will resist
the measures now pursued in a more vigorous way. Committees of
correspondence in the different provinces are in constant communication:
they do not trust in the conveyance of the post-office; they have set up
a constitutional courier, which will quickly grow up to the superseding
of your post-office. As soon as intelligence of these affairs reaches
them, they will judge it necessary to communicate with each other: it
will be found inconvenient and ineffectual to do so by letters. They
must confer; they will hold a conference; and to what these committees,
thus met in congress, will grow up, I will not say. Should recourse be
had to arms, you will hear of other officers than those appointed by
your governor Then, as in the late civil wars of this country, it
will be of little consequence to dispute who were the aggressors." Sir
Richard Sutton spoke in a similar strain; asserting, that though it
was not confessed, the Americans were aiming at total independence,
and would never again submit quietly to English laws and regulations of
trade.

This debate took place on the second reading of the bill. The third
reading occurred on the 2nd of May, when Sir William Meredith insisted
that the parliament of Great Britain had an indisputable right to
lay duties upon the Americans, and to tax them externally. Mr. Thomas
Townshend, also, though equally warm as Sir William Meredith in
opposition to ministers on general points, gave this measure his decided
support. Though averse to meddling with charters, he said, the evils of
town-meetings justified interference, and that the institution of juries
was properly altered according to the forms of the mother country.
Thurlow, the attorney-general, and Lord North spoke in favour of the
bill, likewise, on this occasion, the latter expressing a hope that good
consequences might arise from its adoption. It was opposed by Mr. Burke,
Mr. Charles Fox, and Colonel Barre, the latter of whom reprobated the
violence of both houses. "In the lords," said he, "the phrase is, 'We
have passed the Rubicon!'--in the commons, 'Delenda est Carthago!'"
But opposition was of no avail. The bill was carried by an overwhelming
majority in the lower house; and when it was taken into the upper house,
though it was severely criticised, opposed, and denounced by a few
lords, most of the peers were in its favour, and it passed into a law.

In order to qualify the severity of the bill for regulating the