Part 5

Whether Nova Scotia, and East and West Florida have yielded advantages and returns equal to the enormous sums expended in founding and supporting them, or even advantages, such as the Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations, in their _representation_ of 1768, seemed to expect, it is not our business to investigate:--it is, we presume, sufficient for us to mention, that those "many principal persons in Pennsylvania," as is observed in the _representation_, "whose names and association lie before your Majesty in Council, for the purpose of making settlements in Nova Scotia," have, several years since, been convinced of the impracticability of exciting settlers to move from the _middle colonies_, and settle in that province; and even of those who were prevailed on to go to Nova Scotia, the greater part of them returned with great complaints against the severity and length of the Winters.

As to East and West Florida, it is, we are persuaded, morally impossible to _force_ the people of the _middle_ provinces, between 37 and 40 degrees North latitude (where there is plenty of vacant land in their own temperate climate) to remove to the scorching, unwholesome heats of these provinces[4]. The inhabitants of Montpelier might as soon and as easily be persuaded to remove to the Northern parts of Russia, or to Senegal.--In short, it is contending with Nature, and the experience of all ages, to attempt to compel a people, _born_ and _living in a temperate climate_, and in the neighbourhood of a rich, healthful, and uncultivated country, to travel several hundred miles to a _sea port_ in order to make a _voyage to sea_; and settle either in extreme hot or cold latitudes. If the county of York was vacant and uncultivated, and the more _Southern_ inhabitants of this island were in want of land, would they suffer themselves to be driven to the _North of Scotland_?--Would they not, in spite of all opposition, _first_ possess themselves of that fertile country?--Thus much we have thought necessary to remark, in respect to the general principles laid down in the _representation_ of 1768; and we hope we have shewn, that the arguments _therein_ made use of, do _not_ in any degree militate against the subject in question; but that they were intended, and do solely apply to "new colonies proposed to be established," as the _representation_ says, "_at an expence to this kingdom_," at the distance of "above 1500 miles from the sea, which from their inability to find returns, _wherewith_ to pay for the manufactures of Great Britain, will be probably led to manufacture for themselves, _as they would_," continues the _representation_, "be separated from the _old_ colonies by immense tracts of unpeopled desart."--

[4] "We think of nothing but extending our settlements still further on these _pestiferous sea coasts_, even to the sunken lagunes of _East Florida_, and the barren sands of _Mobile_ and _Pensacola_. The only use of _new settlements in North America_, is for the people in the _Northern_ and other colonies, who want lands _to make staple commodities_ for _Britain_, to _remove to them: but none will ever go to Florida, or thrive in it, more than_ they have done in _Carolina_ and _Georgia_. The climate of _Florida_ is _more_ intemperate, the lands _more_ barren, and the situation _much worse_ in every respect."

_State of Great Britain and America, by Dr._ Mitchel.

It now only remains for us to enquire, whether it was the intention of the Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations in 1768, that the territory, which would be included within the _boundary line_, then negociating with the Indians (and which was the _one_ that was _that year_ perfected) should continue a useless wilderness, or be settled and occupied by his Majesty's subjects.--The very _representation_ itself, which the present Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations say, contains "_every argument on the subject_," furnishes us an ample and satisfactory solution to this important question.--The Lord Commissioners in 1768, after pronouncing their opinion _against_ the _proposed three new governments_, as above stated, declare, "They ought to be carefully guarded against, by encouraging the settlement of that extensive tract of sea coast hitherto unoccupied; which, say their Lordships, _together with the liberty, that the inhabitants_ OF THE _middle colonies_ WILL HAVE (in consequence of the proposed _boundary line_ with the Indians) _of gradually extending themselves backwards_, will _more effectually_ and _beneficially answer_ the object of _encouraging population_ and _consumption_, than the erection of new governments; such gradual extension might, through the medium of a continual population, upon even the same extent of territory, _preserve_ a communication of mutual commercial benefits between its extremest parts and Great Britain, _impossible to exist in colonies separated by immense tracts of unpeopled desart_."--Can any opinion be more clear and conclusive, in _favour_ of the proposition which we have humbly submitted to his Majesty?--for their Lordships positively say, that the inhabitants of the middle colonies _will have liberty of gradually extending themselves backwards_;--but is it not very extraordinary, that after near _two years_ deliberation, the present Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations should make a _report_ to the Lords of the Committee of the Privy Council, and therein expressly refer to that opinion of 1768, in which, they say, "_every argument on the subject is collected together with great force and precision_," and yet that, almost in the same breath, their Lordships "should contravene that very opinion, and advise his Majesty _to check the progress of their settlements_?"--And that "settlements in _that distant part_ of the country ought to be _discouraged_ as much as possible, and another proclamation should be issued declaratory of his Majesty's resolution, _not_ to allow, _for the present_, any new settlement beyond the line;"--to wit, beyond the Allegany mountains?--How strange and contradictory is this conduct?--But we forbear any strictures upon it;--and shall conclude our remarks on this head, by stating the opinion, at different times, of the Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations, on this subject.

In 1748, their Lordships expressed the strongest desire to promote settlements _over_ the mountains and on the Ohio.--

In 1768--The then Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations declared, (in consequence of the boundary line at that time negociating)--That the inhabitants of the _middle colonies_ would _have liberty of gradually extending themselves backwards_.

In 1770--The Earl of Hillsborough actually _recommended_ the purchase of a tract of land _over_ the mountains, sufficient for a new colony, and then went down to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury, to know, whether their Lordships would treat with Mr. Walpole and his associates, for such purchase.

In 1772--The Earl of Hillsborough, and the other Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations, made a _report_ on the petition of Mr. Walpole and his associates, and referred to the _representation_ of the Board of Trade in 1768, "as containing _every argument_ on the _subject, collected together with force and precision_;"--which _representation_ declared, as we have shewn, "_That the inhabitants of the middle colonies_ WILL _have liberty to extend backwards_," on the identical lands in question; and yet, notwithstanding such _reference_, so strongly made from the present Board of Trade to the opinion of that Board,--the Earl of Hillsborough, and the other Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations, have _now_, in direct terms, _reported against_ the absolute engagement and opinion of the Board in 1768.

It may be asked, What was intended by the expressions in the _representation_ of 1768, of _gradually extending themselves backwards_? It is answered, They were only in contradistinction to the proposal of erecting at that time _three new governments at Detroit_, &c. and thereby exciting, as the _representation_ says, the stream of population to _various_ distant places.--In short, it was, we think, beyond all doubt, the "_precise_" opinion of the Lords Commissioners in 1768, That the territory, within the boundary line, then negociating, and since completed, would be sufficient at that time--to answer the object of population and consumption; and that, until that territory was fully occupied,--it was not necessary to erect the proposed _three new governments_ "_at an expence to this kingdom_," in places, as their Lordships observed, "separated by immense tracts of unpeopled desart."--

To conclude our observations on the 6th paragraph, we would just remark,--That we presume we have demonstrated, that the inhabitants of the Middle Colonies _cannot_ be compelled to _exchange_ the soil and climate of these colonies, either for the severe colds of Nova Scotia and Canada, or the unwholesome heats of East and West Florida. Let us next enquire, what would be the effect of _confining_ these inhabitants (if it was practicable) within narrow bounds, and thereby preventing them from exercising their natural inclination of cultivating lands?--and whether such restriction would not force them into _manufactures_, to rival the Mother Country?--To these questions, the Lords Commissioners have, with much candour, replied in their representation of 1768,--We "admit," said their Lordships, "as an undeniable principle of _true policy_, that, with a view to _prevent manufactures_, it is necessary and proper _to open_ an extent of territory for colonization, _proportioned_ to an _increase_ of people, as a large number of inhabitants cooped up in narrow limits, without a sufficiency of land _for produce_, would be compelled to _convert_ their attention and industry to _manufactures_."--But their Lordships at the same time observed,--"That the _encouragement_ given to the settlement of the Colonies upon the sea coast, and the effect which such encouragement has had, has already _effectually_ provided for this object."--In what parts of North America this _encouragement_ has thus _provided_ for _population_, their Lordships have not mentioned. If the establishment of the governments of Quebeck, Nova Scotia, and the Island of St. John's, or East and West Florida, was intended by their Lordships as that effectual provision,--we shall presume to deny the proposition, by asserting, as an undoubted truth,--that although there is at least a _million_ of subjects in the Middle Colonies, none have emigrated from thence, and settled in these _new_ provinces;--and for that reason, and from the very nature of colonization itself, we affirm that none _will ever_ be induced _to exchange_ the healthy, temperate climate of Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania, for the extreme colds or heats of Canada and Nova Scotia, or East and West Florida:--In short, it is not in the power of Government to give any encouragement, that can compensate for a desertion of friends and neighbours,--dissolution of family connexions, and abandoning a soil and climate infinitely superior to those of Canada, Nova Scotia, or the Floridas.--Will not therefore the inhabitants of the middle provinces, whose population is great beyond example[5], and who have already made some advances in manufactures, "by confining them to their present narrow limits," be necessarily compelled to convert their whole attention to that object? How then shall this, in the nature of things, be prevented, except, as the Lords Commissioners have justly remarked, "by opening an extent of territory proportioned _to their increase_?"--But _where_ shall a territory be found proper for "the _colonization_ of the inhabitants of the Middle Colonies?" We answer,--in the very country, which the Lords Commissioners have aid that the inhabitants of these colonies would have liberty to settle in;--a country which his Majesty has purchased from the Six Nations;--one, _where_ several thousands of his subjects are already settled;--and one, _where_ the Lords Commissioners have acknowledged, "a gradual extension might through the medium of a continued population, upon even the same extent of territory, _preserve a communication_ of mutual commercial benefits _between_ its _extremest parts_ and Great Britain."[6]

[5] "Besides _staple_ commodities, there is another more material point to be considered in the colonies, which is their great and daily _increase_; and for which, unless we make provision in time, they can never subsist by a _dependance on Britain_. There are at present (in the year 1770) nigh _three_ millions of people in them, who may, in twenty or thirty years, _increase_ to _six_ millions, as many as there are in England."

_Wynne's History of the British Empire in America, vol. ii. page 398._

[6] Thus the use the nation has for new settlements and acquisitions in North America is for the great increase of the people who are already there, and to enable them to subsist _by a dependance upon her_; which they can never do, _unless they extend their settlements_.

_Wynne's History, vol. ii. p. 399._

"Unprejudiced men well know, that all the penal and prohibitory laws that ever were thought of, will not be sufficient to _prevent manufactures_ in a country whose inhabitants surpass the number that can subsist by the by the husbandry of it; and this will be the case _soon_, if our people remain confined within the mountains," _&c._

_The Interest of Great Britain considered with regard to the Colonies, page 17. Published in 1767._

VII. This paragraph is introduced, by referring to the extract of a letter from the Commander in chief of his Majesty's forces in North America, laid by the Earl of Hillsborough before the Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations;--but as their Lordships have _not_ mentioned either the general's name, or the time _when_ the letter was written, or what occasioned his delivering his opinion upon the subject of _colonization in general_, in the "_remote countries_"--we can only conjecture, that General Gage was the writer of the letter, and that it was wrote about the year 1768,--_when_, the plan of the _three new governments_ was under the consideration of the then Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations, and _before_ the lands on the Ohio were bought from, and the boundary line established with the Six Nations.--Indeed, we think it clear, That the General had _no_ other lands, at that time, under his consideration, than what he calls "_remote countries_," such as the _Detroit_, _Illinois_, and the _lower_ parts of the Ohio;--for he speaks of "_foreign countries_," from which it "would be _too far_ to transport some kind of naval stores," and for the same reason could _not_, he says, supply the sugar islands "_with_ lumber and provisions." He mentions also, planting colonies at _so vast a distance_, that the _very long transportation_ [of silk, wine, &c.] must probably make them too dear for any market," and _where_ "the inhabitants could _not_ have _any commodities_ to barter for manufactures, except _skins and furs_." And what, in our opinion, fully evinces that the general was giving his sentiments upon settlements at _Detroit_, &c. and _not_ on the territory in question, is, that he says "it will be a question likewise, whether colonization of this kind, _could be effected without an Indian war, and fighting for every inch of the ground_." Why the Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations should encumber their _report_ with the opinion of General Gage, on what he calls the settlement of a "_foreign country_" that could not be effected without "_fighting for every inch of ground_," and how their Lordships could apply that case, to the settlement of a territory, purchased by his Majesty near four years ago, and _now_ inhabited by several thousand British subjects, whom the Indians themselves, living on the Northern side of the Ohio [as shall be fully shewn in the course of these observations] have earnestly requested may be immediately governed, we confess we are wholly at a loss to comprehend.

VIII. The eighth paragraph highly extols, not only the _accuracy and precision_ of the foregoing representation of the Lords of Trade in 1768, [which, as has been before observed, expressed, that the inhabitants of the middle colonies _would have liberty to settle over_ the mountains, and on the Ohio], but also the above mentioned letter from the commander in chief in America; and at the same time introduces the sentiments of Mr. Wright, Governor of Georgia, "on the subject of large grants in the interior parts of America."

When this letter was written, what was the occasion of the Governor's writing it,--whether he was _then_, from his own knowledge, acquainted with the situation of the country _over_ the mountains,--with the disposition of the inhabitants of the middle colonies,--with the capability of the Ohio country, from its soil, climate, or communication with the river Powtomack, &c. to supply this kingdom with _silk_, _flax_, _hemp_, &c.--and whether the principal part of Mr. Wright's estate is on the _sea-coast_ in _Georgia_,--are facts which we wish had been stated, that it might be known whether Governor Wright's "knowledge and experience in the affairs of colonies ought, as the Lords of Trade mention, to give great weight to his opinion" on the present occasion.

The doctrine insisted on by Governor Wright appears to us reducible to the following propositions:

1st, That if a _vast_ territory be granted to any set of Gentlemen, who really mean to people it,--and actually do so, _it must_ draw and carry out a great number of people from _Great Britain_.

2d. That they will soon become a kind of separate and independant people; who will set up for themselves,--will _soon_ have manufactures of their own,--will _neither_ take supplies from the mother country, nor the provinces at _the back_ of which they are settled:--That being at such a distance from the seat of _government_, from _courts_, _magistrates_, &c. and _out_ of the control of law and government, they will become a receptacle for offenders, &c.

3d. That the sea-coast should be _thick_ settled with inhabitants, and be well cultivated and improved, &c.

4th. That his ideas are _not_ chimerical; that he knows _something_ of the situation and state of things in America; and, from some _little_ occurrences that have happened, he can very easily _figure_ to himself _what may_, and, in short, _what will_ certainly happen, if not prevented in time.

On these propositions we shall take the liberty of making a few observations.

To the _first_ we answer,--We shall, we are persuaded, satisfactorily prove, that in the middle colonies, _viz._ New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia, there is hardly any _vacant land_, except such as is monopolized by great landholders, for the purpose of selling _at high prices_;--that the poor people of these colonies, with large families of children, _cannot_ pay these prices;--and that several thousand families, for that reason, have _already_ settled upon the Ohio;--that we do not wish for, and shall not encourage one single family of his Majesty's _European subjects_ to _settle_ there [and this we have no objection to be prevented from doing], but shall _wholly_ rely on the voluntary super-flux of the inhabitants of the middle provinces for settling and cultivating the lands in question.

On the _second_,--It is not, we presume, necessary for us to say more, than that all the conjectures and suppositions "of being a kind of separate and independant people," &c. entirely lose their force, on the proposition of a government being established on the grant applied for, as the Lords of Trade have themselves acknowledged.

On the _third_,--We would only briefly remark, that we have fully answered this objection in the latter part of our answer to the sixth paragraph.

And as the _fourth_ proposition is merely the Governor's declaration of his _knowledge_ of _something_ of the situation and state of things in America, and what, from some _little_ occurrences, that have already really happened, he can very easily _figure_ to himself what may and _will_ certainly happen, if not prevented in time:--We say, that as the Governor has not mentioned what these _little_ occurrences are,--we cannot pretend to judge, whether what he _figures_ to himself, is any ways relative to the object under consideration, or, indeed, what else it is relative to.

But as the Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations have thought proper to insert in their _Report_ the above-mentioned letters from General Gage and Governor Wright, it may not be improper for us to give the opinion of his Majesty's house of burgesses of the dominion of Virginia, on the _very point_ in question, as conveyed to his Majesty in their address of the 4th of August 1767, and delivered the latter end of that year, to the Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations, by Mr. Montague, agent for the colony.--The house of burgesses say,--"We humbly hope, that we shall obtain your royal indulgence, _when we give it as our opinions_, that it will be _for your Majesty's service, and the interest of your American dominions in general, to continue the encouragements_" (which were a _total exemption from any consideration-money whatsoever, and a remission of quit-rent for ten years, and of all kinds of taxes for fifteen years_) "for _settling those frontier lands_." By this means the house observed, "_New_ settlements will be made _by people of property, obedient subjects to government_; but if the present restriction should continue, we have the strongest reason to believe, _that country will become the resort of fugitives and vagabonds, defiers of law and order, and who in time may form a body dangerous to the peace and civil government of this colony_."

We come now to the consideration of the 9th, 10th, and 11th paragraphs.

In the 9th, the Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations observe, "That admitting the settlers over the mountains, and on the Ohio, to be as numerous as _report_ states them to be," [and which we shall from undoubted testimony, prove to be not less than five thousand families, of at least six persons to a family, independent of some thousand families, which are also settled _over_ the mountains, within the limits of the province of Pennsylvania] yet their Lordships say, "It operates strongly in point of argument _against_ what is proposed." And their Lordships add, "if the foregoing reasoning has any weight, it ought certainly to induce the Lords of the Committee of the Privy Council, to _advise_ his Majesty to take every method _to_ CHECK the progress of these settlements; and _not_ to make such grants of the land, as will have an immediate tendency to encourage them."