He proceeded on the assumption that every man had his price. The
assumption was unhappily too correct, for he was able to gather round
him, in Parliament or the civil service, his own party, the "King's
Friends," who served him for the profit that they got. No tale of modern
corruption can surpass the record of their plundering of a nation. With
this goes a story of gambling, drinking, and general loose living which,
while the attention is concentrated on it, rouses the belief that the
nation was wholly degenerate, until the recollection of the remnant,
Chatham and the party of the Earl of Rockingham, gives hope of the
salvation of the country.
At any rate, for more than fifteen years of his reign the king was in
the ascendant. There was no party to depose him, scarcely one strong
enough to curb him, even at times of popular indignation. He was,
therefore, as no other king had been before him, able to force the issue
upon the colonies, in spite of the protests of the few friends of
liberty. In complete ignorance of the strength of the colonists, both in
resources and in purpose, he proceeded to insist upon his rights. When
it is remembered that those rights, according to his interpretation of
them, were to tax without representation, to limit trade and
manufactures, and to interfere at will in the management of colonial
affairs, it will be seen that he was playing with fire.
The danger will appear the greater if it is considered that the
population of the colonies had not progressed, like that of England, to
days of easy tolerance. The Americans, and especially the New
Englanders, were of the same stuff as those who had beheaded Charles I,
and driven James II from his kingdom. They had among their military
officers plenty of such men as Pomeroy, who, destined to fight at Bunker
Hill, wrote from the siege of Louisburg: "It looks as if our campaign
would last long; but I am willing to stay till God's time comes to
deliver the city into our hands."[9] Many besides himself wrote, and
even spoke, in Biblical language. There were still heard, in New
England, the echoes of the "Great Awakening"; the preaching of
Whitefield and others had everywhere roused a keen religious feeling,
and the people were as likely as ever to open town-meeting with prayer,
and to go into battle with psalms.
Such, then, were the contestants in the struggle. On the one side was
the king with his privileges, backed by his Parliamentary majority, and
having at command an efficient army and navy, and a full treasury. There
was at hand no one to resist him successfully at home, none to whose
warnings he would listen. And on the other side were the colonists,
quite capable of fighting for what they knew to be the "rights of
Englishmen." Both hoped to proceed peaceably. In ignorance, each was
hoping for the impossible, for the king would not retreat, and the
colonists would not yield. As soon as each understood the other's full
intention, there would be a rupture.
FOOTNOTES:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account