your concerns, external as well
as internal, no longer renders the pursuit of inclination
incompatible with the sentiment of duty or propriety; and am
persuaded, whatever partiality may be retained for my services,
that, in the present circumstances of our country, you will
not disapprove my determination to retire.

The impressions, with which I first undertook the arduous trust,
were explained on the proper occasion. In the discharge of this
trust, I will only say, that I have, with good intentions,
contributed toward the organization and administration of the
Government, the best exertions of which a very fallible judgement
was capable. Not unconscious, in the outset, of the inferiority
of my qualifications, experience in my own eyes, perhaps still
more in the eyes of others, has strengthened the motives to
diffidence of myself; and every day the increasing weight of
years admonishes me more and more, that the shade of retirement
is as necessary to me as it will be welcome. Satisfied that
if any circumstances have given peculiar value to my services,
they were temporary, I have the consolation to believe, that
while choice and prudence invite me to quit the political
scene, patriotism does not forbid it.

Here, perhaps, I ought to stop. But a solicitude for your
welfare, which cannot end but with my life, and the apprehension
of danger, natural to that solicitude urge me on an occasion
like the present, to offer to your solemn contemplation, and to
recommend to your frequent review, some sentiments; which are
the result of much reflection, of no inconsiderable observation,
and which appear to me all important to the permanency of your
felicity as a people. These will be offered to you with the more
freedom, as you can only see in them the disinterested warnings
of a parting friend, who can possibly have no personal motive
as his counsel.

Interwoven as is the love of liberty with every ligament of your
hearts, no recommendation of mine is necessary to fortify or
confirm the attachment.

The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also
now dear to you. It is justly so; for it is a main pillar in the
edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility
at home; your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity;
of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy
to foresee, that from different causes and from different quarters,
much pains will be taken, many artifices employed, to weaken in
your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in
your political fortress against which the batteries of internal
and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though
often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite
moment, that you should properly estimate the immense value of
your national Union to your collective and individual happiness;
that you should cherish a cordial, habitual and immoveable
attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of
it as the palladium of your political safety and prosperity;
watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety;
discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that
it can in any event be abandoned, and indignantly frowning
upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion
of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties
which now link together the various parts.

For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest.
Citizens by birth or choice, of a common country, that country
has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of
‘American’, which belongs to you, in your national capacity,
must always exalt the just pride of patriotism, more than any
appelation derived from local discriminations. With slight
shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners,
habits and political principles. You have in a common cause
fought and triumphed together. The independence and liberty
you possess are the work of joint councils, and joint efforts;
of common dangers, sufferings and successes.

But these considerations, however powerfully they address
themselves to your sensibility, are greatly outweighed by those
which apply more immediately to your interest. Here every
portion of our country finds the most commanding motives for
carefully guarding and preserving the union of the whole.

The North, in an unrestrained intercourse with the South,
protected by the equal laws of a common Government, finds in
the production of the latter, great additional resources of
maritime and commercial enterprise and precious materials of
manufacturing industry. The South in the same intercourse,
benefitting by the agency of the North, sees its agriculture
grow and its commerce expand. Turning partly into its own
channels the seamen of the North, it finds its particular
navigation envigorated; and while it contributes, in different
ways, to nourish and increase the general mass of the national
navigation, it looks forward to the protection of a maritime
strength, to which itself is unequally adapted. The East, in
a like intercourse with the West, already finds, and in the
progressive improvement of interior communications, by land
and water, will more and more find a valuable vent for the
commodities which it brings from abroad, or manufactures at
home. The West derives from the East supplies requisite to
its growth and comfort, and what is perhaps of still greater
consequence, it must of necessity owe the secure enjoyment of
indispensable outlets for its own productions to the weight,
influence, and the future maritime strength of the Atlantic
side of the Union, directed by an indissoluble community of
interest as one nation. Any other tenure by which the West
can hold this essential advantage, whether derived from its
own separate strength, or from an apostate and unnatural
connection with any foreign power, must be intrinsically precarious.

While then every part of our country thus feels an immediate and
particular interest in union, all the parts combined cannot fail
to find in the united mass of means and efforts greater strength,
greater resource, proportionably greater security from external
danger, a less frequent interruption of their peace by foreign
nations; and, what is of inestimable value, they must derive
from union an exemption from those broils and wars between
themselves, which so frequently afflict neighboring countries,
not tied together by the same government; which their own
rivalships alone would be sufficient to produce, but which
opposite foreign alliances, attachments and intrigues would
stimulate and imbitter. Hence, likewise, they will avoid the
necessity of those overgrown military establishments which,
under any form of government, are inauspicious to liberty and
which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican
liberty. In this sense it is that your union ought to be
considered as a main prop of your liberty, and that the love
of the one ought to endear you to the preservation of the other.

Is there a doubt whether a common government can embrace so large
a sphere? Let experience solve it. To listen to mere speculation
in such a case were criminal. It is well worth a fair and full
experiment. With such powerful and obvious motives to union
affecting all parts of our country, while experience shall not
have demonstrated its impracticability, there will always be
reason to distrust the patriotism of those who in any quarter
may endeavor to weaken its bands.

In contemplating the causes which may disturb our union, it
occurs as a matter of serious concern, that any ground should
have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical
discriminations: Northern and Southern; Atlantic and Western;
whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there
is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the
expedients of party to acquire influence, within particular
districts, is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other
districts. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the
jealousies and heart burnings which spring from these
misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other
those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection.

To the efficacy and permanency of your union, a Government for
the whole is indispensable. No alliances however strict between
the parts can be an adequate substitute. They must inevitably
experience the infractions and interruptions which all alliances
in all times have experienced. Sensible of this momentous truth,
you have improved upon your first essay, by the adoption of a
Constitution of Government, better calculated than your former
for an intimate union, and for the efficacious management of your
common concerns. This Government, the offspring of your own choice
uninfluenced and unawed, adopted upon full investigation and
mature deliberation, completely free in its principles, in the
distribution of its powers, uniting security with energy, and
containing within itself a provision for its own amendment, has
a just claim to your confidence and your support. Respect for
its authority, compliance with its laws, acquiescence in its
measures, are duties enjoined by the fundamental maxims of
true liberty. The basis of our political systems is the right
of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of
government. But the constitution which at any time exists till
changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people
is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and
the right of the people to establish government presupposes the
duty of every individual to obey the established government.

Toward the preservation of your government and the permanency of
your present happy state, it is requisite not only that you
steadily discountenance irregular oppositions to its acknowledged
authority, but also that you resist with care the spirit of
innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts.
One method of assault may be to effect in the forms of the
Constitution alterations which will impair the energy of the
system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown.
In all the changes to which you may be invited remember that time
and habit are at least as necessary to fix the true character of
governments as of other human institutions; that experience is
the surest standard by which to test the real tendency of the
existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes
upon the crdit of mere hypothesis and opinion exposes to
perpetual change, from the endless variety of hypothesis and
opinion; and remember especially that for the efficient
management of your common interests in a country so extensive
as ours a government of as much vigor as is consistent with
the perfect security of liberty is indispensable. Liberty
itself will find in such a government, with powers properly
distributed and adjusted, its surest guardian. It is, indeed,
little else than a name where the government is too feeble
to withstand the enterprises of faction, to confine each
member of the society within the limits prescribed by the
laws, and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil
enjoyment of the rights of person and property.

I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the
State, with particular reference to the founding of them on
geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more
comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner
against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature,
having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind.
It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or
less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but in those of the
popular form it is seen in its greatest rankness and is truly
their worst enemy.

It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble
the public administration. It agitates the community with
illfounded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity
of one part against another; foments occasionally riot and
insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and
corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government
itself through the channels of party passion. Thus the policy
and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and
will of another.

There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful
checks upon the administration of government, and serve to keep
alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is
probably true; and in governments of a monarchial cast
patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon
the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in
governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged.
From their natural tendency it is certain there will always be
enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose; and there
being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force
of public opinion to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be
quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting
into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a
free country should inspire caution in those intrusted with
its administration to confine themselves within their
respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise
of the powers of one department to encroach upon another.
The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers
of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever
the form of government, a real despotism.

If in the opinion of the people the distribution or modification
of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it
be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution
designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though
this in one instance may be the instrument of good, it is the
customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The
precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any
partial or transient benefit which the use can at any time yield.

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political
prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.
In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who
should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness
- these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The
mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect
and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their
connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply
be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation,
for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the
oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of
justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that
morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be
conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of
peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to
expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion
of religious principle.

It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary
spring of popular government. The rule indeed extends with more
or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a
sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to
shake the foundation of the fabric? Promote, then, as an object
of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of
knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives
force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion
should be enlightened.

As a very important source of strength and security, cherish
public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as
sparingly as possible, avoiding occasions of expense by
cultivating peace, but remembering also that timely
disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent
much greater disbursements to repel it; avoiding likewise
the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of
expense, but by exertions in time of peace to discharge the
debts which unavoidable wars have occasioned, not ungenerously
throwing upon posterity the burthen which we ourselves
ought to bear.

Observe good faith and justice toward all nations. Cultivate
peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this
conduct. And can it be that good policy does not equally enjoin
it? It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant
period a great nation to give to mankind the magnanimous and too
novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and
benevolence. Who can doubt that in the course of time and things
the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary
advantage which might be lost by a steady adherence to it? Can
it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity
of a nation with its virtue? The experiment, at least, is
recommended by every sentiment which enobles human nature.
Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices.

In the execution of such a plan nothing is more essential than
that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular
nations and passionate attachments for others should be
excluded, and that in place of them just and amicable feelings
toward all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges
toward another an habitual hatred or an habitual fondness is
in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to
its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray
from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against
another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury,
to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and
intractable when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur.

So, likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another
produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation,
facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in
cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into
one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a
participation in the quarrles and wars of the latter without
adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to
concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to
others, which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the
concessions by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have
been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill will, and a
disposition to retaliate in the parties from whom equal
privileges are withheld; and it gives to ambitious,
corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the
favorite nation) facility to betray or sacrifice the interests
of their own country without odium, sometimes even with
popularity, gilding with the appearances of a virtuous sense
of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion,
or a laudable zeal for public good the base or foolish
compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you
to believe me, fellow citizens) the jealousy of a free people
ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove
that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of
republican government. But that jealousy, to be useful, must
be impartial, else it becomes the instrument of the very influence
to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive
partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of
another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one
side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence
on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the
favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its
tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people
to surrender their interests.

The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations
is, in extending our commercial relations to have with them as
little political connection as possible. So far as we have
already formed engagements let them be fulfilled with perfect
good faith. Here let us stop.

Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none or a
very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent
controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to
our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to
implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary
vicissitudes of her politics or the ordinary combinations
and collisions of her friendships or enmities.

Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to
pursue a different course. If we remain one people, under an
efficient government, the period is not far off when we may
defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take
such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any
time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when beligerent
nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon
us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we
may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice,
shall counsel.

Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit
our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our
destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and
prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship,
interest, humor, or caprice?

It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with
any portion of the foreign world, so far, I mean, as we are now
at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of
patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim
no less applicable to public than to private affairs that honesty
is always the best policy. I repeat, therefore, let those
engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But in my opinion
it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.

Taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable establishments
on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to
temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.

Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations are recommended
by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial
policy should hold an equal and impartial hand, neither seeking
nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the
natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle
means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing
with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course,
to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the
Government to support them, conventional rules of intercourse,
the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will
permit, but temporary and liable to be from time to time
abandoned or varied as experience and circumstances shall
dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one
nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it
must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may
accept under that character; that by such acceptance it may
place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for
nominal favors, and yet being reproached with ingratitude for
not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect
or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an
illusion which experience must cure, which a just pride ought
to discard.

Though in reviewing the incidents of my Administration I am
unconscious of intentional error, I am nevertheless too
sensible of my defects not to think it probable that I may have
committed many errors. Whatever they may be, I fervently
beseech the Almighty to avert or mitigate the evils to which
they may tend. I shall also carry with me the hope that my
country will never cease to view them with indulgence, and
that, after forty-five years of my life dedicated to its service
with an upright zeal, the faults of incompetent abilities will
be consigned to oblivion, as myself must soon be to the
mansions of rest.

Relying on its kindness in this as in other things, and
actuated by that fervent love toward it which is so natural
to a man who views in it the native soil of himself and his
progenitors for several generations, I anticipate with pleasing
expectation that retreat in which I promise myself to realize
without alloy the sweet enjoyment of partaking in the midst
of my fellow-citizens the benign influence of good laws under
a free government – the ever-favorite object of my heart, and
the happy reward, as I trust, of our mutual cares, labors
and dangers.

Geo. Washington.

————————————-

Prepared by Gerald Murphy (The Cleveland Free-Net – aa300)
Distributed by the Cybercasting Services Division of the
National Public Telecomputing Network (NPTN).

Permission is hereby granted to download, reprint, and/or otherwise
redistribute this file, provided appropriate point of origin
credit is given to the preparer(s) and the National Public

(ftp mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu) pub/etexts/freenet
–
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms
is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
- Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, June 1776
- 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 (C. J. Boyd, Ed., 1950).

(FIRST CONT. CONGRESS Oct 1774:1-28)

Whereas, since the close of the last war, the British parliament, claiming a power of right to bind the people of America by statute in all cases whatsoever, hath, in some acts expressly imposed taxes on them, and in others, under various pretenses, but in fact for the purpose of raising a revenue, hath imposed rates and duties payable in these colonies, established a board of commissioners with unconstitutional powers, and extended the jurisdiction of courts of Admiralty not only for collecting the said duties, but for the trial of causes merely arising within the body of a county.

And whereas, in consequence of other statutes, judges who before held only estates at will in their offices, have been made dependent on the Crown alone for their salaries, and standing armies kept in times of peace. And it has lately been resolved in Parliament, that by force of a statute made in the thirty- fifth year of the reign of king Henry the Eighth, colonists may be transported to England, and tried there upon accusations for treasons and misprisions, or concealments of treasons committed in the colonies; and by a late statute, such trials have been directed in cases therein mentioned.

And whereas, in the last session of Parliament, three statutes were made; one entitled “An act to discontinue, in such manner and for such time as are therein mentioned, the landing and discharging, lading, or shipping of goods, wares and merchandise, at the town, and within the harbor of Boston in the province of Massachusetts-bay, in North America;” another, entitled “An act for the better regulating the government of the province of the Massachusetts-bay in New England;” and another, entitled “An act for the impartial administration of justice, in the cases of persons questioned for any act done by them in the execution of the law, or for the suppression of riots and tumults, in the province of the Massachusetts-bay, in New England.” And another statute was then made, “for making more effectual provision for the government of the province of Quebec, etc. All which statutes are impolitic, unjust, and cruel, as well as unconstitutional, and most dangerous and destructive of American rights.

And whereas, Assemblies have been frequently dissolved, contrary to the rights of the people, when they attempted to deliberate on grievances; and their dutiful, humble, loyal, & reasonable petitions to the crown for redress, have been repeatedly treated with contempt, by His Majesty’s ministers of state:

The good people of the several Colonies of New Hampshire, Massachusetts bay, Rhode Island and Providence plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Newcastle Kent and Sussex on Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina, justly alarmed at these arbitrary proceedings of parliament and administration, have severally elected, constituted, and appointed deputies to meet, and sit in general Congress, in the city of Philadelphia, in order to obtain such establishment, as that their religion, laws, and liberties, may not be subverted:

Whereupon the deputies so appointed being now assembled, in a full and free representation of these Colonies, taking into their most serious consideration the best means of attaining the ends aforesaid, do in the first place, as Englishmen their ancestors in like cases have usually done, for asserting and vindicating their rights and liberties, declare,

That the inhabitants of the English Colonies in North America, by the immutable laws of nature, the principles of the English constitution, and the several charters or compacts, have the following Rights:

Resolved, N. C. D.

1. That they are entitled to life, liberty and property, & they have never ceded to any sovereign power whatever, a right to dispose of either without their consent.
2. That our ancestors, who first settled these colonies, were at the time of their emigration from the mother country, entitled to all the rights, liberties, and immunities of free and natural born subjects within the realm of England.
3. That by such emigration they by no means forfeited, surrendered, or lost any of those rights, but that they were, and their descendants now are entitled to the exercise and enjoyment of all such of them, as their local and other circumstances enable them to exercise and enjoy.
4. That the foundation of English liberty, and of all free government, is a right in the people to participate in their legislative council: and as the English colonists are not represented, and from their local and other circumstances, cannot properly be represented in the British parliament, they are entitled to a free and exclusive power of legislation in their several provincial legislatures, where their right of representation can alone be preserved, in all cases of taxation and internal polity, subject only to the negative of their sovereign, in such manner as has been heretofore used and accustomed. But, from the necessity of the case, and a regard to the mutual interest of both countries, we cheerfully consent to the operation of such acts of the British parliament, as are bona fide restrained to the regulation of our external commerce, for the purpose of securing the commercial advantages of the whole empire to the mother country, and the commercial benefits of its respective members excluding every idea of taxation, internal or external, for raising a revenue on the subjects in America without their consent.
5. That the respective colonies are entitled to the common law of England, and more especially to the great and inestimable privilege of being tried by their peers of the vicinage, according to the course of that law.
6. That they are entitled to the benefit of such of the English statutes, as existed at the time of their colonization; and which they have, by experience, respectively found to be applicable to their several local and other circumstances.
7. That these, his majesty’s colonies, are likewise entitled to all the immunities and privileges granted and confirmed to them by royal charters, or secured by their several codes of provincial laws.
8. That they have a right peaceably to assemble, consider of their grievances, and petition the King; and that all prosecutions, prohibitory proclamations, and commitments for the same, are illegal.
9. That the keeping a Standing army in these colonies, in times of peace, without the consent of the legislature of that colony in which such army is kept, is against law.
10. It is indispensably necessary to good government, and rendered essential by the English constitution, that the constituent branches of the legislature be independent of each other; that, therefore, the exercise of legislative power in several colonies, by a council appointed during pleasure, by the crown, is unconstitutional, dangerous, and destructive to the freedom of American legislation.

All and each of which the aforesaid deputies, in behalf of themselves, and their constituents, do claim, demand, and insist on, as their indubitable rights and liberties; which cannot be legally taken from them, altered or abridged by any power whatever, without their own consent, by their representatives in their several provincial legislatures.

In the course of our inquiry, we find many infringements and violations of the foregoing rights, which, from an ardent desire that harmony and mutual intercourse of affection and interest may be restored, we pass over for the present, and proceed to state such acts and measures as have been adopted since the last war, which demonstrate a system formed to enslave America.

Resolved, That the following acts of Parliament are infringements and violations of the rights of the colonists; and that the repeal of them is essentially necessary, in order to restore harmony between Great Britain and the American colonies, viz.:

The several Acts of 4 Geo. 3, ch. 15 & ch. 34; 5 Geo. 3, ch. 25; 6 Geo. 3, ch. 52; 7 Geo. 3, ch. 41 & 46; 8 Geo. 3, ch. 22; which impose duties for the purpose of raising a revenue in America, extend the powers of the admiralty courts beyond their ancient limits, deprive the American subject of trial by jury, authorize the judges’ certificate to indemnify the prosecutor from damages that he might otherwise be liable to, requiring oppressive security from a claimant of ships and goods seized before he shall be allowed to defend his property; and are subversive of American rights.

Also the 12 Geo. 3, ch. 24, entitled “An act for the better preserving his Majesty’s dockyards, magazines, ships, ammunition, and stores,” which declares a new offense in America, and deprives the American subject of a constitutional trial by jury of the vicinage, by authorizing the trial of any person charged with the committing any offense described in the said act, out of the realm, to be indicted and tried for the same in any shire or county within the realm.

Also the three acts passed in the last session of parliament, for stopping the port and blocking up the harbor of Boston, for altering the charter & government of the Massachusetts bay, and that which is entitled “An Act for the better administration of Justice,” &c.

Also the act passed the same session for establishing the Roman Catholic Religion in the province of Quebec, abolishing the equitable system of English laws, and erecting a tyranny there, to the great danger, from so great a dissimilarity of Religion, law, and government, of the neighboring British colonies by the assistance of whose blood and treasure the said country was conquered from France.

Also the act passed the same session for the better providing suitable quarters for officers and soldiers in his Majesty’s service in North America.

Also, that the keeping a standing army in several of these colonies, in time of peace, without the consent of the legislature of that colony in which the army is kept, is against law.

To these grievous acts and measures Americans cannot submit, but in hopes that their fellow subjects in Great Britain will, on a revision of them, restore us to that state in which both countries found happiness and prosperity, we have for the present only resolved to pursue the following peaceable measures: 1st. To enter into a non-importation, non-consumption, and non-exportation agreement or association. 2. To prepare an address to the people of Great Britain, and a memorial to the inhabitants of British America, & 3. To prepare a loyal address to his Majesty, agreeable to resolutions already entered into.

* * * * * (FIRST CONT. CONGRESS Oct 1774:1-28)

THE PRICE THEY PAID

Have you ever wondered what happened to the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence?

Five signers were captured by the British as traitors, and tortured before they died. Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned. Two lost their sons in the revolutionary army, another had two sons captured. Nine of the 56 fought and died from wounds or hardships of the revolutionary war.

They signed and they pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor.

What kind of men were they? Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists. Eleven were merchants, nine were farmers and large plantation owners, men of means, well educated. But they signed the Declaration of Independence knowing full well that the penalty would be death if they were captured.

Carter Braxton of Virginia, a wealthy planter and trader, saw his ships swept from the seas by the British Navy. He sold his home and properties to pay his debts, and died in rags.

Thomas McKeam was so hounded by the British that he was forced to move his family almost constantly. He served in the Congress without pay, and his family was kept in hiding. His possessions were taken from him, and poverty was his reward.

Vandals or soldiers or both, looted the properties of Ellery, Clymer, Hall, Walton, Gwinnett, Heyward, Ruttledge, and Middleton.

At the battle of Yorktown, Thomas Nelson Jr., noted that the British General Cornwallis had taken over the Nelson home for his headquarters. The owner quietly urged General George Washington to open fire. The home was destroyed, and Nelson died bankrupt.

Francis Lewis had his home and properties destroyed. The enemy jailed his wife, and she died within a few months.

John Hart was driven from his wife’s bedside as she was dying. Their 13 children fled for their lives. His fields and his gristmill were laid to waste. For more than a year he lived in forests and caves, returning home to find his wife dead and his children vanished. A few weeks later he died from exhaustion and a broken heart. Norris and Livingston suffered similar fates.

Such were the stories and sacrifices of the American Revolution. These were not wild eyed, rabble-rousing ruffians. They were soft-spoken men of means and education. They had security, but they valued liberty more. Standing tall, straight, and unwavering, they pledged: “For the support of this declaration, with firm reliance on the protection of the divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other, our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.”

Targetshooter’s notes: They gave you and I a free and independent America. The history books never told you a lot of what happened in the revolutionary war. We didn’t just fight the British. We were British subjects at that time and we fought our own government! Perhaps you can now see why our founding fathers had a hatred for standing armies, and allowed through the second amendment for everyone to be armed.

Frankly, I can’t read this without crying. Some of us take these liberties so much for granted.

We shouldn’t.

Peace my friends,

Garry Hildreth (Targetshooter)

Erie, Pa

Whereas, since the close of the last war, the British parliament, claiming a power of right to bind the people of America by statute in all cases whatsoever, hath, in some acts expressly imposed taxes on them, and in others, under various pretenses, but in fact for the purpose of raising a revenue, hath imposed rates and duties payable in these colonies, established a board of commissioners with unconstitutional powers, and extended the jurisdiction of courts of Admiralty not only for collecting the said duties, but for the trial of causes merely arising within the body of a county.

And whereas, in consequence of other statutes, judges who before held only estates at will in their offices, have been made dependent on the Crown alone for their salaries, and standing armies kept in times of peace. And it has lately been resolved in Parliament, that by force of a statute made in the thirty- fifth year of the reign of king Henry the Eighth, colonists may be transported to England, and tried there upon accusations for treasons and misprisions, or concealments of treasons committed in the colonies; and by a late statute, such trials have been directed in cases therein mentioned.

And whereas, in the last session of Parliament, three statutes were made; one entitled “An act to discontinue, in such manner and for such time as are therein mentioned, the landing and discharging, lading, or shipping of goods, wares and merchandise, at the town, and within the harbor of Boston in the province of Massachusetts-bay, in North America;” another, entitled “An act for the better regulating the government of the province of the Massachusetts-bay in New England;” and another, entitled “An act for the impartial administration of justice, in the cases of persons questioned for any act done by them in the execution of the law, or for the suppression of riots and tumults, in the province of the Massachusetts-bay, in New England.” And another statute was then made, “for making more effectual provision for the government of the province of Quebec, etc. All which statutes are impolitic, unjust, and cruel, as well as unconstitutional, and most dangerous and destructive of American rights.

And whereas, Assemblies have been frequently dissolved, contrary to the rights of the people, when they attempted to deliberate on grievances; and their dutiful, humble, loyal, & reasonable petitions to the crown for redress, have been repeatedly treated with contempt, by His Majesty’s ministers of state:

The good people of the several Colonies of New Hampshire, Massachusetts bay, Rhode Island and Providence plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Newcastle Kent and Sussex on Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina, justly alarmed at these arbitrary proceedings of parliament and administration, have severally elected, constituted, and appointed deputies to meet, and sit in general Congress, in the city of Philadelphia, in order to obtain such establishment, as that their religion, laws, and liberties, may not be subverted:

Whereupon the deputies so appointed being now assembled, in a full and free representation of these Colonies, taking into their most serious consideration the best means of attaining the ends aforesaid, do in the first place, as Englishmen their ancestors in like cases have usually done, for asserting and vindicating their rights and liberties, declare,

That the inhabitants of the English Colonies in North America, by the immutable laws of nature, the principles of the English constitution, and the several charters or compacts, have the following Rights:

Resolved, N. C. D.

1. That they are entitled to life, liberty and property, & they have never ceded to any sovereign power whatever, a right to dispose of either without their consent.
2. That our ancestors, who first settled these colonies, were at the time of their emigration from the mother country, entitled to all the rights, liberties, and immunities of free and natural born subjects within the realm of England.
3. That by such emigration they by no means forfeited, surrendered, or lost any of those rights, but that they were, and their descendants now are entitled to the exercise and enjoyment of all such of them, as their local and other circumstances enable them to exercise and enjoy.
4. That the foundation of English liberty, and of all free government, is a right in the people to participate in their legislative council: and as the English colonists are not represented, and from their local and other circumstances, cannot properly be represented in the British parliament, they are entitled to a free and exclusive power of legislation in their several provincial legislatures, where their right of representation can alone be preserved, in all cases of taxation and internal polity, subject only to the negative of their sovereign, in such manner as has been heretofore used and accustomed. But, from the necessity of the case, and a regard to the mutual interest of both countries, we cheerfully consent to the operation of such acts of the British parliament, as are bona fide restrained to the regulation of our external commerce, for the purpose of securing the commercial advantages of the whole empire to the mother country, and the commercial benefits of its respective members excluding every idea of taxation, internal or external, for raising a revenue on the subjects in America without their consent.
5. That the respective colonies are entitled to the common law of England, and more especially to the great and inestimable privilege of being tried by their peers of the vicinage, according to the course of that law.
6. That they are entitled to the benefit of such of the English statutes, as existed at the time of their colonization; and which they have, by experience, respectively found to be applicable to their several local and other circumstances.
7. That these, his majesty’s colonies, are likewise entitled to all the immunities and privileges granted and confirmed to them by royal charters, or secured by their several codes of provincial laws.
8. That they have a right peaceably to assemble, consider of their grievances, and petition the King; and that all prosecutions, prohibitory proclamations, and commitments for the same, are illegal.
9. That the keeping a Standing army in these colonies, in times of peace, without the consent of the legislature of that colony in which such army is kept, is against law.
10. It is indispensably necessary to good government, and rendered essential by the English constitution, that the constituent branches of the legislature be independent of each other; that, therefore, the exercise of legislative power in several colonies, by a council appointed during pleasure, by the crown, is unconstitutional, dangerous, and destructive to the freedom of American legislation.

All and each of which the aforesaid deputies, in behalf of themselves, and their constituents, do claim, demand, and insist on, as their indubitable rights and liberties; which cannot be legally taken from them, altered or abridged by any power whatever, without their own consent, by their representatives in their several provincial legislatures.

In the course of our inquiry, we find many infringements and violations of the foregoing rights, which, from an ardent desire that harmony and mutual intercourse of affection and interest may be restored, we pass over for the present, and proceed to state such acts and measures as have been adopted since the last war, which demonstrate a system formed to enslave America.

Resolved, That the following acts of Parliament are infringements and violations of the rights of the colonists; and that the repeal of them is essentially necessary, in order to restore harmony between Great Britain and the American colonies, viz.:

The several Acts of 4 Geo. 3, ch. 15 & ch. 34; 5 Geo. 3, ch. 25; 6 Geo. 3, ch. 52; 7 Geo. 3, ch. 41 & 46; 8 Geo. 3, ch. 22; which impose duties for the purpose of raising a revenue in America, extend the powers of the admiralty courts beyond their ancient limits, deprive the American subject of trial by jury, authorize the judges’ certificate to indemnify the prosecutor from damages that he might otherwise be liable to, requiring oppressive security from a claimant of ships and goods seized before he shall be allowed to defend his property; and are subversive of American rights.

Also the 12 Geo. 3, ch. 24, entitled “An act for the better preserving his Majesty’s dockyards, magazines, ships, ammunition, and stores,” which declares a new offense in America, and deprives the American subject of a constitutional trial by jury of the vicinage, by authorizing the trial of any person charged with the committing any offense described in the said act, out of the realm, to be indicted and tried for the same in any shire or county within the realm.

Also the three acts passed in the last session of parliament, for stopping the port and blocking up the harbor of Boston, for altering the charter & government of the Massachusetts bay, and that which is entitled “An Act for the better administration of Justice,” &c.

Also the act passed the same session for establishing the Roman Catholic Religion in the province of Quebec, abolishing the equitable system of English laws, and erecting a tyranny there, to the great danger, from so great a dissimilarity of Religion, law, and government, of the neighboring British colonies by the assistance of whose blood and treasure the said country was conquered from France.

Also the act passed the same session for the better providing suitable quarters for officers and soldiers in his Majesty’s service in North America.

Also, that the keeping a standing army in several of these colonies, in time of peace, without the consent of the legislature of that colony in which the army is kept, is against law.

To these grievous acts and measures Americans cannot submit, but in hopes that their fellow subjects in Great Britain will, on a revision of them, restore us to that state in which both countries found happiness and prosperity, we have for the present only resolved to pursue the following peaceable measures: 1st. To enter into a non-importation, non-consumption, and non-exportation agreement or association. 2. To prepare an address to the people of Great Britain, and a memorial to the inhabitants of British America, & 3. To prepare a loyal address to his Majesty, agreeable to resolutions already entered into.

* * * * * (FIRST CONT. CONGRESS Oct 1774:1-28)

Cod Fishery Debates, U.S. House of Representatives History of Congress, February 1792, p. 383-390.

The following is an exerpt from debate on a bill before the House of Representatives that would regulate and subsidise the Cod Fish industry in the United States. Mr. Livermore was in favor of the bill and James Madison was opposed.

Livermore Mr. LIVERMORE.–The bill now under consideration has two important objects in view. The one is, to give encouragement to our fishermen, and, by that encouragement, to increase their numbers; the other is to govern those fishermen by certain laws, by which they will be kept under due restraint. Both these objects are of great importance to such persons as choose to employ their capitals in the fishery business. And I believe it will not be disputed that the business itself is of considerable importance to the United States, insomuch as it affords a certain proportion of remittance or exportation to foreign countries, and does not impoverish the country, but enriches it by the addition of so much wealth drawn from the sea.

It is the object of those gentlemen who favor the bill that the fishermen should have some encouragement, not given to them at the expense of the United States, but directed to them out of what was in the former law, called a drawback of the duty on salt. The calculation, as I understand it, has been made as nearly as possible to give that drawback, not to the merchants who export the fish, but to the fishermen who take it, in order to increase that description of men, without whose assistance it is vain to expect any benefit from the fisheries; for if the merchants at present engaged in that branch possessed the whole capital of the United States, yet, if they cannot get fishermen, they cannot carry on the fishery. This is done by a particular class of men, who must be not only expert seamen, but also accustomed to taking the fish and curing it. If these men cannot be had, the capital cannot be employed, and those who undertake the business cannot carry it on, or reap any profit from it.

Whilst the drawback is payable only to the merchant who exports the fish, it is impossible to convince the fishermen that they reap from it any advantage whatever; or, if the more discerning amongst them do perceive any advantage in it, the others who are not so clear-sighted cannot discern it, and are therefore not disposed to undertake the business. It is, however, of considerable importance to the merchants that the fisherman should receive a proper encouragement, even if they were obliged to allow him a bounty out of their own pocket.

The government of the fishermen, after their engagement in this business is also necessary to be provided for; otherwise, frequent instances may occur among that class of men of quitting one vessel to embark on board another, or of shipping themselves for a foreign voyage, before the expiration of the fishing season. In the latter case, the vessel lies useless on the owners hands, and he, together with the whole expense of the outfit, loses all his prospects of future gain.

The two objects here mentioned are fully provided for in the bill. Still, however, it is objected to. But what is the objection? It is, that the word “bounty” is twice used in this clause. Let us now see what advantage will result from striking out this obnoxious “bounty.” None at all. The bill says it shall cease; and have gentlemen any objection to the bounty’s ceasing? Since the bounty is to cease by this bill, what advantage in striking it out? The sense would still remain the same; and I do not know why we should make a law expressly to strike out the word “bounty,” but to strike out the bounty itself.

It is strange to me that any gentleman, whether he is for giving a great bounty or no bounty at all, should quarrel with this unfortunate word. There is, indeed, one part of the section which I will readily consent to strike out and I believe every other gentleman who is in favor of the bill will consent to likewise; and that is the clause which provides that the bounty to be allowed and paid on every vessel, for one season, shall not exceed one hundred and seventy dollars. If, when the vote is taken on the section, there does not appear a majority of the House in favor of striking out the whole, we may then move for striking out the proviso, if it be offensive to any gentleman. If it be not offensive, it may remain.

If gentlemen are disputing only because the word “bounty” is in the bill, they may be perfectly relieved from their uneasiness on that score; for the bill expressly says, “that the bounty now allowed upon the exportation of dried fish of the fisheries of the United States shall cease, and, in lieu thereof,” a different kind of encouragement is to be given. Here is no reason to dispute about a word. If gentlemen are disposed to consent to the principle of the bill, that the drawback of the duties on salt shall be commuted for a certain sum, to encourage the fishermen, they will vote in favor of the bill; if not, they will vote against it. But it is impossible for me to conceive why any gentleman under Heaven should be against it. It is only fixing, for the merchants engaged in this branch, a clear and equitable ratio for distributing among the fishermen that encouragement which they think necessary in order to attach those people to the business, and to prevent them from going to other occupations on land. The bill is an important one, and will increase that branch of business, which is very useful to the community. It does not lay a farthing of bounty or duty on any other persons than those who are immediately concerned in it. It will serve them, and will not injure anybody.

Mr. LAWRENCE said, from examining the section, he conceived it contemplated no more than what the merchant is entitled to by existing laws. The merchant is now entitled to the drawback; but it is found by experience that the effect has not been to produce that encouragement to the fisher men which was expected; and he presumed the way was perfectly clear to give a new direction to the drawback, and this is all that is aimed at in the bill. He supposed that the clause had no necessary connection with the question which had been started respecting the right of the Government to grant bounties; but since the question has been brought forward, it may be proper to consider it. In discussing the question, he inquired, What has Congress already done? Have we not laid extra duties on various articles, expressly for the purpose of encouraging various branches of our own manufactures? These duties are bounties to all intent and purposes and are founded on the idea only of their conducing to the general interest. Similar objections to those now advanced were not made to these duties. They were advocated some of them, by gentlemen from the Southward. He traced the effects of these duties, and showed that they operated fully as indirect bounties.

Mr. L. then adverted particularly to the Constitution, and observed that it contains general principles and powers only. These powers depend on particular laws for their operation; and on this idea he contended that the powers of the Government must, in various circumstances extend to the granting bounties. He instanced, in case of a war with a foreign Power, will any gentleman say that the General Government has not a power to grant a bounty on arms, ammunition, &c., should the general welfare require it? The general welfare is inseparably connected with any object or pursuit which in its effects adds to the riches of the country. He conceived that the argument was given up by gentlemen in opposition to the bill when they admit of encouragement to the fisher men in any possible modification of it. He then adverted particularly to the fisheries, stated the number of men employed the tons of shipping necessary to export the fish taken and inferred the sound policy of encouraging so important a branch of business.

Gentlemen say that we do not want a navy. Grant it; but can they say that we shall never have a war with any European Power? May not the time arrive when the protection to the commerce of this country, derived from this may be of the utmost necessity to its existence? Adverting to Mr. WILLIAMSON’S objection from the unequal operation of bounties, and had referred to the article of the Constitution which says that taxes shall be equal in all the States,

Mr. L. observed, that this article in the Constitution could only respect the rates of the duties and that the same duties should be paid in Virginia that are paid in New York–at the Northward as at the Southward. It surely could not mean that every individual should pay exactly the same sum in every part of the Union. This was a provision that no law could possibly contemplate.

He concluded by a summary recapitulation of his arguments, and saying he hoped the section would be retained.

Madison Mr. MADISON.–In the conflict I feel between my disposition on one hand to afford every constitution and encouragement to the fisheries, and my dislike on the other, of the consequences apprehended from some clauses of the bill I should have forborne to enter into this discussion, if I had not found, that over and above such arguments as appear to be natural and pertinent to the subject, others have been introduced which are, in my judgment, contrary to the true meaning, and even strike at the characteristic principles of the existing Constitution. Let me premise, however, to the remarks which I shall briefly offer, on the doctrine maintained by these gentlemen that I make a material distinction in the present case, between an allowance as a mere commutation and modification of a drawback, and an allowance in the nature of a real and positive bounty. I make a distinction also, as a subject of fair consideration at least, between a bounty granted under the particular terms in the Constitution, “a power to regulate trade,” and one granted under the indefinite terms which have been cited as authority on this occasion. I think however, that the term “bounty,”is in every point of view improper as it is here applied, not only because it may be offensive to some and in the opinion of others carries a dangerous implication, but also because it does not express the true intention of the bill, as avowed and advocated by its patrons themselves. For if, in the allowance, nothing more is proposed than a mere reimbursement or the sum advanced, it is only paying a debt; and when we pay a debt, we ought not to claim the merit of granting a bounty.

It is supposed by some gentlemen, that Congress have authority not only to grant bounties in the sense here used, merely as a commutation for drawbacks, but even to grant them under a power by virtue of which they may do anything which they may think conducive to the “general welfare.” This, sir, in my mind, raises the important and fundamental question, whether the general terms which had been cited, are to be considered as a sort of caption or general description of the specified Towers, and as having no further meaning, and giving no further power than what is found in that specification; or as an abstract and indefinite delegation of power extending to all cases whatever; to all such at least, as will admit the application of money, which is giving as much latitude as any Government could well desire.

I, sir, have always conceived–I believe those who proposed the Constitution conceived, and it is still more fully known, and more material to observe that those who ratified the Constitution conceived–that this is not an indefinite Government, deriving its power from the general terms prefixed to the specified powers, but a limited Government tied down to the specified powers which explain and define the general terms. The gentlemen who contend for a contrary doctrine are surely not aware of the consequences which flow from it, and which they must either admit or give up their doctrine.

It will follow, in the first place, that if the terms be taken in the broad sense they maintain the particular powers afterwards so carefully and distinctly enumerated would be without any meaning, and must go for nothing. It would be absurd to say, first, that Congress may do what they please, and then that they may do this or that particular thing; after giving Congress power to raise money, and apply it to all purposes which they may pronounce necessary to the general welfare, it would be absurd, to say the least, to super add a power to raise armies, to provide fleets, &c. In fact, the meaning of the general terms in question must either be sought in the subsequent enumeration which limits and details them, or they convert the Government from one limited, as hitherto supposed, to the enumerated powers, into a Government without any limits at all.

It is to be recollected that the terms “common defence and general welfare,” as here used, are not novel terms, fist introduced into this Constitution. They are terms familiar in their construction, and well known to the people of America. They are repeatedly found in the old Articles of Confederation, where, although they are susceptible of as great latitude as can be given them by the context here, it was never supposed or pretended that they conveyed any such power as is now assigned to them. On the contrary it was always considered as clear and certain that the old Congress was limited to the enumerated powers,and that the enumeration limited and explained the general terms. I ask the gentlemen themselves, whether it ever was supposed or suspected that the old Congress could give away the moneys of the States in bounties, to encourage agriculture, or for any other purpose they pleased? If such a power had been possessed by that body, it would have been much less impotent, or have borne a very different character from that universally ascribed to it.

The novel idea now annexed to these terms, and never before entertained by the friends or enemies of the Government, will have a further consequence, which cannot have been taken into the view of the gentlemen. Their construction would not only give Congress the complete Legislative power I have stated–it would do more–it would supersede all the restrictions understood at present to lie on their power with respect to the Judiciary. It would put it in the power of Congress to establish courts throughout the United States, with cognizance of suits between citizen and citizen, and in all cases whatsoever. This, sir, seems to be demonstrable; for if the clause in question really authorizes Congress to do whatever they think fit, provided it be for the general welfare, of which they are to judge, and money can be applied to it, Congress must have power to create and support a Judiciary Establishment, with a jurisdiction extending to all cases favorable, in their opinion, to the general welfare, in the same manner as they have power to pass laws and apply money, providing in any other way for the general welfare.

I shall be reminded, perhaps, that according to the terms of the Constitution, the Judicial Power is to extend to certain cases only not to all cases. But this circumstance can have no effect in the argument, it being presupposed by the gentlemen that the specification of certain objects does not limit the import of general terms. Taking these terms as an abstract and indefinite grant of power, they comprise all the objects of Legislative regulation as well such as fall under the Judiciary article in the Constitution, as these falling immediately under the Legislative article; and if the partial enumeration of objects in the Legislative article does not, as these gentlemen contend limit the general power, neither will it be limited by the partial enumeration of objects in the Judiciary article.

There are consequences, sir, still more extensive, which, as they follow clearly from the doctrine combated, must either be admitted, or the doctrine must be given up. If Congress can apply money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may establish teachers in every State, county, and parish, and pay them out of the public Treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may undertake the regulation of all roads, other than post roads. In short, everything, from the highest object of State legislation, down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress; for every object I have mentioned would admit the application of money, and might be called if Congress pleased provisions for the general welfare.

The language held in various discussions of this House, is a proof that the doctrine in question was never entertained by this body. Arguments, wherever the subject would permit, have constantly been drawn from the peculiar nature of this Government, as limited to certain enumerated powers, instead of extending, like other Governments, to all cases not particularly excepted. In a very late instance–I mean the debate on the Representation bill–it must be remembered, that an argument much urged, particularly by a gentleman from Massachusetts, against the ratio of one for thirty thousand, was, that this Government was unlike the State Governments, which had an indefinite variety of object; within their power; that it had a small number of objects only to attend to, and therefore that a smaller number of Representatives would be sufficient to administer it.’

Several arguments have been advanced to show, that because in the regulation of trade indirect and eventual encouragement is given to manufactures, therefore Congress have power to give money in direct bounties, or to grant it in any other way that would answer the same purpose But surely, sir, there is a great and obvious difference,which it cannot be necessary to enlarge upon. A duty laid on imported implements of husbandry, would in its operation be an indirect tax on exported produce; but fill any one say, that by virtue or a mere power to lay duties on imports, Congress might go directly to the produce or implements of agriculture, or to the articles exported? It is true, duties on exports are expressly prohibited; but if there were no article forbidding them, a power directly to tax exports could never be deduced from a power to tax imports, although such a power might directly and incidentally affect exports.

In short sir without going further into the subject which I should not gave here touched on at all but for the reasons already mentioned, I venture to declare it as my opinion, that were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundation, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America; and what inferences might be drawn, or what consequences ensue from such a step, it is incumbent on us all well to consider.

With respect to the question before the House, for striking our the clause, it is immaterial whether it be struck out, or so amended as to rest on the avowed principle of a commutation for the drawback; but as a clause has been drawn up by my colleague, in order to be substituted, I shall concur in a vote for striking out, reserving to myself a freedom to be governed in my final vote by the modification which way prevail.

Bourne Mr. BOURNE, of Massachusetts– Mr. Chairman: I think little can be added after so full a discussion of the subject before you. The object of the first section in this bill is intended for the relief of the fishermen and their owners. They complain that the law now in force was meant for their benefit, by granting a drawback on the fish exported; thus they find by experience is not the case, for they say, that neither the fishermen who catch the fish, nor the importer of the salt receive the drawback; and I rather suppose, sir, it is the case. The owners of the greater part of the fishing vessels are not merchants, neither do they import the salt they consume; but when the fish they take are cured for market, they are sold at the market price; and it frequently happens that those persons who purchase the fish are not the exporters of them, or the importers of the salt, but a third person, who purchases with a prospect of selling them at a profit, is the exporter; and when it so happens, neither the fisherman who catches the fish nor the importer of the salt receive any benefit from the drawback, unless the purchaser (the third person) give a greater price in contemplation of the drawback, which I think is not to be supposed.

Is it worthy the attention of Government that the cod fishery should be preserved? It appears to me that it is. When we consider the labor and assiduity bestowed on this object by our Ministers, at the settlement of peace between us and Great Britain, and the care then taken to secure this privilege, as appears by the treaty–[here Mr. B. read that part of the treaty which secures to us the fishery, he then proceeded]–and consider the struggle made to deprive us of thus inestimable branch of commerce I cannot suppose that any one would, at this day voluntarily relinquish it, and suffer Great Britain to monopolize this branch, and supply the Mediterranean, French and other markets. Great Britain, at present, enjoys a sufficient portion of this commerce, while France is confined to the narrow limits of St. Peters and Miquelon. If we relinquish this branch of the cod fishery, what is left us? Our whale fished is nearly at an end, and unless Government speedily interpose, by granting relief, we shall totally lose it. Does not the British Government wish to deprive us of this branch also? Have not letters or agents been sent to the island of Nantucket, as well as New Bedford, where this branch of business is principally prosecuted, inviting the whale fishermen to remove, and offering them permanent settlements at Milford-Haven, at the expense of their Government? This must be viewed as a great encouragement, in addition to their bounties on oil, to a class of poor men employed in that business. If the cod fishery is relinquished, the fishermen have only to remove to the opposite shore of Nova Scotia where they will find encouragement fully adequate to their services–of all which they are not unapprised. By encouraging this class of men, your revenue will be increased; for in return for the fish exported; you will receive sugar, coffee, cocoa, indigo, molasses, pimento, cotton, dye-woods, rum, wine, salt, fruit, and other articles subject to duty and consumed in the country. And again, your Treasury will receive an excess by the provision in this bill; for I presume the greater proportion of vessels employed in this business are from twenty to forty tons; the town of Marblehead, perhaps, has principally large ones, Suppose, then, a vessel of thirty tons obtains, in a season, six hundred quintals of fish? (a very moderate voyage indeed,) her tonnage is seventy-five dollars; the drawbacks on exportation would be seventy-eight dollars; so that your Treasury retains three dollars gain by this bill, which would be a loss on the drawback.

Mr. Chairman, I think, upon the whole,that by granting the encouragement to the fishermen and their owners held out in the bill would prove very beneficial to the United States, I hope therefore, the section before you will not be struck out

At this point, the Committee rose, and had leave to sit again.

* * * * * (SOUTH CAROLINA-Const AMENDMTS:14-COD FISHERY DEBATES Bourne:29)

The Albany Plan of Union, written by Benjamin Franklin, 1754.

It is proposed that humble application be made for an act of Parliament of Great Britain, by virtue of which one general government may be formed in America, including all the said colonies, within and under which government each colony may retain its present constitution, except in the particulars wherein a change may be directed by the said act, as hereafter follows.

1. That the said general government be administered by a President- General, to be appointed and supported by the crown; and a Grand Council, to be chosen by the representatives of the people of the several Colonies met in their respective assemblies.
2. That within ___ months after the passing such act, the House of Representatives that happen to be sitting within that time, or that shall be especially for that purpose convened, may and shall choose members for the Grand Council, in the following proportion, that is to say,

   Massachusetts Bay – 7
   New Hampshire – 2
   Connecticut – 5
   Rhode Island – 2
   New York – 4
   New Jersey – 3
   Pennsylvania – 6
   Maryland – 4
   Virginia – 7
   North Carolina – 4
   South Carolina – 4 — 48

3. —–who shall meet for the first time at the city of Philadelphia, being called by the President-General as soon as conveniently may be after his appointment.
4. That there shall be a new election of the members of the Grand Council every three years; and, on the death or resignation of any member, his place should be supplied by a new choice at the next sitting of the Assembly of the Colony he represented.
5. That after the first three years, when the proportion of money arising out of each Colony to the general treasury can be known, the number of members to be chosen for each Colony shall, from time to time, in all ensuing elections, be regulated by that proportion, yet so as that the number to be chosen by any one Province be not more than seven, nor less than two.
6. That the Grand Council shall meet once in every year, and oftener if occasion require, at such time and place as they shall adjourn to at the last preceding meeting, or as they shall be called to meet at by the President-General on any emergency; he having first obtained in writing the consent of seven of the members to such call, and sent duly and timely notice to the whole.
7. That the Grand Council have power to choose their speaker; and shall neither be dissolved, prorogued, nor continued sitting longer than six weeks at one time, without their own consent or the special command of the crown.
8. That the members of the Grand Council shall be allowed for their service ten shillings sterling per diem, during their session and journey to and from the place of meeting; twenty miles to be reckoned a day’s journey.
9. That the assent of the President-General be requisite to all acts of the Grand Council, and that it be his office and duty to cause them to be carried into execution.
10. That the President-General, with the advice of the Grand Council, hold or direct all Indian treaties, in which the general interest of the Colonies may be concerned; and make peace or declare war with Indian nations.
11. That they make such laws as they judge necessary for regulating all Indian trade.
12. That they make all purchases from Indians, for the crown, of lands not now within the bounds of particular Colonies, or that shall not be within their bounds when some of them are reduced to more convenient dimensions.
13. That they make new settlements on such purchases, by granting lands in the King’s name, reserving a quitrent to the crown for the use of the general treasury.
14. That they make laws for regulating and governing such new settlements, till the crown shall think fit to form them into particular governments.
15. That they raise and pay soldiers and build forts for the defence of any of the Colonies, and equip vessels of force to guard the coasts and protect the trade on the ocean, lakes, or great rivers; but they shall not impress men in any Colony, without the consent of the Legislature.
16. That for these purposes they have power to make laws, and lay and levy such general duties, imposts, or taxes, as to them shall appear most equal and just (considering the ability and other circumstances of the inhabitants in the several Colonies), and such as may be collected with the least inconvenience to the people; rather discouraging luxury, than loading industry with unnecessary burdens.
17. That they may appoint a General Treasurer and Particular Treasurer in each government when necessary; and, from time to time, may order the sums in the treasuries of each government into the general treasury; or draw on them for special payments, as they find most convenient.
18. Yet no money to issue but by joint orders of the President-General and Grand Council; except where sums have been appropriated to particular purposes, and the President-General is previously empowered by an act to draw such sums.
19. That the general accounts shall be yearly settled and reported to the several Assemblies.
20. That a quorum of the Grand Council, empowered to act with the President-General, do consist of twenty-five members; among whom there shall be one or more from a majority of the Colonies.
21. That the laws made by them for the purposes aforesaid shall not be repugnant, but, as near as may be, agreeable to the laws of England, and shall be transmitted to the King in Council for approbation, as soon as may be after their passing; and if not disapproved within three years after presentation, to remain in force.
22. That, in case of the death of the President-General, the Speaker of the Grand Council for the time being shall succeed, and be vested with the same powers and authorities, to continue till the King’s pleasure be known.
23. That all military commission officers, whether for land or sea service, to act under this general constitution, shall be nominated by the President-General; but the approbation of the Grand Council is to be obtained, before they receive their commissions. And all civil officers are to be nominated by the Grand Council, and to receive the President-General’s approbation before they officiate.
24. But, in case of vacancy by death or removal of any officer, civil or military, under this constitution, the Governor of the Province in which such vacancy happens may appoint, till the pleasure of the President-General and Grand Council can be known.
25. That the particular military as well as civil establishments in each Colony remain in their present state, the general constitution notwithstanding; and that on sudden emergencies any Colony may defend itself, and lay the accounts of expense thence arising before the President-General and General Council, who may allow and order payment of the same, as far as they judge such accounts just and reasonable.

* * * * * (ALBANY PLAN OF UNION Heading-1754:27)