177 | Essays 177 
agreed to by me, as an article fit to be proposed, it 
was merely from a desire of peace, and in compliance 
with their opinion expressed at our first meeting; that 
this was a sine qua non, that the dignity of Britain 
required it, and that, if this was agreed to, every 
thing else would be easy. This reasoning was al- 
lowed to be just; but still the article was thought 
necessary to stand as it did. 
On the 2d, That the act should be repealed, as 
having never answered any good purpose, as having 
been the cause of the present mischief, and never 
likely to be executed. That, the act being considered 
as unconstitutional by the Americans, and what the 
Parliament had no right to make, they must consider 
all the money extorted by it as so much wrongfully 
taken, and of which therefore restitution ought to be 
made; and the rather, as it would furnish a fund out 
of which the payment for the tea destroyed might 
best be defrayed. The gentlemen were of opinion 
that the first part of this article, viz., the repeal, 
might be obtained, but not the refunding part, and 
therefore advised striking that out; but, as I thought 
it just and right, I insisted on its standing. 
On the 3d and 4th articles, I observed we were fre- 
quently charged with views of abolishing the Naviga- 
tion Act. That, in truth, those parts of it which were 
of most importance to Britain, as tending to increase 
its naval strength, viz., those restraining the trade to 
be carried on only in ships belonging to British sub- 
jects, navigated by at least three quarters British or 
colony seamen, etc., were as acceptable to us as they 
could be to Britain, since we wished to employ our 
TYE)