140 



to bring in a bill to restrain the trade and commerce of the provinces 

 of Massachusetts Bay and New Hamp-hire, the colonies of Connecticut 

 and Rhode Island and Providence Plantation, in North America, to 

 Great Britain, Ireland, and the British islands in the West Indies; and 

 to prohibit such provinces and colonies from carrying on any fish'.rv on 

 tlie Banks of Newfoundland, or other places therein to be mentioned, 

 under certain conditions, and l()r a time to be limited." He supported 

 bis motion by declaring that, as the Americans had refused to t ade with 

 Great Britain, it was but just that they should be deprived of the right 

 to trade with any other nation. In particular, he said that the fishery 

 on the Banks of Newfoundland, and the other Banks in America, was 

 tlieir undoubted right, and that, therefore, such disposition might be made 

 of them as the government pleased. The two houses, he continued, 

 had declared that a rebellion existed in Massachusetts, and that it was 

 just to deprive that province of its fisheries; that though a government 

 still existed in New Hampshire, the royal authority was weak; that a 

 quantit}' of powder had been taken out of a fort there by an armed 

 mob; and that, besides, the vicinity of that province to ^lassachusetts 

 Bay was such, that if it were not included, the purpose of the act would 

 be defeated. Rhode Island, he stated, was not in much better situation 

 than Massachusetts; that several pieces of cannon had been taken and 

 carried into the country, and that the people were arming to aid any 

 colony that should be attacked. With regard to Conn 'ciicut, he ob- 

 served that a large body of her men had marched into Massachusetts, 

 on a report that the soldiers had killed some inhabitants of Boston, and 

 that that colony was in a state of great disorder and confusion. To 

 this he added, that the river Connecticut afforded the people of that 

 colony an opportunity of carrying on the fishery, and that the same 

 might be said of Rhode Island; and as the argument of vicinity might 

 be applied also to New Hampshire, the whole ought to be included in 

 the prohibition to fish and trade, in order that the act might not be de- 

 feated. But he was willing, he said, to admit of such alleviations of 

 the measure as would not prove destructive to its great object, and 

 would therei()re move it as only tem[)orary, and would permit pa.rlicu- 

 lar persons to be excepted, on certificates from the governor of their 

 good behavior, or upon their taking a test of acknowledgment of the 

 rights of Parhament. 



Lord North havinc; concluded, a most interestino: and animated de- 

 bate was commenced, which was continued from tim(! to time until 

 the fin.al passage of the bill. It was during the discussion of this meas- 

 ure that Fox made his first great speech; and, as we learn from a 

 letter of Gibbon, the historian, to Lord iSheffield, that he "discovered 

 powers for regular debate which neither his friends hoped nor his 

 enemies dreaded." I cannot forbear to insert a condensed \iewof 

 the course of argument of the menjbers of Parliament who defended 

 and who opposed this crowning act of a cruel and barbrn-oiis polJ(y. 



* 



salt-works, which, for innny years previously, had been considered valuable, as affording a cer- 

 tain jufonie, could hardly be sold at prices above the cost of the materials used in construct- 

 ing them. 



* Tills (lebiito is here abridged from the American Arrliivcs. A regard for brevity h;is not 

 allowiul luc, generally, to presoi've verbal accuracy ; but I have endeavored to give a faithful 

 syuopsis of the remarks of the respective speakers. 



