Page:History of the Radical Party in Parliament.djvu/29

Rh Three subjects now come up for consideration of not merely temporary importance, but raising questions affecting the authority of Government, the rights and liberties of individuals, and the true source of political power. The first and in every way the most important of these three subjects was the struggle between England and the North American Colonies. This contest involved constitutional questions of the gravest character, the ultimate issue being nothing less than the authority to deal with the properties, rights, and liberties of a people by any government not chosen by and directly representing them. Much ingenuity has been employed in discussing whether or not the taxation of the colonies was technically justified by the English law and custom of the time. But the case was one which went too deep for the letter of law and precedent to settle; it was one of fundamental right in accordance with which laws have to get themselves made, and not one which could be answered by mechanical law. If we look not only at the vital consequence of the issue, but at the vehemence and heat by which its discussion was soon surrounded, it is astonishing to see with what absolute indifference its first introduction was attended. The Stamp Act was passed in 1765, with scarcely any discussion at all in Parliament. was one of the very few members of the House of Commons reported by the Parliamentary History as having spoken against it. But the manner in which it was received in America put another complexion upon the matter. In 1766 it was found necessary to repeal the Act, and the discussions which then ensued, and the views taken by different sections of politicians, are characteristic and instructive.

There were three main lines on which opinions ran. In the first place, there was the doctrine of the absolute authority of the Imperial Government over the lives and liberties of its subjects either in America or elsewhere. This was, of course, the view taken by the King, by the King's friends, by the Tories, and by all, in fact, to whom the principle of authority—more or less tinctured with the flavour of divine right—was