ga。　It　fell　quite　easily　less　than　a　year　later。　Some　of　his　officers　urged　him　to　press　on　and　do　it。　But　the　leaves　had　already　fallen；　the　bleak　winter　was　near；　and　Carleton　pictured　to　himself　an　army　buried　deeply　in　an　enemy　country　and　separated　from　its　base　by　many　scores　of　miles　of　lake　and　forest。　He　withdrew　to　Canada　and　left　Lake　Champlain　to　the　Americans。
  CHAPTER　III。　INDEPENDENCE
  Well…meaning　people　in　England　found　it　difficult　to　understand　the　intensity　of　feeling　in　America。　Britain　had　piled　up　a　huge　debt　in　driving　France　from　America。　Landowners　were　paying　in　taxes　no　less　than　twenty　per　cent　of　their　incomes　from　land。　The　people　who　had　chiefly　benefited　by　the　humiliation　of　France　were　the　colonists；　now　freed　from　hostile　menace　and　secure　for　extension　over　a　whole　continent。　Why　should　not　they　pay　some　share　of　the　cost　of　their　own　security？　Certain　facts　tended　to　make　Englishmen　indignant　with　the　Americans。　Every　effort　had　failed　to　get　them　to　pay　willingly　for　their　defense。　Before　the　Stamp　Act　had　become　law　in　1765　the　colonies　were　given　a　whole　year　to　devise　the　raising　of　money　in　any　way　which　they　liked　better。　The　burden　of　what　was　asked　would　be　light。　Why　should　not　they　agree　to　bear　it？　Why　this　talk；　repeated　by　the　Whigs　in　the　British　Parliament；　of　brutal　tyranny；　oppression；　hired　minions　imposing　slavery；　and　so　on。　Where　were　the　oppressed？　Could　any　one　point　to　a　single　person　who　before　war　broke　out　had　known　British　tyranny？　What　suffering　could　any　one　point　to　as　the　result　of　the　tax　on　tea？　The　people　of　England　paid　a　tax　on　tea　four　times　heavier　than　that　paid　in　America。　Was　not　the　British　Parliament　supreme　over　the　whole　Empire？　Did　not　the　colonies　themselves　admit　that　it　had　the　right　to　control　their　trade　overseas？　And　if　men　shirk　their　duty　should　they　not　come　under　some　law　of　compulsion？
  It　was　thus　that　many　a　plain　man　reasoned　in　England。　The　plain　man　in　America　had　his　own　opposing　point　of　view。　Debts　and　taxes　in　England　were　not　his　concern。　He　remembered　the　recent　war　as　vividly　as　did　the　Englishman；　and；　if　the　English　paid　its　cost　in　gold；　he　had　paid　his　share　in　blood　and　tears。　Who　made　up　the　armies　led　by　the　British　generals　in　America？　More　than　half　the　total　number　who　served　in　America　came　from　the　colonies；　the　colonies　which　had　barely　a　third　of　the　population　of　Great　Britain。　True；　Britain　paid　the　bill　in　money　but　why　not？　She　was　rich　with　a　vast　accumulated　capital。　The　war；　partly　in　America；　had　given　her　the　key　to　the　wealth　of　India。　Look　at　the　magnificence；　the　pomp　of　servants；　plate　and　pictures；　the　parks　and　gardens；　of　hundreds　of　English　country　houses；　and　compare　this　opulence　with　the　simple　mode　of　life；　simplicity　imposed　by　necessity；　of　a　country　gentleman　like　George　Washington　of　Virginia；　reputed　to　be　the　richest　man　in　America。　Thousands　of　tenants　in　England；　owning　no　acre　of　land；　were　making　a　larger　income　than　was　possible　in　America　to　any　owner　of　broad　acres。　It　was　true　that　America　had　gained　from　the　late　war。　The　foreign　enemy　had　been　struck　down。　But　had　he　not　been　struck　down　too　for　England？　Had　there　not　been　far　more　dread　in　England　of　invasion　by　France　and　had　not　the　colonies　by　helping　to　ruin　France　freed　England　as　much　as　England　had　freed　them？　If　now　the　colonies　were　asked　to　pay　a　share　of　the　bill　for　the　British　army　that　was　a　matter　for　discussion。　They　had　never　before　done　it　and　they　must　not　be　told　that　they　had　to　meet　the　demand　within　a　year　or　be　compelled　to　pay。　Was　it　not　to　impose　tyranny　and　slavery　to　tell　a　people　that　their　property　would　be　taken　by　force　if　they　did　not　choose　to　give　it？　What　free　man　would　not　rather　die　than　yield　on　such　a　point？
  The　familiar　workings　of　modern　democracy　have　taught　us　that　a　great　political　issue　must　be　discussed　in　broad　terms　of　high　praise　or　severe　blame。　The　contestants　will　exaggerate　both　the　virtue　of　the　side　they　espouse　and　the　malignity　of　the　opposing　side；　nice　discrimination　is　not　possible。　It　was　inevitable　that　the　dispute　with　the　colonies　should　arouse　angry　vehemence　on　both　sides。　The　passionate　speech　of　Patrick　Henry　in　Virginia；　in　1763；　which　made　him　famous；　and　was　the　forerunner　of　his　later　appeal；　〃Give　me　Liberty　or　give　me　Death；　〃　related　to　so　prosaic　a　question　as　the　right　of　disallowance　by　England　of　an　act　passed　by　a　colonial　legislature；　a　right　exercised　long　and　often　before　that　time　and　to　this　day　a　part　of　the　constitutional　machinery　of　the　British　Empire。　Few　men　have　lived　more　serenely　poised　than　Washington；　yet；　as　we　have　seen；　he　hated　the　British　with　an　implacable　hatred。　He　was　a　humane　man。　In　earlier　years；　Indian　raids　on　the　farmers　of　Virginia　had　stirred　him　to　〃deadly　sorrow；〃　and　later；　during　his　retreat　from　New　York；　he　was　moved　by　the　cries　of　the　weak　and　infirm。　Yet　the　same　man　felt　no　touch　of　pity　for　the　Loyalists　of　the　Revolution。　To　him　they　were　detestable　parricides；　vile　traitors；　with　no　right　to　live。　When　we　find　this　note　in　Washington；　in　America；　we　hardly　wonder　that　the　high　Tory；　Samuel　Johnson；　in　England；　should　write　that　the　proposed　taxation　was　no　tyranny；　that　it　had　not　been　imposed　earlier　because　〃we　do　not　put　a　calf　into　the　plough；　we　wait　till　he　is　an　ox；〃　and　that　the　Americans　were　〃a　race　of　convicts；　and　ought　to　be　thankful　for　anything　which　we　allow　them　short　of　hanging。〃　Tyranny　and　treason　are　both　ugly　things。　Washington　believed　that　he　was　fighting　the　one；　Johnson　that　he　was　fighting　the　other；　and　neither　side　would　admit　the　charge　against　itself。
  Such　are　the　passions　aroused　by　civil　strife。　We　need　not　now；　when　they　are；　or　ought　to　be；　dead；　spend　any　time　in　deploring　them。　It　suffices　to　explain　them　and　the　events　to　which　they　led。　There　was　one　and　really　only　one　final　issue。　Were　the　American　colonies　free　to　govern　themselves　as　they　liked　or　might　their　government　in　the　last　analysis　be　regulated　by　Great　Britain？　The　truth　is　that　the　colonies　had　reached　a　condition　in　which　they　regarded　themselves　as　British　states　with　their　own　parliaments；　exercising　complete　jurisdiction　in　their　own　affairs。　They　intended　to　use　their　own　judgment　and　they　were　as　restless　under　attempted　control　from　England　as　England　would　have　been　under　control　from　America。　We　can　indeed　always　understand　the　point　of　view　of　Washington　if　we　reverse　the　position　and　imagine　what　an　Englishman　would　have　thought　of　a　claim　by　America　to　tax　him。
  An　ancient　and　proud　society　is　reluctant　to　change。　After　a　long　and　successful　war　England　was　prosperous。　To　her　now　came　riches　from　India　and　the　ends　of　the　earth。　In　society　there　was　such　lavish　expenditure　that　Horace　Walpole　declared　an　income　of　twenty　thousand　pounds　a　year　was　barely　enough。　England　had　an　aristocracy　the　proudest　in　the　world；　for　it　had　not　only　rank　but　wealth。　The　English　people　were　certain　of　the　invincible　superiority　of　their　nation。　Every　Englishman　was　taught；　as　Disraeli　said　of　a　later　period；　to　believe　that　he　occupied　a　position　better　than　any　one　else　of　his　own　degree　in　any　other　country　in　the　world。　The　merchant　in　England　was　believed　to　surpass　all　others　in　wealth　and　integrity；　the　manufacturer　to　have　no　rivals　in　skill；　the　British　sailor　to　stand　in　a　class　by　himself；　the　British　officer　to　express　the　last　word　in　chivalry。　It　followed；　of　course；　that　the　motherland　was　superior　to　her　children　overseas。　The　colonies　had　no　aristocracy；　no　great　landowners　living　in　stately　palaces。　They　had　almost　no　manufactures。　They　had　no　imposing　state　system　with　places　and　pensions　from　which　the　fortunate　might　reap　a　harvest　of　ten　or　even　twenty　thousand　pounds　a　year。　They　had　no　ancient　universities　thronged　by　gilded　youth　who；　if　noble；　might　secure　degrees　without　the　trying　ceremony　of　an　examination。　They　had　no　Established　Church　with　the　ancient　glories　of　its　cathedrals。　In　all　America　there　was　not　even　a　bishop。　In　spite　of　these　contrasts　the　English　Whigs　insisted　upon　the　political　equality　with　themselves　of　the　American　colonists。　The　Tory　squire；　however；　shared　Samuel　Johnson's　view　that　colonists　were　either　traders　or　farmers　and　that　colonial　shopkeeping　society　was　vulgar　and　contemptible。
  George　III　was　ill…fitted　by　nature　to　deal　with　the　crisis。　The　King　was　not　wholly　without　natural　parts；　for　his　own　firm　will　had　achieved　what　earlier　kings　had　tried　and　failed　to　do；　he　had　mastered　Parliament；　made　it　his　obedient　tool　and　himself　for　a　time　a　despot。　He　had　some　admirable　virtues。　He　was　a　family　man；　the　father　of　fifteen　children。　He　liked　quiet　amusements　and　had　wholesome　tastes。　If　industry　and　belief　in　his　own　aims　could　of　themselves　make　a　man　great　we　might　reverence　George。　He　wrote　once　to　Lord　North：　〃I　have　no　object　but　to　be　of　use：　if　that　is　ensured　I　am　completely　happy。〃　The　King　was　always　busy。　Ceaseless　industry　does　not；　however；　include　every　virtue；　or　the　author　of　all　evil　would　rank　high　in　goodness。　Wisdom　must　be　the　pilot　of　good　intentions。　George　was　not　wise。　He　was　ill…educated。　He　had　neve