The Revolution whose main incidents have here been followed recalls another Revolution enacted near three centuries later amid the forests of the great continent of North America. Both originated in a long series of acts of tyranny, and each gave birth to a hero whose name has become a lasting synonym of strength and greatness. The lessons of history, however, are more often found in contrasts than in similarities, and the points of difference between these two upheavals are no less striking than their points of likeness. The chief difference lies in the individual characteristics of the leaders. George Washington was pre-eminently a hero of the people. He embraced the popular cause from no other motive than a love of what he deemed the people's rights; and when the war of independence closed, he retired from public life and allowed the nation whose battle he had fought to take the government of the country upon itself. The result was the most perfect system of republican government that the world has ever known. Gustavus Vasa, on the other hand, though actuated in a measure by enthusiasm for the public weal, was driven into the contest mainly by a necessity to save himself. The calm disinterestedness which marks the career of Washington was wholly wanting in the Swedish king. His readiness to debase the currency, his efforts to humiliate the bishops, his confiscation of Church property, his intimacy with foreign courtiers,--all show a desire for personal aggrandizement inconsistent with an earnest longing to benefit his race. One must regret that the rare talents which he possessed, and the brilliant opportunities that lay before him, were not employed in more unselfish ends. It is true he gave his country a better constitution than it had before; he freed it from the atrocities of a horrid tyrant; he laid the axe at the root of many religious absurdities; and he relieved the people from a heavy load of religious burdens. But he did not lay that foundation of public liberty which the blood poured out by the Swedish people merited. Of all nations on the face of the globe none are more fitted by temperament for a republican form of government than the Swedes. They are calm, they are thoughtful, they are economical, and above all else, they are imbued with an ardent love of liberty. It is hard, therefore, to repress the wish that Gustavus Vasa had been allowed, at the diet of Vesterås, to lay aside the crown, and that in his place a leader had been chosen to carry on the good work on the lines already drawn. The Revolution had begun with a feeling that the Swedish nation was entitled to be ruled according to its ancient laws,--that it was entitled to a representative form of government; and it was only because of the nation's admiration for its leader that this object was relinquished. The people, having expelled one tyrant, chose another; and ere Gustavus closed his memorable reign,