In order to understand the government of the United States, we must examine its beginnings and antecedents.

THE COLONIES.

When Columbus returned to Spain with his marvelous stories of the New World, expeditions were fitted out which soon filled the coffers of that country with wealth from Mexico, Central and South America, and the West Indies. Spain became the wealthiest nation of the world. Other countries soon caught the infection, and expeditions were sent from France, Holland and England, the other great commercial nations of western Europe.

For a long time scarcely any effort was made to form permanent settlements, and the attempts that were by and by made were unsuccessful. For more than a hundred years the territory now included within the United States remained unoccupied, except at a few points in the southern part. Explorations were, however, pushed with vigor, and many conflicting claims were based upon them.

About the beginning of the seventeenth century permanent settlements began to be made, yet the increase in population was for the succeeding hundred and fifty years very slow. During this time settlements were made in the tropical part of America by the Spanish; the French founded settlements in Canada and established a chain of forts along the Ohio and Mississippi; and the English, though claiming all the land to the Pacific, made settlements only along the Atlantic. The Dutch and the Swedes made settlements along the Hudson and about Delaware Bay, respectively.

By the middle of the eighteenth century, the Swedes had been dispossessed by the Dutch, who in turn had succumbed to the English. And in 1756 began the great struggle between France and England for the possession of the Mississippi Valley. England won, and the existence of the United States as we know and love it became a possibility.

THE CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTION.

The causes of the Revolutionary War fall naturally into two great classes, the remote and the immediate.

The Remote Causes.—Among the underlying causes of the war may be mentioned the following:

1. The location of the colonies. They were separated from the mother country by a great ocean, which then seemed many times as wide as it does now. Communication was so infrequent that the authorities in England could not keep track of what was going on in America, and misgovernment could flourish unchecked because unknown. And so far away and so differently circumstanced from the people in England were the people of the colonies that the former could not appreciate the real needs of the latter.

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 institutions, 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:

1. 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 political 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 disseminate 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 parliament.

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?