Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up freeThe New Hampshire Gazette And General Advertiser
Portsmouth, Exeter, Rockingham County, New Hampshire
What is this article about?
A letter in the New-Hampshire Gazette responds to 'SOLICITOR' by arguing against confiscating estates of absentees who left supportive families in the state, deeming it unjust and cruel compared to allowing resident Tories to retain theirs, and advocates applying the golden rule for equity.
OCR Quality
Full Text
Messieurs Printers,
An ingenious Writer in your paper of the 19th January, under the signature of SOLICITOR, has entertained the public with his opinion of the justice of appropriating the property of British subjects to the use of the State: I shall not pretend to judge of the policy of such a measure, but leave the discussion of so delicate a point to a more able pen: He next points out the justice of converting the estates of Absentees to the use of Government; I shall not pretend to dispute this point with him neither, in some cases; but agreeable to the old proverb, there is no general rule without some exceptions. There is no doubt in my mind, but that the estates of absentees who have left no families behind them, to share the horrors of war, or bear any part of the expences incident thereto, should be confiscated; but if there are any such who have left families behind them in this State, which families have fully answered every demand of government, I can't conceive why such family should be deprived of that estate: The prescriptive act passed years ago in this State, very tenderly affects the families of those persons, if it does not so much affect themselves; and as if this was not punishment enough, those innocent families must be stript of their support, for the attainment of which, perhaps, the wife has equally toiled and labored. One reason; in my opinion, why such an act would be unjust, is this, that it would not be putting those unhappy families on a footing with the Tories, who are present: of the two, absentees and tories, the latter, in my opinion, are full as inimical as the former, and I doubt not they have injured the Americans in their glorious struggle for liberty, more than was possibly in the power of the former, who, by their absence from an early period of the war, could not communicate any thing to the disadvantage of the United States; while the latter have had full scope to counteract every measure taken by the United States, in order to bring them into subjection to the British government.-For instance, it is notoriously known that in some towns in this State, there have been tories who have had a full swing of exercising their talents during the contest to the present day, for discouraging the public measures, for the truth of which I appeal to all who are friends to the revolution; at the same time, those animals are allowed the full enjoyment of their estates, while the poor widow (as he may be termed in her present circumstances) after having shunned those vices, & exerted herself in the common cause, to the utmost of her power, must be stripped of what she has earned by the sweat of her brow, for the support of herself and family. Compare these two cases together, and see
if the confiscating such estates, has not the appearance of injustice and cruelty, and in fact of taking that advantage of an innocent family while the husband is absent, which we are ashamed to take on those where the husband is present, altho' perhaps a thousand times more deserving of it. It may be said we cannot bring any positive proof against the enemy among ourselves; as much may be brought against them as against the families of absentees. and I am inclined to think, that in some instances, the latter would have the advantage. We have some instances of confiscation, by which means many creditors to such estates, who ought to have been paid, are still kept out of their money; and had they been paid, perhaps the public would have reaped no advantage thereby : so that if the public are benefited, individuals are sufferers. Suppose confiscating the estate of an absentee, should put the value of one copper into the pocket of every inhabitant in this State, and thereby deprive a numerous family of their support. and involve them in the greatest distress. Is there a person existing who is possessed of one spark of humanity, but would sooner launch out that copper for the public use, than render such a family miserable by such an act ? I would hope the number is small who have so little public spirit. Were I concerned in determining a matter of so great moment, I would endeavor to place myself in the situation of the family of. an absentee (not of the man) and the result of such determination I would endeavor to conform to the golden rule, viz. "to do unto others as you would they should do unto you."
I have thrown out these hints, hoping some person will, if possible, endeavor to prove that: the plan Solicitor has recommended is just and equitable, notwithstanding the objections above mentioned. No doubt such a point fully discussed and proved, will ease the minds of many of your readers, and in particular the mind of one who thinks himself a friend to justice. and has the vanity to stile himself A WHIG:
What sub-type of article is it?
What themes does it cover?
What keywords are associated?
What entities or persons were involved?
Letter to Editor Details
Author
A Whig
Recipient
Messieurs Printers
Main Argument
confiscating estates of absentees with families that support the government is unjust, as it punishes innocents more harshly than resident tories who actively oppose the cause; such measures should follow the golden rule to ensure equity.
Notable Details