2. The character of the colonists. Character is the product largely of ancestry and circumstances. The ancestors of these people, after a struggle lasting hundreds of years, had established liberty in England and intrenched it in guarantees the wisest ever devised by man. From them the colonists inherited the right of freedom from arbitrary arrest; of giving bail in ordinary offenses; of a speedy, public trial by jury, near the place where the crime was alleged to have been committed; of the writ of habeas corpus; of established rules of evidence; and, indeed, of nearly all the rights mentioned in the first ten amendments to the constitution of the United States. Their ancestors had, in the war between Cromwell and Charles I., laid down their lives to establish the principle that taxes can be laid only by the people or by their representatives. The colonists themselves had been compelled to face difficulties incident to life in a new country, and had developed the power to act independently in matters pertaining to their individual good. And in the management of their several commonwealths they had gained considerable experience in governmental affairs. With such ancestry and such experience they would not tamely endure being imposed upon.

3. The character of the king. On the death of Queen Anne without an heir, George I., elector of Hanover, had become king of England, and he had been succeeded by his son, George II. To both of these kings England was really a foreign country, of whose institutions, and of whose language even, they were profoundly ignorant. As a consequence, their personal influence in England was small. When, in 1760, young George III. ascended the throne, he resolved to be king in fact as well as in name. This determination, which he adhered to, coupled with his unfamiliarity with English institu

tions, explains many things otherwise difficult to understand. (See Fiske's War of Independence, pp. 58–70.)

4. The prevailing mode of colonization. Many of the colonies had been founded for commercial reasons merely, with no intention of forming governmental institutions. Chartered companies and individuals planted settlements for the profit there was supposed to be in doing so. These colonies were designed to be merely "self-supporting trading outposts of England." Money had been put into these enterprises, and in the effort to secure a profitable return many unjust commercial restrictions were imposed upon the colonists.

Immediate Causes.-Among the immediate causes of the Revolutionary War may be mentioned:

The French and Indian War. In the first place, this war facilitated the union of the colonies. Several attempts at union had failed; there were too many opposing influences. While by far the greater number of the colonists were English, there were many Dutch in New York, and some Swedes remained in Delaware. Moreover, the English themselves differed radically in politics, those in the South having been royalists, while those in New England sympathized with Cromwell and parliament. But more serious than these politial differences, were the differences in religion. The old European quarrels had an echo here, and the catholics of Maryland, the episcopalians of Virginia, the puritans of Massachusetts, the baptists of Rhode Island, the lutherans of New York, and the quakers of Pennsylvania, all had grievances to remember. Travel, which does so much to broaden the mind and free it from prejudice, was both difficult and dangerous. The French and Indian War, bringing together men from all the colonies, was of great service in breaking down intercolonial animosities.

Facing the same dangers, standing shoulder to shoulder in battle, and mingling with each other around the camp fires, the men of the several colonies came to know each other better, and this knowledge ripened into affection. The soldiers on their return home did much to dis seminate the good feeling.

In the second place, the French and Indian War by annihilating all the claims of France to American soil removed the principal enemy that had rendered the protection of England necessary to the colonies.

In the third place, this war gave the colonists an experience in military affairs and a confidence in their own powers which emboldened them to dare open rebellion.

And in the fourth place, this war produced the debt which led to the taxation which was the most immediate cause of the outbreak.

2.

Various tyrannical acts of the king. These are given explicitly in the Declaration of Independence.

Some Pertinent Questions.

Name a country in the world's history that ever allowed its colonies representation in its home parliament or legislative body. Name one that does it today. Why do territories in this country desire to become states?

Name some country, other than England, which could have given birth to the United States. Prove your proposition.

The Duc de Choiseul, the French minister who signed the treaty whereby France yielded to England her claims to American soil, remarked after doing it, "That is the beginning of the end of English power in America." What did he mean? Upon what did he base his opinion? Why did France help the Americans in the Revolutionary War?

What is meant, in speaking of the colonies, by royal province? Charter government? Proprietary government?

What experience in law making did the colonists have? Where and when did the first representative assembly in America convene? Find in the Declaration of Independence an expression complaining of non-representation in rarliament.

To the patriotic and far sighted men who had striven to form a union of the colonies, did the religious differences

which frustrated their plans seem fortunate or unfortunate? Can you see how it came about that we have no state church, that we enjoy religious freedom? Doesn't it seem that there must have been a Planner wiser than any man who was working out His own designs?

CHAPTER XVIII.

THE ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION.

WHAT PRECEDED THEM.

The Revolutionary Period.—The nation was born July 4, 1776. From that time until the adoption of the articles of confederation in 1781 the people of the United States carried on their governmental affairs by means of a congress “clothed with undefined powers for the general good."

This congress had, speaking "in the name and by the authority of the good people of these colonies," issued the declaration of independence; it had entered into an alliance with France; and it had prosecuted the war almost to a successful issue, before it had received any definite warrant for its acts. Its acts were justified by necessity, and had their authority in the common consent" of a majority of the people. During nearly all of the revolutionary war, the people of the colonies were largely "held together by their fears."

66

THE ARTICLES THEMSELVES.

Their history.-But these were pre-eminently a people of peace and good order. This is shown in part by the spirit and form of the declaration of independence. They had no idea of allowing themselves to

lapse or drift into anarchy. They understood the necessity for a permanent government.

Accordingly, when, on the eleventh of June, 1776, a committee of congress was appointed to "abolish" one form of government by drafting a declaration of independence, another committee was appointed to frame a plan on which to "institute a new government."

After more than a month's deliberation this committee reported its plan, embodied in what is called articles of confederation. This plan was discussed from time to time, and finally, somewhat modified, was agreed to by congress, November 15, 1777. It was then submitted to the states for ratification.

In July, 1778, the articles were ratified by ten of the states. New Jersey ratified in November, 1778, and Delaware in February, 1779. But the articles were not to become binding until ratified by all the states, and Maryland did not authorize her delegates in congress to sign the instrument in ratification until March 1, 1781. (Maryland claims to have fought through the revolutionary war, not as a member but as an ally of the United States.)

Their peculiarities. The articles of confederation were different from our present constitution, both in principle and in method of operation, as follows:

1. The nature of the government formed. The government was that of a "confederation of states,” each retaining its sovereignty and independence. The union was declared to be a "firm league of friendship." It was to be perpetual.

2. The branches of government. Only one was provided for, a congress. No provision was made for executive or judicial officers apart from the congress itself. The structure of the congress. The congress con

3.