We have considered the Reasons the Governor has
    been pleased to give, in his Message of the Sixth Instant, for
    exempting the Proprietaries Estate in the proposed Tax: And as they
    do not appear to us sufficient, we beg Leave to offer him our
    Sentiments thereon in the following Remarks.
    The Governor finds in his Commission a Proviso.
    “That nothing therein contained shall impower him to consent to any
    Act whereby the Estate of the Proprietaries may be hurt or
    encumbered;” and this he looks upon as the highest Prohibition to
    him from passing the Bill proposed. But the Intention of the Bill,
    may it please the Governor, is not to hurt or
    encumber, but to free from Encumbrance the Estate of
    the Proprietaries, which cannot, in our Opinion, have a worse
    Encumbrance, than the Neighbourhood of so mischievous an Enemy,
    who, as we have frequently been informed by the Governor, have
    taken actual Possession of some Part, and lay Claim to a much
    greater Part of their Country. The Estates of the People are all on
    this Side the Mountains; they are as yet neither invaded nor
    claimed by the French. As Representatives of the People we think it
    as much our bounden Duty to do nothing that may hurt or
    encumber the Estates of our Constituents, as the Governor
    can possibly think it his Duty with regard to the Proprietary
    Estate; yet we never conceived that giving a Part to save the
    Whole, and not only to save it, but to render it of double or
    treble Value (which must be the Case with the Proprietary Lands)
    could properly be called hurting or encumbering an
    Estate. And if the Governor really thought that taxing the Estates
    of the People on this Occasion would be a Hurt to them, and not a
    Benefit, we imagine he ought, in Duty, to refuse his Assent to that
    Part of the Bill as well as the other, and for the very same
    Reason. We for our Parts think differently, and therefore lay the
    Tax as chearfully on our own Estates as on those of our
    Constituents. We know their Loyalty to their King and Love to their
    Country is equal to ours; we do not in the least doubt their
    Approbation of our Conduct; and we would willingly hope the
    Governor might, on such an Occasion, as reasonably expect the same
    Approbation from the Proprietaries.
    For there is, may it please the Governor, in
    the same Proviso of the Proprietary Commission, an absolute
    Prohibition to the Governor, “to sett, lett, lease out, grant,
    demise or dispose of any Lands, Tenements, &c. or to
    intermeddle or concern himself therewith, or with any Part of the
    Property thereof;” yet he is pleased to say, “he knows the Love and
    Affection of the Proprietaries for their Country to be such, that
    if they were on the Spot, they would do any Thing in their Power
    for its Preservation and Safety; and therefore he, on their Behalf,
    proposes to give Lands West of the Allegheny Mountains without any
    Purchase Money, and free from the Payment of Quitrents for Fifteen
    Years to come.” It cannot but seem strange to us, that a Tax on
    Part of an Estate for two Years should be thought to hurt it, more
    than giving Six or Seven Hundred Thousand Acres of it away; or that
    the Governor, notwithstanding so express a Prohibition, should
    think himself more at Liberty in this Case than in the other. If
    the Proprietaries will approve in the latter Case, why not in the
    former? And if the Grant of Lands, contrary to such Prohibition,
    would be valid, why not the Passing of the Bill for a Tax? These
    are Questions that we cannot solve, without a more particular
    Consideration of the proposed Grant of Lands West of the Allegheny
    Mountains, than we should have thought necessary, if it had not
    been repeatedly mentioned to us by the Governor, apparently with a
    View to make the Taxing of the Proprietary Estate on this Occasion
    appear less reasonable. We are sorry therefore that we are obliged
    to observe, that the Proposal is made in such Terms as that it may
    be fully complied with, and yet nothing in Reality be granted.
    First, because Lands West of the Allegheny Mountains differ greatly
    in their Quality, and though some are exceeding good, there are
    many Hundred Thousand Acres that are not worth accepting; and
    good Land is not so much as mentioned in the Proposal.
    Secondly, because the best Lands there, are not better than Lands
    of Virginia in the same Neighbourhood, which may be had without
    Purchase Money, at Two Shillings Sterling Quitrent, and none to be
    paid for Fifteen Years. But the common Quitrent in this Province is
    Four Shillings and Two-pence Sterling. And therefore an Offer even
    of the best Lands in those Parts on that Quitrent would be neither
    more nor less than this, That for the Encouragement of such as
    shall, with the Hazard of their Lives, recover the Proprietaries
    Country from the Enemy, he will graciously sell them a Part of the
    Lands so recovered, at twice the Price demanded by his Neighbour.
    An Offer on the Proprietary’s Behalf, that may indeed be safely
    made, notwithstanding his Prohibition, and without the least Danger
    of offending him. If the Proprietary, to encourage the Settlement
    of the Western Frontier of his Province, and to form a Barrier for
    the rest, will, bona Fide, grant good Lands on
    reasonable Terms; we doubt not but the Assembly will give other
    equivalent Encouragements to the Settlers, in Provisions,
    Carriages, Utensils of Husbandry, Cattle, and the like; but the
    Governor’s Power to make such Grants in their Behalf, at present
    not appearing to us, we must leave that Matter to future
    Consideration.
    We are however clear, that the Governor has
    full Power to pass the Bill in Question, any Prohibition,
    were it ever so express from the Proprietaries, notwithstanding.
    First, because no Prohibition of the Proprietaries can lessen or
    take away from the Lieutenant-Governor any Power such Lieutenant is
    vested with by the Royal Charter. Secondly, For that in the Royal
    Charter, Section IV. the King, for himself, his Heirs and
    Successors, hath “granted free, full, and absolute Power,” (not
    only to the Proprietary and his Heirs, but) “to his and their
    Deputies and Lieutenants, for the good and happy
    Government of the said Country, to ordain, make and
    enact, and under his and their Seals to publish, any Laws
    whatsoever, for the Raising of Money for publick Uses,
    or for any End appertaining unto the publick State, Peace or
    Safety of the said Country, according unto their best
    Discretion, by and with the Advice, Assent and Approbation of
    the Freemen of the said Country, their Delegates or Deputies.” And
    thirdly, because any Prohibition from the Proprietaries,
    restraining the Legislative Powers granted by the Royal Charter, is
    so far from being able to render void a Law made notwithstanding
    such Prohibition, that the Prohibition is in itself void, and a
    meer Nullity. This is not only consistent with plain Reason, but
    has been solemnly considered and determined in the former
    Proprietary’s own Council; his Son and Heir, his faithful
    Secretary, the learned Judge Mompesson, and several others,
    distinguished for their Abilities, being both present and
    concurring, as will, we suppose, appear on their Minutes, of which
    we beg Leave to give the following Extract.
    The Clause in Colonel Evans’s Commission, viz.
    “Saving always to me and my Heirs, our final Assent to all such
    Bills as thou shalt pass into Laws in the said Government,”
    &c.
    “In Answer to a Message from the Assembly,
    requesting the Council to give their Opinion in Writing under their
    Hands, concerning the Saving or Exception in the Proprietary
    William Penn’s
    Commission to the present Lieutenant-Governor, to wit, whether the
    said Saving is void in itself. And whether those Bills which the
    present Lieutenant-Governor shall think fit to pass into Laws, and
    cause the said Proprietary’s Great Seal to be affixed thereunto,
    can afterwards be vacated or annulled by the said Proprietary,
    without Assent of the Assembly of this Province?
    “We of the Council, whose Names are hereunto
    subscribed, are of Opinion, that the said Saving is void
    in itself; and that those Bills which the present
    Lieutenant-Governor shall think fit to pass into Laws, and cause
    the said Proprietary’s Great Seal to be affixed thereunto,
    cannot afterwards be vacated or annulled by the Proprietary,
    without Assent of the Assembly of this Province.”
   
  
    Having thus, we hope, effectually removed the Governor’s
    greatest Objection to the Passing of our Bill, we may be shorter in
    our Observations on the four other Reasons he is pleased to give
    us.
    To the first we shall only say, That we do not
    propose to tax the Proprietary as Governor, but as a Fellow
    Subject, a Landholder and Possessor of an Estate in Pennsylvania;
    an Estate that will be more benefited by a proper Application of
    the Tax, than any other Estate in the Province. The Proprietary,
    may it please the Governor, does not govern us. The Province
    supports a Lieutenant to do that Duty for him, by a large Revenue
    arising from Licences, and other Fees and Perquisites. But if the
    Proprietary actually governed us, and had a Support allowed him on
    that Account, we should not therefore think it less reasonable to
    tax him as a Landholder, for the Security of that Land. The
    Representatives of the People have also some Support as a Part of
    the Government, by the Wages they are allowed for their Service in
    Assembly; would the Governor think this a good Reason, that as
    Owners of Estates they should be exempt from Taxes? Can the
    Proprietary, as Governor, have, from the Nature of his Office, more
    of this pretended Right of Exemption from Taxes than the King
    himself? Are not the Tenants of the King’s Lands (who by every Land
    Tax Act of Parliament are to pay the Poundage) impowered to deduct
    the same out of their Rent? And are not the Receivers of his
    Majesty’s Rents obliged, under severe Penalties, to allow to such
    Deduction? But this is not the first Instance by many, in which
    Proprietors and Governors of petty Colonies have assumed to
    themselves greater Powers, Privileges, Immunities, and
    Prerogatives, than were ever claimed by their Royal Master on the
    Imperial Throne of all his extensive Dominions.
    On the second it may be sufficient to observe,
    that the positive Law of this Province, hinted at by the Governor
    as exempting the Proprietaries Estates from Taxes, is no other than
    the Law for raising County Rates and Levies, which are in the same
    Act appropriated to Purposes for which the Proprietaries could not
    reasonably be charged; such as the Payment of Assemblymens Wages,
    and of the Rewards for killing of Wolves, Crows, Foxes, with other
    Matters more immediately for the Peoples Benefit; it is not, as the
    Governor would insinuate, a general constitutional Law of the
    Province, made to enforce a natural Right, but is confined to
    County Affairs, and has no Relation to Provincial Taxes, especially
    to such as are intended for the Benefit and Advantage of the
    Proprietary Estate more than of any other Estate in the Province;
    which will be evident to the Governor, on his perusing it with the
    smallest Degree of Attention. ’Tis true it is, as the Governor
    calls it, a positive Law, so far as it extends; but to apply
    it to the present Case, seems inconsistent with both Equity and
    Reason. We have likewise a positive Law, that the Peoples
    Representatives shall dispose of the Peoples Money, and this seems
    to us consistent generally with Reason and natural Right; but does
    the Governor think that, because it is a positive Law, it ought to
    be extended to all Cases in Government? If so, we humbly conceive
    he would have proposed some other Amendments to the Bill, and
    different from those he has thought fit to send us: For we,
    considering the Intention of the Grant, have allowed him a Share in
    the Disposition of the Fifty Thousand Pounds; and he proposes, by
    his last Amendment, to have a Share likewise in the Disposition of
    the Overplus, if any.
    On the third Reason, we would only beg Leave to
    ask, Whether, supposing the Proprietary Estate to be taxed, it
    would be equitable that he should have a Negative in the Choice of
    the Assessors; since that would give him Half the Choice, tho’ he
    were to pay perhaps not a Hundredth Part of the Tax? In our
    Estimation, and we think we are not mistaken, he may have Friends,
    Officers and other Dependents enow in every County, to vote as much
    in his Behalf, or more, than his Share of the Tax can possibly
    amount to. But if the Proprietary shrinks at the Injustice of being
    taxed, where he has no Choice in the Assessors, with what Face of
    Justice can he desire and insist on having Half the Power of
    disposing of the Money levied, to which he would contribute not a
    single Farthing? By the Words the Governor chuses to express the
    Power of the Assessors, viz. “Taxing the Proprietaries Estate
    at Discretion,” one would think their Power
    unlimited, and the Proprietary left at their Mercy; but in the
    Valuation of Estates, they are confined by the Bill within certain
    moderate Bounds, are enjoined, and sworn or solemnly affirmed “to
    assess themselves, and all others, equally and impartially, and to
    spare no Person for Favour or Affection, nor grieve any for Hatred
    or Ill-will;” which we think gives the Proprietary as good Security
    for Equity and Justice as any Subject in the King’s Dominions.
    As to the Governor’s fourth Reason, deduced
    from the Usage in this and the other Proprietary Governments, we
    think Usage and Custom, against Reason and Justice, ought to have
    but little Weight. But though it may have been the Usage in this
    Government, and perhaps in others, to exempt the Proprietary Estate
    from Taxes in Cases where their Estates could not by the
    Application of such Taxes be any way benefited, that Usage can, as
    we conceive, have no Relation to the present Case, which, as we
    have shewn, is of a widely different Nature. Nor, if the Governor’s
    Rule from Usage could be allowed, viz. That the Lands or
    Estates of Proprietaries, exercising Government by
    themselves or their Lieutenants, ought to be exempt from
    Taxes, would it operate in Favour of the Estates of
    Proprietaries who not only do not exercise Government by
    themselves, but would restrain their Lieutenants in the Exercise of
    the just Powers they are vested with by the Royal Charter.
    On the Whole, we beg the Governor would again
    calmly and seriously consider our Bill, to which End we once more
    send it up to him. We know that without his Assent the Money cannot
    be raised, nor the good Ends so earnestly desired and expected from
    it be obtained, and we fear his Resolution to refuse it. But we
    entreat him to reflect with what Reluctance a People born and bred
    in Freedom, and accustomed to equitable Laws, must undergo the
    Weight of this uncommon Tax, and even expose their Persons for the
    Defence of his Estate, who by Virtue of his Power only, and
    without even a Colour of Right, should refuse to bear the least
    Share of the Burthen, though to receive so great a Benefit! With
    what Spirit can they exert themselves in his Cause, who will not
    pay the smallest Part of their grievous Expences? How odious must
    it be to a sensible manly People, to find him who ought to
    be their Father and Protector, taking Advantage of Publick Calamity
    and Distress, and their Tenderness for their bleeding Country, to
    force down their Throats Laws of Imposition, abhorrent to common
    Justice and common Reason! Why will the Governor make himself the
    hateful Instrument of reducing a free People to the abject State of
    Vassalage; of depriving us of those Liberties, which have given
    Reputation to our Country throughout the World, and drawn
    Inhabitants from the remotest Parts of Europe to enjoy them?
    Liberties not only granted us of Favour, but of Right; Liberties
    which in Effect we have bought and paid for, since we have not only
    performed the Conditions on which they were granted, but have
    actually given higher Prices for our Lands on their Account; so
    that the Proprietary Family have been doubly paid for them, in the
    Value of the Lands, and in the Increase of Rents with Increase of
    People: Let not our Affections be torn in this Manner from a Family
    we have long loved and honoured! Let that novel Doctrine, hatched
    by their mistaken Friends, that Privileges granted to promote the
    Settlement of a Country, are to be abridged when the Settlement is
    obtained, iniquitous as it is, be detested as it deserves, and
    banished from all our publick Councils; and let the Harmony, so
    essential to the Welfare of both Governors and Governed, be once
    again restored; since it can never be more necessary to our Affairs
    than in their present melancholy Situation. We hope the Governor
    will excuse some Appearance of Warmth, in a Cause of all others in
    the World the most interesting, and believe us to be, with all
    possible Respect and Duty to the Proprietary Family and to himself,
    his and their sincere Friends and Well-wishers.