The Works of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke, Vol. II | Page 8

letter imply that the idea of taxing America for the purpose of revenue
is an abominable project, when the ministry suppose none but factious
men, and with seditious views, could charge them with it? does not this
letter adopt and sanctify the American distinction of _taxing for a
revenue_? does it not formally reject all future taxation on that
principle? does it not state the ministerial rejection of such principle of
taxation, not as the occasional, but the constant opinion of the king's
servants? does it not say, (I care not how consistently,) but does it not
say, that their conduct with regard to America has been always
governed by this policy? It goes a great deal further. These excellent
and trusty servants of the king, justly fearful lest they themselves
should have lost all credit with the world, bring out the image of their
gracious sovereign from the inmost and most sacred shrine, and they
pawn him as a security for their promises:--"His Majesty relies on your
prudence and fidelity for such an explanation of his measures." These
sentiments of the minister and these measures of his Majesty can only
relate to the principle and practice of taxing for a revenue; and
accordingly Lord Botetourt, stating it as such, did, with great propriety,
and in the exact spirit of his instructions, endeavor to remove the fears
of the Virginian assembly lest the sentiments which it seems (unknown
to the world) had always been those of the ministers, and by which
their conduct in respect to America had been governed, should by some
possible revolution, favorable to wicked American taxers, be hereafter
counteracted. He addresses them in this manner:--
"It may possibly be objected, that, as his Majesty's present
administration are not immortal, their successors may be inclined to
attempt to undo what the present ministers shall have attempted to
perform; and to that objection I can give but this answer: that it is my
firm opinion, that the plan I have stated to you will certainly take place,
and that it will never be departed from; and so determined am I forever

to abide by it, that I will be content to be declared infamous, if I do not,
to the last hour of my life, at all times, in all places, and upon all
occasions, exert every power with which I either am or ever shall be
legally invested, in order to obtain and maintain for the continent of
America that satisfaction which I have been authorized to promise this
day by the confidential servants of our gracious sovereign, who to my
certain knowledge rates his honor so high that he would rather part
with his crown than preserve it by deceit."[4]
A glorious and true character! which (since we suffer his ministers with
impunity to answer for his ideas of taxation) we ought to make it our
business to enable his Majesty to preserve in all its lustre. Let him have
character, since ours is no more! Let some part of government be kept
in respect!
This epistle was not the letter of Lord Hillsborough solely, though he
held the official pen. It was the letter of the noble lord upon the floor,[5]
and of all the king's then ministers, who (with, I think, the exception of
two only) are his ministers at this hour. The very first news that a
British Parliament heard of what it was to do with the duties which it
had given and granted to the king was by the publication of the votes of
American assemblies. It was in America that your resolutions were
pre-declared. It was from thence that we knew to a certainty how much
exactly, and not a scruple more nor less, we were to repeal. We were
unworthy to be let into the secret of our own conduct. The assemblies
had confidential communications from his Majesty's confidential
servants. We were nothing but instruments. Do you, after this, wonder
that you have no weight and no respect in the colonies? After this are
you surprised that Parliament is every day and everywhere losing (I feel
it with sorrow, I utter it with reluctance) that reverential affection
which so endearing a name of authority ought ever to carry with it? that
you are obeyed solely from respect to the bayonet? and that this House,
the ground and pillar of freedom, is itself held up only by the
treacherous underpinning and clumsy buttresses of arbitrary power?
If this dignity, which is to stand in the place of just policy and common
sense, had been consulted, there was a time for preserving it, and for
reconciling it with any concession. If in the session of 1768, that
session of idle terror and empty menaces, you had, as you were often
pressed to