representation," to which they declared they would not

submit.

The attitude of the colonies was misunderstood in England. Unfortunately, this misunderstanding was aggravated by misleading reports made by the royal governors as to the character of the colonists. The governors were in constant clash with the legislative bodies in the colonies over matters of public policy. The colonists always sided with their own legislators, so that the reports of the governors to the king and his ministers represented the colonists as turbulent and disloyal.

193. Conditions in the Colonies: Growth of Democracy.-The colonists did not desire a separation from the mother country. They were proud of England; proud to be called Englishmen. And especially was this true after England's great victory over the French. But this feeling was gradually changed to one of distrust and aversion by the shortsighted policy of George III. and the statesmen who controlled English politics at that time. The expense of the four intercolonial wars had been borne to a large extent by the colonies, and they had furnished their full quota of men to uphold the supremacy of England in the New World. They were burdened with debt incurred in the prosecution of the French and Indian War; they had suffered the destruction of much property, and many precious lives had been sacrificed. And even under these conditions they were willing to contribute to the support of the home government, if they, through their legislatures, could say how the money was to be raised. As one after another of their efforts to secure this privilege was spurned, the sentiment for independence was developed; not as a thing in itself to be desired, but as an escape from what they considered the tyranny of a despotic king.

The growth of the spirit of liberty and equality in America was more rapid than its growth in England because the colonists were farther removed from the influences of royalty

and aristocracy. In the colonies, frequent milestones marked its progress. The demand for a representative assembly in Virginia in 1619; the freedom of action accorded the settler in the very beginning of all the New England colonies; the written constitution of the four Connecticut River settlements; Bacon's protest against the tyranny of Berkeley in Virginia; the arrest and expulsion of Andros in Massachusetts; all these were evidences of the growth of democracy in the New World. Had this been respected and understood by the home government, instead of its being antagonized, the history of the Revolution need not have been written.

194. The Principle of Taxation as Used by England.-Engjish statesmen in control during the period just prior to the Revolution contended that nothing was being asked of the colonists which was not already borne by Englishmen at home. This was true. Many of the larger cities in England were not represented in parliament, though they paid taxes regularly. The districts from which members of parliament were elected had been formed years before. In some of these nearly all the people had moved away, but members still continued to be elected. At Old Sarum there were no residents; in several other districts there were but three or four voters, while in certain sections of the country new communities had grown up, such as Birmingham and Leeds, with numerous populations, and large property interests, and yet, without representation in parliament. This was "taxation without representation," just what the colonists were protesting against. It was not honestly contended that this was right. It was a condition that had obtained gradually and was left undisturbed because it suited the ends of the corrupt politicians of that day, and of an equally corrupt king.

195. Navigation Acts: Intercolonial Wars.-These are two of the remote causes of the Revolution. It has been shown how the colonists always loyally supported their sovereign

and bore their share of the burden in the intercolonial wars. The remembrance of his sacrifices rankled in the heart of the colonist when the government for which he had sacrificed so much gave so little heed to his petitions for justice.

The first Navigation Act was passed in 1651. This was reënacted in 1660, and strengthened still further by the acts of 1663 and 1672. In addition to these four principal acts, twenty-five additional acts were passed by parliament during the period from 1672 to 1774. Many of these laws had direct bearing on the commerce of the colonies. It was required that both exports and imports should be carried in English vessels, or in ships built in the colonies, the same to be manned by crews and officers, a majority of whom, in each instance, were to be English. These acts were originally aimed at the Dutch, who had a monopoly of the American carrying trade and, indeed, of the trade of the world. While the acts encouraged activity in ship-building in the colonies to the extent that ship-building in New England had become an important industry, still, the main provisions of the acts tended to make the colonies dependent upon England. As the years passed the acts in this respect became more and more objectionable to the colonies. However, the navigation acts had not of late been enforced with much rigor. The English government, as we have seen, now resolved to enforce these laws rigidly as one method of increasing the revenues. Taken in connection with other burdens, this enforcement became a source of great irritation to those engaged in shipping or mercantile pursuits in the colonies.

196. Writs of Assistance.-Smuggling was the natural result of the navigation acts and was winked at by the colonial authorities, who were opposed to the enforcement of the acts. In order to find smuggled goods the king's officers were given writs of assistance. With one of these in hand an officer could search the house or premises of any citizen at

any time during the day. opposition in the colonies.

This aroused the most violent The search could be made on the unsupported charge of the officer, with no penalty attached if goods were not found.

197. Stamp Act-1765: Protests.-The first bold attempt to tax all the colonies was by the passage of a Stamp Act in 1765. Though the Sugar and Molasses Act had been renewed two years prior to this act, still it affected only New England, while the Stamp Act aroused opposition in all the colonies. It required all legal and public documents, marriage certificates, wills, etc., to be written on stamped paper, for which an increased price was asked, the surplus going to the government. The passage of the act was preceded by a year's notice from the prime minister, Lord Grenville, that such action was contemplated. At a town meeting in Boston, held in May, 1764, to protest against the proposed tax, resolutions eloquently presented by Samuel Adams were passed which, for the first time, formally denied the right of the English government to tax the colonies without their consent. The Massachusetts legislature later indorsed these resolutions and issued a circular letter to the other colonies asking that they petition against the passage of the act. But, disregarding all these petitions parliament passed it.

198. The Stamp Act Congress-1765.-The interval between its passage and the day the Stamp Act was to go into effect was full of excitement in the colonies. Clubs taking the name of "Sons of Liberty" were immediately organized all over the colonies. Massachusetts proposed a congress of delegates from all the colonies to discuss measures to defeat its enforcement. Nine colonies responded and a declaration of rights was drawn up by this "Stamp Act Congress" and sent to the king. It was asserted therein that Americans were British citizens, and it was the right of all such to be represented in any body that levied taxes upon them. This congress also advised the formation of nonimportation clubs among the

colonial merchants, and clubs among the people to encourage the use of home products in the colonies.

199. Organized Resistance: Repeal of the Act: Declaratory Act. As the stamped paper began to arrive for distribution, the excitement became intense. Those who had accepted appointment as distributers were forced to resign, some of them being roughly handled on refusal. The paper was seized and in many cases burned. In Boston the Sons of Liberty tore down the frame building that was being erected for the distributer, and, piling it before his house, placed the stamped paper thereon and made a bonfire of the whole. In New York they broke into the coach house of the governor, placed images of the Devil and the governor on the coach, then paraded the streets, finally burning coach and images, while the governor, and General Gage and his militia, looked on, not daring to resist. On the 1st of November, the day the act was to go into effect, funeral processions were formed, bells were muffled and tolled, and flags were placed at half mast. At Portsmouth, N. H., a coffin was borne in pro cession, inscribed, "Liberty, aged CXLV years"; when the grave was reached signs of life appeared, the changed inscription reading: "Liberty revived," when it was borne back amid great rejoicings. Thus the common people condemned the Stamp Act. And yet, few of the colonial leaders thought of resisting its enforcement after it was once passed, Franklin himself advising submission and Richard Henry Lee accepting appointment as one of the distributers. But the colonists bought none of the stamped paper; and, further, the policy of nonimportation among the colonial merchants was so effective that parliament, yielding to the remonstrances presented by London merchants whose business had greatly suffered thereby, repealed the obnoxious act in 1766. Declaratory Act was appended, however, to the repeal, announcing that the government still held to its right to tax the colonies whenever and in whatever way it thought best.

A