t their liberties, to misrepresent their actions, and to
prey upon them: men whose behavior on many occasions has caused the
blood of those sons of liberty to recoil within them; men promoted to
the highest seats of justice--some who to my knowledge were glad, by
going to a foreign country, to escape being brought to the bar of a
court of justice in their own.

"They protected by your arms? They have nobly taken up arms in your
defence, have exerted a valor, amid their constant and laborious
industry, for the defence of a country whose frontier was drenched in
blood, while its interior parts yielded all its little savings to your
emolument. And, believe me, that same spirit of freedom which actuated
these people at first will accompany them still: but prudence forbids me
to explain myself further. God knows I do not at this time speak from
any motives of party heat. I deliver the genuine sentiments of my
heart. However superior to me, in general knowledge and experience, the
respectable body of this House may be, yet I claim to know more of
America than most of you; having seen and been conversant in that
country. The people, I believe, are as truly loyal as any subjects the
King has; but a people jealous of their liberties, and who will
vindicate them if ever they should be violated: but the subject is too
delicate. I will say no more."

During the debate on the bill, the supporters of it insisted much on the
colonies being virtually represented in the same manner as Leeds,
Halifax, and some other towns were. A recurrence to this plea was a
virtual acknowledgment that there ought not to be taxation without
representation. It was replied that the connection between the electors
and non-electors of Parliament, in Great Britain, was so interwoven from
both being equally liable to pay the same common tax as to give some
security of property to the latter: but with respect to taxes laid by
the British Parliament, and paid by the Americans, the situation of the
parties was reversed. Instead of both parties bearing a proportional
share of the same common burden, what was laid on the one was exactly so
much taken off from the other.

The bill met with no opposition in the House of Lords; and, on March 22,
1765, it received the royal assent. The night after it passed, Dr.
Franklin wrote to Charles Thomson: "The sun of liberty is set; you must
light up the candles of industry and economy." Thomson answered, "I was
apprehensiv