SINCE the publication of the first edition of this pamphlet, or rather, on the same

day on which it came out, the King's Speech made its appearance in this city.

Had the spirit of prophecy directed the birth of this production, it could not have

brought it forth, at a more seasonable juncture, or a more necessary time.

The bloody mindedness of the one, shew the necessity of pursuing the doctrine of the

other. Men read by way of revenge.

And the Speech instead of terrifying, prepared a way for the manly principles of

Independance.

Ceremony, and even, silence, from whatever motive they may arise, have a hurtful

tendency, when they give the least degree of countenance to base and wicked

performances; wherefore, if this maxim be

admitted, it naturally follows, that the King's Speech, as being a piece of finished

villany, deserved, and still deserves, a general execration both by the Congress and

the people.

Yet, as the domestic tranquillity of a nation, depends greatly, on the CHASTITY of

what may properly be called NATIONAL MANNERS, it is often better, to pass some

things over in silent disdain, than to make

use of such new methods of dislike, as might introduce the least innovation, on

that guardian of our peace and safety.

And, perhaps, it is chiefly owing to this prudent delicacy, that the King's Speech,

hath not, before now, suffered a public execution.

The Speech if it may be called one, is nothing better than a wilful audacious

libel against the truth, the common good, and the existence of mankind; and is a

formal and pompous method of offering up human sacrifices to the pride of tyrants.

But this general massacre of mankind, is one of the privileges, and the certain

consequence of Kings; for as nature knows them NOT, they know NOT HER, and although

they are beings of our OWN creating, they

know not US, and are become the gods of their creators.

The Speech hath one good quality, which is, that it is not calculated to deceive,

neither can we, even if we would, be deceived by it.

Brutality and tyranny appear on the face of it.

It leaves us at no loss: And every line convinces, even in the moment of reading,

that He, who hunts the woods for prey, the naked and untutored Indian, is less a

Savage than the King of Britain.

Sir John Dalrymple, the putative father of a whining jesuitical piece, fallaciously

called, "THE ADDRESS OF THE PEOPLE OF ENGLAND TO THE INHABITANTS OF AMERICA,"

hath, perhaps, from a vain supposition,

that the people HERE were to be frightened at the pomp and description of a king,

given, (though very unwisely on his part) the real character of the present one:

"But," says this writer, "if you are

inclined to pay compliments to an administration, which we do not complain

of," (meaning the Marquis of Rockingham's at the repeal of the Stamp Act) "it is very

unfair in you to withhold them from that

prince, BY WHOSE NOD ALONE THEY WERE PERMITTED TO DO ANY THING."

This is toryism with a witness!

Here is idolatry even without a mask: And he who can so calmly hear, and digest such

doctrine, hath forfeited his claim to rationality--an apostate from the order of

manhood; and ought to be considered--as

one, who hath, not only given up the proper dignity of a man, but sunk himself beneath

the rank of animals, and contemptibly crawls through the world like a worm.

However, it matters very little now, what the king of England either says or does; he

hath wickedly broken through every moral and human obligation, trampled nature and

conscience beneath his feet; and by a

steady and constitutional spirit of insolence and cruelty, procured for himself

an universal hatred. It is NOW the interest of America to

provide for herself.

She hath already a large and young family, whom it is more her duty to take care of,

than to be granting away her property, to support a power who is become a reproach to

the names of men and christians--YE, whose

office it is to watch over the morals of a nation, of whatsoever sect or denomination

ye are of, as well as ye, who, are more immediately the guardians of the public

liberty, if ye wish to preserve your native

country uncontaminated by European corruption, ye must in secret wish a

separation--But leaving the moral part to private reflection, I shall chiefly confine

my farther remarks to the following heads.

First, That it is the interest of America to be separated from Britain.

Secondly, Which is the easiest and most practicable plan, RECONCILIATION or

INDEPENDANCE? with some occasional remarks.

In support of the first, I could, if I judged it proper, produce the opinion of

some of the ablest and most experienced men on this continent; and whose sentiments, on

that head, are not yet publicly known.

It is in reality a self-evident position: For no nation in a state of foreign

dependance, limited in its commerce, and cramped and fettered in its legislative

powers, can ever arrive at any material eminence.

America doth not yet know what opulence is; and although the progress which she hath

made stands unparalleled in the history of other nations, it is but childhood,

compared with what she would be capable of

arriving at, had she, as she ought to have, the legislative powers in her own hands.

England is, at this time, proudly coveting what would do her no good, were she to

accomplish it; and the Continent hesitating on a matter, which will be her final ruin

if neglected.

It is the commerce and not the conquest of America, by which England is to be

benefited, and that would in a great measure continue, were the countries as

independant of each other as France and

Spain; because in many articles, neither can go to a better market.

But it is the independance of this country of Britain or any other, which is now the

main and only object worthy of contention, and which, like all other truths discovered

by necessity, will appear clearer and stronger every day.

First, Because it will come to that one time or other.

Secondly, Because, the longer it is delayed the harder it will be to accomplish.

I have frequently amused myself both in public and private companies, with silently

remarking, the specious errors of those who speak without reflecting.

And among the many which I have heard, the following seems most general, viz. that had

this rupture happened forty or fifty years hence, instead of NOW, the Continent would

have been more able to have shaken off the dependance.

To which I reply, that our military ability AT THIS TIME, arises from the experience

gained in the last war, and which in forty or fifty years time, would have been

totally extinct.

The Continent, would not, by that time, have had a General, or even a military

officer left; and we, or those who may succeed us, would have been as ignorant of

martial matters as the ancient Indians: And

this single position, closely attended to, will unanswerably prove, that the present

time is preferable to all others.

The argument turns thus--at the conclusion of the last war, we had experience, but

wanted numbers; and forty or fifty years hence, we should have numbers, without

experience; wherefore, the proper point of

time, must be some particular point between the two extremes, in which a sufficiency of

the former remains, and a proper increase of the latter is obtained: And that point

of time is the present time.

The reader will pardon this digression, as it does not properly come under the head I

first set out with, and to which I again return by the following position, viz.

Should affairs be patched up with Britain, and she to remain the governing and

sovereign power of America, (which, as matters are now circumstanced, is giving up

the point intirely) we shall deprive

ourselves of the very means of sinking the debt we have, or may contract.

The value of the back lands which some of the provinces are clandestinely deprived

of, by the unjust extension of the limits of Canada, valued only at five pounds

sterling per hundred acres, amount to

upwards of twenty-five millions, Pennsylvania currency; and the quit-rents

at one penny sterling per acre, to two millions yearly.

It is by the sale of those lands that the debt may be sunk, without burthen to any,

and the quit-rent reserved thereon, will always lessen, and in time, will wholly

support the yearly expence of government.

It matters not how long the debt is in paying, so that the lands when sold be

applied to the discharge of it, and for the execution of which, the Congress for the

time being, will be the continental trustees.

I proceed now to the second head, viz.

Which is the easiest and most practicable plan, RECONCILIATION or INDEPENDANCE; with

some occasional remarks.

He who takes nature for his guide is not easily beaten out of his argument, and on

that ground, I answer GENERALLY THAT INDEPENDANCE BEING A SINGLE SIMPLE LINE,

CONTAINED WITHIN OURSELVES; AND

RECONCILIATION, A MATTER EXCEEDINGLY PERPLEXED AND COMPLICATED, AND IN WHICH, A

TREACHEROUS CAPRICIOUS COURT IS TO INTERFERE, GIVES THE ANSWER WITHOUT A

DOUBT.

The present state of America is truly alarming to every man who is capable of

reflexion.

Without law, without government, without any other mode of power than what is

founded on, and granted by courtesy.

Held together by an unexampled concurrence of sentiment, which, is nevertheless

subject to change, and which, every secret enemy is endeavouring to dissolve.

Our present condition, is, Legislation without law; wisdom without a plan;

constitution without a name; and, what is strangely astonishing, perfect Independance

contending for dependance.

The instance is without a precedent; the case never existed before; and who can tell

what may be the event? The property of no man is secure in the

present unbraced system of things.

The mind of the multitude is left at random, and seeing no fixed object before

them, they pursue such as fancy or opinion starts.

Nothing is criminal; there is no such thing as treason; wherefore, every one thinks

himself at liberty to act as he pleases.

The Tories dared not have assembled offensively, had they known that their

lives, by that act, were forfeited to the laws of the state.

A line of distinction should be drawn, between, English soldiers taken in battle,

and inhabitants of America taken in arms. The first are prisoners, but the latter

traitors.

The one forfeits his liberty, the other his head.

Notwithstanding our wisdom, there is a visible feebleness in some of our

proceedings which gives encouragement to dissentions.

The Continental Belt is too loosely buckled.

And if something is not done in time, it will be too late to do any thing, and we

shall fall into a state, in which, neither RECONCILIATION nor INDEPENDANCE will be

practicable.

The king and his worthless adherents are got at their old game of dividing the

Continent, and there are not wanting among us, Printers, who will be busy spreading

specious falsehoods.

The artful and hypocritical letter which appeared a few months ago in two of the New

York papers, and likewise in two others, is an evidence that there are men who want

either judgment or honesty.

It is easy getting into holes and corners and talking of reconciliation: But do such

men seriously consider, how difficult the task is, and how dangerous it may prove,

should the Continent divide thereon.

Do they take within their view, all the various orders of men whose situation and

circumstances, as well as their own, are to be considered therein.

Do they put themselves in the place of the sufferer whose ALL is ALREADY gone, and of

the soldier, who hath quitted ALL for the defence of his country.

If their ill judged moderation be suited to their own private situations ONLY,

regardless of others, the event will convince them, that "they are reckoning

without their Host."

Put us, say some, on the footing we were on in sixty-three: To which I answer, the

request is not NOW in the power of Britain to comply with, neither will she propose

it; but if it were, and even should be

granted, I ask, as a reasonable question, By what means is such a corrupt and

faithless court to be kept to its engagements?

Another parliament, nay, even the present, may hereafter repeal the obligation, on the

pretence, of its being violently obtained, or unwisely granted; and in that case,

Where is our redress?--No going to law with

nations; cannon are the barristers of Crowns; and the sword, not of justice, but

of war, decides the suit.

To be on the footing of sixty-three, it is not sufficient, that the laws only be put

on the same state, but, that our circumstances, likewise, be put on the same

state; Our burnt and destroyed towns

repaired or built up, our private losses made good, our public debts (contracted for

defence) discharged; otherwise, we shall be millions worse than we were at that

enviable period.

Such a request, had it been complied with a year ago, would have won the heart and soul

of the Continent--but now it is too late, "The Rubicon is passed."

Besides, the taking up arms, merely to enforce the repeal of a pecuniary law,

seems as unwarrantable by the divine law, and as repugnant to human feelings, as the