But the length of time which Great Britain shall sustain her importance among commercial nations entirely depends on the wisdom of the present measures. If she should give up her dominion over America, her commerce in a little time must perish; should she retain America, nothing can deprive her of it. For, although, should the ties of interest and policy be once severed by the violence of war, passion and resentment, which nothing but great length of time can efface, will succeed; and alliances with other nations, to the detriment of Great Britain, in the mean time will be made: yet should she again be united with us in the same common interest and policy, the task will not be difficult to induce her to pursue what is most profitable to herself, the cultivation of the earth, and the raising raw materials for the manufactures of Great Britain for ages to come. She will attend to and pursue that business, which, under this circumstance, will most naturally and profitably contribute to the common interest of both countries. She will find that she can raise raw materials and dispose of them to Great Britain for greater profits than she can manufacture them, and receive in return all the necessaries and luxuries of life cheaper than she can procure them from other nations. Here her true interest will coincide with and strengthen her political attachments, provided those attachments are formed and maintained on a broad, liberal, and just foundation; I mean, when the same measure of power shall be exercised over her people, and the same enjoyment of privileges shall be granted to them, as are exercised over and enjoyed by the subjects in Great Britain; for it does not require much knowledge of the principles upon which all societies are founded, and of the dispositions of men, to see that nothing short of this policy can shut the door of jealousies, discontents, and separation between the subjects of the same state. BRITISH MISMANAGEMENT IN AMERICA. [Plain Truth; or a Letter to the Author of Dispassionate Thoughts on the American War. 1780.] THA HAT country, I affirm, and from the most perfect knowledge of the disposition of the people I am ready to prove by the most satisfactory testimony, contains a vast body of subjects faithful to the Crown; and that five out of six of its whole inhabitants sincerely wish for a perfect union in polity with this country, from a thorough conviction that their future interest and happiness depend entirely upon it. I will go farther, in affirming from my certain knowledge, that tens of thousands are at this moment willing and desirous to assist Government in suppressing the rebellion and uniting with Great Britain against the power of the House of Bourbon. But, sir, that war has been hitherto conducted from the beginning by persons to whom the executive management of it has been given, on policy totally reverse to all the dictates of common sense. When a general enters into an extensive country of numerous inhabitants, the first thing pointed out by common sense as necessary to his success is to know if the people are divided in opinions, if they are formed into parties, and if any of those parties are either disposed or can be persuaded to assist him; and, if any of them are friends to the measure he has undertaken, cordially to encourage, and with confidence to employ them. Now, it is known to every man who has endeavored to make himself acquainted with the true state of the Middle and Southern Colonies, that ever since the declaration of Independence there have been two determined parties formed in that country; one, by far the majority of the people, zealously attached to their Sovereign and the British Government. And yet it is also known to every man in America and to every American who is now in Britain and lately come from America, that until within a few months all the tenders of service, all the numerous offers of assistance from the Loyalists, have been rejected by our generals. That while the Congress left no severity unessayed to suppress their exertions in favor of Government, the British commanders, coadjutors of the Congress in the measure, treated them—and among them some men of the first weight and influence in America-with ineffable disregard and contempt. Thus was the spirit of loyalty and affection to their Sovereign: thus was the most laudable of all principles ground, as it were, between the upper and nether millstone. And yet, like the faith of the three holy children when thrown into the furnace, their loyalty has sustained the fiery trial, and remains inviolate to this moment. Another instance of the folly and misconduct in the management of the American war was equally criminal with the one I have mentioned, and one of the causes of our want of success. I have ever thought that when a general marches out against his enemy it is with design to meet him, and if superior to him in force to give him battle; and if successful in battle, after defeat to pursue, in order to take or disperse his force; because every man of reflection knows that after the collected force of an enemy in a country without garrisons, as is the case generally in America, is once reduced, the country itself is conquered. This policy is so obvious, so consistent with military duty and the practice of great commanders, that it is difficult to account for a neglect of it. And yet we have seen our generals at the head of a force which has been six times greater than that of the enemy they had to oppose, either sleeping or rioting in their quarters; or indolently following, or shamefully retreating before, and often besieged in their garrisons by, that enemy. The British, like the Roman Colonies, have been, in a manner, lost by the erroneous polity in their settlement, and afterward by the inattention of the State to a reformation of that polity. Neither of them were settled upon those principles which reason and a small share of political knowledge clearly pointed out. The principles of their establishment were totally different from those of the Parent State, and consequently tended to break, in time, the uniformity of the State. Rome, though a free government, gave her colonies too little liberty and governed them for a time by her absolute power. Great Britain, though a mixed government, wisely and excellently composed out of the materials of the three simple forms, gave to her colonies too much liberty; by far more than accorded with her own established polity, and even more than consisted with true civil liberty itself. Her inferior colonial societies were either formed into principalities with little more than a shadow of dependence or subordination, or they were perfect democracies, in a manner independent. Thus Rome and Britain wandered from true wisdom and policy in the settlement of their acquired territories, in different and opposite extremes; extremes which naturally produced the same effects— the revolt of their colonies. But had Rome settled her vacant territory with citizens, and not colonists; had she governed them by the same principles of polity, and given to them the same proportion of civil liberty, which governed and was enjoyed by the citizen at Rome, the cause of their revolt could never have happened, nor the revolt itself have taken place. And had Britain, in like manner, in the settlement of her colonies established their inferior governments on the same principles of mixed polity by which the people in Britain were ruled; and had she incorporated and united them with her legislature on the same principle upon which the people of Britain were united, they would not have thought of revolting without some violent acts of oppression to incite them to it. The seeds of disaffection. sowed in the heterogeneous principles of polity, which are to be found in their colonial systems, could not have existed; because, as their general laws would in that case have flowed from the same fountain, and their particular codes would have been derived from polity of the same nature with that which governed the people of Britain, their political habits, manners, and attachments would have been the same. Those political bands, that cement of national union and harmony, founded in one legislative authority, and arising from the same laws, habits, customs, and manners, which ever did and ever will bind together the members of all societies, would have bound the subject in America as firmly to the State VOL. III.-9 as the subject in Britain. Educated in the same political and national creed, Britons and Americans would have possessed the same faith. They would have heard with the same ear, seen with the same eye, and judged with the same understanding. Their national pride and honor would have been one, and their respect and affections would have been invariably directed to the same supreme head, from whence they equally derived all their protection and happiness. All principle of revolt would have been excluded, and the State would have possessed the same political security for the obedience, fidelity, and attachment of the people in America which it has for those in Scotland, Wales, or any shire in the kingdom. Thomas Jones. BORN in Fort Neck, Queens County, New York, 1731. DIED at Hoddesdon, Hertfordshire, England, 1792. HOW PRESIDENT MYLES COOPER RAN AWAY. [History of New York. First published from the MS., edited by E. F. de Lancey, 1879.] IN August, 1775, a mob, or rather a select party of Republicans, of which John Smith and Joshua Hett Smith were the two most forward, collected together in the evening at a public-house, and after swallowing a proper dose of Madeira, set off about midnight with a full design of seizing the Rev. Dr. Cooper, then President of Kings College, in his bed, of shaving his head, cutting off his ears, slitting his nose, stripping him naked, and turning him adrift (as the expression was). Luckily for the President, a student, who had been out that night, in returning to his chambers overtook these bravos on their way, and overhearing their conversation, instantly took to his heels, and by turning through alleys and taking a nearer course than the assassins, he arrived at the President's room just time enough to give him information of his danger. Rising from his bed, and huddling on some of his clothes, he jumped out of a back window, a few minutes before the rascals entered the front door of the college. Having luckily escaped the intended violence, he took refuge in the house of a friend, was concealed till the morning, and then safely conveyed on board one of his Majesty's ships in the harbor, from whence he sailed for England. Upon his arrival he had two livings given him, both good ones; the first in Berkshire, the second at Edinburgh, in Scotland, where he principally resided. One day in the summer of 1785 he went to dine with a gentleman, a par ticular friend and acquaintance of his, who not being at home, the Doctor repaired to a tavern, ordered a dinner, and while it was preparing dropped down dead. Among his papers the following epitaph was found: Here lies a priest of English blood, But as the first he still preferred, So here he chose to be interred, And, unobserved, from crowds withdrew, To rest among a chosen few, In humble hope that divine love Will raise him to the bles't above. His library sold for £5, the liquors in his cellar for £150. He was buried a few miles from Edinburgh, at the place of depositing the Episcopal ministers who die in that city; this accounts for the words in his epitaph, "to rest among a chosen few." I knew him well. He was honest, just, learned, and liberal; judicious, sensible, friendly, and convivial; he loved good company, and good company loved him; he was by no means dissipated. He loved God, honored his King, esteemed his friends, and hated rebellion. This tribute is due to my deceased friend. I lived with him for several years in the utmost harmony, friendship, and familiarity. Though he was rather hasty in his temper, I scarcely ever saw him in a passion. Rebellion provoked him of all things. Through his means Kings College was raised in reputation, superior to all the colleges upon the continent, and, under his tuition, produced a number of young gentlemen superior in learning and abilities to what America had ever before seen. THE THE WONDERFUL WINTER OF 1779. [From the Same.] HE winter of 1779 was the severest ever known in the middle colonies. It may not be amiss to take some notice of it. The snow began to fall about the 10th of November, and continued almost every day till the middle of the ensuing March. In the woods it lay at least four feet upon a level. It was with the utmost difficulty that the farmers got their wood. The towns in general were distressed for the want of fuel, the garrison in New York particularly so. All the wood upon New York Island was cut down. The forest trees planted in |
