ur day is known as a political right instead of a civil right.
Then, to give point to this argument, the patriot insists that in
determining taxation, 'every man must be his own assessor, in person
or by deputy,' without which his liberty is entirely at the mercy of
others. Here, again, in a different form, is the original
thunderbolt, 'Taxation without representation is tyranny;' and the
claim is made not merely for communities, but for 'every man.'"

In a similar way wrote Benjamin Franklin, some six years after, in that
remarkable sheet found among his papers, and called "Declaration of those
Rights of the Commonalty of Great Britain, without which they cannot be
free." The leading propositions were these three:--

"That every man of the commonalty (excepting infants, insane
persons, and criminals) is of common right and by the laws of God a
freeman, and entitled to the free enjoyment of liberty. That
liberty, or freedom, consists in having an actual share in the
appointment of those who frame the laws, and who are to be the
guardians of every man's life, property, and peace; for the all of
one man is as dear to him as the all of another; and the poor man
has an equal right, but more need, to have representatives in the
legislature than the rich one. That they who have no voice nor vote
in the electing of representatives do not enjoy liberty, but are
absolutely enslaved to those who have votes, and to their
representatives; for to be enslaved is to have governors whom other
men have set over us, and be subject to laws made by the
representatives of others, without having had representatives of our
own to give consent in our behalf."[2]

In quoting these words of Dr. Franklin, one of his biographers feels moved
to add, "These principles, so familiar to us now and so obviously just,
were startling and incredible novelties in 1770, abhorrent to nearly all
Englishmen, and to great numbers of Americans." Their fair application is
still abhorrent to a great many; or else, not willing quite to deny the
theory, they limit the application by some such device as "virtual
representation." Here, again, James Otis is ready for them; and Charles
Sumner is ready to quote Otis, as thus:--

"No such phrase as virtual representation was ever known in law or
constitution. It is altogether a subtlety and illusion, wholly
unfounded and absu