The Freeman 1972 - The Ludwig von Mises Institute

154 THE FREEMAN Marchlay much of what he wrote, he didnot· emphasize natural laws andnatural rights so as to distinguishthem in a divisive manner fromthe rights of Britons under theConstitution, as some writers hadrushed to do prematurely. His appealwas to tradition, precedent,prudence, self-interest, the desireof liberty, and continuity with thepast. And though he bade Americansto resist the Townshend duties,he proposed that they do soin an orderly fashion. First, theyshould send petitions; if these didnot get results, turn to somethinglike a boycott of goods; only whenall peaceful means had failed,should other approaches be considered.But he pled with Americansnot to give in to a spirit. ofriotousness. "The cause of libertyis a cause of too much dignity tobe sullied by turbulence and tumult.It ought to be maintained ina manner suitable to her nature.Those who engage in it, shouldbreathe a sedate, yet ferventspirit, animating them to actionsof prudence, justice, modesty,bravery, humanity and magnanimity."8The Argument Against TaxesThe great appeal of his workstemmed, of course, from the factthat he shredded the argument forthe Townshend duties, showed it8 Ibid., p. 17.to be grounded in sophistry - nobetter than the case for the StampAct, only more subtle - and foundthe duties violative of the rightsof British subjects and potentiallyconfiscatory. As for these dutiesbeing acceptable because theywere external taxes, he thoughtthe case hardly worth considering.The objection to taxation by Parliamentdid not hinge upon thedistinction between internal andexternal; it was to taxation assuch. Americans accepted, hepointed out, as they had accepted,duties that were for the purposeof regulating trade, but not thoselevied for the raising of revenue.·The latter were clearly taxes, andthey involved the taking of propertywithout the consent of theowners. True, incidental revenuesmight arise from the regulationof trade, but they were a consequence,not the cause of it. Nosuch case could be made for theTownshend duties; they were laidon items which must be obtainedfrom England. Certainly, it wasnot the aim of the British to inhibittrade in them nor to restrainit. In fact, it was simplya tax, for the colonists were notpermitted to obtain the goods elsewhere,and might, if the Britishchose, be prohibited from manufacturingthem. There was ampleprecedent for this.Property was no longer· secure,