The Writings of Samuel Adams, vol 2, page 39 by Samuel Adams
<< Return to Title Details & Download40
ormerly shields to the persons of Kings from such kind of imputations; but it is much to be feared, if care is not taken to prevent it, the idle whimsies of Ministers, their weakness and folly, or their daring and impudent attempts to destroy the Liberties of the People, will be attributed to a Cause which no one, to be sure at present, will chuse to mention.--I hope his Honor's reasoning, and his correspondent Conduct, does not lead to this--The House of Representatives seem to be aware of the Danger of such Doctrine, when they expressly say, "They presume not to call in question the Wisdom of their Sovereign or the rectitude of his Intentions"; at the same time that they speak with a manly Freedom, of certain Instructions that have come from Ministers of State, and even treat them with Indignity and Contempt. His Honor presumes "they would not have done this, if they had known it to be an Order from his Majesty." I believe they would not; they saw reason to think that the Mandate to rescind in June 1768, was the mere act of a weak Minister; and as his Honor does not give the least Intimation, that he either knows or believes to the Contrary, I must beg leave to say, that in my poor Opinion, the Epithet given to it by the House, is neither "coarse" nor "indecent."
We seem, Messrs. Printers, to be drawing very near the time, when some people will be hardy enough to dispute, whether we are to be governed according to the rule of the Constitution, the building of which has been the Work of Ages, or to use the words of the House, by the "breath of a Minister of State."--Instructions, form'd by a set of Ministers, calculated for certain purposes and sent over to a Governor, who to avoid their high Displeasure and the terrible Effects of it, must implicitly believe, or say he believes them, to come immediately from the King; and the House of Representatives must by no means controvert them, lest, as Bernard once impudently told them, they should be chargeable with "oppugnation against the King's authority."3 < previous next >