Summary Of The Nature And Extent Of Parliamentary Power

William Hicks; an early colonist from New York; composed a pamphlet called “ The Nature and Extent of Parliamentary Power” in 1768. Hicks argues that England’s parliament, and untimely the king, is trying to suppress the colonies’ liberties and to force the colonies into submission as the crown's slaves. Hicks wrote there were two opinions that the colonies could have chosen: to be submissive to the crown and become slaves or to rise against the crown, in order to liberate American’s liberty. Bernard Bailyn, author of “ The Ideological Origins of The American Revolution”, states that early colonies’ pamphlet captured the mindset and ideologies at the period of time. In hicks’ pamphlets is the ideology of a revolution because it gives details

of events of the parliament being a tyrannical government, who’s goal is to repress the colonies natural rights, and to enslaves them to the crown but can be prevented if the colonies fights for American’s liberty.
Hicks explains parliament's actions towards the colonies was identical was a tyrannical form of government and is corrupted since the crown uses the colonies as it’s their rich resource but ignores their voices for representative. Bailyn wrote that colonist were terrified of tyrannical governments because power is too intoxicating, liable to abuse and cannot withstand the temptations of power”(Bailyn, 165) Hicks wrote that “ when the lords and commons of England, by formal compact with the crown, attempt to bind those, no means considered as parties to their agreement... own enjoyment of all that is valued be in life”. The quote is interpreted as that the government had become corrupted, because hicks and the other colonist belief that a secret agreement between the king and parliament were created at the expense of the colonizer’s resource. Hicks goes even further to say that the kings have fool some colonist with the dogma, “ that the king can do no wrong“ then he quotes Locke’s: “On Government”, “ what property has they in that which another may, by right, take when he pleases to himself”. Hicks proves that the idea that the king can do anything to the colonies from the dogma state that the king cannot be wrong, even if the decisions will have negative impacts of the colonies’ societies. Hicks’ believes that “ lords would embrace an opportunity of acquiring that affluence of rich, meaning that England’s representatives may have forced more towards to themselves rather to the colonies ‘s needs. Hicks explains that England has become corrupted and needs to repress the colonies to feed their own greed.
Once the colonizers saw the indicators of tyrannical government from the king, Hicks points out repressive actions happening towards the colonies after the passing of the stamp act in 1768.

“ Governor Bernard had some legal means or excuse for summoning military help in his vain efforts to maintain order in the face of the stamp act riots, but once the British intervene within the colonies, its created massive panic within the communities” said Bailyn, this standing army has snuffed out freedom in Denmark and throughout the world; to the colonies this was the process of destroying free constitutions of government had been reach”. Hicks wrote the actions and treatment of the England’s army, “ With the will of the commanding officer, he has the power of oppressing any single colony but can also demand high quality supplies that justify to their needs. The idea that the colonists must quarter soldiers in their property if the commanding officer demands, with a certain ample supply was unbelievable since the officer can the power to choose any home at random and the owner must follow the order or be subject to an offense. With England’s soldiers residing in the colonies, the community is paranoid that army will not only suppress them of their natural rights, but may even strip them of these rights and become enslaved to the

crown.
The system that England have employees on the colonies was the “ foundation for slavery” after the stamp act of 1768 and colonies are in the state of panic since they believed the royal army are here capture their liberties and turn them into slaves to the crown.

Hicks wrote, “ their superior power to reduce their fellow subjects to a state of subornation inconsistent with their natural rights, its conflicts with their own constitution”, which explains the colonist’ point of view about how England actions towards their other colonies around the world. The colonies would have hope that parliament would allow their natural rights to be followed as their cousin in England, but the colonies’ rights were dismantled; to the colonist; to justified the needs of the mother country. Bailyn states “the crown is a tyranny in the colonists’ belief, and a tyranny over the body and souls by their policies in the civil affairs of the colonies.” Bailyn reveals that the paranoia of the colonies falling into the hands of a tyrannical was in its final phase, after having their rights suppressed; it would eventually lead to their enslavement unless the colonist react before

hand.
The colonist realizes that their freedom and liberties were at stake when England’s policies was leading to their goal of the submission of the 13 colonies, unless the colonist are willing to stand up for America’s liberty. Hicks wrote “ They are the subjects of this kingdom, but the Americans are the sons, but not the bastards of England”, through out his pamphlet, Hicks never subjected the colonies as England’s citizens but rather called themselves as Americans. The colonists have disguised themselves as a separated entity, which was influenced by some of England’s political ideas, and identity England as a “sovereign and supreme government”. With this belief resonate within the Americans; they came to the conclusion that “ the commons of Great Britain have no natural or acquired superiority over the freedom of America” and this could explain the sudden apparent of British army standing in the colonies since the parliament has tried ignoring the liberties of America. The colonist begins to supports the ideas of American and England’s are separated because under Hicks quotation of Rousseau, “ a subordination, not only incompatible with the principles of English constitution, but even not to be reconciled to the law of nature”, hicks states the policies England has place on the Americans, would indicated that the colonies are has grown apart of England; meaning they are no longer identified as English citizens; and have became a possible threat to the kings society. Bailyn states that once the colonies have seen the sights of a tyrannical government, they came to the conclusion to demand for their independence, instead of being enslaved to the king.
Bailyn explains that paranoid could be the one of the factors behind the ideology of revolution in the colonies since Hicks’ pamphlet portrays the ideology of a revolution because it gives details of events of the parliament being a tyrannical government, who’s goal is to repress the colonies natural rights, and to enslaves them to the crown but can be prevented if the colonies fights for American’s liberty. The pamphlet explains that the colonist have identified themselves no long as English, but Americans and are willing to protect their motherland’s liberties.