and that some even of the Massachusetts acts were thought by administration to be improvements of that government, viz., those altering the appointment of counsellors, the choice of jurymen, and the forbidding of town meetings. I replied, that we having assisted in the conquest of Canada, at a great expense of blood and treasure, we had some right to be considered in the settlement of it. That the establishing an arbitrary government on the back of our settlements might be dangerous to us all; and that, loving liberty ourselves, we wished it to be extended among mankind, and to have no foundation for future slavery laid in America. That, as to amending the Massachusetts government, though it might be shown that every one of these pretended amendments were real mischiefs, yet that charters being compacts between two parties, the king and the people, no alteration could be made in them, even for the better, but by the consent of both parties. That the Parliament’s claim and exercise of a power to alter our charters, which had always been deemed inviolable but for forfeiture, and to alter laws made in pursuance of these charters, which had received the royal approbation, and thenceforth deemed fixed and unchangeable, but by the powers that made them, had rendered all our constitution uncertain, and set us quite afloat. That as by claiming a right to tax us ad libitum, they deprived us of all property; so, by this claim of altering our laws and charters at will, they deprived us of all privilege and right whatever, but what we should hold at their pleasure. That this was a situation we could not be in, and must risk life and every thing rather than submit to it. So this article remained.
The 12th article I explained by acquainting the gentlemen with the former situation of the judges in most colonies, viz., that they were appointed by the crown, and paid by the assemblies. That the appointment being during the pleasure of the crown the salary had been during the pleasure of the Assembly. That, when it has been urged against the Assemblies that their making judges dependent on them for their salaries was aiming at an undue influence over the courts of justice; the Assemblies usually replied that making them dependent on the crown for continuance in their places was also retaining an undue influence over those courts, and that one undue influence was a proper balance for the other; but that whenever the crown would consent to acts making the judges during good behavior, the Assemblies would at the same time grant their salaries to be permanent during their continuance in office. This the crown has, however, constantly refused. And this equitable offer is now again here proposed; the colonies not being able to conceive why their judges should not be rendered as independent as those in England. That, on the contrary, the crown now claimed to make the judges in the colonies dependent on its favor for both place and salary, both to be continued at its pleasure. This the colonies must oppose as inequitable, as putting both the weights into one of the scales of justice. If, therefore, the crown does not choose to commission the judges during good behavior, with equally permanent salaries, the alternative proposed that the salaries continue to be paid during the pleasure of the Assemblies as heretofore. The gentlemen allowed this article to be reasonable.
The 13th was objected to, as nothing was generally thought more reasonable here than that the king should pay his own governor, in order to render him independent of the people, who otherwise might aim at influencing him against his duty by occasionally withholding his salary. To this I answered that governors sent to the colonies were often men of no estate or principle, who came merely to make fortunes, and had no natural regard for the country they were to govern. That to make them quite independent of the people was to make them careless of their conduct, whether it was beneficial or mischievous to the public, and giving a loose to their rapacious and oppressive dispositions. That the influence supposed could never extend to operate any thing prejudicial to the king’s service, or the interest of Britain; since the governor was bound by a set of particular instructions, which he had given surety to observe; and all the laws he assented to were subject to be repealed by the crown, if found improper. That the payment of the salaries by the people was more satisfactory to them, as it was productive of a good understanding and mutual good offices between governor and governed, and therefore the innovation lately made in that respect at Boston and New York had, in my opinion, better be laid aside. So this article was suffered to remain.
But the 14th was thought totally inadmissible. The monopoly of the American commerce could never be given up, and proposing it would only give offence without answering any good purpose. I was therefore prevailed on to strike it wholly out.
The 15th was readily agreed to.
The 16th it was thought would be of little consequence, if the duties were given to the colony treasuries.
The 17th it was thought could hardly be obtained, but might be tried.
Thus having gone through the whole, I was desired to make a fair copy for Dr. Fothergill, who now informed us that having an opportunity of seeing daily Lord Dartmouth, of whose good disposition he had a high opinion, he would communicate the paper to him, as the sentiments of considerate persons, who wished the welfare of both countries. “Suppose,” said Mr. Barclay, “I were to show this paper to Lord Hyde; would there be any thing amiss in so doing? He is a very knowing man; and, though not in the ministry, properly speaking, he is a good deal attended to by them. I have some acquaintance with him; we converse freely sometimes; and, perhaps, if he and I were to talk these articles over, and I should communicate to him our conversation upon them, some good might arise out of it.” Dr. Fothergill had no objection, and I said I could have none. I knew Lord Hyde a little, and had an esteem for him. I had drawn the paper at their request, and it was now theirs to do with it what they pleased. Mr. Barclay then proposed that I should send the fair copy to him, which, after making one for Dr. Fothergill and one for himself, he would return to me. Another question then arose, whether I had any objection to their mentioning that I had been consulted. I said none that related to myself; but it was my opinion, if they wished any attention paid to the propositions, it would be better not to mention me; the ministry having, as I conceived, a prejudice against me, and every thing that came from me. They said on that consideration it might be best not to mention me; and so it was concluded. For my own part, I kept this whole proceeding a profound secret; but I soon after discovered that it had taken air by some means or other.
Being much interrupted the day following, I did not copy and send the paper. The next morning I received a note Ref. 002 from Mr. Barclay, pressing to have it before twelve o’clock. I accordingly sent it to him. Three days after I received the following note from him:
“D. Barclay presents his respects, and acquaints Dr. Franklin that, being informed a pamphlet, entitled ‘A Friendly Address,’ has been dispersed to the disadvantage of America (in particular by the Dean of Norwich), he desires Dr. F. will peruse the enclosed, just come to hand from America, and, if he approves of it, republish it, as D. B. wishes something might be properly spread in Norwich. D. B. saw to-day a person with whom he had been yesterday (before he called on Dr. F.), and had the satisfaction of walking part of the way with him to another noble person’s house, to meet on the business, and he told him that he could say that he saw some light.
Cheapside,
11th instant.”
The person so met and accompanied by Mr. Barclay I understood to be Lord Hyde, going either to Lord Dartmouth’s or Lord North’s, I know not which.
In the following week arrived the proceedings of the Congress, which had been long and anxiously expected, both by the friends and adversaries of America.
The petition of Congress to the king was enclosed to me, and accompanied by the following letter from their president, addressed to the American agents in London, as follows:
“To Paul Wentworth, Esquire, Dr. Benjamin Franklin, William Bollan, Esquire, Dr. Arthur Lee, Thomas Life, Esquire, Edmund Burke, Esquire, Charles Garth, Esquire.
Philadelphia, October 26, 1774.
Gentlemen:—
